Advice:One rifle or Two? And what caliber?

Status
Not open for further replies.

golden220

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
8
Location
NJ
I'm looking to buy a rifle. I am brand new to regularly shooting with rifles, but have been shooting shotguns and muzzleloaders for years. I will have the opportunity to hunt with the rifle, even though I live in NJ, thanks to friends who live in NY and PA.

I want to shoot a lot of target, and eventually use a rifle other the the muzzleloader for a deer hunt. Being in NJ thought, I am limited on my long range rifle shots. I can take the recoil no problem, but I am concerned about not being able to easily develop good rifle shooting practices if I am fighting with the recoil. I'm also a poor college student that likes to keep the rounds cheap, so I have been looking more and the .308 and .22. I want to keep overall costs with glass below 1grand.

Would I be better suited to picking up something like the CZ 452 or other .22LR now and buying another rifle for hunting when I will consistently go? Or should I go for a bigger Remington 700 and just learn that rifle and should I go with 30-06 or 308 or even .270?

I keep on going back and forth between choices, and am just looking for some experienced advice to help me along.
 
All I can tell you is 308 is insanely expensive right now.

I was somewhat in the same boat as you, wanted something to hunt with but still plink cheaply at the range. After fondling a CZ 527 at a gun show, I knew right then it was the one for me. If you get the 7.62x39 version you can hunt medium game with it. Mine ran about $475.
 
Go with a .22 for now and develop good marksmanship skills. This will sort of take care of the rifle jones. Then, when you can afford it, pick up a .308. If you can only afford to shoot the .308 once and a while that is ok, at least you are acquainting yourself with the rifle. Buy an inexpensive reloading bench as soon as you can and craft your own ammo. If economy is your objective, reloading can save you money. To be honest I probably spend more on ammo now that I reload than before but that is because I choose to. On my more "exotic" (re. obsolete) cartridges I really do save money but still shoot more.
 
Buy the .22 and train with it. It sounds your skills have already been made but you should get hands on work with cartridged rounds. .308 is a lot. Too much for my tastes. If you really want a .308 you should look into reloading for it.
 
After looking at options a little more, I'm just going to forget the big game hunting with the rifle right now. I'm stuck between a .223 or a .22LR. I know they are extremely different, but I don't know if I want to work with the Centerfire over the Rimfire. Is there any clear advantage in target shooting with one over the other?
 
Is there any clear advantage in target shooting with one over the other?

.223 is flatter shooting and its more expensive. I think everyone needs a .22. Especially today since every ammo type is through the roof. You can go to the range and shoot all day for around 10 bucks. As for target shooting if you are doing within a hundred yards it shouldn't make a big difference.
 
Yes there is a clear advantage, that being the flatter trajectory of the .223 and the extra range you get with a gun in .223 compared to a .22lr.

I would get a .22 first, then once you feel like you need something bigger get something bigger. I think you might regret getting a .223 before a .22 because you will have spent more money for a gun you won't be able to shoot as much for your first rifle.
 
I'm sure you have the necessary skills from your muzzleloading experience, but the .22 rimfire rifle

a. uses the cheapest cartridge you will ever be able to buy,
b. is the quietest,
c. is extremely accurate within a 100 yard range,
d. helps fine tune your marksmanship--the nonexistent recoil lets you squeeze through while watching the target to diagnose errors easier,
e. is just plain fun to shoot, not only for you but for friends and relatives who may become interested in shooting sports. You'll shoot it much more often than even a .223 centerfire.
f. in cz452 form represents terrific value at about half the cost of a centerfire.

Ammo is a commodity that cycles up and down. Don't buy a specific centerfire chambering because it's cheap now, as that may change. 308 is always a great choice, but if the primary target is deer, it might involve more sturm und drang than necessary. When that time comes, 6.5 swede or 7-08 are worth a look, because they are generally more pleasant to shoot while doing an excellent job ballistically.
 
Just speaking of New York, there is a minimum rifle caliber of .25, .223 cannot be used for hunting. 90% of shots will be 50 yards or less. The longest shot I have ever taken was 200 across a field. That is the reason 30-30 and .35 have always been so popular, not much more is needed. Slugs are required in more and more areas all the time, they will do in a pinch. I use handgun in any area that requires slugs as this is allowed. Nothing a slug can do that I cannot do with my SBH. I realize .308 is expensive right now but bigger stores like Dicks Sporting goods alway have nice package deals this time of year on the Savage bolt actions complete with scope, usually around $300. They even had Marlin levers a few weeks ago in 30-30 for $259. If cost is a major factor I would seriously look into a Marlin lever action in .44 Magnum. The box price is the same as .308 but that is for 50 not 20. It is more than capable of taking any deer in the states you mentioned, they are accurate and just fun to shoot. That covers hunting.

The best bang for the buck is a good .22 Rim Fire. A great way to develop marksmanship skills cheaply. Hope this helps, Bill
 
Everyone needs a rimfire. They're fun, they're cheap to plink with, they improve your marksmanship just by sheer volume you are able to afford, and they can do small game hunting. If you want 100 yard range, get a .22 mag, still cheaper to shoot than centerfires.

I'd NEVER EVER ON MY STUPIDEST DAY recommend a 7.62x39 over a .308 for hunting. I have both. It's tough to find decent ammo for the 7.62x39 for hunting, just doesn't exist. Most of it is wimpy little 123 grain soft points or that hollow point wolf stuff that may or may not expand. Of course I handload for both, but the .308 is light years better, has more range, has more power, shoots much heavier bullets well, approaches the .30-06 so long as bullet weights are keep to 180 grains or below. The .308 is simply the superior hunting caliber between these two, the 7.62x39 is barely adequate. Even the .30-30, which the 7.62x39 is oft compared to, is very much superior by virtue of better hunting load selection and bullet weights. The one advantage of the 7.62x39 is cheap practice ammo, but I handload and that's not really a factor. However, I have two SKSs I play with, too. I mean, I don't limit myself to one gun here in Texas where the second amendment is still considered a personal right, not the collective right of the states. :rolleyes:

Anyway, I'd get a good .22 and follow that up with a good .308. You could get a .30-06, but a short action, light gun will probably be better for the areas you're going to be hunting. The .270 is a fine deer caliber, but it's a better western caliber than eastern, at least more suited to western open spaces. It'd do the job fine, though, in Pa. You can't go wrong with those three calibers, but 7.62s39 is on the weak side and I'd want a bigger, more versatile caliber, myself, if I'm getting ONE hunting rifle.
 
Is a CZ452 worth it over a Marlin 980? I'd like to stay with the .22LR, don't think a 22wmr will be any benefit to me. Is there another rifle I should be looking at, say a Remmy M5 or Stevens? I'd like to be able to shoot iron sights as well as scopes.
 
I'm probably the wrong one to answer the .22 question simply because I have never met the .22 I didn't like. I have a very accurate Remington 512X (pick one up if you can find one), old Mossberg 152, a lovely Ruger 10-22 stainless I really like, a Remington 597 magnum that's a fantastic shooter and is more adult sized than most .22s, and I even have an AR7, much maligned by the unknowing, that is reliable and as accurate as the Ruger and I take along sometimes when I travel. I've fired Marlins, a Papoose and several M60s and they're very accurate and GREAT guns for the money. I've not tried the CZ, but I'm sure it's a nice gun. I don't know if there's really a bad choice in a .22. Go shopping, pick 'em up and shoulder 'em, find one you like. They're all affordable. If you want to approximate a big game gun in feel for practice, I would recommend the Remington 597. It's the only plinker grade .22 I've ever picked up that felt like a real rifle and it also possesses extreme accuracy. I've been told the old plastic mags weren't reliable, but my magnum has no problems with 'em. It is 100 percent reliable. The only thing I felt compelled to add to it is an after market hammer that reduces the trigger effort down to superb levels. I have yet to measure it, but I'd say about 3-4 lbs from what felt like 10-12 lbs as it came out of the box. The thing needed NO accuracy enhancements, is a friggin' 1.5 MOA tack driver. Many plinker grade guns like my Ruger 10-22 shoot around 4 MOA typically. The Marlins I've fired exceed that and my old Remington 512X will shoot 1.5 MOA with average ammo and exceed that with RWS or Eley. But, a gun that shoots 1.5 MOA is a GOOD plinker grade .22 IMHO.
 
Yes on the 22. Twenty twos are never a mistake. The only trouble is trying to pick just one.

For a center fire rifle some have suggested a 7-08. Its a realy good choice. The recoil is much lighter in a lightweight rifle. I had a Remington 700 carbine in 308 with a 20 inch barrel. That gun was pretty brutal to shoot. I shoot 45-70 and i am not recoil sensetive for the most part.

If you can find a Remington model 7 in 7-08 for a good price pick it up. I have two. I have the original version with the 18" barrel. Its my favorite. I liked it so much i bought a NIB model 7 with the laminated stock. The old one is thinner and feels better in the hand. Both have open sights. They are on par with the CZ rifle in size and have no magazine to get lost.

Reload for whatever you get. The 7mm has a large selection of bullet weights and performace parameters.
 
I have a stainless 20" M7 in .308 and I really don't find it recoils that bad. Hmm. I am used to shooting up 12 gauge 3" in the duck marsh and have a 7 mag that's much worse than the .308. I have fired up to .375 H&H and didn't find it that bad. The worst recoil I can recall is firing a slug in my light 12 gauge side by side. :what: THAT'LL wake ya up! LOL But, the little .308 isn't bad at all on my shoulder, even firing 30 or 40 rounds off the bench in a session.

7-08 is a good caliber. I like 7mm as a caliber and have owned a 7x57 Mauser and, of course the Mag. Friend of mine has a sweet 7-08 A bolt short action.
 
Yes Mcgunner that 308 had some recoil. I don't know if it was the lack of weight or stock design. Like i said i shoot 45-70, 3 50 cal black powder guns, one, a lyman with the buttplate from hell, a 54 cal ML and 12 ga shotguns. Pumps ,not the recoil reducing semi-autos. Not counting the usual 30-06 and 8mm Mauser and 300 H&H. The only gun that gave me a push like that 308 was my uncles trap door springfield with 405 gr bullets.

I guess everyone percieves recoil differently. I was leaving the range one day and another shooter was asking about a way to reduce the recoil from a Remington 788 in 308. Someone else told him to find some managed recoil loads. That way you can turn yor 308 into a 30-30.

Maybe the powder in the military loads was a fast burner for semi autos and gave a sharper recoil impulse. Beyond that, i don't know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top