Joshua.s wrote:Sooo, how did you go mate?
Did you make a decision on scope and rifle?
And pics if you did mate please .
mickhead wrote:Go with the LA101 but in 22LR. This is a rifle you will keep for the rest of your life. It is that good. Rabbits, foxes, no probs. Would not go a large wild dog though with any rimfire. Dont skimp on rings. Leupold QRW or PRW are good.
For a scope go to the gun shop and look thru some. Avoid ebay scopes.
Hawke are the cheapest ones to consider, have one on my A22R, made in china but under pommy QA control. Have a Weaver 3 x 10 on my LA101 and it is nice. Leupold, Meopta, Vixen, Minox, Nikon are all good and not too pricey.
Dont go the WMR or .17 route because it will not be fun on the wallet if you want to plink.
If youre going to start reloading, avoid 223, you wont save a lot. Go the mighty 45 70 and with hardcast projectiles you can reload at around the same price of a high end 22 WMR round. (44 mag and 308 is also worth reloading)
Above all, Have fun.![]()
Aussie_Vic wrote:mickhead wrote:Go with the LA101 but in 22LR. This is a rifle you will keep for the rest of your life. It is that good. Rabbits, foxes, no probs. Would not go a large wild dog though with any rimfire. Dont skimp on rings. Leupold QRW or PRW are good.
For a scope go to the gun shop and look thru some. Avoid ebay scopes.
Hawke are the cheapest ones to consider, have one on my A22R, made in china but under pommy QA control. Have a Weaver 3 x 10 on my LA101 and it is nice. Leupold, Meopta, Vixen, Minox, Nikon are all good and not too pricey.
Dont go the WMR or .17 route because it will not be fun on the wallet if you want to plink.
If youre going to start reloading, avoid 223, you wont save a lot. Go the mighty 45 70 and with hardcast projectiles you can reload at around the same price of a high end 22 WMR round. (44 mag and 308 is also worth reloading)
Above all, Have fun.![]()
Does rifle weight matter to a certain degree.
It'll around 3.5kg to 3.6kg with a scope and rings?
What would the ideal rifle weight be for using it on properties, range and out in crown land (state & national parks).
mickhead wrote:LA101 with a scope is a light rifle. Marlin 4570 sbl with scope is much heavier. But much more fun when you shoot it. No probs when you sling it. Carry and shoot what you are comfortable with. And, buy a safe that comfortably holds at least 8 scoped rifles…
bladeracer wrote:mickhead wrote:LA101 with a scope is a light rifle. Marlin 4570 sbl with scope is much heavier. But much more fun when you shoot it. No probs when you sling it. Carry and shoot what you are comfortable with. And, buy a safe that comfortably holds at least 8 scoped rifles…
I can't call the 101 a light rifle by any measure, and certainly not for a rimfire. Even the polymer stock is 3.1kg, the timber one is 3.3kg. And it has no sights.
The polymer Ruger American Compact .22LR is 2.4kg - with sights.
The 1895SBL is a big heavy rifle at 3.63kg, but it does have sights. The 1895G non-stainless .45-70 is 3.175kg, lighter than a timber stocked LA101 .22LR.
mickhead wrote:LA101 with a scope is a light rifle. Marlin 4570 sbl with scope is much heavier. But much more fun when you shoot it. No probs when you sling it. Carry and shoot what you are comfortable with. And, buy a safe that comfortably holds at least 8 scoped rifles…
Aussie_Vic wrote:bladeracer wrote:mickhead wrote:LA101 with a scope is a light rifle. Marlin 4570 sbl with scope is much heavier. But much more fun when you shoot it. No probs when you sling it. Carry and shoot what you are comfortable with. And, buy a safe that comfortably holds at least 8 scoped rifles…
I can't call the 101 a light rifle by any measure, and certainly not for a rimfire. Even the polymer stock is 3.1kg, the timber one is 3.3kg. And it has no sights.
The polymer Ruger American Compact .22LR is 2.4kg - with sights.
The 1895SBL is a big heavy rifle at 3.63kg, but it does have sights. The 1895G non-stainless .45-70 is 3.175kg, lighter than a timber stocked LA101 .22LR.
So going for a lighter rifle is better in a way?
bladeracer wrote:Aussie_Vic wrote:bladeracer wrote:mickhead wrote:LA101 with a scope is a light rifle. Marlin 4570 sbl with scope is much heavier. But much more fun when you shoot it. No probs when you sling it. Carry and shoot what you are comfortable with. And, buy a safe that comfortably holds at least 8 scoped rifles…
I can't call the 101 a light rifle by any measure, and certainly not for a rimfire. Even the polymer stock is 3.1kg, the timber one is 3.3kg. And it has no sights.
The polymer Ruger American Compact .22LR is 2.4kg - with sights.
The 1895SBL is a big heavy rifle at 3.63kg, but it does have sights. The 1895G non-stainless .45-70 is 3.175kg, lighter than a timber stocked LA101 .22LR.
So going for a lighter rifle is better in a way?
Yes, but you won't really know what your personal limit is until get out and lug it around in the bush. Like most things, if a 4kg, 24" rifle is what you have then you'll adapt to it. But if you get to play with a sub-3kg, 16" carbine, you might find it painful going back to old faithful.
bladeracer wrote:Aussie_Vic wrote:bladeracer wrote:mickhead wrote:LA101 with a scope is a light rifle. Marlin 4570 sbl with scope is much heavier. But much more fun when you shoot it. No probs when you sling it. Carry and shoot what you are comfortable with. And, buy a safe that comfortably holds at least 8 scoped rifles…
I can't call the 101 a light rifle by any measure, and certainly not for a rimfire. Even the polymer stock is 3.1kg, the timber one is 3.3kg. And it has no sights.
The polymer Ruger American Compact .22LR is 2.4kg - with sights.
The 1895SBL is a big heavy rifle at 3.63kg, but it does have sights. The 1895G non-stainless .45-70 is 3.175kg, lighter than a timber stocked LA101 .22LR.
So going for a lighter rifle is better in a way?
Yes, but you won't really know what your personal limit is until get out and lug it around in the bush. Like most things, if a 4kg, 24" rifle is what you have then you'll adapt to it. But if you get to play with a sub-3kg, 16" carbine, you might find it painful going back to old faithful.
mickhead wrote:Now you have me curious as to the weightswill put mine on the scales soon and post the results.
I would be very surprised if anyone struggled to carry an LA101 on a sling all day.
bladeracer wrote:
Yes, but you won't really know what your personal limit is until get out and lug it around in the bush. Like most things, if a 4kg, 24" rifle is what you have then you'll adapt to it. But if you get to play with a sub-3kg, 16" carbine, you might find it painful going back to old faithful.
bah! wrote:bladeracer wrote:
Yes, but you won't really know what your personal limit is until get out and lug it around in the bush. Like most things, if a 4kg, 24" rifle is what you have then you'll adapt to it. But if you get to play with a sub-3kg, 16" carbine, you might find it painful going back to old faithful.
Certainly the T1x is very luggable, sling or not!
bladeracer wrote:bah! wrote:bladeracer wrote:
Yes, but you won't really know what your personal limit is until get out and lug it around in the bush. Like most things, if a 4kg, 24" rifle is what you have then you'll adapt to it. But if you get to play with a sub-3kg, 16" carbine, you might find it painful going back to old faithful.
Certainly the T1x is very luggable, sling or not!
The 16" MTR is 2.7kg, in the region that I would consider the "normal" weight of a rimfire hunting rifle. But it doesn't have sights.
My Lithgow Model 1B is right on 2kg, my Cooey Ace1 is under 2kg.
Aussie_Vic wrote:Would 2.7kg be over the limit for a .22 bare with no rings or scope on it.?
Edit: Sorry was a silly question just read above with your Ruger .22lr
bladeracer wrote:Aussie_Vic wrote:Would 2.7kg be over the limit for a .22 bare with no rings or scope on it.?
Edit: Sorry was a silly question just read above with your Ruger .22lr
Nope, not over any limit, unless you find it's more than you're comfortable carrying around the bush all day. As I said earlier, it's just an awkward lump of ballast until you actually want to shoot something
The Ruger American Compact without the scope is an absolute pleasure to wander around with, and the iron sights are just fun to shoot with. My Ruger Precision Rimfire weighs 5.5kg as I have it set up currently. It's still quite comfortable to walk around all day with it hanging on a single-point sling, but it is certainly more obvious that you're carrying it. My Ruger American Rimfire Target with the lami-stock is en-par with the LA101 as they're aimed at similar markets, bench shooting at paper rather than hunting (despite the LA101 being classed as a "crossover") with a heavy barrel, and no sights.
I mainly use the lighter rifles for practicing offhand shooting, a 100rd session offhand with the RPR gets pretty tiring
Shooting off a bench at the range for an hour or two doesn't compare at all with carrying your rifle around for eight, ten, twelve hours or more in heavy terrain, and probably damp weather.
Aussie_Vic wrote:That's good news i thought Ruger was below Lithgow as of accuracy and all roundedness but thoughts are different now on it...
Will have a look at both rifles see which one handles and feels better.
The Ruger American Rimfire Target does look really nice and weight is perfect my kinda style
mickhead wrote:Ok, just done a weigh in
Scales are tested within 2 grams.
I am not a great shot, so the last number is the size of a target that I can consistently hit at 50m with a bag under the forend.
LA 101 with poly stock 3 x 10 x 50 weaver nitrex, prw rings = 3.76 kg 15mm
A22R scoped 3 x 9 Hawke qrw rings = 3.10 kg 25 mm
BL22 scoped vixen 2 x 8 tiny scope = 2.73 kg 50 mm
Heaviest gun is Howa 1500 308 heavy barrel 10 rds mag bipod 4.5 x 14 minox with prw rings. 5.13 kg, 15mm at 100m. Bastard to carry around due to all the stick out bits like mags and bipods, as opposed to the weight.
Lightest is the Rossi 44 mag iron sights 2.95kg 11 rds hit a tennis ball at 50m![]()
Have left a few out, have fun, buy the lithgow.
bladeracer wrote:
The 16" MTR is 2.7kg, in the region that I would consider the "normal" weight of a rimfire hunting rifle.
bah! wrote:bladeracer wrote:
The 16" MTR is 2.7kg, in the region that I would consider the "normal" weight of a rimfire hunting rifle.
Mine is 2.4kg, maybe not mtr model?
bladeracer wrote:
No idea, trying to find definitive weights on the Tikka site is painful.
Is yours modular with removable pistol grip and fore end?
bladeracer wrote:mickhead wrote:Ok, just done a weigh in
Scales are tested within 2 grams.
I am not a great shot, so the last number is the size of a target that I can consistently hit at 50m with a bag under the forend.
LA 101 with poly stock 3 x 10 x 50 weaver nitrex, prw rings = 3.76 kg 15mm
A22R scoped 3 x 9 Hawke qrw rings = 3.10 kg 25 mm
BL22 scoped vixen 2 x 8 tiny scope = 2.73 kg 50 mm
Heaviest gun is Howa 1500 308 heavy barrel 10 rds mag bipod 4.5 x 14 minox with prw rings. 5.13 kg, 15mm at 100m. Bastard to carry around due to all the stick out bits like mags and bipods, as opposed to the weight.
Lightest is the Rossi 44 mag iron sights 2.95kg 11 rds hit a tennis ball at 50m![]()
Have left a few out, have fun, buy the lithgow.
Sounds like weighing them was just a handy excuse to do some shooting
My Rossi .357 is 24" stainless (bought from a member here) and is quite a lump of steel, currently topped with the 2-7x32 scout scope - 3.94kg empty.
mickhead wrote:Mate thats a huge difference! Mine is the stainless puma 92 20 inch, and that 2.95 kg is fully loaded with 300 grain handloads.
Combine that light weight with the stainless buttplate it can be an amusing surprise for those thinking its only a tiny handgun load