At what max range do you think this rifle could ring the steel reliably?

[ChrisBCS]

Posting this here for curiosity and edification purposes... in other words, for S and G. Feel free to crucify my ignorance and naiveté.

The rifle is a .30-06 Remington 700 from 1984. It is bone stock, including the Bushnell Sportview scope that came with it as a package in the 80's. The only thing not stock is that the action is bedded, and the barrel this is also free floated. I will eventually replace the base with a 20 MOA, new rings and optics. Assume a carefully, correctly developed 175+ gr OCW hand load.

Last Thursday evening, I took it out for my first range trip with it. I used the cheapest, garbage Remington 150 gr core lokt cartridges, on sandbags at 100 yards. I used this junk ammo because I had no idea where the scope turrets were, and I wanted just to zero the rifle and to collect chamber fired brass. After getting the turrets at a 100 yard vertical zero, I got to shoot the 5-shot group below, which, frankly surprised me. Hopefully it's no fluke.

 

[17874]

Well, with that set up you would probably be holding over for drop, so it depends on your skill. With a good optic and the right load you could easily reach 1,000 yds and beyond.

 

[Mike_Honcho]

As it sits? With those sweet Core Locts?

Depends on the size of the steel
Depends on the rate of fire
Depends on what is considered 'reliably' - 8/10?

I'll give it 450 yards on a steel IPSC - 30" x 18"


What do I win?

 

[SomeOtherGuy]

Really it all depends on the size of the steel. Seriously though. You can set an accuracy goal and figure out what you are likely to need to upgrade to get there.

 

[proneshooter]

What is the purpose of this rifle?

If it is to remain a deer rifle, I can see its max capability as a 350 - 450 yard rifle depending on what distance you choose as your zero (hint not 100 yards).

The limiting factor is the scope, which has neither a graduated reticle nor easily adjustable turrets. The rifle, of course, is capable of much more.

 

[ChrisBCS]

What is the purpose of this rifle?

If it is to remain a deer rifle, I can see its max capability as a 350 - 450 yard rifle depending on what distance you choose as your zero (hint not 100 yards).

The limiting factor is the scope, which has neither a graduated reticle nor easily adjustable turrets. The rifle, of course, is capable of much more.

It's just a shooter for fun. Don't hunt much these days, but I shoot a LOT. Although, not at greater distances (>200 yds). It was inexpensive, well taken care of, born the same year as me, and I grew up hunting with the same rifle in 7 mm RM.

And the one thing that is going to be replaced ASAP is the scope/rings/base. I want finger adjustable turrets, with solid, reliable, repeatable clicks. Haven't decided on a reticle yet. Until I can afford that, the best thing I can do in the meantime, I figure, is work on the hand load.

 

[briang7511]

I tried the same thing with a 1976 browing bar in 7mm. basic hunting scope, 150gr core lock ammo. I rang steel out to 500yds just holding over.

 

[Mike_Honcho]

While I am sure you know this - you can fractionalize the duplex reticle in same manner (only more grossly) as a MIL Dot.

The ammo, not the optic is the greatest limiting factor in the mix.

 

[buffybuster]

Get some 208AMAX's and the rifle will be able to reach out beyond 1000yds with ease.

 

[Tristian19]

With the right hardware changes, some you have mentioned, and a solid MOA at 100 yards you should not have any issues at 1000 yards plus. As others have mentioned above, other variables will play into equation.

To name a few:
Scope with LR features
Good Ammo (Match or Hand Loads would help greatly)
Shooter/Weapon capable of solid MOA (less better of course) and 2 MOA targets down range
...more the better

I do not see why not. I have a CZ 750 .308 that rings steel at 1000 yards using 175 grain FGMM or my hand loads.

I hit steel (note how I did not say RING) at 1000 yards with my .223 running 75 grain AMax @ 3000 fps hand loads with roughly 8.6 MILs of elevation. She punctured a gallon of water at 900 and 1000 yards a few weeks after I first got her when I was out at Wolfprecision in PA.

Hands down you can do it. I know I do!

 

[jashmore1234]

At least 1200 yards if you can read wind.

 

[Hairball]

I see this same rifle popping up in other threads and I would not change a thing. The rifle is doing exactly what it was made for, 1 MOA or less for a solid hunting rifle. While you don't hunt, you can still shoot it with relative success at longer ranges but I would not tear it down. If you want a more accurate rifle, get another budget rifle with a good action and build it up. It sounds like you bought it because it was built the same year you were born and you wanted it for that reason more than any other.

Once you tear it apart and use the action for a new build, the nostalgia of what you have is lost. I picked up another Marlin last year because it was made the same year I was born. Great rifle, great price, great condition, never fired from what i can tell so I bought it. I still have not shot it yet and maybe I will get around to it next year but it was more for the collection than anything else. This would be a good start for your collection as you can always buy the "latest thing" but older rifles in great shape are getting increasingly more difficult to find. I know most would direct you to replace just about everything but you may regret doing that in the long run JMHO.

 

[ChrisBCS]

I see this same rifle popping up in other threads and I would not change a thing. The rifle is doing exactly what it was made for, 1 MOA or less for a solid hunting rifle. While you don't hunt, you can still shoot it with relative success at longer ranges but I would not tear it down. If you want a more accurate rifle, get another budget rifle with a good action and build it up. It sounds like you bought it because it was built the same year you were born and you wanted it for that reason more than any other.

Once you tear it apart and use the action for a new build, the nostalgia of what you have is lost. I picked up another Marlin last year because it was made the same year I was born. Great rifle, great price, great condition, never fired from what i can tell so I bought it. I still have not shot it yet and maybe I will get around to it next year but it was more for the collection than anything else. This would be a good start for your collection as you can always buy the "latest thing" but older rifles in great shape are getting increasingly more difficult to find. I know most would direct you to replace just about everything but you may regret doing that in the long run JMHO.

Hairball, thanks. This thread and the hand load thread are PRECISELY because I made the decision that I don't want to do a thing to this rifle besides put a nice scope on it (keeping the original stuff), outfit it with an M1907 sling, and build a hand load that will max out its potential.... And then shoot it. It made a 3 shot ragged hole with corelokt, and it's as American as Apple Pie. I've set my mind that it would be criminal to do a teardown of any kind.

 

[LoanHarvey]

What app is that you are using on your phone?

Posting this here for curiosity and edification purposes... in other words, for S and G. Feel free to crucify my ignorance and naiveté.

The rifle is a .30-06 Remington 700 from 1984. It is bone stock, including the Bushnell Sportview scope that came with it as a package in the 80's. The only thing not stock is that the action is bedded, and the barrel this is also free floated. I will eventually replace the base with a 20 MOA, new rings and optics. Assume a carefully, correctly developed 175+ gr OCW hand load.

Last Thursday evening, I took it out for my first range trip with it. I used the cheapest, garbage Remington 150 gr core lokt cartridges, on sandbags at 100 yards. I used this junk ammo because I had no idea where the scope turrets were, and I wanted just to zero the rifle and to collect chamber fired brass. After getting the turrets at a 100 yard vertical zero, I got to shoot the 5-shot group below, which, frankly surprised me. Hopefully it's no fluke.

 

[cramey74]

The 30-06 will sure have enough kinetic past 1000 if you know what I mean.

 

[proneshooter]

I agree that a better scope with a more functional reticle/turrets will greatly enhance the rifle.

I really like the way it looks, with a nice piece of walnut, a classic stock shape, and good blueing. I would not ruin the looks with a scope that looks out of place (too big/gigantic turrets).

 

[Smooth_87]

A vx3 3.5-10x40 CDs gloss would sit beautiful on that, and allow you to shoot it at range

 

[proneshooter]

A vx3 3.5-10x40 CDs gloss would sit beautiful on that, and allow you to shoot it at range

I think you mean the 3.5-10x40 with the Boone & Crockett reticle, and I agree. Mount it with a set of Talley rings and bases and you are GTG.

 

[ChrisBCS]

I was actually looking a the Redfield Revolution 3-9x40 TAC. Thoughts?

 

[proneshooter]

I was actually looking a the Redfield Revolution 3-9x40 TAC. Thoughts?

That would work too. I'd buy one.

 

[JB02]

It would be nice if you had chronograph readings for an entire box. From there you could compute the min and max ballistic capabilities. Then, you need to consider how effective your optics are; I'm skeptical that the Redfield is of much use beyond 600 yards, but I could be wrong.

 

[proneshooter]

I'm skeptical that the Redfield is of much use beyond 600 yards, but I could be wrong.

Being a US made (by Leupold) scope, I would bet fair that it tracks accurately and remains so for quite some time. As far as having enough elevation, the spec sheet says it does.

I run a cheap (by this place's standards) Weaver 3-10x40 mil and I am only handicapped by the lack of magnification and optical clarity when pushing beyond 800 yards (confirmed at Thunder Valley). It tracks and repeats true and the reticle subtensions are right on. Not bad for a $299 Midway USA special.

 

[BWB]

The 30-06 will sure have enough kinetic past 1000 if you know what I mean.

Yep - cracked me up again!

 

[JB02]

Being a US made (by Leupold) scope, I would bet fair that it tracks accurately and remains so for quite some time. As far as having enough elevation, the spec sheet says it does.

I run a cheap (by this place's standards) Weaver 3-10x40 mil and I am only handicapped by the lack of magnification and optical clarity when pushing beyond 800 yards (confirmed at Thunder Valley). It tracks and repeats true and the reticle subtensions are right on. Not bad for a $299 Midway USA special.

To clarify, I mean that the Redfield's glass quality may not be of much use beyond 600 yards even at highest magnification. The Redfield line is ideally suited to taking game just a couple hundred yards away. I'm sure with a 30-06 there is plenty of internal elevation to get well beyond 600, and most scopes these days track decently enough out of the box.

 

[delixe]

The 30-06 will sure have enough kinetic past 1000 if you know what I mean.

Only real operators like you know what you mean.

 

[gookarachie]

Keep the rifle as it is. It looks great. Load up some 185gr berger long range boat tails and it will reach out past 1000.

 

[leadbullet]

why not go take it as far as you can hit and let us know.
cheers.