Thread: Can you help me choose my next build

Originally Posted by Sanctuary

Thanks Beetroot. The CTR in 6.5 with a 24 inch barrel seems to be getting a lot of love from what I’ve read. I do like the look of the new T3x super Varmint in the rough tech stock as it’s also cerakote on the barrel and action for extra protection. What do you think?

Scope wise definitely FFP for me. I have not had any experience with a Mil recticle so I’m not worried ifs it mil or moa. Should I be?

It will be mostly range, and thanks to Grandpamac, I’ve got a possible place to go. I’ll use my T3 for now and shout myself something new for Christmas with a nice new scope on it.

The Super Varmint and CTR are basically the same other than the obvious cosmetic differences.
The real changes are the CTR using CTR/TRG magazines, the CTR having a lighter profile barrel and the Roughtech Super Varmint appears to come with a 2 stage trigger.

If you need 10 shot mags then the CTR is the way to go, unless you plan to change the stock in which case you'll probably be using AICS magazines.
The CTR barrel profile is more than heavy enough and less weight will be better for hunting purposes.
2 stage trigger comes down to personal preference.

As far as Mils vs MOA, definitely Mils.
They both do the same job in theory, but Mils end up dealing with lower numbers that are easier to interpret (seems stupid but it's true) and the reticles seem to be simpler in a Mil scope.
There are also more options for Mil scopes, so if you aren't used to either system may as well start with Mil.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

The Super Varmint and CTR are basically the same other than the obvious cosmetic differences.
The real changes are the CTR using CTR/TRG magazines, the CTR having a lighter profile barrel and the Roughtech Super Varmint appears to come with a 2 stage trigger.

If you need 10 shot mags then the CTR is the way to go, unless you plan to change the stock in which case you'll probably be using AICS magazines.
The CTR barrel profile is more than heavy enough and less weight will be better for hunting purposes.
2 stage trigger comes down to personal preference.

As far as Mils vs MOA, definitely Mils.
They both do the same job in theory, but Mils end up dealing with lower numbers that are easier to interpret (seems stupid but it's true) and the reticles seem to be simpler in a Mil scope.
There are also more options for Mil scopes, so if you aren't used to either system may as well start with Mil.

Hi Beetroot,

Good to know the difference between the Ctr and super Varmint. I’ve done a bit of reading on the Ctr today and most seem to put it in a KSG Bravo or GRS Bi-frostfrost and cost seems negligible between either one.

I’ll try and get my hands on both over the next couple of months and see what feels better.

Ok, thanks for the explanation on moa vs mil. Mil sounds like a plan then.

Muchly appreciated Beetroot

Thanks and cheers,
Sanctuary

If you should end up seriously shooting NRA a MILs scope is totally useless unless you can do excellent mental arithmetic.
Seen guys at my club with MIL scopes struggle the reason being the electronic target systems in use on NZ ranges report in MOA. ie the shot fired is given an x and y correction to centre in MOA. You dont have to use these values but they do make life easier.

Except for 300 meter shooting all ranges are in yards.

Yep, my brain is wired to think in moa.

Originally Posted by zimmer

If you should end up seriously shooting NRA a MILs scope is totally useless unless you can do excellent mental arithmetic.
Seen guys at my club with MIL scopes struggle the reason being the electronic target systems in use on NZ ranges report in MOA. ie the shot fired is given an x and y correction to centre in MOA. You dont have to use these values but they do make life easier.

Except for 300 meter shooting all ranges are in yards.

To be fair, for hunting, NRA, and casual target shooting there is no real reason to not go MOA. It also seems like higher end FFP scopes are less desirable in MOA so could be good deals to be found.

For field target/PRS type events Mils is definitely the way to go and for me Mils is the better system regardless, but there are reasons to go MOA.

Originally Posted by mimms2

Interesting comment. I'd go the other way and say MOA. But then, as you rightly point out...that's the system I was born and raised on and very much "used to"
Though not sure I'd even pick milliradians as a logical thing even if I wasn't.

Everyone over... 25? can visualise 1" and 100 yards.
Anyone who can use a map will be familiar with minutes of arc (longitude) and maybe even arc-seconds.
360 degrees in a circle... 60 minutes to the circle, 60 seconds to the minute... makes sense in my head. Dividing shit by 10 seems almost backwards, in this instance.

Other than using MOA/inches as a rough idea of group size I don't use them for anything else.
As I always have a range finder there is no need to trying ranging a target with the reticle, and every call or correction I make is always in Mils.
Basically all my scopes are FFP and Mil so thats all I think in.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

Other than using MOA/inches as a rough idea of group size I don't use them for anything else.
As I always have a range finder there is no need to trying ranging a target with the reticle, and every call or correction I make is always in Mils.
Basically all my scopes are FFP and Mil so thats all I think in.

Greetings @Beetroot,
I am way over 25 but still favour metres, FFP and mrad. For most of my working life I worked in metric and one of my last tasks was taking of metric quantities from feet and inches (including fractions) drawings that were not to scale. I can't think how I could explain how to go about the process to anyone much younger than I. Anyone under the age of 60 would have spent their working life working in metric. Second focal plane scopes are, IMHO, the principal reason why so many dial up at medium ranges where a hold over reticle offers a much faster shot.
I don't know what maps mimms2 is looking at but the grids to our Topo maps are not in degrees and minutes but are 1,000 metres apart. The old NZMS1 series were 1,000 yards.
Regards Grandpamac

@Sanctuary...you could do LOTS worse than the heavy barrel Howa thats just popped up.....would make like simple having two rifles same calibre...and pretty sure the Howa would scratch ANY target /long range itch you cared to scratch....

Regarding MOA or MILRAD scopes generally MOA has finer adjustment at the top end going as fine as 1/8" at 100yds (3.17mm). You will pay a godly sum to get a MILRAD scope to get that fine with most 10mm per click (0.1 mil).......but it all depends how accurate you want that zero. One eighth out at 100yds equates to one and a quarter inches at 1000yds.......10mm out at 100yds equates to four inches at 1000yds and the "X" ring is 5 inches.........you wouldn't want to be adjusting the windage on a MILRAD scope in a hurry methinks....!

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

@Sanctuary...you could do LOTS worse than the heavy barrel Howa thats just popped up.....would make like simple having two rifles same calibre...and pretty sure the Howa would scratch ANY target /long range itch you cared to scratch....

Thanks Micky Duck. It does appear that I’m spoiled for choice. I’ll be honest I do like the look of the Howa carbon wrapped 6.5 with precision stock that’s for sale on trademe from the upper Hutt gun shop. No idea how it feels in hand though.

In the mean time I’ll continue to read this thread on Mil vs Moa and to be honest I’m none the wiser as to what’s the better path to take lol. More reading required.

mil vs moa....yeah nah...means nothing to me....4 clicks per inch at hundy is ALL that matters to me...and remembering its only 2 clicks on old M8 lol my rifles are zeroed and then not touched.....
go see them folks at upper hutt.....only one way to tell
if Im honest the 6.5crudmore isnt something that squeals my wheels...the hype and hooplah just over did it for me....
I like simple things in life.....
you however can do whatever makes you happy..life would be boreing if we all thought the same.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

mil vs moa....yeah nah...means nothing to me....4 clicks per inch at hundy is ALL that matters to me...and remembering its only 2 clicks on old M8 lol my rifles are zeroed and then not touched.....
go see them folks at upper hutt.....only one way to tell
if Im honest the 6.5crudmore isnt something that squeals my wheels...the hype and hooplah just over did it for me....
I like simple things in life.....
you however can do whatever makes you happy..life would be boreing if we all thought the same.

Thanks Micky duck. I had more luuck with open sights when I was younger, but I can kiss those days long gone.
I’m going sell on most of what I’ve have and re think this over. My 3o8 is trusty so I’ll keep room for that, possibly a tikka Ctr in 6.5 and maybe something in a 7mm. These Might night to come home around Christmas.

All beats are certainly off it something comes up that I start to druel over though.

Cheers Mighty Duck

Originally Posted by mimms2

Every map you've ever seen.
The equator is divided into 360° - these are your degrees of longitude. 1 minute-of-angle is actually an angular measurement taken from a pole, to the equator.
Of course we cheapen this with "a mile, at a mile" (If you watch a ship a mile away, travel one mile, it will have traversed one minute of angle from your perspective); and one-inch-at-100-yards.

Minutes are of course sub-divided into seconds, which is naturally, 1/60th.

Yes, "grids" are now decimal. and you work to 1/10th the square. 1984 I think they changed it?

Greetings mimms2,
I am sorry but I am going to have to correct one of your statements. A ship travelling 1 mile at a range of 1 mile traverses a great deal more than 1 minute of angle from the viewers perspective. It is closer to 60 degrees. You are correct that 1 minute of Latitude is close to 1 Nautical mile, not 1 Statute Mile which is the mile we are familiar with. The mapping grid in NZ is not based on Latitude and Longitude but on a separate grid from 1949 which was updated in 2000. I think that the 1949 grid was changed to metric at about the time of our change to metric in 1975 and the 2000 grid was developed to better match other international grids. For this reason grid references must always include the map sheet number. You can still see degrees of latitude and longitude with minutes to 5 minute intervals marked along the edge of the maps but these do not line up with the grid and are not used for navigation.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by mimms2

Get yourself a .2XX chambering and when you can post <1.5 MOA at 300 yards, all day every day, then go buy a big-boy gun.
Honestly .223rem will do for all NZ game if you can shoot (and if you can't, you shouldn't be putting bullets at animals IMO)
.243 I consider the goldilocks cartridge in NZ. Not too hot, cold, big, small...just right.
Obviously .270 is for homosexuals.
Don't pull the trigger on anything big, if you wouldn't consider the same shot on a rabbit.

You state that the cost of .338 factory is prohibitive... there's no point in burning all that powder and throwing all those .30 cal pills (whatever cartridge) if you're not learning anything, or taking meat. And tbh you're more likely to develop bad habits with a heavy kicker.

I don't mean to be a downer... but there's enough wanabe-sniper fuckwits out there who do our sport and public image no good (fuck here we go, I'm starting to sound like the old pricks)
You may be an upstanding chap. I don't know you from a bar of soap, you don't have any history here, so you get the blunt end of it.
Walk before you run. When your .22LR groups are one hole, then extend the range, then upgrade the cartridge, then when they're one-hole, extend the range, upgrade the cartridge...

Wow, I never knew the .270 is for Homosexuals, I've never had a .270 either, not even a Homosexual relationship.

I was gonna jump in and day .280ai, because I recently Had one built.

I have a .300wm, and .308
But for the Op, what about a Tikka 7mm-08, great factory ammo, it's not gay, it's not the latest fad.

I'm a Creedmoor basher, well I'm on record for bagging them frequently. , it's the choice of Millienial Man Bun types. I never considered it gay but maybe it's the gateway cartridge to a slippery slope.

Originally Posted by CBH Australia

Wow, I never knew the .270 is for Homosexuals, I've never had a .270 either, not even a Homosexual relationship.

I was gonna jump in and day .280ai, because I recently Had one built.

I have a .300wm, and .308
But for the Op, what about a Tikka 7mm-08, great factory ammo, it's not gay, it's not the latest fad.

I'm a Creedmoor basher, well I'm on record for bagging them frequently. , it's the choice of Millienial Man Bun types. I never considered it gay but maybe it's the gateway cartridge to a slippery slope.

I heartd whispers that .30 cals were for fella's that couldn't aim good, so I sold my .308 and got a dog instead.