https://www.americanrifleman.o...er&utm_campaign=0119

Been looking at the RPR for a little bit, not set on what caliber. I'd like to be able to shoot long distance, but that said, there's not many places around me to shoot past 200 yards so I'd have to travel. Thoughts, comments, opinions?

quote:

Originally posted by Les007:
Been looking at the RPR for a little bit, not set on what caliber. I'd like to be able to shoot long distance, but that said, there's not many places around me to shoot past 200 yards so I'd have to travel. Thoughts, comments, opinions?

So I'm guessing you really have not yet shot at longer distances. If so, you need to immediately eliminate the .338 LM cartridge from you list. This is a rifle that comes into its own at 1,000 yards. Realistically it's a one-mile cartridge with the right bullet, gun, and shooter. Could easily go to 2,000 yards, maybe even 2,500 yards in thin air. This is not where you start. And factory ammo cost about $5 per round, for anything accurate for long distance shooting. Oh yeah, and there's lots of recoil in a 338LM -- regardless of what the webz keyboard snipers say.

Don't look at magnum calibers. Ixnay 300 Win Mag, 7mm Remy Mag, 300 PRC, 300 Norma Mag. No need to even look at long-action calibers -- 30-06, 270, 25-06, etc.

Stay with standard-length action calibers, with the old workhorse being 308 Win. In thin air and minimal wind, with the right ammo/gun/shooter, 1000 yards isn't too bad with a 308. But 800 yards is likely a more reasonable accuracy limit. Lots of ammo choices, both good match ammo and cheapo plinking crap.

Better choices for those us who rely on factory ammo is 6.5 Creedmoor, 6 Creemoor, and to a lesser extent 260 Remy. These cartridges are much better than 308 for target shooting. They flight flatter, are less deflected by wind, have less recoil, and are accurate to noticeably longer distances. No issues with 1000 yards, and 1200-1300 yards is quite do-able for the right ammo/rifle/shooter.

There's nothing wrong with a good 223 Remy bolt action. Very low recoil, boat loads of ammo choices, 600 yard targets quite reasonable. I've shot to 700 yards with good accuracy in an AR-15. I'm building a precision 223 rifle for training purposes -- with expectations that it could be an 800 yard rifle.

Highly recommend 6mm CM, which the RPR is chambered in. 6.5 CM would be my next choice, then 308. All have good affordable factory ammo available, and all are easy/cheap to relaod.

Every young sniper stud I know that had to have the.338 Lapua did so for the ability to shoot 1 mile plus. Understand, once owned and the novelty wears off, the credit card company wants the money ya spent to feed the beast. I shot some, had the thrill of hitting stuff beyond any practical range...and left knowing it was for big pocket books. Kinda in the same vein as the .50, a thrill to shoot it. These are middle of no where rifles.

I wasn't necessarily looking at the .338 Lapua, but more the RPR platform in general. The 308 would definitely work. Initially I would not be reloading. I did also consider the Remington 700 in 308, much cheaper too.

.308 is a good round to start with. Plenty of good factory ammo to choose from, save your brass in case you do decide to start reloading.
I'd take the Ruger RPR over anything Remington is making these days. In that price point +/- $1K, Tikka, Bergara, Winchester, etc. have several solid choices.

Of all the guns I’m glad I never bought, a rifle in 338 LM is a conspicuous member of the list.

I suppose my experience was similar to others’. Not much after I got my first “real” precision rifle (a Sako TRG-22 in 308 Winchester), I started thinking that I needed something more suited for really long ranges. Fortunately, however, I did have enough sense to quickly realize that I had no access to ranges where such a cartridge offered any advantages over the rifle I had. That forced me to go back to the TRG and really start learning about long range shooting.

After acquiring another 308 more suited for professional use and becoming more proficient at the art of the precision rifle, the belief that I still needed something more powerful bit me again and I bought a 300 Winchester Magnum. That experience demonstrated how fortunate I had been to not buy a 338. Whether the rifle, my skill with a harder-recoiling gun, or both were responsible for the mediocre results I got with the 300 WM I don’t know, but I could only imagine what I’d have felt like if it had been a 338 rather than a more easily-sold 300.

We’re fortunate to live in an age when truly remarkable rifles, cartridges, and sights are readily available for the long range shooter. Much of that progress is currently being made around what were once called the “medium bores,” at or above .24 caliber and below .30. They are accurate enough and pleasant enough to shoot that they are excellent learning aids. They may not teach us all there is to know about shooting a 338 LM beyond 1000 yards, but they will teach us a lot, and for much less money and pain. And if we must travel to begin to appreciate the characteristics of a particular rifle, the sad fact for most of us is that we won’t travel and shoot as much as we should. A 200 yard range doesn’t offer some of the challenges of longer distances, but it will nevertheless demand learning some vital fundamentals.

All good points, especially having to travel to shoot. Keeping the brass for reloading later also crossed my mind. Thanks to everyone for their input.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:


After acquiring another 308 more suited for professional use and becoming more proficient at the art of the precision rifle, the belief that I still needed something more powerful bit me again and I bought a 300 Winchester Magnum. That experience demonstrated how fortunate I had been to not buy a 338. Whether the rifle, my skill with a harder-recoiling gun, or both were responsible for the mediocre results I got with the 300 WM I don’t know, but I could only imagine what I’d have felt like if it had been a 338 rather than a more easily-sold 300.

We’re fortunate to live in an age when truly remarkable rifles, cartridges, and sights are readily available for the long range shooter. Much of that progress is currently being made around what were once called the “medium bores,” at or above .24 caliber and below .30. They are accurate enough and pleasant enough to shoot that they are excellent learning aids. They may not teach us all there is to know about shooting a 338 LM beyond 1000 yards, but they will teach us a lot, and for much less money and pain. And if we must travel to begin to appreciate the characteristics of a particular rifle, the sad fact for most of us is that we won’t travel and shoot as much as we should. A 200 yard range doesn’t offer some of the challenges of longer distances, but it will nevertheless demand learning some vital fundamentals.

Guessing the caliber played more of a role then the rifle Simple fact. Lower recoiling, lower concussion calibers are easier to shoot period.

I have a place to shoot a big gun within a reasonable drive on a private ranch, steel out to 2650yds. I shoot there twice a month now. I've toyed with building a big rifle. Then the component cost sinks in, cost per shot....$$$$$$ If I did it, certainly would not be a 338LM, there's better option available today. Two good friends are just about done building a 338LM Ackley Improved (250-300fps faster then a 338LM) and 375 Cheytac, good to have friends with these big boomers!

quote:

Originally posted by offgrid:
Simple fact. Lower recoiling, lower concussion calibers are easier to shoot period.

Exactly.
What may seem like relatively minor recoil differences between calibers can result in noticeable differences in ability to shoot similar rifles with a given accuracy.

For example, it's noticeably easier for me to shoot my 6.5 Creedmoor than my 308 (aka "3-oh-hate" in offgrid-speak). It's easier for me to shoot offgrid's 6mm bore rifles than my 6.5 Creedmoor.

quote:

Originally posted by offgrid:
Simple fact.

I agree that it was probably the cartridge.
However, with its aftermarket chassis it was a heavy gun, and coupled with muzzle brake or suppressor the felt recoil wasn’t that bad. I kept thinking, “Come on; you can do this!” but nope—never could. It’s more soothing to the ego, though, to blame the gun at least a little.

My first thought when you mentioned the 338 Lapua was "Ho Boy, lots of Recoil to deal with". Like many others my choice for a caliber in this rifle would be the 6.5 Creedmore.

BTW, one reason for the appeal of the 6.5 is that I should be a rather easy caliber to hand load and the component cost would be much lower. To be a bit blunt it doesn't matter what you are shooting in terms of commercial precision ammo, they will all be distinctly more expensive than typical "range loads" With hand loads this isn't the case, sort your cases by volume, bullets by weight, and use a high quality bullet and you can make your own Precision ammo at prices lower that the typical budget commercial ammo.

Second bit in favor of the 6.5 Creedmore is the recoil will likely be a near match to it's parent case 308W which is very easy on the shoulder when shot from a rest.

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:
My first thought when you mentioned the 338 Lapua was "Ho Boy, lots of Recoil to deal with". Like many others my choice for a caliber in this rifle would be the 6.5 Creedmore.

BTW, one reason for the appeal of the 6.5 is that I should be a rather easy caliber to hand load and the component cost would be much lower. To be a bit blunt it doesn't matter what you are shooting in terms of commercial precision ammo, they will all be distinctly more expensive than typical "range loads" With hand loads this isn't the case, sort your cases by volume, bullets by weight, and use a high quality bullet and you can make your own Precision ammo at prices lower that the typical budget commercial ammo.

Second bit in favor of the 6.5 Creedmore is the recoil will likely be a near match to it's parent case 308W which is very easy on the shoulder when shot from a rest.

So dumb question then, if shooting longer distances, does using 6.5 Creedmore lose it's appeal/luster? I ask this due to a comment one of the workers just told me the other day at a LGS. He basically said the longer you're shooting 6.5, the less power it has at the target. They have both the 6.5 and 338 in stock; because they have both behind the counter, and so high up on the wall I had to ask what calibers they were. He was recommending the 308, even though they don't have it in stock. I have to save up money to buy whatever is I end up choosing, which is why I'm doing the research now. Again, thanks to you all for the comments!

quote:

Originally posted by Les007:
So dumb question then, if shooting longer distances, does using 6.5 Creedmore lose it's appeal/luster? I ask this due to a comment one of the workers just told me the other day at a LGS. He basically said the longer you're shooting 6.5, the less power it has at the target. They have both the 6.5 and 338 in stock; because they have both behind the counter, and so high up on the wall I had to ask what calibers they were. He was recommending the 308, even though they don't have it in stock.

At some point in the shooting game you should learn to recognize which shooters have tens of thousands of rounds down range and which people have tens of thousands of webz commando mouse clicks on the internet.

"Energy on target" has no meaning on paper targets. Even a gentle push with a sharp pencil punches through paper.

"Energy on target" with steel targets comes into play depending on the caliber, the size of the plate, and the impact spotting capabilities of the observers. For 223 Remy, this distance is maybe 700-800 yards. For the 6mm bores, maybe somewhere over 1000 yards. For 6.5mm bores, maybe somewhere beyond 1200 yards. For 308 Win, maybe somewhere over 1000 yards. The magnums are further out.

So....will you be shooting beyond 1000 yards regularly? I can pretty much say hell no.

Let's be honest -- your LGS people are effin clueless when it comes to long distance shooting. Probably in any discipline of long distance shooting, but especially when it comes to steel targets.

6.5 Creedmoor is much better suited for LD targets than 308 Win. Around 400 yards, 6.5CM puts more energy on target than 308 Win, and 6.5's energy advantage increases as distances increase. For all distances, 6.5CM flies flatter and with less wind deflection than 308 Win. 6.5CM is hands down a superior target caliber to 308 Win. Anyone who states differently needs to remove themselves from the rifle industry.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

At some point in the shooting game you should learn to recognize which shooters have tens of thousands of rounds down range and which people have tens of thousands of webz commando mouse clicks on the internet.

LOL Perfect!

To put another fly in the ointment, does anyone have any experience with the 6.5X.284 cartridge?

CW

quote:

Originally posted by C L Wilkins:
To put another fly in the ointment, does anyone have any experience with the 6.5X.284 cartridge?

Definitely some use in F-Class competition.

On the positive side, it's really accurate and there are high-BC bullets in 6.5.

On the negative side, the barrel life is short. The F-Class guys are reporting 1000 to 1200 rounds before pulling the barrel.

6.5 PRC could be a better barrel-life option for the target shooter. I don't know if there's enough experience out there with the PRC, but it might last into the 1500-1600 round ballpark.

By comparison, 6.5 Creedmoor often kills barrels in 3000-3500 rounds.

I'd like to see a .223 version.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

Let's be honest -- your LGS people are effin clueless when it comes to long distance shooting. Probably in any discipline of long distance shooting, but especially when it comes to steel targets.

Oh I don't doubt that, which is why I'm asking for help here.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

6.5 Creedmoor is much better suited for LD targets than 308 Win. Around 400 yards, 6.5CM puts more energy on target than 308 Win, and 6.5's energy advantage increases as distances increase. For all distances, 6.5CM flies flatter and with less wind deflection than 308 Win. 6.5CM is hands down a superior target caliber to 308 Win. Anyone who states differently needs to remove themselves from the rifle industry.

Will I be shooting 1000+ yards on a regular basis? No

Will I be able to shoot beyond 200+ yards on a regular basis? No

That said, where do I go from here? TBD - Most large purchases in my adult life, right or wrong, have been 'buy as much as you can once' vs having to upgrade over time. Again, right or wrong, this has been my approach; maybe that's not the right mindsight for this situation. My local range has 100 yard ranges, and I'm told there is a range somewhere in the general vicinity that has a 200 yard option. Anything longer distance-wise, will require travel.

I would be ok with buying a Remington latest generation 700, but I'm really in love with the Ruger Precision Rifle. The question is, which caliber? I think I'm still leaning towards the 6.5 Creedmore, unless for the distances I can shoot on a regular basis, make this an 'uninformed' or dare I say it, 'stupid' decision on my part?

quote:

Originally posted by Les007:

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

Let's be honest -- your LGS people are effin clueless when it comes to long distance shooting. Probably in any discipline of long distance shooting, but especially when it comes to steel targets.

Oh I don't doubt that, which is why I'm asking for help here.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

6.5 Creedmoor is much better suited for LD targets than 308 Win. Around 400 yards, 6.5CM puts more energy on target than 308 Win, and 6.5's energy advantage increases as distances increase. For all distances, 6.5CM flies flatter and with less wind deflection than 308 Win. 6.5CM is hands down a superior target caliber to 308 Win. Anyone who states differently needs to remove themselves from the rifle industry.

Will I be shooting 1000+ yards on a regular basis? No

Will I be able to shoot beyond 200+ yards on a regular basis? No

That said, where do I go from here? TBD - Most large purchases in my adult life, right or wrong, have been 'buy as much as you can once' vs having to upgrade over time. Again, right or wrong, this has been my approach; maybe that's not the right mindsight for this situation. My local range has 100 yard ranges, and I'm told there is a range somewhere in the general vicinity that has a 200 yard option. Anything longer distance-wise, will require travel.

I would be ok with buying a Remington latest generation 700, but I'm really in love with the Ruger Precision Rifle. The question is, which caliber? I think I'm still leaning towards the 6.5 Creedmore, unless for the distances I can shoot on a regular basis, make this an 'uninformed' or dare I say it, 'stupid' decision on my part?

I don't think you can go "wrong" with the 6.5 Creemore, it will work well at 50 to 1200 yards. However If you develop the skills to do it you will find it difficult to measure your group size at 100 yards because you'll put every shot thru the same hole. BTW, if that happens just measure the diameter of that hole and subtract the bullet diameter. For example if your conglomerate hole measures 1/2 inch in diameter your group size would be 0.500 - 0.264, or 0.236 inch.

Note, don't have a 6.5 Creedmore YET but it will happen someday. What I do have is a home built AR15 with a Shilen barrel that will shoot under 3/10 at 100 yards. Also have a Ruger Gunsight in 308W that is basically a 2 MOA rifle but that's OK because most of the time I'm shooting with iron sights. Thoughts on the 6.5 for me have me considering the Gunsight with a Shilen barrel in 6.5 Creedmore or getting the exact same rifle you are considering in 6.5 Creedmore.