shooting tight groups 100 to 200 yds

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

oneshotor2

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
2
i would like some opinions on your thoughts between a Ruger no1 6mm or a Remington 700 243. witch gun would you choose if you wanted to get serious at shooting consistant groups. i do have a trusted and proven good friend that reloads for me. any input would be great.
 
I have heard that Remingtons quality has been spotty the last few years. That said I would not be surprised if the single shot Ruger was more accurate out of the box. However if you were to get a Remington that you were not happy with, aftermarket support for the model 700 is limitless. I would go with the 700 in .243.
 
Given those two choices I'd go with the Remington 700. My buddy has a Rem 700 SPS Tactical (AAC edition) that shoots pretty well. The .243 is also a proven long range cartridge.

Or, consider some other options:

My Tikka has hands-down been the best off the shelf store bought gun I've ever owned (save for my Accuracy International AX, which I guess could be considered "off the shelf", but is clearly in a whole different category of rifles).

Also, if you really want to shoot small groups:

1) Get good glass… Seriously. Too many people buy a nice rifle and throw a $50 scope on the top, then can't understand why they aren't shooting well. You don't need to spend thousands on your scope (though it can't hurt if you've got it), but you should definitely research the glass you choose at the lower end of the price spectrum.

2) Get good rings/mount for your good glass.

3) Start reloading for yourself, so you can really tune your loads for your gun.

With today's equipment you should be able to achieve 1/2"-1" groups for around $1,000 or so, with some careful purchases, followed by practice and patience.
 
I have a 700 ADL in 308. At 200yds I am getting groups of .307 inch measured center to center. This is one rifles that Dick's sells and is still in the original factory stock. The only thing I have done is had the barrel cut down to 20" with arecessed target crown.
 
I'm a big fan of the Ruger No. 1 and No. 3 (the No. 1's shorter, less attractive brother). I have a No. 3 in .44 Mag, which is one of the rarer models. It is extremely accurate for a pistol caliber rifle.
 
Another vote for the 700. You want 100-200 yards now, it will get boring after a while and you will want to go farther. The 700 will get you there and you then have a very good base if you were to start changing parts down the road.

Look into Vortex scopes. I have a few of them and am very happy with them.
 
Remington 700

IME Ruger #1s can be tempermental, some shoot like a house on fire and some shoot buckshot patterns.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
The odds are not good that a Ruger #1 will be an accurate rifle. They just aren't designed with that as a primary function. Remington is not my favorite brand of rifle and I think you can do better, but between the 2 the 700 is the obvious choice.
 
As much as I love a Number 1 it would be just about my last choice for a bench gun. Remington 700, Tikka or a Savage Model 12 would be my choice.
 
There's a reason that bench rest shooters choose bolt action, and many take a Remington and rework it for max accuracy. You can always get a good one of any make/model and a bad one of another, but odds favor the Remington bolt.

As noted, if you have other options, there are others that I would prefer. My first choice would be a Savage in 6BR if that were an option. Just sayin'
 
You might want to change plans and get a CZ 527 Varmint in 204 Ruger.

It knows where you want the bullet to go.

I honestly can't believe everyone who shoots at a range does not have one.

They are simply the best! On a rope to 300 yards.
 
oneshotor2 Are you buying one or the other?? Do you own both. I quess if you own both you would not need to ask. So if looking to buy , NETHER. Buy a Savage or Tikka.
 
I LOVE the Ruger single shots---but for pure accuracy the 700 would be my choice. Ruger #1's can be MADE accurate, but odds are you won't have to MAKE the 700 accurate-just find a load it likes.
 
There's a reason that bench rest shooters choose bolt action, and many take a Remington and rework it for max accuracy.
Click to expand...

I look at the 700's as the long running champion of the most possible accuracy for a rifle that doesn't require your name to be Rockefeller to own it. They have pretty much always been a rifle that needs to be tweaked to get max accuracy and there are legions of 700 gunsmiths around with the power to make them stand up and sing. IMO it's like buying a Ruger 10/22 rimfire. They aren't the best out of the box but you can make them into one of the best.

The #1 was never that kind of a rifle IMO. It's a basic get the job done type rifle. It's the Marlin 60 of the centerfire world IMO. Wow how the roles are changed when it comes to different equipment.

The thing is though that a person can buy great shooting rifles right out of the box these days. Gunsmiths tend to hate them and give them a bad rap at times because the smiths aren't experts at dealing with those rifles and they don't get paid good money to make something work that already works. Sure you can still probably make a 700 shoot better but it will cost you. You can get a CZ or a Savage or a T/C or a Howa or several other brands that work great without a lot of tinkering. I like Savages myself when it comes to centerfire rifles. They were the first ones that I noticed selling great shooting rifles are working man prices. I have a couple of their centerfire rifles and a couple of their rimfire rifles and they all shoot great. And some of them were ridiculously cheap. I paid $225 for a 110 30.06 with a decent scope on it (used of course). It isn't up to the current levels of Savage but it sure isn't a slouch either. I'd put it up against a #1 any day of the week and most likely come out ahead. And my 12 is just very accurate for a box stock rifle. I've shot my share of 700's. I nearly bought a few too. But that was before I discovered what Savage was doing and what CZ was doing and a lot of other rifle makers too. I suspect a 700 can be made to shoot better than most of those brands but again it won't be cheap. People talk about how their quality has dropped but the truth is they always required tweaking IMO.

I may get flamed for bringing up other brands when you asked a specific question but someone really should make the point. I don't know your situation but I believe a person can find a great rifle for what you might pay for a 700 and it won't require a lot of tweaking. If that helps you then great. If it doesn't then just ignore what I've said. It's just a few molecules on the web anyway. It's just that I had to pick a really good rifle (several actually) and though I came close to buying a 700 I ended up with Savages in centerfire because the price / accuracy ratio was just higher IMO.
 
The 700 is and always has been the standard of out of the box accuracy. As others have said many other brands have upped the game and and may be as good or better out of the box. But that is where it ends. Chances are the 700 will give you the best out of box accuracy. If you want to improve it you can. With other brands the options and gains are minimal. You are stuck with what you bought. The 700 is a better design and stronger than the Savage. No other factory action is even considered at the highest levels of competition. National results are either custom actions or Remington.
 
Can the OP be more specific about what he/she wants to do with the gun? Is it just for the range? Then weight is not an issue. I'd recommend a Tikka Sporter (9 lbs with it's heavy barrel - in either 20" or 24") rather than a 'regular' Tikka that others have been citing.
Heavy of light the Tikka is a solid, smooth and accurate performer but I wouldn't want to be behind a light gun at the range for a lot of learning cycles.
B
 
With other brands the options and gains are minimal. You are stuck with what you bought. The 700 is a better design and stronger than the Savage. No other factory action is even considered at the highest levels of competition. National results are either custom actions or Remington.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? That's the attitude typical of the old school. It is no longer accurate.

Start with the results outlined on this web page:

http://www.savagearms.com/news/article/?id=2K5nTzegQ

Here's a quote from that page:

"Team Savage Takes National Title, Breaks 1,000-yard Record

This list of long-range events Team Savage has won recently is getting almost as long as the distances they shoot at.

They recently added the 2010 F T/R National Championship to that list by taking the team competition in grand fashion. The won both the 600 and 1,000 yard events, establishing an new 1,000-yard record of 778-21X."

That's at least one discipline that Savage is competitive in and they are using stock rifles against custom built rifles at that. And this isn't the only example of national and world titles won by Savage rifles.

And before someone starts talking about how they aren't using stock Savage rifles here's some evidence that they are or at least they are very, very close to bone stock. This is a statement from a member of Team Savage, which has won a number of international competitions using out of the box Savage rifles. Notice how he describes one team member has not made "any" changes to his rifle. It is bone stock and they compete against custom rifles including rifles based on the mighty 700. This key team member said:

"The 12 F/TR rifles we've been using since 2007 started out, and still are, pretty much stock. Not exactly 'bone' stock anymore, but nothing earth-shattering or out of the reach of someone else with one of these rifles.

When I received my 12 F/TR in July 2007 it had already been in someone else's possession previously. So far as I know, all that had been done to it up to that point was a skim coat bedding job using Devcon. The barrel was original, the Target AccuTrigger was stock, and it still had that hideous 'lump' of a cheekpiece.

Due to a mistake on my part remounting the scope between a match here in the Pacific North West, and the SOA/FCNC that year, I ended up augmenting the cheekpiece with some foam padding and a fair amount of duct tape. I used the same stuff to add a bit to the LOP - which didn't work so well. It would compress easily under recoil, and bop me on my glasses every few shots. Still, I think the results were pretty good regardless

At that point if I recall correctly, a couple of the others were running Tubb adjustable buttplates, albeit somewhat modified (lightened) to make weight. One person eventually bedded their rifle, a couple eventually went to the Karsten adjustable saddle cheekpiece that I mounted on mine after 2007, and one person (Darrell Buell) to this day still has not done *anything* to his rifle - no bedding, still uses that factory cheek piece (yuck!), nada. If you've kept track of how we've done as a group, well, Darrell's performance has been a strong testament to the capability of the rifle as it comes from the factory. Prior to Bisley this year I sent my bolt off to Gre-Tan to have the firing pin hole bushed in hopes of buying a little insurance against pierced primers if some water got in the chamber. As it turned out, it was more a matter of 'when', not 'if', and the mod paid for itself several times.

Along the way we had an opportunity to have the rifles re-barreled at the factory - several members of the team were going back for a tour, and to take a factory armorer's course. Mine got re-barreled along with the rest, and shipped back (along with the 'old' barrel (#1); made dang sure of that!). Long story made very short, the new barrel (#2) got sent back because of some problems, and a new one sent out (#3). After the 2008 season, we had another talk and I ended up with barrels #4 & #5. After a thorough scrutiny with the borescope, #4 got mounted on the gun. Anyone who thinks that we aren't getting 'factory' barrels is more than welcome to bring your borescope and take a look down the pipe on one of these and draw your own conclusions

Now that I've once again spent a fair amount of time defending that the Savage rifles we've shot up to this point have been basically stock - with some minor modifications made at our own expense - and that the barrels are most certainly standard factory issue... let me add the caveat that what we may be using in the future may *not* be something you can find a direct match for in a catalog. Oh, it will most likely use standard parts (haven't been able to talk them into letting me stick a Rock or Brux barrel on there... yet) but the configuration may be something a little non-standard. The 12 F/TR rifle still shoots like a friggin' hammer when you get it dialed in - as evidenced by the pile o' goodies we brought back from Bisley with them - but F/TR is evolving. Subtly, but it is changing. Whether what we use ends up filtering back into the product line (gee, there's an idea...) remains to be seen."
 
Last edited:
d2wing said:
The 700 is and always has been the standard of out of the box accuracy. As others have said many other brands have upped the game and and may be as good or better out of the box. But that is where it ends. Chances are the 700 will give you the best out of box accuracy. If you want to improve it you can. With other brands the options and gains are minimal. You are stuck with what you bought. The 700 is a better design and stronger than the Savage. No other factory action is even considered at the highest levels of competition. National results are either custom actions or Remington.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be rude here, but has it been 30 years since you last looked into this issue? The Remington 700 action is a fine action from which to build a precision rifle, but it's hardly the only game in town. For box stock rifles in the precision game, many would argue that Remington is no longer at the top of the heap.

Savage makes nice rifles, Tikka/Sako make VERY accurate guns. Heck, even my Accuracy International would be considered a straight-up "factory" rifle, and with no offense intended to the Rem 700, you'll know the difference the first time you shoot one.

Looking at the equipment that was fielded by the top 50 shooters in the Precision Rifle Series shows a variety of actions have been chosen for those matches, but the Remington 700 definitely isn't the favorite (at a quick glance I'd say Surgeon leads that game).
 
If small groups are your thing, then I think you want to look a custom action in 6mmBR. That combo has been proven to shoot consistently in the 0.1's at 100 yards from the bench.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top