Rifles

Given adequate funds, which would you prefer for all your general medium-game hunting, a single shot, or a good double rifle? This question has been around a good many years, particularly in Africa in the days before one could get good yet inexpensive bolt-action rifles. Today the question might be a bit different. Which one would make the better investment? Or, which would give greater shooter satisfaction? Given the great disparity in prices of good examples of single and double loaders, would there be any real benefit to owning one type of rifle more than another?

Sturm, Ruger & Co. chambers a most unusual (to American shooters) mid-power cartridge in the Ruger No. 1, the 9.3x74R. It's a rimmed cartridge commonly loaded with bullets of 0.366-inch diameter in weights from 232 to 286 grains. This cartridge has power a shade under that of the .375 H&H Magnum. We procured a Ruger No.1 ($1030) in this caliber. Ammunition is not available everywhere, as we found to our chagrin.

We were fortunate to have the loan of a fine Manton double rifle (about $10,000) in this caliber, which not only used the same bullet size as the 9.3x74R, but put out its 320-grain bullets at essentially the same velocity as our handload for the Ruger—though at vastly reduced pressure. While a single shot like the Ruger has the immense advantage of being able to use a variety of bullet weights, the fine double is generally regulated for only one load, with either soft-nose or "solid" bullets. But one load per rifle is generally adequate, as many experienced hunters have found over the years.

Norma, RWS, Sellier & Bellot, and perhaps one or two others make ammo for the 9.3x74R. Hornady has promised to make some for several years, but none is yet forthcoming. We were unable to find ammo anywhere in time for this report, so we resorted to handloading. We used jacketed and cast bullets designed for the various .360-caliber British cartridges. Specifically, we loaded 320-grain bullets from Hawk, Inc., and from Woodleigh, and 275-grain cast gas-checked bullets from Mt. Baldy, into new RWS cases. Nosler also makes several bullets in this size for handloading. We don't claim we got the maximum results out of the 9.3x74R. We stopped when everything was working well. The Manton was easier to feed. Its owner provided all the ammunition, featuring Woodleigh's 320-grain bullets, same as we used in the Ruger, and both Bell and Bertram brass.

So how did these two compare? In several important ways there's no comparison. The Ruger has a list price of $1030, and almost any dealer can order you one. The Manton, or anything like it, will set you back today right around $10,000. And you probably won't find a decent one for sale, though you might find several clunkers. Let's see what we found out about each of them.

When a new cartridge comes along that might be useful as an all-around one, it gets our attention. The recent .338 Federal isnt really powerful enough to qualify as an all-rounder, but it looked to us like a great option for those who want a versatile round with more bullet weight than is offered in the .308, while still being able to fit into the .308-size rifle action. The .338 Federal is essentially the .308 opened to accept bullets of 0.338-inch diameter, sort of a .338 OKH Short, if you will. These .338-inch-diameter bullets offer greater sectional density than similar-weight bullets out of the .358 Winchester. While there are a lot of bullets available in 0.338-inch diameter, the short actions generally used to accommodate this new round will probably dictate that the lighter bullets will be the ones of choice.Still, we suspect many handloading short-range hunters will opt for 225- up to 250-grain bullets. An updated version of the old 250-grain Hornady round-nose bullet is still available and wont take up much powder room.As with most new cartridges, .338 Federal ammunition isnt readily available yet across every sporting-goods counter. We checked various gun shops in Idaho and Montana, but could not find .338-Fed ammunition for sale. In fact, most clerks in the stores we contacted had no idea of what the cartridge was. We finally obtained three of the four types currently available, all by Federal. These were loaded with 180-grain Nosler Accubond, 185-grain Barnes-X Triple-Shock, and the relatively low-cost 200-grain Fusion bullets. We could not obtain the 210-grain Nosler Partition load, though it would be our first choice for serious hunting.Several questions can be put to rest before we look at the three rifles. First, most of us here in Idaho dont consider this caliber adequate for serious elk hunting, much less big bear, though we suspect it would do better than most .30-caliber rifles, even .300 Mags. The bullets arent heavy enough nor velocity fast enough from this small cartridge to perform as well as some of us would like on really big elk. Velocities out of the Kimber were close to factory claims except for the 180-grain Nosler Accubond load, which fell about 90 fps short. Velocities with the Sako were all lower than the Kimbers, and the Rugers short barrel cut speed a whole lot.We believe the .338 Federal will be a mighty fine cartridge for deer, sheep, goat, and so on, performing way better than anything smaller-and assuming a real hunter is behind the rifle. Performance ought to be similar to that obtained from the .358 Winchester So why not get one of those? After all, the .358 owner can use cast-lead pistol bullets. Well, theres a better bullet selection for the reloader in .338, and sectional density is somewhat better too. This means slightly flatter trajectory for the .338 Fed, though probably not by a lot. Finally, the question of recoil is undoubtedly on most shooters minds. We can tell you that even with the heaviest bullets tested in the lightest rifle, recoil is simply not a factor here. Two of the test rifles were much too heavy, but the 6.5-pound Kimber (as tested) was a sweetheart on the shoulder. Forget recoil fears with this cartridge. Heres what we found.

Whether the handler is into hunting, plinking or target shooting-and the majority of .22 owners probably venture into all three areas-there is a rifle style to suit their fancy. The semi-serious will likely own a bull-barreled version at some time in their lives-a step above the standard model with an implied accuracy advantage that appeals to both hunter and target shooter.To see how bigger, heavier fancier .22s performed, we shot and [IMGCAP(1)]compared three heavy-barreled versions of longstanding .22 LR autoloaders. All featured bull barrels with recessed "target" crowns and blow-back bolt cycling designs, 10-shot detachable magazines, heavy laminate stocks with no checkering, sling swivel studs, and were packed with keyed locking devices.No such comparison would be complete without a Ruger 10-22, the most popular rimfire autoloader of all time, so we selected the 10-22 K10/2T, $495, to pit against the Remington 597 LS HB 26579, $337, and Thompson Centers R-55 Benchmark Classic No. 6873, $455.The barrels are the major departures from the base designs in each case. The Ruger 10-22 and Remington 597 feature 20-inch heavy (0.915- and 0.825-inch diameters, respectively) tubes, while the 18-inch Thompson Center barrel measures 0.880 inch. All were button-rifled at the classic .22 LR 1-in-16-inches twist rate.The heavy tubes featured on the three test guns rather offer stiffness to aid accuracy and consistency; bulk to offset minor fluctuations in trigger pressure; and out-front weight to better steady ones hold.Barrel length also means very little. In a rimfire configuration, with a peak of 21,000-psi chamber pressure, the same velocities can be derived from a 12-inch barrel as from a 24-incher. Despite the industrys insistence on longer barrels, .22 LR fanatics universally agree that peak accuracy comes from the civilian-minimum 16-inch barrels, which are stiffer and contain the bullet for a shorter period of time than their longer counterparts.

Lever-action rifles have stood the test of time, being as viable today as they were in the 1860s. Theyve been chambered for nearly every pistol round, and for rifle (and shotgun!) cartridges up to the potent .450 Alaskan and others of even more power. We take a look here at two new offerings in highly practical calibers, both with interesting features and high overall usefulness. The two rifles are Marlins .308 MX ($590) and Brownings takedown BLR in .308 Winchester ($832).[IMGCAP(1)]Marlin has once again come up with a new round for its lever-action line. However, unlike the .450 Marlin, this one makes a great deal of sense to us. The .308 MX is basically a semi-rimmed .308. Its one limitation, as of this writing, is that there is only one loading for it, by only one maker, Hornady. The round features a plastic-tipped bullet of 160 grains. On the other side of our balance sheet, Browning has just brought out a shiny new takedown rifle in a relatively light version with detachable and easily loaded box magazine. Its caliber is the time-proven .308, though the takedown is available in many calibers. How do the two stack up? Heres what we found.

The pursuit of an all-around rifle for big-game hunting leads one to the so-called medium-bore rifles, simply because nothing smaller can do as much. The bigger cartridges can either be handloaded to lower velocity with normal bullets, or reloaded with lighter bullets to cut recoil. In this report we take a look at both bullets and bolt actions to see what hunters might like in a woods rifle.First, we wanted to explore a medium-bore cartridge comparison, pitting the .35 Whelen versus the .350 Remington Magnum, two rounds weve not tested in the magazines history. Second, we have been curious to see how Remingtons three-year-old CDL line fares against the companys standard-bearer, the BDL, which began in 1962.To accomplish this, we got a .35 Whelen Model 700 CDL No. 27019, $907. This is our first test of the Classic Deluxe guns, which kicked off in 2004, the same year the inexpensive ADL line was discontinued.Millions of Model 700s have been sold over the years, so when a 30-year-old trim designation is replaced, we naturally become curious about the new guy on the block. The standard, of course, is the BDL, but we were unable to get a new BDL in .350 Remington Mag. because, oddly, Remington today offers only one rifle in that cartridge, the Model Seven CDL No. 26369, $933.Instead, we acquired a test .350 Magnum 700 BDL without forend tip, in like-new condition. They sell for about $750.

he grand old .375 H&H Magnum has been around nearly a century, and it still holds its own among serious riflemen. Could it possibly have a challenger today? Maybe, but in truth it would take a century to find out, and we'd wager the H&H version will still be around in a hundred years. We chose to put two modern rifles against a slightly older one built on the Magnum Mauser action. We looked at a rifle you can purchase today in the classic old caliber; how another rifle handled the big case a decade ago, and how well a young upstart cartridge does against the original .375 Magnum Belted Rimless, as it was once known. We gathered a classic CZ 602 ZKK Magnum Mauser (about $1200) and a new Remington 798 ($970), both in the .375 H&H version, and a new Ruger Hawkeye African in .375 Ruger caliber ($1095).

We tested the two .375 H&H's with Hornady 270-grain SP InterLock and 300-grain FMJs, with Remington Premier Safari Grade loaded with premium 300-grain Swift A-Frame bullets, and with a handload featuring 300-grain Nosler Partitions. We shot the Ruger with only two types of ammo, both by Hornady. These were the 270-grain SP-RP and 300-grain RNs. Here's what we found.

Many hunters love semiautomatic rifles for shorter-range (under 200 yards) deer hunting, mostly because they dont need sendero-class accuracy, but instead prefer faster-handling, shorter firearms. Also, not having to work a bolt-action rifle in close quarters is a positive, when a fast follow-up shot can prevent wounded game animals from suffering needlessly.

Some parts of the country, notably California, dont permit their fine, law-abiding citizens to own so-called "black rifles," which generally means you cant have an AR-15 if you live there. But you may still want a rifle that handles the .223 cartridge, for a number of reasons. One may be to take advantage of the low-priced "deals" that often come along on surplus .223 or 5.56 ammunition.The need for a non-semiauto .223 is generally met by a bolt-action rifle. Many companies have made delightful little rifles for the .223 over the years, notably Sako and various suppliers of the so-called Mini Mauser in that caliber. The Sako Vixen is still much sought-after, though prices continue to climb, with new versions (Sako 85) around $1600 today.There are plenty of other more affordable choices, however, and for this test we chose three rifles in the $550 to $750 range. The guns were Savages Model 16FSS "Weather Warrior" in stainless/synthetic ($569), Rugers new Hawkeye "All-Weather" also in stainless/synthetic ($749), and Remingtons Zastava-made Model 799 in blue/laminated ($648).We tested the three with two factory loads by Black Hills, a 62-grain FMJ and a 60-grain JSP, as well as Remingtons 55-grain PSP. We also tried two low-cost surplus brands of FMJ ammunition that were loaded in Russia, typical of so much of the very inexpensive stuff that will inevitably find its way into almost all .223 rifles. One of these was brand-named Wolf, and the other was white-box Russian. We also experimented with very-heavy-bullet handloads designed for 1:7-inch twist, but results were uniformly so poor we didnt record them. Here is what we found.

There are those wholl tell you that the era of modern muzzleloadingwas spawned in the wave of patriotism and revived historical interest engendered by the 1976 Bicentennial celebration.You will indeed find that many of the popular sidelock reproduction muzzleloaders were first introduced in that general timeframe and states special blackpowder/primitive weapons hunting seasons started soon thereafter.But the true birth of "modern muzzleloading" - considering the fact that 97 percent of all muzzleloaders purchased for hunting today are in-line rifles - was in the mid-1980s. Thats when a theretofore unknown Midwestern railroad employee/gunsmith named Tony Knight got the financial backing to produce his futuristic in-line (enclosed hammer as opposed to sidehammer) muzzleloading rifle.Knights company was, in fact, named Modern Muzzleloading. The first modern (there were in-line designs back in the 18th century) in-line muzzleloader was actually a bolt-action rifle receiver fitted with a screw-out-and-pull-to-cock bolt and a breech plug in the barrel where a chamber would normally be situated in a centerfire design. The enclosed hammer hit a firing pin of sorts that struck the percussion cap, igniting the powder.The guns were streamlined, lighter and less cumbersome than sidelocks, used faster-twist rifling and, eventually, saboted slugs rather than conical bullets or patched round balls. They felt and shot like rifles; a big factor in their appeal to hunters interested in expanding their hunting opportunities without messing with the primitive aspects of the sidelock guns.New propellants, synthetic blackpowders, were formulated - later in pellet form of specific weights, new sabot styles designed, and new riflestyles emerged as the market grew. Knight was one of the first to design a gun to accept shotgun primers for ignition rather than percussion or musket caps, and further developed that technology to encase the cap in proprietary plastic disk that made it easier to handle and load.In the late 1990s Remington brought out a bolt-action rifle, the Model 700ML (actually a Model 700 centerfire receiver and bolt fitted with a muzzleloading barrel and breech plug) that provided easy access to the ignition system while also enclosing it against the weather. Virtually all other manufacturers jumped on the bolt-action bandwagon.Simplicity then became the goal, since muzzleloading can be a complex and messy. And few years later two stalwart muzzleloading companies, CVA and Thompson Center, introduced simpler exposed-hammer dropping-block designs where a squeeze on the rear of the trigger guard dropped the rear of the action open, exposing the touch hole and primer position.Soon thereafter companies redesigned the single-shot concept with break-action designs (there had been previous versions in budget guns) where the barrel was actually hinged to the lower aspect of the receiver and dropped open to expose the ignition seat.We tested three state-of-the-art .50-caliber modern in-lines: The break-action Traditions Pursuit XLT, the modified dropping block Knight Revolution II and the hinged-block Remington Genesis.

The idea of using just one caliber for all ones hunting and fun shooting may best be met by what we call medium-bore rifles. These include the various .325s, .338s and some .35s, but not the .375 H&H Magnum and its like, which are a lot more powerful. Of all these over-.30 and under-.375 Mag calibers, one of the most versatile is the .338 OKH, also called the .338-06. The new .338 Federal is the .338 on the .308 case, and while were very interested in it, we havent been able to obtain test rifles yet.In the meantime, we chose two .338 Winchester Magnums to go against one .325 WSM in this report. We picked a new Ruger Hawkeye ($749) and the Savage 116FHSS ($602) in .338 Win. Mag; and the Browning A-Bolt ($824) in .325 WSM.Reloaders like the medium bores for their versatility. There are plenty of good bullets out there in .338, ranging from 185 up to 300 grains if you look hard. A variety of powders can make the .338 Mag talk about any talk a shooter might need, from fun at the range to taking big game. The .325 WSM, on the other hand, is a short cartridge with no belt. The case is a short .404 Jeffery size, and takes bullets of 0.323-inch diameter, the same as various 8mm cartridges. Bullets ought not to be a problem for the reloader. The .325 case held 83 grains of water, filled to the top of the case. The .338 Win Mag held 89 grains, which is 7-percent greater capacity. But how do they fare against each other?

Just about anyone who has ever pulled a trigger will admit that there are times when their goal is to send a lot of lead down range with a minimum of effort and a maximum of fun.[IMGCAP(1)]Call it "Rock and Roll" or just plinking, this type of shooting can be accomplished with about any firearm, but is best suited for what can be described as a cross between handguns and rifles.Two models that fall in this category are the Browning Buck Mark Sporter, which lists for $572, and the Walther G22, available for $399. The Browning is more of a traditional cross breed in that the firearm is basically a version of the manufacturers popular handgun that has been adapted with a rifle stock and barrel; while the Walther features space-age technology in a "Bullpup" design that drastically changes the balance and handling capabilities of the little .22-caliber.Both firearms utilize easy-to-load 10-round magazines and are capable of semiautomatic rapid fire favored by plinkers trying to punch holes in a target.These two models both lend themselves to duty (where there are no legal prohibitions in place) as firearms that can be carried in ranch or farm vehicles for quick service as varmint eliminators. Optics such as red dot, laser or even a standard scope can be easily installed to improve their point-and-shoot capability.To review the test firearms handling ability of a variety of ammunition, we selected several brands of .22 caliber long rifle bullets for our review. The ammo included CCI Standard Velocity and Federal Gold Medal 40-grain solids, and Punta Hueca 39-grain hollowpoints made in Argentina. The muzzle velocity of each of the rounds was about 1,200 feet per second.Targets used in our test were the Birchwood Casey Shoot-N-C bulls eyes and saltine crackers (birds and other varmints enjoy cleaning up the pieces). Heres our test report:

Anyone who wants a rifle with more power than a .22 LR but doesn't want all the noise of a .223 can always choose the .22 Hornet. The idea of a handy centerfire rifle for "survival," or as a fun gun for the dedicated woods loafer or weekend plinker can be well met by a rifle chambered for this old cartridge. When the Hornet first came out in the early 1930s it was a big hit, and remained so for many years. Today it has a spotty popularity record, generally because many shooters think more is always better, and want a .223. But the Hornet is a lot quieter, and even cheaper than the .223 for the reloader.

Although the Hornet survives today, guns and ammo may not always be easy to find. A recent casual survey of gun shops in a small deer- and elk-hunting community led to exactly one shop out of three having any .22 Hornet ammunition on hand, and that store had but one box.

The tiny, rimmed cartridge screams for reloading, not only because ammo might be hard to find. A pound of powder is enough for a thousand reloads. The bullets, primers and a pound of powder will cost about $100-150 total, or about 10 to 15 cents a shot. We just paid $32 for a box of 50 factory loads. That's 64 cents each. Ouch! So if you own a Hornet, be sure to save your brass. Also, reloading can make the Hornet more versatile than the .22 WMR or the new .17 rimfire, and it delivers a lot more power than either of those.

We recently tested several bolt-action Hornets and fell in love with a CZ that shot circles around its competition. At that time we though a single-shot version might be even handier, and maybe less costly. We wanted to do without a scope, if possible. We can already hear the complaints, that a rifle without a scope is little better than a handgun. But iron sights are hard to beat for lowest cost, plus all-out durability if they are good ones. Never mind that our test rifles can be scoped, they both came to us with iron sights, and we evaluated them that way.

We acquired a New England Arms Handi-Rifle with hardwood stock (SB2-224, about $250 street price) and a Thompson/Center Encore with synthetic stock, which was the least costly version (about $450 street price). The guns had several attributes in common. The controls were few, and were extremely simple. One button or lever opened each rifle. The only safety on each was the hammer. Both had internal blocks that prevented the hammer from striking the firing pin unless the trigger were pressed. We tested them with Remington Express 45-grain PSP ammo and with two of our carefully assembled handloads, one featuring Barnes' 40-grain Varminator HP bullets (stock no. 22429) and the other with 55-grain Hornady FMJs. We experimented with 75-grain bullets, but the twist rate wouldn't stabilize them. Here is what we found.