# Remington 700 ADL v.s. 700 BDL



## Stealth

Awhile back I went to the general store to look for a .308. Anyway I already had my mind set on the Remington 700. The guy showed me the ADL grade and then he said I'd be better off spending a little more money and purchasing the BDL grade. I asked him the diffrences between the two I knew the BDL was more of a semi-custom grade but I wanted details. Anyway he told me that the BDL had a smoother bolt. Had something called a jeweled bolt, I dont know if the bolt metal or something is better for the jeweled bolt but it looked neat. He also said the BDL had a drop plate which I dont know what that is?

Other than that I coudnt really get anyhting else out of him except the BDL was better alround.

Does anyone here have any helpful input. I'd really appreciate it. The real thing I'm only concerned about is accuracy. If the BDL increases the accuracy of the rifle then I can reason with spending the extra $200. If not then I dont really care about the black ebony forend, or the bolt those are simple luxuries.

Well thanks for the help

Derek


----------



## Plainsman

Stealth

As I understand it the difference in the ADL vs. the BDL is mostly cosmetic. Remember the old 788 Remington for years it was one of the most accurate out of the box rifles, and it was Remington's cheapest. There is no opening in the bottom of the ADL (no drop plate) which gives you access to the magazine. You must run your loaded ammo through the chamber to extract. I don't like that. The difference in accuracy is meaningless. Some people think the ADL is slightly more accurate, because the stock is more rigid without the opening below the action for the drop plate. I doubt it makes a noticeable difference. I have about four BDL's, not ADL. I want to be able to open the plate and drop all shells into my hand. The barrel if finished a little better in the BDL and perhaps will resist rust a little better. I'm not sure about bore finish. That is about all I can tell you. Check out the Remington web site.


----------



## headhunter

Droplate and fancier checkering/wood is the only difference. I have one of each, Its basically all cosmetic.

If you don't mind using your bolt to eject shells, buy the ADL........Just as good.


----------



## sdeprie

Let me get this straight: The guy recommending you spend MORE money is the guy selling you the gun, making the profit on the sale. Have I got this right? :lol: Personal opinion, notwithstanding the advantages listed of the drop-plate. Unless this is an investment, get the ADL and take good care of it. It is well worth the money and should do everything you will ever want it to do.


----------



## Stealth

Thanks for all the help.

Just from what I seen all the diff. just looked cosmetic like yall said. I never knew what the drop plate did.

I dont really mind ejecting the shells out with the bolt.

Now the big question, I just cant make up my mind. Synthetic stock, or wood.

The wood is pretty and very eye apealling. But is subject to weather damage from rain and even humidty.

Synthetic is weather retardent and looks neat if you like the tatical look in a hunting rifle. Other than than it is kinda ugly black, although you can paint all over them to camo them up.

Hmmmmmmm................


----------



## sdeprie

Oh man, that is the question, all right. Wood is sooooo pretty, but synthetic is so durable. For myself, I am getting ready to build several custom guns. One I want to make a presentation piece. The rest are shooters. By that I mean I want to be able to take them anywhere, put them through all kinds of crap, use them for walking sticks, canoe paddle, pry bar, whatever I need. The presentation piece will get a wood stock. The rest? You got it, synthetic. How do you want to treat your gun? If you aren't going to treat it any better than I plan to treat my "shooters", get synthetic. Some say the wood is more forgiving with recoil. That may not be an issue, but I thought I would mention it. So, have I answered your question? I doubt it. Just thoughts to share. Enjoy the choosing. :lol:


----------



## Bobm

IF you looked around you could find a used Bdl for the same or less than a new ADL the drop plate is nice when its bitter cold and you are trying to unload the gun in the dark, Safer too. I buy l my rifles used and have never got a bad one yet. Very few people shoot them enough to give them any appreciable amount of wear. I have Ruger model 77s and I wouldn't want to have to cycle the shells through the action every time I unload. If you look from after deer season to early summer there is always good deals on used rifles, right now is the worst time to buy and the best to sell. The money you save on used rifle can be put into a better scope, nothing is worse than a cheap scope.


----------



## Stealth

Just looked around on the net and they dont even offer the BDL in the .308 Win neither do they offer that caliber with the Wood stocked ADL.

The ADL Synthetic seems most popular and they offer it in .308. Also it is about $80 less than the Wood ADL, so ADL Syntehic here we come


----------



## sdeprie

That's still gonna be a LOT prettier than my 308, an Ishapore with a red dot. It's just plain ugly. But it's fun to shoot.


----------



## Stealth

How is the recoil on a .308. The bigges rifle I've shot was a SKS 7.62x39 and 20 ga. was biggest scatter gun.

How'd you compare the recoil to these catridges. Thanks


----------



## sdeprie

I haven't shot the SKS, but my guess is it will be a little stouter, but in the excitement of hunting you won't notice it. The gun may make it more comfortable, but a semi-auto in general tends to soften it some, usually. I'm sure if you load your own with maximum pressures with 220 gr bullets, you're gonna feel it. But that's not the usual load for a 308 for hunting purposes. You'll feel a 150 or 165 gr load, but it shouldn't be uncomfortable. At the range, you will notice a big difference in felt recoil if you wear your ear muffs. If it sounds loud, it will feel like a harder kick, at least it has in my experience. With a quality rifle like that Rem 700 (especially as opposed to my Ishapore) it will feel better as well.

Summary: Expect a little more than the 20 ga, but not uncomfortable.
:sniper:


----------



## Stealth

Yea, I have a .308 casing and I didnt think it would kick to much. That is one of the reasons I picked the .308.

1)It is the standard sniper round for U.S. military, so I'd like to get familar with it
2)Recoil is not hard
3)As long as you place your shots correctly it will work on most all big game animals.

Craig Boddington's(Craig Boddington is a great outdoor writer, I really idlize his words and take them to heart, I just think he had great experince) dad used his old .308 from everything to pronghorns to moose! So you know what they say shot placement is everything. And with the light recoil you don't flinch and when you don't flinch you place your shot in the right spot! It all works out


----------



## Bobm

Recoil is pretty stout in a light gun if you get to 180 grain bulets which is what I use in mine I have a Ruger ultra light in 308 and it kicks hard with bigger bullets but I usually only have to shoot it once at deer.


----------



## Stealth

Hmmm, I was planning to use for alot of things. Deer , load it down for coyotes and predators etc....


----------



## sdeprie

Bobm, do you think he needs 180 gr bullets for deer? I only load 150 gr bullets. I plan on using Nosler partitions. My range is not great and I don't think these swamp deer are going to be very big, although the doe I got last year was respectable. The recoil would be a little lighter with 150 gr bullets.


----------



## Plainsman

Sdeprie

I agree with you on the 150 gr bullet for deer. I shoot a 165 grain in my 308, but it is a heavy barrel, and I shoot Sierra Gameking. That is what my rifle likes so that is what I shoot. When you shoot premium bullets like the Nosler Partition the performance of these bullets lets you shoot lighter bullets. Here is my line of thinking. These bullets all mushroom to approximately the same diameter. Assuming that is true and they all penetrate the deer completely then the bullet with the highest velocity as it passes through the deer will do the most tissue damage. Hydrostatic shock is what causes tissue damage beyond the physical presence of the bullet. A friend of mine had surgery for a torn rotator cuff about ten years ago. He shoots a light (6.5 lb) 300 Win Mag. He loaded I think it was 110 gr X bullets. I watched through a spotting scope as the bullet struck a nice 4X4 buck. Upon impact the chest area visibly expanded and the buck ran 20 yards before dropping.


----------



## sdeprie

110 gr bullets in a 30 caliber. that's an interesting concept. With the chest cavity expanding, I'm kind of surprised it ran that far, but you never know how tough they can be.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I

150 grain is more than enough. My first year deer hunting I used a 22-250 and that is still the best buck I have shot........and the luckiest aim!


----------



## sdeprie

Be careful. Some people are liable to tell you "the truth, no matter how much it hurts." I do have some 130 gr loads for my 308, but I am not convinced the bullet construction is adequate so I will reserve them for varmints, targets, etc.


----------



## Bobm

I have a 257 roberts and a lifetime supply of federal premium factory bullets with nosler partitions, they go right thru deer with little expansion. It kills them but no blood trail whatsoever and I wouldn't recomend them. I think they would be great for a tougher bodied animal like an elk. I have much better success with soft bullets on whitetails. Remington Corelock work much better in that gun. I shoot federal 180 soft point in the 308 and get real good results. No cripples in 34 years with that load over 50-60 kills maybe more I don't really know for sure. Most shot taken within 100 yards.


----------



## sdeprie

Well, I'm in luck. I just happen to have a couple of boxes of remington 150 gr core-locks, so I should be able to get by, eh?


----------



## OneShotOneKill

Remington BDL is the best choice!

I know Barnes doesn't make a 30 caliber 110gr X bullet, but 110 grain 30 caliber bullets are meant for varmints not deer, bad idea! If you want lower pressures and velocities try Hodgdon's youth hand loading data for the 300 Win Mag. 
http://www.hodgdon.com/data/youth/300winmag_y.php

Remington Core-Lokt's are highly frangible with high weight loss, use premium bullets for your big game like Speer, Sierra, Nosler, or Hornady!


----------



## Bobm

> Remington Core-Lokt's are highly frangible with high weight loss, use premium bullets for your big game like Speer, Sierra, Nosler, or Hornady


!
BS :eyeroll:


----------



## huntin1

I see that OSOK has blessed us with his superior knowledge again.

So little one, you know that Barnes does not make a 110 grain X. Well you are half right, they "no longer" make the 110 grn X bullet. I am the one that plainsman is talking about above. If I can find the box I'll take a pic for you, maybe then you will realize that you are not the all knowing firearms expert that you try to make everyone believe you are.

Core-lokt's are highly frangible huh, yeah right, so are Nosler Partitions. :eyeroll:

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman

OSOK

A 110 grain bullet is only a *"bad idea"* if it is a varmint bullet, and light for caliber. Although the 110 X bullet was light, it was by no means a varmint bullet as you might think. The buck hunt1 shot, in 1994, was at about 200 yards, the deer field dressed about 190 lbs, and the bullet completely penetrated. Now lets look at a couple facts and see what conclusions we come up with. The 110 X could be driven well past 3500 fps. If it mushrooms to the same diameter as a slower 180 grain traveling 2960 fps which do you think would do the most damage? I would say the 110 grain. I say this because if they are both the same diameter, but one is traveling over 500 fps faster, and they both completely penetrate, then the 110 imparts much more hydrostatic shock, hence a much wider wound channel. I also disagree with you about the Remington Core-Lokt. There were very few premium bullets on the market 20 years ago. Today with the higher velocity capabilities of the newer cartridges bullet manufacturers were scrambling to meet the demand for a bullet that would perform at these velocities. The Remington Core-Lokt performed very well when held below 3000 fps. Speer, Hornady, and Nosler all make premium bullets, but not all their bullets are premium bullets. Also, I was not aware that Sierra had joined in by producing a premium bullet. However, when held below 3000 fps the Sierra Gameking will retain weight comparable to some of the new bonded core designs.

I wish they still made the 110 gr X in 30 caliber. I dropped deer faster than the 150, 165, and 180 that I used.


----------



## zogman

Anyone seen the new 700 CDL. In the ad I saw it appears to have the "classic" stock design. I own a 700 classic in 270 cal. Love the gun. :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper:


----------



## sdeprie

Plainsman, Hunt1, Bobm, you guys are going to confuse him with facts, again. You know that just makes him angry, and never convinces him. I suppose those 110 FMJ's are frangible, too, eh? If those were Barnes x-bullets, they were all copper, right?


----------



## OneShotOneKill

FMJ bullets are not designed to mushroom, so they are not frangible. I hope know one is using FMJ bullets for hunting, check your state hunting regulations first.

Barnes X bullets don't reliably expand like other proven manufactures designs. Barnes has deleted the 30 caliber 110 grain X bullet from their inventory for a very good reason Please stick to bullets 150 grains or heavier for your 30 caliber rifle if your big game hunting.

Nosler Partitions are the best bullet for all big game applications!

Remington Core-Lokt's are perfect for lower velocity performers like the 30-30 Winchester & 7x30 Waters in the Thompson Center Contender for deer sized game, but there isn't a need for them when you have Sierra's BTSP on your bench.


----------



## sdeprie

Whoosh!


----------



## huntin1

OSOK,









Barnes X bullets do reliably expand, both Plainsman and I have used them extensively and they are a devastating bullet no matter what the weight. I do not know where you got your information but the person I spoke to at Barnes several years ago said the the 110 X was dropped because of low demand, no other reason. He said that even though the 110 X was designed to expand and work well on deer sized game the consumer outlook was that 110 grain 30 cal. bullets were only for varmints. (A myth perpetuated by most gun writers out there who as far as I can see know just enough about firearms to make them dangerous, kinda like someone else I know) Add to that the fact that the majority of the 110 grain 30 cal. bullets are designed as varmint bullets, there just wasn't enough of a market to keep them in the line. Kind of funny how that is, and then people think nothing of using a 100 grain .243 cal bullet for deer. :huh:

Here endeth the lesson.

sdeprie,
To answer your question, yes the 110 X was all copper, hollow point.

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman

Let me add a little here. OSOK the statement that desprie made about solid copper does not compute to full metal jacket. The X bullet is not a full metal jacket, rather it is a homogenous copper bullet with neither a jacket or a core. It does have a hollow point so expands reliably at velocities as low as 1700 fps as stated by the manufacturer. The early production prototypes of the 1980's had a few problems, but since the early 1990's these bullets have performed flawlessly. They have been continually improved and the new triple X in my estimation is perhaps one of the best penetration expansion ratio bullets on the market for very large game. I like my smaller animals like deer to go down a little faster so have gone to Nosler Ballistic tip and Swift Scirocco bullets. A deer isn't enough animal to contain an X bullet so energy transfer isn't efficient in this size game. Elk, Moose, or bear is a different story. The only X bullet I would use today for deer if they would make it is the 110 gr X bullet. The high velocity creates a wider wound channel than the heavy 150's and up.


----------



## OneShotOneKill

Yes thank you, Barnes deleted them from the inventory for that good reason, low demand for a 30 caliber 110 grain varmint bullet for deer, Good Job! I have witnessed a 100gr X-bullet driven from a 25-06 Remington travel full length of Antelope and never expand from chest to tail. It was a sad sight to watch that animal suffer, so I took it down with my 243 Winchester using 100gain Nosler Partitions, which is also excellent for deer sized game if in the hands of a capable shooter. Barnes have had a lot of problems with their copper alloy and the animals suffer during their failure process, sad!

I guess there is another reason for Barnes deleting the 30 caliber 110 grain X bullet, so some people don't use the wrong weight bullet for big game hunting, like a couple of guys I know! Yes, you got it, X-bullets are not FMJ, nice job. 30 calibers 110 grain Non-FMJ's are varmint bullets nothing more. All these light weight bullets will not hold the energy of their heavier counterparts which are designed for big game hunting applications. I am grateful Barnes did their job.


----------



## Plainsman

OSOK

That's funny I have never seen an animal wounded with a 110 X bullet, and I have seen about ten deer taken with one. A 110 X bullet isn't enough out of a 300 Winchester Mag for deer, but a 100 gr Nosler Partition is? What are you smoking? A 100 grain 25-06 through an antelope stem to stern and you had to end it with your 243? I enjoy the humor you provide.

Page 7 Barnes reloading manual --- "Barnes Bullets are made from a pure copper, not a copper alloy like other manufacturers" 
, Lost River Ballistics J36 are copper nickel *alloy*.

110 gr X will not hold energy? A whitetail requires 1000 ft/lb delivered to target. With a 110 gr X which I loaded to 3600 fps I started with 3165 ft/lb of energy. Granted it looses energy fast, but is above that 1000 ft/lb standard beyond 400 yards. If I remember right you didn't think anyone should shoot that far.

So which is it OSOK, you can't have your cake and eat it too. 
Is it:

#1 = 110 X bullet not enough for deer = 243 to small for deer
Or is it:
#2 = 243 good enough for deer = 110 X bullet good enough for deer

Don't start telling me about ballistic coefficients and sectional density, a 110 grain bullet of 30 caliber travelling at 3600 fps is much more lethal than a .243 caliber 100 gr bullet traveling at 3000 fps period. Also, my 30 caliber is nearly the diameter of your .243 after it mushrooms. Don't get me wrong I like a 243, I have had five of them, but your logic is seriously flawed.


----------



## huntin1

Oh my god, you mean you used a 100 grain bullet for deer? Shame on you. Just because a bullet is only 110 grains does not mean that it is a varmint bullet. Call Barnes and ask them if they ever intended the 110 to be a varmint bullet, the answer will be no. Using your analogy of all light weight bullets being varmint bullets then nothing under a .270 should be used for deer cause I can't find any calibur with a bullet that weighs the 150 gr minimum that YOU have set for all of us. I guess YOU will have to stop hunting with that 243 cause the heaviest bullets you can get for it are those nasty 100 grain varmint bullets.

uke:

huntin1


----------



## OneShotOneKill

*Plainsman & huntin1* , face it you two are nothing more than but another pair of hunters / hand loaders I will give you that much. I truly enjoy this no contest for myself debate.

I did call Barnes, the thing is you guys need to call and ask that same question. Have your wives hold your hands and she can have the tissues ready for you damp eyes, HA HA!!! It only gets better from here!

*huntin1 *read again slowly, I instructed you to use a 150 grain bullet minimum for *30 CALIBER *rifles while big game hunting!

Its #3 = *243 caliber 100 grain bullet are excellent for deer *= 30 caliber 110 X bullets good enough for a coyote = varmints.

30 caliber 110 grain bullets are varmint bullets. *243 caliber 100 grain bullets are big game bullets. *
You are correct 400 yards is too much, its is further then 300 yards, use a calculator if you get stuck. 300 yards is the maximum range for ethical big game hunters.

*Sorry Plainsman *it is impossible to type slowly enough for you to understand when I start explaining coefficients and sectional density to you.

Humor is good, but facts are shocking. *I hope you both are keeping notes.*


----------



## huntin1

uke: uke: uke: uke:

I'm outa here, this is going nowhere.

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman

Hunt1

I agree this is just going to turn into a pi$$ing contest, if it hasn't already. Wish I hadn't got involved. I am going to check with H&R and see what the bore diameter is for their 17 HMR. If it is right I could buy a barrel for my current H&R center fire have the 17 HMR installed and rechamber to 17 K Hornet. See you on another thread.

Like I said on another thread I am riding this nag of into the sunset before she becomes another dead horse being beat and beat. Adios. Hi Ho Ackley away, giddy up you old nag, haw.


----------



## OneShotOneKill

Cool, I can't believe you caved so easily! Have a great day!


----------



## Fireblade545

For people saying they want to put a deer down "faster" using a BT instead of X bullet you are STUPID. Ill show you what a .270 Win loaded with 130Gr. Barnes X bullet will do to a whitetail and show you how fast it will hit the ground.


----------



## Plainsman

I have shot deer with a 270 X bullet 130 grain. They do go down sometimes, but I have found that they normally stay on their feet longer with an X bullet. The wound channel of an X bullet is different than a BT or soft nose. If you look at the chart that Barnes provides you see a 150 grain soft nose gives a very large wound channel initially (six to seven inches in diameter) for about eight inches. Then over the next four inches it tapers down to about two inches. The X bullet opens readily, but the wound channel is about 4 inches in diameter. The wound channel for an X bullet however can travel for 32 to 34 inches (150 gr bullet at 2900 fps) and keep that diameter. Therefore, the X bullet provides more cubic inches of tissue damage over all. This is wonderful for large game like moose etc. but a deer is not 32 to 34 inches through. They always die, but the on average run further. I like the Ballistic Tip when I am hunting with friends, because they normally run a little ways with the X and hunting partners may think you have missed and keep shooting at the deer. I have shot deer with 22 caliber X, 243 caliber X, 270 Caliber X, 30 caliber X, and 45 caliber X. Your dialogue is so rude I would think you are OSOK writing under a different name. Right? Doing (or saying) the same thing over and over expecting different results is the definition of insanity. I'm simply not nuts enough to continue a conversation with someone who through their behavior exhibit's a mental problem. I'm not as angry as I am disappointed that people would publicly exhibit such asinine juvinile behavior. It is fodder for the anti gun crowd. They will point to it and tell the public that we are all social misfits. Your impressing people, but not in the way you might think.


----------



## OneShotOneKill

*Fireblade545, Ok show us!*

*Plainsman, *

You hit my point exactly; Barnes X-bullets don't consistently put animals down as efficient as all other manufactures soft pointed bullets. Sierra has made a bonded core bullets for years, their GameKing are premium bullets at half the price of others. By the way, I don't hide under another forum name! Since Barnes doesn't make the 110-grain X-bullet anymore, what bullet do you use for deer sized game in your 300 Winchester Magnum?

*Have a great day, 
OneShotOneKill*


----------



## sdeprie

Sorry to be late with my response. I've been out of touch for several days. My point with the 110 FMJ was that just because a bullet is 110 gr doesn't mean it is frangible. Case in point was the FMJ. What is important is the bullet construction and what it is designed to do. Now let's see, what was this thread about? Oh, yes. ADL vs BDL. Now, what this has to do with someone's lame attempt to regain some self esteem and respect without demonstrating any credibility, I don't know. Barnes x-bullets are designed to do what they are designed to do, penetrate, with controlled expansion. How this makes them inferior to corelokt, or bonded, I also don't know. I guess at the inferior Ackley Improved velocities compared to the magnum calibers, the core-lokt will hold together enough to perform. face it. there is no bullet that will perform perfectly in every circumstance, at every velocity possible. Use what works best at the velocity you are shooting. If you are shooting high velocity, you need a bullet that will hold together. If your velocity is somewhat lower, you can use a bullet that expands more quickly. Incidently, yesterday I read an article in Peterson's Hunting about making 400+ yd shots consistently and ethically. Not for me, but for those who are up to the discipline, sure.


----------



## OneShotOneKill

*Sdeprie*, Wow, you responded again! Once again read the forum again, I was talking about the Barnes 30 caliber 110 grain x-bullet not all other manufactures 110 grain bullets, DAH! I am glad you realize you don't know much about anything. Enough said!

300 yards is the maximum range for ethical big game hunters!


----------



## huntin1

sdeprie,

What you say is very true, but I'm afraid that the one you are trying to make a point to bases his opinion on what he feels, not on verifiable facts. So if what you have to say does not match with what he feels then you are wrong. It's kind of tiresome trying to make a point with someone who has such moronic ideas, but then it is also kind of fun to see what BS he will spew forth each time he posts.



OneShotOneKill said:


> 300 yards is the maximum range for ethical big game hunters!


uke: Jeez I hate it when someone tries to push their ethics on me.

:sniper:

huntin1


----------



## sdeprie

OSOK, once again, when you don't know what you are talking about, you really don't. The 110 discussion began with mentioning a Barnes x-bullet in 110 gr that was used on deer. You ASSUMED it was a varmint bullet because it was only 110 gr. Therefore it would be too frangible for deer., not paying any attention to the construction of the Barnes x-bullet, which is made from pure copper and not with lead. My point was only that just because a 30 cal bullet is only 110 gr doesn't mean it is frangible, or explosive. Case in point, the 110 gr FMJ. No, it is not for deer hunting, but it won't blow up, just because it is 110 gr. Much more important is the bullet construction. We have said that over and over. And excuse me for having a life outside this forum. I happen to be on vacation seeing my grandchildren and other family. And as far as enough said, I think it was enough when you srote, "sdeprie." THAT was enough. And as far as my not knowing anything, I have admitted my shortcomings often enough and apologized for my mistakes. What I have not done is delete my expert advice. I'm trying to figure out how you can still type with your foot in your mouth.

You know what, forget I said anything. hunting 1 was right. It is a waste of time trying to point out anything to you. I am beginning to believe you are unteachable. I DO believe that anything past 300 yds is unethical for you. It could be that anything past 30 yds is, if you shoot with your own expert advice.


----------



## sdeprie

I want to apologize to most of you out there. I let this whole thing get under my skin again and I should not have subjected you guys to my reply. I should have done that as a personal message instead as a public message. I guess I ASSUMED that writers on this thread would always act responsibly and maturely, and it was just too much assumption. However, I hope I have cleared up some misunderstandings on what I was talkig about. :beer:


----------



## huntin1

No apology needed here.

:beer:

huntin1


----------



## Fireblade545

One Shot Kill .. I would show you if I could. :******:


----------



## Plainsman

Sdeprie

You don't need to apologize to me for feeling the same way I do. It simply gets exacerbating when skulls are so thick they can't absorb a simple idea. It especially gets to you when they try explain something to you that you have known for 30 or 40 years. Then we get this fireblade (which I would bet good money is OSOK, or his imaginary friend) who's last post means what? See, fireblade giving static to OSOK is supposed to prove to us that it isn't OSOK. Anyway, glad your back, and hope your vacation was enjoyable. Later


----------



## sdeprie

"Thank you for your support." :beer:


----------



## OneShotOneKill

*Sdeprie*,

I have treated you with the respect that truly deserve! You simply cannot be taught! Please save us the time to teach you and reread the entire post! I know you type a response without reading the entire post.


----------



## sdeprie

> Please save us the time to teach you and reread the entire post! I know you type a response without reading the entire post.


OSOK, you're finally right about something. I didn't read the entire post. I guess that would be because I HAVE A LIFE and don't have time to read that much BS. Let's see, when I checked your profile, guess what, there was nothing. Tell me who is teachable. And if this is respect.........

Somebody tell me if there is anything worthwhile presented here. Otherwise, I'm outta here.


----------



## OneShotOneKill

*Read and heed:* 
http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/members/phpBB/terms.html

Have a great day, 
OneShotOneKill


----------



## Aussie shooter

Steve, you're OK by me. I much more respect the opinion of someone who will approach a situatuion with humility, and your advice simply reflects an excellent working knowledge of firearms. Thanks for being a good user of the forum. OSOK, I work in a gun shop, and we come across people like you every day. We also come acros people like Steve (sdrepie). It doesn't take much to figure out who we prefer to deal with. No-one frankly cares how much or little you know, if you're a nice guy you're OK by us. Please don't make things difficult. Perhaps you should have a much more careful read of the forum rules because I believe, judging by most of your previous posts and the response from many other users that something isn't right. Thnak you.


----------



## OneShotOneKill

*GOOD ONE AUSSIE SHOOTER, WHICH WOULD YOU CHOOSE IS THE QUESTION?

REMINGTON 700 ADL V.S. 700 BDL?*


----------



## SniperPride

OSOK it seems to me that you are the one who forgot to read the rules.

"You certify that you are 13 years of age or over. All those individuals under 13 years of age will need a full release form from their parents before posting any messages. This is in compliance with the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act of 2000 (COPPA)."
:lol: :wink:
o and btw 700 adl :sniper:


----------



## sdeprie

Guys, thank you for your support, but I think someone wants the attention so bad that he'll take any attention. (That's just my opinion, but I AM a psychiatric nurse, have been for over 10 years. Take it for what it's worth to you.) My suggestion is to just ignore anyone you find really rude and irritating and let the mediators handle it. I, for one, only intend to respond if there is a response that will get someone else in trouble.

The original question, I think it was a moot point because the 308 was only available in one model. As far as other calibers, each of the models has its advantages. It boils down to personal preference, and we know how exact that science is.


----------



## Aussie shooter

Thanks OSOK. Personally, if I had unlimited funds I would choose the BDL. There are advantages to having a hinged base plate, as it is sometimes inconvenient and a little less safe to extract rounds by working them through the chamber. Yes, it's a prettier model too, but that doesn't rate too highly. As I am a full time student though, I would buy an ADL simply because here in Australia it would save me about $200 on things I don't really need, even with the staff discount at the gun shop.

Have a nice day


----------



## SniperPride

wow, isnt australia pretty strict on firearm laws?


----------



## Aussie shooter

Gun laws here are among the strictest. No assault or semi automatic rifles or shotguns, no pump action shotguns, except to special exceptions, usually property owners who have problems with dangerous pests or livestock. These people are rarer than hens teeth. Handguns have a maximum calibre of .38, and a minimum barrel length of 130mm. To own a firearm, one must have an appropriate reason, either a club membership or permission from a property owner to hunt on their approved property. Pistol shooters must attend a minimum number of range attendances each year to retain their licence.

To buy a firearm one must go through a permit to acquire process for each individual firearm he buys. You must specify every detail of the rifle, why you need it and why this need cannot be satisfied any other way. Usually recreational use or pest destruction is a good enough reason.

Whilst to most Americans who hide behind their largely irrelevant (in my opinion!) 2nd amendment right (boy will this open a can of worms) our gun laws might seem ridiculous, since working in a gun shop I have realised that tight gun laws really are best. We get some absolute wackos coming in to the shop wanting to buy guns, the process to own a firearm is so time consuming that only serious and responsible shooters will go through it. We have noticed a marked decrease in firearms crime since 1996 when the laws came in, and realistically, who needs an assault type rifle to hunt anything? If you can't kill it with the first shot, or a quickly chambered second, you really shouldn't be hunting.

Gun laws or no gun laws, I would only ever buy bolt action rifles for better accuracy and reliability.

Just as a post script, the main justification I have heard for loose gun laws from many Americans is that "it is in the constitution therefore it is our right." Which may be valid, it tells me nothing however. Can anyone really tell me why they "need" a semi automatic rifle?

Can't wait to see the rebuttals on this one! Please, be gentle! :beer:

I'm not here to make enemies, I am just speaking from personal experience, and keeping in mind I used to be the most pro gun person you could speak to. As I said my views have changed since working at the Queensland Gun Exchange (www.qldgunexchange.com if anyone is interested, not advertising as I don't believe we ship to the US generally)

Mark


----------



## SniperPride

I have a friend from australia and he talks about the gun laws all the time, but yeah no semi auto rifles or shotguns thats sad. It is somewhat understandable that they dont want assault rifles like AR-15 too. But it just begs to wonder if gun laws are so strict then who are the people with the guns? Alot of criminals, plus the legal owners. And I have heard the whole story of how the USA has so many people getting killed by firearms every year, but remember, while that is true to an extent, the USA is a large country. When you counter in the per capita its a different story. And sure we have wild gangsters running around with handguns and such, but the USA doesnt have much of a choice, if they try take guns away, only criminals will have them. By the way, all the guns that are outlawed that you mentioned are loads of fun to shoot  what would I do without my good ol' 870 12 gauge with 11 round magazine......sigh.... 8) 
:sniper:


----------



## Aussie shooter

LOL interesting points Sniper. If you look up some statistics though, you will find the US still has an unusually high per capita murder and firearm crime rate, especially in city areas. I don't know if you have ever seen Bowling for Columbine or what you think of Michael Moore but he raises some interesting points.

It is my opinion that in most US states, it is far too easy to procure a firearm and ammunition. I was shocked to hear they sold them in places like K-Mart. And ammunition in toy shops and places like that.

You raise a good point about who has the guns. Fortunately our police force is extremely well armed, and have introduced special division for tackling firearm crime and illegal guns trafficking. They, from what I am aware, are really making good moves. Let's face it if the guns are not here to be bought, the bad guys will have much more trouble getting their hands on them. I just think our stats speak for themselves, if you go to our Bureau of Statistics website (which I know nobody will!) and run a search on firearms crime, you will see the decline over the last 8 years. It's www.abs.gov.au


----------



## sdeprie

Aussie, it will be difficult for you to understand our culture and the number of US citizens who were raised in a gun culture. I am not an Anthropologist, and one would be far better able to explain it than I can. The original occupants (at least in our available history) were a warring people who could only gain acceptance through war. When Europeans started arriving and settling, they didn't do so with a police forece, or army, or any protection, but here was all this wonderful, fertile land, apparently just going to waste. If anyone was going to settle here, they had to protect themselves. It is a great debate about whether the colonists were armed better, or the "savages." The firearm was much more powerful and had greater range, but the bow and arrow was silent and much faster to fire. The point is moot. The colonists had firearms to protect themselves and came to depend on them.

When those "bloody yanks" (  ) broke away from English rule, a reason we were successful was because nearly household was armed and knew how to use them. Although armed rebellion to a nation's government seems repugnant to us today, that is the purpose for the 2nd ammendment, to allow the population to be so armed that a government cannot be so repressive that it cannot be overcome if it fails to continue to represent the people. The American Revolution was initiated not because we hated English rule, but because English rule did not allow Colonial representation. Now, there was citizen representation in England, but not for the colonists. The whole shebang was so we could have the right to have a say in how we were governed. The 2nd ammendment was not included so people could hunt game, or shoot recreational shooting matches. The 2 ammendment was to keep the government honest and provide for its overthrow anytime it failed to keep the trust. That's why the NRA protects the right of ownership, not just of sporting firearms, but weapons for the people to protect themselves against any oppression.

Incidently, the bill of rights has a number of promises from the government. However, there is not one law, not one ammendment, not one directive that charges the government with the protection of house and home from crime, only the response to punish afterwards the perpetrators.

The Bill of Rights has a large number of rights that are daily questioned. For instance, the Bill of Rights protects free speach, which unfortunately restricts how much we can censure pornography. The Bill of Rights protects the freedom of religion, which means that the government cannot crack down on just any cult unless it can be proved to be committing crimes under "cover" of religion. The list goes on. Unfortunately, the 2nd ammendment is in the same boat, which is why the NRA supports criminal control rather than gun control. Statistics also show that the vast majority of gun crimes are performed with illegal guns. The US has such a gun culture and such a proliferation of guns already produced and "out there" that it really is a case of "banning guns would only take them out of the hands of honest citizens."

I'm sorry I got so long winded, but I hope this does clear up some of these "crazy yanks" beliefs.


----------



## Aussie shooter

Thanks for the explanation Steve. Quite an interesting read!

I can see where you're coming from and that was mostly information that I had already heard but I still don't agree with the "gun culture" that the US has found itself in.

Historically, I certainly agree. Firearms were clearly needed for survival and protection. Interestingly, however, there were no assault type rifles around back then, so to lean on history as a reason for owning any firearm under the sun is irrelevant. American Indians are no longer a threat to the people of America. Some might say terrorists are, but realistically the threat of terrorists is much different than the threat of native Americans. When Australia was colonised we had similar difficulties with many Aboriginal Australians. And these difficulties, were wrongly (in my belief) resolved with firearms also. And firearms have always been a way of life in Australia, since we have always had a culture of primary production, and Australia largely is still a tough untamed country with many dangerous animals. Australia was also nearly overrun by Japan during WWII. Being a small, isolated country with a small army, plenty of natural resources and land, we should be constantly in fear of our national security. But, we're not. Interestingly, however, despite these historical comparisons, Australia never developed a culture of fear and paranoia the US largely seems to have adopted. The only explanation I can see for the obsession with guns in the US is the culture of fear: fear of terrorists, fear of Indians, fear of an oppressive government, fear of crime: the main product I can see from this fear is too many guns and too much violence. Australians have more of a "she'll be right mate" attitude, which means there are very few areas in Australia where one would be afraid to be out at night, as we are not scared of each other. Except, of course, in some gully where a 300kg pig is grunting and about to gore you! Honestly though, no racism intended, the crime hotspots in my country are areas with ethnic minority groups in high density.

Interesting point about keeping the government accountable by force. We could go on all day here, but again, in my estimation that is unlikely to occur. I'm not well versed on American political systems but it seems to me to be a pretty good system of keeping a government accountable on a democratic basis, rather than one needing to be based on violence.

I think you and I are in the same boat, really, just to different extents in our belief. I am against further restrictions in Australia, our government has already gone far enough. But, I believe and I don't know if you'd agree with me on this one, that it is far too easy to procure a firearm in most states in the US. In Australia, those who go to the trouble of owning a firearm have got to be serious shooters, not just any idiot will fight his way through the red tape. And believe me, in the gun shop every day we come across idiots who we are so glad cannot just get a gun anywhere.

And it is the same in Aus, most firearm crime is commited by criminals. But if it is exceedingly difficult to get a gun in the first place, it will be correspondingly difficult for criminals to get their hands on any, especially with the success our firearms trafficking police are having.

And really, I still don't see the need to own a semi automatic rifle. If you can't put an animal down in one or two shots, don't hunt. They are far less accurate than their bolt and lever action counterparts, and I don't know of many school massacres that have been perpetrated with a bolt action rifle.

Don't get me wrong Steve, I reckon you're a great bloke! And I do enjoy discussions like these, and comparing our countries. It makes for excellent, stimulating debate. Be interested to hear your response! Have a good day champ.

Mark from Australia.


----------



## sdeprie

Mark, I guess what I was trying to project was where our gun culture started. I guess where many of us are now is that we want to protect our personal freedoms as much as possible. I'm not sure fear is nearly as much a part of it as it seems. The mindless acts of violence could be carried out much more easily with explosive devices than firearms, even "assault" weapons. The US media seems to have a field day with any violence and projects this as a nation filled with violence and fear. It doesn't really feel that way from the inside. As far as that goes, a pump shotgun is one of the most dangerous "assault" weapons there are. As far as paranoia, remember the adage, "You're not really paranoid if thre realy IS someone after you." :lol: There are many anti gun organizations in the US, and around the world, for that matter, whose public stated goal is to take away firearms from every citizen, not just criminals. Part of protecting our rights extend not only to the 2nd Amendment, our right to bear arms, but to all of the Bill of Rights. We can say we don't really need semi-automatic firearms, just like we don't really need to have church on sunday night, or we really don't need to have that satire against the government, or we really SHOULD let the police just wander through a home without a proper search permit. Yes, I know that sounds like paranoia, but there are attacks against all of these on a frequent basis.

We don't need semi-automatic firearms. A bolt action or lever action or pump action is just as good....... except for the son of a friend of mine who was born without a left hand. He loves to hunt, motly ducks and geese, and if not for the semi-automatic shotgun he uses, all of his shots would be single shot. But need doesn't really enter into holding the line on protecting our personal rights. That family doesn't really NEED that SUV, but we don't believe the government should be able to make that determination.

So, I guess we both feel we have a solid basis for our beliefs, but so far se still have a right to them, eh? So, I guess if we agree to disagree on this, we can still be forum friends? :beer:


----------



## Aussie shooter

Mate, you're a good bloke, of course we're still forum friends! I like this kind of discussion, it helps me learn more. :beer:

I believe people like your friend's son, and elderly and other likewise disabled people should be able to have access to special licences allowing them otherwise restricted firearms. It's just every Joe off the street that concerns me, for example the people who walk into our gun shop and say "Hi, I want a gun, what can you show me?" It's such a relief to be able to say, "Well mate, here's what you need to do." It's enough to put off the idiots.

You do make a good point about protecting yourself with firearms. A very good point. In Australia if someone breaks into your house with a knife, and you shoot him, you will be charged with murder. Silly, but true. Self defence is not a legitimate reason for owning a firearm, but that roots back to our "she'll be right" attitude and lack of paranoia about anything. Should police be allowed to enter your house with no search warrant? That is subjective. Should we shoot them if we feel they're wrong? Of course not. As the Good Book says, obey the laws of the land. It's just common sense too. Guns will never solve a problem they can only make it worse. That's easy to forget at times

I guess the only thing to be paranoid about is someone taking every gun off us. But, in Australia we also have elections at the moment, and both parties recognise shooting as a legitimate sport. And in all honesty, there are so many shooters in your country, no-one will ever take your guns away from you. Under either Kerry or Bush. There are simply too many shooters with too many votes for anyone in their right mind to allow that. In Australia, 5% of us own guns. In the US, I know it is significantly higher.

Do you agree that the US has a problem with firearms? Or do you think that all is well? I would be interested to hear your opinion on that one, especially as an American citizen, we only hear what is going on through often biassed sources. What, if anything, do you believe needs to change?

Thanks for taking the time, my friend, this is good! :beer:


----------



## sdeprie

Do we have a problem with firearms? That is definitely a regional question. What I mean by that is the old business adage, "Location, Location, Location." I've only really lived in what one could call the "Inner City" once, up in North Chicago. I could hear firearms go off every once in a while, maybe weeks or even months between episodes. The worse place I ever heard any significant problem was while I was stationed in Guam. On New Year's Eve, you could hear automatic weapons discharge all over the island right at midnight. Not really significant? There was a neighbor of ours who received a 9mm wound to the arm from a round returning to earth. You could hear fire3arms far more ofter there than I did in North Chicago. This is an island with very restrictive firearm laws. I didn't even take any with me. All of my hunting there was with archery. There are rough cities where a lot happens. There are many more quiet places where nothing happens for months, even years. And the point I really do want to make is that the vast majority of crimes involving a firearm are with illegal firearms. And even though we do have so many gun owners, there is a vast amount of money being spent every day on the attack on legitimate gun ownership. Yes, this is a subject I take very seriously.


----------



## Aussie shooter

Hmmmm good points, good points. It may seem to you that I am anti-gun, which, as a shooter, is not the case at all. My main take home mesage is not for further restrictions but for the difficulty of procuring firearms, otherwise every psycho could easily get one. The anti-gun lobby in Australia is very weak and never achieves much. Interesting to hear your points of view anyway. It's good we can conduct a good conversation in a friendly and courteous manner, unlike certain other users of this forum! You're a good bloke Steve. Have a good one champ.


----------



## sdeprie

I'm not against the criminal having a hard time getting a firearm. Unfortunately, it is now at the point where it is easier for the criminal to obtain an illegal firearm than a legitimate citizean to obtain one legally. Good luck, and, my friend, have a g' day.


----------



## Bobm

Americans aren't paranoid we are free and freedom has risk associated with it and its worth the risk to most of us, but let me ask you a logical question you say Austrailia isn't worried about being invaded even thpough they have a small Army ect. There is a big reason for that and its the knowledge that you good friends in the USA would be the first ones to come to your side should you be attacked. Now ask your self what would happen if somehow the US was attacked and defeated who would take on that foe, we are the first and last line of defense against the Evil tyrants of the world and I would like to thank Austrailia for the help they have supplied


----------



## Aussie shooter

Were you being sarcastic Bob? Australia has helped in the war on Iraq, although I acknowledge that is a token gesture as the US didn't need our help anyway. Funny thing is, no cynicism against your country or anything, but I highly doubt the US would come to our aid in case of an Australian invasion. Did you know how many times Australia appealed the the US for aid during world war 2, as Japan steadily marched towards our shores? The only time they came to help was when Pearl Harbor was bombed, no sooner. Now the president no longer has the power to declare war, it must be by a majority vote in congress, if a war is not in America's interests, we would be on our own. Cynical, but highly likely, and as you said, Australia has nothing to offer the US. Sad thing is most Australians believe that the US would come to our aid. Unlikely I say. Have a good day anyway mate, I don't want any tension, and I'm certainly not anti-American! :beer:


----------



## Plainsman

Aussie Shooter

I have not talked with you before, but I am sure Bob wasn't being sarcastic. I had not realized that Australia had asked for help during WWII. I hope that things would be different today. I have always considered Australia a friendly nation to us. I see its people as some of the friendliest in the world. England, Australia, Israel and other nations have always stood by us, and I hope we would do the same for them. I wish all of Americas friends had larger militaries because that would make us all safer. I was disappointed that Russia was connected with the UN oil scam in Iraq. After the cold war ended I was hopeful they would be another good ally. I am confused why France and Germany have behaved so badly. Anyway AS I enjoy your posts. I like Bobm see firearms ownership as an important part of freedom. An armed person is a citizen, and unarmed person is a subject.


----------



## Aussie shooter

Thanks Plainsman

I would also like to see all the nations of the world supporting one another like true allies, but in a world where the economy is paramount, unfortunately this is simply not the highest priority. I agree with your last statement entirely, but within reasonable limits, namely, firearms should be difficult to procure to eliminate the ease as to who gets them and for what reasons. In Australia it takes a lot of mucking around to get a gun and a lot of red tape, meaning that irresponsible people generally will not go to the lengths the more serious shooters go to to get guns.

It's a good discussion here and although there are differences in opinion I'm glad we haven't turned it into a slinging match like some other users of this forum. Thanks for your kind words Plainsman you seem like a really good bloke.


----------



## Plainsman

Well AS it bothers me that we were not there for your country. I can think of few other people I would be proud to stand beside in tough times. I hope our nations both see more peaceful times ahead. It is a pleasure to have you on this form.

We do protect ourselves with computer instant background checks before anyone can have a gun. Felons, and anyone convicted of any type of violence can not have a firearm. I don't think we disagree much, I simply think that it should be easy for an honest person to purchase and have reasonable firearms. I am perhaps more liberal in my interpretation of a reasonable firearm.

You're a very reasonable person AS which makes it easy to argue differences of opinion with no animosity whatsoever.


----------



## sdeprie

Plainsman, I agree, AS has always bern one of the best, even when we don't agree.

AS, you're absolutely right, America did try to stay out of that war. We had a huge Isolationist faction and they wanted us to not have anything to do with foreign nations. It was foolish, and wrong, IMO. But they had a lot of votes and couldn't be ignored. We also had a huge faction (not a majority, but huge) who were sympathetic with Germany, and to a point, so am I. Not with their leadership, but with their plight. Japan, on the other hand, was interested soley on Imperialist expansion for their economic growth. (If only they had known the best way to start economic growth was to get their nation destroyed by the allies, they would have started sooner. :lol Many Americans, in their nievety (sp?) thought we could remain untouched. Perhaps that's why we jump in so early now, eh? It's never easy to guide ourselves down that narrow path between too little and too much. Anyway, I hope we have learned that lesson. If Australia needs our help, I know I'll be first in line. Your views may not always match mine, but you have every right to them and I respect them.


----------



## sdeprie

Did I really write all that? Man, I have GOT to get some sleep. But is so much more of a pleasure to have a debate that isn't hateful. Good night.


----------



## Aussie shooter

Thanks fellas, interesting points. Steve and Plainsman (sorry mate, don't know your first name!  ) it makes me feel really good that there are Americans out there like you guys who would be sympathetic to little Australia! Apparently from historical accounts of WWII when our two countries did fight together, Australians and Americans fought really well side by side and experienced a great sense of mutual comraderie. It seems post- WWII our two countries grew diplomatically closer, throughout the Cold War, and Vietnam also. I remember in modern history we learnt a lot about Australian policy during WWII and until the present day about growing closer in many ways, for example economically.

As a country Australia has enormous respect for the US. We live in and rely on the hope that perhaps if we ever did have trouble with invasion, which in my opinion is more than just a possibility, that our American friends might come to our aid. Even our current prime minister (which may just change after tomorrow! Election day) firmly believes this. Perhaps with enough general American public support it may happen.

And you're probably right Plainsman, our opinions don't differ that much as an end product, when it comes down to it I know that neither of us wants a state in which it feels dangerous to walk outside because there are so many guns in the wrong hands.

Every American I have ever come across, whether it be on a forum or meeting face to face has been the friendliest, most amicable type of person I have ever met. It's always remarkable to me. Always interested in the way we do things, very polite and encouraging about everything, and you guys just have this positive enthusiasm towards life. Integrity is such a common thing in all the Americans I met, you all seem like really trustworthy people. I also have a deep respect for the widespread faith in God that I observe throughout the United States. Most Americans have always honestly said to me that any time I am visiting in America I would have a place to stay which is lovely. Americans are such generous people from what I understand and have experienced. All these things I believe have contributed to the prosperity of your country.

Thanks again guys for conducting this discussion with me in such a great manner. If certain others had become involved, we all know what would inevitably occurred. It's great to hold interesting conversations where there are differences in opinion in a way where opinions are respected and taken on board. Great stuff blokes I look forward to more of it.

Also Bobm, I hope I didn't offend you at all, please accept my apologies if that was the case! :beer:

Mark from Australia


----------



## sdeprie

Mark, you're going to give a conplex, or maybe just a swelled head.  Don't forget, Americans are just people, too. We have our share of bad eggs. But as a people, we believe in the goodness of people and their potential. At least, I like to think we do.


----------



## blep

whoever said it is the shot that counts was the rightest .I have an ADL in .222cal.I load with 4895 right up to the neck and stick a 52 grain hp on top.This think will drop holes on top of each other at 100yds so what's the problem killing deer?granted anything over 250 in the body may be a silly shot,it does not carry enough punch but head shots at any range produce dead deer.My brother had a .243 and my Uncle had a .308(BDL).I always viewed that one as being the most versatile of all of them.He could load such a range of powders and bullets it is amazing.Anything from woodchucks to bear are in danger when a .308 is around.I wouldn't try that with my .222


----------



## Duckslayer100

blep said:


> whoever said it is the shot that counts was the rightest .I have an ADL in .222cal.I load with 4895 right up to the neck and stick a 52 grain hp on top.This think will drop holes on top of each other at 100yds so what's the problem killing deer?granted anything over 250 in the body may be a silly shot,it does not carry enough punch but head shots at any range produce dead deer.My brother had a .243 and my Uncle had a .308(BDL).I always viewed that one as being the most versatile of all of them.He could load such a range of powders and bullets it is amazing.Anything from woodchucks to bear are in danger when a .308 is around.I wouldn't try that with my .222


Holy crap, way to raise the dead!


----------



## centermass

Well I read nearly all the arguements on this thread about bullet wieghts so I figured I might as well add my two cents. First though your choice of a Remington 700 in .308 is great either ADL or BDL. I am speaking from a lot of rounds down range out of an M24 sniper rifle. They are great in any weather and the action is very versitile should you want to do modifications down the road. Stay with a synthetic stock since you plan on using it for hunting you will have more sucess due to limited changes in accuracy due to changing weather...
Now as far as rounds go. The subject of muzzle velocity and potential energy have come up in several of these posts. One thing to keep in mind when speaking of energy down range a lighter bullet will tend to lose speed the further it travels. The velocity out of the muzzle is less important then what that round is doing at 100m, 200m, 300m, and so on. I have a BDL myself that has been modified slightly for both competition shooting and hunting. It is .308 (7.62) and shoots 1/8 MOA at 100m. I shoot either match grade ammo or Hollow Tip Bow Tails out of it for both hunting and competition. I have experimanted with several different manufacturers and bullet wieghts. The best shooting round out of that particular weapon in that caliber is Black Hills HTBT in 174 grains. They will fly truer and hit harder both at short range and down range. The added wieght combined with the shape of the bullet allow it to stay super sonic longer then lighter rounds. This adds up to more energy downrange and much improved accuracy. I have shot seveal types of "off the shelf" ammo out of this rifle and the closest I can come to accuracy if Federal Match grade ammo in the same wieght. Trust me when I tell you the Black hills ammo will take down game as large as an Elk and I wouldnt even be afraid to say probably a Moose with a well placed shot. Although you will probably never need to shoot the distances that I shoot it is always nice to know that you have the right ammo to do it should the oppertunity present itself. Again just my two cents happy shooting!!


----------



## Savage260

Hollow Tip Bow Tail, really, Centermass? Is that what snipers shoot? I really only want to shoot what snipers use because they are the best. Where can I find these Bow Tailed bullets?


----------



## AdamFisk

:rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin:


----------



## farmerj

> limited changes in accuracy due to changing weather...


WOW, I just gotta get me a synthetic stock....

Considering the thermal coefficiency of plastic is 4 1/2 times what wood is. Meaning it will have a much larger change.

Get whatever is cheapest and then go stick a good laminated stock on it and get it bedded. You'll have a rifle that will be a dream to shoot.


----------



## KurtR

Who makes a 174 grn 30 call bullet?


----------



## Savage260

The same company that makes the Bow Tailed bullets........DUH!!!! 

Actually, I think it talks about 174gr bullets in the book "Sniper" that I read a year or two ago. Can't remember 100% for sure, but I think it was 174gr.


----------



## xdeano

I think the 303 enfields use to use a 174g bullet. But that's a .311 bore dia. not .308. Or maybe he's just got a bad batch of bullets. My suggestion is if you're off by 1g in your bullets, you'd better pitch them and start over, that's a heck of a deviation.

xdeano


----------



## spentwings

Savage260 said:


> Hollow Tip Bow Tail, really, Centermass? Is that what snipers shoot? I really only want to shoot what snipers use because they are the best. Where can I find these Bow Tailed bullets?


I was wondering about you,,now I know for sure. :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman

spentwings said:


> Savage260 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hollow Tip Bow Tail, really, Centermass? Is that what snipers shoot? I really only want to shoot what snipers use because they are the best. Where can I find these Bow Tailed bullets?
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering about you,,now I know for sure. :eyeroll:
Click to expand...

You took that serious? You have to give up that cheap whiskey. :wink:


----------



## alleyyooper

Hope no ever tells all the old timers that they need to buy new tupper wear stocks for their guns. Ain't any wonder they were able to harvest so much game back in the day, those flexing wood stocks just added to the challange so they learned to shoot.

 Al


----------



## Savage260

Spent, you don't have a clue!

Plainsman, thanks for catching the joke! You are right, cheap whisky is bad for folks!!! Might make you buy BOW Tailed bullets!!!


----------



## dpgunsmith

you are all full of it.. specially centermass...

the most accurate 30 cal bullet is the 171 3/16 gr hollow tail boat tip made by hornoslespeesierra company. pack that baby ontop of 2.6oz of powder... (slightly compressed load) and you can shoot 1/64 MOA at 1,000 yards.


----------



## spentwings

Plainsman said:


> spentwings said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Savage260 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hollow Tip Bow Tail, really, Centermass? Is that what snipers shoot? I really only want to shoot what snipers use because they are the best. Where can I find these Bow Tailed bullets?
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering about you,,now I know for sure. :eyeroll:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You took that serious? You have to give up that cheap whiskey. :wink:
Click to expand...

A greater truth has never been told. :wink:


----------



## Plainsman

Good morning to you spentwings. I'm pleased you have a sense of humor and didn't take that as a jab. Were so close to deer season how can anyone be anything but happy.


----------



## barebackjack

centermass said:


> I have a BDL myself that has been modified slightly for both competition shooting and hunting. It is .308 (7.62) and shoots 1/8 MOA at 100m.


0.13" groups consistently!?!?!?!

Who does your gunsmith work? Thats the rifle ive been searching for all these years!


----------



## barebackjack

Aussie shooter said:


> Were you being sarcastic Bob? Australia has helped in the war on Iraq, although I acknowledge that is a token gesture as the US didn't need our help anyway. Funny thing is, no cynicism against your country or anything, but I highly doubt the US would come to our aid in case of an Australian invasion. Did you know how many times Australia appealed the the US for aid during world war 2, as Japan steadily marched towards our shores? The only time they came to help was when Pearl Harbor was bombed, no sooner. Now the president no longer has the power to declare war, it must be by a majority vote in congress, if a war is not in America's interests, we would be on our own. Cynical, but highly likely, and as you said, Australia has nothing to offer the US. Sad thing is most Australians believe that the US would come to our aid. Unlikely I say. Have a good day anyway mate, I don't want any tension, and I'm certainly not anti-American! :beer:


Actually, Australia only came to the US for help in WWII AFTER the defeat of the UK in the south pacific in/around 1942. A few other countries that wanted our help as early as 1936 were Poland, France, the UK, among others. We had a large "isolationist" view at the time, choosing to offer aid in the form of money and war materials rather than man power. (I knew those history classes would be handy some day).

As far as your view on our gun laws, we'll just not go into it and have to agree to disagree. You say nobody needs a semi-auto for hunting, I say, what gives my government the right to tell me, a law abiding citizen, what I do or dont need? Until im a convicted felon, they have no right to tell me what I can or cant have/do. (But wait, Australia was founded with felons and convicts oke: ). Just chiding ya on that last one, even if it is true.

As far as you saying your gun bans have reduced crime, that is false. The only two things that have been reduced since the Australian gun ban/buyback has been accidental gun deaths, and firearm enabled suicides. Your violent crime rate has actually increased, and your gun related assault rate has stayed relatively the same, fluctuating above and below pre-ban levels.


----------



## scorpiont52

sdeprie said:


> Let me get this straight: The guy recommending you spend MORE money is the guy selling you the gun, making the profit on the sale. Have I got this right? :lol: Personal opinion, notwithstanding the advantages listed of the drop-plate. Unless this is an investment, get the ADL and take good care of it. It is well worth the money and should do everything you will ever want it to do.


i have had a rem ADL for 32 years, very acurate many deer taken with it, the only differance to me is a floor plate and differant color sceam on stock...also more money,,,.thing is do you want it pretty, or do you just want it to shoot,,,the ADL has never failed me once


----------

