RIFLESCOPES: IS BIGGER ALWAYS BETTER?

Craig Boddington

The “standard” American riflescope has been based on a one-inch tube diameter (26mm) for most of my life. European scopes were more likely to be based on the larger-diameter 30mm tube, but until maybe the 1990s 30mm tubes were fairly uncommon in North America…and scope rings in that diameter were limited and hard to find.

Blaser optic — Blaser-two scopes: Boddington’s Blaser set up with two scopes. Bottom, a Zeiss 3.5-10x56mm. With the extra-large objective, a good example of a scope designed to maximize the poor light shooting European hunters are accustomed to. Top, a Leupold VX6 2-12x42mm, a very capable scope, but with a more modest objective lens.

I don’t think it’s yet true that 30mm scopes are more popular than one-inch tubes but, for sure, 30mm scopes are widely accepted, and there’s little difficulty finding mounts and rings. The current trend is toward larger and more powerful riflescopes. 30mm is not the limit; scopes with 34mm tubes have been available in Europe for many years, and are becoming more common over here.

Boddington’s Jarrett .300 Win Mag accounted for this Dall ram in Alaska. Mounted with a Leupold VX6 3-18x44mm scope, the rifle weighs 8.5 pounds. For Boddington, that’s a comfortable weight, and an objective lens of this size can still be mounted low on the receiver.

Comparing and judging riflescopes is difficult. Regardless of diameter, the tube is just that: A metal tube, housing the internal mechanisms, with ocular and objective lenses affixed at each end (and usually housed in their own tubes, which we call “bells”). Sound construction is essential, but it’s always the quality of lenses and coatings that determine clarity of image. With riflescopes, the only real comparisons that can be made are “apples to apples.” Construction and quality of lenses and coatings must be more or less equal, otherwise you’re comparing apples to oranges!

Leupold’s 1.75-5x20mm scope is probably the quintessential “dangerous game” scope. It serves its purpose but, even in high-quality scopes, the straight tube with small objective lens cannot be as bright as a scope of similar power with a larger objective.

Quality of lenses and coatings are also important in “brightness,” which is of critical importance to all hunters. Good glass with the most modern coatings admits more useable light into the scope tube. However, if these are similar, the diameter of the objective lens is the primary contributor to brightness. So, regardless of tube diameter, a “dangerous game” or “tactical” scope with a straight tube forward and a 24mm objective lens cannot be as bright as the same scope with a forward bell housing a larger diameter objective lens. Somewhere in the gun safes or shop I have riflescopes with 20, 24, 28, 33, 36, 40, 42, 44, 50, and 56mm objective lenses.

: A gorgeous desert bighorn, taken with Donna Boddington’s MGA .270 with Leupold VX3 3.5-10x40mm scope. With a short stock and 22-inch barrel, the rifle is short, light, easy to carry, and has all the capability needed for the shots she is likely to take.

If all else is equal, bigger is usually brighter. I am told that there is a point of diminishing return; as in water down a hose, a scope tube can accept only so much light, so there’s no point in putting a huge 56mm objective on a one-inch-tube scope. There have been one-inch scopes with extra-large objectives, to me ungainly in appearance. Today, with most manufacturers also offering 30mm tubes, most one-inch-tube scopes have retreated to objectives of 50mm and less, resulting in a package that appears more balanced, plus doesn’t need to be mounted as high.

So, is the bigger tube “better”? In some ways, yes. The larger tube is not necessarily “brighter.” Again, this depends mostly on quality of glass, lens coatings, and size of objective. However, the water hose analogy holds: A larger tube admits more useable light. From a mechanical standpoint, the larger tube allows a greater range of adjustment. This doesn’t mean that all scopes with larger tubes are engineered to take advantage of this, but most top-quality scopes are. With today’s interest in extreme-range shooting, this is important: If you’re dialing elevation on your turret, you’re essentially done when you run out of adjustment!

The bigger the scope (and larger the objective lens), the higher the scope must be mounted for a good cheek weld on the comb. This Savage with fully adjustable “AccuStock” solves that problem with height of comb easily adjusted.

Not everyone, perhaps not even many of us, need or care about multiple revolutions of scope adjustment. I don’t, but here’s a strong argument for the 30mm tube: It’s here, and here to stay. The majority of new scope developments have gone to 30mm tubes. So, the best glass, the newest coatings, more adjustment, and all the bells and whistles, are most likely to be found on 30mm scopes.

So, if 30mm tubes are good, then 34mm scopes must be even better, right? Yes and no! The ability to utilize more light and the increased range of adjustment also apply. Many serious extreme-range shooters have gone to 34mm scopes. For many years variable scopes were stuck on “about” three times zoom, as in the popular 3-9X. Today variable scopes are available with six and even eight times zoom. There is advantage in the tactical arena: A 1-8X scope (eight times zoom) allows a true 1X (no magnification for close quarters, all the out to 8X for longer ranges. However, 34mm scopes are not yet common.

3 Scopes — Top to bottom: Riton 1-8x28mm, 34mm tube. Center, Leupold VX6 2-12x42mm, 30mm tube; Leupold VXR 2-7x33mm, one-inch tube. These scopes vary in magnification and size of objective lens, but scopes with larger tubes will be heavier and bulkier.

I tried one two years ago and had a terrible time finding mounts and rings for the rifles I wanted to try it on! With pandemic shortages and shipping backlogs, I doubt this has gotten better…but it surely will in time!

All that aside, I will always make two arguments against larger tubes and larger scopes. First is weight: The larger tube is heavier! Add in a larger objective lens and a big objective bell to house it, and you have more weight. The 34mm scope mentioned above happens to a Riton 1-8x28mm with straight forward objective. Designed as a tactical scope, with eight-times-zoom capability, I figured it would be an awesome scope for a .375, and it is. One of few mounting systems I could find in 34mm was a Blaser saddle mount. The scope we’ve been using on our Blaser .375 barrel is a Leupold VXR 2-7×33 with 30mm tube and a modest objective bell.

A heavy-bossed buffalo taken with a Sabatti .450/.400 double topped with a Leupold VXR 1-4x20mm scope. For the purpose, this was all the magnification needed, but a straight-tube scope with small objective is always limited in brightness.

I weighed the two scopes. Including the steel Blaser mount, which is heavier than some, the 1-8x28mm scope with 34mm tube weighed just over two pounds. Also with Blaser mount attached, the 2-7×33 with 30mm tube weighed exactly half as much, just over a pound. Flip a coin: 1-8X magnification versus 2-7X for a full pound of extra gun weight?

The second primary argument against thicker tubes and larger objective lenses is bulk. For a foot hunter (and, for that matter, a foot soldier), the larger the scope, the more there is to catch on things and snag in brush. For all of us, the larger the objective lens, the higher the scope must be mounted to clear the barrel. Many modern rifles with adjustable cheek rests address this problem, but not all of us have them (or want them).

This vintage .270 is topped with an (equally vintage) Leupold 2-7X. The rifle shoots well enough to deserve a bigger scope. However, the stock fit is perfect with a small scope mounted low…and the rifle is just too pretty to mess up!

Ultimately, it depends on what you want to do. Larger-diameter scopes and large objective lenses were developed in Europe, where “shooting hours” as we American hunters know them are uncommon. Rarely do they use artificial lights or thermal imaging, but in Europe the hunt often continues far into the night, long after we’re back in camp enjoying a fire. They use moonlight (against snow when possible), and they need the brightest scopes available.

Like millions of other whitetail hunters, I understand the importance of those first and last minutes of daylight. For sure, I appreciate a clear, bright scope! However, I watch the clock: I won’t shoot until 30 minutes before sunrise, and I’m done at 30 minutes after sunset. For my deer hunting, I find a high-quality scope, whether one-inch or 30mm tube, with a medium-size objective, say 36 to 44mm, to be bright enough.

Although 30mm scopes are “in” today, many manufacturers still offer both one-inch and 30mm tube scopes, in a variety of magnifications and objective lenses. Top to bottom, three of the excellent Vector “Continental” scopes: 3-18x50mm, one-inch tube; 2-12x50mm, 30mm tube; 1-6x24mm, 30mm tube with straight forward tube.

For many, hog hunting has changed the game. Much of mine is done in California, where we don’t hunt at night. Across Texas and the Deep South, shooting hours usually don’t apply to feral hogs! Now you’re playing by European rules. Absent lights and thermals, you need the brightest scopes possible, large tubes and big objective lenses!

I have long since accepted 30mm tubes for much of my hunting, primarily because of their availability in high-quality scopes, with features I like, such as dial-up turrets and lighted reticles. However, they are heavier, bulkier…and costlier. Fine if you actually need the capability. Also fine if you just want it.

Right Riton 1-8x28mm with 34mm tube (photo 3087). Left, Leupold VXR 2-7x33mm with 30mm tubeFor hunting purposes, the capabilities of these two scopes are similar…but the scope with the 34mm tube weighs twice as much.

It’s not something we can do all the time, but we do a fair amount of mountain hunting. Although I try to keep the weight down a bit, today I use 30mm scopes on my mountain rifles. My Jarrett .300 Win Mag wears a Leupold VX6 3-18x44mm scope with 30mm tube, not a giant scope at all, but plenty of capability. The rifle weighs 8 ½ pounds with scope, no lightweight, but weight I’m comfortable carrying. With calibrated CDS turret I can ring steel out to 1000 yards with no problem. This gives me plenty of confidence and capability for shots I might actually take at game, which is about half that distance.

On the bench with a 26 Nosler topped with a Huskemaw 3-12LR, 30mm tube, set up with dial-up turrets for long-range work. Moderate in magnification with a modest objective lens, a good compromise between size, weight, and capability.

In recent years, Donna has taken more sheep and goats than I have (partly because it’s sort of her turn). Her go-to mountain rifle is a lot different from mine. She’s several inches shorter and a third lighter. She has no business carrying as heavy a rifle, and a long rifle bangs against her legs in steep country. Also, she won’t take shots quite as far as I might. Her go-to mountain rifle is an MGA .270 with Leupold VX3 3.5-10x40mm with one-inch tube. The light scope contributes to overall weight of less than six pounds. Realistically, the scope has enough magnification, and is plenty bright enough, for just about any of the hunting we actually do.

You may need (or want) much more scope: Higher magnification, the largest scope tube you can get, the biggest objective lens. Nothing wrong with that, but you’re probably going to pay more. And you’re going to have to carry it up the mountains and drag it through the brush.

THE PERFECT ZERO?

Craig Boddington

Previously, this column discussed the process of “sighting in.” If you’re happy, then we’re done; it’s time to head for the deer stand! We’re going to assume we have enough accuracy to reliably hit a deer’s vital zone at whatever distance we might shoot. The vital zone of even a small deer offers about an eight-inch target, so extreme accuracy isn’t essential for much for field shooting.

Jarrett-300groups — Boddington’s Jarrett wears a Leupold scope with a CDS turret, calling for a 200-yard zero. The left-hand group was shot at 200 yards, ensuring a good starting point for dialing with a 180-grain SST load.

Hey, I love tiny groups because they instill confidence, and I love to ring steel at long range. However, I’m unlikely to shoot at a game animal much past 400 yards. Most of my shots at game are much closer, and many of us rarely need to reach past 200 yards. Theoretically, if your rifle is producing one-inch groups at 100 yards (one Minute of Angle or “MOA”), then it should produce two-inch groups at 200 yards, four-inch groups at 400 yards, and so on. Considering the size of the vital zone, one MOA is more accuracy than essential.

: Some of Boddington’s rifles wear iron sights…and a few have worn barrels. Either way, extreme accuracy isn’t possible…and unnecessary for a lot of field shooting. With excellent paper-plate accuracy at 50 yards, this old .300 Savage would be just fine to 150 yards…if Boddington could see the front sight well enough!

Actual groups usually get larger as distance increases, so I don’t mind having more accuracy than I really need, but let’s be reasonable and practical. Even today, with the best rifles, optics, and ammo ever, not all rifles can produce one MOA accuracy.

Tight groups instill great confidence, but sub-MOA groups aren’t essential for most field shooting. This Savage 100 .30-06 is more than field-ready: The excellent right-hand group is two inches high at l00 yards; the bullet will be “on” at about 200 yards

Not a train smash; 1.5 MOA is plenty for most field shooting. Most modern rifles will do at least this well, and that’s “good enough,” at least at normal field ranges. I have older rifles that are “two MOA” rifles. Also not a problem. I hunt with them, but only in close-range situations! With such rifles, I usually do my zeroing on ten-inch paper plates. In that context, “paperplate accuracy” is good enough! Regardless of the accuracy you have to work with, and the ranges you might consider shooting, you still must decide exactly where to leave your rifle zeroed before you head afield.

TRAJECTORY CURVE

Traditionally, most of us leave a rifle zeroed slightly high at 100 yards, to take advantage of the bullet’s trajectory. Here’s how this works: There are two straight lines, line of bore and, slightly above, line of sight. Both are straight, but the path of the projectile is curved. Gravity starts working on any projectile as it leaves the muzzle, and air resistance slows it down. As distance increases, the projectile falls ever more quickly, eventually striking the ground.

: Gordon Marsh of LG Outdoors — Gordon Marsh of LG Outdoors at his bench, checking handload velocities with a Lab Radar, a wonderfully accurate tool that uses Doppler radar to measure bullet speed.

If line of bore and line of sight remain parallel, the bullet will never cross the line of sight and no zero can be achieved. Using sight adjustments, we actually zero so the line of bore and line of sight slightly converge. Line of bore remains straight, while the projectile’s path is curved. With line of bore tilted slightly upward relative to line of sight, the projectile’s curving path crosses line of sight twice, once at short range and again farther out. In between these points the projectile’s path will be above the line of sight. The point at which this distance above line of sight is greatest is referred to as “mid-range trajectory.”

On the bench with a Springfield Waypoint in 6.5mm PRC. The scope is a Zeiss 2-12X; the big 56mm objective requires the scope (line of sight) to be considerably higher than line of bore. Height of the scope is a critical factor in good ballistics data and must be correct.

The steepness of the trajectory curve depends on velocity and projectile aerodynamics. In establishing final zero, we usually try to use that curve to best advantage, extending the ranges at which we can shoot without having to worry about holding off the target (above or below) to compensate for that curving trajectory.

There should be little mystery about the actual trajectory curve. For generations, printed ballistics charts have yielded this information, usually suggesting various sight-ins at 100 yards (the bullet’s first crossing of line of sight), and telling us greatest height of trajectory, and where the dropping projectile crosses line of sight again, and yielding bullet drop at various ranges as the decline accelerates.

On the bench with a Jarrett rifle in .300 Win. Mag. Boddington’s California range is hot in summer, cool in winter, and always near sea level. When figuring ballistics data for open-country hunts, he estimates expected temperature and elevation. This works fine for the ranges he shoots at game, but guesswork isn’t good enough for extreme-range shooting.

Today, ballistics programs and smartphone apps yield the same information, and allow us to input altitude, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, and more, all of which increase in importance as range increases. Printed data assumes a standard measurement of line of sight over line of bore (height of scope). Electronic data allows us to input this. With the larger (higher-mounted) scopes in vogue today, that measurement must be accurate.

PH Poen van Zyl and Texan John Stucker at the bench in Mozambique, checking zero on Stucker’s .375. With a crocodile hunt in the offing, we adjusted our zeros very carefully to be exactly dead-on at 50 yards.

All data, whether printed or electronic, assumes that the starting velocity is correct. Barrels vary in length, and there are “fast” barrels and “slow” barrels. For truly accurate data, it’s essential to use a chronograph to check the speed of your load in your rifle.

Boddington was delighted to take this ancient and gnarly spike on his Kansas farm. The rifle is a Mossberg 464 with AimPoint red-dot sight. The rifle was zeroed at 50 yards, the shot about the same distance

Fortunately, the vital zone of a big-game animal remains a large target! None of this stuff matters much if your goal is to shoot your buck from a favorite treestand, like in thick timber at my Kansas farm. When I’m setting up a rifle for an open-country hunt, you bet I measure height of scope and check velocity! Effects of altitude and climatic factors are less critical…until you get past normal shooting distance, or you have extreme variations. In preparation for fall hunts, I do my summer shooting in hot, low country. I make a guess on anticipated altitude and climatic factors, run the data, and zero accordingly. This has proven adequate for the ranges I shoot at game…but isn’t precise enough for extreme-range work!

DEAD-ON OR SLIGHTLY HIGH?

Whether at 25, 50, or 100 yards, a dead-on zero with a modern rifle cartridge is the first time the bullet crosses the line of sight. Farther on, it will be above the line of sight and, as the curve steepens, it will cross line of sight again somewhere downrange.

It is not true that “dead-on at 25 yards” will be close to “on” at 100 yards. This is possible with slower cartridges, and with iron sights or low-mounted scopes. With faster cartridges and higher-mounted scopes, I’ve found that a 25-yard zero will usually strike too high at 100 yards. A 50-yard zero comes closer, especially with low-mounted sights. I often zero iron-sighted rifles and scoped big-bores at 50 yards and call it done, knowing that I’m unlikely to use such rifles much past 100 yards. However, with today’s big scopes, I find that a 50-yard zero is usually three or four inches high at 100 yards. This puts the second crossing of the line of sight ‘way out there, and creates a mid-range trajectory as much as six inches above line of sight. For me, this increases risk of shooting over an animal (or hitting too high).

John Stucker and Boddington with Boddington’s Mozambique croc, taken in September 2021 with a Blaser .375 H&H. The Nile crocodile must be taken with either a brain or spine shot. All rifles were zeroed dead-on at 50 yards; Boddington’s four-hunter group took four big crocs…anchored with one shot each.

For close-range work, there’s nothing wrong with a 100-yard zero. Depending on cartridge, “dead-on at 100” will be on again at 150 to 175 yards, with little mid-range-rise. More common is to zero a “couple of inches high” at 100 yards. You can study ballistics charts and programs, and you should. Depending on your cartridge (and load, and bullet), a zero of two to 2.5 inches high at 100 yards will put you dead-on somewhere between 200 and 300 yards. You shouldn’t have to hold low at closer range, and you shouldn’t have to hold over until nearly 250 yards. In my youth, Jack O’Connor was our greatest gunwriter. His consistent advice was to zero “two to 2.5 inches high” at 100 yards. I believe his formula remains sound, and that’s the way I usually zero for general-purpose use. Most important to me: I never establish a 100-yard zero any higher than that, because of the risk of shooting over at “medium” range!

DIALING THE RANGE

These days, dial-up turrets are all the rage, and they change the game. Some systems require either a 100 or 200-yard zero as the starting point. If you intend to dial the range, then I assume you may be shooting at some distance. I don’t like a 100-yard zero in open country, simply because you must start holding over (or dialing) at fairly close range. With today’s optics, dialing is precise, but fraught with human error: You must dial correctly and, if you don’t shoot, you must remember to dial back to zero. (Trust me, everybody forgets now and then!)

Leupold CDS — With a good scope, dialing the range or holdover is the most precise method, but the data must be correct and verified by shooting at actual distance. This CDS turret is for a .300 Weatherby Magnum load at a measured 3185 fps with 180-grain SST. The 6000 feet elevation and 30-degree F temperature reflect anticipated hunting conditions.

I’ve used several systems with good results, but a favorite is Leupold’s Custom Dial System (CDS), with turret calibrated to my load at a stated altitude and temperature. On these, again, I strike an average of most likely conditions. My CDS is based on a 200-yard zero. At 250 yards I’ll usually hold slightly high on the shoulder, keeping it simple and taking advantage of that large vital zone. I normally don’t consider dialing until about 300 yards.

If your system is based on a 200-yard zero, then you should check zero at the actual distance, so your starting point is verified as correct. Then, if you’re serious about shooting at longer ranges, you need to verify your data all the way out. This is a stumbling block for many who don’t have ready access to a “long” range. Sorry, whether published or electronically generated, data cannot be considered valid until verified by shooting at actual distance. The farther you might consider shooting at game, the more critical this becomes!

Rigby 7x57 groups — : This Rigby 7×57 groups about 1.5 MOA with this load, a 139-grain Interlock at 2700 fps. Zeroed two inches high at 100 yards, the bullet will be “on” at 200 yards, so a dead-on hold will work to about 225 yards.

Finally, if you’ve traveled some distance—by any means—it’s important to check zero when you arrive at your hunting destination. There’s no consistency about how much (or how little) rattling around may cause a shift in point of impact, so it’s always worth checking. On long, tough hunts, I’ll usually check zero every few days, for sure if the rifle has been dropped! I also recommend checking zero after an inexplicable miss. It’s terrible for the ego, but great for peace of mind to know for sure it was your fault! When planning ammo for a distant hunt, factor in enough to check zero about three times!

AR PLATFORM PERFORMANCE By Craig Boddington

More juice from the lemon?

Warm, sunny midday, we were tootling around Zack Aultman’s place in southern Georgia in a four-wheeler. A decent-sized boar jumped up on the forest verge and started jinking across a clear-cut, running at top speed like a champion broken-field runner. Zack was driving and there was an AR-15 between us. I knew it had a loaded magazine in the well, but I was a second slow on the uptake and the pig had already covered some ground before I got the rifle charged and up. The first shot felt good, but I guess the pig zig-zagged out of the way because there was no apparent effect.

Boddington and his friend Zack Aultman with a Georgia hog dropped in its tracks at about 200 yards with the .308 Arrow cartridge. Based on the 7.62x39mm with body taper removed, this cartridge seems to develop about as much bullet weight, velocity, and downrange energy as can be wrung out of the AR15 platform

I lost sight in some brush and figured I’d had my chance—and then the pig reappeared, still in the open and streaking off, now pushing 200 yards. Swinging hard, I got with the pig and a bit ahead. Lucky shots sometimes happen; at the second shot the pig somersaulted in a cloud of dust. The animal had gone down so fast—and so hard—that I assumed I’d broken the spine. Nope, by mysterious coincidence (or the pig’s incredibly bad luck), the bullet had struck center on the shoulder, and there was no exit.

My friend Zack enjoys a long deer season on his place, and has an ongoing problem with feral hogs. He’s also a bit of a rifle addict, so there’s no telling what he might have on hand. Other than to verify it was a “normal” AR with empty chamber and cartridges in the magazine, I hadn’t looked closely at the rifle when Zack handed it to me. Considering hogs are always in season and, knowing Zack, I assumed it was reasonably zeroed. Now we both paused and took a closer look, because the way this little rifle flattened that hog was impressive.

AR Bolt — Almost all rifle actions have limits on cartridge size. The standard AR15 bolt face is sized to the .223/5.56mm’s .378-inch rim diameter. The bolt face can be altered, but the AR15’s integral magazine well and magazine put a sharp limit on cartridge length.

Look, maybe that was a fluke…like my shot. No two animals react exactly alike upon receiving a bullet, and flukes can be both good and bad. So, when evaluating cartridge and bullet performance on game, it’s risky to make assumptions based on limited exposure. I make no definitive claim, but terminal performance gave us pause. The rifle was from Arrow Arms in nearby Macon, Georgia, and the cartridge was their proprietary .308 Arrow, propelling a 125-grain jacketed hollowpoint at 2814 feet per second.

The .308 Arrow, left, shown with its parent cartridge, the 7.62x39mm Russian. Essentially an “improved” version, the .308 Arrow increases velocity by removing body taper and using a sharper shoulder angle.

There’s nothing magic about those numbers, slower than a .308 Winchester, also faster, and yielding more energy at 200 yards, than anything else I’ve shot out of an AR15 platform. The AR10 was developed for the 7.62×51 (.308 Winchester) cartridge. In the late 1950s, Gene Stoner and his team the AR10 scaled down the AR10 to create the AR15, lighter, handier, and intended for smaller, less powerful cartridges. The .223 Remington was essentially a parallel development, created in 1957 to fit the AR15 action.

Remington released the .223 Remington as a sporting cartridge in 1963, and in 1964 both the .223 (5.56mm) and M16 were adopted by the U.S. military. The .223 quickly became a popular varmint and target cartridge, but decades would pass before semiautomatic sporting versions of the AR15 achieved widespread popularity. During most of those decades, the AR15 and the .223 Remington (after 1980, 5.56x45mm NATO) were inextricably linked, with few other options.

During the last 20 years, much effort has been expended developing cartridges that increase, or significantly alter, performance from an AR15 action. Cartridges are often developed for specific actions…especially popular actions. And, most rifle actions have limitations. Over decades, Winchester developed several cartridges for their 1894 lever-action. Most were based on the .30-30 case because the ’94 needs a rimmed case…and the action has both pressure and cartridge dimension limitations.

The .300 AAC Blackout has become extremely popular. Although it offers the advantage of using standard AR magazines, it was at least partly designed for suppressed fire. Velocity is low, and Boddington considers it extremely marginal for hunting.

Even the versatile bolt-action has restrictions. Classic and current bolt-actions like the 98 Mauser, Winchester Model 70, Remington Model 700, and Savage 110 can be adapted to a wide range of cartridges, but cannot house the largest cartridges like the .338 Lapua and .378 Weatherby family (although there are extra-large bolt-actions that can).

Action length is always a consideration. As a detachable-magazine rifle with integral magazine well, the AR15 action is limited to cartridge length of 2.275 inches. This is a short centerfire rifle cartridge. Cartridge overall length specification is 2.825 inches for the popular 6.5mm Creedmoor. The Creedmoor (and the entire .308 Winchester-based family) fits easily into the AR10 action (because that’s the cartridge size it was designed for), but you simply cannot house that size of cartridge or that level of power into an AR15 action.

On the bench with a left-hand-eject AR from Wilson Combat. The incredible popularity of the AR15 platform has led to much cartridge development. There are numerous options but, ultimately, the action size can yield only so much power.

There’s only so much juice to squeeze from a lemon. However, because of the incredible popularity of the platform, a lot of cartridges have been developed to squeeze just a bit more juice from the AR15. Cartridge length is the primary limiting factor. The .223 Remington case can be necked up or down, changing bullet diameter and weight, which dictates potential velocity. The .223/5.56mm rim diameter is .378-inch. Without altering bolt face, this is also a limitation, and you can’t alter the case shape much without going to cartridge-specific magazines.

Depending on chambering, ARs are suitable for a wide range of hunting. For sure, it’s a ball to use an AR for shooting prairie dogs!

Among others, the very fast .17 Remington is the .223 case necked down; the .300 AAC Blackout is the .223/5.56mm shortened and necked up, but designed so standard 5.56mm magazines can be used. The AR15 action can handle a wider or fatter case, which increases powder capacity. Winchester’s .350 Legend retains the .378-inch rim and, at 2.25 inches, is short enough. However, the rim is rebated (smaller than the base), and the base diameter is larger (.390 inches). Wider cases with rebated rims are also how they cram the .30 Remington AR and .450 Bushmaster into the AR15 action. Both of these use a rim diameter and bolt face of .473-inch, same as the .30-06. Performance is amazing from the little AR15 action. However, magazines must be modified (with a single-stack follower), and magazine capacity is greatly reduced.

Jason Morton and Boddington with a good Kansas whitetail taken with a CZ 527 bolt-action in 6.5mm Grendel. AR15-compatible, the Grendel is a versatile hunting cartridge but, provided velocity is meaningful, no 6.5mm can hit as hard as a .30-caliber.

It’s probably not a coincidence of design that the AR15 action easily houses the 2.2-inch 7.62x39mm Russian. Propelling a 123-grain bullet at a bit over 2400 fps, the 7.62 Russian is obviously a long-proven military cartridge. It’s also a pretty good hunting cartridge, effective on deer and hogs at short to (very) medium range, with performance on game on par with the .30-30 (which is not damning with faint praise). With rim diameter of .447, the standard .223/5.56mm bolt face won’t work, and specific magazines are required, but the 7.62mm Russian is a fairly common and popular AR chambering. The 6.5mm Grendel, which I like very much, is simply the 7.62x39mm case necked down with body taper removed. It is much faster, propelling a 123-grain bullet 2650 fps. Now 20 years old, the 6.8mm SPC Remington is another option. Designed as a military cartridge to offer better terminal performance than the 5.56×45 yet with minimal reduction in magazine capacity, the 6.8 SPC is also an effective short to (very) medium range hunting cartridge. Based on the old .30 Remington, the 6.8 SPC has rim diameter of .422-inch. Although never widely adopted by the military, the 6.8 has its fans, but I never warmed up to it.

An Alexander Arms 6.5 Grendel in a prairie dog town. With light recoil and the aerodynamic advantages of 6.5mm bullets, the Grendel is a wonderfully versatile AR cartridge…but the 6.5mm (.264-inch) bullet doesn’t have the hitting power of a .30-caliber.

As a hunting cartridge, I considered the 6.5mm Grendel one of the most versatile options for an AR, and still do. Then, by chance, I ran into the .308 Arrow. It is nothing more, nor less, than the 7.62mm Russian case, blown out to remove body taper, with sharper shoulder, but retaining the .30-caliber bullet. It is thus essentially an “improved” version. A proprietary of Arrow Arms (www.arrowarms.net), the improvement is considerable, with Hornady offering cases and dies. Arrow Arms loads are rated: 125-grain bullet at 2814 fps; 130-grain bullet at 2739; and 150-grain bullet at 2545 fps. This is still far short of .308 Winchester velocity; that’s just not possible from the AR15 action. However, these are very credible velocities: Much faster than the .300 Blackout, 7.62 Russian, or .30-30, and in the ballpark with the .300 Savage (also not damning with faint praise).

A couple of hogs taken at sunset with a .350 Legend. Although chambered in bolt-actions, Winchester’s .350 Legend is AR15-compatible, sharing the .223/5.56mm bolt face. In any action type, it’s a fine short-range hunting cartridge, but lacks the velocity to be effective beyond about 200 yards.

Unlike many of the AR cartridges, the .308 Arrow was not designed as an alternative military cartridge, nor for use with suppressor; it was designed as a hunting cartridge, to wring maximum .30-caliber performance from the AR15 platform. Again, it’s dangerous to reach conclusions based on limited exposure. However, like so many Americans, I believe in .30-caliber performance…and I believe in at least moderate velocity. We probably have all the cartridges we need (maybe too many), so I don’t predict huge popularity for the .308 arrow. Even so, it’s a sound cartridge that really does squeeze a bit more juice out of the AR platform. I’m going to spend a bit more time with it.

To Travel With Firearms

TO TRAVEL WITH FIREARMS …
By: Craig Boddington

At the airport on the way to Argentina: Duffel bag, gun case, and carry-on. A gun case automatically means you’re traveling heavy; overweight baggage charges are part of the deal when you travel with firearms.

Just recently I got back from a “mixed bag” hunt in Argentina: where I did some wingshooting, deer, and water buffalo hunting. I took an over/under Blaser 12 gauge; and a Blaser R8 with .270 and .375 barrels. At this moment I’m on an airplane, headed toward Cameroon. I do not have a gun case in the cargo hold; I’ll be using a “camp gun.” In this article I will be discussing the pros and cons of flying with and without firearms while traveling to hunt.

Mindsets vary. If you’re a hunter who views a firearm as an essential tool, then, so long as a suitable tool is available, it may not be important for you to bring a favorite firearm. On the other hand, if you’re a “gun guy,” it may be important for you to bring a firearm you consider perfect for game you’re hunting. Destinations vary. Sometimes it’s fairly easy to bring guns; other times it’s a major hassle, but still possible. And there are places where the hunting is great but it is not possible to bring a firearm. You simply must use whatever is available.

I’m both a hunter and a “gun guy.” Given a sensible choice I prefer to bring my own. However, I’ve hunted several places where bringing a firearm isn’t possible. That’s easy: I’ll use whatever is available! Where decisions get hard are situations where practicality and convenience enter in. Essential to consider: Game and hunting conditions; and what firearms are available?

Continue reading “To Travel With Firearms”

Double Rifle Cartridges

What do you think of when someone mentions double rifles? For many, the double rifle conjures romantic thoughts of nostalgia and tradition. In the United States, we tend to think of the double rifle as a large caliber specialist, meant only for dangerous game. In Europe, however, double rifles are favored for driven game thanks to the fast second shot. There’s no reason why a double rifle (of the appropriate caliber, of course) couldn’t be effective in the US for black bear, wild hogs, or any close-cover hunting where shots beyond a hundred yards are unlikely.

Gordon Marsh shooting a Sabatti double rifle in Mozambique — Gordon Marsh of Wholesale Hunter on the range in Mozambique with a scoped Sabatti double in .450/.40003”. This rifle accounted for three buffaloes over the next few days.

Although modern manufacturing techniques have lowered the costs of purchasing customizing a double rifle, they’re still generally more expensive. The double requires more hand-fitting, and getting both barrels to shoot together is a time-consuming process. The double is the least accurate action type, but it’s a short to very medium-range arm…and nothing is faster for delivering a second shot.

Continue reading “Double Rifle Cartridges”

Wyoming Mountain Goat: A Once in a Lifetime Hunt (Nick Oceanak)

I am standing on a ridge that was the last significant barrier for over 600 Nez Perce Indians during their flight for life from the U.S. Calvary in the fall of 1877. This breath-taking view is in Northwestern Wyoming among the Absaroka Range in the Shoshone National Forest. The history of our lands is fascinating and it’s amazing to be among the beauty and vastness of such places. Today, this land shares with me the opportunity to hunt the majestic and all mighty Mountain Goat!

Nick Oceanak - Shoshone National Forest Wyoming — Standing along the Absaroka Range in the Shoshone National Forest

I grew up the son of an accomplished outdoorsman in the great Cowboy State of Wyoming. My father, Craig Oceanak, started Timberline Outfitters in 1979, and our business stands for experience and credibility. I’ve been guiding professionally for 16 years and I’ve loved every minute of it. Well, perhaps not every minute, but trust me when I proclaim that I love my job! Needless to say, I have hundreds of hunting stories from guiding experiences alone, but this post is about one of my hunts—a once in a lifetime hunt.

Continue reading “Wyoming Mountain Goat: A Once in a Lifetime Hunt (Nick Oceanak)”

Matching the Scope to the Rifle

A couple of weeks ago I was at the range and I felt really silly. I was shooting a Marlin lever-action “guide gun”—very tricked up, but still a .45-70, and I had a big variable scope on it, 30mm tube with large objective. Before you judge, I had a reason for doing this: the rifle seemed to be accurate, so I put a powerful variable on it and turned it all the way up so I could see how well it grouped. I would never hunt with that much glass on such a rifle. Range work done, I took the big scope off, mounted an Aimpoint red-dot sight, and took it pig hunting.

Photo Courtesy of Craig Boddington — This Marlin “guide gun” has a very good ghost ring aperture sight, but as middle age advances all open sights are getting harder to see. As an alternative I mounted an Aimpoint red-dot sight, a truly excellent type of sight for shots out to perhaps 150 yards.

Continue reading “Matching the Scope to the Rifle”

TO TRAVEL WITH FIREARMS … By: Craig Boddington

TO TRAVEL WITH FIREARMS …
By: Craig Boddington