Springfield Armory has a new .22 bolt action rifle. It looks interesting from several perspectives. One, it’s a bolt action rimfire, so that has my attention immediately (I love bolt action rifles and I love rimfires). And two, it is being offered in both a composite stocked (read: Tupperware) competition version (something in which I have negative interest) and any of several grades of walnut. Fancy walnut…that works for me.
The Springfield Armory 2020 rimfire rifle stocked in what they call AAA walnut. It comes with a Picatinny rail for mounting a scope, or you can remove the rail and use conventional scope mounts.A view from the right. If that’s AAA walnut, I’m the Pope.Another shot of the Springfield 2020 rifle with fancier walnut and a Leupold scope. It is a good-looking rifle.
It’s the last part about the fancy walnut that has my attention. Springfield’s graded walnut runs from standard (they call it satin select) all the way up to AAA (or finely figured) walnut. That’s cool, as most manufacturers don’t give you a choice on the quality of the walnut figure. Judging by the photos on the Springfield website, I’d say they are grading their lumber way too generously; what they show as AAA walnut I would classify A grade stuff, but hey, it’s a start, and it’s a move in the right direction.
A Springfield 2020 rimfire rifle with satin select (or plain) walnut.As mentioned above, Springfield is also offering their new rifle with two versions of a composite stock. One is black, the other is a speckled charcoal affair.
The Springfield .22 with a black composite stock. These are on Gunbroker for as low as $389.
The Springfield 2020 .22 rifle wearing a sage wtih black webbing stock (their description, not mine).
I’ll be watching the Gunbroker.com and Gunsamerica.com listings. These rifles are already up on Gunbroker. When the listings that include photos of the actual rifles (and not just a standard print media photo) are up, I’ll pay attention. The gunshops will show the wood if it’s really good, and if it is, it’s likely I’ll pull the trigger (pardon the pun). If that happens, I’ll write about it here.
High end rimfire rifles appeal to me, and I own two or three that have exceptional wood. You can read about them here.
Sometimes picking the featured photo for each of our blogs is a challenge. Do you select a photo that captures the essence of the story, or do you feature a photo that highlights what you like most? A Mannlicher rifle almost requires a full length photo of the rifle as the lead, but for me and this rifle it was the wood. That’s why I went with the photo above. Here’s a photo showing the entire rifle…a Ruger 10/22 Mannlicher.
Fancy walnut gets me every time.
Introduced in 1964, the standard model Ruger 10/22 semi-automatic rifle has been in production continuously ever since. During that time, there have been more variations than you can shake a stick at. Walnut, birch, plastic, folding, Circassian stocks. Takedown models. Target models. Mannlichers, standards, and compact models. Bull barrels, regular, short, and long barrels. .22 Long Rifle, .22 Magnum, and .17 caliber rifles. All kinds of commemoratives. With production exceeding 5 million rifles, more Ruger 10/22s have been manufactured than any other .22 rifle (the highest production for any rifle in any caliber, though, is the AK-47, with total production quantities unknown but estimated to exceed 100 million). The 10/22 has a unique rotary magazine design, the rifle is relatively inexpensive, and a 10/22 simple to maintain. I’ve bought and sold several and I still have three or four stashed in the safe. I’ve shot the hell out of a few but I never wore one out. Reliability and longevity are two of any Ruger’s most endearing (and enduring) qualities.
A view of the left side. The rifle has good figure on both sides.
One of my favorite 10/22 configurations is the Mannlicher, which has a full length stock. This is an early one manufactured in 1974. You can make a career out of collecting 10/22s, and there have been several variants of the 10/22 Mannlicher. I’m not a serious enough collector to go after all of them. This particular rifle caught my eye because of the walnut. I’m a sucker for any rifle with highly figured walnut, and good wood is not something you see too often on an inexpensive rifle like the 10/22.
Ruger’s recent run of Mannlicher 10/22s featured a laminated stock. There’s one on Gunbroker.com with a “buy now” price of $895. Hope springs eternal.
I paid way too much for my Mannlicher 10/22 several years ago, but that’s okay. Another way of looking at it is that I bought it too soon. Prices pretty much always go up on guns. This one has already caught up to what I paid.
The 10/22 10-shot rotary magazine, a box of old Federal .22 Long Rifle cartridges, and my Mannlicher.Close enough for government work and open sights.
A Ruger 10/22 rifle can be surprisingly accurate. I wanted to get out and shoot at 50 yards, but the West End Gun Club is still inaccessible (the stream across the access road is running too high). So I took the Mannlicher to the Magnum Range (an indoor range) a couple of weeks ago. The distance was only 50 feet, but sometimes halitosis is better than no breath at all. I used my range bag as a half-assed bench rest and I managed to shoot a few decent groups using the Ruger’s open sights.
A simple rear sight. The plate can be adjusted up or down for elevation; the sight can be drifted left or right for windage. This one is pretty much right on the money as is.The Mannlicher’s front sight…a simple gold bead. The metal cap at the tip of the stock is a traditional Mannlicher touch.Another photo of the metal forearm cap on my 10/22 Mannlicher.The Mannlicher forward sling swivel is another nice touch. Instead of a screw in single attachment point beneath the forearm, a Mannlicher forward sling attachment straddles the stock as you see here.
The Mannlicher style reaches back to the 1880s. Prussian military officers designed a rifle that featured a full length “Stutzen” stock with a metal cap at the end and a carbine (or short) length. This evolved into a sporting rifle in 1903 (Ernest Hemingway hunted with one). The slim profile, compact size, and full length stock came to be known as the Mannlicher style. I first saw a Mannlicher-style rifle on a limited run, used Model 70 Winchester at the Donn Heath gun shop in Fort Worth, Texas. That Model 70 was under $200 and I wish I had the foresight to buy it. It handled beautifully and it just felt right. Today, those Model 70 Mannlichers are in the stratosphere.
Ernest Hemingway’s Mannlicher. He took it on his first African Safari. In 1997, Hemingway’s Mannlicher sold for $6,325. It would bring considerably more today.The Winchester Model 70 Mannlicher. These rifles go for $4,000 to $5,000 today.
My 10/22 is an easily handling rifle that fits me well. I don’t shoot it that often, but every time I do, I enjoy it. I’m hoping that West End will open again soon so I can put the Mannlicher to work on the 50-yard range.
My 10/22 Mannlicher. It’s not for sale.
This old Ruger 10/22 has a couple of nice features. One is the pistol grip cap. It’s plastic, but it still looks good and this one is in good shape.
Another cool touch is the fancier black plastic butt plate. Other base model 10/22s have a simpler and cheaper butt plate. This one looks good.
So there you have it…the latest installment in our Rimfire Series. There’s more coming, so stay tuned.
Never miss an ExNotes blog:
If you would like to see our earlier blogs on .22 rifles and handguns, here’s a set of links.
I’ve been a Ruger No. 1 fan for close to 50 years. It started with one I’ve written about before, and that is a Ruger No. 1A chambered in the awesome .30 06 Government cartridge. I’ve spent time on the range and I’ve hunted with this rifle, and it is probably my all-time favorite firearm.
What attracted me to the No. 1 was my father’s fascination with the rifle (he never owned one, but he wanted to), the beautiful and exquisitely figured walnut Ruger used on these rifles, and their style. To me, they just look right. My fixation started in 1976. Ruger roll-stamped every firearm they manufactured with “Made in the 200th Year of American Liberty” that year.
Rugers with this roll-marked stamp are known as Liberty or Bicentennial guns.Like I said, the walnut on my Ruger .30 06 is exquisite on both sides.As I said, the highly-figured walnut is exquisite on both sides of this .30 06.
The Ruger No. 1 came in different configurations, and the ones you see here are what Ruger called the 1A. They had 22-inch barrels, iron sights, and the Alex Henry fore end (that’s the fore end with the notch at the front). There are all sorts of suppositions about what why the notch was originally included on the Farquharson rifles that influenced the Ruger No. 1 design, but no one seems to know for sure. I just like the look of the thing. To me, these rifles are elegant. They’re not particularly light, but they’re short and it’s easy to get around in the woods with one. Back in the day, I bought a straight 4X Redfield scope and a still prefer a 4X non-variable scope for hunting (even though it’s tough to find one these days; high-powered variable scopes are all the rage).
Those west Texas days back in the ’70s were good. We spent a lot of time (essentially every weekend) out in the desert north of Fabens chasing jackrabbits and coyotes, and the No. 1 you see here sent a lot of those critters to the Promised Land. Jackrabbits were grand fun. It was hard to believe how big some of them were.
The accuracy load for my .30 06 No. 1 is the 130-grain Hornady jacketed softpoint bullet over a max load of IMR 4320 propellant. IMR 4320 is no longer in production, but I’ve got about 10 pounds of it so I’m good for a while. The rifle will put that load into an inch at 100 yards all day long, and the 130 grain Hornady bullet seems to be perfect for jackrabbits. Yeah, I know, that’s maybe a little more power than needed for Peter Cottontail, but hey, like Donald Rumsfeld used to say: You go to war with the army you have.
Gee whiz…a group I shot 40 years ago!
The .30 06 also does well with other loads. I was on the range with the ammo I had on hand a week or so ago with heavier bullets and I was pleased with the results. I tried 180 grain Remington bullets loaded on top of 48.0 grains of IMR 4064. Those loads shot low and had perceptibly heavier recoil, but they grouped under an inch at 100 yards.
Three shots at 100 yards with the Ruger .30 06 No. 1A. The load was the 180 grain Remington jacketed soft point bullet and 48.0 grains of IMR 4064, with military brass and a CCI 200 primer.
The title of this blog is A Tale of Two Bicentennial No. 1 Rugers, and that brings us to the second rifle. I was in Ohio on a secret mission about 15 years ago and the guy I visited there learned of my interest in guns. He took me to a local shop that only sold through an online auction (that was the gunshop’s business model). When we arrived, I quickly noticed another Ruger No. 1A, this time chambered in .243 Winchester. It was a bicentennial rifle, it looked to be a near twin to my .30 06 1A, and I had to have it. I tried to buy it while I was there and have shipped to my FFL holder in California, but the owner confirmed what my friend told me…I had to bid on it at auction. I did, and I won the auction at $650. Bear in mind that these rifles’ list price in 1976 was $265, and they typically sold at $239 back then. If you think I got scalped, think again. I won the auction, and the MSRP on these rifles today is something around $2,000. And the ones made back in the 1970s are, in my opinion, of much higher quality in terms of walnut figure, checkering, and other attributes.
A .243 Winchester Ruger No. 1. It wears a period correct El Paso Weaver 4×12 telescopic sight.The left side of the .243 No. 1.Ruger used to put fancy walnut on the No. 1 rifles. Today, not so much.A fancy walnut, red pad Ruger No. 1. Sweet!Like the .30 06 No. 1 featured above, this .243 is also a Liberty gun.
Most recently, good buddy John gave me a bunch of assorted brass and I started loading bits and pieces of it. I loaded the .30 40 Krag and wrote about it a week or so ago. There were a few pieces of .243 Winchester brass and that had me thinking about the .243 No. 1 in this blog. You see, I bought that rifle, stuck it in the safe, and never fired it. That was a character flaw I knew I needed to address.
I thought I had a set of .243 dies, but I was surprised to find I did not. I had some ammo, so I guess at some point I had .243 dies. I bought a new set of Lee dies, and I already had some .243 bullets. And as it turns out, the Lyman reloading manual lists IMR 4350 as the accuracy load for 60 grain bullets, and I had some. I only loaded six rounds (using the brass John gave to me), and I thought I needed to buy .243 brass (everybody is sold out of .243 brass right now). Then I started poking around in my brass drawer and it turns out I have five boxes of new Winchester 243 brass. I swear I’m gonna find Jimmy Hoffa or an honest politician in my components storage area one of these days.
The Tula factory ammo I had didn’t shoot worth a damn. Tula is cheap ammo, this stuff was old, and it grouped around 2.9 to 3.5 inches at 100 yards. I also had some very old reloads that had 100 grain Sierra bullets and 34.0 grains of IMR 4064, and it did only marginally better. The six rounds I loaded myself with the brass good buddy John provided was better. At least I think it was better. I used 65 grain Hornady V-Max bullets and 43.2 grains of IMR 4350 powder. I had one good group and one lousy group. But hey, Rome wasn’t built in a day, and I’m just getting started. I’ll buy some heavier 6mm bullets (.243 is 6mm), I’ll try them with a few different loads, and you’ll get to read about it here on the ExNotes blog.
More stories on Ruger single-shot rifles (the No. 1 and the No. 3) are here.
I am a fan of both the No. 1 and the No. 3 Ruger single shot rifles. The No. 1 is the more elegant rifle with a fancier lever, a pistol grip stock, checkering, a rubber shoulder pad, a slick quarter rib, fancier walnut, and more. The No.3 was the economy version without checkering, plain walnut, an aluminum (and later plastic) shoulder pad, and a no frills look. When I started collecting these rifles in 1976, the No. 1 was chambered in contemporary cartridges and priced at $265. The No. 3 came in classic chamberings; in 1976 that included .22 Hornet, .30-40 Krag, and .45-70. Ruger listed the No. 3 at $165, and you could buy them all day long for $139. Which I did. In 1976, I bought No. 3 rifles in all three chamberings. All had the “Made in the 200th Year of American Liberty” inscription.
Take a look at the finish on this Ruger No. 3. It’s better than how they came from the factory.
I was younger and dumber in those days, and I stupidly sold all three rifles within a year of purchasing them. The Hornet went to Army buddy Jim, the .45-70 went to another Army buddy also named Jim, and the .30-40 was traded for something else I can’t remember. If you’re reading this blog, you realize the phrase “stupidly sold” is redundant. We have all sold guns we wish we kept.
Ruger has to have one of the best fonts ever for chambering designation.
I wanted to undo the wrong I did, and about 15 years ago I started a search to replace my No. 3 rifles. The .45-70 was the easiest to find and the .22 Hornet followed shortly thereafter. The prices had gone up (used, they were going for about $650-$700 back then). The .30-40 Krag was tougher to find. I’m assuming it was because Ruger made fewer of them. Then I spotted something I had to have: An unfired .30-40 No. 3 advertised on Gunbroker, and it had significantly nicer wood then No. 3 rifles typically have. I had to own it and I paid top dollar. When I called the shop, I used my American Express card instead of a certified check because I was eager to get it. I had to pay a 4% premium, but that turned out to be a good thing (more on that in a second).
Unusually highly-figured walnut on a No. 3 Ruger.
The shop that sold it to me did something stupid. They shipped the rifle in the original box with no additional padding and they didn’t insure it. You could get away with shipping a No. 1 Ruger in the original box, as they were stout and contained big pieces of foam padding. The No. 3 had a flimsy cardboard box in keeping with the No. 3’s lower price. You can guess where this story is going.
A view of the No. 3’s port side at the West End Gun Club.
Yep, the rifle arrived with the stock broken at the wrist. Wow. The wood was as beautiful as it looked in the Gurnbroker.com ad, but it was busted. I had a brand new, unfired 200th year No. 3 in .30-40 Krag with nice wood and its collector value was ruined. Like the box, I was crushed.
I called the shop owner, who turned out to be a real prick. “It’s your problem, and it’s between you and the US Post Office,” he told me. “You didn’t tell me to insure it, so I didn’t. Once it leaves here, it’s yours.” I told him I was going to have the stock repaired and I offered to split the cost with him, but he kept repeating his mantra: Once it leaves here, it’s yours.
Keep us publishing: Please click on the popup ads!
I told this sad story the next day during our usual geezer gathering at Brown’s BMW in Pomona, and good buddy Dave asked if the gun shop had asked me about insurance. “Nope, he never asked and I didn’t mention having it insured. I guess I just assumed it would be.” Dave explained that I was right to make that assumption, so I called the shop owner again, I explained to him I had learned about insurance responsibilities, and I again offered to split the repair cost. He said no again.
Then I remembered I had used my credit card. I called American Express, I explained the situation, and I told them it would cost about $275 to have the stock repaired and refinished. Not a problem, the guy on the other end of the line said, and just like that, he took $275 off the charge and said that the shop owner had 30 days to appeal. He didn’t, and that was that.
I sent the rifle off and when it came back I was both pleased and disappointed. I had asked the place I use for such work to match the original Ruger finish, but they did not. Instead, it was a much deeper and more glorious oil finish. It was nicer than the original finish, but it wasn’t original. That was good news and bad news. I had planned to keep the gun in its unfired condition, but now that it was busted, repaired, and refinished, it would be a shooter (that was the good news).
You can just barely see where the crack was in the stock wrist, but that’s because I used flash for this photo. In normal light, you really can’t see it.
I didn’t shoot the No. 3 immediately. This all happened 15 years ago before I retired and before COVID hit. I recently decided I needed to shoot the .30-40, so I ordered unprimed brass and Lee’s Ultimate four die set. Both were initially unavailable, but they came in and I was in business. I already had large rifle primers, a stash of what has to be one of the best powders ever for cast bullets (SR 4759), and a bunch of 173-grain gas checked bullets.
.30-40 Krag ammo in new brass, loaded by yours truly.Ready for the range.
I seated the cast bullets to the crimping groove and used the Lee factory crimp die, and the cartridges looked great. I tried a number of different SR 4759 powder charge levels in the Lyman cast bullet manual. When I fired on the 50-yard line at the West End Gun Club using the rifle’s open sights, I found that 20.0 grains of SR 4759 is my accuracy load.
I held at 6:00, and the rounds shot very close to point of aim at 50 yards. The target was mounted on its side, as you see it here.Very modest bore leading in the No. 3. That SR 4759 load with the 173-grain bullet is accurate even with the Ruger’s factory iron sights.
The .30-40 Krag is an interesting cartridge. It was the US Army’s standard chambering after they phased out the .45-70 Springfield. The new rifle was the 1892 Krag-Jorgensen rifle made at the Springfield Arsenal. It was the first military cartridge designed for smokeless (as opposed to black) powder, and it originally fired a 230-grain jacketed bullet. The .30-40 is a rimmed cartridge that looks a lot like the 7.62x54R Russian cartridge (which came out just one year earlier). The ballistics of both are fairly close to the .308 Winchester (which is the 7.62 NATO round we currently use).
.45-70, .30-40 Krag, 7.62x54R Russian, .308 Winchester (7.62 NATO), .30 06, and .300 Weatherby cartridges. The .300 Weatherby is the fiercest recoiling cartridge in the group when loaded with jacketed bullets at factory velocities (the cartridge shown here is loaded with a cast bullet). With the exception of the .300 Weatherby, Gatling guns have been chambered in each of these cartridges. Modern mini-guns are electrically-powered Gatlings chambered in 7.62 NATO (.308 Winchester).
After our experiences in the Spanish-American War, our government load plant created and issued a hotter version of the .30-40 Krag in an attempt to match the speed and ballistics of the Spanish 7mm Mauser round, but the Krag rifles started cracking bolts. All the .30-40 Krag ammo was recalled and reconfigured with the original, lower pressure load. The .30-40 Krag was also used in the Gatling gun. You can read about that here:
The .30-40 Krag only lasted about a decade in US government service. It was replaced with the .30-03 in 1903 (which was soon replaced with the .30-06, which became one of the most popular hunting cartridges ever). The history of this fine old cartridge is interesting; shooting it with cast bullets in a sleek Ruger No. 3 is good old fun. I might never have known that if the stock had not broken.
The 6.5 Creedmoor cartridge draws a lot of flak on the Internet. I suspect most of the folks who go negative do so with no real experience. I have two 6.5 Creedmoor rifles, and both do very well for me. Will they magically overcome a shooting skills deficit? No. Are there other cartridges out there that can do as well? Sure. But the 6.5 Creedmoor, in my opinion, does what it is supposed to, and that’s provide accuracy with modest recoil. I’m a believer.
I had my two Creedmoors on the range a few days ago, a Browning X-Bolt and a Ruger No. 1 (you’ve seen them on these pages recently). Both are elegant rifles and each has what I would call exhibition grade wood. The Browning has a curly maple stock and the Ruger has fancy walnut. Both are factory rifles, and other than mounting scopes on each, both are unmodified guns.
Which one is prettier? It’s a tie in my opinion. Good wood, to me, is one of the best parts of having a fine rifle, and both these 6.5 Creedmoors answer the mail in that regard. The wood seems to be alive on each, changing depending on the viewing angle and how the light hits it. This sensitivity to light orientation is probably more pronounced with the maple-stocked Browning. The curl runs from front to rear and top to bottom on both sides (this rifle has an unusually highly-figured stock). When photographed from the front (as I did in the photo below), the figure on the Browning is more subdued.
When photographed from the rear, though (as you can see below), the Browning’s curl really pops. The Ruger’s fancy walnut looks good from any angle.
The Browning is a bolt action rifle based on the Paul Mauser design (as are nearly all bolt action rifles) and it holds five rounds (four in the magazine and one in the chamber). You can buy extra magazines and carry them with four more rounds ready to go in each (you know, in case your deer starts returning fire). The Ruger is a falling block action and it is a single shot. I prefer that and I admit it is a bit of snobbery on my part; I like to think I only need one shot. On the rifle range, I only load one round at a time. Come to think of it, on a hunt I also only load one round at a time. California’s magazine restrictions are irrelevant to me; to my way of thinking if you need a 30-round magazine you aren’t much of a shot.
As much as I love Ruger No. 1 rifles, I prefer the scope location on a bolt action rifle better. A telescopic sight on a bolt action is in a more natural position. The Ruger No. 1 positions the scope further forward, and even when I mount the scope as far to the rear as it will go, it requires an unnatural amount of forward stretch to get the correct eye relief. You can get Ruger scope rings with a rearward setback to overcome this problem, but they look goofy and they add more weight to the rifle.
The Ruger is a heavier rifle. Part of that is the slender and shorter barrel on the Browning. Walnut is lighter than maple, but the Ruger barreled action is heavier that the Browning X-Bolt barreled action. Browning’s specs put the maple X-Bolt at 6 1/2 pounds; a Ruger No. 1B (this rifle’s configuration) is listed as 8 1/4 lbs. On the rifle range the Ruger’s heft doesn’t bother me. If I was carrying a rifle all day on pig hunt, I’d prefer the lighter Browning. The Browning feels almost dainty compared to the No. 1.
I mounted inexpensive scopes on both rifles. The Browning has a Vortex 4×12 scope and the Ruger has a 3×9 Redfield. The optics are equally bright on both. The Vortex has indistinct indexing on its windage and elevation click adjustments; the Redfield turret is snappy and allows counting clicks by feel alone as you make them. The Redfield Revenge is discontinued (the Redfield company is no more), but it is a good scope. I prefer the Redfield to the Vortex.
Both rifles are accurate at right around minute of angle, and both will occasionally get down in the 0.6-inch group neighborhood. The Ruger didn’t like the Speer 140 grain jacketed soft point bullet with 41.0 grains of IMR 4350, although I’ve used it before with a lighter charge of that same powder and achieved sub-minute-of-angle groups. Rifles have their preferences. With a load dialed for each rifle, the accuracy of both rifles is comparable.
I tried a few loads in both rifles recently with IMR 4350 and Varget powder, and I also tried neck-sized-only ammo in the Browning. Here are the results:
If there’s an advantage to neck sizing fired cases in the Browning, it’s not obvious to me. I’m going to full length resize the brass from this point forward, which will allow me to use my reloaded ammo in either rifle.
When I bumped the IMR 4350 charge up to 41.0 grains, accuracy deteriorated from previous sessions. The Browning likes 40.7 grains (or maybe a little less); the Ruger did better with the Speer 140 grain jacketed softpoints at 39.5 grains of IMR 4350.
What’s next? I found Berger Bullets load data for IMR 7828 SSC propellant. That’s a slower burning propellant ordinarily used in magnum cartridges, but I like the fact that it fills the case (which should make for a more accurate load) and I thought I would give it a try. I have 20 rounds loaded and I’ll test this combo later this week. Stay tuned, and you’ll read about it here on the ExNotes blog.
This was another blog with a daunting title challenge. I went with the one you see above. Other choices were “The 6.5 Creedmoor No. 1” and “Surfing While Under The Influence.” The story goes like this: A few years ago Ruger built a limited number of their elegant single-shot No. 1 rifles chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor. They were built exclusively for a Ruger distributor, and as is that distributor’s habit, they were fitted with 28-inch barrels (the normal barrel length for the beavertail fore end No. 1 Rugers is 26 inches). If you tell me a rifle is a limited edition you have my attention. Tell me it’s a Ruger No. 1 and I’m about 90% of the way there. If it has fancy walnut, you can hear the cash registor go “ka-ching.”
I’d been watching the Creedmoor No. 1 rifles on Gunbroker.com, but I didn’t see any with wood that caught my attention. Then one night I’d had a beer or two (okay, maybe it was four or five) and I was surfing the Gunbroker.com site, and this 6.5 Creedmoor No. 1 appeared:
The Ruger No. 1 first hit the market in the late 1960s, and it is about as classy a rifle as ever existed. It’s a real specialty item. Today the craze is all about black plastic semi-automatic rifles with big magazines; but none of that nuttiness has ever appealed to me. A single shot rifle, on the other hand, gets my attention immediately. They are just cool. There’s something inherently worthy about having to make that one shot count.
The 6.5 Creedmoor cartridge was developed specifically as a target round, and it’s been catching on for the last few years. It has the same trajectory as a .300 Winchester Magnum but with substantially less recoil, and everything I’ve read about the Creedmoor said it is inherently accurate.
So, back to my quest for a 6.5 Creedmoor No. 1. The price on Gunbroker seemed right, I hit the “buy now” button, and the rifle had a new owner. The next day I looked at the Gunbroker ad again, and something I had not noticed the night before caught my attention. It was listed with a 26-inch (not a 28-inch) barrel. Hmmm. So I did a bit more research. What I had purchased was a rifle from Ruger’s earlier run of 6.5 Creedmoor No. 1 rifles, which folks tell me is even harder to find than the more recent group of 28-inchers. Hmmm. A rare No. 1 in the chambering I wanted with beautiful wood. Sometimes you just get lucky.
When the rifle arrived, I bought an inexpensive Redfield scope, a set of Lee reloading dies, a box of 6.5mm bullets, and a bag of Starline brass. I only loaded two different loads, and I was off to the range. All the hype about the 6.5 Creedmoor’s inherent accuracy? Hey, I’m here to tell you that if you’re looking for an argument, I’m not your guy. My No. 1 convinced me that the 6.5 Creedmoor is indeed an accurate cartridge.
I loaded two different recipes with the 140-grain Speer jacketed softpoint bullets seated to an overall cartridge length of 2.700 inches, IMR 4350 powder, Winchester large rifle primers, and virgin Starline brass. At 100 yards, I fired five rounds with the above load using 38.5 grains of IMR 4350, and those five went into 2.272 inches. I was just getting warmed up. I then tried the same combo but with 39.5 grains of IMR 4350. The first three-shot group was 0.701 inches, and the second three-shot group was 0.978 inches. This was outstanding for the first outing. Maybe I just got lucky. But I don’t think so. I think that the 6.5 Creedmoor is everything folks say it is.
Last week I was on the range again with a different rifle, and good buddy Dan asked if I shot 6.5 Creedmoor. I do, I answered. It seems somebody shot a box or three of factory ammo and didn’t keep their brass. Dan wanted to know if I wanted it. Does the Pope poop in the woods? Is a bear Catholic? You bet, I answered. Any kind of brass is hard to come by these days. But 6.5 Creedmoor? For free? Like I said, sometimes you just get lucky.
6.5 Creedmoor brass in the vibratory cleaner. It’s looking good.6.5mm bullets in Speer and Nosler flavors. I only tried the Speer bullets so far. I’ll bet the Noslers are going to be more accurate.
I’ll keep you posted on 6.5 Creedmoor developments right here on the ExNotes blog. I’ll load more ammo this week and I’ll get on the range shortly after that. Stay tuned.
Help us keep the lights on…please click on the popup ads!
I’ve been on a tear the last few weeks, playing with the Mk V 300 Weatherby and developing loads for it. I developed loads with cast bullets and with jacketed bullets, and at reduced-load levels and at factory ammo levels.
The Internet weenies advise going hotter with this cartridge to get better accuracy, but I don’t want more accuracy that badly (don’t get me wrong; I like accuracy, but not at the expense of this kind of recoil). The recoil with this cartridge is severe. I shot some sub-minute-of-angle groups with the 180 grain Remington jacketed softpoint bullets. I also had a few larger groups, but I’m chalking that up to the wind and me still being a bit recoil sensitive. For me, it’s close enough to call it done.
All groups presented here were at 100 yards from my Mk V Weatherby. It has a walnut stock and a 26-inch barrel. I bought this rifle about 10 years ago but I had not shot it much until recently. I have a 4×16 Weaver on this rifle and all groups were with the scope at 16X. The scope is no longer available, but it is a good one.
This Mk V initially had a terrible trigger. It was creepy and gritty, and it was so bad it surprised me. I was thinking about spending another $200 on a Timney trigger and then a funny thing happened: The trigger suddenly and spontaneously improved. It’s about a three-pound trigger now with zero creep. Don’t ask me how or why. Maybe there was some grit in the trigger, or maybe there was a burr somewhere in the mechanism. Whatever it was, it’s gone.
I now use a Caldwell shoulder pad for the full bore stuff. It helps tremendously with recoil, but it is probably degrading my shooting position because of the unnatural stretch to get a good scope picture and cheek weld. Even with that pad, though, I still get kissed by the scope on occasion. The rifle likes to let me know who’s the boss.
The Caldwell shoulder pad really helped tame the 300 Weatherby’s recoil.
Cast bullets are okay for light loads and practicing, but to keep the groups below 3 inches, I had to use a bore brush between every group. If I didn’t bore brush it every three shots, the groups opened up. If I use a bore brush and run it through the barrel three or four times after each group I can keep my shots in the black.
After calling Hodgdon to make sure I wouldn’t blow myself up, I tried a few jacketed loads with 130 grain Hornady and 150 grain Winchester bullets and Trail Boss powder. They grouped okay. The jacketed bullets with Trail Boss were more accurate than the cast bullets, but not as good as the full bore stuff. It’s good to know, but I’ll reserve the Trail Boss for cast loads.
Hornady 130 grain jacketed soft point bullets. In my 30 06 Ruger No. 1 with IMR 4320 powder these bullets will group under an inch all day long.Winchester 150 grain jacketed soft point bullets. These bullets shoot into a half inch from my 30 06 Winchester Model 70.Remington 180 grain jacketed soft point bullets. These bullets shoot well in any rifle I’ve tried them in (a single-shot Browning 30 06 B78, a custom Howa 1500 30 06, a Ruger 308 GSR Scout rifle, and others). They are no longer available, which is a pity.200 grain Sierra jacketed hollowpoint boat tail bullets my good buddy Marty gave to me.
I shot neck sized brass with the Trail Boss cast and jacketed loads because the Trail Boss loads don’t expand the case very much and it’s easier to reload if I neck size only. I don’t have to lube the cases and it goes a lot faster.
180 grain cast .309 bullets from my good buddy Roy.
The Trail Boss sweet spot with cast bullets is 20.0 grains. That’s near the bottom of the charge range. I went down to 19.5 grains and there was no improvement in group size. I went above 20.0 grains and the groups opened up. I’m a quick study. 20.0 grains. Got it.
I tried neck sizing only (instead of full length resizing) with full bore loads and I found that was not the way to go. I had a lot of cases that wouldn’t extract when I shot neck sized only full bore loads, and then I found when I neck sized a case it stuck it in the chamber even without firing (it was difficult to extract). Full bore loads have to be full length resized in my 300 Weatherby (with an extra quarter turn on the sizing die after it touches the shell holder for this rifle; that’s a trick a tech rep at Sierra turned me on to). The cases expand too much if you neck size only after firing full bore loads.
With cast bullets, crimping the bullet is necessary for better accuracy. Not crimping opened up the groups substantially. Crimping brought them back down. But that’s only with cast bullets. For jacketed bullets, the rifle doesn’t care if you crimp them or not. There’s no accuracy gains to be had with crimping jacketed bullets in my rifle.
Keeping the bore clean makes a difference (duh), and you need to get up close to make sure the bore is clean. Simply judging cleanliness by the patch coming out clean isn’t good enough. After my patches were coming out clean, I took a photo of the muzzle. I looked at it on my computer and I was shocked. Before examining the photo, I thought this was a clean barrel:
A macro photograph of the Weatherby’s muzzle after I thought it was relatively clean.
I realized I still had a lot of copper and lead streaking in the barrel and I went to work on it with Hoppes No. 9 and Butch’s Bore Shine. That reduced most of the copper, but the lead was not giving up. A bit of online research, and what do you know: Solvents (like Hoppes or Butch’s) don’t affect lead at all. I’ve been a shooter for 50 years and that was news to me. Nope, lead has to be mechanically removed. I soaked a pad with Kroil penetrating oil, ran it through the bore and let it soak for a while, and then I ran a bore brush down the barrel repeatedly. It was better, but it needed more. I repeated the process several times over the next two days and got the bore down to this:
The Weatherby muzzle after a much more stringent cleaning. Additional effort did not remove the minute streaks of remaining lead and copper.
The bore wouldn’t get any cleaner that what you see above. To the naked eye, it looks clean. But then, to the naked eye the first photo looked clean. I was probably penalizing my inspection with that macro photo. I know I could probably get it cleaner with something like JB Bore Paste, but I’m hesitant to use an abrasive in the bore.
It’s Trail Boss for cast and reduced jacketed loads, and IMR 7828 for the factory level loads.H1000 is a powder I had not previously tried in the 300 Weatherby. That’s the Mk V behind it. Weatherby has discontinued walnut stocks on their regular production rifles; they are still available on rifles through the Weatherby Custom Shop. Nothing looks better than fancy walnut, in my opinion.
I loaded various permutations of IMR 7828 and H1000 propellants, and the Sierra 200-grain jacketed hollowpoint boat tail and Remington 180-grain jacketed soft point bullets for the factory level loads.
So how did the above combinations perform at 100 yards? Take a look:
The rifle is unquestionably capable of better results than you see above, but not with me. I’m usually not recoil shy, but this 300 Weatherby at factory ammo levels is a bit beyond what I’m willing to live with on a regular basis. A better rifleman could probably keep most of the above loads below an inch. But an inch and half is good enough for me, and several of the factory-level loads above did that. I can hunt with this rifle, and that’s what I’m going to do.
So what’s next? I found a couple of boxes of 180 grain Hornady jacketed soft point bullets, and I have a few Nosler 180 grain bullets as well. I’m going to try a few loads with them. I haven’t tried too many loads with lighter bullets, mostly because earlier results were disappointing. But I haven’t given up on the lighter bullets. I’m going to revisit a few loads with them. And I have a couple of powders I want to try as well. Bottles of powder don’t last long with a 300 Weatherby, though, when you look at kind of powder charges these cases demand. When you’re dispensing 80 grains of propellant per round, 100 rounds of 300 Weatherby consumes an entire bottle of powder. And powders (like everything else) are somewhat difficult to find these days.
Truth be told, the 300 Weatherby is specialty item, and it’s a punishing beast. It’s surprising how much of an increase in recoil there is in going from a 30 06, a 300 H&H, or a 7mm Magnum (in either Remington or Weatherby flavors) to a 300 Weatherby. But shooting the 300 Weatherby is fun in its own way. I sure enjoy mine.
If you shoot a 300 Weatherby, we’d like to hear your thoughts on the cartridge and the rifle. Please leave a comment here on the ExNotes blog.
More Tales of the Gun…revolvers, rifles, pistols, pellet guns, reloading, and more. It’s all right here!
Rimfire rifles are cool. The ammo is inexpensive (when you can find it), there’s no recoil to speak of, they are accurate, and they usually cost less than centerfire rifles. Usually. Unless you go for fancy wood and high end rifles. Both the rimfires you see above fit that description.
The one on the left is a CZ452 Varmint model and it is a stunning rifle. I bought it used and came to it in a unusual way. I’d never owned a CZ before I bought this one. I heard they were accurate and I’m a sucker for a pretty piece of walnut. I saw this one on an Internet rimfire forum, and I knew the chances of finding one like it in a store were slim. So I wrote to the owner through the board’s messaging system and asked if he’d be interested in selling it. “No way,” came the quick response. I forgot about it and then one day about a year later came the email. The guy needed cash and I needed that rifle. It was a match made in heaven, and I bought it as you see it here, complete with the Mueller scope. It’s as accurate as I hoped it would be (it’s the most accurate .22 rifle I own). Patience pays big sometimes.
Have you clicked on your popup ads today?
The one on the right I came to own in a different manner. About 15 years ago Susie and I were in Rapid City, South Dakota. Rapid City is a cool little town and it has a very cool gun store. First Stop Gun is a dream come true: A real gun shop, with an eye for high end guns, blue steel, and good wood. I didn’t buy anything on that visit, but having learned about the gun store I watched for their listings on Gunbroker.com. One day, they posted an ad for a Remington Custom Shop Model 504.
I pounced on the 504 and I’m glad I did. Remington (as we knew it) is no more, the Custom Shop (as we knew it) is no more, and the Model 504 is no more. This one checked all the boxes for me…great wood, a Custom Shop rifle, and a rimfire. Yeah, you might say I paid too much for it, but the value is only going one way (and that’s up). I’d say I didn’t pay too much; maybe I just bought it too soon. And no, it’s not for sale. It shoots well and the Model 504 has the feel of a full size centerfire (check out the recoil pad on this rifle). It doesn’t feel dinky like many .22s do. It’s just a fun gun to shoot and it’s a fun gun to look at. I do both a lot.
Do you like photos of high end handguns and rifles, and fancy walnut? Then here is where you want to be: Tales of the Gun!
When you’re a reloader you get a bunch of odds and ends components and you go on a jag to load them all just to get the stuff off the bench. Oddball bullet dribs and drabs, brass you don’t want to bother cleaning, trimming, or sorting, that sort of thing. I had a bunch of the above laying around crying out to become .223 ammo, I hadn’t been to the range with my Mini 14, and it was time to shoot up the leftovers.
First, a bit about the rifle. It’s what Davidson’s called the Mini 14 Tactical, and it was a limited run they had Ruger make with Circassian walnut stocks. I looked at a bunch of them on Gunbroker before I spotted the one you see here and I pounced (most had very plain walnut).
An unusual Mini 14 with a Circassian stock. I get a lot of compliments on this rifle. It’s not for sale.
This is a rifle that gets compliments every time I bring it to the range. I’ve written about my Mini 14 before here on the ExNotes blog and I know what it takes to make this puppy group. This wasn’t going to be one of those days; like I said, I was just using up remnants from reloading sessions for other rifles.
The left side of the Mini 14’s Circassian walnut stock.The right side. This sure is a nice-looking Mini 14.
The Davidson’s Mini 14s came with 30-round mags and a flush suppressor, both of which are apparently favored by folks who rob gas stations and convenience stores (our legislators have their heads so far up their fourth points of contact they haven’t seen daylight in decades). I replaced the flash suppressor with a muzzle brake to make the rifle much less intimidating.
You might laugh at a muzzle brake on a Mini 14. It works, though. Fire a Mini 14 with a muzzle brake and then fire one without and you’ll feel the difference.
I also installed the Tech Sights Mini 14 rear aperture sight, which I like a lot better than the standard Mini 14 rear sight.
The Tech Sights rear aperture sight. If you have a Mini 14 and you don’t have one of these, you’re missing the boat.
I loaded three configurations of ammo. The first was a new load I had developed using XBR 8208 propellant. For reasons I can’t remember, I had a bunch of Hornady 55-grain full metal jacket bullets I had pulled from another load. If you look closely at the photo below, you’ll see the circumferential ring where the collet puller grabbed the bullets. My thought was that pulled bullets would degrade accuracy, which is why they were tucked away and ignored for a long time. The load was 25.3 grains of XBR 8208, mixed brass previously fired in the Mini 14 (neck sized only for this load), and Winchester small rifle primers. I seated the bullets about midway in the cannelure, but I didn’t crimp. For this load, I didn’t tumble or trim the brass, either.
55-grain bullets loaded in .223 Remington brass for the Mini 14. Note the circumferential bullet puller collet marks just above the cannelure.
Surprisingly, the above load shot relatively well. If the marks on the bullets affected accuracy I couldn’t see it. I shot a few 10-shot groups at 50 yards just to get into the swing of things, and then I fired a 10-shot group at 100 yards (which I’ll get to at the end of this blog). The 10-shot group at 100 yards wasn’t too shabby. The rifle shot low left (my aim point was at 6:00), but I hadn’t adjusted the sights for this load.
50-yard groups with the above load. The flyers are do to operator error. The groups showed promise at 50 yards, and I knew I would test them at 100 yards.
For the next load, I had a few 35-grain Hornady V-Max bullets I normally use for my .22 Hornet. This is a bullet I guessed would not do well in the much-higher-velocity .223 Remington cartridge, and I was right. Some of them grouped okay at 50 yards, but they were right on the edge of instability. A few tumbled and went wide. I didn’t bother firing these at 100 yards; if they were flaky at 50 yards, they would be positively flaky at 100.
.223 Remington cartrdiges loaded with 35-grain Hornady VMax Hornet bullets. The ammo looks good, but it was not a good load for the Mini 14.The 35-grain VMax loads at 50 yards. The bullets were right on the stability threshold.
The last group was one I put together using another set of leftover Hornet bullets, the 46-grain Winchester jacketed hollow point bullet. They shot poorly when I tested them in my Ruger No. 3 Hornet, and they were really terrible in the .223 Mini 14. I suspect they were breaking up in flight. Several went wide or through the target sideways.
46-grain Winchester hollowpoint jacketed bullets loaded in .223 brass. This didn’t work out at all.A huge hollowpoint. It might work well on prairie dogs in the .22 Hornet, but these bullets weren’t stable and didn’t group well in the .223 Remington cartridge.
The 46-grain Winchester groups were huge at 50 yards and I could see on the target that they were unstable. At least one tumbled. Some never even made it to the target.
The above load’s poor performance was predictable, but I’m one of those guys who has to pee on the electric fence. You know, just to make sure. The arrow points to a spot where a bullet went through the target sideways.
After testing the above bullets at 50 yards, I knew that the Hornet bullets were a no go. Actually, I kind of knew that before I tested the load. But I had the bullets and I thought I would give it a try.
I wanted to see how the pulled 55-grain Hornady bullets would do at 100 yards, so I moved a target out to 100 yards they did relatively. The group centroid shifted from my usual Mini 14 load, but it was fairly tight for iron sights with junk/untrimmed mixed brass.
55-grain full metal jacket boattail pulled Hornady bullets, 25.3 grains of XBR 8208 propellant, Winchester small rifle primers, and mixed brass provided a 3.65-inch 10-shot group at 100 yards. The black bullseye is 5.50 inches in diameter. I was pleased with these results.
Well, you live and you learn. I cleaned off the reloading bench, I had a little fun, and I now know from personal experience that 35-grain and 46-grain Hornet bullets won’t do very well in the .223. Sometimes it’s good to learn what doesn’t work as well as what does.
More guns and reloading content? Like fancy walnut? Hey, it’s all right here!
You can’t beat free…sign up here and never miss an ExNotes blog.
I saw this very interesting post on Facebook from good buddy Reeve not too long ago and I thought you fancy walnut aficionados might enjoy it:
Here’s my take on a Stevens Little Scout. I built it for my grandson from a rough original. The barrel has a new liner, and the stock changed to a pistolgrip. The forend changed from the lifeless little wedge to a Schnabel. The wood is Turkish walnut. I hot blued the metalwork. Engraving and color case by Mike Crumling.
Reeve, thanks for allowing us to share your artistry. I’d say your grandson is a lucky guy on many levels. That is a beautiful rifle, my friend.
Never miss one of our stories! Subscribe for free!
