Gwion wrote: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.