Which Rifle??

dev110

I'm just looking for some advice on which rifle to upgrade to...

I have had a .22lr for about a year and a half and want to move to something bigger after Christmas. I want something that will be an all-rounder. Something for foxes, rabbits and other vermin.

I was mainly thinking of a .223 but lately was thinking of .220 swift and .22-250. Not sure if .22-250 needs a deer licence dough.

Any advice on these rifles would be great help.

Glensman

Well im glad to be first to reply. Get a .223. Just do, someone else will type why in a while

Of the rifles it depends on your budget. Howa 1500, Tikka T3 or Remmy 700 would be the main good .223 rifles- but if you have a bit of cash to splash you mite go for a Sako 75 or 85.

I have a Howa, but I wanted a Sako...

homerhop

was looking at a very nice ruger .223 today and all going well may splash out after christmas.

dev110

I was thinking of getting a cz, remmy 700 sps or howa 1500.
What do ye think of these rifles?

Also what scope would you recommend? I would prob spend ~€300 on one

ormondprop

rugerman is selling a cz 527 in .204 for 350 euro, this would be perfect for you

FISMA

dev,
You cannot go wrong with either the Remington 700 or Howa 1500 in 223. Both are excellent firearms. If I had to choose between the two, price could be the deciding factor alone.

I have owned both and loved both. Both are tack drivers and I have nothing bad to say about either.

I love the stock on the Howa. It fits my hands nicely. I get a nice grip on the stock as it is thicker (wider) than the 700.

The weight of the Howa appears to be greater than the 700, although I have not weighed them. It's not a lot of weight, like holding an air rifle. You may actually prefer a bit of extra weight which I would on a 30-06. But for a 223, the kick back isn't really a problem.

I wasn't crazy about the bolt on the Howa. Just did not seem to be as nice as my 700. The 700 bolt just felt better and seemed more solid. That's saying nothing about cycling the bolt.

Remington has a big "+" when it comes to heritage, name brand, and lineage. It is nice to know that there are millions of 700's out there, although not originally designed in 223. Still, I don't mind (engineering wise) when the original barrel is drilled for a smaller round, it's the bigger round that makes me worry.

Remington's customer service is fantastic. Once I bought a 700 and while removing the screws to install a base I noticed that the screw was not turning easier as it was being removed. The dreaded cross threaded screw:-( In all fairness to Remington, the problem may have occurred at the dealer and not the factory - who knows what they might have done to it. Anyhow, Remington sent me a brand new firearm where others would have drilled and tapped.

Concisely: if I had to choose between the Rem and the Howa, I would chose the Remington. However, that's weighing personal factors according to my particular needs. Again, either rifle is great.

Go with the 223 forget the other calibers. Check the ballistics, trajectories, drop and all. I love the swift and the 22-250. However, In Ireland we must consider prices.

I did a price to performance analysis and could not justify the 22-250 or swift. If you are just moving up from the 22lr and needing to let lead fly down range for practice, the 223 is the way to go. It flies almost as fast as the others but costs much less.

If you get to the level at which you outperform the 223, then it is time to move up. Until such time as your equipment outperforms you, go with the 223.

So, please advise what prices you are seeing on the Howa and the Remington.

There may be some sales of the Howa 1500 with a Stirling Nikko scope package. Great deal, but the scope and rings do not come close to the level of the 1500. It's fine for a bit of glass on the rifle until you decide on a scope, which is another story. When you're ready, let us know.

Slan

Glensman

Told you someone would go to the bother of explaining why to go .223

---

^^

Narrowing the selection to the Howa and Remmy is no bad thing- but I wouldn't overlook Tikka or Sako if you have the money.

If you are in to customising, or want to get into it in the future then Remington and Howa have 2 of the best actions out there...

Cass

dev110 wrote: »

Not sure if .22-250 needs a deer licence dough.

No it doesn't. Common misconception that has come up in other threads.

FISMA

Glensman is wise beyond his years and if I had his money, I could throw mine away or at least use as fire to keep warm .

Seriously though, if you do have the dosh AND are willing to throw down and get to a higher level of rifle, than Glensman is correct, a Sako or Tikka would be nice.

Until you are able to truly say that the 700 limits you and not the other way around, go with the 700.

Personally and thank God, I am in a position where I could afford whatever rifle/scope combo I like. I still find the 700's to be my choice.

I have shot Tikka and Sako level rifles with S&B or Swaro scopes and in most cases, seen the difference (off the bench). However, for what I am doing (field, off sticks, freehand), the 700 with a Burris is hard to beat.

Concisely: the benefits of the Tikkas and Sakos over the 700 and 1500 are measurable. However, when hunting in real life, off of sticks, no bench, no rest, freehand, or with a sling, the shot is more about the shooter than the rifle. Until you can drive tacks with the 1500 or 700, think twice about the Tikkas or Sakos.

With that said, I usually advocate buying the most gun you can afford. Don't buy cheap stuff as you'll regret it later. Cheap stuff NOT being the 700 or 1500.

If you could spend twice as much and shoot twice as well, I would spend ten times the money. Unfortunately, hunting/shooting obeys no such equation. The 700 will get you out in the field and chances are that you will never need a better rifle in your life.

Glensman

FISMA wrote: »

Glensman is wise beyond his years and if I had his money, I could throw mine away or at least use as fire to keep warm .

Seriously though, if you do have the dosh AND are willing to throw down and get to a higher level of rifle, than Glensman is correct, a Sako or Tikka would be nice.

Until you are able to truly say that the 700 limits you and not the other way around, go with the 700.

Personally and thank God, I am in a position where I could afford whatever rifle/scope combo I like. I still find the 700's to be my choice.

I have shot Tikka and Sako level rifles with S&B or Swaro scopes and in most cases, seen the difference (off the bench). However, for what I am doing (field, off sticks, freehand), the 700 with a Burris is hard to beat.

Concisely: the benefits of the Tikkas and Sakos over the 700 and 1500 are measurable. However, when hunting in real life, off of sticks, no bench, no rest, freehand, or with a sling, the shot is more about the shooter than the rifle. Until you can drive tacks with the 1500 or 700, think twice about the Tikkas or Sakos.

With that said, I usually advocate buying the most gun you can afford. Don't buy cheap stuff as you'll regret it later. Cheap stuff NOT being the 700 or 1500.

If you could spend twice as much and shoot twice as well, I would spend ten times the money. Unfortunately, hunting/shooting obeys no such equation. The 700 will get you out in the field and chances are that you will never need a better rifle in your life.

When I originally filled out my application for the .270, I put down Sako 85 thinking that i should have the money by the time the permit came through.
When I did get the permit I could only afford a second hand Howa 1500. When i say only, I dont mean to put the rifle down. It is a tack driver, feels nice, shoots great and didnt cost 2 fortunes!
I dont regret going with the Howa in any way, shape or form.

When I have spare cash in a few years time I'll have Ferghal put a Krieger barrel on it and then it'll out-shoot any factory Sako!

dev110

Thanks for all the info and advice.

Its looking like I'll be going for a remmy. What do you think of a 700 sps varmint?

What magnification of a scope would be the best for a .223?

Glensman

dev110 wrote: »

Thanks for all the info and advice.

Its looking like I'll be going for a remmy. What do you think of a 700 sps varmint?

What magnification of a scope would be the best for a .223?

How do you feel about bodybuilding as a hobby???

Unless you Need a heavy rifle, don't buy a heavy rifle. By the time you stick on a scope and bipod it'll be pulling your arms out at the sockets!

On the scope, an 8x56 would be my preference. Although i seen a Bushnell 10x42 on Ebay last week with target turrets, I read the reviews and it seemed a good scope for the price.
I myself am a Massive fan of fixed power scopes, ask a lot of people and they have 3-9x40 scopes that are Never taken of 9x. They'd be better off with a fixed power scope, they're lighter, simpler, easier to get the eye on to and tend to have better glass (when spending the same money).

Glensman

Scopes for medium to long range varmint cartridges


These flat shooting, centerfire varmint and small predator (CXP1 game) cartridges can often get by with the scopes recommended in the category above, but sometimes they can use more magnification. Typical maximum ranges run 225-300 yards.
Common examples of such varmint cartridges include the .17 Rem, .204 Ruger, .222 Rem, .223 Rem, .22-250, .220 Swift, .243 Win., 6mm Rem. and similar cartridges.



An adjustable objective (AO) or side focus scope adjustable for parallax is recommended.


Fixed power scopes - Minimum magnification 6x; maximum magnification 12x; 10x scope recommended.
Variable power scopes - Minimum magnification 4x to 8x; maximum magnification 12x to 25x; 6-18x (approximate) scope recommended.

dev110

Would the ordinary sps be good enough?

I would be a fan of variable powered scopes but I very rarely take mine off 3x and only use 9x for sighting in or abit of target shooting.

Have you ever found a situation where you wished you had more magnification?

Glensman

dev110 wrote: »

Would the ordinary sps be good enough?

I would be a fan of variable powered scopes but I very rarely take mine off 3x and only use 9x for sighting in or abit of target shooting.

Have you ever found a situation where you wished you had more magnification?

Plenty of times! To begin with, you could zero a .223 at 200 yards if you wanted, I would want about 20x to do that.

Really in a hunting situation you rarely need to go past 12, although I shot a fox last night with the Leupold at 20x (full power), when it's there, why not use it?

The thing is, with a .223 you can really push accuracy and range to their limits- but not with a scope that doesn't let you see enough of what you're aiming at!

FISMA

Dev,
Glensman's advice is spot on. I could not agree more when it comes to magnification with scopes. I have seen people using a variable 20X scope or bigger with deer in a field no bigger than 100 yards. What exactly they intended to do with such magnification was beyond me - was there a particular hair on the deer that you wanted to hit?

My deer rifles are fixed, but my 223 is a more multi-function gun, thus, it gets variable.

Glensman's advice is sound. If you have a game in mind, say lamping, then pick a magnification, set it, and learn to shoot.

Too many newbies fiddle and fuss with their equipment rather than learn how to shoot. I am a big fan of iron sights first and then glass. Minimize the number of variables you can when learning to shoot: gravity and wind are enough to keep you busy for a lifetime wind, spin, mass, and powder add icing to an already decorated cake. A scope just adds another level of abstraction.

It's kind of like someone new to shooting trap and skeet. Rather than learn good practice, they are lulled into believing that it's the choke that is the problem. If you can shoot a shotgun, chokes matter little.

Big targets need small magnification and small targets need big magnification. You may get a second shot at a big target, such as a deer, or even a running shot (don't often recommend). Thus, a fixed 4x scope is what many seasoned deer hunters use.

I have often told people that you know you're a deer hunter when you turn you 3-9x40mm scope back down to 4x magnification and keep it there.

Small vermin targets - you get one shot and they are gone. You will need bigger magnification here. The first shot means everything.

My vermin rifle is the Rem 700 SPS. I have Burris Zee rings and a Burris Fullfield II 6.5-20X50 scope. I have to check what height the rings are. Whatever they are, they are almost perfect. The bell is just off of the barrel.

Is the Rem cheaper than the 1500 or are they close in price?

ormondprop

http://www.islandsports.ie/rifles.html
they have tikka lites for 750 which is a bargain and would be a great gun or if you want to spent more you could go for this deal
http://www.sportsden.ie/guns/gun-showroom/tikka-t3-tactical-223-deal.html

optics wise spend as much as you possibly can and go for good glass not extra gimmicks, i have a hawke nite eye 6.5-20x50 with an illuminated reticle and its crap, the glass is bad so you need all the magnification to be able to see your target but the more you zoom in the worse the image gets, and the glass is so fussy you spend so much time playing with the adjustable objective and magnification and illumination before you take a shot the fox has already left, i've since splashed out on a schmidt and bender 4-16x50, less magnification, no illuminated reticle but a way better scope, although it is about 5 times the price of the hawke

if i were you i'd buy a cheap second rifle and then blow all the rest of your money on a scope, schmidt and bender, zeiss, swarovski, leupold, any of the top makes

dev110

FISMA wrote: »

Is the Rem cheaper than the 1500 or are they close in price?

I'm not sure as I can't remember how much the howa was because I was looking at them about six months ago but my local shop was pissing me around saying he would have them in two weeks so went back then and it was the same story so I went off the idea of changing.

I agree completely about all the little things which can get in the way of learning to shoot properly such as messing with a scope. I started shooting when I was 15 with my dads shotgun then he got a cz lux .22lr with only iron sights then I got money together and put a 3-9x40 on it. After that when I was 16 dad traded in his rifle against my 1st shotgun and about six months after that I bought a cz style in .22lr with a hawke endurance 3-9x40 and I'm now looking to get into something bigger. I love pushing a rifle as far as it can go and see what I'm able get out of it.

dev110

ormondprop wrote: »

http://www.islandsports.ie/rifles.html
they have tikka lites for 750 which is a bargain and would be a great gun or if you want to spent more you could go for this deal

Thats a really good deal but I would want to trade my .22lr in against a new .223.

I was just wondering there would the hawke endurance 3-9x40 be ok to but on a .223 until I got more money together and get a good scope?

Glensman

dev110 wrote: »

Thats a really good deal but I would want to trade my .22lr in against a new .223.

I was just wondering there would the hawke endurance 3-9x40 be ok to but on a .223 until I got more money together and get a good scope?

My shooting partner has a CZ style with that scope.

Would it be any good on a .223? Prob not. They aren't any good in low light, or under the lamp really... I don't know if it would be any good even with the relatively mild recoil of a .223.

ormondprop

it would get you by for a while i'd say but maybe you'd be better off saving up for another while and trade your cz and scope for a .223 + a good quality scope, what is your budget at the moment

dev110

What make of scope would you recommend? I would want to get a good scope straight off and not have to worry about changing later on. Something like a 4-16x50 or like you were saying in one of your previous posts a 6-18x50

What would be a price of a good scope? I don't want to spend as much as the rifle on a scope but something that would be good for foxing in day or night etc

dev110

My budget isn't great yet but I'll be working all Christmas and will hope to have enough by mid Jan.

I would be looking at spending around €300-€400 with my rifle and about the same on a scope.
It will mean a few easy weeks in college after Christmas thats for sure

ormondprop

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056100399
this is a great price if its in good condition and then ring a few dealers for a good secondhand scope and you might pick up a 8x56 schmidt or zeiss which would be good and will hold its value fairly well if you want to sell it off for something like a 3-12, 4-16 or 6-20 when you can afford it
paul o halloran in drangan and sean in stakelums in thurles usually have a few nice second hand scopes

Glensman

I bought a second hand Leupold VX-III 6.5-20x40 for around the money you're talking about. You want to be on Ebay watching now to see what prices scopes make and then come Jan you'll be able to spot the bargains.

If you type in 'rifle scopes' and hit 'used' on the left, you'll see a selection of scopes.

The only scope I every bought new (a Bushnell Buckhorn) was a piece of crap. Every other scope was second hand and thankfully, very good.

MarkD.

ormondprop wrote: »

http://www.islandsports.ie/rifles.html
they have tikka lites for 750 which is a bargain and would be a great gun or if you want to spent more you could go for this deal
http://www.sportsden.ie/guns/gun-showroom/tikka-t3-tactical-223-deal.html

If a person does a competency course, has good reason and has permission by farmers to control ermin is there hope of getting a .223 as there first rifle?

ormondprop

MarkD. wrote: »

If a person does a competency course, has good reason and has permission by farmers to control ermin is there hope of getting a .223 as there first rifle?

i've heard of people getting centrefires as their first firearms but i reckon it depends on your super, the op already has a rifle so should have no trouble upgrading

MarkD.

ormondprop wrote: »

i've heard of people getting centrefires as their first firearms but i reckon it depends on your super, the op already has a rifle so should have no trouble upgrading

Can be like a lot of things in Ireland, luck of the draw. Thanks for the reply

dev110

I'm not to sure about a .204 as I have heard mixed stories about them. Some say the barrel goes quicker than other rifles, some say that they are good in the wind and others say they're not. Also saw a thread on here today I think from the start of this year from a user Kielan or something like that saying he had one and changed to a .223 and wouldn't go back and would choose a .22 hornet over it also.

This will be my new project. Maybe if I see a good scope I should buy it and then theres no going back this time

FISMA

Dev,
Look around both here and abroad for people selling the 700 and you will notice that a lot of them have Burris Fullfield II scopes mounted. I think you should look at them as they are in my practice, the most scope per euro.

As stated above by the lads, the Schmidts and Swaro's are the best scopes if you have the money. I think Marine Corp snipers use Schmidt & Benders. That tells you just how good they are.

If you can afford that level of scope, fair play.

The next level as I see it is the Leupold. Again, a great scope. If a deal presents itself, take it. The Vari-X II's are spot on.

At the lower level, the cheapest scope that is still good are the Redfield scopes. I am not sure who makes them these days, may even be Leupold. But the one I have that is years/decades old is still a great scope.

However, on all my rifles are Burris Fullfield II scopes. I put them around the same performance level as the Leupold, with a slight advantage going to Leupold and a large advantage to Burris in price. I personally, cannot look through a Leupold and justify spending the extra dosh.

Looking through glass such as Leica, Swaro, or S&B demonstrates better optics. However, optics is a tricky game. Again, if you double what you spend, you are not going to get twice the scope.

So...
If you are into deer hunting your general purpose scope is a 3-9 magnification with a 40mm bell.

For small varmints, I like the 6.5-20 mag with a 50mm bell.

Here's my choice for your needs.
http://www.opticsplanet.net/burris-65-20x50mm-fullfield-ii-rifle-scope.html

The above has the mil-dot reticle, nice if you intend to lead out a moving target. I like the ballistic plex reticle.

I think I saw the 6.5-20x50mm with the ballistic plex reticle last week for $350. Depressing price for those this side of the pond:-(

The 4.5-12x42mm is a happy medium all around scope.

The Burris quality, glass, and workmanship just cannot be beat for the price. You are not buying a cheap scope with Burris, just one that is inexpensive.

<mod snip>

ormondprop

a friend of my fathers who does a serious amount of lamping rebarrelled his .223 sako 75 to a .204 and loves it, a .204 will be my next rifle, anyone i talked to who has one or used one said they're flatter and buck the wind better than a .223, i remember bunnyshooter saying before that it had less wind drift than his swift aswell, for hunting purposes it would take years to burn out a barrell even if you fire 400 shots a year it would still probably take over 10 years to notice a differance in accuracy, the one advantage a .223 has over it is cheap ammo for plinking or target practice but for hunting you'd probably be better off with premium ammo which is gonna be about the same price anyway, are you definately trading the .22? i dont think i will ever not have a rimfire, i love the .22 and is by far the most used gun i have, would you consider having both a .22 and a .223

dev110

Fisma,

That is a lovely scope and think it would work very nicely on a .223 and is within what I am looking to spend. I can't wait till I get a .223 now. I think I will start looking around and see what trade in prices I can get and see what they are looking for a remmy 700 sps.

Ormondprop,

Being a college student there wouldn't be a hope of me affording a .223 straight off as much as I would love to keep my .22lr but it has served its purpose and taught me all I no about rifles to a small degree and I think its now time to move up as I'm looking for more from it which it can't give

Cass

Don't know if i have permission to post in the Glensman and FISMA thread, but i'm going to chance it.:D:p

The better part of the posts above contain some good advice and should be heeded, although there are a few things i would suggest myself.

Firstly, Optics. Do not compromise on a scope. You mention that you would not like to have to pay as much for the scope as the rifle, well my opinion would be to pay as much IF NOT MORE for the scope than the rifle. Now i know with money being tight for everyone at the moment that is much easier said than done. A good scope will see you out the life of the rifle and beyond. The last thing you want is to buy a cheap scope and head out then realise you cannot see because of clarity issues, poor light, etc or worse again that it looses it's zero after each shot.

Secondly, do not be lead astray by one particular brand over another. You will be advised to buy Remington, Tikka, CZ, Steyr, Savage, etc, etc but generally by people that own them. Now thats not a criticism, but owners of a particular brand sometimes can be blind to the faults of that brand. DO NOT buy based solely on advice until you have gone out and at least picked up the brands being recommended. In my case i bought a CZ Kevlar over a Tikka because i liked the stock and feel of the CZ over the Tikka, even though technically the Tikka is the better rifle. Thing is i have to pay for and live with the rifle so i might as well be happy with my purchase.

Lastly and to tie in with the above point get out and get looking. Try as many different dealers as possible for both trade in value and stock they have. You would be surprised as to how many lads went out looking for a particular type or brand then found a "gem" and it was not what they had in mind when they went looking. The feel of a rifle will dictate whether its for you or not. I know price is always foremost, but i think it was mentioned already, if you cannot find something thats screams its for you, maybe you would be better off waiting for a month or so and getting something thats right rather than trying to "upgrade" 4 to 6 months later for the one you should have gone for first.

Remember buy once and buy right.

FISMA wrote:

Concisely: the benefits of the Tikkas and Sakos over the 700 and 1500 are measurable. However, when hunting in real life, off of sticks, no bench, no rest, freehand, or with a sling, the shot is more about the shooter than the rifle. Until you can drive tacks with the 1500 or 700, think twice about the Tikkas or Sakos.

Could you explain this to me in more detail because i think i'm either getting the point wrong or just not understanding it. You are saying that the Tikka and Sako are more accurate of the bench than the Remington off the bench, but in the field a less accurate Remington is better. Surely if the Tikka and Sako are more accurate of a bench than a Remington of a bench then it stands to reason they are more accurate of sticks, knee, post, whatever.


Also the Remmy SPS comes in new at €900+. The Tikka T3 Varmint comes in at €1050. For the money i know which one i'd be taking. The Tikka. Better action, better barrel, more accurate, and most importantly no need to tweak it as you would/might have to to get a Remmy up to the standard of a Tikka.

ormondprop

remmy sps's are around the same price as a tikka t3 lite and the tikka is meant to be a lot better, the stocks on the sps are meant to cause accuracy problems and the triggers are very heavy, for your money a tikka or cz would be a good choice, remmys are great if you go for the likes of a vssf II but the cheaper models like the sps need a couple of hundred for a stock trigger and even barrell, as they can be very poor out of the box, although saying that you could be lucky and get a good one

dev110

ezridax wrote: »

Don't know if i have permission to post in the Glensman and FISMA thread, but i'm going to chance it.:D:p

Don't worry you won't lose an arm anyway

So what your saying is I should keep an open mind and see what the dealers have in stock and what deals they will do.

Can I just ask how do you find the cz?
How accurate is it?

Also in Duffy's in Galway a remmy 700 sps is €795 and a cz synthetic is €830

ormondprop

the prices on duffys website hasnt been updated in a long time so if you go into a dealer with a handful of cash you will pick up a rifle for less than that site says, with your budget i'd go for a tikka t3 with something like a burris or nikon scope on it

dev110

ormondprop wrote: »

remmy sps's are around the same price as a tikka t3 lite and the tikka is meant to be a lot better, the stocks on the sps are meant to cause accuracy problems and the triggers are very heavy, for your money a tikka or cz would be a good choice, remmys are great if you go for the likes of a vssf II but the cheaper models like the sps need a couple of hundred for a stock trigger and even barrell, as they can be very poor out of the box, although saying that you could be lucky and get a good one

:eek: I didn't know that the sps would have accuracy problems. I don't want to be spending more money trying to sort out problems. I want a good rifle that will straight straight out of the box. Would a cz be a better option?

dev110

O really, I call in on my way home from college this week and I'll see what they have. If tikka are within my price range I could see myself going for one as I've heard good things about them. I'll see what they have in scopes just to see the differences between Ireland and England

ormondprop

www.airgunbbs.com is a very good place to keep an eye on for 2nd hand scopes, the site isn't working at the moment though as they are updating it

FISMA

ezridax wrote: »

Don't know if i have permission to post in the Glensman and FISMA thread, but i'm going to chance it.

Permission? It is my great pleasure!

Dev - Ez gives excellent advice. EZ's advice is worthy of a it's own forum, if not, it's own site/publication.

I have found myself searching his posts on more than one occasion: well thought out and unbiased. Please keep up the good work.

ezridax wrote: »

Could you explain this to me in more detail because i think i'm either getting the point wrong or just not understanding it. You are saying that the Tikka and Sako are more accurate of the bench than the Remington off the bench, but in the field a less accurate Remington is better. Surely if the Tikka and Sako are more accurate of a bench than a Remington of a bench then it stands to reason they are more accurate of sticks, knee, post, whatever.

True, that does stand to reason.

The point I was trying to get across was that the advantage a rifle shows while sitting on a bench, in a vice/rest, is usually not replicated in field shooting - given the constraints of the setup from which the shot is taken.

The variance inherent in a setup that is likely to be used in the field: off of sticks, slinged, freehand, off of tree/branch, off the knee, or whatever will cause more inaccuracy to enter than those accuracies witnessed on a bench.

Still wordy, but does that make sense?

ezridax wrote: »

Also the Remmy SPS comes in new at €900+. The Tikka T3 Varmint comes in at €1050. For the money i know which one i'd be taking. The Tikka. Better action, better barrel, more accurate, and most importantly no need to tweak it as you would/might have to to get a Remmy up to the standard of a Tikka.

€1050 - that's a depressing price for a rifle that State side goes for less than $600. Taxes, taxes, taxes.

Cass

dev110 wrote: »

Don't worry you won't lose an arm anyway

Here's hoping. :cool:

So what your saying is I should keep an open mind and see what the dealers have in stock and what deals they will do.

Exactly. I bought my CZ in February and have about 90 rounds gone through it. Just no real time for getting out. Then i was out with a friend helping him pick out a deer rifle when i seen a beautiful .223 with custom stock, barrel, etc that a lad traded. Got me thinking, and now i trading my CZ and going to try and build an FTR in .223cal. My point is i had no intention of doing this and i bought the CZ with a specific reason. Now thats all changed because of a rifle i found without actually looking for it.

Can I just ask how do you find the cz?
How accurate is it?

The CZ i have is the one with the Kevlar (H&S) stock. Its a custom stock on a factory rifle, but it comes stansdard like that. It also has a fully floated barrel and aluminium bedding block giving stability and improved accuarcy. There are 5 models in the CZ in .223 cal. There is the standard model, Lux model, Synthetic model, Laminate model and lastly the H&S (Kevlar) model. They go from about €600 new up to €1400, depending on where you buy obviously. They come with a usual 1:12 twist rate, but the upper model such as the Kevlar comes with a faster 1:9 twist meaning she will shoot the heavier bullets well giving longer distances and better killing power.

However i'm not trying to tell you to buy a CZ. They are a cracking rifle, but there are better for the same money and as said the Tikka for me beats every other rifle simply for value for money. Yes the stock is synthetic and boy do you know it, but thats why they are so cheap, but lets face it your not firing the stock at them and the Tikka with its 1:9 twist is well able for the heavier round like the CZ meaning 300+ yard shots are a piece of p**s (with practise obviously).

FISMA

Dev,
I hope you're not going to sell the 22? You probably will not get the price of a pint for it. Just get a collection going. You have to start somewhere.

I love my 22. Aside from the 12ga, it is one of the most versatile guns out there.

Cass

FISMA wrote: »

Still wordy, but does that make sense?

I think i'm getting it. Basically if a €2000 setup can shoot one hole groups at 200 yards from a bench and rest, but a €1000 setup can shoot 3/4" groups at 200yds why pay the extra €1000. Plus bench/range shooting conditions are in no way simialr to field shooting.

Well if i have that right then i agree with you. If i have it wrong, then take pity.

€1050 - that's a depressing price for a rifle that State side goes for less than $600. Taxes, taxes, taxes.

Heartbreaking isn't it?

sikastag

Spend once. Spend Wisely. Buy a Tikka.:D Does the job outright from the start. No tweaking. No slobbering. No extra money. Unless the idea of uprgrading/customisation/paying over the odds for accuracy over a prolonged period of time appeals to you. Good prices to be had at the moment so it is a good oppurtunity to stretch the budget, and who knows, you may not have to stretch as far as you think! Also .223 aint the be all and end all. Plenty of capable and accurate rounds out there to choose from (including .223). Youre in a great position of being able to pick and choose so take your time.

patsat

IMO I'd try and get a tikka you won't be sorry! For me they would be my first choice of what has been mentioned if I wanted a rifle that would shoot straight from out of the box and didn't want to spend money improving it.

I have no experience with sakos so I won't comment on them but I have plenty of exp with the others.. And I own a cz 550 and a 700 sps stainless so I'm by no means bias towards the tikka! I also just sold a cz 527 in .223!


Although the tikka would be the best option for the money a cz 527 in .223 can be picked up for half nothing and it would not disappoint you.. Just have a look around to see what bargains are out there but I'd try and stick to a cz or tikka if it's an out of the box rifle your looking for!

Tackleberrywho

If Op wants a cheap .223, I know of a Sabatti threaded for a mod.

The owner is in Canada, but the rifle is in a local RFD for sale.
€550 I think he wants for it, it was only used for 6 months. Owner has Emigrated.

It's very clean rifle, in almost new condition.
It's quite accurate for a sporting rifle.

If you want a fox rifle I would not go without a mod on board.

The Big Fella

Is cz a bad word lads?:D You dont seem to be mentioning the cz527 much. As Im gona buy one chambered in .223 in the next few weeks, Im just wondering why ye dont highly reccomend it?

monte

buy the cz great out of the box gun no need for any upgrades have 1 myself

patsat

The Big Fella wrote: »

Is cz a bad word lads?:D You dont seem to be mentioning the cz527 much. As Im gona buy one chambered in .223 in the next few weeks, Im just wondering why ye dont highly reccomend it?

I had one myself they are a great gun just very under-rated! No need to worry

clivej

The Big Fella wrote: »

Is cz a bad word lads?:D You dont seem to be mentioning the cz527 much. As Im gona buy one chambered in .223 in the next few weeks, Im just wondering why ye dont highly reccomend it?

monte wrote: »

buy the cz great out of the box gun no need for any upgrades have 1 myself

Just a couple of photo's of my CZ varmint in 223 with the H&S kevlar stock. It will shoot sub 30mm @300m and 10 shot one hole groups, a big hole mind, with Federal 55gr FB HP @€;13x20.

If ezridax has traded his CZ varmint then I would be looking to find it quick if I was you.

Cass

The Big Fella wrote: »

Is cz a bad word lads?:D You dont seem to be mentioning the cz527 much. As Im gona buy one chambered in .223 in the next few weeks, Im just wondering why ye dont highly reccomend it?

I would and do recommend them highly as posted above ...............

The CZ i have is the one with the Kevlar (H&S) stock. Its a custom stock on a factory rifle, but it comes stansdard like that. It also has a fully floated barrel and aluminium bedding block giving stability and improved accuarcy. There are 5 models in the CZ in .223 cal. There is the standard model, Lux model, Synthetic model, Laminate model and lastly the H&S (Kevlar) model. They go from about €600 new up to €1400, depending on where you buy obviously. They come with a usual 1:12 twist rate, but the upper model such as the Kevlar comes with a faster 1:9 twist meaning she will shoot the heavier bullets well giving longer distances and better killing power.

The only reason the Tikka gets a vote above the CZ in my book is price. I have the same as clivej and they truely are a tack driver. Only thing is they are a little dearer than the Kevlar model of CZ and the OP is looking for top quality for as little money (like anyone else would be).

I wouldn't use the situation or thread to try and sell me CZ to him would look somewhat biased and not what this forum/thread is about.

clivej wrote:

If ezridax has traded his CZ varmint then I would be looking to find it quick if I was you

Its in the for sale wanted section, but i'm not selling because its letting me down. At the end of the day i'm a target shooter. I tried buying the best for hunting and the CZ ticked all the bixes for me. As said i prefered the feel, grip, look of the CZ over the Tikkaso i bought it. Problem is the range demands more of my time than i care to admit so my hunting is almost non-existant. Hence the reason i'm selling it, to finance my (proposed) new target rifle build.