New to Rifles, Need Advice on a Practice .22 for Long Range

[CraigC]

You have to be more specific. First thing you need to do is define "long range". For some folks, 125yds is long range. For me, 125yds is the edge of its effective range on small game and these shots are to be taken when offered. Second, you need to decide how much you want to spend and how much accuracy you need.

For me, long range is 200yds and beyond. For this to be a worthy endeavor, you need a rifle that shoots well under MOA at 50yds. Even with subsonic target ammo, which is always the most accurate at long range, things begin falling apart at 100yds. A half MOA rifle at 50yds quickly becomes a 3/4-1MOA rifle at 100yds. A 1MOA rifle at 100yds quickly becomes a 2-3MOA rifle at 200yds.

So if you're okay with the occasional hit on small targets like bottles and cans at 200-300yds, then any old .22 rifle will do. However, if you want to get serious, there are better options. Firstly, it will cost you 1.5-2 times as much money to get a semi-auto that shoots as well as a boltgun. Savage and CZ make wonderful boltguns in the $400 range that make great long range guns. While the 10/22 pictured below shoots measurably better than my boltguns, including a Savage MKII, CZ452 and Remington 541-T, I also have more than twice as much invested in it. Another consideration is a canted rail. You need a good 15-20MOA rail to get zeroed at 200-250yds. These are not available for every make and model of rifle and that can affect your decision. Another option, which can also be coupled with a canted rail, are the Burris Signature Zee rings which have offset inserts that can be used for up to 40MOA of additional elevation. These can be used on any rifle for which Weaver style bases are available.

Here is my present long range rig. It's a "10/22" with nary a Ruger part, including a Nodak receiver, KIDD trigger group, Clark barrel, R/T bolt, Boyd's stock, Warne mounts and a Bushnell Elite 3200 10x. It shoots wonderful little 0.30"@50yd groups with Wolf MT but that becomes 4-6" at 250yds.

 

[Manny]

Toivo, Yep, Rimfirecentral.com is what I meant. I have it saved and went off memory as I didn't want to look it up after starting my answer as I often lose what I've typed if I do so.

CraigC, awsome rifle!! Looks to be a whole lot of fun.

 

[diesel]

craig c

nice lil tack driver, i have a 10/22 but it is stock mainly for my 10 year old .
dont get me wrong i shoot the heck out of it ,and i squrell hunt with it.
my son the 10 year old wants to shoot my vtr.308 but he,s not ready

 

[DFWB]

Take a look at the Remington 597... Feels like a mans rifle, not a toy. Heavy barrel, very accurate. Had mag issues on early runs, but they replaced the old plastic mags with metal mags and fixed the problem.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

I run the Burris Signature Zee rings since I can't get a canted base for the way my 10/22 is set up. It's not 40MOA. The off-center inserts are up to 0.020" vertical deviation from centerline per scope ring, which is a linear measurement. Use two sets of 0.020" offset inserts will net you can up to 0.040" of linear offset. However, the angular measurement, or cant, depends on how far the rings are spaced from one another. You'd have to solve angular for a right triangle by knowing the distance between the rings and the rise. With 5" of separation between the rings and .040" of linear offset, that gives me 0.46 degrees, or 27.6MOA

The closer you can put the rings, the more cant you can get because while the rise is fixed, spacing the rings closer increases the angular measurement. If you mount the rings 3" from one another, you can get 45.6 MOA. You can probably mount the rings right up against the turret block but you're going to have no support on the rest of your scope body. I'd rather have rings further apart to give less leverage on the scope ends but I have no choice on my setup. If you're lucky, you can run both a canted base and the Zee rings.

 

[CraigC]

It's not 40MOA.

I stand corrected, I was running off of memory, which is not always foolproof. I don't particularly like Burris' rings and as such, never gave them much more than passing thought. If they had a thumb lever or at least a proper clamp they would be wonderful.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

No problem. I purchased under the bonehead assumption they were 40MOA as well because of several threads I read. Only once when I received them did I come to the realization that the ring offsets will net you .040" of offset, but the ultimate MOA gained or lost depended on the ring spacings. You can get 40MOA if you mount the rings close enough to one another This is the only set of Burris rings I own because there is no other method I can introduce any cant. As seen in the photos I attached in my previous post, there is no other method I can introduce cant on this rifle except the Zee rings. I'm happy with them though. Even though it's a 1" scope with limited turret adjustment, I should have enough elevation to get paper at 300, but I haven't taken it out for a spin yet.

 

[CraigC]

Now I understand why you can't use a canted mount.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

Yeah, it was kind of a stupid design on the part of the company that offered that piece of kit but oh well! Here is an example of a competition 50m match rifle with the aperture/peep/iron sights if the OP is interested in this route as well. It's more accurate than I'll ever be. Walther GX-1 KKM competition rifle. The nice thing about these rifles is that everything is completely and fully adjustable.






With all the tacticool accessories.

 

[LAGuy]

Wow! Quite the response. Thanks to everyone for your input. It was a LOT to read and think about.

So far I have definitely decided to make the move to a bolt action, rather than a semi. There seems to be unanimous consent that bolt actions are more accurate, and this is really what I am aiming for. It also helps that bolt action will help me train for some bigger rifles down the line. (And if I want something for more rapid fire I can always get an AR-15 down the line! ;-)

I have looked closely between the Savage Mark II's, and the CZ's, among others, and I am thinking the Mark II may be the better way to go for now. Although the CZ's look amazing, and perform great, I am really looking to spend a little less than that to lean on. (Not that I won't get one in the future!)

I guess now I am beginning to wonder which Mark II model would best fit what I am trying to achieve. They have so many different models, and frankly they all seem pretty similar (despite a range in prices). I think I would like to have the option to shoot with or without a scope, and with or without a bipod.

Any thoughts on which model would best fit what I am trying to achieve? Or other thoughts in general?

 

[BrocLuno]

Good starting point - nice used Remington 513T. You can shoot up to good club level comp and it will still be in the family decades from now

 

[toivo]

I guess now I am beginning to wonder which Mark II model would best fit what I am trying to achieve. They have so many different models, and frankly they all seem pretty similar (despite a range in prices). I think I would like to have the option to shoot with or without a scope, and with or without a bipod.

If it were me, for long-distance shooting I would go with a BTV or TR. Iron sights are going to be tough at distance unless you go with a peep. You might see if any of those models are tapped to accept the peep that comes on the FVT model. Both the BTV and the TR have an extra front stud for mounting a bipod.

 

[sixgunner455]

If you really want irons on your Savage, the only one to consider is the MKII FVT. The Williams peep rear and globe front is the way to go. Just plan to buy bases or a rail for when you want to put a scope on it, since it's drilled and tapped for them. The stock is nothing to write home about, though - to really be happy with it, you'll probably end up replacing it. It's the same one that came on my FV. I had to put a cheek riser on it, add a weight to the the butt for balance, and then add some length to the butt for LOP, as well.

I got the FV simply because of price, I decided that the FVT wasn't what I really wanted since I was going to scope it anyway, and I didn't get the TR or something else with a nice factory stock because the stock I really want isn't available on a factory rifle.

 

[GCBurner]

Shooting reduced-size targets at 25 yards with a rimfire is a good way to get the fundamentals down for shooting at longer ranges. A 4 minute of angle target at 25 yards is equal to one inch. If you can group your shots consistently into a target that size, with the proper rifle you should be able to hit a 4 minute of angle target at almost any range. That's the thinking behind the Appleseed type of marksmanship training. Pretty much any modern .22 from a major manufacturer should be able to shoot 1" groups at 25 yards, just pick one that fits and handles well for you.

 

[mac66]

If it was me, I would buy a Ruger 10/22, good sights and sling and then take it to an Appleseed shoot to learn how to shoot it. Once you have mastered the fundamentals and shot expert at Appleseed, I would then make it into a training rifle for my M1a.

Oh wait. I already did that.

 

[CZguy]

mac66,

I liked that you used a 10/22 rifle, rather than a carbine.

 

[LAGuy]

After doing some more research and thinking heavily about it, I am going to take the plunge and buy a Savage Mark II FV. Although it doesn't have iron sights, I will load on a scope and it DOES come with the heavier barrel. I can pick one up online for about $200, but then I have to pay the transfer fee to CA, so it might be cheaper to pick one up locally. Anyone with experience purchasing in CA have any thoughts?

Also: I am debating between the Bushnell Trophy 3-9 x 40mm Bone Collection scope vs the Mueller APV 4.5 - 14x40 scope. Thoughts on these versus others in the price range?

Everyone here has been a great help!

 

[tech30528]

I've got to go with the 10 22. I have three of them. My first (and my first rifle) was a target model which has progressed to a fully dressed out target rifle. We shoot ping pong balls off of golf tees from the porch at 117 yards. I have another one that is dressed out with a custom barrel that is going out past 150 yards, and then one that has a stock stainless barrel and a red dot.

I've heard people say that if you want accuracy you have to go bolt. I unloaded a 25 round mag in to a 1 inch square at 25 meters in 18 seconds and he stopped saying that. Thing is the 10 22 is like the small block Chevy of the rimfire world. There are tons of accessories available, and they are cheap. It is an extremely reliable rifle that can be made to do pretty much what ever you want it to do. Did I mention cheap? You can do a complete internals upgrade including trigger, mag release, bolt and hammer spring for $115. Nothing wrong with branching later, but for your first this is the one.

 

[toivo]

Congrats on your new rifle! I think you'll be very happy with it. I own CZs and Savages, and they're both good.

Also: I am debating between the Bushnell Trophy 3-9 x 40mm Bone Collection scope vs the Mueller APV 4.5 - 14x40 scope. Thoughts on these versus others in the price range?

Definitely the Mueller, IMO. The adjustable objective makes it parallax-free at just about any distance you want to shoot, from 10 to over 100 yards. That comes in very handy on a rimfire. (Get the one with target knobs if you're going to be messing around with extreme distances but might still want to shoot some closer-in stuff.) The Bushnell, if it's the one I'm thinking of, is fixed-objective with a parallax setting of 100 yards. That's more of a centerfire scope.

 

[wraith56]

LA guy,

it sounds like you are doing exactly what i did three years ago. I got a MK II FV with a Mueller APV scope. It has been worth every penny and I still shoot it all the time. I had not used many scopes then but i read up on a bunch of scopes them and the Mueller APV seemed like the best buy.

The only negatives I have experienced is that the scope is high for the factory stock which makes eyeposition seem unforgiving and finicky. i've been meaning to try a cheek pad on the stock to see if that fixes it, but haven't gotten around to it. A smaller power scope mounted on lower rings would also be easier.

Don't discount the APV just because of that. My dad uses a cheaper, higher magnification scope with an even less forgving eye position on a much more expensive gun. So get what you can afford to shoot and discover what works for you.

 

[awayne]

you're gonna love your new rig. after a few hundred rounds, you should be able to reduce groups at 50y to less than .50. buy you a good caliper--makes for great competition with yourself.

 

[CraigC]

Between the two scopes I would take the APV but would prefer the APT model. A mil-dot reticle is especially useful for long range shooting.