Hunting Rifle & Scope setup

[Turbolover]

I'm new to hunting, and all it's aspects... So I was just wondering if someone could help me figure out what I should get. I'm looking to spend under $1,000 for rifle (so far I've looked at the savage 110), and scope (I've looked into Bushnell's banner, and trophy) + scope rings, ect. I will be using this for hunting everything from deer to elk. So I figure a 30-06 is a fairly good caliber, am I correct? I would be very appreciative for any information. As I said I'm very new to this so any, and all info is appreciated. One thing is, I would really like to clarify if having a multi zoom scope effects shot placement? Thank you.

[ArkansasHunter]

Turbolover 1st. allow me to WELCOME you to GUN and GAME feller !!!
The 30-06 will do a job on both critters BUT I've never hunted ELK so Let's see what many of the more knoledgable members say.

When you go to looking for the rifle would you do something for me ?
Would you check out the new Ruger hawkeye boltaction rifles please sir.
I bought the synthectic stock/ matte stainless model in 308 and let me tell you it is bullet hole acurate.
Ruger did an exstensive upgrade to there former boltaction.
Try your best to hold one in your hands, heft it up to your shoulder like your gonna shoot it.
Check out the mauser style action and it comes with scope rings too.
I honestly think after looking at several other fine brands you'll choose the Ruger.

Please let us know what you buy and No I don't own stock in Ruger, I'm just passing on something great to you...A.H


EDIT Ruger is 100% American Made !!!!!

[Turbolover]

Thank you very much, you couldn't suggest a scope for it could you?

[Big Tool]

You definitely are heading in the right direction for a good multiuse setup. 30-06 is a great caliber. I think it is voted the most popular in NA.

Savage makes a good gun, but like AH said I would definitely take a look at the ruger. They are very nice and aren't too expensive either.

I would probably pass on the bushnell. They are Ok, but i think you will be happier in the long run with one of the slightly higher end scopes such as leupold or Nikon.

Good thing about the Ruger is it does come with the rings which will save you some dough.

The multi power will not have any change in the Point of impact. It just gives you the advantage of being able to have better visibility at longer ranges. I usually go with a 3x9 power for hunting purposes.

Good luck and welcome to G&G.

You may also want to take a look at the Pentax Game seeker scopes. They are relatively cheap. "Under 150" and have very clear lenses that are comparable to leupold and Nikon for 1/2 the price. I have them on two different guns and they are excellent for the money.

[ArkansasHunter]

I'm going to let someone else recommend a scope because in the past I bought Tasco World Class scope's.
Which were $50.00 dollar scopes when I bought 2 of them.

When I bought the Ruger rifle I bought a Burris Full Field scope 3X9 40mm it cost less than $220.00.
It's an excellent scope But theres others that cost a lot more. But Burris scopes are tuff and just as good as any out there. No Brag but a Fact !
So lets see what the other members recommend.

By the way in your price range you can buy a nice rifle and a nice scope but when you go to looking at rifles check out the Ruger Hawkeye and they come in many calibers.
If you can stand a little extra recoil then the 300 win mag is what you need.
Stay in touch...A.H

[Ron AKA]

It sounds like you are a down to earth big game hunter. For a scope I would suggest a fixed 4X power, and there is nothing wrong with a Bushnell Banner. If you are standing on your two feet and shooting without a rest, it is very hard to hold anything more than a 4X. Yes you can go with a variable power, but you are still not going to use much more than 4X hand held. For all practical purposes it will not change the point of impact.

I think the Savage guns are very good. I would also suggest you look at the Remington model 700 -- there are many different versions depending on what you want to spend and what you want for a stock. The basic action is the same and very good.

For a cartridge there is nothing wrong with a 30-06. It is fine for the game you intend to hunt. If it was for me, I would go with a 270 as it is a bit lighter in recoil and for all practical purposes can take the same game including the elk. It also shoots a little flatter which makes aiming easier.

Ron

[ArkansasHunter]

The only reason I buy varible power scopes is to crank it up to look at the animal to determine wether or not I want to shoot it.
But before I pull the trigger I put it on 4 power.
If your going to hunt Elk and did buy, say a 300 Win mag I think you should consider a variable power scope because you can shoot a heck of a long ways with a 300 Win mag.
And an Elk might be 300 yards or futher and they can be within feet too.
So a varible power scope comes in handy if just to get a better look at the animal.
A.H

[Asphalt Cowboy]

Savage has come a long way with their quallit over the past number of years. Their new rifles are as well built and accurate as any out of the box rifle made IMHO. But as A.H. said, have a look at the Ruger also. Not just any rifle will feel right for you. How it comes to shoulder, how it points and of course the balance.
As for the scope. With the budget you've set I would suggest you spend as much on the scope as you do the rifle. You just can't beat image clarity and light gathering capability durring that first ten minutes of the first legal shooting hour.

[.280Rem]

For the money you mentioned ($1000), you can get pretty good stuff. My go-to rig would be a Rem 700 topped with a VX-III 2.5-8. That would put you right up to but not quite your limit. Step down to a VX-II in 3-9, and you'll save $100 but not suffer any on the scope. Since you're just starting out, I assume you wont be handloading, so choice of cartridge is still wide open, but somewhat limited too. 30-06 is a fine all around choice for N. America. Along the same lines, but with a little more "umph" the 300WSM would be good. Or for a little less recoil but still good all around use, 270Win or 270WSM. All of those of those will usually have a wide range of factory offerings on shelves just about anywhere you go.

[turner]

I'll suggest a couple of things others have already endorsed; the Ruger Hawkeye in 30/06, .270, or .308. These are all well-known and proven calibers that no deer or elk at out to 300+ yds could ever tell which of them sent them to sleep. Good bullets of 130-150gr for the .270 and 150-180 for the two .30 cals would be a good place to start. The big plus a Hawkeye gives you is a "free" mounting system with Ruger's free integral rings. It's an outstanding system. There are some very fine scopes out there for $200-$300, including Leupold VXI and II, Nikon, Burris Fullfield II, Bushnell Elite 3200, plus others. I'd suggest a 2-7 variable or 3-9 variable, although a straight 4x would also be fine. The best deal in a scope I've seen lately is this one:
Bushnell Elite 4200 3-9x40

The Optic Zone - Detail

Search internet vendors for other or similar models to help in saving some cash. This scope is a GREAT value. Best of luck.

[Phil Lozano]

Personally, I would suggest the best scope you can afford. I would even spend more for a good scope than a rifle. You can only shoot as well as you can see (even when conditions are tough). I like Leupold and Kahles (heard Nikon's are nice, however, I am boycotting them, from a problem they did not resolve).

As far as cartridges go, the 30 06' is a bit on the light side for all N.A. game.

If only owning 1 rifle, I would look at a 338 Win. Mag. first, but would not go lower than a 300 Mag. I have a 300 Win. Mag. and shoot 200 grain bullets out of it for larger game. More powerful than an 06' and shoots much flatter. Many cartridges will kill Elk, even some not suitable to hunt Elk with.
Deer, are different. Deer are not all that tough to kill, so a cartridge like a 25 06', 270, 280 or 7mm would make a great Deer cartridge.

Bottom line, bigger bullets kill better than smaller bullets. There is a thread "If you could pick only 1". Suggest you have a look there and read my post there (if you're interested).

As far as rifles go, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .hummmmmmm. Have not bought a rifle in a long time . . . . . am starting one soon, but not a factory rifle. I would consider a Kimber. Pretty nice rifles. Heard some nice things about CZ's as well.


Best,
Phil
______________________________
Professional Hunter ~ Tanzania
Stay out of sight and down wind

[Hotled]

Turbo,
The Savage 110FP is one of the most accurate guns made right now. I personaly own 2 of them in the 110FP model.
It is a 1 holer at 100y no problem and 1/2 moa if I'm not even trying with my 25-06 and the 300 mag isn't far behind at all.
I'm not 100% sure if the 110GXP3 will be quite as accurate at the 110FP because the FP uses a heavy barrel but it will still be the best gun for the money and better than most extremely expensive rifles.

[andrew cochran]

Try a Ruger Hawkeye. They are nice rifles and I want one but that will unfortunaly be in the futer.

[oldjarhead]

I recommend the Savage, I also own two and find them to be very accurate out-of-the-box, well made, and Savage has great customer service.
I have several friends who own Ruger and Savage, to a man they prefer the Savage over Ruger. Many of them complain the Ruger is not as accurate as the Savage. I have, also, had a couple dealers tell me that Ruger accuracy is less than par.
Remington is a good choice but more spendy than Savage.
30/06 or .308 Win will serve your hunting purpose and the ballistics are quite similar.
For scopes, I recommend you check out Mueller, good quality at a reasonable price, and a lifetime warranty.
Good luck and good hunting.

[SwedeSteve]

I agree with bumping up to 300WM if you're going after elk in open country.

[nathangdad]

The .30-06 is the greatest all around hunting caliber in America.
It is quite capable of handling all game on the North American continent.
Over the counter ammunition can be had in a wide variety of bullet weights and designs to accomodate your specific hunting situation.

Yes - although advertising will not say this it is true that cranking the power up or down on a variable power scope will cause the crosshairs to
"wander" thus affecting shot placement. Some scopes will do it less than others but in truth there is no level of manufacturing that eliminates this
situation. So, it is in your best interest to have your scope sighted in for the ammo you are firing and the power you wish to use on the hunt.

Take time to practice at the range with the ammo you will use and the power setting you plan for your hunt. Study the published trajectory
of the ammo you plan to use and purchase a rangefinder to assist in determining the distance to your target as it is difficult for most people to estimate true distance in a hunting scenario.

Common sense planning and practice will do a great deal to make your
hunt successful.

[Turbolover]

It seems like quite a few people like the Ruger Hawkeye (how much are the mounting system, and integral rings worth), though I hear a lot of people commenting on how accurate the savage is. How is the Rugers accuracy compared to the Savage? I weigh about 140 pounds (I'll probably grow more since I'm 15 though), so I'm not sure if I could handle a 300 magnum... I'll probably just stick with the 30-06. It seems like the Burris Full Field scope 3X9 40mm, or some sort of 4x scope would be best. I'd like to hear some more people talk about the zoom effecting the shot placement, because I've only hear two or three, and they were split between it not changing, and it changing... Also were would be the best place to try out some rifles, and scope to see how they work?

Also I want to thank everyone that has contributed, your info has been very helpful in my decision in what would work best for me.

[turner]

Originally Posted by Turbolover

It seems like quite a few people like the Ruger Hawkeye (how much are the mounting system, and integral rings worth), though I hear a lot of people commenting on how accurate the savage is. How is the Rugers accuracy compared to the Savage? I weigh about 140 pounds (I'll probably grow more since I'm 15 though), so I'm not sure if I could handle a 300 magnum... I'll probably just stick with the 30-06. It seems like the Burris Full Field scope 3X9 40mm, or some sort of 4x scope would be best. I'd like to hear some more people talk about the zoom effecting the shot placement, because I've only hear two or three, and they were split between it not changing, and it changing... Also were would be the best place to try out some rifles, and scope to see how they work?

Also I want to thank everyone that has contributed, your info has been very helpful in my decision in what would work best for me.

Hello again, I'm willing to be up-front and say that in a typical sporting rifle, you'd get the "luck of the draw" as to whether a Ruger or Savage was more accurate. Most people who speak badly about Rugers have not owned one made in the last 1-5 yrs. Your choice of the Burris Fullfield II is a fine one...I own one 3-9 myself, and another in 2-7x35, both purchased in the last 6 months and VERY good scopes. They are brighter than a like sized Leupold VXI, in my opinion. I was surprised to see how many recommended the .300mag and ABOVE to a new hunter only considering game up to the size of elk. Here I go... "Shame on you!" This fella has NO NEED for a .300 mag or .338 as a NEW hunter ONLY hunting game UP TO elk, period. The calibers mentioned from '06 and down to 25/06 make lots more sense, period. Finally, the integral ring system offered by Ruger saves $50-$100 over what the Savage, or like, would need in addition, to even approach the Ruger system. The Burris scope, again is a good one(I like both of mine), but I must also say the Leupold VXII and Bushnell Elites are on the same level, with the 4200 head and shoulders above the others. best of luck to you, and enjoy the outdoors as much as the thought of "Trophies"!

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by turner

I was surprised to see how many recommended the .300mag and ABOVE to a new hunter only considering game up to the size of elk. Here I go... "Shame on you!" This fella has NO NEED for a .300 mag or .338 as a NEW hunter

I mentioned I would look at a 338. Only because it is so far superior to a 30 '06, it is not even worth debating.

RE: A first time hunter;

There are exceptions to every rule, I know a woman who's fist rifle was a 300 Win. Mag.. She is 4' 11 1/4" and 109 pounds. She shot a 7mm Mag. once, left the range and the next weekend arrived with a 300 Winnie.

Light bullets out of a 300 Mag. do not recoil much, unlike the 220 grain loads I Max'ed out in her rifle for her Black Bear hunt.

A 9 , 9 1/2 lb. rifle in 300 Mag. is no problem to manage at the range nor afield.

Best,

[samuel]

I've seen smaller people that handled bigger guns fine and have seen big ones complain about what I considered light recoil guns.There are a lot of ways to tame recoil nowadays.But I do believe it should be considered. sam.