which rifle should I buy?

[gaseousclay]

I've narrowed my choices down to a Remington 700 CDL Classic Deluxe .270 win or a Winchester Model 70 sporter .270. I've read mixed reviews for both, some good, some bad. they both seem comparible in quality to one another - my only peeve with the Winchester is the 3 point safety which seems redundant, other than that it seems like a solid rifle.

so does anyone here own either of these rifles? if so, can you specify what it is you like about your rifle?

 

[The Nid Hog]

I've fired the heck out of the military variant of the Remington 700 and I loved it. It was a pleasure to shoot.

 

[Snipersnest]

I had 700BDL in .30-06. It was a nice shooter. Have you considered a Ruger M77? They're a great rifle and are priced very reasonable. You also might consider a .308 caliber. It's a very versitable round, which can be downloaded to shoot chucks or uploaded to shoot elk. Got my elk with a .308 M77. Mistake I made was using the bull barreled version for an elk hunt in Idaho. Lot of weight to carry around in mountains that are straight up and down!

 

[Hawkeye5]

Odds are that as long as you stay with Remington, Winchester, or Ruger you will have a good rifle. Savage has some good offerings also.

More important is how the rifle fits and feels to you. Is the length of pull right, how does it fit your hand, etc.?

If you really don't like a three position safety then Winchester and Ruger are not options, at least in a new rifle. Older Ruger rifles had a tang safety.

I personally like a short action, but that is more a reflection of where I hunt and the caliber I prefer.

 

[hometownhero]

I picked the winchester but I'm sure that either will be good. Might want to look at what savage has as well. A friend of mine got one (.270) for Christmas last year and it has been a great rifle.

 

[csmorris]

Both excellent rifles but I prefer the 700 action.

 

[gaseousclay]

Both excellent rifles but I prefer the 700 action.

this is why i'm having such a difficult time choosing. I really like the older Winchester Model 70 Super Grade too, but I think that's a little out of my price range -- those rifles have some of the most beautiful wood stocks i've seen. but, Remington looks pretty darned nice too.

the other problem i'm having is accessorizing. there are so many cool things to buy in addition to the rifle. i'm also looking at scopes and rifle slings

 

[csmorris]

this is why i'm having such a difficult time choosing. I really like the older Winchester Model 70 Super Grade too, but I think that's a little out of my price range -- those rifles have some of the most beautiful wood stocks i've seen. but, Remington looks pretty darned nice too.

the other problem i'm having is accessorizing. there are so many cool things to buy in addition to the rifle. i'm also looking at scopes and rifle slings

Glass and other additions (as well as calibre) really start to vary when you get into intended use (what are you shooting, where are you shooting it, likely range, terrain, etc.). There will be as many answers as there are people out there. Questions to ask yourself are:
- Will this do the job I need it to do
- Do I like it (action, finish, calibre, whatever)

Do that and stick with a quality manufacturer (Winchester, Remington, and several others) and you will not go worng.

 

[gaseousclay]

...chambered in 6mm Remington. Great for varmints.

I don't know what you're intending to shoot with this thing, but I would recommend highly the 30.06 caliber for a couple good reasons:

It's very easy to find someone else with extra ammunition in the field, should you need a few rounds.

But my main reason is for loading flexibility. There are so many weights and styles of bullets available for .30 caliber that is is easy to load a 30.06 cartridge to do either much more or also much less than the .270 cartridge. If you load your own cartridges.

Which, after learning to do it, I couldn't imagine shooting as accurately with factory loads.

I'm mainly looking for a long range rifle for big game. I chose the .270 because I read that this caliber shoots flats and has less recoil than the 30.06 (but not by much). I basically want a rifle that can handle deer, elk, moose or other similar game in N. America. when I was at the sporting goods store the other day they had a used (but technically new and unfired) Remington 700 7mm Remington Magnum -- the price was great, but I decided it was a little too much power than what I wanted.

 

[knlgskr]

I'm mainly looking for a long range rifle for big game. I chose the .270 because I read that this caliber shoots flats and has less recoil than the 30.06 (but not by much). I basically want a rifle that can handle deer, elk, moose or other similar game in N. America. when I was at the sporting goods store the other day they had a used (but technically new and unfired) Remington 700 7mm Remington Magnum -- the price was great, but I decided it was a little too much power than what I wanted.

If the price is right, the 7mm mag. is an excellent cartridge in an excellent rifle. The .270 is a "necked down" 30-06 case and it along with the .308, 30-06, 7mm mag, are all versatile cartridges. Browning, Savage, Ruger, Sako are all fine rifles and you won't go wrong with any of them.

You might also consider stainless steel rifles with synthetic stocks which make them "all weather" rifles.

Scopes, go for quality regardless of whether your preference is for fixed or variable.

May St. Hubert (his day is 2 Nov) the patron saint of hunters smile upon you.

 

[stobes21]

If you like the 7mm option but don't want the power of the magnum there is also the 7mm-08 Rem. It'll kick a whole lot less than it's magnum cousin but still be quite effective on deer, elk, and other common north american game. Plus, it's a shorter cartridge (based on the .308), so it'll result in a shorter action on your rifle.

 

[Hawkeye5]

Flat shooting is fine, but knowing your rifle/cartridge combination along with a good scope, rangefinder, and reading the wind is more important.

I hunt several fields where 200 yard shots are common. Now 200 yards seems a long ways, but in the world of long range shooting that is a chip shot.

 

[gaseousclay]

Flat shooting is fine, but knowing your rifle/cartridge combination along with a good scope, rangefinder, and reading the wind is more important.

I hunt several fields where 200 yard shots are common. Now 200 yards seems a long ways, but in the world of long range shooting that is a chip shot.

don't all scopes have to be calibrated to the cartridge you're using? I was looking at a N i k o n Monarch scope and Leupold V.3 scope and they both looked decent, but I know nothing about how to calibrate them.

 

[auk1124]

Scopes have to be zeroed at the range, yes. Not hard to do, really, if you have a rifle rest.

IMO more important than your choice of Remington vs. Winchester will be your choice of glass. No quicker way to ruin the utility of a good rifle than to put a cheap, crappy scope on it. I'd rather have a cheap rifle with an excellent scope than the other way around. Don't skimp on the quality of the glass.

 

[stobes21]

[Simple Physics] is going to tell you that lighter recoil is directly proportional to lower impact energy at the target.

That task of taking down game isn't that hard, but you must know what you need to take down any particular species. You've listed some pretty big game, so you're not going to be as effective with a lighter slug.

If you leaf through the ballistics tables of any good reloading book at a shooter's supply shop, you'll see all the possibilities available to you in .30 cal, and comparative calibers as well. I had a 7mm Remington Magnum, too. I'd have rather had the 30.06, it is more flexible.

It's been my experience that flat trajectory doesn't mean much, but bullet weight does. Bullet weight determines how much effect wind has, but also flight time does. The best of both worlds is a heavy, fast, bullet. You can do that, but not without a heavier recoil. Force is a product of mass times acceleration, as you know.

If you're not going to be loading your own cartridges, you might just want to see what different loads are available for whatever caliber you choose.

Good luck, shoot straight.

Not to be a jerk or anything, but physics will tell you that muzzle energy is not the same as energy at the time it hits your target. The following ballistic chart is a good example of how distance can dramatically change a bullet's retained energy:

7mm-08 Rem. (140 gr): @muzzle: 2542 ft/lbs @100yds: 2180 ft/lbs @300 yds: 1577 ft/lbs

.270 Win. (150 gr): @muzzle: 2900 ft/lbs @100yds: 2391 ft/lbs @300 yds: 1589 ft/lbs

7mm Rem. Mag. (150 gr): @muzzle:3221 ft/lbs @100yds: 2667 ft/lbs @300yds: 1792 ft/lbs

.308 Win. (150 gr): @muzzle: 2648 ft/lbs @100yds: 2061 ft/lbs @300yds: 1193 ft/lbs

.30-06 Spfd. (150 gr): @muzzle: 2820 ft/lbs @100yds: 2281 ft/lbs @300yds: 1445 ft/lbs​

Source

So at the muzzle the 7mm Rem mag is tops, followed by nearly identical power with the .270 win and 30-06, followed by the .308 and finally the 7mm-08 Rem. But, at 300 yards the 7mm Mag still has the most energy, followed by nearly identical energy from the 7mm-08 and the .270, then the 30-06, then the .308 a distant 4th.

Now, compare their recoil energy for the same bullet weight above:

7mm-08 (8lb rifle): 12.6 ft/lbs
.270 Win (8lb rifle): 17.0 ft/lbs
7mm Rem. Mag. (8.5lb rifle): 19.2 ft/lbs
.30-06 (8lb rifle): 17.6 ft/lbs
.308 Win (7.5lb rifle): 15.8 ft/lbs​

Source

So at 300 yards you get nearly identical energy from the 7mm-08 and the .270 win, but even with identical weight guns the 7mm-08 shooter will face about 2/3 of the recoil that the .270 shooter will. Compare the 7mm-08 to the .30-06 and the result is significantly less recoil but with more energy on the target.

Now obviously there are plenty of other factors to consider. And the ballistic table shows that at shorter distances the difference between muzzle energy and energy on target is reduced. But it is just flat out wrong to say that more recoil will always equal more energy into the target.

 

[elkaholic]

I chose the Winchester, just because I've always wanted one myself. But trying to choose which brand to get, caliber remaining the same, is kinda like getting into a Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge debate.

I used to have a Savage 110 (package gun) in .300 Winchester Magnum that I used for elk, deer, bear in Oregon. That Savage was one of the most accurate rifles I've ever shot, they are known for that. Recoil was stout, but I believe a lot of that was due to the Savage's lighter weight than, say, a Remington or Winchester. It came with a Bushnell 3-9X scope, which after a few years and boxes of shells, shook right out of its rings/bases. I sold that gun before I went overseas, instead of trying to fly it from GA to OR.

I am now in Idaho, and bought a Ruger M77 in 7mm Remington Magnum, since it is still a good choice for elk, but a little more versatile when going after some of the smaller animals, like pronghorn. I scoped it with a Leopold 3-9X, and the quality is MUCH better than the old Bushnell. Recoil seems sharper to me, like the 7mm kicks "faster" than the .300 did. I wish I'd have gone with another .300.

Most people (read gun writers) agree that the .270 is the absolute minimum for elk, and moose are much bigger. Your best bet is to research the best calibers for what you are hunting, and decide a price range you are willing to spend. At least 1/2 to 2/3 of that should be in your glass, and the rest toward the rifle.

Whatever caliber you choose, get acquainted with it through lots of shooting. Once you have it zeroed in (preferably at 200 yds min.) practice at different distances, uphill/downhill, etc. so that when the time comes you know where your bullet is going to hit when you pull the trigger.

Good Luck and Good Hunting!

 

[gaseousclay]

IMO more important than your choice of Remington vs. Winchester will be your choice of glass. No quicker way to ruin the utility of a good rifle than to put a cheap, crappy scope on it. I'd rather have a cheap rifle with an excellent scope than the other way around. Don't skimp on the quality of the glass.

I hear ya. I'm budgeting at least $400-500 for a nice scope, so don't worry, no skimping on scopes for me

 

[gaseousclay]

...in Owatonna, is a Cabelas store. They've got a great gun library with really knowledgeable staff who should be able to answer all your questions.

Candy store for grown men, I tell you.

I think the one that's closest to me is in Rogers, MN. I also assumed all Cabela's stores had a gun library. either way, i've decided i'm going to buy my gun at a smaller store about 45 minutes from my house, mainly because when I stopped by last week they were incredibly helpful, and in this day and age customer service is a big deal to me. I just got my Cabela's Visa in the mail so I might buy my scope from them

 

[gaseousclay]

Whatever caliber you choose, get acquainted with it through lots of shooting. Once you have it zeroed in (preferably at 200 yds min.) practice at different distances, uphill/downhill, etc. so that when the time comes you know where your bullet is going to hit when you pull the trigger.

Good Luck and Good Hunting!

that's the plan. I'll more than likely spend a lot of time at the range to better acquaint myself with my new toy.

 

[NBT]

I voted for the Remington 700... mines a tack driver right out of the box.
Remington 700 SPS in .308, changed out the factory stock to a Hogue, and have 20 MOA EGW base, and a Nikon Buckmasters Scope on it.
This is my Whitetail rig.... someday.
To be honest...that's what I set the rifle up for... after 24 years of hunting... I have yet to shoot a deer with a gun Always hunted deer with a bow.
Have done a LOT of shooting though. I would not eliminate Savage either...they are producing some real nice firearms today.