.223 Rem / .308 Win Bolt - Action Rifles

T.O.M.

T.O.M.

Joined
Jan 2, 2011
Messages
174
I'm looking for a reliable, smooth-operating bolt-action rifle, chambered for either .223 or .308. I don't know the pros and cons regarding either cartridge, so if possible, tell me what they're good for. I've been eyeing the Beretta Tikka T3 and the Remington 700.
 
For hunting ---

.308 - deer, black bear sized animals.

.223 - Varmints from 'chucks ,coyotes ,etc

Tikka, Rem 700,Savage are good economical choices .
 
I'm not a fan of recoil and only shoot paper @ 100 yds so I sold my .308 Rem 700 and bought a .223 Savage Model 12. Both are great shooters but the accu-trigger on the Savage is a very nice feature.
 
Can't speak for the Tikka, but I have Remington bolt-actions in both calibers. If you're looking for a good sub-moa rifle right out of the box, there are several good 700's to choose from.

Basically, what mete said about application: .308 for bigger game, longer range, .223 for smaller game or if you're recoil-sensitive (although the .308 is not bad either, in my opinion). Both good for precision shooting, provided the correct set-up, conditions, and skill.
 
remington 700 ltr 308 - best for your money for less than 1K.

with this, get a good Vortex optic. Talk to Scott at Liberty optics - A patriot.

Get the Seekins Precision 20MOA base and rings with your scope (also from Liberty). Glen is a really nice guy. Operates out of Lewiston, Idaho.

Get some Black Hills Match ammo, and you are in business.



on the cheap, the Howa 308 rifles with scope can be had for about $600. Howa is a Japanese company that makes rifles with the Weatherby trademark.

hope this helps
 
Are you going to hunt? If so, what do you expect to go after?

Are you shooting mainly target?

Do you expect to shoot a high volume of ammo?

If you are going to shoot a lot of targets just for fun, 223 is cheaper and produces less recoil. However, as noted above, it is a varmint round not ideally suited for larger game. I have several rifles in each caliber and shoot the 223s more.

DancesWithKnives

Edit: Forgot to add, if you get a 223 hopefully the rifle will have a reasonably tight twist, like 1:9 or better (my tightest is 1:7). That rifling will permit you to stabilize the much longer and heavier VLD bullets that some guys like to shoot at longer ranges.
 
Thanks for the replies.

Which cartridge is more widely used and popular? It'll be mostly for the range and for some hunting, but nothing specific yet.
 
.223 is more widely used, probably, since AR-15s and a bunch of semi-auto rifles use it. And it's cheaper.

But as people are saying, they're two totally different types of rounds. You need to decide what you want it for, then pick. Don't base it on which round is more popular.
 
Along with 7.62 x 39mm, these are about the most popular cartridges. I would say that 223 is more common and generally costs about half as much---although that's a rough estimate.

DancesWithKnives

Edit: My Bush Bash Buddy makes a good point. If you pick 223, you aren't going to be deer or hog hunting with it in many states. And anything larger than deer is right out.
 
.223 is a very marginal round for deer even for an experienced hunter and is illegal in many states.

The last time I went shopping (for a .30-06) I got it down to a choice between the Tikka and a CZ. Very different rifles- the Tikka is lighter (good for carrying, bad for recoil), but nothing feels as good to me as the CZ, it just shoulders, points and balances in a way that makes you wonder why all rifles don't feel like that. My mind got made up for me when a friend of mine gave me a great deal on a pre-64 Model 70 which was my grail at the time.

The best advice I ever got was to shoot everything you can and find what works best for you. Since that is easier said than done, at least try to handle everything you can. Shut out the salesmen and other customers and really try to get a feel for how the rifle handles for you.
 
If you're not entirely sure what you want to do, just go with something in .308 - that way you'll pretty much have all the bases covered.

Also, if you plan on doing any stalk hunting over rough terrain or long distances, do not go with a heavy barrel target type rifle. Get something lightweight with a synthetic stock and shorter barrel (20-24" max).









WTB: NIB Spyderco Scorpius PE
 
Another vote for savage. Spend a little less on the rifle and a little more on the glass - you won't regret it. Nikon, Burris, leopold or the lower end zeiss conquest are all really good scopes.
 
If you are going to be hunting, which if often best in low light at dawn or dusk, I second the good glass recommendation. When I had a productive job and could have bought a nice custom rifle, I instead decided to spend the bucks on an illuminated reticle Swarovski 1.5-6 x 42mm scope. As I've gotten older and my eyes less acute, I've been even happier with that decision. You don't have to go that expensive---the other brands mentioned above are very good. I just mounted and bore sighted a friend's rifle with a 3-9 x 50mm Leupold Vari-X II (not their top of the line) and was quite impressed with how bright and sharp it is. Damn nice scope.

DancesWithKnives
 
I have purchased scopes/binocs from www.swfa.com before and been satisfied with their pricing. This time of year they often have discounted SHOT Show floor demo models that have never been mounted on a real rifle and come with normal warranties.

You can get an idea of pricing there.

DancesWithKnives
 
IMHO spend at least $400 on the scope alone, and plan on $60 plus for rings. I know the zeiss was around $400, leopold & nikon run the gamut.
It's easy to buy a rifle more accurate then you are, but you can NEVER buy too much scope.
 
Good advice, especially if you are hunting or serious about target shooting.

If you are just casually plinking with a 223 in good light, you might be able to get away with less. I have an inexpensive (well under $100) Bushnell 3-9 x 40mm on an old Mini-14. Although I was blessed with a rifle that is pretty accurate by the Mini-14 standards of its era, it reaches its potential with the Bushnell.

I once made the mistake of putting an inexpensive Bushnell on a 338 hunting rifle because I was using my good glass on other rifles. After well under a full 20 rd box of ammo, some lens elements were rattling around and the scope was useless. To Bushnell's credit, they replaced it under warranty. However, you wouldn't want to have that happen right after you got into the Montana backcountry with your $700 out-of-state tag (I think they are going up to around $1K this year) and fired a couple shots to make sure the rifle/scope were still properly sighted.

DancesWithKnives
 
I'm debating on either a :

Tikka T3 Lite .308

or

Tikka T3 Scout CTR .308

I can get the Scout, but have no scope for a while, or just get the Lite and have some money to buy a scope. Does anyone know if there's a big difference between the Scout and Lite?
 
I wouldn't want to take it hunting but here is my precision rig in the making.
Remington 700 SPS varmint .308. Cut to 22" threaded for a suppressor, AZ precision bolt knob, eagle stock pack, harris 9-13" bipod, EGW 20moa rail, seekins 30mm low rings, Falcon Menace 5-25x50mm mil/mil
.75" at 100yds with 168g FGMM. MOA out to 500yds.
I wouldn't hunt big game with .223 but it's fine out to 600yds for range work.
IMG_1198.jpg


On another note, I have a Zeiss conquest on a browning 30-06 and it is much clearer than a leupold VX3. Lowlight clarity is excellent.
 
I think the Scout is a heavier-barreled tactical type rifle with a larger magazine and a scope rail. The Lite looks like a lighter hunting (field) configuration rifle. If you plan to carry the rifle hunting, I'd favor the Lite. If you plan to mostly target shoot or varmint hunt from a blind, I'd pick the Scout.

DancesWithKnives
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top