[Dynasty]

...For under $500. Can it be done?

I want something that is reliable, simple, fun, and accurate. I shoot my Marlin Model 60 with a BSA Sweet .22 scope and have a blast plinking with it.

However, I want something more precision and accurate, so I'm hoping to get some ideas from you guys. The longest distance I have available to me is 300 yards, so keep that in mind. I will not be competing in official competitions, just having fun with my buddies and seeing who can make the best shot.

Fill out the following form with you your suggestion of $500 .22LR precision bolt rifle:

Rifle -
Scope -
Mounts -
Accessories -

If you feel up for it, please link us to your suggestions. I'm sure others could benefit from this too.

[rcmodel]

http://www.gunauction.com/buy/11672545/rifles-for-sale/bolt-action-rifle/cz-452-american-.22-cal-bolt-action-nib-16-in.-threaded-barrel-no-reserve!

rc

[d2wing]

Hard to beat a CZ 452. I have not shot a 455. CMP have Kimberly 52s for $500 with target sights. I'm sure others can recommend Savages and Vintage target rifles like the Mossberg US 44.

[StrutStopper]

Hopefully, I'm in the process of doing just what you want, only it will probably cost a hair over $500. I just picked up a CZ 455, Burris Signature Zee rings, dovetail to weaver adapters, and next paycheck will bring a Mueller 4.5-14x40 scope. A varmint model would probably been a bit more accurate on the bench due to weight and the stock shape, but I wanted to go a bit lighter. Regarding your model 60, it could probably do what you want too. They are some serious shooting guns. I threw a Boyd's rimfire varmint thumbhole stock on mine, the same scope that you have, and an mcarbo spring kit that made the trigger pull much better than stock. It shoots lights out off of a rest at 25 and 50 yards, never tried shooting further than that.

[WNTFW]

Just add 30 to what d2wing said. The Kimber 82G at the CMP, not the 52. (He might be Winchester man.) Kimber 82G will be really hard to beat for what you get for the money. I shoot mine @ 200yds on a regular basis. Mainly at 12 gauge hulls & skeet in whole or part. Very easy to switch from peeps to scope. The rail underneath allow a bipod to be easily attached.

Ditto on the Vintage Mossberg recommendation. I have friend with on that is not ammo sensitive at all. Pretty good sights & trigger.

That said my brother just bought a used 10/22 that is phenomenal. It is a Clark Custom. The trigger is probably as perfect as I have used. It is in my care until at least the 14th of January.

[kludge]

Under $500...

Savage Mark II BV (Weaver mounts come with the rifle) $385.
http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/MARKIIBV/
BSA Platinum Target 6-24x44, 1/8MOA Target dot, 1/8MOA clicks, on sale for $75.
http://www.natchezss.com/product.cfm?contentID=productDetail&prodID=OSPT624X44TS
Weaver rings

Mine shoots consistently in the .30"s (50yds) and I have one group that I can't measure, ~0.13". With good match ammo (I can't afford $80 a brick) it could do better.

$110 more: http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/MARKIIBTVS/
$50 less: http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/MARKIIFV/

[R.W.Dale]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=689224

See the above thread




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

[TooManyToys]

Keep your eyes open for a MOSSBERG 144.
These 60's vintage target grade .22's are very sweet shooting guns and can still be had for under $500.

[stubbicatt]

I dunno. Either a CZ or a Anschutz. Both are very very good, but I don't think you can do better than the Anshcutz.

[WNTFW]

Anschutz for $500 ?

[MrBorland]

This would be a nice set up, and would allow you to quickly switch between scope & some nice iron sights. A bit over $500, but you may be able to find each of these items a bit cheaper somewhere.

Rifle: CZ 452 Trainer, $315 from Whittaker's (http://www.whittakerguns.com/).

Scope: Mueller 4.5-14 APV (http://swfa.com/Mueller-APV-Riflescopes-C135.aspx), $130 from SWFA

Mounts: Leupold QR (http://swfa.com/Leupold-QRW-1-Rings-P1037.aspx), $59 from SWFA

Accessories: YoDave trigger kit (http://www.yodaveproducts.com/index.html), $18

Optional Accessories:
Turner NM sling (http://prostores3.megawebservers.com/turnersling_com/-strse-High-Power-Competition-Gear-cln-Turner-National-Match-Service-Rifle-Slings/Categories.bok), $43 (second)
BRNO front/rear aperture sight set, $108

Total without BRNO aperture sights or sling = $522

[mdauben]

I had asked a similar question over on Rimfire Central (a rimfire forum) and the overwhelming recomendation there was to look at a CZ 455 or 452. MrBorland's suggestion above certainly looks like a great set up for your price point.

[heavydluxe]

My suggestion... a Savage Mark II with a bull barrel. The FVT model is perfect if you want iron target sights. If you want a scope, the FV (I think) has a mount cut into it.

There's probably a 'tacticalized' version with a rail, too, if you prefer.

If you elect to go with an optic, you'll get better quality for a lower price with a decent, fixed-power scope. 4x ought to be waaay more than enough for the range of a .22lr.

[sixgunner455]

heavydluxe, 4x is not enough for true precision with the .22LR. For one thing, the .22 can shoot much further than people think, and lots of magnification makes it much easier to take advantage of the accuracy inherent in the rifle, whatever rifle it is and whatever distance you want to shoot at. Parallax adjustment comes into play there, especially if you are shooting at .25" dots.

What I see as being important in this kind of a setup is the scope, the fit of the stock, the trigger, and the barrel.

I set one of these up. I bought a Savage MKII FV for ~$200.00, Burris Signature Zee rings for ~$50.00, a kydex cheek riser for ~$30.00, and a recoil pad for the purpose of adding 1" to the LOP. I already had a Bushnell 3-9x40 scope on hand, which I put on there "temporarily". It's still on there, but it will probably get replaced later this year.

The FV reciever is drilled and tapped, and comes with bases. They were a very tight fit with the rings - I had to file and stone the sides of one of the bases to get the ring to finally slide on.

The cheek riser made it possible to have a proper cheek/stock weld. The 1" thick recoil pad made the LOP more comfortable. The 1lb of lead I put inside the hollow stock balances the long heavy barrel.

Savage's Accutrigger is very nice, user adjustable, and is OEM on the FV.

So - my parts list:
$200 rifle
$50 rings
$30 cheek riser
$30 recoil pad
$15 sling

$325 total, since I already had that scope lying around - it was a take-off. I'll probably replace the stock eventually, because the forend is too narrow, too round on the bottom, and it's too flexible. I'll definitely be replacing the scope with something better - but if you go with exactly the parts I have, you'll still have ~$200 to buy a scope with out of your $500. You should be able to get something decent.

When I replace that scope, it will be with something that has adjustable parrallax, and it will have much greater top-end magnification than 9x. It will probably have mil dots.

[heavydluxe]

heavydluxe, 4x is not enough for true precision with the .22LR. For one thing, the .22 can shoot much further than people think, and lots of magnification makes it much easier to take advantage of the accuracy inherent in the rifle, whatever rifle it is and whatever distance you want to shoot at. Parallax adjustment comes into play there, especially if you are shooting at .25" dots.

I think you misunderstood my point, so I'll clarify... On a budget, the overall quality of the glass and construction is going to be in favor of a FIXED magnification scope at any given price point. That is, looking at two $200 scopes, I'm more likely to get a better construction quality and optics in a 6x fixed scope than I will a 3-9x at the same price. So, if you need more magnification, I think a fixed scope (whatever the magnification) will be a more economical investment.

Now, my opinion: Unless you're going for benchrest-style precision, I would be willing to bet that a 4x scope is still more than adequate for almost any practical range shot with a .22lr. I have a similar scope - a 1-4x - on my 'precision AR' (in .223Rem) and can put shots down at 300yrds with very good precision given a suitable shooting position/platform. I'm betting that the ballistics of a .22lr would make the same results difficult with any environmental variance at range.

Lastly, I'm a great champion of the .22lr. I think many people significantly undervalue it's effectiveness and potential just because it's small.

[R.W.Dale]

I think you misunderstood my point, so I'll clarify... On a budget, the overall quality of the glass and construction is going to be in favor of a FIXED magnification scope at any given price point. That is, looking at two $200 scopes, I'm more likely to get a better construction quality and optics in a 6x fixed scope than I will a 3-9x at the same price. So, if you need more magnification, I think a fixed scope (whatever the magnification) will be a more economical investment.
.

While this may have been true 20yrs ago its not today.

Today fixed power Scopes are either extremely cheap sub Walmart grade optics or expensive specialist Scopes. The variable power scope has supplanted the fixed YEARS AGO and as such manufacturers have wasted no development on the type compared to some very innovative modestly priced variables, PARTICULARLY the now almost universal 3x9x40mm

You can buy a sightron s1 3x9x40 for $100 or less on sale. YOU WILL NOT buy a fixed 4x with comparative optics for under $400.

You gotta realize that scope makers probably sell 1000 3x9x40s for every fixed 4x so naturally for that reason alone quality per cost is going to be in the variables favor.


Putting a 4x on a precision rifle is a mistake from an accuracy standpoint as well as a financial one. How are you going to take advantage of a moa 22 when the crosshairs hide a 3moa target dot?





posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

[WNTFW]

Fixed power have their drawbacks. I have found variable to be the way to go. Adjustable parallax is good too.

What you need also is enough elevation. Some scopes won't take a .22lr out to 200yds. I would rather dial up & have no holdover.

I also like target turrets.

500 is a bit tight on the budget, but don't let that stop you. Worst case is you will still have fun.

[Cee Zee]

A lot of people are suggesting a CZ 452 but IMO a CZ 453 is a vastly superior rifle. It has several trigger adjustments the 452 doesn't have plus it has the set trigger if you want to use it. That means you can get the pull down to about 8 oz. if you want. I have mine set to about 12 oz..

But my Savage MkIIBTV is actually slightly more accurate. It isn't built as well as the CZ but it is well built. In 100 years the CZ will likely still be going while the Savage maybe will and maybe won't. And the difference in accuracy is very slight and is no doubt about the individual rifles and not the whole line of rifles.

The CZ is a much better hunting rifle. The MkII is a better bench gun. It depends on what you're looking for in a rifle really. The MkII is cheaper but both deserve great glass. So if you need glass to come with your rifle then maybe the Savage is the best pick.

[chaser_2332]

I vote cz 452 mine is setting in a Boyd stock until I can snatch up a manners t4 for it, but the way it shoots now has me rethinking that its lights out. No problem making 250-300yd hits on 10" steel with the 1-4 scope. I have bigger scopes to out on this rifle but I keep coming back to the 1-4 I have never felt underpowered.
http://i932.photobucket.com/albums/ad170/chaser_2332/37CA168B-E59D-41CC-A3FA-6AEB74C811B6-1876-000002CE784975B8.jpg

[SwampWolf]

The Remington Model 504 is a very nice .22rf rifle. Mine has a Nikon Prostaff 4x mounted on it and it is very accurate, well-made and reliable.

[mdauben]

4x ought to be waaay more than enough for the range of a .22lr.
You might be surprised. Serious benchrest shooters normally use 36X or 40X fixed scopes on their .22 rimfires. Even for casual precision shooting I would consider at least a 4-14x50 AO variable to get the most from a rifle if you intend to shoot at distances of 100yds or more.

[velocette]

The Kimber 82g from the CMP @ $425.00 + $25.00 shipping, delivered to your door. No FFL No dealer, to your door.
Comes with very good target aperture sights and grooved for a rimfire scope mount. Bull barrel, adjustable trigger, walnut stock.
Probably the best bargain in rimfire target rifles in the past 10 years.
Mine was good enough to get me to the top of expert class in smallbore prone competition with a 99.33% 10 ring performance. (99.5% is master classification) You could sell off the sights for $125.00 (the going price) and have a down payment on a decent scope. All for less than $450.00.
Buy them now because the CMP will be running out very soon and then the price will go up up up because there will be NO more, not never.
Note: the stock in the photo has been modified by me for smallbore prone shooting.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p235/RogerS_photo/82g005.jpg

[MilsurpShooter]

I always tell everyone if they can find an old Remington 511 for sale, throw on a BSA sweet's scope and you've got a cheap, accurate plinker

[redneck2]

This exceeds your price point but...

I was shooting my CZ 453 heavy barrel Varminter yesterday. It's got a VX-3 4.5x14x40 AO. Single set trigger set about 8 ounces. Trying out Wolf Ultra Match ammo at 50 yards.

It was kinda consistent at around 3/4". Saw that the AO was set to 100 yards. Corrected that and shot .2. Don't believe that ammo selection, AO, magnification, or trigger can't make significant difference. How are you gonna shoot one hole groups if you can't see the hole??

[Curator]

Find a Marlin 2000 on Gunbroker or AuctionArms for less than $500 and jump on it. The New Savage MKII transplanted into a Boyds laminated stock would be my second suggestion. The "accu-trigger" is just that. Any BSA martini right up to the International if you can get a deal.

[Cee Zee]

Serious benchrest shooters normally use 36X or 40X fixed scopes on their .22 rimfires

I use a T36 Weaver (36X) on my CZ 453 for shooting 50 yard targets. The better you can see the smaller the groups you will get.

I also use AO adjustments for every distance too. It makes a huge difference. If you aren't lining up the scope the same way every time you'll never get the rifle pointed the same way. And the only way to be sure of that is to adjust the AO so you see the same way every time. If you can move your head and make your reticle line up at a different spot then your AO isn't set right. People will tell you that it doesn't matter a lot under 100 yards with a scope that is under 9X but I think it does. I have made great improvements by keeping my AO adjusted according to distance. And those lines they give you to go by are just guesses. There a good place to start but only actual practice will tell you how to set the AO correctly.

[kludge]

You bet it does. Especially with my 24x scope and benchrest matches. Get that rifle in a vice and adjust the parallax out of it!

[Centurian22]

I'll cast a vote for the Savage Mark II heavy barrel (possibly FV). I'll also vote for a centerpoint scope in magnification of your choice. This is my plan for a good bolt .22 with similar purpose as yours.

[Captcurt]

Hard to beat a CZ 452. I have not shot a 455. CMP have Kimberly 52s for $500 with target sights. I'm sure others can recommend Savages and Vintage target rifles like the Mossberg US 44.
Got to go with d2 on this. My CZ 452 shoots as good as my Winchester 52B.

[Joshua M. Smith]

I have a Savage Mk II BTVS that I like... now.

As it came from the factory, the heavy match-type barrel was touching the stock due to the receiver having been installed crookedly, and the sear sloped after a few hundred rounds.

When they wanted me to ship the rifle to Canada on MY DIME (and were quite rude about it) after waiting for the build to come from the factory and paying good $$$ for it as it was supposed to be a semi-custom job, I just fixed it myself.

Additionally, the magazines tend to fall apart at the rivets after a bit.

Yes, it now does sub-MOA. However, the customer service I experienced from Savage Canada has soured me on all Savage products, including Savage USA.

My next .22 will be a CZ.

Regards,

Josh

[tuj]

Ok, guys, I shoot USBR50 (smallbore benchrest). You are not going to build a competitive rifle for $500. Won't happen.

I tried to build a benchrest rifle using a Savage MKII. Never got accurate enough.

Best effort I have had: Kimber 82G, replaced striker spring with stronger spring, replaced cocking stud, polished the bore with JB bore paste, NemoHunter 4oz trigger job, Winchester 52C EGW scope rail, Harrell barrel tuner, Weaver T36 scope. It will shoot around 0.3" 5-shot groups at 50 yards and will shoot high 230's on the USBR50 target (which has a 10-ring that is 0.1" wide). The only thing not done to the Kimber is to bed it. The Kimber tends to like Lapua Center-X. Adding the barrel tuner shrunk group sizes by about 0.1" at 50 yards. Going to a 36x scope from a 32x scope probably added 5 points to the score.

My best .22 is my highly modified 40X. It will shoot 0.2" 5-shot groups at 50 yards and will shoot high 240's on the USBR50 target. It has a Benchmark 2-groove barrel, Harrell barrel tuner, McMillian fiberglass BR stock, Jewell 2oz trigger, squared and trued action, bedded, T36 glass. I shoot Eley Black box or Federal Ultramatch UM22 with this rifle.

To get any kind of precision, you are going to want a T36 or better scope. You will also need to shoot high-quality ammo and buy your ammo by lot number and tune your rifle to the lot of ammo you shoot. You will also need a quality front rest. I use the Sinclair competition rest. You will also want high-quality front and rear bags with Cordura nylon ears. And work on your bench technique.

http://renkucorp.com/jf/pics/guns/IMG_20120708_075725sm.jpg
http://renkucorp.com/jf/pics/guns/40x/122711/DSCF0474tgt_group_sm.jpg
http://renkucorp.com/jf/pics/guns/USBR50_bullseye.jpg

[MrBorland]

You are not going to build a competitive rifle for $500. Won't happen.

tuj - nice set-up, to be sure, but the OP said he won't be formally competing - just wants the most accuracy he can get for $500.


A lot of people are suggesting a CZ 452 but IMO a CZ 453 is a vastly superior rifle. It has several trigger adjustments the 452 doesn't have plus it has the set trigger if you want to use it. That means you can get the pull down to about 8 oz. if you want. I have mine set to about 12 oz..

Never been a fan of the set trigger myself. Admittedly, I haven't shot a lot of them, but IME, pushing it forward to set it lead to a lot of overtravel when the shot broke. I tuned my standard 452 triggers and replaced the single set trigger on my CZ550 with a Timney. Much improved, IMO. YMMV.

[tuj]

CZ's are good choices for accuracy-per-cost. Once you get the rifle, there are a few things you can do to get it as accurate as possible:

-slug the bore and use JB bore paste to polish any tight spots.
-bed the action.
-use a deresonator, they actually work, cheaper than a tuner.
-use the best scope you can afford with the highest magnification you can afford.
-make sure your scope has an AO (and you use it).
-polish the bolt, firing pin, sear. You can use felt and Flitz polish paste.
-use high-quality ammo (Eley, Lapua).
-get a solid front rest and rear bag.
-try to shoot 'free recoil' or as close to it as you can get.

[ironworkerwill]

I got a savage MkII TR in .22lr. I say its the most impressive 22lr I have ever shot. It likes most ammo, especially Eley and Federal match. Although, believe it or not, it also shoots the Remington "golden bullets" fairly well(when they don't misfire or go "poof" and fall 10 yards down range). My rifle has a Redfield 4-12x40 on top and shoots sub moa 5 shot groups at 100yds with Eley black box all day long.

[tuj]

1" 5-shot groups at 100 yards with a 12x scope from a MKII "all day long"?

I'd like to see that. Maybe so, but I have a MKII TR and I did everything to make it shoot and it wouldn't hold sub-MOA consistently at 50 yards, let alone 100.

Shooting .22 at 100 yards is more about reading wind than anything.

http://www.gunsmoke.com/guns/1022/images/22hv_drift_plot.gif

[ironworkerwill]

well let me rephrase: not on a windy day. My savage model 93r17(Canadian made Wal-mart gun) shoots even better than my mkII TR does. But too the wind makes all the difference.

[tuj]

Well since you bring up the 17HMR....my 93R17 will consistently shoot right around 1MOA at 100 yards from a bipod. I have done a lot of ammo testing with the 17. Below is the best group I was able to wring out of it, but rarely will it shoot a group larger than 1".

http://renkucorp.com/jf/pics/guns/209217_10150596295320374_532280373_18546853_431838_o_small.JPG
http://renkucorp.com/jf/pics/guns/savage/rifle611/good_group_sm2.JPG

[ironworkerwill]

My 93r17 was without the accutrigger! I had to fiddle with it forever to get it where I liked it. I took the spring out of an ink pen to replace the Savage spring and drove the pin out that the trigger hinged on and polished everything. It still has more overtravel than I like.

[greyling22]

I'm running a cz452 with a mueller apv on it and a yodave kit. I also lightened the trigger spring by taking the nut off the strut (it makes sense if you look at it, but not when you type it out)

I now have about a 6oz pull with no creep. At 50yds off a sandbag it shoots under 1" with most ammo bulk ammo (2" with remington target and cci subsonics) and will do 3 shot cloverleafs and 5 shot ragged holes at with wolf match tagret.

I"m sure a savage would get you there for less money, but the savage action looks cheap. The cz looks like a real rifle.

You could also probably shoot real well with a quality free floated barrel in a 10/22 and a little trigger love.

[tuj]

You know, there are a lot of guys I see on the forums that claim 'one ragged hole' at 50 yards with low to moderately priced ammo with low to moderately priced rifles. Now I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I compete against guys who have put thousands of dollars and lots of effort and rounds into tuning their rifles and getting the most out of their setup and honing their bench technique, shooting off one-piece rests that cost more than several of the rifles mentioned in this thread combined. In other words, these guys have the best gear, and top notch technique.

They don't clean the USBR50 target.

I challenge those of you who think you have an accurate 22, get a copy of the USBR target (or you can get a 10-shot variant over at RimfireCentral that you can print out) and shoot it at 50 yards and post your setup/ammo and score.

Here's even a link: http://www.southpondcottages.com/metaleer/10Joe-.pdf

[d2wing]

Tuj, it is good to have input from an actual benchrest shooter. I too am skeptical of some the claims. I would be interested in picking your brain on this topic. What would be a rifle to learn on?
Sorry, missed post #33 about the CZ. Sounds like a good project. My Lux shoot a tad better then my American. Maybe I can tighten them both up. They are both more accurate than I am.

[tuj]

d2wing: If you're interesting in benchrest, not just a rifle that shoots good (which the CZ and Savages certainly do), then the best advice I can give you is to head over to the Benchrest Forum classifieds (http://benchrest.com/class/index.php?a=5&b=199) and buy a used dedicated benchrest rifle.

If you want to go new, good rifles (as starters) include:
Anschutz 54-series action
Remington 40X action
Suhl150 action
and a number of custom actions out there like Turbo.

Then you'll want a good barrel, and while some rifles shoot really good from the factory, the quality control isn't tight enough to guarantee a shooter. Can you imagine, rebarreling a new Anschutz? People do it.

Add a custom stock, a bedding job, and of course a top quality trigger and stick a tuner on the barrel and *hopefully* you have a benchrest rifle! (Which is why it's better to buy your first one used and have all this already done to it). Then you need a good front rest and rear bag.

So anyway, if you're not competing, you don't need to do all that. Instead, focus on getting the most out of your setup. To do this, you'll want to buy a good rifle, of which the Savage or the CZ are good suggestions, as is the Kimber 82G. Get the trigger as light as you can safely. Tune the rifle by shooting groups and measuring the sizes, experimenting with:
-ammo
-torque on the action screws (get a FAT or better torque screwdriver)
-hold of the rifle

Try to be as consistent as possible and shoot at least five 5-shot groups to prove anything works better than another. Do your testing at 25 yards to minimize the wind, but when you think you have something, take it out to 50 for final testing.

My bench gun, which is not what I would call a top-notch gun, would shoot 0.25" 5-shot groups at 50 yards (measured center-to-center using OnTarget software) using pretty much any decent ammo (Eley yellow box or better) and it would do so *consistently*. Now that it's been tuned, it will do a little better than that with Eley black box of the slower lots or Federal UM22.

[greyling22]

I consider 1 ragged hole to be all the shots touching. Not necessarily a round ragged hole. And my cz won't do that every grouping every time with wolf mt. But it will 40% of the time. The other 60% is 3 or 4 in a cloverleaf and 1 or 2 fliers. I don't know if it's me, the ammo, or the gun. Groups with the mt open up to about 1.5" at 100 yds. That is probably me and my 14x scope and crappy rice filled sand bag.

The claims I am always skeptical of are the guy s who shoot 1" groups at 100 with irons. My be their eyes are just better than mine, but I can't even SEE a 1" circle on white paper at 100, much less hit it multiple times.

[Cee Zee]

I don't believe the OP even mentioned a competitive BR rifle tuj. Read his post again. No one is claiming you can win a benchrest shoot with a $500 rifle and that's $500 including the scope. That would just be silly to even consider and no one is doing it.

My suggestion for a $500 bolt action rifle that shoots as accurately as possible (and remember this includes the scope) would be a Savage Mk with anything other than a Savage synthetic stock and with a bull barrel and I'd add something like a Nikon ProStaff scope with Burris Zee rings. I believe you could come close to coming in under $500 for that setup. And it would shoot quite well for the money you have invested. Sure there are some Savages that won't shoot all that accurate but a lot more do shoot well at least according to the reports I see here and my own experience.

BTW I don't let over travel scare me away from the set trigger. It's just a matter of learning to expect it IMO. Besides you don't have to use it. I just know that mine shoots very well and the added adjustments over the 452 trigger more than make up for anything the set trigger might take away. I've shot both and I much prefer the set trigger. If I was using the rifle as a hunting rifle then maybe I wouldn't but I use it for plinking and informal target shooting. I have won my share of contests with that rifle though. Of the last 10 contests I shot with that rifle (none against true BR rifles - that wouldn't be fair) I managed to win 8 of them. I'd like to have a good BR rifle but I like having a rifle that is more flexible to be honest. Between the two I am going to buy the more flexible rifle first. YMMV of course.

[JTW Jr.]

I got a Savage GBXP "Dicks Special" for $259 ( sold the package scope for $20 , it sucked) , added a Mueller APV and bipod / monopod setup...great casual shooter.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8148/7530668172_e386aedcb9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_t_wylie_jr/7530668172/)
IMG_4265_Savage (http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_t_wylie_jr/7530668172/) by the45guy (http://www.flickr.com/people/john_t_wylie_jr/), on Flickr

I also have a FV-SR , I like it , shoots well , but the stock sucks.... if I recall I paid $270 for that , but had the SS 10x scope leftover from something else , replacing with a Mueller Target dot soon.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7254/7533184220_87c36f3a88_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_t_wylie_jr/7533184220/)
IMG_4269_2_Savages (http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_t_wylie_jr/7533184220/) by the45guy (http://www.flickr.com/people/john_t_wylie_jr/), on Flickr

[tuj]

I want something more precision and accurate
I don't believe the OP even mentioned a competitive BR rifle tuj.

I know the OP didn't state he wanted a benchrest rifle. I just wanted to put in a reality check with how good a Savage, CZ, or Kimber will *actually* shoot. I know, I have shot all three and I've worked on all three to get them to shoot.

What I'm also trying to do is introduce the OP and anyone else to the awesome sport of rimfire benchrest. If what you are after is accuracy and precision, there is no other shooting sport like benchrest.

So my question to the OP is this: Do you just want to shoot tiny groups and post pretty pictures of them? Or do you want to go to the next level of precision shooting? Because if your goal is the former, yes, a Savage or CZ or Kimber will all get you there. But if your goal is the latter (and maybe you don't know what your goal is, that's ok, that's part of the fun), to feel like a master of accuracy and precision, then benchrest is where it's at.

I still encourage everyone who thinks they have an accurate rifle to give the USBR50 target a try and post your score. They don't call it the 'Green Monster' for nuthin'.

[MrBorland]

You know, there are a lot of guys I see on the forums that claim 'one ragged hole' at 50 yards with low to moderately priced ammo with low to moderately priced rifles. Now I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I compete against guys who have put thousands of dollars and lots of effort and rounds into tuning their rifles and getting the most out of their setup and honing their bench technique, shooting off one-piece rests that cost more than several of the rifles mentioned in this thread combined. In other words, these guys have the best gear, and top notch technique.

They don't clean the USBR50 target.

I challenge those of you who think you have an accurate 22, get a copy of the USBR target (or you can get a 10-shot variant over at RimfireCentral that you can print out) and shoot it at 50 yards and post your setup/ammo and score.


"One ragged hole" can certainly be bigger than USBR50 10-ring (or even 9-ring) standards. "Accurate" in many cases is relative, and I don't think anyone could expect a CZ/Savage "ragged hole" to be in the same league as a BR ragged hole. I've never made the ol' "one ragged hole" claim, but I do love a good challenge, so I may try that USBR target on my next range trip. ;)

In the meantime, I'll offer a NRA Smallbore target I shot with my CZ452 Lux. I'm definitely not a smallbore shooter, and the 452 isn't a smallbore rifle, but I'm posting this just to give the OP an idea of the accuracy one can expect from rifles in this price point. The thrown shot, BTW, was called and the result of an "idiot thought" entering my head just as the shot broke :cuss: (I did mention I'm not a smallbore shooter :o)

CZ452 UltraLux, front & rear BRNO aperture sights, 50 yards, prone, with a military sling, & CCI SV ammo. 0.9"/0.4" 10-/x-ring, respectively.

http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp239/becke016/GunsTargets/CZ452LuxBRNOsights12-14-12.jpg

[tuj]

MrBorland: that's some good prone shooting! I think if I laid down to shoot, I might never be able to get back up!

[Mr.Revolverguy]

50 yards
http://www.dayattherange.com/?p=2384

100 yards
http://www.dayattherange.com/?p=2554

[redneck2]

Anybody here ever use an Eabco HP tool to make hollow points on match ammo?? Read about it on another forum. Supposedly helps in some cases.

The wind drift chart above is pretty neat. 5" of drift at 100 kinda makes you think...

[MrBorland]

I still encourage everyone who thinks they have an accurate rifle to give the USBR50 target a try and post your score. They don't call it the 'Green Monster' for nuthin'.

tuj - certainly one couldn't reasonably expect BR scores without BR gear (rifle, rest, ammo), so what would you think would be a good score with a standard sporter rifle & ammo? You've got my curiosity piqued. ;)

[Cee Zee]

I just saw where tuj is claiming small groups are impossible with a Savage or a CZ. Maybe with you shooting them. I don't shoot USBR50 targets. I do shoot ARA rimfire targets. My best score is 2250 out of 2500. I generally average around 1900. The top BR shooters at my club don't shoot better than 2250 very often.

You're wrong about Savages and CZ's not being capable of great targets. Will they do it as consistently as a custom built BR rifle? Of course not. They aren't BR rifles. But can you take that BR hunting with you if you want to go? I can certainly take either my Savage or my CZ.

I get tired of hearing "can't" from certain corners. Believing in yourself is a big part of shooting. In fact it's probably the biggest factor. The Russians did research on the issue and that's what they came up with. The Russians pretty much invented sports science and they used it to achieve great success. So you aren't doing people any favors by telling them they "can't". Yes of course you must master the basics of shooting, a consistent aim, a consistent hold, a consistent trigger pull, and using your head to figure out things like wind and bullet drop. But once those things are learned it will be hard to put them into practice if you think it can't be done with your hardware.

You haven't shot every CZ or Savage. You don't know what every rifle can do. So don't handicap people before they start by telling them they "can't". It's the people who overcome that word that have shaped this world. I seriously doubt anyone thinks a sporter or ever a varmint rifle can shoot as well as a BR rifle when shooting from a bench. So why spoil people's aim by telling them they "can't" do well? They can and they do. Maybe not every time but you can bet nearly ever BR shooter learned to shoot with a regular rifle. And maybe you think it's best to discourage people from spending what they can and encouraging them to spend 4 times as much (or more) for BR rifle but I don't. You'll just discourage people from ever taking up shooting IMO.

[tuj]

Cee Zee: I never said "small" groups are not possible with CZ or Savage rifles. Both are fine rifles. It depends on what degree of accuracy you are going for. I tried to build a benchrest rifle out of a Savage MKII; it never got accurate enough for me.

The last thing I am trying to do is discourage anyone from shooting! In fact, I posted a link to a 10-bull target that I encourage and challenge anyone to try.

We're all shooters here. I have several of the rifles mentioned in this thread and I like them very much, even the Savage MKII; it's a fine rifle.

[tuj]

tuj - certainly one couldn't reasonably expect BR scores without BR gear (rifle, rest, ammo), so what would you think would be a good score with a standard sporter rifle & ammo? You've got my curiosity piqued.

210/250 would be a very good sporter score IMHO on the USBR50.

[MrBorland]

210/250 would be a very good sporter score IMHO on the USBR50.

pshaw. No problemo*. :cool:









* I'm kidding of course. Yup, a 210/250 (or 84/100) would be mighty fine. Still, I'll give it a whack. I love a challenge.

[redneck2]

so how is the USBR target scored? That is, does the bullet just have to cut the outside edge? I saw a post about one that had to have the entire hole inside the circle. If you touched the ring, it went to the next lowest value

[tuj]

The USBR is like most shooting targets in that the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt. The only unique thing about the USBR target is that if you obliterate the 10-ring (ie. no part of the ring is visible), you get an 'X' (which counts as 10 but is used to break ties).

A scoring plug or an 'Eagle Eye' scoring aid or an overlay are very useful when scoring the USBR target.

[Cee Zee]

I never said "small" groups are not possible with CZ or Savage rifles.

Well it seemed as though you were saying it wasn't possible to shoot consistent small groups with those rifles. I would agree they aren't up to what a BR rifle will do but they cost a quarter to a tenth of what a good BR rifle costs. You can get a good Savage for under $300. It's not at all unusual to see people spend well over $3000 on a BR rifle if they pay an expert to build it. I'd certainly like to have one. I actually called a guy to buy one but it was already gone. I still feel like shooting myself over that deal because it was going for an unreal price. But I ended up with another great rifle so I can't complain too much.

But I still say that a good sporter or varmint rifle is where most people learn to shoot well. They get the accuracy bug from a rifle like that IMO. Few people start out buying a BR rifle. And those CZ and Savage rifles give people accuracy that is uncommon at their price levels. I know there are more accurate rifles around but not rifles you can build for $500 including glass and mounts. I'd say only Savage comes in under $500 these days. It might still be possible to get a Trainer and stay under $500 total for a full setup. But I doubt it. I know it can be done with a Savage. And to be honest my Savage shoots more accurate than my CZ although not by much.

I just think telling people they will never get to experience true accuracy without buying a BR gun is like telling someone they will never experience real speed unless they buy a Bugatti Veyron Super Sport when they are considering a measley Nissan 370Z. Sure the Bugatti will go 90 mph faster than the Nissan but unless you're Bill Gates or Warren Buffett it's not exactly an affordable car. The Nissan can be bought for a mere $35,000 or so and it will "only" go 175 mph. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIScuIIvMeE) But like that sporter CZ you can use it as an every day driver while anyone who does that with a Bugatti is asking for problems - expensive problems.

There's a reason they don't build them all the same friend. And budgets are one of the big reasons.

[tuj]

Hey CeeZee: I started out shooting a 17HMR for group sizes off a bipod. That was my introduction to accurate bench shooting. I was shooting for group sizes and testing different ammos and techniques and generally having a blast.

But I wanted to see how my shooting really stacked up. So I took up benchrest. I got into the game with a used BR rifle and glass for around $1500, got a cheaper Caldwell 'The Rock' rest, and went shooting!

Along the way I have had the opportunity to meet numerous BR shooters of all kinds, serious, casual, etc. I have tried to learn from them, and I enjoy competing against them, even if I rarely place; I'm definitely a mid-pack shooter. I was fortunate enough to get my wife interested in rifle shooting, and after she got too good at shooting silhouettes, I moved her on to BR. We built her Kimber 82G up over the last year and tuned it; it will shoot in the high-230's now.

I agree a BR rifle is not versatile. My BR rifle has a 2oz trigger with zero take-up. It has no safety. I wouldn't even lift it off the bench loaded let alone hunt with it. But then again, hunting isn't really my thing.

Any of the rifles listed on this thread will be fairly accurate and might be exactly what the OP is looking for; the Savage MKII, the Kimber 82G, the CZ 452 (I've shot all of them and more).

I'm just offering another path for the OP. If you are an accuracy junky (like me), and you want to truly test yourself and your setup, then IMHO, you have to get into benchrest. Or at least subscribe to Precision Shooting magazine. :-)

[Dynasty]

I'm not looking to purchase a bench rest competition type rifle. I just want something accurate out of the box. I will not be changing stocks or triggers on the rifle. I'm not that particular, guys.

I'm looking for something I could buy, throw on an optic, and hit beer cans/3"-5"-8"/paper plate targets from 100-300 yards consistently.

[Deltaboy]

My vote is for a used 500 Remmy bolt rifle. I have a 512 That shoots minute of nickel at 100 yards with bulk Federal ammo.

[d2wing]

After reviewing the links provided by mr revolver guy, it seems the best odds would be a CZ varmint. It is safe to say that accuracy varies by individual rifles and ammo in each rifle. A Savage may outshoot a CZ depending on ammo or some other factor. One of my CZ's usually outshoot the other, my 10/22 with a bull barrel and custom stock is close behind, followed by my Winny 74, Marlin 70. Haven't shot the Kimber. Good luck.
I sure would enjoy meeting some of you at a range and see what they will do.

[tuj]

I'm looking for something I could buy, throw on an optic, and hit beer cans/3"-5"-8"/paper plate targets from 100-300 yards consistently.

A stock 10/22 will do that. As will any of the rifles mentioned in this thread. Nothing about that is 'precision' but hey, we each enjoy shooting in our own ways. Sometimes nothing beats plinking.

[afponiky]

I've got a 452 for sale, but it has the Klinsky stock along with the Bruno sites. along with all the original stuff.

Going to be way more than 500, guess it's what your looking at doing and what you want to shoot!



AF

[sheffieldshootr]

I have a CZ and Annie that are set up very similar and I ran them head to head today.

I intended to do some group shooting and then shoot a USBR target with each rifle - all at 50 yards. Unfortunately, the group shooting took about two and a half hours due to on and off shifty winds and then a big nasty thunderstorm (high winds and lightning) rolled in right in the middle of the first USBR target. So, I am posting the 50 yard group shooting test only.

I had three Caldwell spinning wind flags up at 3 yards, 25 yards, and 50 yards and I used a Caldwell rest and Caldwell rear bag set on one of our concrete benches (covered firing position).

The CZ:

CZ 452 American purchased new in 2004
Swift 6-18X44 (set on 18 power throughout the test)
Weight of rifle with the scope mounted is 7 lbs 4 ozs
Weight of trigger pull = 3 lbs 2 ozs
This is the rifle I use to shoot in the RFC Online Matches Factory Box Stock Sporter Class - it is a ringer!
This rifle is box stock. I was very lucky - the trigger has lots of the usual CZ creep but it is relatively light for a CZ 452 and a 3 X 5 index card will pass freely the length of the forend between wood and metal.

The Anschutz:

Anschutz 1710 purchased new in 1991 (I think the old box is marked 1712D)
Swift 6-18X44 (set on 18 thoughout the test)
Weight of the rifle with the scope mounted is 8 lbs
Weight of the trigger pull = 2 lbs 4 ozs
I used the factory adjustment screws to take it to its lightest setting about three years ago. I shoot it occasionally in the RFC Online Matches Unlimited Class and 2BAB Class (to pricey for the Box Stock Sporter Class and the trigger has been adjusted).

One may question the following, but............

1. Light shifty winds were present throughout the group testing. But, I think I shot enough to reflect some trends.

2. I am not the best shot in the world but I think I am a consistent one and I thing I shot enough to reflect some trends.

3. I shot straight through without cleaning the rifles and the fouling group between each ammo type is marked with an "F". Both rifles were cleaned a couple of weeks ago and they were both fired last weekend and zeroed to shoot just to the right or left of POA at 25 yards with the ammo that I used in the top line of each section. I am glad the POIs were off center because this prevented my POA from getting ruined. I adjusted the AOs for 50 yards before I started shooting.

4. I ran out of Green Tag. I simply glanced at the long skinny box and thought there was more in there than there really was. The CZ only got eight rounds of Green Tag (I fired the 3 foulers and one group). So, I shot three CCI Blazer groups with each rifle to round out the target and that gave the rifles a low priced ammo test.

5. I did not have any really high end ammo like TENEX, RWS-R50, or Midas on hand. That would have been a nice addition.

The format was for the five shot fouler group to be followed by four other five shot groups with each ammo type.

Steve Van Kauwenbergh, a North Alabama Shooting Association Member and RFC Registered User witnessed the test. I hope Steve made it home safely because the heavy stuff hit just after we locked the gate and headed home.

Here are the rifles:

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/CZandAnnie-1.jpg
Here is the very busy target:

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC01619.jpg

I am sorry the photography is not better. But, I am still a rookie with a digital camera.

No "one hole groups all day long" here. But, these rifles are close. Center to center nothing is over an inch (it was 85 degrees with light shifty winds and I know I pulled some shots) and two or three are just a tad over a quarter inch. You draw your own conclusions. I am sure there are some better shots than I and I would love to see them shoot something similar and post a target.

This is my test. It was fun. No trigger kits, no glass or pillar bedding, no custom work of any kind. Just two factory sporters. One from Anschutz and one from CZ. Imperfect? Yes. Did I learn something? Yes, I will keep them both.

Dynasty, A CZ 452 American or Savage Mk II should do the trick for you. The Anschutz tested above runs about $1,300 these days. You should be able to pick up a used 452 American for around $300 to $400

[sheffieldshootr]

As you can see from my latest match report below, some very humble rifles can perform exceptionally well in good hands even at 90 yards.

Six shooters and one spectator (my wife aka match photographer ;)) enjoyed a cold, overcast, and windy morning of shooting today.

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04827_zps33afc35c.jpg

The conditions were as tough as the competition was in today's event. But, we had fun making the little chickens fly at 90 yards.

Here are some random shots:

One has a minute to engage five of these from 90 yards with 10 rounds from a standing start:
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC03854.jpg
One's score is the number of birds left standing and the low score wins. Each shooter makes three runs at the little birds.

Peary uncases his TC Classic.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04826_zps0a0f0627-1_zps475cb015.jpg

I shoot some sighters. Didn't even have to remove the turret caps as the zero was still holding from my daughter's use of the rifle in the Speed 90 Match at Thanksgiving.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04812_zps9cb15215.jpg

Bill shoots his Ruger 10/22.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04815_zps02dfa290.jpg

BJ left one up in the first string. I have done this before and it stings. However, he hung in there and cleaned the next two racks. You never know what little quirk or errant wind might leave the door open for you.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04818_zps69567213.jpg

Watching the hits and misses.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04823_zps6b6dee78.jpg

The hat and hearing muffs were crimping my style in the sighters, so I decided to just go with ear plugs during the actual match. It was a good decision.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04824_zpse6f0ff20.jpg

Keith and I loaded only five rounds instead of ten for the shoot off for first place. He finished before I had even shot my third round. I assumed he had cleaned them and I pressed down for a 5 for 5. As it turned out, I needed it to win. Keith had left one up.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/sheffieldshootr/DSC04825_zpsa4af1235.jpg

Today's scores:

Place, Shooter, Rifle, Scope, Ammo, # left standing in 1st Rack, 2nd, 3rd, Total, Tiebreaker

1st Danny Creasy, CZ 452 American, Simmons Deerfield 4-12X40 AO, CCI Blazer, 0,0,0,0,0
2nd Keith McBrayer, Ruger 10/22, Barska 6-24, SK Rifle Match, 0,0,0,0,1
3rd BJ Kavanaugh, Savage Mk II FV, Barska 6-24X42, CCI SV, 1,0,0,1
4th Peary Willard, TC Classic, Tasco World Class 3-12, Federal 510, 1,0,1,2
5th Bill Parkhurst, Ruger 10/22, Nikon BuckMaster 6-18X40, CCI SV 2,1,1,4
6th Mike, Savage Mk II, Bushnell, Federal Auto Match, 3,1,4,8

Thanks for all the help in running the match fellas and thanks for taking the pics Karen.

Not sure when or where the next Raptor Match may be, but I know there will be one.

[Cee Zee]

Does anyone have an actual link to the USBR50 target? It won't be possible to shoot good scores consistently but I'm betting that a sporter or varmint rifle can come up with a decent score fairly often. I'm not saying they can compete with a BR rifle. I know that isn't going to happen. But I've seen very good targets shot on ARA targets. The sample USBR50 target that can be printed on a regular printer would be nice. It's a given that the measurements for the target must be available to print targets on a computer printer though because no two of them seem to print things exactly the same size.

I have a copy of what is called a USBR-25 target which I assume is 25 targets of the 50 used on the USBR-50 target. I'm certain that was how it was portrayed to me when I downloaded it some time ago. I checked the size of the group needed to get a 10 on every shot for this target and then I did the same for the ARA target. I used OnTarget, the program for calculating group sizes, to do this. What I found was that it is necessary to maintain a group size of .327" to get a perfect score on the USBR target. In order to get a perfect score on the ARA target a person would have to maintain a group size of .233". This is going by what I have heard about the scoring of the USBR target. I'm not all that familiar with that target but what I've heard is that a person gets the best contact score on that target. In other words if you hit the 10 ring at all you get a score of 10 for that shot. I could well be wrong about that. Again I am not that familiar with the target in question. I am familiar with the ARA targets though. I know how they are scored. In fact there is a scoring diagram on every target. So I am quite sure that the group size I listed to get a perfect score on that target is correct.

What I know is that only a very few people have ever scored perfect on the ARA target. The total number of perfect scores in actual competitions was under a dozen the last time I checked. And one person was responsible for several of those perfect scores including having done it once with a pistol. He's the only person to have done that. I'm not familiar with the USBR targets. Is it common to get a perfect score on that target? I'm not talking all X's. I'm just talking all 10's.

I don't know how accurate my calculations are for the USBR target, I don't even know the scoring for sure and I don't know what kind of scores are typical for rimfire rifles from 50 yards. I'm just trying to get a handle on this to be honest. What I do know is that I have shot a 2250 with my Savage MkIIBTV on an ARA target. That means I got 20 out of 25 rounds in that .233" group size and kept the other 5 close enough to get a 50. For those that say consistent shooting isn't possible that might mean something. But I can't shoot that well every time. Far from it. I can shoot about a 1900 every time. That puts me with a little over half of my shots in that .233" zone with the rest in a .489" group size, which is what it takes to score a 50. So that looks like an average group size of .361". You'd be amazed how often I've been told that isn't possible but I do it. Or at least I could when I was in practice. I probably need to practice up a little to get back to that level but I could do it within a week if I had good ammo. I've done it for years except during the winters. It gets mighty cold sitting on a bench in the winter around here. :)

[redneck2]

My S-I-L went to their website last night and printed off a dozen sheets. FWIW, the 10 ring is about the diameter of a .22 bullet hole.

[tuj]

Hey CeeZee: When I said the USBR50 target, I meant the 'Green Meanie', 25-bull target as shot from 50 yards. Scoring: if you clip any part of the 10-ring, that's a 10. The 10-ring is actually smaller than a .22 round, so it helps to have a scoring overlay or a plug. I am not sure if the ARA target is harder or not, I have only shot ARA once or twice.

In our local club, we have never had a perfect 250/250 score on our range in competition. We've had some 247's and 248's with lots of X's, but never a clean target. When I went to the regional competition last year for Texas, no one cleaned a target in competition either.

If you go on RimfireCentral, they do a match every month for benchrest. In the unlimited class it is still very very rare to see anyone claim they cleaned the target. http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=181

If you want to buy the USBR targets, I get them from here, they print them on nice heavy paper that makes very clean holes:
http://www.pistoleer.com/targets/benchrest/

[redneck2]

tuj....I asked before but didn't see an answer. Have you ever tried the Eabco HP tool??

I was in the LGS today. Found a brick of the Wolf Ultra Match, $7.50/box IIRC. Woo-hoo.

[tuj]

hey redneck, sorry I missed your post.

I've seen and considered the PACO Accurizing tool which is very similar to the Eabco tool but has 3 different shapes it can imprint on the bullet. Personally when I've talked to other benchresters, they have told me two things:

1) the Eley EPS bullet that is in the higher grade stuff already has an interesting nose on it that is not typical and is supposedly superior for accuracy, so why mess with it.

2) It's not so safe to be banging on rimfire rounds...

I *have* tried several brands of HP rounds, both standard and subsonic in the Kimber 82G trying to find an ammo that my gun likes (this particular one hates Eley).

[MrBorland]

210/250 would be a very good sporter score IMHO on the USBR50.

tuj - I had a chance to shoot that USBR50 target. I used my CZ452 UltraLux with BRNO F/R aperture sights, a Turner sling, shooting prone, CCI SV ammo. Those little circles were impossible to see, so I had to paste some ShootNC's over them.

I shot a single target, and admit being a little disappointed initially at a score of 72/100 (or 180/250). Not the 80ish I was thinking. I overlaid the target with a 50 yard smallbore target, though, and saw it corresponded to a 98-3x, which is about as good as I've been doing, so I think my USBR50 score is pretty representative.

I'd like to give it another whirl with my scoped CZ452 Varmint, shooting off a bench with some good bags. Might have to break out the Eley ammo, too. Apples to apples and all that. ;)

[Cee Zee]

I found this target that I shot. The individual targets are the same size as the ARA targets. I shot this with my Savage MkIIBTV from 50 yards. 25 of these targets would make up an ARA target. But at least you can get an idea what the ARA targets are like and how well the Savage can shoot. I shot this target to send in to Savage because I was having keyhole problems at the time. The holes that are circled in red are the bullets that keyholed on me. I did get that problem worked out but it took a while. It did hurt the accuracy of the rifle some but not a lot. Anyway here's the target. BTW your bullet holes have to be inside the scoring ring to get the higher score. You can touch the lower ring but no more than half ot it the way I read the scoring chart that comes on the ARA target. I can post a copy of that if you're interested. But keep in mind this is a copyrighted target so we can't be printing up targets that are too close to the ARA targets. This target is not a direct copy of the ARA target. There are some key differences. I don't see how they can copyright a circle though. If this were an ARA target I would have hit 10 out of 12 100 point scores with 2 50 point scores for 1100 points out of 1200 possible. Again, the ARA targets have 25 of these targets. And again, the inner ring measures half an inch from the outside of the ink on both sides. So given a .223 bullet hole a group of 100 scores would require a quarter inch groups or just slightly more than a quarter inch group. I would say there are 2 quarter inch groups on this target and 40% of a third one. People never believe me when I say it but this target was not that exceptional. I've shot much better groups than .25" with my Savage.

BTW when I sent the rifle in for the keyhole problem Savage tested it at 100 yards and shot a .7" group with it at that distance. I have that target too if you'd like to see it. I can probably find a lot of these targets actually. I often saved a copy of anything a quarter inch or better. But I certainly didn't save all my targets that had groups that size. I would have had hundreds of them at least.

http://www.a-framevideo.com/keyhole%20problem%20b.jpg

[redneck2]

What was the cause of/solution to the keyhole problem?? I've had it on centerfire, but never rimfire.