Getting opinions on the first rifle

[Formidilosus]

Regarding Formidilosus and caliber “minimums”, I’ll link to a post of his that seems to infer a disregard for “cartridge minimums” on a thread discussing .223 on elk

.223 for bear, mountain goat, deer, elk, and moose.

To jump in on said dumpster fire, my take is this: Hunting big game with a .223 is the equivalent of all the IGFA 4, 6 and 8 pound test line class records. Can you spool a TLD 25 up with 8 pound test and catch a marlin? Yes. It is certainly possible. Is it less ethical? Probably. The fish...

www.rokslide.com

Perhaps Form can weigh in himself.

Short answer-

Rifle? Easy- T3x Lite. Scope? Easy- SWFA SS 6x Milquad. Mounts? Easy- Sportsmatch. Cartridge? Easier- 6.5 CM.

And a second identical one in 223 with 1-8” twist.

Whether the person knows that they want to or not, that combination will perform way beyond normal hunting ranges if they eventually want to. If not, having a reliable, robust and simple scope to shoot 0-300 yards is no handicap.






Long answer-

There are two main facets to this- hunting and shooting. People conflate the two and while complimentary, they are not the same. I wonder with some of the suggestions how many new shooters posters have been able to turn into truly competent and skilled rifle users? I certainly know I have damaged or hampered the progress of newer shooters, or even experienced shooters, by following conventional thoughts.

For a variety of reasons I have taught a lot of people to shoot for hunting purposes. I started with conventional beliefs for all of it- 30cals, magnums, Winchester’s, remingtons, dozens of Savages, Leupolds, Zeiss, etc. etc. Between hunting and crop depredation/culling I have see a few animals killed with pop guns to 50 cals and I also get to see a relatively significant amount of people that get taught then go out use what they’ve learned to kill animals. I’ve watched all of the successes and problems that they have.

What is consistently obvious is that the vast majority of people are over gunned, over cartridged, over X’d, under bulleted, under rifled, under scoped, and under skilled.

I shoot thousands of 308 and 300 Mag rounds a year. Few appreciate the 3-0-hate more than I. However, for this discussion, having shot and used almost every rifle and cartridge mentioned, as well as seeing game killed with them.... If a person is going to get one rifle, objectively there is no logical argument for anything but a 6.5 Creedmoor.
Killing isn’t about how much the rifle recoils, but about tissue damage and placement. 6.5mm bullets create excellent wound channels and there isn’t an Elk that is falling to a 30cal, that won’t fall to a 6.5mm with like speed at normal ranges. Recoil is on the lighter side (though it still recoils), great ammo is everywhere for $20-$30 a box, there are excellent guns chambered for it, and it will kill elk without issue way past where nearly anyone would attempt a shot with any cartridge.


I’m a big fan of knowing the outcome before we even start. For $2000 a person can have it all. Buy the above setups an (6.5CM and 223 Tikka with 1-8” twist) and not worry about it. A new shooter with both of those setups, a case of ammo and a summer of correct practice will turf everything 600 yards and in.

 

[Formidilosus]

I have zero emotional attachment to rifle and scope make/model brand. I try greatly to be as objective as possible and not make conclusions until enough data has been gathered.


As I wrote on another thread about why Tikkas-



Function:


Loading- Bolt travel with no binding at any point during cycling in snow, ice, sand, and excess debris, when cycled rapidly. Magazine feeding smoothly and positively in snow, ice, sand, and with excess debris.


Firing- Reliability of FCS when dealing with snow, ice, sand, and excess debris. Trigger reliability in all weather conditions, trigger being drop safe.


Extraction- bolt cycle positively and with no binding in adverse conditions. Consistent and reliable extraction in snow, ice, sand, and with excess debris.


Ejection- Consistent and reliable ejection in snow, ice, sand, and debris.



Shooting Performance:


Precision- Consistent and known precision from rifle to rifle with little to no variation- I.E., good barrels with excellent QC.


Trigger- Easily adjustable weight, no creep, clean and consistent break.


Action- smooth and anti-binding. Short bolt throw (less than 90°). Positive and consistent travel.


Stock- Stiff forend to resident contact and torque on the barrel and action from field positions. Vertical grip for increased trigger and recoil control. Negative comb and no drop at heel for straight line recoil and spotting impacts.


The only point that the T3x is weak on is the buttstock (drop at heel). Everything else was purposely designed for, or it’s lineage was, function and shooter feel in adverse conditions. Of all the the mainstream rifles, having seen lots used heavily, they are the most consistent and trouble free. That’s not to say that they never have problems, but the rate of issues is way lower than almost any other. One can take 10 T3x’s, mount good scopes in good bases/rings, and be very confident that none of those rifles will give any trouble or hassle, and the shooters performance/perception behind the rifle will be excellent. They will shoot, function and work as they should. One can not say the same of Remingtons, Savages, Ruger Americans, etc. This isn’t about what I like or think. I’m not a fan of anything but performance. I did not “like” Tikkas a decade ago. I personally like Pre 64 Winchester’s and old world Mausers. But I couldn’t say with a straight face that they are better performers in backpack hunting and shooting use than Tikkas.

 

[16Bore]

It’s too f’n simple. I was reading on the Internet........blah blah blah.

 

[BjornF16]

Short answer-

Rifle? Easy- T3x Lite. Scope? Easy- SWFA SS 6x Milquad. Mounts? Easy- Sportsmatch. Cartridge? Easier- 6.5 CM.

And a second identical one in 223 with 1-8” twist.

Whether the person knows that they want to or not, that combination will perform way beyond normal hunting ranges if they eventually want to. If not, having a reliable, robust and simple scope to shoot 0-300 yards is no handicap.






Long answer-

There are two main facets to this- hunting and shooting. People conflate the two and while complimentary, they are not the same. I wonder with some of the suggestions how many new shooters posters have been able to turn into truly competent and skilled rifle users? I cerntianly know I have damaged or hampered the progress of newer shooters, or even experienced shooters, by foloow Inf conventional thoughts.

For a variety of reasons I have taught a lot of people to shoot for hunting purposes. I started with conventional beliefs for all of it- 30cals, magnums, Winchester’s, remingtons, dozens of Savages, Leupolds, Zeiss, etc. etc. Between hunting and crop depredation/culling I have see a few animals killed with pop guns to 50 cals and I also get to see a relatively significant amount of people that get taught then go out use what they’ve learned to kill animals. I’ve watched all of the successes and problems that they have.

What is consistently obvious is that the vast majority of people are over gunned, over cartridged, over X’d, under bulleted, under rifled, under scoped, and under skilled.

I shoot thousands of 308 and 300 Mag rounds a year. Few appreciate the 3-0-hate more than I. However, for this discussion, having shot and used almost every rifle and cartridge mentioned, as well as seeing game killed with them.... If a person is going to get one rifle, objectively there is no logical argument for anything but a 6.5 Creedmoor.
Killing isn’t about how much the rifle recoils, but about tissue damage and placement. 6.5mm bullets create excellent wound channels and there isn’t an Elk that is falling to a 30cal, that won’t fall to a 6.5mm with like speed at normal ranges. Recoil is on the lighter side (though it still recoils), great ammo is everywhere for $20-$30 a box, there are excellent guns chambered for it, and it will kill elk without issue way past where nearly anyone would attempt a shot with any cartridge.


I’m a big fan of knowing the outcome before we even start. For $2000 a person can have it all. Buy the above setups an (6.5CM and 223 Tikka with 1-8” twist) and not worry about it. A new shooter with both of those setups, a case of ammo and a summer of correct practice will turf everything 600 yards and in.

Form,

What 6.5 CM bullet would you choose for elk in black bear country?

 

[Formidilosus]

Form,

What 6.5 CM bullet would you choose for elk in black bear country?

Almost any. I’ve carried and used 130, 140, and 156gr Berger’s, 140gr and 147gr ELD-M’s, 143gr ELD-X’s, Accubonds, Monos, etc.

Apparently I’m in the minority, but I do not find elk, or bear, or anything else for that matter hard to kill. Place a projectile with sufficient penetration and the widest wound channel possible in the chest cavity and they all die quickly. The less recoil and muzzle jump, the more rounds fired, the more rounds fired the more that bullets are inserted in chests cavities and not guts/legs/air.

If a person just had to have very deep penetration while still having lower impact velocity performance, the Federal Terminal Ascent 130gr is an excellent projectile.

 

[Laramie]

A lot of information posted. If I was the OP I probably would have tapped out by now but just in case I'll throw my opinion out there.

Here is a decent recoil table so you can compare all the suggestions-

Rifle Recoil Table

I am a 30-06 fan for a lot of reasons. The biggest reason, it is one of, if not the most, versatile cartridges on the market that also has the most readily available ammo. Factory ammo can be purchased from 55 grain all the way up to 220 grain. For those recoil fans out there, a 30-06 with a 125 grain bullet moving at 2700 FPS, the recoil energy is less than a hot 95 grain .243 load at just 10.2 lbs. Step up to a 150 grain moving at 2800 FPS, and you are at 17.6- just a smidge over the .308. It can be loaded hotter with great bullets as the shooter increases ability and the game necessitates more killing power. I like 165 grain quality ammo for elk.

As far as what to spend in ratio to rifle vs scope, 50/50 or 40/60 should put you in the ballpark. Don't skimp on your mounts and rings!

Happy shopping.

 

[Formidilosus]

I think there have been some excellent alternatives...it's just that everyone has some sort of bias whether it is bladed trigger, sloppy bolt, flexible stock or fugly. Most of the ones listed hover around MOA with the right ammo.

Ruger American
Savage 11
Kimber Hunter
Mossberg Patriot
Bergara B14 (mostly American)
Remington 7/700

Stepping up a price point increases the field:
CA
Barrett
Kimber Montana, Mountain Ascent
Weatherby Mark V
Seekins Precision Hunter 2

I'm sure there are others...

This is an example for conversation, not trying to be a jerk or argue.


Sloppy bolts and flexible stocks aren’t bias- they’re function.


Rugar American- noodle for a stock. Small parts issues at times when used heavily. No great replacement stocks. Trigger can be susceptible to dust. Bolts do not bind as much as most however.

Savage, all of them- generally very flexible forend on stocks, problems with extraction and ejection are relatively common with ice and sand. Action and bolts are extremely rough, bind easily, and when run fast feeding problems are not unusual. Detachable mags can be finicky with debris, sand, ice snow. Trigger is adjustable, but when dirty tend to have problems.

Kimber Hunter- all the Kimber 14 point checklist items. Stock is serviceable however, a bit flimsy on the forend. Mags can be a bit finicky and do not feed totally smooth. Trigger is not as easily adjustable, but tends to be reliable. Precision is more consistent than in the past, but still not where it should be. Probably the closest out of this list.


Mossberg- pretty much exactly the same as the RA.

Bergara- Remington triggers. Could just stop right there... But, not made in America, heavy, bolt binds at rear, firing, extraction, and ejection relatively susceptible to snow, ice, sand, and debris. Much better than Remington.

Remington- everything from Bergara, plus poor QC, very spotty precision, poor stocks, barrel and chamber issues, reciever bridges often not machined in alignment, base screw holes often misaligned, bolt handle failure common enough to warrant getting it pinned/welded, etc, etc.


CA- Remington triggers. Precision and QC are spotty. Stock issues are relatively common. Extremely rough action/bolt, brings heavily at rear with any lateral pressure.

Barret Fieldcraft- Remington triggers. Action and bolt can bind with lateral pressure at rear. Feeding can be a bit rough, though malfunctions are rare. Best production true lightweight rifle. If sub 6lb all up is “required”, go TT or Geissele 2 stage and it’s a good choice.

Kimber Montan, MA- see hunter above.

Weatherby Mark V- Precision/barrels can be spotty. Trigger more susceptible to snow, ice, sand, debris. Action can bind though not as bad as most, when shot heavily have seen a couple bolts worn out to the point of falling apart.


Seekins Precision Hunter 2- Remington trigger. Action/bolt binds and can be rough. Some can be difficult to cock.



Now T3x- Extremely reliable and smooth feeding in snow, ice, sand, and with debris. Bolt is very hard to bind at any position. Short bolt throw, easy to cock and close, fast to cycle. Single stack, single feed magazines feed smoothly and reliably even with snow, ice, sand, and debris. Triggers are excellent both in feel and reliability in adverse conditions. Stocks are stiffer than most in the forend, grip is interchangable. Precision is generally very good, best in class is the norm. Barrels are excellent. Issues- drop at heel in the stock. Chintzy for cartridges above 3.5” COAL. Some LA chambered T3’s can have ejection interfered with by scopes having large windage turrets.

Sako and Sauers have similar, if not different, pluses and minuses as Tikka.

 

[Flatland Newbie]

Thank you for all your posts and opinions. A lot of helpful information and a lot to think about.
I think as far as the caliber goes I will stick with 308 and as I get more skilled with the weapon I will upgrade to more fancy or manly caliber.
Could you please help me to figure out the difference between those two?
For now my shopping is online only, I want to know make a list of what to look at as far as the models go and then go to the store and try as many as I can.
https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/tikka-t3x-superlite-bolt-action-rifle and https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/tikka-t3x-lite-stainless-steel-bolt-action-rifle

 

[Nealm66]

Before you commit, I would consider the 6.5-300 weatherby in a vanguard.

 

[Ram94]

Thank you for all your posts and opinions. A lot of helpful information and a lot to think about.
I think as far as the caliber goes I will stick with 308 and as I get more skilled with the weapon I will upgrade to more fancy or manly caliber.
Could you please help me to figure out the difference between those two?
For now my shopping is online only, I want to know make a list of what to look at as far as the models go and then go to the store and try as many as I can.
https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/tikka-t3x-superlite-bolt-action-rifle and https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/tikka-t3x-lite-stainless-steel-bolt-action-rifle

About 3-4 ounces due to the fluted barrel on the Superlite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dead eye BT]

Thank you for all your posts and opinions. A lot of helpful information and a lot to think about.
I think as far as the caliber goes I will stick with 308 and as I get more skilled with the weapon I will upgrade to more fancy or manly caliber.
Could you please help me to figure out the difference between those two?
For now my shopping is online only, I want to know make a list of what to look at as far as the models go and then go to the store and try as many as I can.
https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/tikka-t3x-superlite-bolt-action-rifle and https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/tikka-t3x-lite-stainless-steel-bolt-action-rifle

Those 2 are exactly the same, except the superlight has a fluted barrel and is 0.39# lighter (according to the specs). You can’t go wrong with either one.

 

[Flatland Newbie]

Thank you for all the ideas about the gun.
Can we talk more about the scope. What do you prefer MOA or mil? Mil makes a lit more sense as I'm originally form Europe. What magnification would you recommend? Maybe suggest certain model. Again, the main goal is western hunting (if there is such a thing)
Budget is in $1000 area. I Can pay a bit more if I will get a lot more for the extra $200 or so. Hope his helps.

 

[Ram94]

Are you looking to dial or use a holdover reticle?

 

[Rob5589]

Thank you for all the ideas about the gun.
Can we talk more about the scope. What do you prefer MOA or mil? Mil makes a lit more sense as I'm originally form Europe. What magnification would you recommend? Maybe suggest certain model. Again, the main goal is western hunting (if there is such a thing)
Budget is in $1000 area. I Can pay a bit more if I will get a lot more for the extra $200 or so. Hope his helps.

Pick what you prefer and learn it. They are both just units of measure.

 

[Flatland Newbie]

I think dial in would work best. I zero at 100 and I'm good to go. If it is a longer shot that I need to take i will have or should have plenty of time to dial in. the follow up shot maybe the holdover would be better but technically I think it can be done with the last setting of the reticle.

 

[BjornF16]

Swarovski Z5 2.4-12x50...perfect light gathering for forest low light and good enough for mountains as well. I have one on my Fieldcraft 6.5 CM and really like it. Weighs 16 oz.

The one scope I like better is Z5 3.5-18x44. It has parallax focus and also weighs in at 16 oz.

MOA vs MIL...6 one way, 1/2 dozen the other. Whatever you're most comfortable with.

I personally prefer MOA, and try to keep it consistent amongst my various scopes.

 

[Woodrow F Call]

If you want an inexpensive option, I've had a good experience with the SWFA 6X so far. I need to get more shooting time and playing with the dials. I'd definitely stick to mils especially since that's what you are used to.

 

[Ram94]

Nightforce SHV 3-10 would fit your budget and be very reliable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Flatland Newbie]

What are you preferring hold over or dial in ?

 

[Ram94]

I dial anything over my 100 yard zero if I have the time. Under 500 yards, holdover reticle works well too, but I find it more accurate to dial and just have a simple Plex reticle. The SHV has capped turrets, some guys take the cap off and no harm done. I leave mine on for security and if I’m dialing, I have time to spin it off anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk