accuracy problems with '06 - contd

Well, if you're trying to shoot long range and you're not buying quality ammunition or hand loading quality ammunition then you're throwing money away. Buying cheap ammunition and hoping it performs well at long range isn't the way to do anything. You'll want to buy as much as you can afford of the same lot of ammunition that your rifle likes once you discover what that is.

Bedding a rifle improperly can cause more problems than it fixes. So watch several videos, use more than you think you'll need of release agent. Go slow and be patient follow the instructions and your bedding will turn out okay.
 
Got it back yesterday, trigger's light and crisp.

He mentioned to me after I asked which gun cleaner he prefers (I always gather as many opinions as possible) and he said NOT to use one that removes copper fouling

he said the copper deposits fill in low spots in the barrel so it's good to have some, but not a lot.

This goes against everything I ever thought about cleaning. I always thought clean it completely every time.

I use Ballistol and I'm not sure if that removes copper fouling. FWIW I prefer aerosol cleaners as I can squirt it into the barrel then used my cleaning brushes/patches.
 
Hoppes #9 is the solvent I use most often.
I can't believe a "real gunsmith" suggested "not using a copper remover". I'd question his integrity/experience.
 
no experience, just assuming smaller bullet = less damage bc less mushrooming...?
Click to expand...

Bad assumption. It is actually the smaller bullet that is more likely to cause meat damage. It will also be going faster which cause more damage. I use both 165 and 180 gr bullets exclusively in a 30-06 for deer and pigs.
 
After all this. Bedding needed, broken bolts fixed, smoothing trigger work, on the scout for better heavy weight or lighter weight ammo, preferenced ammo brand, copper removing cleaner, he said, she said, the gunsmith said. {Dog never commented.} were near those Fall months now. Everyone has a long gun sale going on or about to start after the Holiday. Hang that old 06 on the wall were you can see throughout the winter at whim. It's the perfect time pull that credit card out and go buy a new rifle OP. (yesiree it sure is.) :D
 
He must be a credible smith bc hes loaded with jobs to do. I had a 2 week wait for mine. Maybe he knows something that goes against conventional wisdom. Just like any other field ways of doing things change. Heck I work in medicine and our treatments change almost every few years.
cant be buying a rifle now. Im stuck with this one
 
Would you believe your mechanic as to which way to vote?

He may be a good mechanic but be completely out to lunch on what makes an accurate rifle.
 
My experience with 1:10 '06s is that I get tight groups with bullets from 110 to 180 grains. Way, way back, I even did okay with swaged .32-20 80-grain flat-nose in my jackrabbit shooting days.

No bullet ruins meat if you don't shoot Bambi in the eating part.

For just deer hunting, anything that groups inside of two MOA is quite adequate. Since back around 1930, what with my father and uncle, I'd venture that the "Eatman boys" have killed around 200 or so bucks with 150-grain bullets from '06s.
 
shot it today. Trigger was much better. Here's how it went...

First out of the barrel, spot on perfect. Next, 8" low (yikes). Then I noticed the club has a lead sled. I set that up to take all the recoil (or most) out of it and hold the gun steady. Next shot, 6" low and right. OK no improvement, odd. Next one, 2" low and right or the previous.

Time to adjust. corrected using dials and visual study. Next shot, same exact spot. OK weird. At this point I asked the rangemaster who took a look at it. He boresighted it and said the reticle was correcting properly. Next shot, 6" up and right, next shot...on the previous. OK so precision is there. Now let's adjust the scope again. Instead of visual alignment, I just used the 1/4" clicks on the dial since it was nearly impossible to keep the rifle steady as I looked through it. The following two shots were on each other, 4" up and right. So clearly the adjustments suck. Again I adjust accordingly, then the next 2 are nowhere to be seen (unless they tacked the same holes, unlikely. To rule out the incorrect adjustment, I REVERSED the adjustment, then the next two were again nowhere.

***. He said he's never seen a scope act like this. I had it in a benchrest so it took my variables out (although for the record the first spot on shot was freehand). He said the adjustments did suck but also the part (i forget) that holds it stable is likely rattling loose. So I spent about 25 rounds of ammo in total to no avail. I contacted Nikon as he said they may offer a trade-up or repair.

it's a Prostaff 3-9x40 BDC. It came with my gun. I wouldn't have bought it alone, but what the hell right?

So now to add to this cluster of all clusters, I am looking into a scope to possibly purchase as I await Nikon's response.

He recommended Leupold (of course) or nightforce (yeah, Budget says no).

I looked into Redfield revolution 4-12x40 as it's made by Leupold and they look pretty solid. I do like the finger adjustments, No more turning a dime in the stupid shallow groove.

also looked into Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14 as its a $350 scope I can get for $200. Reviews from other forums seem to think Redfield is good, but head to head the Buckmaster is superior. It has been discontinued last year as Nikon says they'll upgrade their Prostaff line.

Also, consensus online is that either of these are better choices when compared to Leupold Vx-1. VX-3 is where it really becomes a Leupold so I'm told.


*side not, rangemaster told me not to clean it after he saw me doing so. He said it needs to form some lead fouling to"condition" it and form tighter groups. These days it seems people are feeding me information that go against my previously held belief. But then again I'm a noob so I'm open to suggestions.
 
My scopes are almost all Leupold Vari-X IIs. Old, like me. :D But they still work as well as they ever did. Set it and forget it and go shoot something. So far, so good. Coyotes at night, Bambi in daytime.

Cleaning? Mostly, I just spray a little WD40 on a patch and run it through the bore a couple of times. Then, a patch with a little RemOil sprayed on it, same deal. If groups degrade, I've gone to Hoppe's copper remover a couple of times and life returned to its normal sub-MOA. Been doing that for over forty years, now. But I don't worry about how others do their deal. :)
 
Redfield 3-9 is a bit less expensive and should be all that's needed for hunting.

I got the 4-12 but with thoughts of longer range shooting at some point.

And yes, you get all sorts of "advice"

Cleaning if it degrades seems to be the best but you need to have reasonably accurate for it to degrade in first place.

I normal use a mix of Hoppes 9 and Kroil. I have never got any copper reaction but I shoot lower velocity than max as I am not into hunting, just 100 yd target shooting.

I have some close to 100 year old Model of 1917s that cleaned that way can shoot a 5 inch group of 3/8 (best) at 50 yds using the iron sights (sight picture is harder at 100 and this is just entertainment and seeing how good the reloads are.

Bores are a bit crazed and no idea what history is but original barrels.
 
aHA! I took my rings off the base today out of curiosity. Loose screws and slightly damage groove lip. The gunsmith was supposed to check torque, but maybe he only did it on the rings. Rangemaster said today that could have been the issue. So I loctite'd it down and will see Sunday. If it's wonky again, I'm ordering a new scope (and one piece DNZ mount).

edit: as far as scope power, I will definitely upgrade from 3-9 IF I get a new one. I can barely see the bullseye at 9x when I'm sighting in. I don't mind movement of the reticle, just need to see what I'm aiming at, especially if the animal's at 200 yds!
 
I can barely see the bullseye at 9x when I'm sighting in
Click to expand...
If you are sighting in at 100 yds, then put the power adjustment somewhere in the middle (4 or 5). No need to go to 9x for only 100 yds.
 
On sight-in, I use 9X so I can see .30 holes without the spotting scope. After I'm all happified, I then shoot a group at 3X to see if the scope is righteous.
 
The reason I use 9x is I can't see the holes otherwise. I'm "guessing" that the bullseye is somewhere there in the middle. I like to visually see (clearly) what I'm shooting at.


Like with mt 22, I zoom in to 9x for 50 yds! but I can see the exact dot of the bullseye. Plus that way when I'm done with my target, I can precisely shoot the staples off :)
 
mendozer said:
Also, consensus online is that either of these are better choices when compared to Leupold Vx-1. VX-3 is where it really becomes a Leupold so I'm told.
Click to expand...

First off any VX1 scope will be a better scope than the Redfield Revolution. Leupold isn't going to put better tech in a Redfield than its gold ring products. The only issue you might have with the VX1 is the parallax is set at 75 yards instead of 150 like the VX2, I have a newer VX1 on my daughters .250 Savage and have no issues with the parallax. For a sub $200 scope in the 2-7 or 3-9 power range you'll be hard pressed to find a better scope.

For years the standard for Leupold was the Vari-X/VX-II 3-9X40 this is the most popular selling version of the Leupold. One thing to remember about Leupold is technology trickles down line with them. A couple of years ago they went to the VX3 line and VX2 got the VX-III tech and the VX1 got the VX-II and so on. The new VX1 now has finger adjustable turrets with clicks like the VX2 & 3 and the same Multi Coat 4 glass coatings as the VX-II. The only thing you can't really get on a VX1 is the CDS dial.
 
On sight-in, I use 9X so I can see .30 holes without the spotting scope. After I'm all happified, I then shoot a group at 3X to see if the scope is righteous.
Click to expand...

I need a spotting scope of 40x to see the holes at 100, your eyes more better than my eyes!

When I was hunting I sighted in at 3x and that was what I shot at. 9x was for scanning from a fixed position (stable)

I always went back to 3x, wider field of view and plenty good for hunting (never did see any of the holes in the animals until I skinned em!

Still whatever works. Lot of varried vegitation so wider was bette.

I had the raised rings for any bear encounter, not a fun thought trying to get one of those critters in the scope to shoot.
 
Talk with your smith about checking ring alignment and perhaps lapping the ring(if needed).

If the rings are not coaxial they flex the scope tube.The weak zone in the tube is where the turrets attach.All the precision the scope (hopefully) was built with is compromised if the tube is flexed

Could be your scope just failed for any number of reasons,but,IMO,misaligned rings is a prime root cause.
 
Voila! the loose mount was the culprit. Again visually correcting the issue with the reticle (which was opposite of scope directions) made it go haywire, so i used the directions and calculated it by clicks.
20140831_222248.jpg


However, the down adjustment on the scope SUCKS! To move down 10 inches I must have done like a million clicks.

I eventually got it on bullseye then took it out of the bench rest and tried the next 5 by hand. I was high, but that's on me not the scope. Then I tried 200 yd using the BDC. I missed up and left by quite a bit 3 times.

But keep in mind this is cheapo PPU 150 grain stuff too.

So my best conclusion is at first it was fine, because that sight in went well, but over the next 5 or so range visits, that mount loosened more and more (especially the visit where I used 180 grain) and eventually got way off. So I'll keep an eye on this to ensure it stays where it is.

I think I'll go 165 grain for hunting. However it's hard to find 165 gr practice rounds locally. Usually they only have 150 or 180.

I may go to a one piece DNZ mount as well after hunting season. The one piece design gives me peace of mind, as it's 50% less chance of something moving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top