Budget MOA Rifle

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by RC20

As we are a diverse and welcoming group!

Also note that the ref to a Safe Queen and your handle can leave some question as to gender. I for two would have used "dude" as well.

No ding but handles can be interpreted a number of ways. 45 years ago I worked with a guy by the name of Shirley and knew a Rossie when I was a kid (not a clue what they were thinking)

Mine happens to be a ref to a Honda Motorcycle model (CB700SC is the show name, RC20 is the actual Honda model)

Even if it is a girl, what difference does that make? Shooting in not about gender!

[RC20]

I am scratching my head here.

The OP made a note that "not a dude".

I was pointing out that as Safe Queen applies to a gun that never is taken out and used, the use of ARQueen for a handle does not necessarily denote gender.

Am I missing something here?

Did I not say diverse group? That includes women and as well anyone else that wants to self identify as anything they choose

Me, I got no bias. Confused at times yes, biased, no

[agtman]

I am scratching my head here.
The OP made a note that "not a dude".
I was pointing out that as Safe Queen applies to a gun that never is taken out and used, the use of ARQueen for a handle does not necessarily denote gender.
Am I missing something here?

No, you're entirely correct. The OP's screen "handle" was in fact gender ambiguous, ... or was until she clarified it. Sort of like the former Bruce Jenner coming out and unburdening his/herself publicly as "Caitlin" whatever.

Perhaps the problem is: too many "sensitive Sallys," where the use of the word "Sally" is not intended to be gender-specific, but can include many wussified males.

[GRG]

In reference to the topic of an affordable moa rifle, the Ruger Predator is more than capable of doing that. The Precision rifle and Savage, Tikka etc. all weigh in that 10-11 lb range which if it will be used as a hunting rifle as well is a bit heavy in my eyes. The Predator was my choice as the reviews on it have been excellent with the only exception being the stock. I am going to put an MDT chassis on so with it and the butt stock, mag and grip it will not be much cheaper than the Precision but with a medium weight barrel and a little lighter stock it will be close to 2lbs lighter. To me that was the big sell on this setup. I also spent about 15 min cleaning up the trigger and dropping in a new spring and now have a very clean 2lb 9oz trigger.

[kraigwy]

I know that the phrase "budget MOA" might be construed as an oxymoron but is that always true?

Correct about not always true.

After sending my wife to a long range shooting school I bought her a Ruger Precision Rifle in 6.5 Creedmoor. In playing with that rifle I fell in love with the 6.5 CM and decided to buy a light hunting rifle in that caliber.

I paid just under $400 for a Ruger American Predator in 6.5. Found it to be ever bit as accurate as the RPR, at 1/3 the cost.

Check out the YouTube videos regarding the RAP esp in 6.5.

In addition, play with loads, H4350 is a good powder but I found that Win. 760 to be the most accurate powder in both our 6.5 CMs, Whats more, I dont have to weigh the charges, being a ball powder it meters quite well.

[Jim Watson]

Although the 6.5 CM is considered a mild round to shoot, the 6.6 lb Predator would not be my first choice to shoot for groups from the bench. Maybe in .223 for close and midrange.

We see lots of posts from people who want the proverbial All Around Rifle and think they will be happy with high round count from light hunting rifles, OR to hump a heavy target rifle in the woods. I expect they will be adding a second gun to specialize before long.

[Lohman446]

The thing is: MOA is a pretty defined specification. With modern machinery and methods it seems that it can be hit pretty cost effectively. Of course MOA and "precision shooting" are different things.

Contrary to what those with expensive rifles made in the past, where MOA was an achievement, would like sub MOA is entirely possible in budget rifles from several manufactures (some going as far as to guarantee it). Now you run into the problem of the rifles ability vs the shooters ability. My budget sub MOA is rifle fully capable of it and I have watched it do it off of a bench and an adjustable rest.

Meaningful in the field? Probably not. I have always known my rifle (and not just this one) was more capable of accuracy than I was

[spacemanspiff]

You already stated the purpose for this gun to be a range rifle. So you won't worry about it being heavy, or whatnot. Not a hunting rifle, just put holes in paper consistantly. Great!

The budget you seem to be allowing yourself is sub $500, and some of the rifles you are looking at include a scope. Now theres been plenty of responses about the rifle selections and plenty of pros and cons for the rifles you have already researched. But lets discuss the glass for a minute.

Amazon has a Leupod vx-1 3-9x for approximately $160. Figure in rings, and mount, well I don't know those prices off top of my head, lets just call that $200 total, give or take 20 bucks. I would trust a Leupold over the scopes included in those rifle packages. Its not the finest glass, but we are talking budget, right?

Next, decide on the caliber. Affordable yet accurate, and light on recoil, I would think either .243 or 22-250 are great options. Its a range rifle, so its not like you are going to be putting hundreds of rounds downrange at a time.

I gotta ask tho, if its just a range rifle that you want to shoot nice tight groups with, why aren't we discussing a 22lr? Does it have to be a centerfire? You want a good solid budget rifle that is less than $500, theres plenty of rimfires out there that will do that job.

But I digress. Which of the rifles you researched so far feels right in your hands?

[stagpanther]

I look at from the point of the view of the barrel. My opinion is that Savage Ruger and even Mossberg as of late all have mastered the art of producing consumer grade barrels all of which are capable of shooting beyond what I can do. The rest is just tweaking the other components. A cheapo axis 1 308 I bought years ago for $275 could do this; and it wasn't because of my skills.

[Damon555]

Here is what I think of when people ask similar questions......

http://www.cabelas.com/product/SAVAG...LE/1994604.uts

http://www.cabelas.com/product/REMIN...LE/1702465.uts

Pick one of these two in .223 and shoot the heck out of it. Neither of these rifles is their respective manufacturer's budget rifle either. What you get is a step up from the cheaper options.

[ARqueen15]

A little slow and late to reply thanks to being away from home thanks to the hurricane.

One of you keenly mentioned why not a 22LR bolt gun and indeed I've given those some thought too...the obvious candidates being the ruger american rimfire, the savage mk2, and of course, the CZ452/455 (pretty gun with the wood stock that one is). If I got a .22, then those would be the 3 rifles I'd consider. Ironically, some of those rimfires would be more expensive to buy than the like of a .204/.223/.243/6.5 creed, remington 783 or TC compass.

22 magnum or 17 hmr might extend the range to 150, perhaps 200 yards, but I also know they can't be reloaded and aren't going to be near as cheap as 22LR.

I should say that among other guns, I have a 22 which is a plain jane M&P 15-22 that's fun to shoot at the range with a nice Nikon scope. I've tried a variety of ammo and found what it likes (CCI subsonic, no surprise). On a very good day I see the rare MOA groups but more realistically it is a 3-4 MOA and that's how i'd characterize it. I've got some Lapua and Eley match ammo on the way just to see if it can get any tighter but i'm not expecting miracles. It isn't a target gun and though S&W makes a match barrel you'd still have the action being one of a budget .22 and nobody I know is placing in rimfire bench matches with M&P's...

If it is a centerfire then I'm narrowing it down to the 783, the T/C compass, and some variety of the savage axis.

So having lived and breathed auto-loaders, I can't say if a .22 bolt gun would be fun. Maybe it would be more than a centerfire bolt gun seeing as I'd be burning a nickel every time I shot it rather than a dollar bill or 3 quarters with a centerfire bolt gun

[huntfisheat]

My tiger American rimfire is great i have a nikon 3x9 rimfire scope on it and have shot quite a few 1/2 niche groups at 100yards i shoot it when I let my 308 or rifle cool some shot lots of squarrls to the stock is to me the nicest plastic stock out now for the rimfires and a good trigger I'm not a fan of the transfer bar on it but still a great trigger for a rimfire with they used a 1022 barrel but it shoots so good it don't matter. I had a axis in 270 for wet days and it shot amazing it liked 150 gr it was before they changed the name to axis it was a edge.

[ARqueen15]

I've seen a ruger american rimfire (in 22 mag but I assume it's virtually identical in .17hmr/22LR) and it seemed reasonably well built. It had rather useful sights if one wanted to forego a scope too. Being a rimfire it was quite compact and light so it would be easy to carry it on an extended hike, small game hunting, etc. How far are you shooting your rimfire and what do your groups average around? I've found .22LR to be fairly predictable at 50 yards but things seem to open up with many rifles once you stretch things to 100.

I finally got a look at the remington 783 and the T/C compass in person at a big box store. These are definitely not prom dates as the stocks are very utilitarian. Just pushing on the front of the 783 in particular I could sense some flex. Obviously there is a price point and performance is about all anyone would likely care about in these rifles. Otherwise, there wasn't much to pick from between the two....plastic/nylon stocks that only a mom could love, OK-feeling actions with the 783 having what felt like a lighter or plastic knob on the bolt, built-in rail mounts and sling attachment points on the compass....priced very similarly, both have rebates. The axis I had already seen and it is marginally better than these two but also more expensive.

[spacemanspiff]

Price check AuctionArms.com for some of those 22 rifles you mentiond. True, the CZ455 is retailing in the 400 range, but i have seen a handful posted in the 300 range, new rifles not used.

I usually bring the 22 rifle to the range even if my intent is to shoot the AR or the M1. It provides a nice little break for the shooter in the lane to my right from having my brass rain upon them.

And while most people shoot 22 at a maximum of 50 yards, I still find enjoyment shooting it at 100. There are days when I only take the 22 to shoot and can spend hours setting little challenges for myself.

I suggested it because you are looking for something that can shoot 1moa, and is affordable in both the gun and ammo.

[makarov]

My brother bought a Savage in 6.5 Creedmore, that thing is an absolute tack-driver. Can't beat them for the money. His is the heavy barrel model, but the lighter contour hunting models are really accurate as well.

[RC20]

I almost always have a 22 with me.

I had a S&W MP15-22, good enough gun once thy sorted out the extraction issue, sure not accurate like I hoped (ARs in general for me)

I have a CZ452 and I like it a lot.

If I was to do over I would get a Savage with the heavy target barrel. More stable.

CZ shoots pretty much anything decently. Mine really likes the Norma TAC 22 (I guess tactical is in, tactical 22 though?)

The only downside is the trigger, just not quite there for adjustable and fine break.

Great field 22

Bolt action get you to take your time and shoot well. Semi auto fun for plinking.

[tobnpr]

A sub-moa rifle is one that will shoot to that level, consistently.
Five shot groups minimum, all the time. Not "sometimes", not a cherry-picked three shot group out of several.

No doubt manufacturers are turning out more accurate rifles, most of which will be accurate "enough" for most people. Problem I see nowadays, is that when someone gets one that shoots 1-1/2"-2" with factory ammo they feel they got a lemon...

Don't buy an entry level factory rifle expecting custom rifle accuracy- you may be lucky and get it, maybe not...

[stagpanther]

Hmmm--kinda agree with that--except someone like Carlos Hathcock might not--to whom one and only one shot is the one that counts.

Looked at from that point of view--what is more accurate--the first shot hitting the POA or the consistency of the multiple shot group?

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by tobnpr

A sub-moa rifle is one that will shoot to that level, consistently.
Five shot groups minimum, all the time. Not "sometimes", not a cherry-picked three shot group out of several.

No doubt manufacturers are turning out more accurate rifles, most of which will be accurate "enough" for most people. Problem I see nowadays, is that when someone gets one that shoots 1-1/2"-2" with factory ammo they feel they got a lemon...

Don't buy an entry level factory rifle expecting custom rifle accuracy- you may be lucky and get it, maybe not...

So much for one mans opinion!

[RC20]

Having been in the game a while, I can tell you that those so called MOA rifles are a bunch of bull.

They still are 1.5 inch rifles.


It takes some good load development to get them under 1 inch.

That's one reason the Savage Cabela 12FV is such a bargain.

It has a heavy barrel and that gets you 1 inch, 1/2 or so with reloads.

Dicks also has a budge heavy barrel rifle.

Those pencil barrel standards are lucky to get 1.5 inch with 3 shot group.

I have one, throws the first one about 1.5 inches to the left of the next two.

Its off the rifle, I will play with it as a guy claims he can get one to shoot sub MOA 5 shots with the right loads.

Most people shoot factory. A lot of those do not have match grade ammo.

308 has a lot, 6.5 has a lot, 270? 243?

[Pathfinder45]

Here; buy this one: http://www.gunbroker.com/item/693109226
If it's over your budget, sell your AR's until you have enough in your new budget.

[tobnpr]

So much for one mans opinion!

Actually, I see nothing that's "opinion" about that post.

What, exactly, would your rebuttal be?

[NateKirk]

Get a savage or a Tikka T3

[Model12Win]

Don't discount the M39 Mosins. Those guns are absolute TACK DRIVERS with solid ammo. Surplus ball is dirt cheap and the guns themselves are at an all time low cost due to recent imports of them.

I guarantee they are built better and far, FAR tougher than anything you listed. They are in short, phenomenal rifles.

[agtman]

Don't discount the M39 Mosins. Those guns are absolute TACK DRIVERS with solid ammo. * * *

Depends on what "solid" ammo you're referring to, but Mosins are generally "tack drivers" as compared to Mini-14s.