Best hunting Rifle poll.

[Curly]

The Steyr prohunter has a really nice adjustable trigger, sub-moa out of the box accuracy.  I don't know if the stock is full aluminum bedded.  The stock is adjustable though, so that is a nice feature. 

[Stein]

Educate me, what rifle comes out of the box sub moa with a competition level adjustable trigger, full aluminum bedded stock,  and everybody and their brother makes stuff for it in the $800 range?  I'm serious, there may be some out there and I would check them out.

"Sub MOA" is a result of many factors including the ammunition, and of course the shooter. I've seen some rifles advertised as "Sub MOA" that shot 2.5" groups with some loads. In my experience most factory rifles will shoot 1 MOA or better with the right loads, but it may require extensive handload development. For most big game hunters a rifle that shoots even 1.5 MOA is adequate at reasonable distances.

If a trigger breaks cleanly and is adjustable down to two pounds like many are now, what is the line that makes it "competition level"?

Bedding stock: is that necessary for someone who wants a hunting rifle, and it shoots sub MOA but doesn't have an aluminum bedding stock?

Accessories: same question as bedding stock.

Thanks.

OK, I'll bite.  Reliably sub MOA with factory ammo, adjustable trigger in the 3 # range with a crisp break and a stock that isn't impervious to the elements (dirt in there, moisture swelling, shooting off a backpack, etc won't impact point of impact).  As far as accessories, most people are going to at least put on a scope (are the rings readily available by all mfrs or do you have to take what is available?) and things like replacement or extra magazines, spare parts and the like are pretty helpful as well.

My experience is that in the budget rifle category, there are two types.  Those that are $400 all in including scope and those where you can get a decent core rifle for $500 with the idea of probably upgrading a couple of things.  It is pretty hard to put a high quality trigger and nice stock in a rifle that sells for $500 when those two things easily go for $300 by themselves.

Maybe I'm wrong and somebody sells a solid rifle with a quality trigger and well designed and fitted stock made from quality materials for $500, I just haven't seen it yet.  For $1,000, maybe, but I would rather have exactly the parts I want rather than what the manufacturer happened to slap in there.

[Bob33]

Savage and Tikka (and others) make rifles in the $400 to $700 range that will shoot well with several different factory loads. Both have triggers that can be safely adjusted into the low twos. I wouldn't consider them works of art or choices one would make if he wanted to do much customization. But off the shelf, they shoot well and will kill critters if the hunter does his part.

[jackelope]

Educate me, what rifle comes out of the box sub moa with a competition level adjustable trigger, full aluminum bedded stock,  and everybody and their brother makes stuff for it in the $800 range?  I'm serious, there may be some out there and I would check them out.

"Sub MOA" is a result of many factors including the ammunition, and of course the shooter. I've seen some rifles advertised as "Sub MOA" that shot 2.5" groups with some loads. In my experience most factory rifles will shoot 1 MOA or better with the right loads, but it may require extensive handload development. For most big game hunters a rifle that shoots even 1.5 MOA is adequate at reasonable distances.

If a trigger breaks cleanly and is adjustable down to two pounds like many are now, what is the line that makes it "competition level"?

Bedding stock: is that necessary for someone who wants a hunting rifle, and it shoots sub MOA but doesn't have an aluminum bedding stock?

Accessories: same question as bedding stock.

Thanks.

OK, I'll bite.  Reliably sub MOA with factory ammo, adjustable trigger in the 3 # range with a crisp break and a stock that isn't impervious to the elements (dirt in there, moisture swelling, shooting off a backpack, etc won't impact point of impact).  As far as accessories, most people are going to at least put on a scope (are the rings readily available by all mfrs or do you have to take what is available?) and things like replacement or extra magazines, spare parts and the like are pretty helpful as well.

My experience is that in the budget rifle category, there are two types.  Those that are $400 all in including scope and those where you can get a decent core rifle for $500 with the idea of probably upgrading a couple of things.  It is pretty hard to put a high quality trigger and nice stock in a rifle that sells for $500 when those two things easily go for $300 by themselves.

Maybe I'm wrong and somebody sells a solid rifle with a quality trigger and well designed and fitted stock made from quality materials for $500, I just haven't seen it yet.  For $1,000, maybe, but I would rather have exactly the parts I want rather than what the manufacturer happened to slap in there.

I have a Remington 700 Long Range in .25-06. It was $599 new. I put a Timney trigger in it. $120.00. It has an older Vari-X 2 scope on it. You can buy a VX-II for $400. It rides in a Bell and Carlson M40 stock from Remington.  This was shots 3, 4 and 5 out of the brand new rifle with factory ammo.

[jackelope]

This was a 5 shot group. Shots 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 out of the brand new rifle.  Factory ammo.

[Yondering]

I had to vote Tikka T3 since I could only choose 1, but would have cast a second vote for the Ruger American. Reason being for the performance you get, mine has been darn good, and leaves more room in the budget for better optics. I choose either one over a 700, but have all three in the safe and the 700s can shoot well too.

Depending what accessories you count, like bipod and spare mags, etc, I have ~$900-$1,000 in my American Predator in 6.5 C, and think you'd be hard pressed to put together a better package for similar cost. It was able to make honest 1,000 yard vital zone hits in mild wind on steel down in Oregon last fall. I don't have group pics to post but it shoots about like Jackelope's pics above
-$400 rifle
-$400 scope (Leup Mark Ar)
-$40 base (EGW 20 moa)
-$40 each spare mags (my one real complaint about the rifle, cost of mags)
- cheek riser, trigger job, suppressor mount, and opened barrel channel my own work, assign whatever $ amount you'd spend.

2 lb triggers are not hard to do on these for a guy with some tinkering ability.

Just my 2 cents.

[Curly]

One rifle that should maybe be included in the "other" category in the poll is a Montana Rifle Company rifle. It might be slightly above the $1,000 limit, but I picked up a nice MRC x2 rifle in 243 recently and so far it seems really nice. It was $1170; stainless, synthetic and glass bedded. They do have models that I think are a little less money too in a wood stock.

[grundy53]

Educate me, what rifle comes out of the box sub moa with a competition level adjustable trigger, full aluminum bedded stock,  and everybody and their brother makes stuff for it in the $800 range?  I'm serious, there may be some out there and I would check them out.

"Sub MOA" is a result of many factors including the ammunition, and of course the shooter. I've seen some rifles advertised as "Sub MOA" that shot 2.5" groups with some loads. In my experience most factory rifles will shoot 1 MOA or better with the right loads, but it may require extensive handload development. For most big game hunters a rifle that shoots even 1.5 MOA is adequate at reasonable distances.

If a trigger breaks cleanly and is adjustable down to two pounds like many are now, what is the line that makes it "competition level"?

Bedding stock: is that necessary for someone who wants a hunting rifle, and it shoots sub MOA but doesn't have an aluminum bedding stock?

Accessories: same question as bedding stock.

Thanks.

OK, I'll bite.  Reliably sub MOA with factory ammo, adjustable trigger in the 3 # range with a crisp break and a stock that isn't impervious to the elements (dirt in there, moisture swelling, shooting off a backpack, etc won't impact point of impact).  As far as accessories, most people are going to at least put on a scope (are the rings readily available by all mfrs or do you have to take what is available?) and things like replacement or extra magazines, spare parts and the like are pretty helpful as well.

My experience is that in the budget rifle category, there are two types.  Those that are $400 all in including scope and those where you can get a decent core rifle for $500 with the idea of probably upgrading a couple of things.  It is pretty hard to put a high quality trigger and nice stock in a rifle that sells for $500 when those two things easily go for $300 by themselves.

Maybe I'm wrong and somebody sells a solid rifle with a quality trigger and well designed and fitted stock made from quality materials for $500, I just haven't seen it yet.  For $1,000, maybe, but I would rather have exactly the parts I want rather than what the manufacturer happened to slap in there.

Hopefully it isn't on the recall list....

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[NW SURVEYOR]

There is a SAKO Finbear in 7mm mag for $700 for sale.
Buy it put a used 2x7 VXll on it and you're out a grand.
You will own a piece of history with some old school class that fits like a glove and shoots like a dream.
Sako has been putting out great shooting rifles since before I was born.  There may be more modern rifles available, but none better. Carrying a rifle that you have confidence in is a
Treat in itself.

[jay.sharkbait]

Educate me, what rifle comes out of the box sub moa with a competition level adjustable trigger, full aluminum bedded stock,  and everybody and their brother makes stuff for it in the $800 range?  I'm serious, there may be some out there and I would check them out.

"Sub MOA" is a result of many factors including the ammunition, and of course the shooter. I've seen some rifles advertised as "Sub MOA" that shot 2.5" groups with some loads. In my experience most factory rifles will shoot 1 MOA or better with the right loads, but it may require extensive handload development. For most big game hunters a rifle that shoots even 1.5 MOA is adequate at reasonable distances.

If a trigger breaks cleanly and is adjustable down to two pounds like many are now, what is the line that makes it "competition level"?

Bedding stock: is that necessary for someone who wants a hunting rifle, and it shoots sub MOA but doesn't have an aluminum bedding stock?

Accessories: same question as bedding stock.

Thanks.

OK, I'll bite.  Reliably sub MOA with factory ammo, adjustable trigger in the 3 # range with a crisp break and a stock that isn't impervious to the elements (dirt in there, moisture swelling, shooting off a backpack, etc won't impact point of impact).  As far as accessories, most people are going to at least put on a scope (are the rings readily available by all mfrs or do you have to take what is available?) and things like replacement or extra magazines, spare parts and the like are pretty helpful as well.

My experience is that in the budget rifle category, there are two types.  Those that are $400 all in including scope and those where you can get a decent core rifle for $500 with the idea of probably upgrading a couple of things.  It is pretty hard to put a high quality trigger and nice stock in a rifle that sells for $500 when those two things easily go for $300 by themselves.

Maybe I'm wrong and somebody sells a solid rifle with a quality trigger and well designed and fitted stock made from quality materials for $500, I just haven't seen it yet.  For $1,000, maybe, but I would rather have exactly the parts I want rather than what the manufacturer happened to slap in there.

Hopefully it isn't on the recall list....

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 I haven't heard of any first hand accounts of Remington triggers failing and I suspect that most of the alleged issues were people lying or modifying triggers at home etc. I would also venture to say that there are just as many issues with triggers elsewhere in the industry.

[h20hunter]

Above is edited for general civility. If a reply or contribution can't be done without putting down or belittling don't bother.

[grundy53]

Educate me, what rifle comes out of the box sub moa with a competition level adjustable trigger, full aluminum bedded stock,  and everybody and their brother makes stuff for it in the $800 range?  I'm serious, there may be some out there and I would check them out.

"Sub MOA" is a result of many factors including the ammunition, and of course the shooter. I've seen some rifles advertised as "Sub MOA" that shot 2.5" groups with some loads. In my experience most factory rifles will shoot 1 MOA or better with the right loads, but it may require extensive handload development. For most big game hunters a rifle that shoots even 1.5 MOA is adequate at reasonable distances.

If a trigger breaks cleanly and is adjustable down to two pounds like many are now, what is the line that makes it "competition level"?

Bedding stock: is that necessary for someone who wants a hunting rifle, and it shoots sub MOA but doesn't have an aluminum bedding stock?

Accessories: same question as bedding stock.

Thanks.

OK, I'll bite.  Reliably sub MOA with factory ammo, adjustable trigger in the 3 # range with a crisp break and a stock that isn't impervious to the elements (dirt in there, moisture swelling, shooting off a backpack, etc won't impact point of impact).  As far as accessories, most people are going to at least put on a scope (are the rings readily available by all mfrs or do you have to take what is available?) and things like replacement or extra magazines, spare parts and the like are pretty helpful as well.

My experience is that in the budget rifle category, there are two types.  Those that are $400 all in including scope and those where you can get a decent core rifle for $500 with the idea of probably upgrading a couple of things.  It is pretty hard to put a high quality trigger and nice stock in a rifle that sells for $500 when those two things easily go for $300 by themselves.

Maybe I'm wrong and somebody sells a solid rifle with a quality trigger and well designed and fitted stock made from quality materials for $500, I just haven't seen it yet.  For $1,000, maybe, but I would rather have exactly the parts I want rather than what the manufacturer happened to slap in there.

Hopefully it isn't on the recall list....

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 I haven't heard of any first hand accounts of Remington triggers failing and I suspect that most of the alleged issues were people lying or modifying triggers at home etc. I would also venture to say that there are just as many issues with triggers elsewhere in the industry.

That's hilarious. Especially since I don't own a Tikka. I do however have a couple Remington 700's. My point I was trying to make was that there is no perfect guns. They all have flaws. I don't worship at the alter of any of them. Therefore I can enjoy all of them. Thank you for your concern though. My mother would appreciate it.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[NW SURVEYOR]

You know what kills me?
The need for a spare clip.
Heck, I've been hunting deer and elk for forty five years and I've never had to reload. I shoot my share of game and I'm just a meat shot.  I don't screw around with 1000 yard shots, but if I did I sure wouldn't be wondering about a fast reload.  Concentrate on the shot at hand and don't worry about slapping in another four rounds. I shoot a bolt action like most people, but I stuff the cases in from the top and make that first shot count.  I can't remember ever needing more than three rounds, and that was at a big bull that was mortality wounded at forty yards, I just wanted to make sure he didn't make it to the reprod. 
Anyway, sorry for being off subject.
The best rifle for under a grand is the one that you can and do have confidence in.
The rest is Hype.

[dscubame]

You know what kills me?
The need for a spare clip.
Heck, I've been hunting deer and elk for forty five years and I've never had to reload. I shoot my share of game and I'm just a meat shot.  I don't screw around with 1000 yard shots, but if I did I sure wouldn't be wondering about a fast reload.  Concentrate on the shot at hand and don't worry about slapping in another four rounds. I shoot a bolt action like most people, but I stuff the cases in from the top and make that first shot count.  I can't remember ever needing more than three rounds, and that was at a big bull that was mortality wounded at forty yards, I just wanted to make sure he didn't make it to the reprod. 
Anyway, sorry for being off subject.
The best rifle for under a grand is the one that you can and do have confidence in.
The rest is Hype.

I have learned a lot in my 45 years as well and intend on continuing to learn for the next 45 years.  I have learned the difference between a clip and a magazine in my first 45.  Continue on...

[sumpnz]

You know what kills me?
The need for a spare clip.
Heck, I've been hunting deer and elk for forty five years and I've never had to reload. I shoot my share of game and I'm just a meat shot.  I don't screw around with 1000 yard shots, but if I did I sure wouldn't be wondering about a fast reload.  Concentrate on the shot at hand and don't worry about slapping in another four rounds. I shoot a bolt action like most people, but I stuff the cases in from the top and make that first shot count.  I can't remember ever needing more than three rounds, and that was at a big bull that was mortality wounded at forty yards, I just wanted to make sure he didn't make it to the reprod. 
Anyway, sorry for being off subject.
The best rifle for under a grand is the one that you can and do have confidence in.
The rest is Hype.

I have learned a lot in my 45 years as well and intend on continuing to learn for the next 45 years.  I have learned the difference between a clip and a magazine in my first 45.  Continue on...