Looking to pick out a first centerfire rifle

[Doc7]

Hello all,
I am strongly considering purchasing my first centerfire rifle. I have come up with the following list of attributes, in decreasing order of importance to me. They are preferences and not requirements.


1) First centerfire rifle for myself and want to practice enough to ingrain good habits, and not ingrain bad ones. This will also be a rifle that I put in the hands of first time shooters after introducing them to my 22LR rifle(s) and 22 revolver, to go to the next step (most of the people who visit the range with me are first, or close-to-first, time shooters). Therefore recoil must be manageable for new shooters (so a .270, .308 is out because I wouldn't expect a new/first-time shooter to be interested in firing multiple strings of fire without developing a flinch with recoil associated with those calibers)

2) Accurate round that I can use to practice long range rifle work, let's say 100 to 300 yards. My current range has a 100 yard max so most shooting will be at that distance, but I do want to stretch it out at other ranges. I'm not currently interested in 500-1000 yard shooting except for occasional fun, and it is not a requirement for the rifle to be a ballistically superior round at those ranges.

3) Ammunition and components are available at typical outlets. I don't want to be hoping to stumble across ammo (although, right now that's what my 22 is like). I want to be able to feed this thing so if we shoot 100 rounds in a day at the range with new shooters I am not keeping a close eye on ammo count thinking about how it will be hard for me to find more.

4) It is a round that is relatively beginner-friendly for a Reloader, with appropriate reloading equipment and manuals. I don't want to be trying to make a wildcat cartridge, etc

5) Light weight but still appropriate for caliber/recoil purposes. I think I am looking for a synthetic stock with this rifle. I got a laminate stock on my last 22 bolt action and with a scope I'm looking at 9 LB Plus. WOW that got heavy quick with nothing except a 4x scope on it. I don't want this rifle to be that "heavy-for-caliber" even if I scope it.

6) Would really like to have a rear peep sight and a front post, (i am OK with after-market installations) along with a quick detach scope or low magnification red dot optic. This way I can show a new shooter (or take it out to longer ranges) how both sighting systems work. I am thinking a "Scout Scope" or Intermediate Eye Relief is what I would need to use here to allow both to be mounted at the same time. It is OK if the sights are not co-witnessed, ie, only one can be used at a time (Scope can be used, but irons can't be until the scope is removed - as long as I can use the scope without removing the irons).

5) Hunting capabilities. I currently plan on using 20 gauge slugs for deer, so unless I end up with a rifle in appropriate caliber we are talking coyotes, really. With a 20 gauge assumed range of 125 yards, I'm pretty limited on deer rifle caliber options that a) cover the 125-200 yard range for deer, and b) also meet preferences 1 and 2. So this is the final and least important preference. I can pick up a dedicated deer rifle later on if my 20 ga isn't doing it for me.



Caliber wise I think I am looking at .223, .22-250, .243, maybe 30-30? Any other suggestions? I don't know if a lever action round really meets the "moderate-range riflework" of #2 (i always have imagined 30-30 as a deer rifle not a paper puncher), i would love to be corrected if I'm wrong) and I don't know about Availability and Reloading Capability for pretty much any centerfire rounds as I have no experience in this arena.

I stumbled across the Mossberg MVP Patrol rifle recently and think that it actually meets a lot of these preferences.

How does a rifle like that compare to something like a Remington 700 for these purposes? Is it pretty much because of the Picatinny rail offering more sighting options and other than that there is no real difference when it comes to meeting my preferences? I'm trying to decide if there is a real reason for going with something like a Mossberg rifle (which I typically consider to be a Shotgun brand) as opposed to a more traditional model.

This is a lot so I'll stop typing now... thank you!

 

[moxie]

I think you've pretty much defined an AR platform, especially if you intend to shoot 100 rounds a day, and afford it. The .223 is much more reasonable when it comes to reloading too.

An AR is light, accurate, comes with a peep sight usually, and virtually any kind of optics are readily available for it. Great coyote rifle, and a lot of folk use it for deer.

I'd look at one of the mid-length barreled versions for your purposes, but an inexpensive M4 style like the S&W 15 Sport is really appealing.

 

[jmr40]

I have AR's, and they are an option, but I bought one of these 2 weeks ago in 223. Price was under $400 out the door. With a 3-9X40 scope on it weight is under 7 lbs. Only been to the range with it once, but shot a 1 1/4" group at 200 yards using cheap FMJ ammo.

http://ruger.com/products/americanRifleCompact/models.html

I bought the compact model, but they sell a full size for the same price, weight difference is insignificant.

http://ruger.com/products/americanRifle/models.html

With good bullets a 223 is a better whitetail killer out to around 200 yards than your 20 ga. is at any range. If you want more power the same rifles are chambered in 308 which is suitable for any animal in North America and would be the next cheapest to shoot.

223 recoil is almost non existent. 308 is there, but tolerable.

Forget iron sights even if you decide on an AR. A low powered scope does everything better. I've never had a quality optic let me down. Iron sights have.

 

[j1]

NOTHING compares to a Remington mod 700 favorably, especially in 30 06.

 

[Corn-Picker]

Based on your preferences, the 223 seems like the obvious choice. Cheap practice ammo for $0.35/round, 100s of ammo types for everything from groundhog to deer, and there's no doubt it's a great shooter without too much recoil (although it can have a bit of muzzle blast with a short barrel).

I wouldn't make life tougher than it needs to be with regards to rifle selection. There are so many options out there that you can overwhelm and paralyze yourself with choices if you'fe not careful. I'd go to a few different shops and shoulder a bunch of rifles. See which one fits you best, and buy it in 223.

I'll go against the common THR grain and say that you should stick with less expensive optics until you figure out exactly what you like best and what you'll be using the rifle for. If you're not shooting at dusk/dawn, constantly adjusting your turrets, or spending all day looking through your scope then a $150 optic should work well enough.

 

[handloader357]

I have a rifle in all of those calibers, so its hard for me to cast a vote because I love them all!

I guess if I had to I'd narrow it down to the 22-250 or 223. The perceived recoil from a 243 or 3030 can be off-putting to a new shooter. While the 22-250 is my favorite 22 center fire round, the 223 is more prevalent and cheaper. Ive had some experiences with Mossberg rifles that were not so good so Id say go with a remmy in 223.

 

[Doc7]

I guess one issue with the AR is that I currently live in NJ which restricts me on various options with regards to stock, etc., and I also hunt in PA occasionally where a Semi Automatic rifle (of any caliber and type) is prohibited for hunting.

I am trying to move to Virginia (and may be doing so as little as 5 weeks from today as I have an interview down there in 2 weeks). They have more lax laws for sure. Though, the more I read, the more I find no rifle areas down there as well.

 

[Tophernj]

Personally I would look hard at the CZ 527 Carbine in either 223 or 7.62x39. Great little bolt action guns. Nice, handy length and reasonably priced ammo. Both have iron sights on them and can be scoped if you desire. Detachable mags and the set trigger make them winners.

C

 

[Doc7]

Thanks for the suggestions so far guys. The M&P15 sport comes in configs that will be legal pretty much everywhere. The semi-auto is the only limitation (for use in PA as hunting) but hunting is low on my list of preferences as previously mentioned. So that, along with the other rifles listed above, are definitely all in the running.

How does .223 and 22-250 compare as far as barrel life, Cost and Ease of reloading? Is there a significant ballistic diff?

 

[moxie]

Here's the ballistics:
http://www.hornady.com/images/ballistics/ballistics_charts.pdf

The 22-250 is a lot more expensive factory load and for reloading. Neither is hard to do.

 

[Doc7]

Sounds like .223 is my cartridge!

I am intrigued by the comment about 223 being better than 20 ga slug for deer I would have thought the size of the hole made a bigger difference (and in some places 223 not legal). But like I said hunting isn't the main goal of this rifle.

Now I will have to select a platform from which to fire it.

 

[Cee Zee]

I'd go with the .223 also. And it isn't needed to go for an AR. You can buy a bolt action rifle for less money and IMO it forces you to think about each shot instead of spraying ammo in a hurry. Lots of newbies love the feeling of power they get from ripping off 30 rounds real quick. That runs into money fast. One shot at a time makes more sense because you will have time to think about your last shot and how to avoid the same mistakes. A single shot might be the best choice in fact. A Handi-rifle might be a good choice. H&R might still make them. They're cheap and fairly accurate and durable. Something like a Savage Axis might be a good starting point too. I wouldn't expect it to last forever but it would be a minimal investment for a .223 that may end up sitting in a closet gathering dust.

 

[B!ngo]

I was going to recommend a Tikka T3 Lite chambered in .223. It's a great rifle for newbie's: essentially no recoil, quieter than an AR because there is no bolt assembly moving with the shot and all gasses exit through the barrel opening rather than the ejection port, very smooth and satisfying operation, and easy for anyone to realize satisfying accuracy.
For the owner (i.e. the OP), besides all of the good stuff listed (above) it's a great shooting rifle that is dead-on accurate. It's really well constructed with a synthetic stock that can be taken anywhere without risk of marring and scratching, and it's light weight an easy to carry.
B

 

[Fremmer]

I would try a .243 Winchester. It'll do everything you need, very light recoil, and it'll kill deer dead.

The ammo won't be as inexpensive as bulk .223, but you should be able to reload easily.

.223 if you buy an AR, .243 if you buy a bolt gun.

 

[HexHead]

I agree with the others that have opined that .223 is the logical choice given your criteria. I also recommend a bolt gun over an AR for the reasons given above. While the Tikka is a good choice for a lightweight rifle, a Weatherby Vanguard S2 may be a better choice as it's stock design will help minimize felt recoil even more. The 2014 models have a 1:9 twist, so you can use heavier bullets for deer hunting. The S2 are also guaranteed to shoot sub-MOA right out of the box.

And forget that Savage Axis suggestion, their trigger is crap.

 

[powder]

5.56, 22-250 is preferred for ballistics but more expensive to shoot, .243 is great and so is the 6mm.

Rem. makes some great semi-autos in .243 and 6mm...


The M&P Sport is a great choice IMO...

 

[js8588]

5.56/223

CZ 527 Lux or some flavor of AR.

 

[kieranklein]

I live in Virginia not sure where you are seeing the no rifle hunting at. Around here (floyd county) is rifles no problem. As long as its .23 caliber or bigger.

 

[bscott29]

243

 

[armedwalleye]

See Fremmer's post about 7 above. He nailed it.

 

[d2wing]

I also vote .223. The .243 is a good choice but for primarily range use a the hunting you mentioned the .223 would be easier and cheaper to shoot but a lot. The .243 will give you added range for deer. I have used both .223 to 200 yards, 243 to 400 yards with soft point expanding bullets. As for 20 gauge vs .223, I have shot deer with both. The .223 is substantially more effective. A slug makes a big hole and penetrates just fine usually passing through leaving a clean narrow wound. But the .223 expands and dumps it's energy in the body of the animal causing massive destruction of tissue. I had doubts myself the first time I shot a 250 lb. 14 point Buck with my AR. I am a believer now. I have shot dozens of deer mostly large with a variety if weapons. No doubt that shot placement means more than
Caliber, but in Calibers, fast modern center fires with correct bullets are much more effective than slugs or slow calibers of any size. That said no caliber makes up for poor placement and all legal calibers are enough. Just some have more range and kill quicker and with more certainty.

 

[35Remfan]

223 AR: meets all of your criteria. Practice; accuracy to 300yds; ammo availability and low cost; low recoil; and even hunting(meets this the least). But with the AR platform just change the upper later to a more hunting friendly caliber(if you feel like the 223 is not up to the task) and you will be all set.

 

[MIL-DOT]

Personally I would look hard at the CZ 527 Carbine in either 223 or 7.62x39. Great little bolt action guns. Nice, handy length and reasonably priced ammo. Both have iron sights on them and can be scoped if you desire. Detachable mags and the set trigger make them winners.

The CZ is a great option, I also have the carbine .223, and I love that thing.
Another advantage the CZ has over other bolt actions is the fact that it's ok'd by the manufacturer for shooting 5.56, not just .223's, like nearly all others.

 

[Doc7]

I'm fairly sure I've decided with the input of everyone here taken into account that I am going to go with a bolt-action. Reason being, a bolt action meets my requirements as well as a semi-auto does, and I think I will get a better out-of-the-box trigger pull on a bolt-action without spending more money to upgrade the trigger. (I realize that I didn't put any Cost considerations into the main post but I'm probably looking to have rifle and optics for under $800-900).

I will likely end up with an AR when after we finish moving to a new place in the next couple months and I find a new range that has 3-gun or the like. At that time I could focus on building a gun that fits that role.


For a relatively new shooter myself, will I see a real-world impact on accuracy by going with a 5.56 chamber vs a .223 chamber? I understand that all conditions being equal, there is slightly more "wiggle" for a .223 in a 5.56 chamber instead of a dedicated .223 chamber. How good of a rifleman must one be before this makes an impact on their group sizes? If it's something only a vaunted few will ever even see, well, by the time I am that good I will have more rifles, and get the 5.56 so I can shoot a larger variety of ammo.

 

[WestKentucky]

For your purposes I would look at the may sees in 7.62x39. Cheap military ammo that's easy to get. Bullets aplenty for reloading purposes.