Thread: Desirable features of an all round NZ hunting rifle

Originally Posted by 6x47

Agree on the Ballistic Turret- both of mine immediately went and were replaced with an MOA labelled cap. I feel these are more future-proof than true custom (distance labelled) caps, eg a simple change of projectile forced by unavailabliity.

As for parallax and "focus" issues, I think you need to do a bit of reading. These are not same. Young eyes with maximum "accommodation" ( the tech term for ability to adjust focus with varying distance) cannot overcome parallax issues. Parallax causes aiming errors which become important obviously at longer ranges where there is far less leeway for error, esp in wind. You need everything going your way. I'm also a F-Open shooter so am acutely aware of these things.

BTW, the amount of parallax error at any given magnification does not vary with the objective diameter. If your 18X scope has a 40 or 56mm objective, there is no difference in that variable.

Important to note as well that if your head is always in the same position (optimally, eye looking dead centre into the ocular lens) then you will never have a parallax POI shift.

However, I do like the image and reticle being focused into the same plane.

Good article here: https://www.rifleshootermagazine.co....ined-1-6617150

However, no need for a fancy adjustable stock (easily adjustable also means can easily go out of adjustment...).

Just use pipe insulation and duct tape, add a low profile stock pack for extra security and a little storage.

Perfect.

I'm not aware of any practically-useful formulae but the critical consideration is that the potential aiming error increases the higher the magnification. My 6BR varmint gun is often run on its max 25X magnification and if you're trying to hit a rabbit at say 400yds, you want to eliminate as many aiming errors as possible.

Consciously keeping your eye in the centre of the visual field helps but it's a distraction. When you're making wind calls especially in LR target shooting, you don't need extra distractions. When I set up for a long range shot, I almost subconsciously reach for the parallax knob. That variable is then gone.

Thanks Caberslash. I didn't know Rifle Shooter was available online. That guy is quite a prolific writer isn't he ? The article focuses on adjustable stocks rather than principles of parallax. 6x47, I'll start a new post on parallax when I've got a it more time. We've got away from the all rounder theme a bit now.

Originally Posted by 6x47

I'm not aware of any practically-useful formulae.

Seen this one? I've used equation 6 (example 3) before when choosing a scope, to see how much parallax error there'd be for a given error in eye alignment/cheekweld. More useful than just calculating the maximum parallax figure before you can't see through the scope anymore.

Worth Reading

Light. You carry more than you shoot.
Short. Better in the bush.
Easy care (Stainless etc)
Enough accuracy and knockdown power to tip things over at 4-500m. >100 grain bullet. 308, 708 are all fine
Great trigger (I just cant stand bad triggers)
Half cock
Great optics. Low bottom end, proper glass. You know what I mean.
See through scope covers.
With either dial-up or a Xmas tree (fine out to 4-500m)
A light easy on/off bipod.
A light can, and still short.
Low noise, low recoil.
Easy in the hand - no annoying stick out mags. Blind mag is fine.

I use a chopped & canned Kimber 708 with a Swaro 1.7-10, a can and a halfcock. And a Snipepod.

Top of my wish list on a rifle are:
Stainless steel
Vertical grip
Pic rail with integrated sling stud up front

Unfortunately 2 of these things are always aftermarket

Oh and also the ability to accomodate projectiles seated out long

Was randomly thinking about this thread on a hunt the other day. Choice of scope is just as important as what's underneath it. Setting up one rifle for short range bush work and longer distance shooting is a tall order, but some of the top end scopes have a large magnification range. That would be my starting point. After that, I would want a rifle that is as short as possible and many of the obvious other features already mentioned (e.g. reliability; weather resistance etc).

Originally Posted by GDMP

I do personally prefer rifles with blind magazines.....saves a bit of weight,makes for a stronger stock,and you can't possibly lose your magazine or have cartridges fall out of the bottom of your rifle.....

its my one complaint about the kimber montanas
a nice floorplate would make it even better for me

Originally Posted by Bill999

its my one complaint about the kimber montanas
a nice floorplate would make it even better for me

I agree, cycling rounds out the top is a pain in the butt. Some good pros as mentioned though

I'm a big kimber Montana fan and the bottom metal exists for the classic timber stock version so I imagine it's possible but not recommended for the carbon stock as it weakens it too much apparently, unless you epoxy the bottom metal to strengthen it I imagine
I got a rem700 223 short action floorplate with the intention of fitting it to my 300blk to make it "perfect" for my use but the geometry is wrong so it was a no go. The upside was the Remington 223 metal follower and spring was far superior and solved a lot of fail to feed problems with flat faced subsonic projectiles
The action works far better as 308 based cases but I fully recommend the Remington follower/spring upgrade for the 223 length action as it's a straight fit and solid upgrade to the shit plastic one they come with