What Rifle for a new shooter?

[Plowboy]

Yeah .223 is a nice all round calibre for southern Australia and will be a good first centrefire rifle(My choice too). Amo is widely available and cheaper than most if not all CF. If you don't reload that will make a big difference to how much you shoot. Once you get a fair bit of practice in and maybe start reloading you can move to other more specialised calibres

[trevort]

definetely the wrong scope

[Plowboy]

Yeah mate go a Vortex. I just got my second. While a razor would most likley out of your price range but even my crossfire was good. Those vipers would be just what you need. I would not go to much more than 16X if you're mainly shooting at night because you hardly go much over 14X or you loose too much light.

My cross fore is going to move to the hummer and the nighteater can go to the cupboard as a just incase scope.

[bigfellascott]

Definately DON'T go the 3-9 variable, it is way to limiting when it comes to long shots - 223 is capable of some long shots no worries there and the 3-9 variables will just limit your ability to use the 223's capability. I'd definately look around the 18x upto 25x as the max,

Like one of the other fellas said you can wind them down to the low power if needed but if you don't have the maginification up the upper end you will struggle to hit things consistently at distance over 250m or so, personally I think a 3-9 really belongs on a 22 or scrub rifle where most shots are close in and the occasional long shot presents.

I wouldn't put anything under a 14x on yours, definately go bigger if you can afford it.

Good luck and welcome to the world of guns!

[kjd]

G'day mate,welcome to the forum my choice would be a CZ527, CRPF, detachable mag, set trigger, and huge mauser extractor, or the Ruger M77 again CRPF (controled round push feed) I'd go a 223 over a 204 for economy, unless your reloading, keep in mind if reloading you will be able to throw heavier pills at bigger game with the 223

I wholeheartedly agree mate if you aren't reloading the .223 is the best choice out there for a new centrefire shooter. You will be able to shoot 223 bullets 2 to 1 compared to a 204 for factory ammo price.

[220]

the scope that was suggested to me was the Leupold I 3-9x50

Bigfella is right 20x is the go!
You need a reasonable amount of magnification to see a fox a 200m!!!
As I was told you can alway wind it down but you can't wind it up if you don't have it!

What you need to see a fox at 200m is a decent light and quality glass, plenty of people seem to think magnification will make up for inferior glass, it wont.
Ideally we would all be able to afford to Kahles or similar but we can't, a quality scope in lower magnification is a better proposition than higher magnification in poorer glass.
Have a talk to the blokes who do a lot of spotlighting and you will find that most wind the magnification back for really long shots as even quality glass can't gather enough light when you start looking at 3/400m under a light. 12-14x seems to be where most end up.
I think you will find most pro shooters would still be using a euro 8x56's, I'm talking about the blokes that do it full time for a living not those that put a rack and spotlight on their vehicale and call themselves a proshooter.
Sightrons are definetly worth a look, IMHO probably the best value going, send missed a PM if you want to know how they compare to others, he has sold pretty much every scope he had (Vortex, bushnell, Leupold etc) and just about everything he owns now wears a Sightron.
While a 3-9 might not be ideal plenty of foxes and other critters have been shot at 300m plus with them, budget will probably decide what you end up purchasing but I would recommend going for quality over magnification.

[Glenn]

Yes I agree you need good glass!!!!
I never said you didn't!
I have talked to Missed and I am buying a Sightron for my 6mm and my 20PPC as soon as I sell my Leupold!

I know you wind the mag down at night!

As I was told you can alway wind it down but you can't wind it up if you don't have it!

That is why I wrote that!

I'm talking about the blokes that do it full time for a living not those that put a rack and spotlight on their vehicle and call themselves a pro shooter.

The OP asked a question and I gave my opinion, that's all!
If you think putting a laughing face at the end of the above sentence would mean I missed your sarcasm you are wrong!!

No I am not a PRO shooter, I do a bit of spotlighting, 2 to 3 times a week!
I thought that would give me a little insight to offer some advice!

Apparently I was wrong!!
I will not make that mistake again!

Glenn

[220]

Yes I agree you need good glass!!!!

that was the point I was trying to make, if your limited to a budget you are better off sacrificing a bit of magnification than quality. If the choice was limited to VX-1 3-9 or nighteater 6-24 which would you choose?
High range variables have only really been available for a decade or so yet cartridges like 222, swift, 22/250 etc have all been around for 60 years or more and shooters managed to make full use of them without 20, 30 or 40x magnification. Every second post I read seems to say you need a minimum of 12x on a 22 and 20x plus on a HMR to take full advantage of the range they offer in the feild. More magnification seems to be the standard answer given to everything,
Question:I can hit rabbits at 200m with my 22lr
Answer: You need more magnification
Question: My stock rifle won't shoot better than 1/2moa
Answer: Get a bigger scope
While more magnification definetly has its place, more is not always better or the answer to everything

I'm talking about the blokes that do it full time for a living not those that put a rack and spotlight on their vehicle and call themselves a pro shooter.

If you thought this was dirrected at you maybe you need to HTFU, how would I know if you spend 1 night a year or 365 nights spotlighting, have a roof mounted light and rack fitted to your rig or not, the point I was trying to make was if you are going to ask a professional make sure they are, every country town seems to have 30 utes with a roof mounted light and rack and most will tell you they a pro shooter all you need to do is ask.

The best thing about forums is everyone has an opinion and we are all free to share them.

[bigfellascott]

QUOTE: High range variables have only really been available for a decade or so yet cartridges like 222, swift, 22/250 etc have all been around for 60 years or more and shooters managed to make full use of them without 20, 30 or 40x magnification. Every second post I read seems to say you need a minimum of 12x on a 22 and 20x plus on a 17hmr.

Begs the question why Scope Manufacturers decided to make scopes with greater magnification if it wasn't wanted!

I'll stick by what I said previously - I'd rather put a decent quality scope on a 223 with say a max of around 14-20x magnification than a 3-9 which is some what limiting at times, yes higher magnification isn't a great advantage at night spotlighting, but at least he will have the flexiblity of some extra magnification during daylight hunting if needed!

I understand your point about cheap high magnification or less magnification but better quality you are right about quality - for me buy the best scope you can for the money, thats what I have always done, my scope cost more than the rifle (about twice as much in fact) Zeiss 6.5-20x50 brillant scopes. And yes he can probably get by with a quality 3-9 if he needs to but for me I'd rather find the extra $$ and get a quality higher magnification scope than the 3-9 that allows a little more flexibility if needed.

[220]

Begs the question why Scope Manufacturers decided to make scopes with greater magnification if it wasn't wanted!

Wanted is different to needed, you only need to look at the power out puts of family cars compared to 10-20years ago, most have just about doubled. Was it needed, well considering speeding laws etc have gotten tougher, you would have to say no, yet plenty want the increase and it gives manufacturers a marketing advantage over the competition.
I guess scope sales are the same, there are plenty of people who think magnification will fix what ever problem they are having, or who like the idea of the availability of more magnification even if it will never be used.
Very few shooters will replace a scope with another of the same magnification and as we know a quality scope will just about last a lifetime, so what can manufacturers do?
Offer a new reticle, quick focus etc but they aren't really going to tempt a shooter to replace an existing scope, they need something they can convince shooters they really need and is different to their existing scopes, combining these with more magnification seems to be the thing that works.

[bigfellascott]

[quote="220"]I guess scope sales are the same, there are plenty of people who think magnification will fix what ever problem they are having, or who like the idea of the availability of more magnification even if it will never be used.

I can't speak for others with higher magnification scopes, but I've certainly used the highest magnification of 20x on mine! Not sure why you think people wouldn't use it?

Very few shooters will replace a scope with another of the same magnification

Why do you think that is?

My guess is they realise that they can have better magnification/performance thus allowing them to see things at longer distances clearly and in doing so hopefully improve their chances at hitting them, it certainly helps me when it comes to shooting groups at 200mtrs or further, I've tried it on a lower power 10 or 12x from memory and I struggled, but at least I had the choice to wind it up and improve the situation, certainly wouldn't have achieved the same groups with a 3-9 Variable! My mate has a 3-9x Leupold on his 223 and he used mine and instantly wanted to get more magnification, he couldn't believe how much better it was to use. I remember the old days where a 4x40 was the go, thank god we have advanced enough to realise there are definately better options out there. Like you say mate cars have improved a lot over the years, yes they have more power (only if you put the foot down will it be used) and sometimes its needed sometimes its not, but atleast the choice is there and thats what the higher magnifications scopes give me the choice instead of having to put up with something with limited potential for what I use them for.

I can't imagine too many long range shooters who would swap their high magnification scopes with a 3-9x and be happy with that decision do you?

Horses for courses mate if you are happy to limit yourself with a 3-9x for long range work then that's fine, me I'll go for the higher magnification, unless I'm in the market for a 22 scope then I'd go a 3-9x quality scope.

At least we agree on someting mate - Buy Quality, like the old saying "Rich man buy once - poor man buy forever".

[220]

IMHO there are far more rifles about that are over scoped than under, while more magnification definetly has its place I've seen a lot more missed oppertunities due to to much magnification than to little. I honestly couldn't tell you the number of times I've seen blokes miss the oppertunity at a shot because they couldn't find the animal in the scope, needed to adjust the magnification or parralax or couldn't decide on which hashmark or dot to use, but it is a common occourance. Admitedly the majority of the time they are newer shooters but a 3-9, 4-12 or similar without adjustable AO would eliminate the problems they have and be entirely adequate for pretty much 100% of the shooting they do.

[Plowboy]

While this is way off topic now I just add this. I just went down slightly in magnification (24 down to 20) but went up a lot in quality. But one of the main reasons why I wanted to change was the fact that my old vortex crossfire had an AO and I hated it for the reasons 220 pointed out. I have now got a side parallax adjust on the tikka. Much easier and faster to use and does not make me change my position to get a crisp picture of my target. The extra 4x I lost was never used anyway and the higher quality glass will more than make up for that.