John Wayne
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 1,133
I'm considering replacing some guns in the collection, and would like to focus on having fewer, more versatile guns than several specialized ones. I like the AR platform for its modularity and legendary accuracy, and I am seriously looking at an alternate caliber (i.e., not .223/5.56) to fill this void.
This rifle needs to be fun to shoot, extremely accurate, and 99% reliable. As this will not be intended for SD (I prefer a handgun for that role), I would rather have it be accurate at the expense of an occasional FTE, but of course accurate and reliable is always better. My requirements for accuracy will not be satisfied by "accurate enough for hunting," quite simply because I derive great satisfaction from punching tiny groups of holes in paper.
Despite going the AR route, I don't want a tactical-whiz-bang ninja rifle. I am looking at 20-24" bbl, fixed stock, full handguard with no rails.
As for the "why not an AR in 5.56 and a cheap bolt gun" argument, my reasons are that I love to shoot. I also like to hunt, but if I can get two or three deer a year for my freezer I'd just as soon stay in bed in the morning
As such, I see no reason to spend a lot of money on a rifle I'll use a few times a year. I'd rather save my money and put it toward a rifle I will shoot often and become more familiar with, that can also be used for hunting. I thought about the AR-10 route but cost is a factor, and I would like to build my rifle from readily available parts.
I also handload, and have no problem using a brass catcher and not having factory ammo on hand (but cheap, readily available ammo is always a plus). Shots will be 300 yards max, most likely 50-150 yd. based on the deer I have taken in the past few years (all with .270 Win). Caliber needs to be considered humanely effective to at least 200 yards, preferably more--farther shots would be headshots if there's any doubt as to effectiveness (so it's either a hit or a clean miss with no harm to the animal.)
Right now, here's what I'm thinking:
7.62x39 is readily available, and with comparable ballistics to the .30-30, it will certainly do. However, it has a reputation for poor accuracy--I'm not sure if this is due to cheap Commie ammo, .308 bullets in .311 bores, or what. I have also heard of BCG strength problems with this caliber.
6.8 SPC is supposed to offer better short range knockdown power than the 5.56, but I'm not sure of its long-range performance.
6.5 Grendel, from what I've heard, is an excellent long-range cartridge with very good wind-bucking properties and great accuracy. I tend to be suspicious of calibers named after mythical creatures, and brass is very expensive, but other than that I have no problems with this cartridge.
.25 WSSM Would probably offer ideal performance, but I'm hesitant to shoot anything labeled "magnum" out of an aluminum-receivered gun. I plan on doing a lot of shooting, would this caliber batter the gun apart?
I'm setting the upper ceiling limit around $1,000 for the rifle itself. Scope/sights, brass, dies, etc. are in a seperate budget.
This rifle needs to be fun to shoot, extremely accurate, and 99% reliable. As this will not be intended for SD (I prefer a handgun for that role), I would rather have it be accurate at the expense of an occasional FTE, but of course accurate and reliable is always better. My requirements for accuracy will not be satisfied by "accurate enough for hunting," quite simply because I derive great satisfaction from punching tiny groups of holes in paper.
Despite going the AR route, I don't want a tactical-whiz-bang ninja rifle. I am looking at 20-24" bbl, fixed stock, full handguard with no rails.
As for the "why not an AR in 5.56 and a cheap bolt gun" argument, my reasons are that I love to shoot. I also like to hunt, but if I can get two or three deer a year for my freezer I'd just as soon stay in bed in the morning
As such, I see no reason to spend a lot of money on a rifle I'll use a few times a year. I'd rather save my money and put it toward a rifle I will shoot often and become more familiar with, that can also be used for hunting. I thought about the AR-10 route but cost is a factor, and I would like to build my rifle from readily available parts.I also handload, and have no problem using a brass catcher and not having factory ammo on hand (but cheap, readily available ammo is always a plus). Shots will be 300 yards max, most likely 50-150 yd. based on the deer I have taken in the past few years (all with .270 Win). Caliber needs to be considered humanely effective to at least 200 yards, preferably more--farther shots would be headshots if there's any doubt as to effectiveness (so it's either a hit or a clean miss with no harm to the animal.)
Right now, here's what I'm thinking:
7.62x39 is readily available, and with comparable ballistics to the .30-30, it will certainly do. However, it has a reputation for poor accuracy--I'm not sure if this is due to cheap Commie ammo, .308 bullets in .311 bores, or what. I have also heard of BCG strength problems with this caliber.
6.8 SPC is supposed to offer better short range knockdown power than the 5.56, but I'm not sure of its long-range performance.
6.5 Grendel, from what I've heard, is an excellent long-range cartridge with very good wind-bucking properties and great accuracy. I tend to be suspicious of calibers named after mythical creatures, and brass is very expensive, but other than that I have no problems with this cartridge.
.25 WSSM Would probably offer ideal performance, but I'm hesitant to shoot anything labeled "magnum" out of an aluminum-receivered gun. I plan on doing a lot of shooting, would this caliber batter the gun apart?
I'm setting the upper ceiling limit around $1,000 for the rifle itself. Scope/sights, brass, dies, etc. are in a seperate budget.
