"" and cost to be able to shoot as much as possible ""
"" 223 ""
"" but not for 1000 yards "
- Thread starter Snip-er
- Start date
"" and cost to be able to shoot as much as possible ""
"" 223 ""
"" but not for 1000 yards "
To be clear, the OP said this:
"I want to be able to shoot long distance somewhere between 600 and a 1000 yards (my main focus), but still be able to plink as close as 50."
To some extent, the 223 vs other calibers discussion is a debate about how much of a cheapskate you are versus how much you're going to be stretching your legs past 600 yards. If you're like me and you're a cheapskate and you want to shoot out to 1,000 yards, then the 223 isn't for you. You'll spend a bunch of time and money trying to learn how to push the limits of a cartridge that was never designed for that purpose. If you aren't a big cheapskate and you want to learn how to shoot with a fun and low-recoil cartridge without spending a bunch of time and money pushing the limits of the caliber and then upgrade later, then the 223 is fine.
After having had a 223 for awhile and upgrading to a 6.5CM, I wish I had never spent all the money on the 223 that I did. I learned a bunch, but it cost a fortune for me to figure out that the 223 isn't a long range cartridge unless you're willing to spend a ton of time and money testing out expensive bullets and turn it into a single shot rifle. The cost difference in powder, bullets, factory ammo, etc. between a 223 and 6.5 is negligible. You really aren't saving as much as you think. My 223 bullets were $20 per 100 and got me to 600 yards. My 6.5CM bullets are $25 per 100 and will go past 1000 yards. And I use less of them because I don't miss as much. Powder difference is literally a couple pennies a round.
But I will agree with the other side when they say that a 223 is a heck of a lot of fun to shoot. I stayed inside 400 yards for a long time and my 223 was a blast to shoot at those distances. But if the OP is even considering 1,000 yards, then I think the 223 should probably be considered inadequate unless he understands that he'll be single loading expensive bullets, turning his bolt gun into a single shot, having a hard time spotting rounds that far with no power, and turning hits into misses and he may not know if it was his fault or the wind or his loading or whatever.
"I want to be able to shoot long distance somewhere between 600 and a 1000 yards (my main focus), but still be able to plink as close as 50."
To some extent, the 223 vs other calibers discussion is a debate about how much of a cheapskate you are versus how much you're going to be stretching your legs past 600 yards. If you're like me and you're a cheapskate and you want to shoot out to 1,000 yards, then the 223 isn't for you. You'll spend a bunch of time and money trying to learn how to push the limits of a cartridge that was never designed for that purpose. If you aren't a big cheapskate and you want to learn how to shoot with a fun and low-recoil cartridge without spending a bunch of time and money pushing the limits of the caliber and then upgrade later, then the 223 is fine.
After having had a 223 for awhile and upgrading to a 6.5CM, I wish I had never spent all the money on the 223 that I did. I learned a bunch, but it cost a fortune for me to figure out that the 223 isn't a long range cartridge unless you're willing to spend a ton of time and money testing out expensive bullets and turn it into a single shot rifle. The cost difference in powder, bullets, factory ammo, etc. between a 223 and 6.5 is negligible. You really aren't saving as much as you think. My 223 bullets were $20 per 100 and got me to 600 yards. My 6.5CM bullets are $25 per 100 and will go past 1000 yards. And I use less of them because I don't miss as much. Powder difference is literally a couple pennies a round.
But I will agree with the other side when they say that a 223 is a heck of a lot of fun to shoot. I stayed inside 400 yards for a long time and my 223 was a blast to shoot at those distances. But if the OP is even considering 1,000 yards, then I think the 223 should probably be considered inadequate unless he understands that he'll be single loading expensive bullets, turning his bolt gun into a single shot, having a hard time spotting rounds that far with no power, and turning hits into misses and he may not know if it was his fault or the wind or his loading or whatever.
I understand that.
But I also know a few things, one of which is that making repeatable, consistent, high hit percentages beyond 600 yards gets exponentially difficult no matter the caliber. The other one is that new shooters with zero rifle experience do not have a frame of reference to conceptualize that difficulty. The third thing I know is that east of the Mississippi, shooting past 600 yards is not something you find everywhere. Hell, shooting past 300 is a struggle
The only way to climb that curve is to shoot a lot and shoot with a purpose. You can certainly shoot a lot with a 6.5. You'll just pay more for barrels than you otherwise would.
All of this is info for the OP to digest, not meant to push him in one direction or the other.
Last edited:
One of the issues with questions like this is that every beginner wants to start at 1K then work to long range... Nothing against that but its a big jump that used to take years building on information accumulated from experience. Now no one has time to fool with learning just jump in and go.
I was trying to politely get to that point, but you're exactly right. And even today, with all the ballistic apps and laser rangefinders, you still need flawless shot execution and experience in reading your environment to get a good grasp of what the wind is doing. Two things that can only be learned by shooting and shooting a lot with a purpose.
The learning curve is the learning curve and there are no shortcuts.
Tis true, all this stuff has compromises in different ways.
Then there's having match factory ammo available at a decent price if one doesn't reload.
I'm looking forward to how a 224V does in a bolt action, especially seated out to 2.5". It might be the answer many of us are looking for as far as an inexpensive round to shoot but with some hard numbers. 90's with .52BC at 2900 fps with 29 grains of powder?! Low recoil and speculating 3000 -4000 barrel life.
Starting at .223 and ending at 6.5 is going backwards. You want to start off easy and then add skill using a inferior tool to accomplish the same thing. When you get bored with the 6.5, which it's been called because it's so 'easy' to hit with, then move into something more challenging like a .223 at distance. You'll have a ton of positive experience pushing you rather than second guessing every shot that's really beyond your variables. Meaning, you can do EVERYTHING right and still have a greater chance at missing with .223 than 6.5. Gain confidence with the 6.5 and move on from there. You're not saving much buying match grade .223 compared to 6.5 and reloading is going to be nearly a wash. Your only cost advantage to .223 and or 5.56 is plinking ammo which will never give good results beyond 50 or 100. The same gun, 5.56 AR, produced sub MOA with match and 15+ MOA using cheap reloads. That's quite a variance to deal with. For the results you want, you'll have to use specific, expensive ammo. And frankly, 6.5 match ammo is reasonably priced and can be found just about everywhere.
Otherwise get a .22 lr and use that to train with while you save up for proper precision rifle. You'll get all the "wind calling" one would want shooting out to 50 yards and it'll be very cheap to shoot.
Otherwise get a .22 lr and use that to train with while you save up for proper precision rifle. You'll get all the "wind calling" one would want shooting out to 50 yards and it'll be very cheap to shoot.
308pirate;
I took the advice and reread the article, taking more time to carefully review both the body of the article and the section summaries, and I stand by my comments.
I recommend the 5.56 chamber as does the article.
"Summary: Buy a well-made rifle with the chamber you want based on your needs, shoot the right ammo in it, and have fun. For most people, especially those not sure of what type of shooting they’ll be doing, a 5.56mm chamber is the best all-around choice. It is my fervent hope that this article has helped you better understand the topic at hand."
I flatly refuse to unequivocally state that it is reliably safe to fire 5.56 ammunition in a 223 chamber, and I don't think I'm going to see you do it either, or at least I hope I won't. I stated that shooting 5.56 ammunition in a 223 chamber could result in excessive pressures. The article doesn't disprove this, but I'll concede the point anyway; however, I don't see the author saying it's a good idea either. For what it's worth, I have only 5.56 chambers, and personally believe it's the wiser choice among the two.
While I also suggested the 5.56 chamber could be less accurate, that has not been my own personal observation.
You can be as dismissive and coy as you wish, I recognize a personal attack when I read one.
So, be that way.... Two can play.
Snip-er;
The first rifle I bought was a Remington VLS 700 223 sometime back in the mid 1990's. The throat was going so I gifted it to a relative for use as a 223 'Chuck gun. It had an actual 223 chamber, and a 1:12" twist 24" barrel. Not knowing much about the chambering(s) or even that there were two loadings and two chamberings, I went ahead and fired both with zero untoward consequences. Subsequently, I was 'schooled' regarding the widely accepted lack of wisdom inherent in doing that.
...As were all of us here in this site over the past nearly two decades.
Now, we have the Lucky Gunner Article brought to our attention. I buy it; lock, stock, and barrel. Very informative, I think it brings a bit of relief, and no small degree of clarity.
What am I going to do? For me, it doesn't matter, I no longer own the Remington, and the other five chambers I own are all 5.56, and I won't be buying any more with 223 chambers. Choose as you will.
Greg
I took the advice and reread the article, taking more time to carefully review both the body of the article and the section summaries, and I stand by my comments.
I recommend the 5.56 chamber as does the article.
"Summary: Buy a well-made rifle with the chamber you want based on your needs, shoot the right ammo in it, and have fun. For most people, especially those not sure of what type of shooting they’ll be doing, a 5.56mm chamber is the best all-around choice. It is my fervent hope that this article has helped you better understand the topic at hand."
I flatly refuse to unequivocally state that it is reliably safe to fire 5.56 ammunition in a 223 chamber, and I don't think I'm going to see you do it either, or at least I hope I won't. I stated that shooting 5.56 ammunition in a 223 chamber could result in excessive pressures. The article doesn't disprove this, but I'll concede the point anyway; however, I don't see the author saying it's a good idea either. For what it's worth, I have only 5.56 chambers, and personally believe it's the wiser choice among the two.
While I also suggested the 5.56 chamber could be less accurate, that has not been my own personal observation.
You can be as dismissive and coy as you wish, I recognize a personal attack when I read one.
So, be that way.... Two can play.
Snip-er;
The first rifle I bought was a Remington VLS 700 223 sometime back in the mid 1990's. The throat was going so I gifted it to a relative for use as a 223 'Chuck gun. It had an actual 223 chamber, and a 1:12" twist 24" barrel. Not knowing much about the chambering(s) or even that there were two loadings and two chamberings, I went ahead and fired both with zero untoward consequences. Subsequently, I was 'schooled' regarding the widely accepted lack of wisdom inherent in doing that.
...As were all of us here in this site over the past nearly two decades.
Now, we have the Lucky Gunner Article brought to our attention. I buy it; lock, stock, and barrel. Very informative, I think it brings a bit of relief, and no small degree of clarity.
What am I going to do? For me, it doesn't matter, I no longer own the Remington, and the other five chambers I own are all 5.56, and I won't be buying any more with 223 chambers. Choose as you will.
Greg
Last edited:
Good question, I'm done with that.
Greg
Greg
I would go .243 as it does very well out to 1000+ with proper bullets.
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/735285565
Scope
https://www.opticsplanet.com/vortex-diamondback-hp-4-16x42mm-riflescope.html
That leaves you a wee bit for the rest. Not going to get much better with your budget.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/735285565
Scope
https://www.opticsplanet.com/vortex-diamondback-hp-4-16x42mm-riflescope.html
That leaves you a wee bit for the rest. Not going to get much better with your budget.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
You can always have it rechamber for .243 Ackley Improved for a bit more performance, if you reload. Berger has a 115gr VLD that does very well.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
I think that model has a 9.25 twist rate so it wouldn't work for 115's. 115's work best with 7.5 twist rate. 90-95-100 grain would be better for heavy bullets in this twist rate, IMO.
OP: Steve123 gave some good advice in the second page of this thread. Others have too. I shoot 6.5CM (AR-10 platform). Lots of guys in my area are shooting bolt guns in .243 caliber and at distances you are contemplating. Another caliber (not mentioined) is 22-250. I'd go for a Remington action regardless of caliber as you can always build that up (lots of stocks/barrels) as money becomes available. I'd spend most my budget on getting the best scope you can.
I'd look at a Rem 700 or Ruger Am. And look to spend 2-3 times more on scope than rifle. I'd look to be spending &1000-&2000 for scope/mounts. Luepold makes a nice scope in that range. (I have a Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50 and just bought a Kahles 624i) There are a mind boggling number of choices in the market for rifles and even more choices in scopes. If I were you, I would keep researching and studying and saving. I think you'll be happier by waiting, learning, and having a larger budget, when it comes to buying time. Good luck, lg
PS: 243 and 22-250 are cartridges that have been around a long time. So fair ammo choices & availability off the shelf and lots loads if you end up reloading. Easier on your shoulder to shoot as well. Finally, one member here wrote: 'this is not a poor man's game'. I agree. I'm not rich, nor poor, but I am a studier and saver.
I'd look at a Rem 700 or Ruger Am. And look to spend 2-3 times more on scope than rifle. I'd look to be spending &1000-&2000 for scope/mounts. Luepold makes a nice scope in that range. (I have a Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50 and just bought a Kahles 624i) There are a mind boggling number of choices in the market for rifles and even more choices in scopes. If I were you, I would keep researching and studying and saving. I think you'll be happier by waiting, learning, and having a larger budget, when it comes to buying time. Good luck, lg
PS: 243 and 22-250 are cartridges that have been around a long time. So fair ammo choices & availability off the shelf and lots loads if you end up reloading. Easier on your shoulder to shoot as well. Finally, one member here wrote: 'this is not a poor man's game'. I agree. I'm not rich, nor poor, but I am a studier and saver.
Last edited:
I would say get the rifle first, hopefully it comes with a scope, and then get the optic you want. That way you can get started on learning the rifle and building your skills. I do agree with the above of watching the exchange on the forum for a good deal on stuff. Also you do not have to get everything all at once. I build an AR and am building a second upper, and maybe a rifle soon too, and I used the same mind frame of building up my bolt-action as some do with ARs. And I have been buying a part here the barrel there and then the chassis. just slowly buying the stuff for it as I can.
I put in my suggestion for caliber as either .308 WIN or 6.5CM. The .308 being the cheaper to shoot because it is the sibling caliber to 7.62NATO and military calibers do well so they sell cheaper. But 6.5CM does better at range as davsco pointed out. And the prices for it are reasonable these days too.
I put in my suggestion for caliber as either .308 WIN or 6.5CM. The .308 being the cheaper to shoot because it is the sibling caliber to 7.62NATO and military calibers do well so they sell cheaper. But 6.5CM does better at range as davsco pointed out. And the prices for it are reasonable these days too.
Snip-er I just looked at Ruger's website and they have new models for 2018 in the Predator line that IMO make it a no-brainer purchase over everything else for someone with your budget and intent.
They now offer the Ruger American Predator rifle from the factory using AI mags with their factory stock. This eliminates the need for a person to buy this rifle and have to spend $200 for bottom metal from CDI.
Is it a long term solution for serious shooting and competition? No. Is it a near perfect solution for wanting to taste what is available with minimal investment? Yes.
These new rifles are also priced the same as previous models. So worse case scenario is $449 at Cabela's and best case is approximately $360 at Whittaker Guns.
I know one poster stated he didn't have good accuracy with the Ruger. I don't doubt that, but there are many accounts of people who own the Predator in 6.5cm that get outstanding accuracy. I have shot one for the tune of 30 rounds of my handloads using Nosler RDF bullets and it did extremely well around 1/2 MOA.
I would buy the 6.5cm over the 6 in your situation due to ammo availability.
Also, IMO forget the 308 - even though a box of 6.5cm may be a few dollars more - there is no need in putting up with the recoil of the .308 - nothing to do with ballistics. In a light rifle like the Ruger it will be noticeable.
They now offer the Ruger American Predator rifle from the factory using AI mags with their factory stock. This eliminates the need for a person to buy this rifle and have to spend $200 for bottom metal from CDI.
Is it a long term solution for serious shooting and competition? No. Is it a near perfect solution for wanting to taste what is available with minimal investment? Yes.
These new rifles are also priced the same as previous models. So worse case scenario is $449 at Cabela's and best case is approximately $360 at Whittaker Guns.
I know one poster stated he didn't have good accuracy with the Ruger. I don't doubt that, but there are many accounts of people who own the Predator in 6.5cm that get outstanding accuracy. I have shot one for the tune of 30 rounds of my handloads using Nosler RDF bullets and it did extremely well around 1/2 MOA.
I would buy the 6.5cm over the 6 in your situation due to ammo availability.
Also, IMO forget the 308 - even though a box of 6.5cm may be a few dollars more - there is no need in putting up with the recoil of the .308 - nothing to do with ballistics. In a light rifle like the Ruger it will be noticeable.
Damn it! They also have a 10 round in the ranch blackout. Why do all the cool things come after I buy the previous model?!
Its not a 6.5 but my 300 BO will stack some bullets touching one another at 100 which is more than I was hoping for in it and the 243 I gave a friend put a nice group about 3/4" with federal hunting ammo when I was sighting it in. They are a nice option for a low priced entry. Just sand the stock out on the left side where they all seem to warp to touch the barrel and turn the trigger down a bit from its factory heavy setting.
Last edited:
Are you saying not all of those things are needed to be successful at the same distances with other calibers?If .223 for 600-1000 yards ( Maybe just under 800 yards ) then need : very good rifle , very good scope , very good ammo , very good shooter and much more $$$$
Pinging the 1000 plate once out of ten is not success, BTW
Thanks for all the replies! I really appreciate it. A lot of great information you have all given me. I will take it all and make the best decision I can. Thank u.
On a side note, for what its worth, I am far from novice or new shooter. I am former Army Infantry with some sniper training while I was in. I can hold my own long distance. I am just not to familiar with the long rifle platforms and that is why I was inquiring about what rifles and cartridge application to try and get for the budget I currently have. I am a handgun guy, but I miss shooting long distance and that' why I'm looking to get back into it. Again, thanks for everyone's time and effort to help me and give me such extensive replies. They have all been good research for me. Thank you all very much.
On a side note, for what its worth, I am far from novice or new shooter. I am former Army Infantry with some sniper training while I was in. I can hold my own long distance. I am just not to familiar with the long rifle platforms and that is why I was inquiring about what rifles and cartridge application to try and get for the budget I currently have. I am a handgun guy, but I miss shooting long distance and that' why I'm looking to get back into it. Again, thanks for everyone's time and effort to help me and give me such extensive replies. They have all been good research for me. Thank you all very much.
Last edited:
From my understanding when more than 700 yards 800 yards or more ~~~1000~ , it's not easy , do need lot of shooting experience , many conditions when shorting like wind ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ,and a lot notes , each person will have different shooting talent "" one shot Hit the target ""（ for all LR and ELR calibers )
PS : Translated and written ( sorry )
Last edited:
I think his point is that one of the few advantages of 223 is cost, and that's completely negated when you're talking about pushing it past 600 yards when factory 6.5 CM ammo that will go to 1,000 easily can be had for $1.25 a round and the brass sold for around $.25 per round if you don't want to reload.
Lots of solid advice and I agree going with a 6.5 creedmoor, pick up a Savage FCP, but a SWFA SS, see if the rifle likes the 143s or 147s and shoot. You should be within your budget for all that and the minor accessories you need. Best of luck!
As luck would have it, yesterday I shot long range with a guy that just bought a new Savage heavy barrel bolt rifle in 6.5 Creed. Getting it out, he exclaimed, here's my new truck gun. My first thought was, oh man, you done chose wrong, here we go, I'll just watch to see what happens.
For the first time ever "for me with a Savage bolt rifle, out of three", there were zero complaints, the rifle fed and ejected cases well, also it was sub moa, like at .8, with inexpensive factory ammo, the bulk stuff from Sportsman's Warehouse, with the Hornady 140 gr HPBT. He had the trigger adjusted to less than 2lbs and it wasn't a bad trigger at all. The bolt feel wasn't anything like the Savages of old I've been around which felt like they had sand in them, instead it was reasonably smooth.
The catcher...
He got it on sale for $350 but sent the $100 rebate in, so with tax he's into it for around $280.
Okay, I'd get one for that crazy low price!
For the first time ever "for me with a Savage bolt rifle, out of three", there were zero complaints, the rifle fed and ejected cases well, also it was sub moa, like at .8, with inexpensive factory ammo, the bulk stuff from Sportsman's Warehouse, with the Hornady 140 gr HPBT. He had the trigger adjusted to less than 2lbs and it wasn't a bad trigger at all. The bolt feel wasn't anything like the Savages of old I've been around which felt like they had sand in them, instead it was reasonably smooth.
The catcher...
He got it on sale for $350 but sent the $100 rebate in, so with tax he's into it for around $280.
Okay, I'd get one for that crazy low price!
Nope, I don't get that from his later reply.
If you don't reload, 223 is a non-starter beyond 500 - 600 yards. If you do reload, the cost difference between 223 for plinking and 223 capable of reaching 1000 yds with ease (from a bolt gun) is $.01 per round (the difference in cost between a shitty bullet and an 80 gr VLD).
I agree with you. But all that is true no matter what caliber you shoot.
I have two Tikka T3X CTR's. One in .308 and one in 6.5CM. They both shoot wonderfully. For your first rifle I recommend going with the .308. As a new shooter you will want to spend a lot of time at the range developing your skills and .308 ammo can be found everywhere and there are way more ammo choices. For instance, I can run .308 match loads when I feel like shooting for groups. I can run standard hunting loads to save a little money and still get good accuracy or I can shoot cheap military surplus and get groups small enough to shoot steel at distance. In my experience, the .308 will do most everything the 6.5CM does out to about 800 with just a touch more wind drift/drop. Once you are happy with your shooting and learn how to dope wind, you can move on to another caliber like the 6.5CM. The good news is that your .308 will still shoot great due to excellent barrel life and will probably be worth what you bought it for. I shoot many different calibers, but will always have a couple .308's in my collection. Just my opinion.
I'd say .308 just for the sake of learning the wind instead of having the cartridge/caliber do it for you. A lot of learning can be done with a .308 out to 600 yards. People tend to forget that and only want to tout their ballistics and low recoil. Yeah, I get it. There are advantages to those shooting PRS, but that's it's own thing. Maybe that's YOUR thing. Who knows? I hunt too, so I appreciate the energy at closer distances. My 2 cents since my end goal is shooting a heavy .30 in either 300WM or Norma Mag out to a mile at which point I'll have to deal with the wind drifts I was seeing with the .308 at much closer distances. It just depends on your goals. However, if you're happy with 1000 and maybe a few hundred further and your goal is to stay with a short action, then I'd go with the 6.5 creedmoor and make it your baby.
i like that set up. ty
Steve do you know what Savage in the 6.5 Creedmore it was? Can you find out if the rebate is still available and where? Thank you sir!
I didn't look to see what model it was, it was very basic.
I think the rebate ended on December 31st 2017.
I just bought a Savage 10 FCP-SR in 6.5cm delivered for $700. Got the $100 rebate approved but not yet in the mail. Rebate ended in December.
One hell of a rifle for $600 even if the Accustock gets tossed. The action and barrel with the accutrigger will build a great gun as one adds chassis, glass, and goodies.
VooDoo
One hell of a rifle for $600 even if the Accustock gets tossed. The action and barrel with the accutrigger will build a great gun as one adds chassis, glass, and goodies.
VooDoo
The 80 VLD is 30+ cents per round, which significantly drives the cost of loading for a 223. Shoot I paid 25 cents a bullet for my 140 ELD-M rounds for my 6.5CM, which is my entire point. I loaded my Tikka with 75 BTHP Match Hornady bullets, which were around 20 cents apiece and barely fit into the mag well. Pushing a 223 to 1,000 yards might be fun for some, but loading expensive bullets and turning your rifle into a single shot when you could have just bought a 6.5 and loaded cheaper, used your DBM, and spent way less time developing loads, is a much better "novice" path to success.
I don't shoot .223 at 1000yd and am unlikely to start doing it.
But at my altitude of 4500ft ASL (860 millibars), starting at 2800fps (at .6gr of Varget below max), Pejsa shows the 75gr HPBT-Match doing 1300+ fps, and my loads fit in and feed very well in my 24" AR setup. So while I probably won't do it, I also wouldn't feel all that out of place beginning the training if I ever change my mind. The good part is, even with the 1:9" twist in my 24" Savage Bolt gun, the same round would probably work well enough to stick with the program.
Funny, though, at Whittington's altitude, the rounds will do fine, but I'd be asphyxiating with my COPD. I tried 8000ft this past Oktoberfest, and came close to burning out a brand new set of brakes coming back down the mountain in a hurry.
I don't need to turn any of my .223's into a single shot to reach the distances with my existing loads, but to use them in F Class, the rules require me to single feed no matter what the cartridge length is; so....
The cost is less of an issue for me. But when I'm shooting the .223, I recognize that even with the pricier components, I'm still a good bit ahead of the expense I'd be incurring with my .260 or .308. Also, as a challenge, as an exercise in wind training at the long distances, the .223 makes me work harder, which may not be such a terrible prospect.
For anything other than target shooting, I consider the .223 to be maxed out (for DRT) on 'Chucks at 250-300YD, and really prefer the .22-250 for them. If somebody was shooting at me from 1000yd and I had a lot more guts than I currently possess, I'd want nothing less than my 260 for shooting back.
Greg
But at my altitude of 4500ft ASL (860 millibars), starting at 2800fps (at .6gr of Varget below max), Pejsa shows the 75gr HPBT-Match doing 1300+ fps, and my loads fit in and feed very well in my 24" AR setup. So while I probably won't do it, I also wouldn't feel all that out of place beginning the training if I ever change my mind. The good part is, even with the 1:9" twist in my 24" Savage Bolt gun, the same round would probably work well enough to stick with the program.
Funny, though, at Whittington's altitude, the rounds will do fine, but I'd be asphyxiating with my COPD. I tried 8000ft this past Oktoberfest, and came close to burning out a brand new set of brakes coming back down the mountain in a hurry.
I don't need to turn any of my .223's into a single shot to reach the distances with my existing loads, but to use them in F Class, the rules require me to single feed no matter what the cartridge length is; so....
The cost is less of an issue for me. But when I'm shooting the .223, I recognize that even with the pricier components, I'm still a good bit ahead of the expense I'd be incurring with my .260 or .308. Also, as a challenge, as an exercise in wind training at the long distances, the .223 makes me work harder, which may not be such a terrible prospect.
For anything other than target shooting, I consider the .223 to be maxed out (for DRT) on 'Chucks at 250-300YD, and really prefer the .22-250 for them. If somebody was shooting at me from 1000yd and I had a lot more guts than I currently possess, I'd want nothing less than my 260 for shooting back.
Greg
Last edited:
