Tactical rifle thoughts

Part of the point I'm making is that (relatively) thinner barrels aren't necessarily much less accurate for the first few shots. If you believe a good shot or two will resolve your challenges out to 400 meters or so, a very heavy barrel doesn't really make sense.

Just something to think about.

Once upon a time, I looked for a rifle that could do it all- address multiple targets at close to medium range, shoot very accurately at extreme distance, and function as a hunting rifle. There's always a tradeoff when you're looking for the most versatility, but I believe most of us will have our needs best met by an accurate, sturdy, well-balanced bolt-action rifle in a common full-power hunting caliber. Sure, a rifle like this won't excel at taking on 50 people at 10', and it won't be the ideal rifle for shooting Taliban in the head at 800 meters. It will, however, be useful in many other ways, and its superb handling characteristics will encourage a lot of use...which will of course build a lot of skill.

You should especially think about this if you want to own 200-400 meters out, move easily, and don't plan on taking an entire squad of infantry on by yourself in situ. (And if you do plan on taking on such a group without moving, you have poor planning or don't grasp decent tactics or strategy.)
 
My brother bought a Weatherby Vanguard in a .308 caliber. He mounted and sighted the scope, made a few practice shots. A few days later he killed a deer at 210 yards with one shot. It dropped straight to the ground and never moved. We stepped off the distance so the yardage figure is approximate. I was extremely impressed with the riffle.
 
RickyB said:
My brother bought a Weatherby Vanguard in a .308 caliber. He mounted and sighted the scope, made a few practice shots. A few days later he killed a deer at 210 yards with one shot. It dropped straight to the ground and never moved. We stepped off the distance so the yardage figure is approximate. I was extremely impressed with the riffle.
Click to expand...

Same here, I took a deer off hand at 150 yards with mine this last year.
 
Gees, I'm outta touch with this subject. Good reading. I wish I still lived on a farm where I could just walk out in a field and go plinking. Not the same in the suburbs.
 
my medium weight barrel 308 mauser is my 'tactical' rifle.

Weighs more than I'd like. But everything is a tradeoff. When I shot often, and was very familiar with the rifle and the handloads I developed for it, and was 10 years younger without eye damage-(you like my list of qualifiers?) you would not believe the distance of a one shot heart lung area drop, offhand, I put on my only antelope.


The yardage is too long to be believed but I really knew that rifle.

I would like to know why we have to use the word 'tactical' at all?

I think many of the persons buying tactical rifles actually mean testicle.

If you are competent with your firearm you have tactical ability. How much difference is there between a production heavy weight bolt action varminter or field gun, and a military style 'tactical' sniper rifle?

Well, not much. They handbuild theirs to great expense. The time and money are exponentially disproportionate to the improvement in accuracy, but like Race guns or long range target, this effort is considered worth while, and is...because of the venues.

Hooray -500 bucks will still get you a decent bolt. You don't have to tell it it's not 'tactical'.


munk
 
Hard to go wrong with a decent Mauser and midpower scope. My '03 wore a 2-8x, but it malf'd. A 6x Kahles is going on it...

John
 
Thomas Linton said:
I confess a near total ignorance of Remington 700's, but a battle rifle has to be capable of sustained rapid fire. A "hunting" rifle is unlikely to cut it. (How many hunters expect to let off dozens of rounds in a few minutes -- or seconds?)

:D LOL...I had to laugh at the hunting rifle comparison...Iv'e had the same 5 rounds in my clip for 2 years.....You have to see a deer to shoot it....:D

VEGETARIAN = Native American word for Bad Hunter.
Click to expand...
 
Only the lightweight, and featherweight rifles are not capable of some sustained fire without barrel heating and wandering poiont of aim. But, there is a role for a light weight, move fast, strike hard and long and get away arm; and in one version its known as a Scout Rifle. Anyone want to suggest the scout rifle is not a tactical rifle? A bolt 'battle rifle' has to have a medium weight barrel and be capable of repeat fire to some extent, but guess what? Anyone think an 03, a Mauser, Enfield, or the Russian wont also have a wandering zero as the barrel heats? We're talking minute of man in a battle.

Tactical depends upon the use. There is no best. The use of the word is hystericaly funny, and finally rather depressing....as arms afficianados become shrill even their toothbrushes are in camo..and are tactical.
Tactical Tactical Tactical, yanny yanny yanny....it's the white noise sound of modern arms.

munk
 
Kamagong,

I have been going through a lot of the research you are doing now on this issue and maybe I can help you a bit.

First, you want monotonous reliability from any shooting iron, so that encompasses your number one criteria.

Second, I am a great devotee of Jeff Cooper’s writings but have often found that I had to modify his approach to fit me (and my budget). A fixed scope is fine and they tend to be tougher than the variables, but if you are talking about a “Sniper grade” long range accuracy rifle you will want a higher power or variable scope. A lower power fixed, (not higher than 6x) for general purpose and closer target engagement, is better. It all comes down to speed. The higher the magnification, the more time it will take to get on a target at close range. And you should do a little point shooting to practice for extreme close range target engagements of less than 20 metres, otherwise, use a good powerful handgun up real close for defense and the rifle for attacking further out.

I personally have an older Remington Model 660 in .308 mounting a Leupold 2-7x Compact scope which I keep set at 2x for close up target engagement and then with a quick twist I can dial the magnification up for longer range targets. Up close I need speed, not magnification. Longer range will mean longer time to engage, usually.

The Burris Ballisti-Plex range adjusted reticle is great but a standard duplex reticle is, if you learn how to use it, useful for multiple range engagement too. You set your zero point at the cross hairs, and then do a little practice to see where the top chevron and bottom chevrons of the vertical stadia wire zero for different ranges. You can set a zero of five hundred yards and then you will find that the top chevron will give you a close in zero point and the bottom chevron will give you an extreme range zero. It all depends on the size of the reticle of your scope.

The use of a single zero point can also be done the way that the USMC trained their snipers in Viet Nam. Zero for 700 Metres. For targets up to 100 Metres, hold dead on (heart), 100-700 Metres, hold on the crotch, 700 Metres, hold dead on (heart), 700-1000 Metres, hold on top of the target’s head. This technique allows you to use a single zero and the parabolic arc of the bullet’s flight path for multiple range engagements.

Also, learn what your stadia wires cover at 100 metres (reticular subtension). A wire that covers 1” @ 100 M will cover 2” @ 200 M, 5” @ 500 M, 9” @ 900 M, etc. This becomes a very fast and reliable range finder once you have learned it. An average human head is 5-6 inches across and 9 inches high (from chin to top of scalp), average chest 18” across the shoulders. If you are sub-tending half the width of a target's head with a 1” stadia wire the target is approx. 200-300 metres away. If you are sub-tending the full width of his head the target is approx. 500-600 metres away... the full height of his head equals approx. 900 metres away, etc. Adjust your point of aim accordingly and you are in business.

BTW, I have put on some very impressive, long string rapid fire demos for friends with my .308 and have never had any problems with overheating, and I am talking 40-50 rounds just as fast as I can work the bolt, single feeding all the way after the mag is emptied, but hitting a man size target every shot at 120 yards. Shooting as fast as you can is only asking to miss. Only hits count. That’s what precision riflery is all about.

Good luck and good shooting,
KJ. Moulton

“Conquer Yourself First, All Else Will Follow.”
 
Had a Savage FP10. Fantastic setup, always hit the mark, to the point it was boring for me. Same went for my Remington PSS,.. but for some reason i was better with the FP10, but never really bonded with either.. I prefer a ligher weight approach

PSS
IMGP1384.jpg


The Blazer R93 if your at a bench, and weight and $$ not a concern. The Tikka has great reviews and for the $ should be beautiful...

For me,.. their can be only one. Lightweight, fast, and perfect inside 300yds (the way it sits anyhow)... poi may drift as she heats up, and optics may limit her at range... but the light weight factor is big in my book, and the way she shoulders is just 100% perfect for me.. out of the box no less. The rife: Steyr Scout

styer.jpg
 
For me 45-70 lever action carbine. Lots of woods. Don't need a lot of range. Manueverable and packs a punch.
Tery
 
tsf said:
For me 45-70 lever action carbine.
Click to expand...

The late Jeff Cooper was always concerned that the BATF would find out about 45-70 leverguns and reclassify them as "destructive devices." Rather than tactical guns, maybe those things are more "strategic" weapons.
 
I guess a guy needs to ask himself what he'll be doing with the rifle and then find the one that fits.

I love my 45/70 lever, old micro groove that it is.




munk
 
heh...

As far as the whole "tactical, SHTF,Emergency Rifle" concept, I'm positive if such an occasion were to arise I would perish while standing in front of my safe debating the merits of my Winchester Featherweight '06, my Savage Scout, and my Marlin 45/70.

My father has a Tikka '06. When he first got it, I tried pretty hard to find flaws in it (maybe because it wasn't a Remington?) Truth is, it's a helluva good rifle, and the best bang for the buck going nowadays, IMHO. It kicks harder than alot of hunting rifles out there, but it's a pretty good trade off for the lighter weight.

Oddly enough, this is a rifle category I have very little to consider with. I absolutely love my three current centerfire rifles, and have actually fallen out of the market for purchasing.

How very refreshing to see a thread like this one that's not overrun with a billion AR-15 variants, AK-47's, FN, H&K and the like. Not that all those rifles lack merit or anything. I guess it just warms my heart to consider that if I AM crazy for being perfectly satisfied with my old bolt actions, I'm not alone out there.:D
 
......ah hem: I would stand in front of my safe holding a M1A with lots of loaded mags, dragging out a couple AK varients for issue to family members or friends.

If you're a guest at the munk Compound when the SHF, better get in line early for choice dibs.



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