AR vs Bolt Action .223

F

fitz

New member
Am looking into purchasing a rifle for predator hunting. Would like to get pros and cons of going with an AR vs a bolt action in .223. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
 
The only real pro of an AR is quick follow up shots. They are good when more than one dog comes in because you can get shots off one after another without manually actioning another bullet in the chamber. Most people get AR's because they are fun to shoot and like the look and feel of them, I am one of those people. Both bolt action and AR are very accurate. It comes down to how much you want to spend and whether or not you like an AR or a traditional style gun.
 
What THI06 says is true. But their triggers even the after market ones suck compared to a good trigger on a bolt gun. They are heavy. So lots of guys order them with shorter barrels. The result is the bolt gun with the longer barrel is like comparing a regular .223 to a 22-250 you're losing 150 fps plus. I know lots of guys with bolt guns that still get doubles.

The bolt gun is cheaper or you can have one rebarreled and my guess you will have a much higher quality shooting piece of equipment for the same price as a match grade AR.
 
Last edited:
Thats very true. My AR is very heavy with a scope, and the trigger does suck compared to a bolt action. Nobody really needs an AR, but they are just so darn cool! haha I also do not like taking it out and scratching the thing all up since they cost so much. I am thinking of buying a Stevens 200 to take coyote hunting so i dont care if it gets scratched or wet.
 
Bolt guns are not always more accurate, a floated varmint style AR upper is capable of outshooting most bolt guns.
 
It's all what you want to spend vs your experience. The entry level that I would suggest is a Savage Kit. If you know some more, pursue this line. Wify has stomped her foot down, dinner is now. Have ? get back.
Jim
 
I agree with Jay. The semi-autos are fun to shoot and are great for those who like them. I don't have any, I use bolt or single shots. If I hunt open country I will use a bolt gun. In most of my area it is densely covered and I use a single shot. The odds of having a follow up shot requiring speed is nil and none. I would encourage you to get a bolt gun for now. Stick around here long enough and you will probably come down with BRD. I could not get it because I have been diagnosed with NEM.
 
Quote:
Bolt guns are not always more accurate, a floated varmint style AR upper is capable of outshooting most bolt guns.



I have to agree.
Today, the average AR is probably more accurate than the average bolt gun.

The only disadvantage to the AR is that the stock doesn't fit some people well, which can be fixed with the right scope mounts.
And you will lose brass unless you use a catcher.

Jack
 
I will also add, that my AR triggers are much better than factory boltgun triggers. However they are not factory and cost alot more. I would have to agree with Jack on the accuracy of AR vs boltgun on average.
 
What Jack said is true. The AR design is inherently accurate. Typically a $1000-$1500 AR will shoot alongside an extremely worked over (accurized/blueprinted) bolt action gun costing two or three times as much. My Dtech 243WSSM shoots as well at any range as my blueprinted 40X .308 (at considerably less than 1/2 the price). That's pretty normal.

As mentioned, besides the cool factor, follow up shots are easier, maintenance and cleaning are a snap, and almost limitless configurations are easy and relatively cheap (and don't require a gunsmith). You can also change rifles in a matter of a few seconds (literally) by simply changing uppers. A 16" barrel .223 "brush gun" one minute and a full blown long range match rifle (in any number of chamberings) 10 seconds later.

Quote:
But their triggers even the after market ones suck compared to a good trigger on a bolt gun. They are heavy. So lots of guys order them with shorter barrels. The result is the bolt gun with the longer barrel is like comparing a regular .223 to a 22-250 you're losing 150 fps plus. I know lots of guys with bolt guns that still get doubles.

The bolt gun is cheaper or you can have one re-barreled and my guess you will have a much higher quality shooting piece of equipment for the same price as a match grade AR.



The aftermarket triggers do NOT suck. I've got Jewell triggers in AR and bolt, and it's as good in the AR as in the bolt, which is to say, they are equally excellent. I can adjust either down to less than 2 oz pull.

A lot of guys do get ARs with short barrels, but it's not usually because of the weight, it's to make it a faster swinging rifle. Remington lists their 700SPS varmint (the equivalent to my WSSM) at 8.5 lbs. My WSSM weighs...8.5 lbs (including sling and slip on butt plate). If I was interested, I could easily drop probably a pound or more by changing the stock, handguard, etc (and still have a bull barreled match grade rifle). The shorty barreled carbine (M4) variant is listed at 5.56 lbs. Weight is not a factor.

By the time you have a bolt gun accurized and re-barreled with a match grade barrel, you will have considerably more money in it than what you will have in a match grade AR, and unless you are talking about a $4000 + benchrest gun, it's very unlikely it will shoot more accurately.

The AR isn't for everybody. They are a little strange ergonomically at first for those of us used to drop comb stocks. Much of that can be "fixed" with stock extensions (or different stocks), high "forward mount" scope rings, etc., but they will still take a little familiarization.
 
For what i use mine for and probably how most people are going to use there varmint rifles for i just couldnt justify the cost. Doesnt mean i cant afford it. I just couldnt justify the extra expense. I bought a tikka t3 .223 and i find it will shoot most ammos at less than 3/4 inch @ 100 yards. That is also one thing i have heard about the ars, and correct me if im wrong, is that to get really good accuracy out of them you have to reload to do it. I can go buy just about any type of .223 bullet and it will shoot remarkably well. I have 5 different factory bullets in the safe that will shoot 3/4 @ 100 yards. And they are all different. Different manufacture, and different bullet type.
So for the $500 i have into my tikka(i bought it used and put a $100.00 mueller scope on it.)I dont think you could come close to it with an ar. The trigger is phenominal. It is easily adjustable to what ever i want. No smithing required. It is nice and light. Yeah a quick follow up shot would be nice but i have yet to need a follow up shot with the .223. So for the cost difference i cant justify the additional $600.00. I would rather buy another tikka
 
Quote:
Bolt action guns are more accurate, but like said in above posts the follow-up shot will take longer.



I've seen some recent posts of targets from some of these black beautys and I'm impressed. I think some are right up there with these big bull barreled rigs. Oh , oh . I'm feeling strange, oh no , the "DARK SIDE". /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
Dont let someone tell you that bolts are more accurate that an AR , like said about , a floating barrel will stand with a bolt all day lond . I got a DPMS in a 20" bull . I put it on the bench against my custom 7mm and it stand with it shot for shot , yes the factory trigger is bad but i will be changing it out . Ive got a little under 900 in my AR and love it . My 7mm is around 2 grand . You can take an AR and do unlimited things with it bar none . Its great for follow up shots and it fun to shoot . If you know someone that has one see if they will let you take it out , once you do you will make up your mind . I know i did .
 
For offhand and stand shooting, I wouldn't trade the AR I have for any bolt gun. For bench-only shooting at chucks and P-dogs off a bench, I could probably build a better shooting bolt gun. Yes, the stock trigger has to be replaced and you need a heavy free-float barrel, but the AR fills a definite niche. Some shooters don't like the ergonomics of the AR, and I can understand that.
 
Like everyone has already pointed out, now just for my .02.

I have a Cooper in 204 and a Les Baer in 223. Guess what one is more accurate and has a better trigger. I have had the Les Baer out and have yet to try a ammo that will shoot over 3/4". It is alittle heavy with a Illuminated Leupy Mark 4 6.5-20x50. But not alot more so then the Cooper with it B&L 4200 6-24.

BTW with Black Hills blue box 60gr Vmax, its favorite, it will one hole it every time.
 
The simple solution to this question... buy both. LOL

I have one of each, I take the one with me that I feel like for that particular day.

Each one has its advantages and disadvantages, learn to adapt and overcome. I love the both, wouldn't want to be without either one. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
I have both, matter of fact the last gun I got was a bolt action .243 Ruger Fontier, short barrel, lightweight gun which I planned to use in the dense, brushy, hilly areas that I hunt. I absolutely love my Bushy varminter tho. Shooting is a lot of fun and contrary to what some believe that you have to reload to get good accuracy, I have gotten extremely good accuracy (less than 1" moa if I do my part) from everything I have ran through the Bushy, Black Hills, Remington, Ultramax, etc. Every bit as good or better than bolt rifles. Does anyone "need" an AR to hunt with?, no, you can kill yotes with any number of types of guns out there but what does "need" have to do with it, it's the satisfaction /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif.
 
Quote:
Do they make a benchrest AR?



Have not seen AR set any BR records, not even at the local club level. AR is very accurate, lots of guy used them in XC matches but it isn't an one holer, not one that will bring home the cake in a BR match anyway.

 


Write your reply...
Back
Top