Home› Main Category› Hunting
Advise me on a hunting rifle decision
I am pretty much committed to .30-06 (or .308) for east Texas whitetails - not necessarily because it's what is needed to get the job done, but just because I like it and have confidence with it. After a several year 'lay-off' from deer hunting, I started back with a push-feed Model 70 in .30-06, and have had nearly perfect results - three shots, three deer - one DRT and two that didn't make it 50 yards from the point of impact. The rifle is a '64 model that had apparently spent its entire existence in somebody's closet, pristine condition when I bought it about three years ago. It isn't the classic pre-64 model, but it looks better than most mid-priced wood stock rifles and shoots MOA with my hand loads.
The trigger on the Model 70 is OK, but since practicing at longer ranges with my AR, with the National Match trigger, I now believe I could improve on the Model 70 groups with a nicer trigger. It's fine, just like it is, at ranges just beyond 100 yards, but I have so far failed to get the consistency I would like at 300 yards. With a 4.5-14x40 side focus Nikon Buckmaster, I'm shooting pie-plate accuracy. That isn't terrible, but not quite good enough for the kind of shots I'm willing to take on whitetails.
The reason I'm suddenly interested in my 300 yard accuracy is because last year's wildfires took out some of the woods where I hunt, and I will now actually be able to see that far from my blind. Last year's buck was the longest shot I've ever taken on a deer, 118 yards, and it was basically a 'chip shot' for this equipment, even with me at the controls, so I intend to hone my skills for a longer shot, this year. But, I'm not sure I can do any better with the factory trigger.
So, my quandary is whether to put a good trigger in the Model 70 and try to whittle my 300 yard groups down to 3", or buy a new rifle that comes with a nice trigger - something like a Tikka in .308, or a CZ in .30-06 (since you don't really gain anything with a long-action .308). I'm not really into building or customizing, and I'm reluctant to tinker with something that already works 'pretty good' - I'm more of an "off-the-shelf" type of guy, except for hand loading.
What would you do?
The trigger on the Model 70 is OK, but since practicing at longer ranges with my AR, with the National Match trigger, I now believe I could improve on the Model 70 groups with a nicer trigger. It's fine, just like it is, at ranges just beyond 100 yards, but I have so far failed to get the consistency I would like at 300 yards. With a 4.5-14x40 side focus Nikon Buckmaster, I'm shooting pie-plate accuracy. That isn't terrible, but not quite good enough for the kind of shots I'm willing to take on whitetails.
The reason I'm suddenly interested in my 300 yard accuracy is because last year's wildfires took out some of the woods where I hunt, and I will now actually be able to see that far from my blind. Last year's buck was the longest shot I've ever taken on a deer, 118 yards, and it was basically a 'chip shot' for this equipment, even with me at the controls, so I intend to hone my skills for a longer shot, this year. But, I'm not sure I can do any better with the factory trigger.
So, my quandary is whether to put a good trigger in the Model 70 and try to whittle my 300 yard groups down to 3", or buy a new rifle that comes with a nice trigger - something like a Tikka in .308, or a CZ in .30-06 (since you don't really gain anything with a long-action .308). I'm not really into building or customizing, and I'm reluctant to tinker with something that already works 'pretty good' - I'm more of an "off-the-shelf" type of guy, except for hand loading.
What would you do?
Replies
You were supposed to hold back on presenting the perfect solution until the thread went through all the customary twists and turns. Spoil-sport. :nono:
I'd tinker with the trigger bedding and handloads
This^
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
Yes, I am aware of the .30-06 capabilities, in a general sort of way. I have had numerous groups in which the three best shots out of a five shot group were around 3/4", and I have even put a few shots inside of 3" at 300 yards, so I think the load and the bedding are OK. Consistency and repeatability are the issues in my circumstance, and I believe my technique is the real issue. I'm discovering that the trigger makes much more of a difference (for me) at longer distances.
I've already bought two 7mm-08's. I gave them both away. :tooth:
Actually, they were presents for my SILs, for doing some work they wouldn't accept pay for. I put 20 rounds apiece through them (sighting in, ya know) before turning them over, and I was extremely impressed with the chambering. But I have a ton of .308 brass, and I'm just partial to .30 caliber for hunting, just because it's been very successful for me for a long time.
I'll probably try the trigger adjustment.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
Thanks for the trigger adjusting advice, Bigslug and everyone else. I'll likely give it a try when I have enough time to tinker with it. I may want to get a torquing screwdriver first, and choose a time when I can re-zero.
Now, in a similar vein, let me derail my own thread by revisiting an old discussion, but with a slightly different twist - post '63 Model 70 vs Remington 700.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, Model 70 purists lament Winchester's decision to lower production costs for 1964 models ("New Model 70") because of the switch from controlled feed to push-feed, comparatively cheesy checkering, cheaper bottom metal and trigger guard, and a way too large gap between barrel and stock. They did this because the new Remington 700 was kicking their butt in the marketplace. As it turned out, the lower priced "New Model 70" was not a success, probably due in part to Jack O'Connors scathing reviews of it, calling it "...one of the ugliest rifles I had ever seen."
I get that it was a downgrade from the pre '64 models, but my question is: how does it compare to the Model 700's from about the same era? The military used a lot of Remington 700's with good success, and they were push-feed, and it has been and still is being used as a sniper weapon, so this seems like a relevant question. Also, I'm curious as to whether any of the Model 70's used by the military were New Models, and, if so, how they performed.
My understanding is that the New Model's action was actually stronger than the CRF action, because it fully enclosed the case head, like the Remington, and that it never experienced feed problems, so was it not still the equal of the Model 700? Also, the New Model still retained the 3-position safety, still had a good trigger, still had quality bluing and a high gloss finish on the stock. So, how was it not the equal of the 700?
I'm not trying to be argumentative - I would just really like to know, from those who have experience working on and shooting bolt action rifles, whether the much criticized New Model 70 is the equal of the 700's of the same era, or even today's similarly priced rifles.
Bisley, while I won't step out on a limb and make a direct recommendation, I will say that I did my model 70 which is essentially the same as yours, myself. I honed or stoned the surfaces of the trigger and sear and made adjustments to it. There's basically one screw. Mine is one of my best triggers, not because I'm some kind of guru gun smith but because it is much simpler than other triggers to work with. However, I will say that I had instruction on how to check it for safety. Take your scope off and drop it on the recoil pad from a foot off the ground. If you don't have a pad, drop it on a soft carpet from about 12 inches. If it doesn't release the trigger it is supposedly safe. What I did was drop it, lighten the adjustment and drop it again until the pull was where I wanted it and it was not going off when dropped.
In my opinion, the older model 70s already has one of the best triggers ever put on a factory rifle. It's simple and easy to adjust. No need to spend money on a new rifle or another trigger.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Pre or Post, the 70's got a MUCH better stock trigger and safety arrangement than the 700. The Winchester safety immobilizes the firing pin and has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the trigger. Best thing to do with an old 700 trigger is use it as a fishing sinker.
The fit of the receiver-to-barrel threads is generally sloppier from the factory on the Winchesters. My Post-'64 NRA Match Rifle got the last inch chopped off the back of the factory tube and was re-threaded to correct this. Neither's a custom fit, but Remingtons seem to be better on most of the one's I've helped my smith tear down.
I prefer the Post-'64 extractor to the EARLY and magnum Remington extractors which are held in with a rivet (which I've seen break a couple of times). The new, non-magnum Remingtons press in and snap into place. This is a pretty solid arrangement which I like better than the Post-'64 system.
The Remington receiver design - basically being a tube - is possibly a little better and uniformly distributing all the various forces subjected to it. It's good basis for an accuracy rig because of this. Flat bottomed actions like the Winchester may possibly be easier to bed, but I've never noticed much difference in that regard.
Action strength. . .the CRF Mauser 98, built with pre-modern steel and firing cartridges made of brass nowhere near as good as what we have today was plenty strong for the task of a 50,000-60,000 PSI cartridge. Just how strong do you need it to be? A Remington 700 is probably less likely to throw shrapnel across the landscape if you do something stupid like fill a .308 case full of Bullseye. I've seen the results of this - the gun held together, although it was functionally DONE, and the liquified brass flowed back around the firing pin and sprayed the operator in the face. Safety glasses saved the day, but he's still gathered some interesting scars from what I hear.
Controlled round feed is MAINLY a method for keeping people who don't know how to run a bolt gun from jamming it up. It's good for adrenaline-charged situations where the less-programmed operator might short-stroke the bolt. The locked on shooter will never know the difference from a functionality standpoint, HOWEVER, if you've never run a real Pre-'64, you owe it to yourself to shoot one. The feeding is as slick as greased eel boogers.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
$225 mas a' mino for a Jewell.
Practice till you think you got all the accuracy out of the rig you can obtain then consider bedding and so forth.
http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/2012_05_01_archive.html
I don't know if you reload but here is a good series on precision reloading for the '06.
It pertains to competition use of the '06 but will cerainly carry over to hunting ammo
Thanks Paul, I totally agree. I inhereted my dads 1967 mod 70A in 30-06 quite a few years back and I would challenge anyone to tell if it had the factory trigger or an overpriced aftermarket trigger. I've brought up in the past that many factory triggers can be cleaned up and adjusted to perform as we would like them rather than throw money at a firearm just for bragging rights. You have to keep in mind that back then, 3" at 100yds was considered acceptable for an off the shelf deer rifle. Peoples requirements have gotten tighter since then. My dad's mod 70 couldn't get much below 2" at 100yds until I had the barrel counter bored. 35.00 (about 20 years ago) and a trigger job turned it into a sub-MOA rifle with almost any factory ammo.
Upon reflection, the post '63 Model 70 I own is already more accurate than I'm likely to shoot, in a hunting situation. My intention, now, is to simply get the best trigger pull I can out of it, and try to reproduce some more of the load I have already developed for it that is consistently close to MOA at 100 yards. All of the deer I've already shot with it have been one shot stoppers at around 100 yards, and I've made some very good 300 yard shots on targets. But my consistency is not there, yet, and I believe the answer for that is simply to improve my skills. Trigger adjustment alone, and more practice, may get me where I want to be. Also, when time allows it, I will be doing more 300 yard practice with .223, which should improve my skills, somewhat.
When time allows, I'm gonna try to adjust the factory trigger and possibly do some very light smoothing if I think I can do it without taking too much metal off and screwing it up. If I do screw it up, then I'll shell out for good trigger.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Well I'll be. I never woulda thunk a all that!
Hmmm..............Anybody got some bread handy? I think I smell Spam Frying:spam::spam::spam:...:popcorn::uhm:
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Your fun to read. I hope you dont get picked on too much and stop posting
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.