6mm Creedmoor

[taylorce1]

Finally got the rifle range ready, mounted up a scope this morning. Still going to give the bedding a little longer to cure before taking it out. The Accustock was buggered up by someone who tried to make it fit a standard recoil lug, so I had to bed. Right now with the scope mounted it weighs in at 10 lbs 4.4 oz suppressed, but the scope is just temporary until I can find exactly what I want. Right now I'm looking at Bushnell LRTS 4.5-18X44 or NF SHV 4-14X50 and they'll add quite a bit of weight, I was going to go with a lighter Leupold. My original goal was to be sub 10 lbs suppressed, but the 18" X-Caliber barrel still came in heavier than I planned, so I've given up and just going with the NF or Bushnell.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50258823501_d3142409ba_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jzcBeF)

Rifle started life as a Stevens 200 .243 Win.
Accustock was picked up off of Gunbroker, with a .223 M10 youth I bought.
PT&G parallel recoil lug precision ground
Stockade bolt handle and lift kit.
X-Caliber 1:7 5R Savage Magnum contour barrel 18"
Silencer Co Omega 300 suppressor.
Burris Tactical 2 piece picatinny rail
Vortex Medium rings
Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16X40 AO (temporary)


I also went looking for something to test, and wound up with a case of Barnes LRX ammo for $195 delivered. Cheaper than I could buy the components. I have a premium 4th season rifle Mule Deer tag here in Colorado to give this rifle a go in November so I hope my rifle likes them.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50258823536_c27cc31807_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jzcBfh)


I also picked up a three boxes of Hornady Black 105 grain HPBT to try. It was surprising how much longer the 95 grain LRX bullet was than the 105 HPBT.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50258235173_9cea949a3f_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jz9Am6)

[Robinhood]

Nice Job Taylorce1. I hope it shoots as good as it looks!

[Ted_Feasel]

Finally got the rifle range ready, mounted up a scope this morning. Still going to give the bedding a little longer to cure before taking it out. The Accustock was buggered up by someone who tried to make it fit a standard recoil lug, so I had to bed. Right now with the scope mounted it weighs in at 10 lbs 4.4 oz suppressed, but the scope is just temporary until I can find exactly what I want. Right now I'm looking at Bushnell LRTS 4.5-18X44 or NF SHV 4-14X50 and they'll add quite a bit of weight, I was going to go with a lighter Leupold. My original goal was to be sub 10 lbs suppressed, but the 18" X-Caliber barrel still came in heavier than I planned, so I've given up and just going with the NF or Bushnell.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50258823501_d3142409ba_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jzcBeF)

Rifle started life as a Stevens 200 .243 Win.
Accustock was picked up off of Gunbroker, with a .223 M10 youth I bought.
PT&G parallel recoil lug precision ground
Stockade bolt handle and lift kit.
X-Caliber 1:7 5R Savage Magnum contour barrel 18"
Silencer Co Omega 300 suppressor.
Burris Tactical 2 piece picatinny rail
Vortex Medium rings
Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16X40 AO (temporary)


I also went looking for something to test, and wound up with a case of Barnes LRX ammo for $195 delivered. Cheaper than I could buy the components. I have a premium 4th season rifle Mule Deer tag here in Colorado to give this rifle a go in November so I hope my rifle likes them.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50258823536_c27cc31807_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jzcBfh)


I also picked up a three boxes of Hornady Black 105 grain HPBT to try. It was surprising how much longer the 95 grain LRX bullet was than the 105 HPBT.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50258235173_9cea949a3f_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jz9Am6)Very nice, hope she's a laser.. just my opinion I would not discount vortex, primary arms athrna reticle if you like ffp mil ranging scopes

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[tobnpr]

In that price range, Athlon's lineup are worth a look if you haven't owned one... I think the Midas Tac and Ares BTR Gen II are great values.
I'm extremely impressed with the quality of their mid and upper tier optics.

[Robinhood]

In that price range, Athlon's lineup are worth a look if you haven't owned one... I think the Midas Tac and Ares BTR Gen II are great values.
I'm extremely impressed with the quality of their mid and upper tier optics.

I can attest to their top tier stuff being good for the money.

[Ted_Feasel]

I can attest to their top tier stuff being good for the money.I'd have to agree, don't own any Athlons.. yet ... but have used tried a couple friends out and I didn't have any complaints.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[derrelw]

That is a beauty for sure!

[taylorce1]

Very nice, hope she's a laser.. just my opinion I would not discount vortex, primary arms athrna reticle if you like ffp mil ranging scopes

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Well I don't know if I like FFP scopes, this would be my first. I have some Mil-Quad reticles in SS fixed scopes that I like. What I really want is locking turrets or zero stop and prefer a capped windage knob. I really don't like really busy reticles and the NF F1 and Bushnell G3 aren't terrible. I also want to stick with 30mm scopes for right now.

[celltech]

Also consider the Tract Toric line of 30mm scopes as well. Made in Japan by LOW with locking turrets and a zero stop. Awesome glass quality regardless of price. And a 15% discount if you are MIL/LEO.

[tobnpr]

Well I don't know if I like FFP scopes, this would be my first. I have some Mil-Quad reticles in SS fixed scopes that I like. What I really want is locking turrets or zero stop and prefer a capped windage knob. I really don't like really busy reticles and the NF F1 and Bushnell G3 aren't terrible. I also want to stick with 30mm scopes for right now.



I primarily shoot target at known long ranges, and for that application prefer SFP. The reticle doesn't grow with magnification and obscure point of aim like it does with FFP.
If shooting unknown ranges as in PRS (at other than the magnification where it would be accurate), or hunting long-range without a rangefinder, then FFP is a must.

Misconception that FFP is "better" because it costs more- which just isn't true. Really depends on the type of shooting you do, as to which type is best suited.

[taylorce1]

I primarily shoot target at known long ranges, and for that application prefer SFP. The reticle doesn't grow with magnification and obscure point of aim like it does with FFP.
If shooting unknown ranges as in PRS (at other than the magnification where it would be accurate), or hunting long-range without a rangefinder, then FFP is a must.

Misconception that FFP is "better" because it costs more- which just isn't true. Really depends on the type of shooting you do, as to which type is best suited.

I want the reticle subtensions to be correct regardless of power settings. I'd be just as happy with a MOA reticle as a MIL as long as it tracks correctly when I crank on the adjustments. I am also staying under 20X so the reticle doesn't become unusable on the top end, on the bottom I figure it'll pretty much work like cross hairs.

[Ted_Feasel]

Well I don't know if I like FFP scopes, this would be my first. I have some Mil-Quad reticles in SS fixed scopes that I like. What I really want is locking turrets or zero stop and prefer a capped windage knob. I really don't like really busy reticles and the NF F1 and Bushnell G3 aren't terrible. I also want to stick with 30mm scopes for right now.Thats what I used to say, I used to use sfp moa, a friend got me to try a ffp mil tree (ebr2c)and once I got used to it I and use nothing but now. It was a.tad busy at first but once I figured out how o could kmow a objects distance i was sold.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Jbotto]

Great looking set-up! [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SageRat Shooter]

I want the reticle subtensions to be correct regardless of power settings. I'd be just as happy with a MOA reticle as a MIL as long as it tracks correctly when I crank on the adjustments. I am also staying under 20X so the reticle doesn't become unusable on the top end, on the bottom I figure it'll pretty much work like cross hairs.

Once you go FFP, you'll never go back; I can attest to that personally.

I can also give a +1 to the Athlon Ares BTR Gen II 4.5-27x50 FFP optics. The other new line of Optics that seem to be quality is Element Optics line. https://element-optics.com/ Their top 2 optics are FFP with the lowest model being SFP.

[Ted_Feasel]

I want the reticle subtensions to be correct regardless of power settings. I'd be just as happy with a MOA reticle as a MIL as long as it tracks correctly when I crank on the adjustments. I am also staying under 20X so the reticle doesn't become unusable on the top end, on the bottom I figure it'll pretty much work like cross hairs.Ffp your subs are accurate no matter what magnification.. the only conceivable downside to FFP i could possibly see a argument for is certain reticles if not etched fine enough can leave some room for error from the reticle covering a area that could be larger than you like but most good ffp makes have figured out the optimal reticle size. On ffp the with magnification change , changes in direct ratio to the object so all the way down reticle is small, all the way up it takes up the whole lense but everything stays in correct subs from min to max

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[J.Baker]

Solid copper bullets are always longer than traditional jacketed lead bullets as copper weights less than lead. Need that extra length to get the weight.

[Ted_Feasel]

Solid copper bullets are always longer than traditional jacketed lead bullets as copper weights less than lead. Need that extra length to get the weight.And something to remember I think both hornady and berger have done write ups on it, the longer the pill, that faster the twist needs to be to stabilize it.. would almost expect a longer driving band would fix that but apparently not or at least as a rule of thumb

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Orezona]

That is a great looking rifle.

[Robinhood]

Right now I'm looking at Bushnell LRTS 4.5-18X44 or NF SHV 4-14X50 and they'll add quite a bit of weight, I was going to go with a lighter Leupold. My original goal was to be sub 10 lbs suppressed, but the 18" X-Caliber barrel still came in heavier than I planned, so I've given up and just going with the NF or Bushnell.

The vortex AMG or a kahles is availabe for just a little more used.

[taylorce1]

Solid copper bullets are always longer than traditional jacketed lead bullets as copper weights less than lead. Need that extra length to get the weight.

I understand all of that, but what I guess I should have said is I'm that I'm surprised how deeply the 105 HPBT looks to be seated. There is only a .050" difference in length between the two. I realize that if the 105 had a similar polymer tip they would look closer to the same as well.


And something to remember I think both hornady and berger have done write ups on it, the longer the pill, that faster the twist needs to be to stabilize it.. would almost expect a longer driving band would fix that but apparently not or at least as a rule of thumb
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

That's why I went with a 1:7 twist instead of a 1:8. I have some 115 Berger and DTAC bullets to eventually try as well.


That is a great looking rifle.

I hope it looks even better when I get the barreled action coated after hunting seasons are over. I hope to pack it on a CO pronghorn doe, CO mule deer buck, and OK white tail hunt this year before I finish the rifle off with some Cerakote.