Hey
I have seen 2 .22 rifles I am interested in, the Savage MKII FSS or the Mossberg 802 Plinkster. Which one will be better and why? I'm planning on target shooting, plinking and possibly small game shooting and will these rifles be alright for an adult (I'm not used to the notation and stuff used so I'm not sure). This will be my first rifle.
I feel the Savage to be the better rifle, and the better buy. The Plinkster is Brazilian-made, and quality has been spotty. Some have good luck with it, some bad. The Savage has a consistently better reputation.
__________________ If you actually passed third grade English, let it show!
Adult Literacy is your friend.
There's quite a bit to consider here...let's start with ammo capacity.
Savage - 5 +1 in the chamber
Mossberg - 10 +1 in the chamber
Barrels
In my opinion, Savage makes a far better barrel, BUT they both are free-floating and both have a 1:16" RH twist which is good for accuracy.
Sights - The Mossberg comes with standard iron sights, whereas the Savage has a fiber-optic front sight for low light situations. (if you're not going to use a scope)
Trigger - The Savage has the "Accutrigger" system. I have a Savage in .17HMR with this trigger and I love it. It's adjustable (if I remember right) from 2lbs. to 7lbs. pull. Helps when it comes to having a nice crisp trigger pull that is nececssary for tight groups.
Cost (not sure what currency you're using in Australia) - The Savage is $199-$242 depending on where you buy.
The Mossberg starts @ $138 (from Mossberg)...you can get it with a 4x scope for $148. (granted, this won't be much of a scope, but still, a scope.)
Now, you just have to weigh out what is important to you, depending on what kind of shooting you're going to do. If ammo capacity and cost is important, the Mossberg has the Savage beat hands down. If it's pin-point accuracy you're looking for, the Savage might be the better choice even though it's a few more $$$ and holds half the ammo.
Not to give you way too much to think about, but have you considered the .17 calibers? They're a hot little round and far more accurate and have a further range. The .17 REM or .17 HMR are great little rounds. Fun to shoot. I have .22's and .17's and when it comes to accuracy and range, I always choose the .17 over the .22.
Good luck in your first gun buying venture, I'm sure it will be the first of many!
__________________
When they come for my guns, I'll give 'em the bullets first!
I'm not really concerned about ammo capacity and the prices are similar in Australia, around $100 AUD difference.
My main concern is accuracy, so i think i will go for the Savage. But this could change because I'm going to apply for my license next week, then have to wait at least a month before it comes, and only then i think i can buy a firearm, then i have 21 day cooling down period which is gonna be a long hard wait....
With regards to ammo, the range near my house only does .22 i think, i will ask about the .17 when i go next week. I also have a big bore range near my house as well, but i want to start of with a small bore first.
With regards to sights, i want to use iron sights, not a scope, unless later i feel the need for a scope. I was wondering what fiber optic sights where and how they compared to standard iron sights.
Thanks for the great advice, it has been very helpful.
I'm not too concerned about clip size, and the pricing is about $AUD100 difference, with the Savage being the most expensive.
I'm mainly going for accuracy, so i think i will go with the Savage. But this might change because I'm going to apply for my license next week and it comes in the mail in at least 28 days.
With regards to caliber, i think the range near my house only does .22 and air rifles. I will ask them when i next go.
I'm planning on using iron sights, so I just have one more question, what are fiber optic sights and how do they compare to iron sights.
I still would like to hear other peoples comments on the 2 rifles.
The fiber-optic sights use a clear colored plastic that gathers light and seems to glow, making them more visible. Great for low-light situations - lousy for precision accuracy. NO target gun wears them.
I really prefer a good aperture sight - the smaller the aperture, the more consistent and accurate it is.
At up to 50 meters, a good aperture sight is as tight shooting as a scope.
Still, neither of these guns is a 'target rifle', so it's a matter of personal preference.
I collect vintage Mossbergs - there is NO 802 plinkster in my gun locker. I don't consider it a true 'Mossberg', and it has nothing to offer that another gun doesn't have.
Carried in the field, it should make a good 'bunny thumper' though - semi-auto, good capacity and very light-weight.
__________________ If you actually passed third grade English, let it show!
Adult Literacy is your friend.
The fiber-optic sights use a clear colored plastic that gathers light and seems to glow, making them more visible. Great for low-light situations - lousy for precision accuracy. NO target gun wears them.
I really prefer a good aperture sight - the smaller the aperture, the more consistent and accurate it is.
At up to 50 meters, a good aperture sight is as tight shooting as a scope.
Still, neither of these guns is a 'target rifle', so it's a matter of personal preference.
I collect vintage Mossbergs - there is NO 502 plinkster in my gun locker. I don't consider it a true 'Mossberg', and it has nothing to offer that another gun doesn't have.
Carried in the field, it should make a good 'bunny thumper' though - semi-auto, good capacity and very light-weight.
OK thanks. I might get a scope mounted on it, will a scope mount be expensive?
EDIT:
Or would it be better to pay a bit more and get a CZ 452 .22LR. I have heard good things about them.
Last edited by Spartigus; 11-10-2007 at 05:44 AM.
Reason: Forgot to mention someting
A scope is no problem. You can get a low-price model from Simmons, Bushnell or other makers. Y'all probably have more Chinese-made choices than we have here.
A simple set of rimfire rings, and you're in business. These rifles are grooved for the standard rimfire rings, so no special mounts are needed.
A decent scope should run under forty bucks (or is it 'Roos' down under?).
__________________ If you actually passed third grade English, let it show!
Adult Literacy is your friend.
Spartigus, a good scope can cost you as much as your gun, if not more. You can get .22 specific scopes which are calibrated for the ballistics of a .22 LR. from BSA. It makes for fast and accurate adjustments at different yardages. I picked up one for my .17 that cost around $70. If you just want a scope that will work, find yourself a cheap tasco and go from there. If you're going to do some serious shooting you might want to upgrade down the road.
It does sound like a .22 is perfect for the range that is near where you live. I wouldn't imagine that they would grumble too much about a .17HMR though. Ya might want to ask them in advance. I prefer the .17HMR over the .22 cause the trajectory is a hell of a lot flatter...which translates to a lot less adjustment for different yardages. @ 100 yards, there is about a 2-3 second travel time for a .22. With the .17HMR it's just under a second. The .22 is going to be considerably less as far as cost, that's for sure. You can plink all day long for $10, whereas the .17 will run you four or five times that. If you're seriously going after accuracy, I would go with the .17 or buy a .22 that you could get a heavier barrel for, trigger kit, bench shooting stock, and upgrade as you go, like the Ruger 10/22. I put a bull barrel on my 10/22, bench rest stock (flat on the bottom of the forend for resting), trigger kit, and titanium extractor claw and I can drive tacks with that thing all day long. At 100 yards, I use a 1" shoot 'n see target, and I can hit it every time, until a wind picks up. LOL. Not so sure you can get all that on a Savage or Mossberg. Just something to chew on for the long run of things.
Mounting the scope itself usually runs about $20-30 for the mounts and the labor should be free if you buy the scope at the same time. At least, that's how it works most of the time here in the states.
Good luck!
__________________
When they come for my guns, I'll give 'em the bullets first!
At 1200fps a .22lr would travel 100yds in 1/3d of a second but it is slowing down so a good estimate would be 1/2 of a sec. .A Chinese scope may work but in glass you get what you pay for.Most Chinese scopes go bad in short order.This wasnt true with the old Jap scopes but today the cheap ones arent clear and dont hold up long and if you have to replace them it costs as much as one scope that is both clear and will hold up. sam.
The Savage is $450 and the CZ452 is around $700+ in Australia. Is the increase in price worth it for the CZ452?
I basically want the gun to be capable of at least 1" groups and shoot consistently. I basically want a fun target shooter to learn about shooting and the occasional hunt possibly.
I would hate to see what our top .22s would cost over there like a Cooper which starts at about$1100.Anyway,if You are going to even come close to MOA with a .22lr you are going to pay dear for a sight system and windguage and ammo will be about $10.for 50 on up.Leftyo is in this line.He can advise on .22s at long range.But I know it aint easy. sam.
I would hate to see what our top .22s would cost over there like a Cooper which starts at about$1100.Anyway,if You are going to even come close to MOA with a .22lr you are going to pay dear for a sight system and windguage and ammo will be about $10.for 50 on up.Leftyo is in this line.He can advise on .22s at long range.But I know it aint easy. sam.
I know ey, but its not so bad if you earn AUD .
What i mean was, is the Savage MKII FSS accurate and consistent enough to shoot in a 1" group.
What i mean was, is the Savage MKII FSS accurate and consistent enough to shoot in a 1" group.
I cant emagine any out of the box .22lr that would shoot MOA at 100yds.I know they wont with less than match ammo.But if it can be done I suppose Savage is as good a bet as any.I dont care for the long mag.for target shooting.Might be okay with high sandbags.I beloeve Mossburg might be too new to take the chance but could be wrong. sam.
I cant emagine any out of the box .22lr that would shoot MOA at 100yds.I know they wont with less than match ammo.But if it can be done I suppose Savage is as good a bet as any.I dont care for the long mag.for target shooting.Might be okay with high sandbags.I beloeve Mossburg might be too new to take the chance but could be wrong. sam.
OK thank you very much. What is MOA?
All I'm after is a reasonably accurate .22, will the savage will be alright?
. 
