View Full Version : Took my Savage 110 LRH to the range today , and my Kimber
The 110 7mmRM is deadly accurate . Shooting Nosler brass , 150 ELDX bullets , Federal LMR 215 primers and 60 grains of Reloader 22 .
The Kimber was struggling today , LOL . Same brass and bullets , CCI BR2 primers and 58 grains of 22 .
Five shot groups at 100 yards , Savage on the top , Kimber on the bottom . https://i.ibb.co/4tRQBgV/image2-1.jpghttps://i.ibb.co/XkfJ7bW/IMG-2633.jpg
Dave Hoback
10-16-2022, 09:46 PM
Yerp… Savages tend to do that to other factor rifles.
I have a surplus of the Hornady 150 ELDX's so last week I set about mitigating the problem. Used my old flat back 116 with a weather warrior barrel to help. 61gr of RL-22, Norma brass and Rem 91/2M primers. First three were like your top right target. Last two were uhh...somewhere else....much like your Kimber. Drat!
I have a surplus of the Hornady 150 ELDX's so last week I set about mitigating the problem. Used my old flat back 116 with a weather warrior barrel to help. 61gr of RL-22, Norma brass and Rem 91/2M primers. First three were like your top right target. Last two were uhh...somewhere else....much like your Kimber. Drat!
I think I'm the problem with the Kimber , I need to get the scope higher , I can't get a clear view through the scope the way it is now . Hoping it gets better the more I shoot it .
Dave Hoback
10-17-2022, 02:03 PM
Really? If it’s still wearing the Nikon from the picture you posted the other day, it looks about where it should be. In fact, your 110 above the Arken looks like it’s mounted crazy high! I know the stock has adjustable comb height. Can’t tell what insert you are using. Don’t get me wrong, I actually prefer having the scope higher & using adjustable cheek rest. But I prefer more inline Chassis as well. I’ve just always found standard Sporter style stocks with no comb adjustment, to be about right with the low rings. Higher rings seemed to make them more a “Chin” weld, instead of a Cheek weld.
I think I'm the problem with the Kimber
Meh...I think it is a new rifle and needs tuning...lower left on Kimber looks ok.
Whynot
10-17-2022, 02:38 PM
Couple of thoughts:
With the barrel profile on the kimber and the chambering- I'd switch to 3 shot groups.
Light barrels can be exceptionally accurate- but not as forgiving with just any load-- so you'll have to work to find it.
And I wouldn't be concerned about trying to out shoot the savage.... When you talk to people who have "moved on" from savages to other guns they usually don't mention accuracy as a reason for it- Savage rifles generally shoot (or can with a little effort)
Did you fire form from 280 or did you buy 280 AI brass?
Dave Hoback
10-17-2022, 02:49 PM
LOL.. switching to 3-shot groups doesn’t make it anymore accurate obviously. Not a huge deal either as it’s going to pretty much be a dedicated hunting rifle, yes? So 100yd groups aren’t the focus. But yeah, good idea when doing load development though..sticking with 3-shot group testing. Will help eliminate factors beyond your control, like barrel heat.
I’ve actually decided on ONE-shot groups only. I feel this gives me the best control of outside eliminating outside influences. So that I can concentrate on the accuracy of loads only. Yeah… that’s the ticket.
No? ;)
Really? If it’s still wearing the Nikon from the picture you posted the other day, it looks about where it should be. In fact, your 110 above the Arken looks like it’s mounted crazy high! I know the stock has adjustable comb height. Can’t tell what insert you are using. Don’t get me wrong, I actually prefer having the scope higher & using adjustable cheek rest. But I prefer more inline Chassis as well. I’ve just always found standard Sporter style stocks with no comb adjustment, to be about right with the low rings. Higher rings seemed to make them more a “Chin” weld, instead of a Cheek weld.
Well , it may be that I'm used to my scope being high after shooting the 110 with the FX100 scope , it has it's own mount , a one piece mount made for that scope .
But with a scope mounted low , it feels like I'm laying my face on the weld and looking at an extreme angle . I prefer to just have my cheek touching the weld , not actually laying on it . Plus , I see my heart beat if I have to much contact with the weld or hold the gun too tight .
https://i.ibb.co/wdzqbnj/IMG-2619.jpg
Meh...I think it is a new rifle and needs tuning...lower left on Kimber looks ok.
I hope you're right , and it's just that it's new to me . Plus trying to find what it wants to shoot , I'll try 162's and I have 180's though they might be to heavy for this barrel , it's a 1-9 twist .
Couple of thoughts:
With the barrel profile on the kimber and the chambering- I'd switch to 3 shot groups.
Light barrels can be exceptionally accurate- but not as forgiving with just any load-- so you'll have to work to find it.
And I wouldn't be concerned about trying to out shoot the savage.... When you talk to people who have "moved on" from savages to other guns they usually don't mention accuracy as a reason for it- Savage rifles generally shoot (or can with a little effort)
Did you fire form from 280 or did you buy 280 AI brass?
I ordered new brass , Nosler .
I wondered the same thing about three instead of five shot groups . Thats why I took two guns , the range goes in 15-20 minute sets , so I would shoot five with each gun , taking breaks to let them cool . I actually took my Ryobi fan to blow on the gun I wasn't using , not sure if it helped or not .
Funny thing was , the Kimber's first shot always seemed to be a flyer , then the next three would be better .
Whynot
10-17-2022, 03:17 PM
It doesn't look high- you are fairly close to the barrel with what looks to be a 40 or 44mm. Not familiar with the monarch scope but I'd guess it's a 1" tube- so combine a smaller tube with the fact that you don't have a 1 piece rail on the rifle and it makes the distance between action and scope look like it sits higher than it does. Add in differences in peoples face structure.
When a scope is to low for me and you have to turn your head to get down low enough to get behind the scope I usually end of canting the scope a lot. What looks strait when you are in the correct position looks much different with your head on a weird angle.
It doesn't look high- you are fairly close to the barrel with what looks to be a 40 or 44mm. Not familiar with the monarch scope but I'd guess it's a 1" tube- so combine a smaller tube with the fact that you don't have a 1 piece rail on the rifle and it makes the distance between action and scope look like it sits higher than it does. Add in differences in peoples face structure.
When a scope is to low for me and you have to turn your head to get down low enough to get behind the scope I usually end of canting the scope a lot. What looks strait when you are in the correct position looks much different with your head on a weird angle.
I like my scopes to be when I shoulder the gun I have a clear view through the scope with zero shadows , and I'm not getting that with this gun . I'm limited with eye relief because of the mounts . Not sure why , but I'm "fighting" to find that clear view , so I think I'm not anchoring my face in the same , does that make sense ?
does that make sense ?
Mostly? :cool:
Yeah it does.
CFJunkie
10-18-2022, 07:34 AM
I learned not to comment on what scope height for others may need after a close friend with a very large, wide head could not get comfortably behind the scope on one of my rifles.
He just couldn't get his eye in line with the optical plane of the scope.
He was having the same problem with one of his new ARs.
He just needed higher rings and a higher scope mount.
So, if CRJR needs a higher scope mount than most of us do to comfortably get behind his scope, he should use a higher scope mount.
He is the only one who can tell what works for him.
I learned not to comment on what scope height for others may need after a close friend with a very large, wide head could not get comfortably behind the scope on one of my rifles.
He just couldn't get his eye in line with the optical plane of the scope.
He was having the same problem with one of his new ARs.
He just needed higher rings and a higher scope mount.
So, if CRJR needs a higher scope mount than most of us do to comfortably get behind his scope, he should use a higher scope mount.
He is the only one who can tell what works for him.
Yeah , it's definitely a problem for me , my eyes are very close together . I have problems with binoculars also , I can't close them down enough to get a full circle . Plus my heads a little lopsided , I was a forcep baby and came out crooked faced .
Thank god I'm hung like a horse !
Oh , and I have a sick sense of humor , LOL
So I raised the scope on the Kimber and tighten the new mounts , using blue loctite . Also loaded some 162 ELDX's with H4831SC . Started out good , then I tried to move the scope over , and it didn't react when I turned the turret . After that it was walking everywhere . I think both my Monarchs are bad . I sent both of them in for service today , not sure what to hope for . But , I did order a new Trijicon Credo 4x16x50 SPF . Europtics had them for 60% off , I couldn't hardly not buy it , LOL.
The blue tape was where I sighted it in .https://i.ibb.co/HTCbHgV/IMG-2656.jpghttps://i.ibb.co/0Cz744c/IMG-2657.jpg
prdatr
10-26-2022, 09:09 AM
As far as I know Nikon got out of the Sport Optics so it will be interesting to see what their response is.
As far as I know Nikon got out of the Sport Optics so it will be interesting to see what their response is.
What Nikon did was if you sent in a scope for repair they gave you a voucher to purchase any Nikon product. I sent in a Monarch last year and they gave me the voucher that I sold to a friend that wanted a Nikon camera.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.