What would you guys try next...

1stmar · October 26, 2014, 08:50 PM

A bit frustrated with my 22-250. I burned through a factory barrel which was easily 1/2 moa, frequently shot much better with a lot of different powders and bullets. Finding a good load was never an issue. Had a McGowan barrel put on, trued action and bedded with devcon. Note new barrel is 1:12. Worked up an ocw load of 35.7 gr of 4064 with sierra 55gr hp. Can't get anything worth talking about. 5 shot groups are typically .75-1moa, 2 shots clusters with both vertical and horizontal dispersion. I wait a min between shots. I've tried varying seating depths. I've also tried 52 gr amax, 60gr vmax. I worked up some reduced loads with sr4759. They shot ok, .5-.75moa. Not great. So what do you guys think? I was thinking of changing to rl15 or aa2230. Just can't help thinking something isn't right with the rifle. Shouldn't be this hard to get a load for this cartridge.

Snyper · October 26, 2014, 09:00 PM

Quote:

2 shots clusters with both vertical and horizontal dispersion

I'd double check the scope mounts, and the torque on the action screws.

It could also be your bedding job isn't perfect, and may need more attention

Get a high powered magnifier and look closely at the crown too

William T. Watts · October 26, 2014, 09:06 PM

Typically IMR4064 is one of the go to powders for this round, I've had good luck with the 50 & 55gr Sierra SP flat base bullets. Boat tail bullets do not shoot well in my Winchester model 70 classic, too bad mine came with a 1 in 14 twist!. You might try slipping a business card between the barrel and the forend tip, often a bit of upward pressure will help.. Good luck!! William

Bart B. · October 26, 2014, 09:48 PM

Some McGowen barrels are not very accurate.

1stmar · October 26, 2014, 09:59 PM

I dble checked all the scope screws,mother were tight. The bedding job looks very good but I'm no expert. I had heard flat base may shoot better then bt, I bought the vmax (maybe it was the amax) specifically for the fb. I can bring it back to the smith who did the bedding, or contact the smith who installed the barrel. Not sure how they validate either, I would think the bedding would be easier to validate the a poorly manufactured barrel. I had some reservations about the barrel but the smith seemed to speak highly of them and if not mistaken I think Brian uses them as well.

603Country · October 27, 2014, 09:22 AM

Like William Watts said, 4064 is a long-time favorite powder for that caliber. Still, you might try R15. Recent load testing for a new bullet in my 223 was poor with my favorite powder and I had to try 2 others before I found the magic load. So it could be that 4064 isn't THE powder for your new barrel.

And did you give the barrel a good cleaning recently? I'd take all the copper out and start over. I had to do that recently with a rifle of mine. Groups opened up and I gave it the usual light cleaning (Shooter's Choice). That didn't work for me as well as usual, so I took Boretech Eliminator and cleaned out the copper. Shot a few foulers and was then right back to shooting the little groups.

Seems to me that each barrel has a mind of its own. Put 20 or 25 rounds through my 220 and it needs a good cleaning (Douglas barrel). Takes more like 50 or so rounds for my 223 to start shooting worse. The 260 has a Brux and I have to shoot it a lot before groups open up, though I haven't yet figured out what that approximate number of rounds is.

And...a couple of years ago I had a scope die on me. Groups just got sort of random and loose. Took me a couple of hundred rounds before I thought maybe I should swap out the scope. And it was the scope that had gone bad, though I'll say it was 'lightly bad'. I could still have hunted with it, I suppose.

603Country · October 27, 2014, 01:34 PM

A followup to my last note. I had planned to check the POI on my 260 and my 270 today. The 270 hadn't been shot in a while, and since I expect the grandson to show up this weekend and want the 260, I thought I'd better see where the 270 was shooting. Shot the Tikkka 260 first. Two rounds into one hole. Ok, I'll leave that one alone. Shot the 270 and got an ugly 1 1/2 inch group. And then shot another one. Never shoots that bad. It's a Sako I've had for many years. Thought I'd better clean it, so ran some Shooter's Choice through it and got all the carbon fouling out. Thought maybe I should just check for copper, so grabbed and used the Boretech Eliminator, and had a river of blue coming out of the barrel. Cleaned and cleaned and finally ran out of copper. Took it to the bench and shot a couple of foulers and then a nice group of about 3/4 inch, which is what I expect from it. Must have been the copper.

Ready to go now...

1stmar · October 27, 2014, 02:20 PM

I have no more then 200 rounds through it and I am usually pretty anal about cleaning (typically after every shooting). However the last two ranges sessions of 30 rounds or so I have not cleaned it. I will clean it before my next outing. I just bought some kg12 to try. While working up my ocw even three shot groups were not overly promising and that was with a clean barrel. At that point the barrel was very new so I attributed it break in and under developed load but was concerned about it.

T. O'Heir · October 27, 2014, 02:34 PM

"...burned through a factory barrel..." Define that. It takes thousands of round to burn out any barrel.
You think .5-.75 moa isn't good enough? What are you expecting?

1stmar · October 27, 2014, 03:09 PM

Rifle is a ruger 77 mkII varmint. Bought it used when it first came out. I've had it for 15+ years and have easily shot 2500 rounds through it. I was loading just off the lands, over time the cartridge length increased by over .030. Accuracy degraded tremendously. I am expecting .25-.5moa.

603Country · October 27, 2014, 05:22 PM

Like 1stmar, I shot the throat out of a rifle some years ago. My 220 Swift (Ruger M77V Tang version) had been a great shooter. Replaced it with a Douglas and it continued to shoot great and even with the same pet loads I had worked up for the previous barrel. I could have kept using the old barrel, but was having problems with getting anywhere near the lands. And I wanted a thinner barrel anyway.

Colorado Redneck · October 28, 2014, 12:01 AM

I did the same thing---burned through a barrel on a 22-250 Savage model 12. Probably over 4000 rounds down the tube, and accuracy degraded fairly rapidly---from 3/8" groups to all over the place in about 200 rounds. Replaced it with a Criterion barrel, and can't say enough good about the entire experience.

One of the sages here in TFL said something like this: "All barrel makers put out a stinker every so often." For some shooters, 1-1.5 MOA is acceptable.

It may be the barrel, but you may be able to work at finding a load that your barrel will shoot well for you. As far as I know, there ain't no guarantees with this gun business. If you try lots of combinations of powder/bullets/primers and don't find something your new barrel likes, you might have to move on from that set up. It can be frustrating as heck sometimes.

Good luck!

tobnpr · October 28, 2014, 07:39 AM

Action screw torque the same as before you re-barreled? Given the new barrel, I'd play with that a bit as well.

Are you sure the new barrel isn't making contact with the barrel channel?

It sounds like barrel harmonics to me, it can be a tricky thing.

I'm not familiar with the range of bullet weights typically used with this chambering, but I'd be sure to run the gamut there, concentrating more on that and limiting powder selection to two or three known to be the "go to" for it. JMO...

I also noticed that the action was trued- so there's more than the one variable that was changed here (barrel). It's possible something got screwed up here.

Everyone has a different definintion/scope as to what constitutes "trueing"... what exactly did they do?

I wouldn't waste hundreds of rounds on this pursuit- if you can't get results with reasonable effort, I'd contact McGowan and send it back for them to go over.

old roper · October 28, 2014, 08:04 AM

I would call McGowen see what they have to say. I'm sure you had some conversation about accuracy with them before you had work done.

Most of the 22-250/22-250AI I've shot had 1/14 twist barrels and had pretty good luck with H-380 and IMR-4895 and that was with 50/55gr bullets.

GWS · October 28, 2014, 02:29 PM

I thought that a 1 in 14 twist in 22-250 and other fast .22's were best for small bullets 50 to 55 grains?

That 1 in 12 and quicker was needed for bullets as they grow in length (weight)?

Would someone clarify this for someone looking to buy his first fast varmint rifle?......me

1stmar · October 28, 2014, 03:54 PM

Been in contact with the smith who installed the barrel. He is standing behind his work and I'm confident he will address if needed. I have messed with the screws since it was bedded as I don't have a torque wrench. Going to give it one more run this weekend with a different scope. Hopefully it doesn't snow!

Rimfire5 · October 29, 2014, 07:02 AM

I have had the best results with Berger 52 grain # 22408 bullets (almost as good with Sierra 52 gr # 1410 and Sierra 52 gr flat base # 1400 bullets) and Reloader 15 or N140 powders compared to 55 grain bullets. My buddy has had the same results with his Savage 1:12 twist Model 12 LPV.

Check the trigger, I changed to a Timney set to 2 lbs with my Remington and got an improvement in accuracy.

reynolds357 · October 29, 2014, 11:02 PM

I have a Mod 70, 7 Rem mag that was re-barreled by Mcgowen. It shoots about 3/4 MOA. It is not as accurate as my bone stock Mod 70 7mag.
Lilja is now the only barrel I regularly use.

Nathan · October 30, 2014, 03:59 AM

I would try some 40-50 gr FB bullets....maybe 3 different types at 3 powder charges each. I would also run a BAC of factory through. If nothing shows promise, I would send it back. They should exchange barrel for blank.

1stmar · November 1, 2014, 04:54 PM

A little better luck today. Given the conditions I was satisfied. I made a scope change. So now I'm on the hunt for a scope. Wind was 15+ and it was dark.
.407

1stmar · November 1, 2014, 04:57 PM

This one was .391. Still fighting a flyer. Could have easily been wind

1stmar · November 1, 2014, 04:58 PM

.436- not great but acceptable. I think I can inprove on these a bit

1stmar · November 1, 2014, 05:02 PM

Worst of the 4- .536...

Thanks for the responses.. Thinking of 1 of two scopes...
Bushnell 6-24 elite
Sightron SII 36x

I have a b&l 6-24 which I believe is the same as the bushnell, I like it a lot. I've heard good things about the sightron. Any suggestions or thoughts on the two scopes is welcome.

Rimfire5 · November 2, 2014, 08:27 AM

Those groups aren't all that bad. They are all prairie dog extinguishers. In fact, I would be encouraged by how many of the rounds are touching.

From the looks of it, you have some really tight clusters destroyed by 1 or two rounds that are out of the group. The variation isn't large but enough to make the groups measure larger than they could.
It could be wind gusts but I'll assume that you have wind flags out to monitor the wind.
Assuming that it is not wind gusts, when I see that pattern in my results, I immediately conclude that some fine tuning on my technique may be the solution.

Are the outliers coming at the end of the group or are they randomly occurring? If always towards the end of the group, it could be barrel heating, getting too excited, gradually adjusting your shooting position during recoil, or even losing concentration.

I have in seen those kind of results in my shooting when:
1) I don't have a solid rear rest so the stock moves slightly.
2) I don't get behind the scope in the same position as I did when I shot the rest of the group. I find that I tend "creep up" closer to the scope as I shoot.
3) Moved my finger tip position on the trigger. It doesn't take much of a movement to move the point of impact at 100 yards or more.
4) Let the barrel get hot by shooting the group a bit too quickly.
5) Jerked the trigger on the last shot because I was trying to get the last shot to be great.
6) Didn't have a comfortable set up position so there is tension in the set up and I can't maintain a consistent set up while shooting the complete group.

I've done all of those with calibers from .22LR to .30-06, more with the bigger calibers than the smaller.

On clue to situation # 2 above is when you finish one group with a particular load and shoot the next group with the same load at a slightly different point of impact. That would indicate that the set up position has changed. It that happens during a group, you will open the group up with one or two rounds.

Rimfire5 · November 2, 2014, 08:42 AM

I use Sightron 36Xs with a 42mm front objective on my .22-250 and one of my .223s. The Big Sky II version is slightly more expensive than the older model. I have both and the are both fine scopes.

I also use Weaver T-36s on others - the T-36 with a 40mm front objective is not as bright as the Sightron but it has target turrets which are good if you are shooting at different distances. The Weaver is in the $ 410+ range.
The advantage of the 36X scopes is that you can see the .223 bullet holes at 200 yards without relying on a spotting scope, but they are strictly for target shooting. I even switch to a Weaver T-36 when testing loads for my Marlin .30-30 XLR at 100 yards. I am a great believer in "aiming small, shooting small" and with my 71+ year old eyes, magnification helps to keep the aim point consistent.

I recently tried the new Bushnell 6500 Elite 4.5-30X50. It was such a nice scope ($ 740) that I bought another when it was on sale for $670. I was very impressed by the lowest range of magnification on a scope that went to 30X. If you need a variable power scope, it is a dandy. It is shorter than the Sightron and Weaver and has a side focus instead of the traditional AO adjustment on the front of the barrel. I mounted them on an AR .223 and a M1A .308 and am happy with the results, especially at 30X.

Weaver has a new XLR 48X 42mm front objective with a side focus that looks pretty nice, but it is hard to find. My range buddy just got one and it looks like it is a more modern design. It was under $ 800.

October 26, 2014, 08:50 PM	#1
1stmar Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Connecticut Posts: 2,378	What would you guys try next... A bit frustrated with my 22-250. I burned through a factory barrel which was easily 1/2 moa, frequently shot much better with a lot of different powders and bullets. Finding a good load was never an issue. Had a McGowan barrel put on, trued action and bedded with devcon. Note new barrel is 1:12. Worked up an ocw load of 35.7 gr of 4064 with sierra 55gr hp. Can't get anything worth talking about. 5 shot groups are typically .75-1moa, 2 shots clusters with both vertical and horizontal dispersion. I wait a min between shots. I've tried varying seating depths. I've also tried 52 gr amax, 60gr vmax. I worked up some reduced loads with sr4759. They shot ok, .5-.75moa. Not great. So what do you guys think? I was thinking of changing to rl15 or aa2230. Just can't help thinking something isn't right with the rifle. Shouldn't be this hard to get a load for this cartridge.

October 27, 2014, 02:34 PM	#9
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	"...burned through a factory barrel..." Define that. It takes thousands of round to burn out any barrel. You think .5-.75 moa isn't good enough? What are you expecting? __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

October 28, 2014, 07:39 AM	#13
tobnpr Senior Member Join Date: August 1, 2010 Location: Tampa Bay Posts: 4,556	Action screw torque the same as before you re-barreled? Given the new barrel, I'd play with that a bit as well. Are you sure the new barrel isn't making contact with the barrel channel? It sounds like barrel harmonics to me, it can be a tricky thing. I'm not familiar with the range of bullet weights typically used with this chambering, but I'd be sure to run the gamut there, concentrating more on that and limiting powder selection to two or three known to be the "go to" for it. JMO... I also noticed that the action was trued- so there's more than the one variable that was changed here (barrel). It's possible something got screwed up here. Everyone has a different definintion/scope as to what constitutes "trueing"... what exactly did they do? I wouldn't waste hundreds of rounds on this pursuit- if you can't get results with reasonable effort, I'd contact McGowan and send it back for them to go over. __________________ Remington 700/Savage Rebarreling /Action Blueprinting 07 FFL /Mosin-Nagant Custom Shop/Bent Bolts Genuine Cerakote Applicator www.biggorillagunworks.com

October 28, 2014, 08:04 AM	#14
old roper Senior Member Join Date: June 11, 2007 Posts: 2,155	I would call McGowen see what they have to say. I'm sure you had some conversation about accuracy with them before you had work done. Most of the 22-250/22-250AI I've shot had 1/14 twist barrels and had pretty good luck with H-380 and IMR-4895 and that was with 50/55gr bullets. __________________ Semper Fi Vietnam 1965 VFW Life member NRA Life Member

October 28, 2014, 02:29 PM	#15
GWS Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2010 Location: New Mexico Posts: 688	I thought that a 1 in 14 twist in 22-250 and other fast .22's were best for small bullets 50 to 55 grains? That 1 in 12 and quicker was needed for bullets as they grow in length (weight)? Would someone clarify this for someone looking to buy his first fast varmint rifle?......me Last edited by GWS; October 28, 2014 at 05:17 PM.

October 26, 2014, 09:06 PM	#3
William T. Watts Senior Member Join Date: January 20, 2010 Location: Central Arkansas Posts: 1,074	Typically IMR4064 is one of the go to powders for this round, I've had good luck with the 50 & 55gr Sierra SP flat base bullets. Boat tail bullets do not shoot well in my Winchester model 70 classic, too bad mine came with a 1 in 14 twist!. You might try slipping a business card between the barrel and the forend tip, often a bit of upward pressure will help.. Good luck!! William

October 26, 2014, 09:48 PM	#4
Bart B. Senior Member Join Date: February 15, 2009 Posts: 8,927	Some McGowen barrels are not very accurate.

October 26, 2014, 09:59 PM	#5
1stmar Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Connecticut Posts: 2,378	I dble checked all the scope screws,mother were tight. The bedding job looks very good but I'm no expert. I had heard flat base may shoot better then bt, I bought the vmax (maybe it was the amax) specifically for the fb. I can bring it back to the smith who did the bedding, or contact the smith who installed the barrel. Not sure how they validate either, I would think the bedding would be easier to validate the a poorly manufactured barrel. I had some reservations about the barrel but the smith seemed to speak highly of them and if not mistaken I think Brian uses them as well.

October 27, 2014, 09:22 AM	#6
603Country Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2011 Location: Thornton, Texas Posts: 3,998	Like William Watts said, 4064 is a long-time favorite powder for that caliber. Still, you might try R15. Recent load testing for a new bullet in my 223 was poor with my favorite powder and I had to try 2 others before I found the magic load. So it could be that 4064 isn't THE powder for your new barrel. And did you give the barrel a good cleaning recently? I'd take all the copper out and start over. I had to do that recently with a rifle of mine. Groups opened up and I gave it the usual light cleaning (Shooter's Choice). That didn't work for me as well as usual, so I took Boretech Eliminator and cleaned out the copper. Shot a few foulers and was then right back to shooting the little groups. Seems to me that each barrel has a mind of its own. Put 20 or 25 rounds through my 220 and it needs a good cleaning (Douglas barrel). Takes more like 50 or so rounds for my 223 to start shooting worse. The 260 has a Brux and I have to shoot it a lot before groups open up, though I haven't yet figured out what that approximate number of rounds is. And...a couple of years ago I had a scope die on me. Groups just got sort of random and loose. Took me a couple of hundred rounds before I thought maybe I should swap out the scope. And it was the scope that had gone bad, though I'll say it was 'lightly bad'. I could still have hunted with it, I suppose.

October 27, 2014, 01:34 PM	#7
603Country Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2011 Location: Thornton, Texas Posts: 3,998	A followup to my last note. I had planned to check the POI on my 260 and my 270 today. The 270 hadn't been shot in a while, and since I expect the grandson to show up this weekend and want the 260, I thought I'd better see where the 270 was shooting. Shot the Tikkka 260 first. Two rounds into one hole. Ok, I'll leave that one alone. Shot the 270 and got an ugly 1 1/2 inch group. And then shot another one. Never shoots that bad. It's a Sako I've had for many years. Thought I'd better clean it, so ran some Shooter's Choice through it and got all the carbon fouling out. Thought maybe I should just check for copper, so grabbed and used the Boretech Eliminator, and had a river of blue coming out of the barrel. Cleaned and cleaned and finally ran out of copper. Took it to the bench and shot a couple of foulers and then a nice group of about 3/4 inch, which is what I expect from it. Must have been the copper. Ready to go now...

October 27, 2014, 02:20 PM	#8
1stmar Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Connecticut Posts: 2,378	I have no more then 200 rounds through it and I am usually pretty anal about cleaning (typically after every shooting). However the last two ranges sessions of 30 rounds or so I have not cleaned it. I will clean it before my next outing. I just bought some kg12 to try. While working up my ocw even three shot groups were not overly promising and that was with a clean barrel. At that point the barrel was very new so I attributed it break in and under developed load but was concerned about it.

October 27, 2014, 03:09 PM	#10
1stmar Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Connecticut Posts: 2,378	Rifle is a ruger 77 mkII varmint. Bought it used when it first came out. I've had it for 15+ years and have easily shot 2500 rounds through it. I was loading just off the lands, over time the cartridge length increased by over .030. Accuracy degraded tremendously. I am expecting .25-.5moa.

October 27, 2014, 05:22 PM	#11
603Country Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2011 Location: Thornton, Texas Posts: 3,998	Like 1stmar, I shot the throat out of a rifle some years ago. My 220 Swift (Ruger M77V Tang version) had been a great shooter. Replaced it with a Douglas and it continued to shoot great and even with the same pet loads I had worked up for the previous barrel. I could have kept using the old barrel, but was having problems with getting anywhere near the lands. And I wanted a thinner barrel anyway.

October 28, 2014, 12:01 AM	#12
Colorado Redneck Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2008 Location: Northeast Colorado Posts: 1,993	I did the same thing---burned through a barrel on a 22-250 Savage model 12. Probably over 4000 rounds down the tube, and accuracy degraded fairly rapidly---from 3/8" groups to all over the place in about 200 rounds. Replaced it with a Criterion barrel, and can't say enough good about the entire experience. One of the sages here in TFL said something like this: "All barrel makers put out a stinker every so often." For some shooters, 1-1.5 MOA is acceptable. It may be the barrel, but you may be able to work at finding a load that your barrel will shoot well for you. As far as I know, there ain't no guarantees with this gun business. If you try lots of combinations of powder/bullets/primers and don't find something your new barrel likes, you might have to move on from that set up. It can be frustrating as heck sometimes. Good luck!

October 28, 2014, 03:54 PM	#16
1stmar Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Connecticut Posts: 2,378	Been in contact with the smith who installed the barrel. He is standing behind his work and I'm confident he will address if needed. I have messed with the screws since it was bedded as I don't have a torque wrench. Going to give it one more run this weekend with a different scope. Hopefully it doesn't snow!

October 29, 2014, 07:02 AM	#17
Rimfire5 Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2009 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 923	I have had the best results with Berger 52 grain # 22408 bullets (almost as good with Sierra 52 gr # 1410 and Sierra 52 gr flat base # 1400 bullets) and Reloader 15 or N140 powders compared to 55 grain bullets. My buddy has had the same results with his Savage 1:12 twist Model 12 LPV. Check the trigger, I changed to a Timney set to 2 lbs with my Remington and got an improvement in accuracy.

October 29, 2014, 11:02 PM	#18
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 6,165	I have a Mod 70, 7 Rem mag that was re-barreled by Mcgowen. It shoots about 3/4 MOA. It is not as accurate as my bone stock Mod 70 7mag. Lilja is now the only barrel I regularly use.

October 30, 2014, 03:59 AM	#19
Nathan Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2001 Posts: 6,334	I would try some 40-50 gr FB bullets....maybe 3 different types at 3 powder charges each. I would also run a BAC of factory through. If nothing shows promise, I would send it back. They should exchange barrel for blank.

November 2, 2014, 08:27 AM	#24
Rimfire5 Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2009 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 923	Those groups aren't all that bad. They are all prairie dog extinguishers. In fact, I would be encouraged by how many of the rounds are touching. From the looks of it, you have some really tight clusters destroyed by 1 or two rounds that are out of the group. The variation isn't large but enough to make the groups measure larger than they could. It could be wind gusts but I'll assume that you have wind flags out to monitor the wind. Assuming that it is not wind gusts, when I see that pattern in my results, I immediately conclude that some fine tuning on my technique may be the solution. Are the outliers coming at the end of the group or are they randomly occurring? If always towards the end of the group, it could be barrel heating, getting too excited, gradually adjusting your shooting position during recoil, or even losing concentration. I have in seen those kind of results in my shooting when: 1) I don't have a solid rear rest so the stock moves slightly. 2) I don't get behind the scope in the same position as I did when I shot the rest of the group. I find that I tend "creep up" closer to the scope as I shoot. 3) Moved my finger tip position on the trigger. It doesn't take much of a movement to move the point of impact at 100 yards or more. 4) Let the barrel get hot by shooting the group a bit too quickly. 5) Jerked the trigger on the last shot because I was trying to get the last shot to be great. 6) Didn't have a comfortable set up position so there is tension in the set up and I can't maintain a consistent set up while shooting the complete group. I've done all of those with calibers from .22LR to .30-06, more with the bigger calibers than the smaller. On clue to situation # 2 above is when you finish one group with a particular load and shoot the next group with the same load at a slightly different point of impact. That would indicate that the set up position has changed. It that happens during a group, you will open the group up with one or two rounds. Last edited by Rimfire5; November 2, 2014 at 08:46 AM.

November 2, 2014, 08:42 AM	#25
Rimfire5 Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2009 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 923	Scope suggestions I use Sightron 36Xs with a 42mm front objective on my .22-250 and one of my .223s. The Big Sky II version is slightly more expensive than the older model. I have both and the are both fine scopes. I also use Weaver T-36s on others - the T-36 with a 40mm front objective is not as bright as the Sightron but it has target turrets which are good if you are shooting at different distances. The Weaver is in the $ 410+ range. The advantage of the 36X scopes is that you can see the .223 bullet holes at 200 yards without relying on a spotting scope, but they are strictly for target shooting. I even switch to a Weaver T-36 when testing loads for my Marlin .30-30 XLR at 100 yards. I am a great believer in "aiming small, shooting small" and with my 71+ year old eyes, magnification helps to keep the aim point consistent. I recently tried the new Bushnell 6500 Elite 4.5-30X50. It was such a nice scope ($ 740) that I bought another when it was on sale for $670. I was very impressed by the lowest range of magnification on a scope that went to 30X. If you need a variable power scope, it is a dandy. It is shorter than the Sightron and Weaver and has a side focus instead of the traditional AO adjustment on the front of the barrel. I mounted them on an AR .223 and a M1A .308 and am happy with the results, especially at 30X. Weaver has a new XLR 48X 42mm front objective with a side focus that looks pretty nice, but it is hard to find. My range buddy just got one and it looks like it is a more modern design. It was under $ 800.