BK
Member
Non-intimidating.
Not sure who told you that, but they are wrong. A boresighter should put you on the paper, thus saving time and money (wasted ammunition), but it is not a substitute for proper sighting-in.I was under the impression that a boresighted gun would be dead on
While I am not a big Savage fan, your experience is not necessarily a condemnation of the rifle. Remember that it is only one part of a system, and that the scope and mounts are equally important (as your edit suggests that you now appreciate).all the threads about the (supposed) inherent accuracy of Savage rifles out of the box got me thinking that it'd be reasonably close to dead-on right out of the box
You will need this sort of thing for sighting-in, but not for target shooting. Do yourself a favour and ditch the supports as soon as possible.all I'll need now is a good set of sandbags/rest/bipod or something like that for some 100-200 yard target shooting at the range
I've been taking stock of my firearms collection, and it appears I am weak in one category, the hunting rifle, I have a good selection of the other "primary" firearms that any sport shooter/outdoorsman should have with the exception of the hunting rifle
Rifles; a semiauto .22LR carbine, a single-shot .22LR/L/S, both scoped with 3-9x 40mm scopes, Dad's .22 Short, .22LR single-shot, Winchester '94 in 44-40
Here's the question, is the Winnie '94 in 44-40 (which I understand is a handgun cartridge) capable enough as a hunting rifle, most of my shots would be short to medium range, but I'd also like a long distance hunting rifle
What would be a reccomended hunting rifle, something in a common, inexpensive caliber that can be easily reloadable, I was thinking something in the 30-30/30-06/.308 range, possibly a bolt action, used is not a problem, reliability, accuracy, and affordability are key here....