Forum shooting challenge: The under 500 500

[Ultimitsu]

@Ultimitsu stop fixating on 1/4 or MOA in general. You realize a 2MOA rifle will score 19 in this competition while a 1/4MOA rifle only gets 22?

I am not "fixated" on 1/4 MOA, my last few posts deal with 1 MOA rifle.

Actually I am not convinced that if a rifle does 2 MOA at 100, it will reliably do 2 MOA at 500. the bullet is likely to be tumbling a bit therefore far more likely to fare worse at 500.

But even if we ignore that cynicism, sure a 2 MOA rifle may do 15, the point of participating a challenge would still be winning it. Otherwise we could say a 3 MOA rifle would still score 5. But who wants to spend 500 for a challenge to have a 3 MOA gun?

[ChrisW]

I am not sure why you would rubbish Rimfire Central. Look at the size:
* This forum - Threads: 47,083, Posts: 782,521, Members: 7,998
* Rimfire Central - Threads: 473,223, Posts: 5,000,803, Members: 154,084

Rimfire Central is generally speaking a very respected forum, well run and well moderated. I mention RC because the RC has a lot of people tinkering with rifles about the price range referred to in this thread. If you go to Snipers Hide - a long ranger shooter forum - people there tend to talk about 5k rifles and 5k scopes.

I am not sure why you think somehow centre fire rifles are "mostly hand made by craftsman" with "More work went into the bolt than your average rimfire." The average rimfire that people over at RC play with are CZ and Ruger, they both between 600 to 900 here in NZ. many people there have been long term Anschutz class users.

Check out a review for a typical low-end centre fire gun, the infamous Remington 770: https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle...on-770-review/

Yeah.. I think CS 453 has more work gone into its trigger than Remington has put into the whole gun.

I think the point being made re the "mostly hand made by craftsman" comment is that most of the rifles that will be real contenders in this event will be old guns, that date back to a time where each rifle had a much higher degree of manual machining, hand fitting, and workmanship put into it. As such many of these now cheap, old rifles have a much higher degree of craftsmanship and quality then would be found on a comparably priced new-ish gun.
For say, $400, you can either buy a high quality old gun, or a low quality new gun. IMO, the high quality old gun has much more potential.

[gadgetman]

I think the point being made re the "mostly hand made by craftsman" comment is that most of the rifles that will be real contenders in this event will be old guns, that date back to a time where each rifle had a much higher degree of manual machining, hand fitting, and workmanship put into it. As such many of these now cheap, old rifles have a much higher degree of craftsmanship and quality then would be found on a comparably priced new-ish gun.
For say, $400, you can either buy a high quality old gun, or a low quality new gun. IMO, the high quality old gun has much more potential.

An early 1900s $400 sporterised swedish mauser is going to be head and shoulders above a more modern, low end $400 rifle that's a couple years old (eg used remington 770 or any other entry level rifle that's a few years old). The swede will have been made by craftsman, with parts individually fitted, all very high quality solid steel. Often each part is serialised to the rifle and stamped with an acceptance mark after its been (manually) fitted by said craftsman. Often multiple generations of craftsmen would continue the work of their fathers before them - they took pride in their work and it was more than a transitional job & that can be seen in the quality and finish of old rifles.
Whereas a Remington 770 or other entry level "modern" rifle (basically anything "modern" you can buy for $400) is thrown together with any manor of modern cost cutting. Flimsy plastic stocks, pressed in barrels, plastic parts everywhere possible, the cheapest labor you can find. (Iv used a $400 value for the rifle to allow some money for a cheap scope)

Personally im expecting to see an early 1900s rifle, probably a swede in 6.5x55 take the prize.

Though there are also some pretty good budget rifles around that could do it too. The likes of the Savage Axis are known for being quite basic but nonetheless showing the typical accuracy of its more expensive stable mates. A couple of years ago you would also have been able to pick up the likes of a Howa 1500 or Marlin M?7 for around $400 if you were patient. I think this challenge may have an impact in the market in this price bracket now.

I'm still keen to have a crack at this, though with my skill level I'd never be a contender to win.

[Ultimitsu]

I think the point being made re the "mostly hand made by craftsman" comment is that most of the rifles that will be real contenders in this event will be old guns, that date back to a time where each rifle had a much higher degree of manual machining, hand fitting, and workmanship put into it. As such many of these now cheap, old rifles have a much higher degree of craftsmanship and quality then would be found on a comparably priced new-ish gun.
For say, $400, you can either buy a high quality old gun, or a low quality new gun. IMO, the high quality old gun has much more potential.

An early 1900s $400 sporterised swedish mauser is going to be head and shoulders above a more modern, low end $400 rifle that's a couple years old (eg used remington 770 or any other entry level rifle that's a few years old). The swede will have been made by craftsman, with parts individually fitted, all very high quality solid steel. Often each part is serialised to the rifle and stamped with an acceptance mark after its been (manually) fitted by said craftsman. Often multiple generations of craftsmen would continue the work of their fathers before them - they took pride in their work and it was more than a transitional job & that can be seen in the quality and finish of old rifles.
Whereas a Remington 770 or other entry level "modern" rifle (basically anything "modern" you can buy for $400) is thrown together with any manor of modern cost cutting. Flimsy plastic stocks, pressed in barrels, plastic parts everywhere possible, the cheapest labor you can find. (Iv used a $400 value for the rifle to allow some money for a cheap scope)

Personally im expecting to see an early 1900s rifle, probably a swede in 6.5x55 take the prize.

Not that you are wrong, but I think "old rifles" is too generic a term that does not really mean anything more than rifles that are just old.

Sure, there are high end rifles from 60 years ago surviving to this day. But there are also many and many low end rifles from early to mid 20th century still floating around. A lot of the WWII rifles were sportised and many were not craftsmans' work, and were definitely mass produced to be able to hit man sized target at about 200m.

I used to check out guns at Will's fishing and hunting before he moved to west Auckland. He had a fair selection of old guns. From memory anything decent commanded a nice price tag. Will is certainly a guy that knows his old gun trading business.

High end old rifles that still have good bore and rifling, and in generally good condition are not cheap. Unless you buy from an unaware estate executor, most people know what their guns' worth. Try buy an 1970s Anschutz 54 rimfire, see how likely it is to get it under 500.

Last year a forumer bought an 1990s Anshutz 54 MSR, I think he paid about 2000.

[Pete_D]

I think if everyone who's following this actually manages to give it a go time will tell what works and what doesn't. Should be a bit of fun either way and motivation to prove each other right or wrong. I still think we need a open sights modified scoring system....Please.....

[faregame]

Actually I am not convinced that if a rifle does 2 MOA at 100, it will reliably do 2 MOA at 500. the bullet is likely to be
tumbling a bit therefore far more likely to fare worse at 500.

Why would it be tumbling?

[Tussock]

@Ultimitsu Anschutz are nice rifles. Regardless, you are babbling nonsense all over out shooting challenge. You need to buy a $500 centerfire and start learning.

[Marty Henry]

I think the point being made re the "mostly hand made by craftsman" comment is that most of the rifles that will be real contenders in this event will be old guns, that date back to a time where each rifle had a much higher degree of manual machining, hand fitting, and workmanship put into it. As such many of these now cheap, old rifles have a much higher degree of craftsmanship and quality then would be found on a comparably priced new-ish gun.
For say, $400, you can either buy a high quality old gun, or a low quality new gun. IMO, the high quality old gun has much more potential.

I must see if my nephew wants to sell his 770, its not as bad as the review rifles and is actually scarry accurate. At least with the nikko scope he has on it I could see the target properly.

[gimp]

Buy now this and you'll be away

https://www.trademe.co.nz/sports/hun...e83ce19b83542b

[rossi.45]

so what are you trying to achieve here . . . to get newbies into deer, target, varmint, service rifle shooting, with some of the choices put up its unclear

[Tussock]

so what are you trying to achieve here . . . to get newbies into deer, target, varmint, service rifle shooting, with some of the choices put up its unclear

Not quite sure what you mean. The angles people come up with to confuse the issue surprise me. I'm trying to get people who find this amusing to have a go for amusement. The 10" target is a dead deer if shot placement is correct, though this is something of a side issue.

Not referring to you here @rossi.45 but I can't understand why some people get so bent out of shape about competition. This is why I liked racing. In a race, someone is slightly ahead of someone else they win. You avoid having armies of bush lawyers trying to elevate their self esteem by re-interpretation of the rules.

Try hit the targets. Try get a score. Try to enjoy it.

[Tussock]

More importantly, to me anyway, what price will people put on a 1.5-5 power Leopold V-X111? If I don't use the Loopy, this is my rifle.

https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....-%24900-48744/

$450? I have one vote at $450 from the sale thread. Leaves me $50 for a scope.

Were my old 4x32 Nikon be valued at $50 I am away. More for the scope or less for the rifle and I am on open sights

[Carlsen Highway]

Ultimitsu, I bought this for $500. And many others like it that would shoot nearly as well, old BSA's and old Brno's.

It will shoot anything I load for it into an inch. I cannot get it to shoot badly. I have fucking tried. I just put it into a different stock and it still shoots as well. I am at my wits end.

The 40 year old scope I put on it puts it $100 over the entry minimum, but I bet I could beat you with it at 500 metres using its open sights. I throw down my challenge.

[Tussock]

Rather than risk cursing myself, I will shoot my new BSA open sights as well.

[Tussock]

I'm of the opinion my VX-111 is worth $500 after looking around. This may allow me to use my old Nikon 4x32 without voiding my masculinity. I may just shoot it scoped and open sights.