Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
supporter fiction v facts: Ruger v Tikka
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Singleshotneeded" data-source="post: 1969761" data-attributes="member: 60284"><p>I started out with a tang safety Ruger M77, it shoots pretty well...about MOA. I've had a couple more Rugers and a couple of Tikkas, and though the Rugers are competent, the Tikkas shoot a bit better. After seeing this, I picked up a few late 1950s CRF Husqvarna 1600s to see if fine shooting rifles was a Scandinavian trait. I took my time and waited for rifles that were in great condition and well cared for. I have a 9.3X62 which shoots MOA, and it's my northern B.C. moose rifle...as it can deal with a grizzly if needed. I have one in .270 Win, and it's 2/3 MOA...I use that for deer in southern B.C.. The jewel is my Husky 30.06, it puts 3 168 grain Barnes Vor-tx copper bullets into the same hole with a trace of clover-leafing. So was I happy with the result of my experiment buying used Husqvarna 1600s? Damned right I was! The results are all with factory ammo...the 9.3 likes Hornady Int'l Superformance 168 grain, and the .270 likes Nosler Accubonds in 140 grain. Based on this, I've recommended used Huskies in good condition to a few new young hunters with limited funds. They were all very happy with their rifles...and with the money they saved they were able to buy better scopes, making for even better shooting!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Singleshotneeded, post: 1969761, member: 60284"] I started out with a tang safety Ruger M77, it shoots pretty well...about MOA. I've had a couple more Rugers and a couple of Tikkas, and though the Rugers are competent, the Tikkas shoot a bit better. After seeing this, I picked up a few late 1950s CRF Husqvarna 1600s to see if fine shooting rifles was a Scandinavian trait. I took my time and waited for rifles that were in great condition and well cared for. I have a 9.3X62 which shoots MOA, and it's my northern B.C. moose rifle...as it can deal with a grizzly if needed. I have one in .270 Win, and it's 2/3 MOA...I use that for deer in southern B.C.. The jewel is my Husky 30.06, it puts 3 168 grain Barnes Vor-tx copper bullets into the same hole with a trace of clover-leafing. So was I happy with the result of my experiment buying used Husqvarna 1600s? Damned right I was! The results are all with factory ammo...the 9.3 likes Hornady Int'l Superformance 168 grain, and the .270 likes Nosler Accubonds in 140 grain. Based on this, I've recommended used Huskies in good condition to a few new young hunters with limited funds. They were all very happy with their rifles...and with the money they saved they were able to buy better scopes, making for even better shooting! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
supporter fiction v facts: Ruger v Tikka
Top