clover

The next purchase is probably a long way off but one can't help the mind frivilously wandering towards "the next step".. Research suggests a 6.5mm of some sort is a good choice for 1000yd. So far I'm satisfied with my newish .223 Tikka Varmint (some hopefully non-too-serious teething troubles notwithstanding) , plus they're the only manufacturer who do anything interesting / niche / target-centric in a true left-handed format; so please on suggestions of alternatives from other manufacturers I've been looking at their two more target-oriented T3x models; the Sporter and Tac A1. As most of you probably already know these guns are based on the same platform and both are available in blued / blacked carbon steel (sadly no stainless option) with 24" threaded barrels. Past this point they begin to differ a fair bit. Stock: The Sporter has lovely traditionally-styled adjustable laminate woodwork while the Tac is a lot more contemporary with AR-type butt and pistol grip, along with a host of rails around the barrel. Trigger: The Sporter has the standard single-stage unit found on most Tikkas, while the Tac has the two-stage unit also found on the arctic. Mag Assy: The Sporter uses the standard plastic Tikka Varmint mags and trigger housing, while the Tac uses the higher-capacity double-stack mags found on the CTR and others. Scope Mounting: The Sporter has the standard Tikka rails while the Tac has a Picatinny rail fitted. Calibre: The Sporter is available in (amongst other larger and smaller bores) .260 Rem and 6.5x55 while the only 6.5mm offering for the Tac is the currently trendy 6.5mm Creedmore. Mass: Somewhat surprisingly given the sizeable stock on the Sporter, it's apparently lighter than the Tac at 4.4kg versus 5.1kg with the longer barrel. Cost: SGC list the LH Sporter at £1745, while the Tac comes in at £1845, so there's not a whole lot in it. Cherry picking from both I prefer the aesthetic and probably ergonomics of the Sporter stock; especially since I don't think there is a true-LH stock option on the Tac - meaning the comb adjuster knobs may well stick into the face of a leftie. That said having had a play with a Sporter in the flesh a while ago I was a bit disappointed by the very large mag well in the underside of the stock. I also suspect that the stock / action interface might be better on the Tac given that it's a "chassis-based" system. I like the two-stage trigger of the Tac, although looking at a picture of the unit I think it's only really a single-stage with a bit of sprung travel to the blade; so potentially nicer in terms of usage but little different in terms of sear engagement / functionality. I've heard tales of the feed lips wearing on the plastic mags so the metal one seems preferable; also for its higher capacity. While I appreciate that the Picatinny rail is more versatile than the standard Tikka setup, I'm very happy with the Optilocks on my Varmint so would be quite happy to go this way again. Of the three calibres on offer I'd take the Creedmore over the rest as it seems more popular (at least currently) than the .260 and more efficient than both the .260 and the 6.5x55. Finally, comparing the specs of both guns and their cost the Tac seems to offer a lot more than the Sporter (trigger, mag system, scope rail) for not a whole lot more money; although I suspect the stock of the Sporter adds significantly to its price; since give or take the action appears the same as that of the Varmint; which in a similar format is nearly £700 cheaper! My head says the Tac but my heart loves the appeal of the Sporter with its proper target stock in the classic 6.5 Swede chambering. Currently my wallet is shouting at them both to Foxtrot Oscar, I have no slot on my ticket and plenty to learn from the .223, so I can't see a purchase of either being imminent.. but I'd love to hear any opinions or experiences of either anyone might like to share

Thanks chaps! Yes, I'd call a flier a shot outside the group that I can't explain. I did call a few on the last shoot but then I know these are down to me so can be ruled out to an extent. I'd guess the 69gn stuff I'm currently using would be fairly standard fare for the 1:8 twist barrel. I see the NRA shop have GGG 69gn stuff so I'll grab a box of that when I'm next at Bisley too. PPU also do a 75gn load but I can't find any of this locally. tbh I'm wondering if I'm expecting too much from "cheap" ammo, although am loathe to buy any more expensive stuff while I'm unsure of my technique - just found some Hornady match .223 but that's twice the price of the HPS stuff I'm currently using! Happy to further explore the potential for it to be shooter error; I do have experience with recoiling stuff as I also use a .357 mag lever action, however this is shot standing over much shorter ranges - as such I'm far more familiar with the stance and the expected level of accuracy is a lot less too. Prone shooting with a significantly recoiling gun is a wholly new experience to me. I was definitely bottom of the experience pile by a long way at Bisley last month - next time I go I'll try and both get some feedback on my technique and see if someone else will shoot some groups with my rifle. I think if there is a problem with technique it will be with recoil management due to inconsistent hold and butt positioning. My current setup is a Harris bipod up front and a bag at the rear; not that I can see it but I'm getting a fair bit of muzzle rise so I'm guessing the bipod is "hopping"; despite my efforts to pre-load it. I've also noticed that muzzle deflection under recoil is usually fairly unpredictable; always upward but often with left / right components... the way I've dealt with this in the past (with lesser-recoiling guns) is to use a light grip as I've found this is more forgiving than a tight one it's easier to be consistent when allowing the rifle to "free recoil", however appreciate that this is going to be decreasingly viable with heavier-recoiling rifles. On the subject of support I've got a Caldwell Deadshot Combo front and rear rest that needs filling (glass beads?) which I'd like to try in preference to the bipod; the 'pod is convenient but I'd always preferred bags when shooting off the bench. I'd be a lot more confident of my abilities off a bench, however sadly while our range has a fantastic steel example it's not passed for anything larger than .22LR. Off a bench and bags I can get the crosshairs dead still, realistically prone I'm probably holding within .25 MOA - not perfect but then IMO of little consequence when the rifle is shooting at 1.5-2MOA. Rule out all user error and that's still a 1.25-1.75MOA group. I think I've got everything related to the rifle setup pegged, thanks - PX was tested as you suggest, everything nice and tight, bore recently cleaned but enough shots to allow it to foul again... I can't do a lot other than research until I can get back to a range with some more ammo; don't suppose you can recommend any good (preferably online) resources for prone technique? I've found a few on youtube but nothing so far that really starts with the very basics. Thanks again for your thoughts Thanks - most points addressed above but the AR example is somewhat heartening - it's nice to have the effect of poor technique quantified; although I wonder if a massive amount of that wasn't due to the instability of the monopod (what position was he shooting from?). I'd be interested to hear any other tips you might have for increasing consistency when shooting prone!

Thanks - I'm guessing that could be the case too. I'm hoping to have reloading capability in the not-too-distant future, so it's not the end of the world if I use the remaining HPS ammo for familiarisation with the rifle / recorded use to appease the FEO until then. I'll maybe pick up some alternative ammo in the meantime if I get the opportunity and also going to work on my prone technique as this can't be doing me any favours. Might crack out the chrono on the next excursion to see if the velocity behaviour has improved now the gun should be broken in. I've also got a nagging feeling at the back of my mind about the stock's contact with the barrel at the breech end - I'm tempted to crack out the abrasives to get some clearance; although for now will probably content myself with investigating the contact points a bit further.

An update. Got the chance to test the rifle again at 100, 200 and 300yd. The barrel was well-cleaned beforehand with copper solvent, 10 one-way passes of a PB brush, more solvent on a patch, dry patches until they came out dry, an oiled patch then a dry one to finish. All groups were shot from prone with a rear bag. There was a bit of a breeze but nowt too bad. Results started off promising and went downhill.. 100yd 1. 4 shot group: 3 shots into 12mm c-c (sub-0.5MOA); spoiled by a flier (2nd shot of the four) at 7 O'clock bringing the group size up to around 37mm c-c (1.5MOA). 2. 3 shot group: 3 shots into 13.5mm c-c (c. 0.5MOA). Bottom two shots through same hole. Group dispersion diagonally strung high-right to low-left. POI maybe 12mm lower than best three shots of previous group. Making a composite of the two groups above would give a diagonally-strung group high-right to low-left of 37mm c-c - i.e. the 2nd groups would fit neatly in the space between the 1st group's main three shots and "flier". 200yd 1. 5 shot group: 4 shots of fairly even dispersion into 37mm (sub 0.75MOA) spoiled by a flier at 4 O'clock bringing group size up to around 88mm c-c (1.75MOA). 2. 5 shot group: 5 shots diagonally strung high-left to low-right, 69mm c-c (1.4MOA). Approximately same POI as previous group. 300yd 1. 5 shot group: 3 horizonally central, vertically strung into 84mm c-c (1.2MOA) further two shots at 3 and 9 O'clock bringing group size up to 162mm c-c (>2MOA). So, it's not very clever. I can't see any trends in the groups other than they're pretty much all over the place - some otherwise acceptable (or in the case of those at 100yd very good) but with fliers; some evenly distributed, some strung in opposite directions. There appeared to be some POI shift between the two groups at 100yd; this could have been the clean barrel fouling or just the result of random distribution over two groups, within one poor group. Group size increase with range is perhaps non-linear; possibly suggesting a stability issue but there are no keyholed shots, nor were there any at 600yd.. while this barrel should easily stabilise these bullets. I'd like to think it's not the scope but haven't really ruled it out. I do have another I could try but am loathe to upset the mounts - thanks to getting screwed on my original choice of scope I do have a couple of pairs of spare rings, so I could get another set of bases to avoid disturbing the original setup.. on the one hand I don't want to chuck another £60 away; on the other I was considering hoovering up another set of stainless bases before everywhere runs out so I can build another set for another rifle in future using the rings I have. Ammo is another possibility - I've found very few reviews of the HPS Target Master I'm using, although it seems to use reasonable quality components (69gn SMKs and PPU cases). Out of curiousity I did weight the most recently fired 25 cases which came in with an extreme spread of 2.3gn / 2.3% of mean and std. dev of 0.68gn / 0.7%, which I didn't think was too bad compared to these values on 6mmBR. When first testing the rifle I did run the first shots through it past the chrono - giving not too wonderful numbers - over 12 shots a mean of 2753ft/s, an extreme spread of 93ft/s or 3% and a standard deviation of 27ft/s or 1%. This was when the barrel was running in though, so might be an unfair representation of what the kit's capable of. I did also notice that the meplats of some of the SMKs are fairly roughly formed and sometimes somewhat angled; while this can't do accuracy any favours I've seen similar on promo images for the bullets so I'm guessing it's not a handling issue and considered acceptable by QC. Despite this there are many accounts of these bullets performing very well, so I'm hesitant to blame them. I'd like to test some more ammo but off the shelf I think I'm limited to GGG 69gn and PPU 75gn if I want heavier stuff. Does anyone have any experience of either of these rounds, or the HPS stuff I'm currently using for that matter? Finally there's always me. Position was stable and i was able to hold the crosshairs within 0.5MOA with ease. Trigger control was generally good, recoil control less-so as it's not a position I'm used to and found the butt sitting in different parts of my shoulder - sometimes giving a lot of support against a bony bit; sometimes in the sofer "pocket" inside my shoulder. The 2nd 200yd group was shot with the gun tucked into the soft bit, purposefully maintaining head and shoulder position with respect to the gun during reloading, but still the group was less than great. So there we go - tending towards subbing in another scope just to rule that out while looking to source some different ammo to try. As usual I'm always interested to hear any thoughts anyone might have

Thanks guys - some interesting discussion going on Thanks for your support! Sounds like you have a very nice setup and are getting cracking results considering you're not using the heaviest bullets on offer. I'd be very tempted to stick so 90gns though it though since you've certainly got the twist for it! I can imagine how difficult shooting over the terrain you describe could be; but as you suggest my gut tells me something's amiss to cause my issues. Everything's tight as far as I can see through so it looks like an issue with the ammo, barrel, scope or driver! That's encouraging, thanks! As above I'm currently restricted to factory ammo so the 69gns are as good as it gets for now. I'm not an inexperienced shooter and after some fettling the trigger is breaking at a nice crisp 1.6lb and it's easy to squeeze with a relatively stable sight picture, so I don't think trigger technique is an issue. I'd not rule out driver error completely as this was all at the end of a very long day plus I have little experience in shooting prone and do find consistent butt/shoulder positioning difficult. That said I'd have to be doing something pretty bad to sling them 2 mils from the middle - I can shoot considerably better than that freestanding! Hopefully I'll get the chance to test it soon. Will give it a thorough clean before I do and start from square one again.

Thanks - sounds very pleasant Thanks - in response to both the above my limited experience would agree - Thursday's range visit saw some time in the butts while a much more seasoned CF shooter was planting lots in the middle with his 6mm BR! A spreadsheet is currently being constructed to compare the relative merits of some of the popular 6 and 6.5mm cartridges (BR, PPC, Creedmore, Swede, .260 Rem) as well as the venerable .308, although... Indeed - I'm currently happy to be learning the ropes with the .223 at the moment and see no point in chucking more money I can't afford at missing at longer ranges with a new gun and more expensive ammo.. it's always good to do some number-crunching to allow the slow and considered formulation of what might come next though! So.. I've had the chance to play with the rifle a little and nothing appears loose - whipped the scope and mounts off and the base to ring bolts are still holding at the 5Nm they were torqued to when initially assembled. I also tweaked the ring caps bolts again - interestingly for the 2nd time I got a uniform amount of angular displacement out of them before the torque screwdriver clicked over; however I think this might just be the plastic inserts in the rings "settling". It all certainly seems to be gripped tight enough as the scope's not moved axially in the rings under recoil. I'm still a bit perplexed by Thursday's problems as the total movement on the target from one shot (low and extreme right) to the next (low and extreme left) was probably about 4 mil.. the calculated deflection at that range with a 10mph wind is 2.3 mil; meaning the wind would have had to have changed by around 17mph to cause that shift - 13mph if we allow 1 mil for group dispersion. I'm still not hugely convinced tbh.. by contrast earlier I was holding off for wind by around 0.5-0.75 mil which would suggest a breeze of around 2.5-3mph.. gusting to 8-9mph to push it off to the right then back the other way by the same amount to push it off to the left. Possible I suppose, but still doesn't explain the vertical component. Anyway, looks like I'm back to testing at short range, then. Thanks for the replies!

Thanks - those were pretty much my initial thoughts too. However, loose mounts aside I don't really want it to be any of the above as they point to significant expense or a really poor barrel! Best case scenario it'll be loose mounts; although they feel solid enough and none of the other fixings had loosened significantly. The only ones I've not checked yet are the ring-to-base bolts; which I'll have a look at when I get the chance. I have found a few accounts on the net of these bolts coming loose so fingers' crossed this is the problem! I'm away from the rifle currently so trying to second-guess the problem.. at 300yd the target backing board was around 7 mil across; making it 3.5 mil at 600yd. Shots were falling just outside the backer on either side so call it 2 mil in each direction. If the mounts are 125mm apart on the gun this would equate to a relative shift between them of 0.5mm total; which seems just about plausible in the horizontal axis if the bolts are loose (and the fit between the mounts and rings isn't great); perhaps less-so vertically although I suppose there could be some movement under recoil. I'd hope the scope isn't the problem as it's really seen little use and is a decent model that should withstand a lot more than a .223 in a heavy rifle can throw at it. I really can't see it being a fouling issue as it'd only had 30-odd rounds through it since cleaning last time (44 rounds total through the gun since purchase) and very little copper came out when it was last cleaned. That said there's always the possibility that I'm not doing it right / am expecting less cleaning than necessary.. surely it should do more than 30 accurate rounds between cleaning though? Before the range visit it had 20 (one way) passes with a phosphor bronze brush and KG copper solvent, dry patches until clean then a couple of patches with carbon solvent, dry patches until clean and finally an oiled patch.. Thanks - I'm guessing the angular size of the rings is consistent over all ranges? We were using 300yd McQueen targets at 300yds, not sure at 600yd but they looked approximately scaled. Yes, perhaps it is just a case of recognising and accepting the limits of the gear. According to the JBM ballistics calculator the bullets are still supersonic at that range but they've lost around around 75% of their energy by that point. End of the day I don't regret my choice as IMO it pays to start at the bottom and .223 offers a relatively gentle and frugal introduction to centrefire. Once I've got to grips with this one and after a bit of experience have a better idea of what I want to shoot I'll perhaps look at something bigger. Appreciate your support Thanks - looking forward to reloading but that's probably a while off yet! Sounds like you you have a very nice setup; obviously well-suited to greater distance with the longer tube. I considered a GRS stock for mine but if I want to do practical it won't suit weak-shoulder stuff very well and besides I really like the front-heavy balance with the current synthetic stock. Is the CG Jackson trigger single or two-stage? I've been spoilt by true-two-stage airgun triggers so was looking at replacements, however have got the pull down to 1.5lb / 700g with a spring change so that will probably do for now. To be honest if your setup is doing around 2 minutes in still conditions when punting 80gn SMKs a little faster than mine's chucking out 69gn-ers, perhaps I need to re-assess what I expect from mine in a breeze! Thanks again for everyone's thoughts - I think the plan for now is to whip the scope and mounts of to check the tightness of the base to ring bolts. If they're loose I'll pull it all to bits, re-fit them with threadlock and start from scratch mounting the scope again. If tight I'll get the gun checked again at sub-300yd to see if it's behaving itself at this range.

Thanks - looks like it's back to basics at closer range then! Ta - it seems Century has a bit of a rep! Earlier in the day I did notice that two adjacent flags were flying against each other(!) so it's evidently not going to be as straightforward as a nice, constant, measurable breeze across the range - I can certainly accept that a lot can happen over 600yd and that .223 isn't the ideal calibre for reaching out that far. One would hope for some level of consistency though; it's massively disheartening when you're putting them all consistently in / near the middle then all of a sudden you're missing the backing board completely at opposite corners! You're correct that the rifle just had the bare muzzle - no mod or brake on the end. Thanks - maybe I was just expecting a bit much based on a "lucky" 10 rounds or so. I'm stuck with factory ammo currently so the 69gn SMKs are about as large as I'm going to get I think.. I'm using HPS Target Master at £83/100 from the NSRA shop, which considering the bullets used (admitted with PPU cases) I thought was pretty good compared to the cost of other ammo. I have to keep telling myself that I'm just starting out so there's no point in spending the earth on ammo while I'm still getting to grips with everything and really just plinking. I do have a stash of 69 and 77gn TMKs awaiting the eventual arrival of a reloading setup. I didn't go any larger as there seemed to be conjecture over whether I'd get enough velocity from a 20" barrel to stabilise them. There's also the cartridge length issue to consider (in relation to the mag), although I don't think this is insurmountable given that all the Tikkas are built on a large action so there's plenty of room. How big is the 4 ring on the F-class target? I believe the bull is a minute, so the 4 is two maybe? Sounds like great shooting at any rate with a lowly .223! I'd like to have a crack at 1000yd at some point, but I think given yesterday's experience I've got a lot to learn before I bother trying!

It was indeed. I appreciate that 600yd is pushing it somewhat; it just happened that this is the ammo I have (until I can start reloading) and our club had the range booked so it would have been rude not to have given it a go. We were shooting 2-up on a lane (alternate shots) but irritatingly my partner had just finished when it all started going squirly so I had nobody to benchmark my performance against. Tbh I'm totally green to centrefire (this was the first time I've shot past 100yd) so I'm not going to pretend I know all about wind.. I'm aware of the magnitudes of drift involved from ballistics calculators but was surprised by the sudden shift in horizontal drift and vertical displacement - having been happily dropping them in the bull with a little horizontal hold-off until that point. I'm hoping to get down there again next month and might try and test the rifle at closer range beforehand to further rule out environmental factors. Thanks for taking the time to reply

1:8", 20" tube, MV is around 2750ft/s with the 69gn SMKs It's performed very well with these rounds until suddenly spewing them all over the place. The first very high shot (that actually went through the target holder!) showed no signs of tipping / keyholing.

Finally got the chance to stretch the legs of the new toy today. At 300yd it was convincing dropping shots into around a minute / 3". Moving back to 600yd it was still keeping within maybe 1.5 minutes / 9"; less when I got the wind correction right. Until this point I was really pleased with it until the last shot ,which printed very high - maybe 30" / 5 min. The detail ended and I had to wait a while before trying again; the first shot of the next string again around 30" high and now 40" right. The next around 30" low and 40" right, the final one before I gave up maybe 30" low and 40" left (all dims approx as gauged against squarish target holder). There was a bit of a breeze at 600yd however until the first wayward shot I'd been successfully holding off by no more than 2 MOA with a consistent vertical POI corresponding with the POA. The wind didn't appear to have picked up significantly when the problems began. The kit is as follows: Tikka T3x Varmint, .223 Rem. Sightron SIII 10x42 Optilock rings and bases HPS Targetmaster 69gn (SMK) All shots were shot prone using a Harris bipod and rear bag. I'm pretty sure it's not driver error - certainly based on the success I was having until it all went wrong. Scope mount tightness (rings and bases to rifle) was checked before the final two shot and nothing was found to be significantly loose (each fixing tightened a fraction of a turn more but this made no difference to rifle behaviour). I've not had the mounts off yet to check the tightness of the ring-to-base bolts but there's no perceivable play between the two on the gun. Stock bolts were also checked at the same time and found to be fine. The rifle has had a total of just under 50 round through it; all the same batch. It started playing up on the 31st shot after it was last cleaned. I ran some patches through the barrel and got out a modest amount of copper fouling (3-4 slivers on one patch) and the usual carbon. I didn't get a chance to put any more rounds through the gun after cleaning but did have a look through the bore - the scope's crosshairs appearing dead central on the target for windage and maybe 7 mils below the target as viewed through the barrel. So.. I'm thinking possible causes could be: - Goosed scope, although it's not seen a lot of use and seems broadly-speaking OK when bore-sighted - Loose mounts - still need to check ring/base screws but there's not detectable play on gun - Excessively fouled barrel - I'd like to think unlikely given the minimal round count and lack of significant fouling on patches - Defective ammo - possible but based on previous performance I have no reason to see why this should be the case I appreciate that these bullets will get pushed around a lot by wind at 600yd but that doesn't explain the vertical POI shift or large changes in horizontal POI despite an apparently constant wind speed. The scope has been adjusted by maybe 30-35 MOA to zero, of a possible total range of 150 MOA on each axis / 75 MOA in each direction. In addition around 20 MOA of elevation were added to get me on target at 600yd but that still leaves around 20 MOA left of elevation so it's not right at the limit of its adjustment. This was an irritating end to an otherwise very enjoyable day and obviously I'm now left questioning the capability of the rifle. I'd welcome any thoughts on anything I might have missed or should check - other than looking at mount bolt torque and re-testing with the cleaned barrel (not sure when I'll get the chance) I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to proceed! Thanks!