albat wrote:What are these rifles for exactly seen plenty of them lately target rifle i would presume?
Gamerancher wrote:One for the wanna-be snipers out there.
albat wrote:I saw an ozziereviews lucky 13 tikka chassis review a couple of weeks ago on his u tube channel cant reaĺly see too many advantages over a good wooden stock for target work but i no nuffin about target shooting anyway
Lokvo wrote:I can't help myself...I'm sort of digging it haha. Shallow I know.
Yipikaye wrote:Hi All,
Super newbie here so please be nice Actually first post!
I'm also very new to shooting. (Just joined a club and applied for firearms license in Australia)
I was seriously considering this firearm as my first firearm to learn on and eventually compete in a few competitions.
There are a few things I was hoping to get out of this sport including meeting new people and making new friends. I'm a little concerned with this thread as I fear if I was to choose this firearm people may jump to conclusions seeing a newbie with this gun without getting to know me first.
Is this a general feel towards all Tactical stocks? I've been shooting a few times with wood stock .308's and would like to get a nice one in the future as I really like the look of them! However for the first time in Sweden I went shooting with a Tactical stock and whilst they look menacing it felt a lot more secure and safer to hold and shoot. Its actually given me the confidence to consider taking the sport further.
My thoughts on selecting this firearm were as follows:
1. For someone with no accessories yet this is well priced with all the accessories you get, bipod, muzzle break, carry case etc...
2. I like the idea of the safety
3. Like the Tac feel (as above)
4. Muzzle break would be good for learning and can remove for competition
5. Seems like a good all round .308
6. Good all rounder for long range precision, Benchrest, Field Rifle & 3 Positional
7. I really enjoyed firing a Tikka previously and have also fired a few Beretta in USA and Sako in Sweden.
A possible alternative setup could be:
1. Tikka T3x Varmint caliber 6.5 Creedmoor, 308 or 7mm rem mag.
2. Muzzle brake
3. Scope Vortex Viper PST 5-25x50 FFP (if i can find a good 2nd hand) -- Colleague may sell me his
4. TAC21 stock.
What are your thoughts on this alternate setup or would I have the same issue with the Tac stock.
Thanks for your help!
bigfellascott wrote:I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.
bladeracer wrote: ... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.
Yipikaye wrote:Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.bladeracer wrote: ... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.
Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.
Yipikaye wrote:Very good tip with the lighter bullets I'll research into this.
I would like to understand why the muzzle breaks are bad when shooting around other people (I don't want to be rude!). I've never used one before but I have fired 3 rounds with a silencer and it was excellent. I'm hoping its a similar effect (i know they're not the same of course).
with regards to the scope I'm actually not planning to spend more than $500 for my first scope if I can avoid it because im 99% sure I'll choose the wrong one and end up selling it in 6 months. This way I can get confident with one I think I would like and if I still do 6 months I can upgrade and get a better one, if not I will have hopefully found what I do like. So... Any suggestions you have would be awesome. Actually I would like to re-use the cheaper scope on a .22 I get in the future so I'm really not sure what to get at all.
Yipikaye wrote:Hi All,
Thanks for the advice. I will go with what I like and not worry too much about what others thinkbigfellascott wrote:I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.
Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.
The Tac chassis is practical too. After firing a heap of rounds I touched the top of the barrel near the scope and it was really hot (noob i know) so the extra protection is useful. Not to mention the rail etc.bladeracer wrote: ... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.
Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.
bigfellascott wrote:Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.
There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.
bigfellascott wrote:Yipikaye wrote:Hi All,
Thanks for the advice. I will go with what I like and not worry too much about what others thinkbigfellascott wrote:I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.
Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.
The Tac chassis is practical too. After firing a heap of rounds I touched the top of the barrel near the scope and it was really hot (noob i know) so the extra protection is useful. Not to mention the rail etc.bladeracer wrote: ... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.
Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.
Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.
There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.
Gun-nut wrote:bigfellascott wrote:Yipikaye wrote:Hi All,
Thanks for the advice. I will go with what I like and not worry too much about what others thinkbigfellascott wrote:I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.
Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.
The Tac chassis is practical too. After firing a heap of rounds I touched the top of the barrel near the scope and it was really hot (noob i know) so the extra protection is useful. Not to mention the rail etc.bladeracer wrote: ... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.
Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.
Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.
There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.
Holy s**t, really? What state is in?
bladeracer wrote:bigfellascott wrote:Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.
There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.
If a firearm is licenced as is I can't see how they can claim it is now illegal if the rules haven't changed. If they aren't happy about the Firearms Registry allowing us to own something then they need to take it up with the Registry, it's nothing to do with the owner.
On the other hand, if they actually re-write the rules then there might be a problem. But my understanding of Australian law is anything that makes something illegal that is currently legal requires fair and just compensation be paid to lawful owners.
bigfellascott wrote:It's already in law, they just haven't been enforcing it and no they don't have to pay compensation, just like the Adler you can hand them in or get the mod done to make them legal, apparently people have been getting letters telling them to hand them in or sell them to Firearms Dealers or face legal action.
bigfellascott wrote:...just like the Adler you can hand them in or get the mod done to make them legal, apparently people have been getting letters telling them to hand them in or sell them to Firearms Dealers or face legal action.
Yipikaye wrote:whoa! I feel for the people getting their guns taken.
I understand they would know you have this from the registry but, how would they know if you'd bought a different gun and changed it to a military looking stock?
I assume you could change the stock on this gun and it would be OK again.