Advice on new rifle .308or.300winmag

[Gwion]

That all depends were you live, Albat. Trying to get cheap, accurate ammo around here is near impossible; it's the main reason I started reloading.

[albat]

Yeah Queensland is good for the el cheapo ammo makes a reloader get fat and lazy ha ha!

[Bigjobss]

Bit late to the party but I went through a simmilar decision a few months ago and decided on a 300WM instead of an '06 based on the following set of circumstances:
1. I dont target shoot, therefore cost is not an issue
2. My primary target is Sambar, therefore assuming all things being equal and shot placement is constant a few extra ft/lbs up the sleeve cant hurt
3. Im not particularly recoil sensitive
4. Magnums make me smile when I shoot them
5. If I decide to reload in the future the 300WM would be more versitile

On #3 I get the feeling that the recoil of magnums seems to be overstated by a lot of folk, just get a gun that fits and hold it right and tight, ive been smacked around by a poorly fitting 12g shooting target loads than my 300.

[Gwion]

I am pondering on a similar line of thought although the 308 is set in stone. the quandary is can I use a target gun (savage 12 ftr) for hunting or as most Australian ranges seem to be max 600m is a 26 inch barrel Sako 85 varmint good enough or even a Sako TRG 22. Help required. The magazine capability just seems such a benefit to single loading.

A target gun for hunting is going to be heavy to carry around and a hunting rifle will rarely if ever be quite as accurate as a well put together target rifle (but you are talking poofteenths of an inch difference in accuracy from quality rifles).

My suggestion is this. If you have a budget that allows for the consideration of a Sako TRG, get your self a nice hunting rifle like a Sako 85 hunter in 7-08 and start off you target shooting with an Omark in 308 (will cost you between $500-1000). Put a 6-24 scope on the Omark and a 3-9 or 2-10 on the Sako. Both rifles and scopes will come in at about the same price as a Sako TRG with scope (or probably cheaper depending on scope choice).

Then you have a rifle for each purpose and different head stamped ammo so you never mix them up when you get into reloading (if you haven't already).

You will eventually upgrade the Omark if you get right into the sport but you will sell it on for as much as you bought it for or keep it as a spare.

[bigfellascott]

What sort of hunting are you doing that will see you shooting things out around the 600m or more? Personally I'd just use the Savage you have and see how it goes, you'll soon workout if it's going to suit the type of hunting you want to do with your target rifle.

[Gwion]

What sort of hunting are you doing that will see you shooting things out around the 600m or more? Personally I'd just use the Savage you have and see how it goes, you'll soon workout if it's going to suit the type of hunting you want to do with your target rifle.

I think he was referring to shooting targets at 600, not hunting.

Hunting with a target rifle is definitely possible but you will need different ammo and a lighter rifle will be more user friendly. Conversely, target shooting with a hunting rifle is perfectly doable but has it's draw backs. I have seen guys at the club shoot well with hunting rifles and people shoot poorly with target rifles.....

[in2anity]

What sort of hunting are you doing that will see you shooting things out around the 600m or more? Personally I'd just use the Savage you have and see how it goes, you'll soon workout if it's going to suit the type of hunting you want to do with your target rifle.

I think he was referring to shooting targets at 600, not hunting.

Hunting with a target rifle is definitely possible but you will need different ammo and a lighter rifle will be more user friendly. Conversely, target shooting with a hunting rifle is perfectly doable but has it's draw backs. I have seen guys at the club shoot well with hunting rifles and people shoot poorly with target rifles.....

How about a super-short, heavy barrel .308? That SPS Tactical 16.5" (or the slightly heavier 20") springs to mind. Best of both worlds - accurate + light; you just sacrifice a little velocity + increased felt recoil. But that rifle still has 800 ftlbs @ 600m (albeit more of a rainbow, so you'd need optics with plenty of elevation). Then just load it down for punching paper...

[Gwion]

How about a super-short, heavy barrel .308? That SPS Tactical 16.5" (or the slightly heavier 20") springs to mind. Best of both worlds - accurate + light; you just sacrifice a little velocity + increased felt recoil. But that rifle still has 800 ftlbs @ 600m (albeit more of a rainbow, so you'd need optics with plenty of elevation). Then just load it down for punching paper...

There are a number of basic design and construction elements that put the target rifle (even a factory offering) that little bit ahead of even a well made factory hunting rifle. The major aspect is action design. A single port fed target rifle action is significantly stiffer than a hunting (or 'repeater) action with a gaping magazine port in the bottom and an ejection port on the side. Tolerances are also a factor; ie: just how well to all the parts of the action, barrel, stock, etc all match up. Yes, a hunting rifle can be worked to be incredibly accurate but the same amount of work put into a target rifle will almost always result in a slightly more precise shooting platform.

Yes, one can be used to do two jobs but neither will fill both roles perfectly.

As for the last part of your post: optics with elevation are not all you will need to hunt out at 600m (not that i have done it or plan to at anytime soon, i'm simply not a good enough shooter as yet). You will also need a bullet designed to handle the impact velocities on your target game, you will need a range finder to accurately calculate distance, a high level of wind reading ability, a lot of experience with that particular firearm and recorded performance data in various conditions to be able to accurately set up your shot, etc., etc., etc..
Also, you wouldn't "load down for punching paper", because, a/ you want to get as much data and experience with your chosen load as possible for shooting out further, and b/ you still want as much consistent velocity as you can to maintain BCs to give you reliable elevation and maximum wind efficiency for the chosen round.

So, again. One can do both but neither will be ideal in both situations.
How do i know this? I have been shooting f-class with a hunting rifle for the last 2 years. My theory was to use f-class to learn how to shoot better at longer or intermediate (out to 600) ranges for the possibility of long range hunting and to improve my closer range shooting (out to 300). Yes it is improving my shooting but the more i get into it the more i want a dedicated rifle for each rather than one that will do both... kind of....

[in2anity]

There are a number of basic design and construction elements that put the target rifle (even a factory offering) that little bit ahead of even a well made factory hunting rifle. The major aspect is action design. A single port fed target rifle action is significantly stiffer than a hunting (or 'repeater) action with a gaping magazine port in the bottom and an ejection port on the side. Tolerances are also a factor; ie: just how well to all the parts of the action, barrel, stock, etc all match up. Yes, a hunting rifle can be worked to be incredibly accurate but the same amount of work put into a target rifle will almost always result in a slightly more precise shooting platform.

Yes, one can be used to do two jobs but neither will fill both roles perfectly.

As for the last part of your post: optics with elevation are not all you will need to hunt out at 600m (not that i have done it or plan to at anytime soon, i'm simply not a good enough shooter as yet). You will also need a bullet designed to handle the impact velocities on your target game, you will need a range finder to accurately calculate distance, a high level of wind reading ability, a lot of experience with that particular firearm and recorded performance data in various conditions to be able to accurately set up your shot, etc., etc., etc..
Also, you wouldn't "load down for punching paper", because, a/ you want to get as much data and experience with your chosen load as possible for shooting out further, and b/ you still want as much consistent velocity as you can to maintain BCs to give you reliable elevation and maximum wind efficiency for the chosen round.

So, again. One can do both but neither will be ideal in both situations.
How do i know this? I have been shooting f-class with a hunting rifle for the last 2 years. My theory was to use f-class to learn how to shoot better at longer or intermediate (out to 600) ranges for the possibility of long range hunting and to improve my closer range shooting (out to 300). Yes it is improving my shooting but the more i get into it the more i want a dedicated rifle for each rather than one that will do both... kind of....

I don't disagree with you in the slightest Gwion - but OP wanted a single rifle that (somewhat) ticked both boxes, and something like the rifle I suggested could fill both roles satisfactorily. I might be wrong, but my impression is that he's not competing F class like you - he just wanted a rifle that he could plink with, occasionally really reach out with (at the range), yet also comfortably (and practically) hunt with - if you operate within your limits, you don't need all that gear you suggested to do that.

With regard to having two different loads, I disagree with your statement that you "wouldn't" do it. The reason I disagree with that statement is because it's what I do myself with my 30/30 (and have been doing for many many years, off-the-back of shooting fullbore target in my teen years). I routinely plink rainbow lead at varying distances inside 300m, but when I go out into the field, I switch back to the hottest, flattest loads possible. In the field I just operate inside the point-blank capabilities of this projectile/load (around 150m with Hornady FTX for a 30/30). As you know hot 308s are pretty flat inside 200m.

We all know that OP won't be taking 600m hunting shots, he'll quickly figure that out - so why is it so important to gather data for such max loads? Instead, couldn't he gather his data on his reduced loads for improving his day-to-day target at the range (and stick to point-blank in the field)?

I guess it's worth saying my observations are theoretical - I don't own that rifle, nor have I ever shot it. But at least as an entry point for both disciplines, don't you think something like that could be a good start? That's all I was saying dude - I wasn't saying that it's appropriate for F class.

[Gwion]

I guess it's worth saying my observations are theoretical - I don't own that rifle, nor have I ever shot it. But at least as an entry point for both disciplines, don't you think something like that could be a good start? That's all I was saying dude - I wasn't saying that it's appropriate for F class.

Yes. A rifle like you described could do both target and hunting. My point was that if he has the budget for a Sako TRG, then he has the budget to afford two rifles that will fill each role more adequately that buying one rifle to do both!

As for loading down... well, fair enough if you already have the skills and experience with your hunting round; however, i'd put "plinking" and "target shooting" in two different categories. If you are "target shooting", you are generally constantly working on skills and equipment to improve your score or group size; if you are "plinking" you are generally happy to fire off as many rounds as you feel like on the day and as long as you didn't completely screw up you will be happy with the results. My point there was that if you are trying to learn to shoot long range so that you can hunt long range, then using the same load is a better idea than changing things up all the time.

Totally agree that unless you are practicing to shoot long range first round hits constantly, it is best to keep your hunting to within max point blank.

[Baronvonrort]

If porcine animals become aerodynamic and folding stocks become legal in NSW you could get a Barrett MRAD, you can change it from .308 to 300 win mag by changing barrel and bolt in the field.
When you add up the cost of optics on multiple rifles it may end up cheaper to have one of these.

Perhaps we should lobby for a change on this ridiculous law by saying we could reduce the number of guns we have if we are allowed to have this Barrett-
www.barrett.net/firearms/mrad

[in2anity]

Yes. A rifle like you described could do both target and hunting. My point was that if he has the budget for a Sako TRG, then he has the budget to afford two rifles that will fill each role more adequately that buying one rifle to do both!

Can't argue with that - you can pick up a used 308 fullbore rifle that'll drive tacks for under $1000. Then just grab a 308 sporter for the field - you'd be out of jail for less than your smancy "tactical" rifle. Is that what OP wanted though?

If you are "target shooting", you are generally constantly working on skills and equipment to improve your score or group size; if you are "plinking" you are generally happy to fire off as many rounds as you feel like on the day and as long as you didn't completely screw up you will be happy with the results.

When it comes to punching paper, I'm always chasing group size, no matter how you categorise it , and besides many forms of target shooting don't demand official target rifles, for example 3 position or MRCA doesn't demand the accuracy of fullbore or F class; the shooter will by far be the biggest variance here. What about metallic silhouette? You don't need a target rifle to win metallic silhouette matches - just something that accurate enough to realise the shooters inherent shooting skills.

[Gwion]

...... and besides many forms of target shooting don't demand official target rifles, for example 3 position or MRCA doesn't demand the accuracy of fullbore or F class; the shooter will by far be the biggest variance here. What about metallic silhouette? You don't need a target rifle to win metallic silhouette matches - just something that accurate enough to realise the shooters inherent shooting skills.

Sako TRG 22 goes for over $6400 these days.

No matter what style of target shooting, for that price you can buy a nice hunting rifle with respectable glass and a decent target rifle (for any chosen discipline) with acceptable glass and still come out with change.

[bladeracer]

Sako TRG 22 goes for over $6400 these days.

No matter what style of target shooting, for that price you can buy a nice hunting rifle with respectable glass and a decent target rifle (for any chosen discipline) with acceptable glass and still come out with change.

I've seen them at $5325.

But it's still ridiculous money unless you're trying to win matches.

[<<Genesis93>>]

For that price you could even buy a man-servant to carry your gear.

[simmo]

An interesting discussion. I have just made the foray into using a hunting rifle for target work and it's eminently doable...as long as your barrel is up to the task of putting 10-15rds or so down range without heating excessively and you choose your ammo right. I have a T3x lite in 22" lite barrel.
The comment about the shorter heavey barrel has merit. I refer to the Tikka CTR (available in .308 and .260 with 20" barrel). It shoots exceptionally well (I personally shot one at 600m and managed a 53.4 in FO) and is light enough to haul up hills and through scrub as a hunting rifle.

[in2anity]

An interesting discussion. I have just made the foray into using a hunting rifle for target work and it's eminently doable...as long as your barrel is up to the task of putting 10-15rds or so down range without heating excessively and you choose your ammo right. I have a T3x lite in 22" lite barrel.
The comment about the shorter heavey barrel has merit. I refer to the Tikka CTR (available in .308 and .260 with 20" barrel). It shoots exceptionally well (I personally shot one at 600m and managed a 53.4 in FO) and is light enough to haul up hills and through scrub as a hunting rifle.

The only catch is you'd need to handload down for it; hot factory .308 would really sting in such a light rifle; I don't see one plinking more than 20 of those comfortably

I'm pretty sure I'm going a buy one as my next rifle and have it smithed to take proper target sights. One thing I'm a little concerned about is the short sight radius though - not sure how much depth of field you get across a 16" barrel...