Community
Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

Cheap vs. Expensive?

Thread Tools
 
Old 02-05-2008, 02:44 AM
  #31  
 
kdvollmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 583
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

Paul,
No worries on the insult. It happens, and many times unintentionally. As for the question of whether a rifle can actually be verified. It isn't so much that a rifle will hold 1/2 inch at that range, but 1/2 MOA. as you may, or may not know, one MOA (minute of angle for those that don't) is 1 inch at 100 yds. That take a little further is one inch for EVERY 100 yds. therefor 1 MOA at 100yds, is 1 inch, at 200 yds, 2 inches, 300yds, 3 inches. 2 MOA at 100 is 2 inch diff, at 200 yds, is 4 inches....etc.
SO, all that said, a gun guaranteed to shoot 1/2 MOA out to say 1500 meters, will shoot a 7 1/2 inch group. A 1 MOA gun would be a 15 in group.

You are also very correct in saying that there are MANY average guys that think that just buying the cool guy equipment by it self will make them a world class shooter, when the fact is that there is soo much more that goes into long range shooting than anybody can imagine. Temp change from zero, humidity, light, ammo storage, different ammo for different tasks.

Average groups for rifles at those ranges, depend on the gun, the shooter, the ammo....lots of variables. For example, the dakota longbow gives their promise with match ammo. Might have been match ammo from their ammo shop. Available to the public, costs about 80-100 a box, but it will get it done. Might be tested with Black Hills Match, which is the factory ammo I choose. Said by many to be the industry gold standard now for accuracy. I tend to agree. So anyway, it really differs. When I got to shoot the AI Rifle in California. Sure, 100 yds, not much, but with their rifle, and ammo ( can't remember the brand, but I am thinking Norma, or Lapua brand) i shot the smallest group ever for me, 1/4 inch or so ( before i get blaasted for that, it is an estimate, but it was one small hole, not much bigger than a 30 cal hole.) That was a good improvement on the 1/2 inch I could shoot with my rifle and match ammo. And I thought that I already had an accurate rifle. It was for sure a better more accurate rifle.

For me personally, I consider myself a pretty damn good shot. Generally, I shoot around 1/2 inch groups at 100 -200 yds. the further out, I tend not to be quite as steady, though I have taken Prairie dogs at over 700 meters. I would say in all honesty, out to long - long range, I am an honest 3/4 to 1MOA shooter. Longest confirmed shot was 926 meter. It was a 10" x 10" steel plate. That was with an M-24 Sniper Rifle.

Hope that helps answer some of your questions for me, and maybe fill in some blanks on how I look at rifles VS cost VS rifle ability.

kdvollmer is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 03:32 PM
  #32  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

Now that's impressive. I was looking at the rules for the F class long range shooting and the 10 ring for 600 yards is 3 inches I think. You would clean up in that competition.

KD, I understand now. I know how MOA works I just thought they were guaranteeing that the gun would shoot half inch groups at 500 yards and was wondering how you would verify something like that. A bird could fart 100 yards down range and change your path at 500 yards.

I'm not sure how it works with rifles but that theory does not work for muzzle loaders and shotguns. Just because you shoot great groups up close doesn't mean they will at 100 yards and beyond. I have seen it several times where a gun will shoot great at 75 yards and fall apart at 100 yards and beyond. I noticed while testing different loads for my slug gun this was quite evident. My muzzle loader would do the same thing. One inch or better groups at 100 yards but out to 150 yards the groups opened up to about 5 inches. I played with different load weights, different powder and bullets with a better BC and cut that in half though. I discovered faster is not always better.

Seen it with .22's as well.

Never messed much with centerfires though because of where I live. I just got a 243 for a varmint rifle though. 300 yards seems like an incredible distance to me, let alone 600 and beyond[].

I've never shot a deer farther away than 80 yards though.

I just figure when I hear someone say a gun will shoot a certain sized groups at a specific distance I figured it was actually shot at that distance. I guess that is where I got confused.

Paul
Paul L Mohr is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 03:48 PM
  #33  
Spike
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Midland County, MI
Posts: 38
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

Just a guess, but I would imagine the accuracy drops off when the speed of the projectile drops below the speed of sound and encounters all sorts of turbulence when this occurs. That would help explain why it isn't as evident in most higher powered rifles, but can be readily apparent with muzzle loaders and shotguns.
the_sandman_454 is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 04:28 PM
  #34  
DM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

I also would much rather have one high end gun that several average ones...

I have prople tell me all that time, "i can't afford to have a gun like yours"... Yet they have 10, 15 or more guns in there closet!!!

That just cracks me up!! lol

DM
DM is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 07:39 PM
  #35  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MB.
Posts: 2,984
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?


ORIGINAL: DM

I also would much rather have one high end gun that several average ones...
I agree with you 100% but the question would be what cartridge, that’s the challenge...[8D]
trailer is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 07:48 PM
  #36  
Nontypical Buck
 
SwampCollie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Where the ducks don't come no more
Posts: 4,420
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?


ORIGINAL: Ridge Runner

paul my best has been a 1 7/8's in group at 660 yards, off a bipod.
Thats not that big of a deal... heck I can do that too off a good rest... with no wind.... if I haven't had any coffee that day... and I'm feeling just right... and if no one is watching.... and if the target is just about 560 yards closer.....
SwampCollie is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 09:00 PM
  #37  
DM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

ORIGINAL: trailer

ORIGINAL: DM

I also would much rather have one high end gun that several average ones...
I agree with you 100% but the question would be what cartridge, that’s the challenge...[8D]
I could easily get by the rest of my life with a 30-06, i just don't see a problem here...

DM
DM is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 09:10 PM
  #38  
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 824
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

Life is too short to have crappy guns.
vabyrd is offline  
Old 02-05-2008, 11:10 PM
  #39  
 
kdvollmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 583
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

If I had to have just ONE rifle, it would be a really high quality gun in one of the .300 mags. Not sure which one exactly, as I have only shot the .300 Win Mag which is no slouch in itself. Of course, that would be for everything bigger than small game. Really kind of Ugly on Prairie Dogs.....
kdvollmer is offline  
Old 02-06-2008, 05:23 AM
  #40  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MB.
Posts: 2,984
Default RE: Cheap vs. Expensive?

ORIGINAL: DM

ORIGINAL: trailer

ORIGINAL: DM

I also would much rather have one high end gun that several average ones...
I agree with you 100% but the question would be what cartridge, that’s the challenge...[8D]
I could easily get by the rest of my life with a 30-06, i just don't see a problem here...

DM
I would have a harder time, but the 30-06 would be a good choice...
trailer is offline  


Quick Reply: Cheap vs. Expensive?


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.