Compact and Lightweight, Scout-like, .308 Bolt Gun

[OlongJohnson]

So, after reading Misanthropist's excellent article, I started snooping around Remington's site and found this:

https://www.remington.com/rifles/bol...seven-laminate

May stay reasonably priced:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/863562040

[okie john]

So, after reading Misanthropist's excellent article, I started snooping around Remington's site and found this:

https://www.remington.com/rifles/bol...seven-laminate

Adding the DBM from PTG:

http://pacifictoolandgauge.com/remin...aics-mags.html

..would yield a pretty damn Scouty rifle, with rifle sights and everything. Personally, all I'd need to do is lop off 1-2" off the stock, which would be easier to do with the laminated wood than synthetic, although this would be a lot cheaper to buy-in:

https://www.remington.com/rifles/bol...c-heavy-barrel

A Scout is supposed to be easy to use for fast offhand shots. Neither of the Model 7s that I owned were worth a hoot for that because the balance is so far aft that the muzzles floated all over the map. This would likely be worse with a laminated stock since laminate is so much heavier than wood and there’s a honkin’ big mass of it aft of the pistol grip.

Pre-war Mannlicher-Schoenauer and Mauser carbines have full-length stocks and steel nose caps to shift weight forward so they balance properly. Mounting a Scout scope on the barrel does the same thing, but it would probably take a medium-taper 22” barrel to make an M-7 balance well. Anything you add that sits aft of the forward action screw, like a conventional scope or DBM, will only make things worse. To quote a very experienced elk hunter from another board, "Stock heavy, barrel light. As poor a still-hunting rifle as I've ever owned.”


Okie John

[rob_s]

May stay reasonably priced:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/863562040

That’s intriguing...

[Navin Johnson]

Glad you enjoyed it also - that Seven is sure classier than my plasti-puncher, plus the irons are a nice addition.

I do like the prices on the no-frills heavies, though.

Do these Rem., TC, Howa, Ruger American etc. (sub $400) rifles show durability vs. the next step up like a Bergara or Tikka or Model 70 ($800ish)?

I know these cheap guns are capable but in the long run would it pay off to buy a more expensive rifle?

Thanks

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Well, my experience is limited to exactly one 783.

But it's hard for me to see what part of it would be notably vulnerable; I guess conceivably you could break the stock. Although I would also guess that if you filled it with expanding foam that it would become extremely rigid; that works for fibreglass boats.

Nothing about the bearing surfaces in the action jumped out at me as being undersized or prone to damage...but I guess it's possible there's some vulnerability in there I didn't notice. But I doubt it's more fragile than a 700, say, and that seems to have served its purpose in plenty of harsh environments.

Certainly possible that something else is tougher. But I don't think you would see a consistent, reliable increase in durability by stepping up in price. I think it's more likely that there are standout models from this manufacturer or that which are particularly robust, and ones which are fragile, and I don't think it would necessarily map onto price in any kind of predictable way.

Just a guess, though.

[OlongJohnson]

I haven't owned a Howa mini action, but I can say the standard short and long actions are the Toyota Land Cruiser of bolt-action rifles. Kinda heavy, but built phenomenally well. Every bit of Japanese quality, especially when they were polished blue or stainless, rather than rough or cerakoted. Only wart is the bolt stop screw, but that's an easy lathe project to fix.

[okie john]

Do these Rem., TC, Howa, Ruger American etc. (sub $400) rifles show durability vs. the next step up like a Bergara or Tikka or Model 70 ($800ish)?

I know these cheap guns are capable but in the long run would it pay off to buy a more expensive rifle?

That depends on your intended use plus what you want from the aftermarket and the knowledge base.

I’ve tried a Howa and two Tikkas because they’re known for accuracy, but that didn’t pan out because I’m a shitty benchrest shooter and I lack the attention span to develop match-grade handloads.

After I sold them, I bought a Remington 700 package rifle https://www.remington.com/rifles/bol...ynthetic-scope Cost was between a 783 and a Tikka. It’s a rugged, proven design. Top-notch parts and accessories are commonly available. Almost any gunsmith can work on them and may even have parts on hand. None of that is true for the newer rifles you mentioned, at least not yet.

After I upgraded the scope and mounts, I started testing common factory loads. So far it’s reliably under 1.5 MOA with several of them and sub-MOA with two of the cheaper ones. That’s better than the Howa and midway between the two Tikkas with the same type of ammo, but again, I'm the limiting factor.

Howa has been common here for decades; Tikka is getting there. They’re good rifles. The others are unknowns for now, especially for extended use or harsh conditions, and I don’t want to be the guinea pig if anything goes wrong.

My 700 will hang with any of them, plus lots of people know how to fix it cheaply, easily, and quickly.


Okie John

[DacoRoman]

Your very welcome.

On positive note Stargazing away from town should be virus safe, so if your situation allows time for it now I think it'd be good couple/family activity.

Not sure of your local climate, but I've found here in Midwest outside of winter months mosquitoes to be a right pain for watching meteor showers and such. Part of that is mosquitoes like me far better than other people, so we sometimes sit in the SUV and on slight incline if possible so can use both windshield & sunroof/moonroof with all windows shut to watch.

Thats why when we do get a telescope I plan to make sure have the right brackets & gear to set scope up outside and view via smartphone or other digital camera to tablet or laptop screen away from the bugs when they are bad.

One positive for midwest winter star gazing with good winter gear is one can be quite cozy and avoid straining neck by making bed in the snow.

Yeah bugs! I moved to North AZ a little more than a year ago from Georgia...the mosquitoes and "no see 'ems" were a nightmare in GA. Here it isn't nearly so bad. In Sedona there are mosquitos but a little spray will send them running. Ironically I've camped only in the winter, spring and fall around N. AZ. This year will be the first time we are planning on going during the Summer, but we plan to go only at the higher elevations to stay away from the high heat.

I like your high tech solutions to the pesky mosquito problem!

[DacoRoman]

https://shop.astronomerswithoutborde...ctor-telescope I would highly recommend this telescope for entry level and fairly portable. You need a table or stool to set it on though. A cheap scope may be ok but a cheap tripod will be misery.

Many thanks for the suggestion. I'll be checking it out. Great point about the tripod, makes total sense..sort of like balancing a scoped rifle on a thin stick I guess!

[rob_s]

@LittleLebowski any chance we could split off the stargazing campin whatever chatter into a less distrwcting thread?