Long Range/Precision Bolt Rifles Anyone?

Light weight, skinny barrels can shoot bullets as accurate as heavy weight, thick ones. Weight and profile have nothing to do with accuracy. But those things do help one hold the rifle more steady.

In my observations of super accurate rifles doing their thing, the common element is their bore and groove diameters. They're very uniform and the groove diameter's smaller than bullet diameter. Most commercial factory and aftermarket barrels are not.

Skinny and lightweight M1 and M14 barrels of good, match grade quality, will shoot handloads and commercial match ammo inside 4 inches at 600 yards. How many commercial or aftermarket barrels of any weight will do that?
 
I have a Savage 110 300 wm with a HS precision stock, I decided after I built my 308 AR that my SPS varmint 308 wasn't going to be of much use.
 
You must have had the regular accutrigger.

I pick up my new rifle next week, which has the target accutrigger and is adjustable down to 6oz pull.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if the Accu-trigger that I took off was a target style or not. The action is from a rifle built back in '06. Not even sure if they had the target version back then so probably not.

It wasn't the weight of pull that turned me off, as whoever owned the rifle before me had it set pretty low (I never tested it on a scale) but rather the trigger blade itself. Too much of a two stage trigger feel for me. I prefer zero slack in any of my target triggers. Just a personal preference really.

As to not hijack the OP's thread here's my LR308 that's set up for long range steel targets.....

 
Just picked her up this afternoon

My newest acquisition and will be my long range target rig.
Savage 12 Long Range Precision in 6.5 Creedmoor.

Just need a scope and bipod and I'll be in business.
 
What other 5-shot group sizes were shot in load development?

I ask because most accuracy claims state the smallest group shot with a given load. If all groups shot with a given load aren't within 10% of the same size, they don't have enough shots in them to represent the load's real accuracy.
Click to expand...
Well, Bart, I was doing load development for my customer, and when a rifle shoots a 5-shot sub-caliber group, I am done. So, I don't know what other groups it shot after I handed it over, but the customer (a competitive shooter)called me and asked what I had done to the barrel to get it to shoot so well, so I have to assume it shot pretty well even after load development.
 
Here is my stick.

Kimber 8400 Advanced Tactical .308
20 MOA base
Vortex branded (either badger or seekins) 34mm precision matched rings.
Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50mm FFP MRAD
CDI Precision Gun Works bottom metal with AI Magazines
Atlas Bipod

Sorry for the bad pics, quickly taken with a cell phone and basement lighting





In the wild ;) before the bottom metal install and atlas bipod

 
Very nice HK fan9 ^^

Mine:
Remington 700 SPS Tactical .308
EGW 20 moa base
Vortex Viper pst 6-24 ffp
Vortex (Seekins) Precision Matched Rings low
HS Precision stock
Timney flat trigger
Wyatts trigger guard/mag
Harris bipod
Badger Ordinance bolt knob

imagejpg2_zpsb54c848f.jpg

imagejpg1_zpsd5d10be4.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nice set up, how's the SPS tactical shoot, I was looking at getting a .223 bolt gun for cheaper practice under 600 yards, and the SPS tactical and a new stock were one of my considerations.
 
Hard to believe that no one showed a long action yet. Am I the only one who believes a -06 that dominated the LR scene for 60+- years is still very capable.
No -06, 300wm, 7rm,6.5x55 etc...
 
Am I the only one who believes a -06 that dominated the LR scene for 60+- years is still very capable.
Click to expand...
The 30-06 was popular due to many of the matches being geared towards military rifles, and many of the shooters having learned while in the military

It was easy to find "match" ammo in 30-06 and 308, and not so much in other cartridges

It wasn't because they are really "better"
 
Also plenty of guys listed and showed their 308's. But none for any long action.
Click to expand...
I think that's largely due to the fact people don't like more recoil than than necessary when shooting off a bench

My "long range" bean field hunting rifle is a Sendero 7 Mag with a Leu 6.5 X 20 AO that's probably as accurate as any of those 308's
 
Hard to believe that no one showed a long action yet. Am I the only one who believes a -06 that dominated the LR scene for 60+- years is still very capable.
No -06, 300wm, 7rm,6.5x55 etc...
Click to expand...

Techically my rifle is a long action, just used to chamber a short action round.;)


I have no problems with long actions at all, just not needed for that I do, which is shooting under 1000 yards. Paper is pretty easy to kill compared to game, so really the less recoil the better. If and when I shoot out the barrel on my Kimber in .308 I plan to re-barrel it to a 6.5 creedmoore.

I think .30-06 is a great round, but in long distance rigs I believe it will be more common place to see .300WM and such.
 
Hard to believe that no one showed a long action yet. Am I the only one who believes a -06 that dominated the LR scene for 60+- years is still very capable.
No -06, 300wm, 7rm,6.5x55 etc...
Click to expand...
Guess I could have posted a picture of mine in post22
 
The .30-06 dominated long range matches for only 30 years. 'Twas in 1935 when a .300 H&H Mag won the big 1000-yard match at the Nationals setting a record and it quickly became the favorite for bullseye targets past 600 yards. While the H&H round shot bullets out only a little faster and had more recoil for a given rifle weight, they were typically used in heavier rifles (with "bull barrels) and therefore were as easy to shoot accurately as the .30-06 and bucked the win a little better.

Three main reasons why the .30-06 was "the" cartridge for matches. One was the M1903 and Win. 54 actions were long enough for its ammo to be clipped up and charge magazines easily for rapid fire matches. An other was the military 172-gr. match bullet as well as cases were available through the DCM for civilians to use. And new M1903 .30-06 barrels could be bought from the DCM for a few bucks each.

Starting in 1963, the superior accuracy of the .308 Win. over the .30-06 and the .30-.338 Win Mag accuracy over the .300 H&H, plus Sierra's changeover from FMJBT match bullets to HPBT ones for better accuracy, the .30-06 faded away from match use. Three years later, in 1966, the NRA changed the targets for use up to 600 yards to smaller scoring ring diameters. In 1972, the long range target (a 36" high scoring 5-ring, in use since about 1900) was changed to smaller scoring rings and a 20" 10-ring. The .30-06 was no longer competitive at long range.

Longer, flat surfaced receivers are better than any round one or short one. They resist torquing from barrel twist that increases with muzzle velocity and bullet weight. Remington's short 40X centerfire receiver was the worst ever barreled action made when it had the factory .30-.338 Win Mag or 7mm Rem Mag barrel in it. Epoxy bedded, it would last about 75 to 100 shots before it had twisted out of a perfect fit and accuracy went down the drain. Rem's 7XX receivers were/are the same. Pillar bedding helps somewhat, but they're best epoxied into a flat bottom/side sleeve like the benchresters did back in the 1960's with Rem. 722 receivers with .222 Rem barrels on them for best accuracy. Or use a Win 70 receiver and it'll do just fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top