Re: 284 rifle build
This is a "million dollar debate" in the world of F-Class as I have seen it.
The 7mms are basically impossible to beat for BC, unless you want to get into the .30 cal magnums or larger, which are not an option in F-Class since Brakes & Suppressors are not allowed.
So when you go 7mm, you have the "Mild, Medium, & Max"
Mild - 7mm-08, great barrel life, low recoil, but can't really produce the velocity that you need.
Medium - .284, good barrel, manageable recoil, very close to optimal velocity
Max - 7mm Mag (WSM, SAUM, etc), short barrel life, pretty much need a Brake or Suppressor or a fair amount of weight for reasonable recoil, best option for maxing out the 7mm ballistic performance.
If you go back a couple of years to the 2009 F-Class World Championship, the Brits beat the US (who were shooting 6.5mms) with 7mm Mags, and in 2005 the South Africans also won shooting a 7mm. Guess what the US Team will be shooting in 2013 at the Championships, 7mms!
"Million Dollar Question" now, which 7mm will it be?
Go with a .284, and you are giving up some FPS. Go with a Mag, and you will be burning barrels and beating yourself up.
For those who may not have caught it:
.284 Shehane -
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2012/05/284-shehane-284-improved-for-long-range/ In terms of "Tactical/Practical" for me, that includes positional shooting (sitting, kneeling, standing, to include unsupported). As such, heavy rifles with long barrels that would do well in F-Class or "Prone Matches" like the ones at Thunder Valley, don't really do that well in positional shooting. For me, "Tactical/Practical" is going to be a rifle that weighs 12-14 pounds and has a 18"-22" barrel. I don't think that a rifle along those lines is going to be a good fit for a .284?
The winners in the "Tactical/Practical" world still seem to be the 6mm & 6.5mm with rounds like a .243 or .260.
Sorry for the ramble, and the sidetrack, hopefully there is some value in there somewhere!
M Richardson