need help on caliber choice

I think you should sell that 17 hmr for a 22mag. It probably would have killed that coyote that got away from you and will still be great on fox and coon since you don't shoot past 75 yards. the 17hmr is accurate but really fox is the size limit for sure.

For a center fire caliber .223 is probably the best if you don't reload. If you start reloading you can have reduced loads down to about .22 mag level.

If you want a lower power and less popular cartridge you shuold think about the .222 rem instead of the hornet. Again you can do reduced loads in the future. This should be ample for 100 yards. There are way more guns out there chambered in .222 then any of the other small centerfires mentioned.It tends to be one of the most accurate rounds ever made. The hornet on the other hand is notorious for being very picky. It says on the midway usa that in june they will have fiochi vmax loads for cheap its about the same price as .223 fiochi which is moa for me. Its like 30 bucks for 50 i think. These other exotic calibers while very cool cost more like 1 dollar a shot. there is more ammo available too like privi is 995 a box for soft points lots of choices.
 
Last edited:


Huh....I thought all the savage guys just swapped barrels at the kitchen table and had no need for a gunsmith? [/quote]




I've got em wrapped up on the kitchen table in rubber bands like baseball cards. The part that sucks is that barrels dont come with bubblegum
 
Here's some actual sales data recorded by the BATF for excise sales tax purposes from 2005. The BATF holds back their records for one year so this information was released in early 2007. The information comes from Shooting Industry Magazine

I have not seen any newer data, but the latest possible data likely available at this time would be 2008 data - a three year gap from this information. I checked the BATF web site and could not find any additional later data. Maybe its there, but I couldn't find it...

I really doubt anything has changed significantly for any manufacturer in the interim as increased production requires significant additional capital investment in the firearms industry. That is not what most companies have wanted to do in the political climate of the past 10-15 years with the possible exception of S&W.

Some of the names/or lack of names in several of the categories might surprise ya'...

http://www.shootingindustry.com/Pages/SpecRep1.html

Here are some additional articles from shooting Industry magazine about firearms sales, etc. in 2008-2009. I could not find any newer BATF records here either. Still lots of information to look through at this link...

http://www.shootingindustry.com/Pages/news.html

-BCB
 
the remington 700 would not be used in the m24 and m40 ; army and marine sniper rifles if they were pretty good. you can get a $400 700 in the caliber of your choice. with an adjustable trigger. facory barrels require lots of time and loads to get tot choot. krieger . 1/2 inch no fuss. pour some powder crunch a bullet on top of it
 
Originally Posted By: RONINFLAGthe remington 700 would not be used in the m24 and m40 ; army and marine sniper rifles if they were pretty good. you can get a $400 700 in the caliber of your choice. with an adjustable trigger. facory barrels require lots of time and loads to get tot choot. krieger . 1/2 inch no fuss. pour some powder crunch a bullet on top of it

Besides the the action, what is really remington on the M24/M40 rifles? And of those parts how many of them have to be worked on to get them up to their specs. My point being is that with enough money and gunsmithing you can make any rifle shoot. IS the 700 action the best to build the rifle on? Probably, but to say the 700 series rifle is the best in the world just because the action is used seems like a stretch.

If you say the 700 is the best rifle because its chosen by the armed forces then you would also have to say that the Beretta 92 and M16 are the best in their repsective classes as well. Not true......they just happen to be the most affordable. Contrary to populer belief, government and state agencies are worried about cost. I guarantee if cost wasnt an issue, numerous weapon systems would be replaced immediately. I fully believe they still use Remington actions today simply because the cost in procuring new equipment and the logistics of having to retrain all personnel would be astronomical. It basically boils down to the general realization that 1. There are better systems out there, 2. while they are better, they arent better by a large enough margin to warrant the cost of a complete transition.IMO.
 
Isn't this a great country..??

We can all have those IMO "thingys", and they don't even have to be educated or informed to get peddled on the internet as fact...
thumbup.gif


- BCB
 
Companies that used to make a great product that now turn out sub par gear for more money based on their name appreciate people like yourself. Im sure you think that Colt still makes the best 1911's too.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunI've owned a BUNCH of rifles. Including a BUNCH of 700s. NONE of my 700s have been subpar in any way......

Wow, so no gunsmithing at all on your rifles. No wonder you're sold on them. Im confused as to how all the 700 gunsmiths are staying in business with these perfect rifles that are being produced.
 
Originally Posted By: warpig602 Contrary to populer belief, government and state agencies are worried about cost.

crazy.gif
Yea,,, and the federal deficete clearly proves it too !!!
crazy.gif


I'm just suprised that more private buisnesses don't do "No-Bid" contracts like the feds. It's clearly shown to be a real cost saver..

No offence Mr WarPig but you really are full of it..
laugh.gif

Oh yea,,, IMO
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunNo, it's more like nobody cares..........

Oh, thats why. Good one. Maybe tomorrow we you can work on your 2nd grade arguement skills and leave these 1st grade ones behind.
 
Back
Top