Qualifications are coming soon.
I'm about to field a Ruger M-77 Mk.I .30-'06 with a super-lightweight contour barrel and a Redfield scope, with sling and buttcuff, as a patrol rifle.
Tell me I'm wrong.
posted by Matt G @ 2:32 AM
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Tell me I'm wrong.
About Me
- Name: Matt G
- Location: N, Texas, United States
I think that there's bound to be a way to serve myself, serve my community, and not take freedom away from good people.
Previous Posts
- Insulted.
- Livin’ inna hood.
- Can I have a do-over?
- Tagged Twice!
- Lapses in the sense of personal responsibility: Water
- Take it a step further...
- So, have fun with this.
- Multiculturalism.
- Worth Drinking:
- Chalkdust and blood
9 Comments:
OK, your wrong. :) What's the matter with Fluffy the wonder .35? Ah - no scope on the '03. Gotcha. My choice for a patrol rifle would probably be a .30-30 with a 2.5 power scope. I've yet to see anything around here that would need more than a good bullet properly applied - or two. The AR can stay in the safe.
I'm cheating, Giz; there'll be two rifles, with the AR stil coming along in the car. I strongly (STRONGLY) considered putting my M-94 in as a patrol rifle, but that's just too much overlap. If I only had one car rifle, I could do a LOT worse than the thutty-thutty, but I can't deny that it's easier to engage multiple targets with an AR, and do so one-handed, if need be. I'm not by any means saying that if can't be done-- I'm just saying that it's easier to put shots on targets quickly with the AR with its EOTECH sight rig and iron backup sights.
The .35, while it would be a decent trunk rifle, is a dedicated iron sight setup, and has too much overlap with the AR.
My idea with the '06 is a stand-off weapon, with which I could make called shots with at distances that are not practical for civilian law enforcement with iron-sighted rifles. Even 100 yards is a long distance to call a head shot with a hostage-taker, when using an iron-sighted rifle. With a decent 1.25 MOA bolt action rifle with sling and quality scope, the only question would be finding a good rest and remembering bring one's aiming point down two inches. For a roadblock situation, I can't think of a better car-penetrating round in my inventory.
I'm NOT trying to pretend that I'm a sniper. Far from it. We actually have a sniper (my chief), who has decided to put together a bit more rigorous rifle course for this rifle than for the ARs. I hope he's gentle. :)
An AR already? OK, that's cheating.. (smiles) I'm a fan of the AR, not the cartridge though. Double taps help bunches. Around here, we have yet to have a true multiple shots fired incident. Ten years back we had one, but it was uncalled for. What sort of loads are you going to carry for the 'o6?
In the immortal words of John Muir, 'come to kindy terms with your ass, for it bears you'.
If it works, use it. I'd likely do the same if I were putting a kit together for the same purpose. I agree on the overlap statement with the 30-30, too. A good assortment of throw weight to feed it would only add to the versatility, not to mention the ubiquity of the cartridge. They probably sell .30-06 at mom and pop C-stores out there.
That alone might keep me from using 6.5x55 instead of a common chambering, penetration and SD be hanged.
The AR is department issue. In an active shooter situation in, say, the high school, I'd probably grab it or the 870.
Frankly, John's and Byron's new 7600s in .35 Whelen would be pretty decent patrol rifles, too.
It so happens that this rifle really likes Remington green box 165g loads. If I can't find 'em, I'll probably just go with the 150's, though I really like the SD of the 180's.
Your last reply says it all, Matt:
>>It so happens that this rifle really likes Remington green box 165g loads. If I can't find 'em, I'll probably just go with the 150's, though I really like the SD of the 180's.<<
Reasonably accurate and a plethora of loads to choose from. Do some more experimenting and you might even be able to tighten those groups to MOA. And frankly, for an ad-hoc long range weapon, your sporter setup will do everything a gollywog sniper rifle will, and weigh less to boot.
Whether you choose your '06 or a dedicated sniper setup, the rifle's capability will probably outstrip your own - and I'm not knocking your maksmanship. The defining factor is always going to be the guy behind the trigger.
Of course, you already knew that...
I sold my dedicated sniper rig for a song a year or so ago: Remington Sendero M 700SF in .300 WinMag. Stainless, heavy fluted 26" barrel with a kevlar stock and aluminum bedding block embedded. Shot a .73" group right out of the shop, and then I gave it a trigger job and started reloading. My handload would give an honest 3120 fps with 180g Sierra handloads over an Oehler chronograph, and (according to the tech at Sierra) it wasn't even over specs for pressure.
But my wife (a sculptor) needed a kiln. We've now got that kiln. And the former sheriff has a damned accurate high-powered rifle.
Greenbox - great! I've found that for those of us on a budget simply adding a box or two to the shopping cart every time gains one a good stockpile. I used to see '06 AP at the gunshows. Got some?
I don't think you're wrong at all. Rather appears to me that you are doing a solid mission analysis, identifying potential situations, and equipping yourself for the best, rather then a compromise response. Since you have the ability to cart all the equipment around (i.e. Cruiser)and the blessing of the Chief, why not take advantage of the situation? I'm in the camp of "it's better to have and not need, then to need and not have". My opinion, YMMV.
Regards,
Striker
Post a Comment
<< Home