Getting opinions on the first rifle

[Teaman1]

My opinion is dial if you’re going to make a habit of taking and practicing long shots. I used to want to be ready for ultra long range shots, but I’ve found I just don’t get those opportunities very often. I now set up for a 250 yard zero with an 2.5-8 power scope and just don’t worry about it inside of 300 yards

 

[denn30]

I'm in a very similar situation and coming from 5 years bowhunting just bought my first gun (which I appreciate isn't a lot of life experience hunting).
I bought a tikka t3x superlite stainless on sale, with a vortex viper 4-9x 40
I can't give you much a of a comparison but it seems to be a super rifle for me. Have only shot it at the range. Excited to head to the woods with it. This isn't a a gun review but just telling you what I bought given a similar situation.

i'm in the market for my first rile too. and seriously considering the Tikka T3x Superlite. what caliber did you end up with? how's the recoil? i'm trying to decide between .308 and 30-06. i'm in Washington state, so mostly deer and up to elk.

i've read that although the .308 has less recoil it's not by much and depends on the load. if that's the case the 30-06 seems to be more versatile. i shoot 12 gauge shotgun without a problem although it's a Remington Versamax which is supposed to be one of the softer 12 gauge. and lastly, i'm planning on putting on a Limbsaver.

thanks!

 

[ColtyJr]

May I suggest instead of a box store (Cabelas/Bass Pro) try to find a local gun shop even if it means traveling 45 minutes or so they’ll usually know more and their customer service is usually more accommodating because you’re not just another number for them you could be helping put food on the table during this difficult time. Also I’d suggest 7mm-08 or 280 Ackley improved there’s more “boutique” cartridges and others that will kill just as well but bullet selection is much better with the .284 calibers compared to the .277(270) and they both recoil very similar to the new fad 6.5 Creedmoor

 

[Formidilosus]

What are you preferring hold over or dial in ?

A well designed FFP, mil/mil scope is significantly easier and faster to learn to use correctly, than any other option. This is not an opinion.


Dialing elevation, holding wind is the fastest way to HIT across the board once you move beyond 300’ish yards.

i've read that although the .308 has less recoil it's not by much and depends on the load. if that's the case the 30-06 seems to be more versatile. i shoot 12 gauge shotgun without a problem although it's a Remington Versamax which is supposed to be one of the softer 12 gauge. and lastly, i'm planning on putting on a Limbsaver.
thanks!

Neither the 308 or 30/06 are “light” recoilers. There are no zero objective reasons to choose a 30/06 over a 308 unless you get free ammo. There is nothing more versatile about the 06 and any supposed reason is ballistic masturbation.

With that, to match a 130gr good 6.5mm bullet in the Creedmoor, you need to shoot a good 185-190gr 30cal bullet. That is a very big difference in recoil and shoot ability. Further, Walmart sells excellent 6.5 CM ammo, they do not sell excellent 308 or 30/06 ammo. Having seen the results of more than a lot of medium to big game animals killed with 6.5mm’s and 30cals at CM and 308/06 velocities from less than 10m to more than 800m- there is no appreciable difference in killing ability until you get to the large 200+ grain frangible 30cal bullets- then recoil goes way up, and hit rates go down.

Also I’d suggest 7mm-08 or 280 Ackley improves there’s more “boutique” cartridges and others that will kill just as well but bullet selection is much better with the .284 calibers compared to the .277(270) and they both recoil very similar to the new fad 6.5 Creedmoor

The 7-08 is a great round, that can use great bullets. Same of the 280. However, when using like performing bullets there is a very large difference in recoil between them and the 6.5 CM. When measuring shooting performance, the 6.5CM is at the very limit of recoil that most shooters can deal with in a sub 8lb rifle without focused practice and effort. The 7-08 and especially the 280 with good bullets are beyond that threshold, unless braked.

The 6.5CM is not a new “fad”. It’s been around way longer than the hunting world believes. There is nothing magical about it other than it offers readily available, over the counter rifles and ammo that used to require handloading to achieve.

 

[slowelk]

A well designed FFP, mil/mil scope is significantly easier and faster to learn to use correctly, than any other option. This is not an opinion.


Dialing elevation, holding wind is the fastest way to HIT across the board once you move beyond 300’ish yards.






Neither the 308 or 30/06 are “light” recoilers. There are no zero objective reasons to choose a 30/06 over a 308 unless you get free ammo. There is nothing more versatile about the 06 and any supposed reason is ballistic masturbation.

With that, to match a 130gr good 6.5mm bullet in the Creedmoor, you need to shoot a good 185-190gr 30cal bullet. That is a very big difference in recoil and shoot ability. Further, Walmart sells excellent 6.5 CM ammo, they do not sell excellent 308 or 30/06 ammo. Having seen the results of more than a lot of medium to big game animals killed with 6.5mm’s and 30cals at CM and 308/06 velocities from less than 10m to more than 800m- there is no appreciable difference in killing ability until you get to the large 200+ grain frangible 30cal bullets- then recoil goes way up, and hit rates go down.







The 7-08 is a great round, that can use great bullets. Same of the 280. However, when using like performing bullets there is a very large difference in recoil between them and the 6.5 CM. When measuring shooting performance, the 6.5CM is at the very limit of recoil that most shooters can deal with in a sub 8lb rifle without focused practice and effort. The 7-08 and especially the 280 with good bullets are beyond that threshold, unless braked.

The 6.5CM is not a new “fad”. It’s been around way longer than the hunting world believes. There is nothing magical about it other than it offers readily available, over the counter rifles and ammo that used to require handloading to achieve.

Are you saying that a perfectly placed shot from a 130gr 6.5 is just as deadly as a perfectly placed 18gr 30? Or is it just as deadly regardless of shot placement? If that's the case, how are they equivalent? Does kinetic energy not matter, or are you saying that they are close enough that it is negligible?

This is a legitimate question, no snark or pretense.

 

[Flatland Newbie]

now i get it, cal vs cal is the same thing as heavy vs light arrows or fixed vs mechanical broadheads. I thought it was a lot easier with guns LOL

 

[Formidilosus]

Are you saying that a perfectly placed shot from a 130gr 6.5 is just as deadly as a perfectly placed 18gr 30? Or is it just as deadly regardless of shot placement? If that's the case, how are they equivalent? Does kinetic energy not matter, or are you saying that they are close enough that it is negligible?

This is a legitimate question, no snark or pretense.

I’ve written about terminal ballistics quite a bit, in short:

Think of lethality as ultimate death with little regard for speed of death, and incapacitation as inability to move, with little regard for speed of death. As hunters, we want animals to be both incapacitated quickly and to expire relatively quickly. Ft-lbs of energy is not a wounding mechanism, it will not tell you anything that actually matters about how a bullet will preform.n There is not a single legitimate terminal ballistics facility that even looks at ft-lbs when measuring bullet performance. Every time a real study is done on how bullets kill, it is proven that placement, penetration, and tissue damage is what physiologically determines incapacitation and death.

In order of importance for both incapacitation and leathality-

Placement
Sufficient penetration to reach vital organs
Width of wound channel
Shape of wound channel


Using elk, and focusing on shots that land in the chest cavity coming or going, and ignoring poor placement like gut shots (as you need something very big and frangible, I.E.,- 200+ grain Berger/ELD-M/ATIP to make a measurable difference for poor shots) there is little measurable difference between most bullet diameters. Given like construction, and especially when each individual round is paired with an ideal projectile for its impact velocity, you do not notice much difference between them. Peoples perception is very different however. What is noticeable when watching people is that the bigger the recoil, the faster they perceive the animal going down. YouTube is full of this. Shooters will use a big cartridge, shoot an elk, it stands there for 10-15 seconds before falling, and proclaim “it’s a bad azz powerful round, and elk are tough”. Then from the same people, you will see them shoot a smaller round (these days it’s mostly 6.5 CM), the elk has the same reaction, and they’ll say “it’s marginal”.
In general it’s just that- perception and an expectation that “bigger is better”. When controlled for placement and impact velocity and when paired with the quickest killers for each (for instance 155gr to 168gr Berger/ELD-M for 308/30-06, and 140-147gr Berger ELD-M for 6.5 CM) one can not tell which is which on deer from watching the animal get shot and go down. Reaction to shot and distance traveled are variable between each animal, yet when taken in aggregate there is no discernible difference when seen in large numbers such as culling or crop depredation and when used side by side. To that point, there is no discernible difference between those two (or any caliber in between) and the 77gr TMK from a 223. Reaction to shot, distance traveled, time to expiration, and tissue damage are all very close. Yes, you will have outliers with all, but in aggregate, there’s just not much difference.

What does deer have to do with elk? Well, the difference between a 77gr bullet and a 165gr bullet in deer is WAY bigger than the difference between a 130gr bullet and a 165 grain bullet in elk.... and yet differences in lethality and incapacitation times on 200lb mammals between the 77gr and 165gr bullet are so similar as to be almost non observable. What is consistently observable is that as long as placemat is decent and penetration reaches vital organs; the more tissue that is destroyed, the faster animals go down. Placement and width of wound channel is where incapacitation is sped up.
What is also very evident is that hit rates, and therefore speed of incapacitation is directly proportional to recoil. One would think that the bigger the bullet, the faster animals die, and the less animals are lost. The exact opposite is the case. The least amount of animals lost or wounded, given like ranges and using the best killing bullets, is with .224’s, then .243’s, then 6.5mm, then .284’s, etc. That is because placement is the biggest factor in killing. It does not matter who you are, the less a gun moves, the less the explosion in front of your face, the closer your shots land to center.

If I showed people an elk shot with a 180gr Barnes TSX shot through the lungs, and a 147gr ELD-M shot through the lungs at the same impact velocity, and just said one was shot with a 30cal magnum, the other with a 6.5mm- everyone would pick the 147gr ELD-M animal as the one shot by a magnum. Everyone.

 

[Formidilosus]

The above is for normal to medium range shots. Not true long range, not big frangible bullets, though the same issues crop up with them.

now i get it, cal vs cal is the same thing as heavy vs light arrows or fixed vs mechanical broadheads. I thought it was a lot easier with guns LOL

Kind of, but not really. Imagine if arrow weight, and bow poundage really didn’t contribute to penetration, but instead of the force of the bow mainly being input to the shooter on the draw, instead it was input to the shooter immediately upon release with the pain difference between 45lb draw weight, and 80lb draw weight being put directly into the bow hand- that is rifle ballistics and shoot ability.

 

[slowelk]

I’ve written about terminal ballistics quite a bit, in short:

Think of lethality as ultimate death with little regard for speed of death, and incapacitation as inability to move, with little regard for speed of death. As hunters, we want animals to be both incapacitated quickly and to expire relatively quickly. Ft-lbs of energy is not a wounding mechanism, it will not tell you anything that actually matters about how a bullet will preform.n There is not a single legitimate terminal ballistics facility that even looks at ft-lbs when measuring bullet performance. Every time a real study is done on how bullets kill, it is proven that placement, penetration, and tissue damage is what physiologically determines incapacitation and death.

In order of importance for both incapacitation and leathality-

Placement
Sufficient penetration to reach vital organs
Width of wound channel
Shape of wound channel


Using elk, and focusing on shots that land in the chest cavity coming or going, and ignoring poor placement like gut shots (as you need something very big and frangible, I.E.,- 200+ grain Berger/ELD-M/ATIP to make a measurable difference for poor shots) there is little measurable difference between most bullet diameters. Given like construction, and especially when each individual round is paired with an ideal projectile for its impact velocity, you do not notice much difference between them. Peoples perception is very different however. What is noticeable when watching people is that the bigger the recoil, the faster they perceive the animal going down. YouTube is full of this. Shooters will use a big cartridge, shoot an elk, it stands there for 10-15 seconds before falling, and proclaim “it’s a bad azz powerful round, and elk are tough”. Then from the same people, you will see them shoot a smaller round (these days it’s mostly 6.5 CM), the elk has the same reaction, and they’ll say “it’s marginal”.
In general it’s just that- perception and an expectation that “bigger is better”. When controlled for placement and impact velocity and when paired with the quickest killers for each (for instance 155gr to 168gr Berger/ELD-M for 308/30-06, and 140-147gr Berger ELD-M for 6.5 CM) one can not tell which is which on deer from watching the animal get shot and go down. Reaction to shot and distance traveled are variable between each animal, yet when taken in aggregate there is no discernible difference when seen in large numbers such as culling or crop depredation and when used side by side. To that point, there is no discernible difference between those two (or any caliber in between) and the 77gr TMK from a 223. Reaction to shot, distance traveled, time to expiration, and tissue damage are all very close. Yes, you will have outliers with all, but in aggregate, there’s just not much difference.

What does deer have to do with elk? Well, the difference between a 77gr bullet and a 165gr bullet in deer is WAY bigger than the difference between a 130gr bullet and a 165 grain bullet in elk.... and yet differences in lethality and incapacitation times on 200lb mammals between the 77gr and 165gr bullet are so similar as to be almost non observable. What is consistently observable is that as long as placemat is decent and penetration reaches vital organs; the more tissue that is destroyed, the faster animals go down. Placement and width of wound channel is where incapacitation is sped up.
What is also very evident is that hit rates, and therefore speed of incapacitation is directly proportional to recoil. One would think that the bigger the bullet, the faster animals die, and the less animals are lost. The exact opposite is the case. The least amount of animals lost or wounded, given like ranges and using the best killing bullets, is with .224’s, then .243’s, then 6.5mm, then .284’s, etc. That is because placement is the biggest factor in killing. It does not matter who you are, the less a gun moves, the less the explosion in front of your face, the closer your shots land to center.

If I showed people an elk shot with a 180gr Barnes TSX shot through the lungs, and a 147gr ELD-M shot through the lungs at the same impact velocity, and just said one was shot with a 30cal magnum, the other with a 6.5mm- everyone would pick the 147gr ELD-M animal as the one shot by a magnum. Everyone.

Medium range you define as 800 and in? Beyond that you’d need to be concerned about projectile expansion, right?

 

[IL Rifle]

So basically if I go with Tikka it would be a good idea to look at 270 Winchestero or 7mm Remington Magnum?
I would prefer a gun that I will actually enjoy shooting VS one or 2 shots and feels like my shoulder is giving up on me.
Once all the corona shit is over I will go to the local Cabelas or BassPro and check out all the guns that I can get my hands on just to see how they feel.
We do not have too many hunters in the area and no ranges in the close proximity. This is another downside of being this close to Washington DC. Most people are all about home defense type guns and dont spend time in the woods.
With all this being said internet is my only resource. And nobody in my family hunts so I'm a "bad seed" that has to learn starting form the basics. No knowledge of the generations has been passed to me.

I was pretty much in the same boat as you when I was young. No one before my generation was a shooter or hunter. While I had an interest, I really didn't get an opportunity until I got to know my father in law.

Considering your experience with rifles, I suggest two things to help you with becoming familiar with shooting positions and properly using the sling to provide support for the rifle and control recoil. First, save a few dollars for a quality .22LR bolt action such as a CZ American or an older Marlin, Savage, etc. Same basic stock and operation as your hunting rifle, just less recoil which makes learning quicker and less likely to develop bad habits. They aren't expensive and the best rifle training tool there is. There are lots of used ones around. With a .22LR you don't have to worry about recoil so you can concentrate on form, trigger break, and how to use a bracing sling. And you don'[t need a long range to practice with a .22. Second, check with a local (not big box- they won't know) GS for a rifle course in the area. One option is to take an Appleseed course. It's one or two days using a .22LR and they teach the old USMC/US Army prone, sitting and standing positions that were used with the 1903 and Garand before the AR/M16 days. (some of the Appleseed people can be a bit "intense" but I ignored that, went for the rifle training and found the rifle training very valuable) The older positions are geared towards taking advantage of the longer range of the 30-06 and the .308. They also teach how to use a supporting sling. As you've noted, the shooting style of the home defense "operator" is decidedly different and, in my opinion, really doesn't provide any value to hunting. Alternatively, since you're in the DC area, maybe you can find a vet through the VFW or other military association who will teach you how to properly use a bolt action in the field.

 

[Formidilosus]

Medium range you define as 800 and in? Beyond that you’d need to be concerned about projectile expansion, right?

More like 600’ish. And that’s because of impact speed. Most cup and core bullets need around 1,800fps for reliable expansion, and really 2,000 is better. For most standard cartridges that’s around the 600 yard mark.

Take another 100-200 yards off for normal cooper monos such as Barnes.

 

[Sawdust145]

Browning Hells Canyon Speed in a 30-06, 7mm, or 300 win mag. You can hunt anything in the west.

 

[slatty]

i'm in the market for my first rile too. and seriously considering the Tikka T3x Superlite. what caliber did you end up with? how's the recoil? i'm trying to decide between .308 and 30-06. i'm in Washington state, so mostly deer and up to elk.

i've read that although the .308 has less recoil it's not by much and depends on the load. if that's the case the 30-06 seems to be more versatile. i shoot 12 gauge shotgun without a problem although it's a Remington Versamax which is supposed to be one of the softer 12 gauge. and lastly, i'm planning on putting on a Limbsaver.

thanks!

Hey i'm just answering your question because you asked me, but I defer greatly to others on this thread that actually know guns. I picked up a .308. I find the recoil manageable which is not my experience with a .30-06 being a new shooter. Want nothing to do with that gun (again, being a newbie).
Happy hunting.

 

[Spoonbill]

i'm in the market for my first rile too. and seriously considering the Tikka T3x Superlite. what caliber did you end up with? how's the recoil? i'm trying to decide between .308 and 30-06. i'm in Washington state, so mostly deer and up to elk.

i've read that although the .308 has less recoil it's not by much and depends on the load. if that's the case the 30-06 seems to be more versatile. i shoot 12 gauge shotgun without a problem although it's a Remington Versamax which is supposed to be one of the softer 12 gauge. and lastly, i'm planning on putting on a Limbsaver.

thanks!

I have a t3 in 30-06 and you definitely feel it. Have you thought about a 270? It will kill elk just fine, especially using a premium bullet like a partition or accubond. Recoil isn’t bad and ammo is just as available as 06 and 308. Food for thought.

 

[denn30]

I have a t3 in 30-06 and you definitely feel it. Have you thought about a 270? It will kill elk just fine, especially using a premium bullet like a partition or accubond. Recoil isn’t bad and ammo is just as available as 06 and 308. Food for thought.

thanks for the suggestion! i'm leaning toward the 308 or 7mm-08 (supposedly it has even less recoil than the 270). keep in mind, all of my caliber "knowledge" is from online searches. my main concern is that i don't want to go around wounding animals. hopefully only taking shots within 300 to 350 will help ameliorate that.

 

[Ramtough14]

I'm late to the party, but I wildly enjoy dialing to hold over. I've done both at extended ranges (out to 1100), and once you know how, dialing is significantly more precise.

 

[_Scooter_]

Testing waters , toying the idea of buying a rifle for the trip out west and also for deer and bear in Virginia. I haven’t hunted with the gun that much, I mostly shoot a bow and hunt with it.
It would be nice to get your opinion if I should get a cheaper gun first or would it make more sense to invest in something better. Let’s say the budget may be as high as $2000 for the gun and scope. Is buying used guns a good idea or is it better the buy new?
ive done the research and a lot of People like tikka T3.
Thank you for your help

Full disclosure: my previous experience is with handguns and defensive shooting. This is my first rifle and I just ordered it a few days ago, so I do not have it yet, have only handled it at the shop I bought it from and haven't shot it yet.

Your budget was my exact budget and just went through the same with scenario with buying my first hunting rifle. I was basically setting aside $1,200 for the rifle and $800 for the scope. Checked out as many different rifles as I could. Was about to pull the trigger on a Tikka T3x but something in me just couldn't bond with the stock on the T3x. Others suggested getting the Tikka and just replacing the stock, but when all said and done I could have a rifle with all metal parts (no plastic trigger guard) and a nicer stock for close to what the Tikka would cost after mods/stock replacement, trigger guard replacement, recoil pad replacement (apparently the Tikka in .30-06 are known to have gnarly recoil and a garbage recoil pad, etc. (they claim the pad on the T3x is improved over the pad on the T3, but it still felt pretty hard to me). Not knocking the Tikka at all, I just wanted something a little different and didn't want to do any modding or tinkering and wanted metal parts.

I ended up going with a Winchester Model 70 Extreme Weather Stainless in .30-06. No plastic parts, fluted barrel, Bell and Carlson composite stock (not injection molded) and a Leupold VX-3i 3.5-10x40mm CDS-ZL scope. I went with the .30-06 because it's arguably one of the most versatile calibers out there, especially if you plan on hunting big game of almost any size in North America and only want/can only afford to have one rifle to do it all, but in all honesty you cannot go wrong with any of the calibers you are considering. No plastic parts, fluted barrel, Bell and Carlson composite stock (not injection molded) and a Leupold VX-3i 3.5-10x40mm CDS-ZL scope (I plan on using this as a hunting rifle only, have no aspirations to do any long range shooting and didn't want to over-scope the rifle since the majority of the shots I will be taking with this rifle probably won't be that far out).

I didn't really get a deal on the rifle (I'm in CA and everything is expensive here, and with shipping and FFL fees, etc. I really wouldn't have saved much if I bought the firearm online and had it shipped to an FFL, and a lot of LGS out here aren't doing FFL transfers right now with the pandemic). Got a great deal on the scope though, and once the the rifle and scope arrive they'll mount it for free. Bought it from a mom and pop LGS that I've bought other firearms from in the past and still came in under budget.

I have had plenty of people tell me the setup I got is great, while others told me I made all the wrong choices. Many have said the .30-06 was a great choice while others have told me it's going to be shoulder punishing recoil and the at the scope I bought is junk and Leupolds are garbage, and should have bought this rifle in this caliber, or this scope. Others even suggested rifles and scopes that were way beyond my budget, basically telling me that it's the absolute best or nothing at all. The thing is you're almost guaranteed a nice shooting rifle for hunting no matter what your budget. You can get something like the Tikka (or spend even less) and get a great shooting rifle, or you can spend a little more because you simply want something with a different aesthetic or more refined that won't necessarily shoot any better than a less expensive firearm, but you're proud to own and appreciate. I think a lot of people get too caught up in the minutia of specs and what not and start losing sight of the big picture. Most modern gear is awesome stuff and can be found in any price point or budget. No need to get caught up in the snobbery of thinking you must have "insert whatever brand here". Either way it's a win/win and but what makes you happy.

 

[Woodrow F Call]

If you can take your rifle and put 10 rounds in a pattern that is about an inch at 100 yards on demand, you can reliably make adjustments for your trajectory, the round can ethically kill at the range.... that's all you need.

 

[Nealm66]

Good choice if you asked me. Good luck hunting!

 

[Kisssofdeath]

My first reply here.

I'll jump on the Tikka bandwagon also. I would suggest the Tikka T3x Lite Stainless in 6.5 CM.
For the scope I would recommend the Meopta Optica6 3-18x50 in SFP.
You will need a scope base, for that I would recommend the Mountain Tactical either 0 or 20 MOA. Honestly there are many to choose from, whatever you buy I would recommend one with the recoil lug.

This is my Tikka T3x CTR. If you can swing the extra weight I'd get this model for more versatility. The chassis is a MPA, scope is a Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27x56, suppressor is a Silencerco Specwar. This setup is not built to carry around but with the factory stock and a 1" tube scope the CTR isn't that heavy.