TargetTalk

j-team wrote:By the way, if I was getting into 300m I would build up my own rifle. I would use a Barnard action and a truflite barrel chambered in 6mmBR. In a multi adjustable aluminium stock of some kind.

Your post has got me thinking. Other than G&E, will any centerfire actions "drop into" a smallbore stock so that you could just swap barreled actions? I suppose a barrel-clamp design would work (like the Gilkes-Ross stock), but what about something a little more conventional, such as the new Precise aluminum stock?

Jason

Mostly centre fire actions are bigger than smallbore. So, it is possible to have a centre fire rifle stock at you fit a smallbore action into with an adapter (spacer). I know of one shooter who has a Barnard actioned Palma rifle which he can drop in an Anschutz actioned smallbore barrel which has had a sleeve fitted to it to match the Barnard diameter.

It's less likely that you could fit a Centre fire action into a stock that is inletted for smallbore action. But, nothings impossible if you are prepared to customise things...

What about for the square-bottom Match 54 action? It looks like Keppeler centerfire actions are about the same size, but I've never seen a Keppeler action or stock.

Jason

Coming from a service rifle background has mad me relize a few things.
1st I wont shoot a non adjustable rifle seriously anymore. It really sucks fighting the rifle.
2nd Recoil is BAD. I started shooting the M1 and it really beats the crap out of you. It takes some of the fun out of it.
3rd The 6BR and its variants are the way to go.

I personally would shoot a free rifle of some kind in 6BR-BX or 6mm Dasher or something similar. MAYBE the 6XC but it just doesnt have the raw accuracy that the 6BR does.
Matt

Thank you all for your replies :)

300 meter shooting is alive and well in Minnesota. The Minneapolis Rifle Club has a climate controlled range with electronic scoring which we use year around. We shoot F class, prone, three position, and offhand. It beats ice fishing.

The initial comment and question are a little like the reports in the 1960s-1980s of anomalous measurements of the force of gravity, that indicated there was a 5th, antigravity force in the universe. Those measurements were viewed as flukes, errors, fakes, or who knows what. Some decades later, a different line of experiments and data leave us with the dark force, an antigravity force that probably is the main form of energy in the universe.

Regarding the early Tanner and Tanner Hammerli rifles, although they were in 7.5 (except for ones for the US market or Germany) and for a specific 300M competition, the issues relate very closely to .22 rifles and others.

Back to their history, Tanner (and Gruenig) were Swiss marksmen who were very unhappy with the poor scores that the Swiss straight pull rifles were producing. Hammerli was the main "afterworker" of those rifles. Tanner worked with them, with progressive innovations trying to improve the results.

The side mounted sights were one early step. This was done for neurophysiologic reasons to improve aim (the factor here is not optical, but the relationship of head position to body stability and aim accuracy). The rear sight was moved to the side, as was the front sight. This was an adaptation of the system used in the M1 sniper rifles (used on that gun for an entirely different reason) and later, on the Steyr AUG (pre-A1 designs). Although the original reason for side mounted sights that were not center aligned was different on those rifles, the effect of the side position overrode the prroblems of an off-center sight line.

Gruenig used a similar side mount for the diopter, but the diopter itself was center position on their earlier rifles. Now, the position of dovetail tends to be center, but they offer a side offset, similar to Tanner.

The other problems Tanner encountered in the original straight pull rifles were the trigger, and the overall accuracy of the rifle independent of the sight. He developed his own trigger, which is somewhat unique including easy external adjustment for trigger pull. Gruenig used Anschutz triggers initially, later introducing his own design.

The main problem of inaccuracy, however, could not be solved so long as the original straight pull bolt system was retained. Tanner and Gruenig used similar, but not identical solutions to this. The main features were recessing the cartridge into the bolt face, use of a few large interlocking lugs, and separating the barrel from the action to reduce adverse vibration coupling between the two. This last step differentiates these guns from the Mauser type actions. The recessing of the cartridge moved the gas seal rearward in the breech. In rimless cartridges, the gas seal is a bit in front of the rim. As a result, the usual system places the gas seal into the chamber, where dirt can accumulate, and expansion from heat with firing is greater.

Tanner started with replacing the trigger, bolt, and receiver with his own design (and stock), but using Hammerli barrels. Later, he stopped using those barrels, but around that time, Hammerli was disappearing progressively as a company as well.

The Tanner lug system posed a problem with CISM (magazine fed) rifles, due to the size of the lugs. For those rifles, Tanner moved the lugs to the rear of the bolt, similar to the Steyr and Enfield system.

Unlike Gruenig, Tanner never introduced metal stocks. The vibration coupling between the stock and action would make this traditional approach seem like the optimal one, but tunable stocks such as Keppeler, Gruenig, and Tesro offer provide alternative solutions.

The Gruenig metal stocks fit a number of Anschutz actions. The Keppeler stocks either fit a few of those actions, or for nearly all the others, adapter plates are available that provide a good fit. They also use an unusual method of counterweight tuning, that does not affect the "feel" of the stock as much as the other systems. Three different metal stocks are available from Keppeler, which mostly differ in degrees of freedom for adjustment.

For the .22lr guns, in theory one could recess either the bolt face, or chamber face to accept the rim of the cartridge. In practice, recessing the chamber face is a problem due to variation in rim thickness, so usually the bolt face is recessed.

As to caliber, the 30-06 design is old, but has a major advantage over the 308 due to the distance from the powder front to the bullet. This reduces exposure of the base of the bullet to the most intense part of the flame. The 6mmBR cartridge accomplishes the same end result, but does so by using a very long neck to the cartridge. In 1906, this type was too costly to make for military use (and probably still is).

The general trend in rifles for use up to about 500M is for shorter barrels, especially at 50 and 100M, and to some extent even to 300M. Originally (early 1900s to 1930) this was to lighten the weight and increase maneuverability, and made possible by changes in powder formulations (shorter burn times possible). Now the trend is the result of a balance between the effect of vibration, and bullet velocity. In general, the longer barrels result in a higher velocity for a standard burn rate cartridge (unless the barrel length significantly exceeds the burn time of the powder). However the amplitude of vibration tends to be greater for longer barrels (roughly proportional to barrel length). As a result, two opposite or contrary factors are at work with barrel length.

For the .308 and 30-06, the optimal barrel length (and twist rate) therefore vary with distance. Long distance 308 and 30-06 usually give optimal accuracy with a longer barrel and slower twist rate, all else being equal.

The barrel mass or heavy barrel (diameter usually) affects a number of things. One is vibration ampitude, which can be less with the larger diameter barrels. Can be, but is not always be. The other is repeated firing, the heating rate of the barrel is less, and there is less change in accuracy with repeated firing. Thermal effects on barrel length and vibration pattern are a major factor in accuracy in both handguns and rifles. This also accounts for a fair amount of the effect of ambient temperature on gun accuracy. Vibrationless barrel, of course, does not show most of these effects. That type of barrel is not easy to make, and optimally starts with a cartridge that, itself, is designed for minimal vibration of the barrel.

The 6mmBR cartridge offers a number of advantages. In addition to low cross wind resistance, the long neck on the casing and the small volume for the powder give an consistent burn rate and final pressure. Lower recoil is pleasant, but the "felt recoil" usually does not affect accuracy. All of that corresponds to gun movement after the bullet has left the muzzle, and can not be influenced by the recoil. Recoil of the gun BEFORE the bullet leaves the muzzle does influence accuracy, as dose muzzle blast as the bullet leaves the muzzle. The 6mmBR is a bit better on that. The low wind resistance makes it possible to use this cartridge out to 1000 yards without going to different barrel lengths and twist rates (see above re .308/30-06), but it is not optimal at that distance.

Back to Hammerli, where this began. In addition to association with Tanner, another Swiss marksman and gunsmith, Furter, worked with them. Initially, this was as a design engineer, developing the details of the International/208 from the far inferior Walther Olympia for which Hammerli had acquired the patents after WWII. His work included adaptation of the Luger lock action to high accuracy handguns (leading to the Hammerli 120 and his own later free pistols) and rifles. In Scandinavia, the desire for a rapid fire high accuracy rifle led to a number of alternative straight pull designs. The Lynx was popular, but not entirely so accurate. The Jalonen rifles use a more "refined" straight pull system but with excellent accuracy in the end result.

Finally, changing barrels or custom barreled actions always are an option. A 10-20% failure rate for end accuracy should be expected, however, even when "the best" barrel is combined with "the best" action. Whatever "the best" might be. This is due to unforeseen vibration couplings between the two. The Tanner, G&E, and Bleiker systems with strong separation of the units reduces this chance, but it still remains at the 10% level, minimum.

You are looking for a Rifle to get a qualifying score so that you can then get a decent Rifle and ammunition through your Countries regulations. I assume the score you gave is Prone?

If I was in your position limited really to 30-06 and was in the States for a visit I would look at a standard Palma type Rifle with sights. I am not sure of the availability in the States but you might find something in your price range sights included although they may be the most expensive part. If it is second hand obviously and in 308 you might be able to get it rechambered into 30-06.

When we first started in 300Mtre here (NZ) we just shot our Palma style Rifles in 308, no adjustable cheek pieces, thumbholes etc. just a basic stock. Our Ladies also shot these and had no problems shooting sixty shot matches. We were competitive shooting in the high 580's with the odd 590 thrown in. Of course now would use the 6BR if I was still competing.

Given the original question was asked nearly five years ago, I think the OP has bought their rifle by now.

Never noticed that!! Thanks,

J wrote:
The side mounted sights were one early step. This was done for neurophysiologic reasons to improve aim (the factor here is not optical, but the relationship of head position to body stability and aim accuracy). The rear sight was moved to the side, as was the front sight. This was an adaptation of the system used in the M1 sniper rifles (used on that gun for an entirely different reason) and later, on the Steyr AUG. Although the original reason for side mounted sights that were not center aligned was different on those rifles, the effect of the side position overrode the prroblems of an off-center sight line.

Sorry to highjack, but the Steyr AUG doesn't have off set sights. Designed to be an ambidextrous rifle that just needed the bolt changed and the ejector port cover swapped overto change right to left, an off set sight would defeat the design purpose.

On the AUG and M-1 sniper, the metal sights are center-line.

The optical scope, however, is offset to the left. On the Tanner, the scope mount also is offset to the left. On the G&E scope mount for the old dovetail, the scope could be either centerline, or offset to the left depending on how it was adjusted. On the Tanner, the LH tanner is set up for a RH scope mount or offset for the iron (diopter) sights.

On the M-1 and AUG, there is no provision for a right-sided scope mount.

These are true scopes, not the mini optical sights that can be mounted midline.

As to the basic question for 30-06, the problem is Massachusetts. There are several solutions. The most obvious is what most n MA do ... have a shooting option in NH or VT. The other options are to enter a 5th dimensional space-time dimension so that one is not actually in MA, to use antique guns that are exempt, or to convert a rifle to a breech loading, non-metallic cartridge gun so that the cartridge itself is not needed.

As to reboring a .308 to 30-06, it can of course be done, but there are a few problems to consider. One is that barrel life on most of these guns is only 5000-6000 rounds and less if military ammunition is used (due to flame temperature). Between remaining barrel life and cost for the boring, usually it's more cost-effective to get a new Shilen or Lothar Walther barrel (a few hundred) and just adjust headspace (cheap and simple process).

How is Massachusetts a problem? The OP (original poster) was from India, and I suspect that nearly five years later he has returned. He has not logged on Since 2011 by the way.

It may be advisable to check MA laws regarding the requirements for possession of live metallic cartridge ammunition in MA, especially by non-residents and those not licensed to possess firearms in that state. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that the more recent rules or at least their interpretation are even tighter than they were a few years ago.

The AUG does not have anything mounted to the side. The A1 housing group has the 1.5x Swarovski optic mounted centrally and the A3 housing has a 1913 rail, again mounted centrally, with a small forward rail on the right hand side for accessories. Again, nothing offset to the left whatsoever.

Yes, but the offset design is pre-A1. By the A1, the position was placed midline to make adjustment easier, and the loss in aim superiority was not considered "relevant".

J wrote:It may be advisable to check MA laws regarding the requirements for possession of live metallic cartridge ammunition in MA, especially by non-residents and those not licensed to possess firearms in that state. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that the more recent rules or at least their interpretation are even tighter than they were a few years ago.

But how is this relevant for a question that was asked in 2010, by a person who has not logged onto this board since 2011?

Insightful question.

Perhaps not relevant for the person who originally asked the question (the MA laws are far stricter now, anyway). However helpful for me. In checking the current MA law, a solution for how to provide a large number of match rifles and pistols to the MIT (Cambridge) firearms activity emerged, that was buried in the details of the law. Until seeing this, the logistics of getting the guns there and back was very troublesome.

Also, perhaps worth mentioning: I do plan to offer a few of my G&E and Keppeler .223, .308 and 6mmBR rifles late this year or early next year. Perhaps a 7.5 Swiss. A few still don't have reservations placed on them. If anyone is interested. The G&E are ST200 series. The Keppeler a mixture of the K06 stock, and wood stock.