So, as background, I want to start hunting. So first I want to learn to shoot. And that will mean buying a rifle, probably sooner rather than later. But I don’t know much about rifles. I’ve been out to the range once with my `mentor’, but she hasn’t shot many different rifles either. So I’m wondering how inaccurate the cheapest second-hand rifle might be (.22 rimfire at this point; I want something I can afford to shoot many rounds through), and whether I should invest in a decent one or save my money for the shot-gun and rifle that will be fired in earnest rather than in practice.
The day we were at the range, a guy there offered us a try on his rimfire shooting target rounds with a scope off bench rests. Any of us, including the neophyte, could put 5 rounds into a 1/2" cluster at 25yds with that. The neophyte, when shooting his friend’s decent rifle through open sights from a prone position got maybe a 3" cluster at 25yds. So I guess my question is: what kind of cluster would your inexpensive mass-produced rimfire get if the shooter’s steadiness is removed from the equation?
I second the 10/22. There are lots of aftermarket products for it as well: synthetic stocks, scopes, magazines, etc.
It’s hard to answer your accuracy question. Rifles vary somewhat, even within the same make and model. If you bench rest a decent .22, at 25 yards it should be pretty darn accurate. Anything over a 1" group would be terrible. Note: bench rest means a device which holds the rifle still, thus taking the shooter out of the equation.
At 25 yards, a good .22LR rifle with good ammo will shoot 10 shots inside a 1/2 inch circle or so (price=~$400+ US). A cheap rifle can shoot 2-3 inches at the same distance (~$100). When my 10/22 was new it shot about 1.5 inches at that distance (~$170). Not great, not the worst. An Olympic-grade rifle will shoot basically into one hole that far, but they start at around $1200.00 or so new.
There’s lots of accessories for Rugers, like target-weight barrels and better trigger parts. The barrel you can change yourself (in the US anyway) but the trigger a gunsmith really should do. If you get a thicker barrel, you need to cut out the stock bed or get a stock that will fit. Also note that the target-weight barrels usually don’t have any front sight, so they’re scope-use only. (The 10/22 shoots about 1/2" with a $75 target barrel on it).
Good bolt-action .22’s are the Remington 541 (if it’s still available or whatever they’re selling in its place now) for about $450 US. It comes with a bull-barrel already, and the trigger is a Remington 700-style (short-throw, just like the centerfire rifles). No sights, scope-only… The little Marlin “Olympic”-target rifle shoots very good for the price too (about $450 US). It comes with diopter sights (Olympic style) but you can remove them and mount a scope.
Finally, ammo makes a big difference in the way any .22 shoots, and the most expensive isn’t always the best-shooting in any particular gun. You need to try all the different brands you can get to see which does best.
~
Thanks all! I guess my mental statistical model (yes I’m a geek. What can I say?) is that:
bullet_hole=Where_I_point ± Rifle_error
and
Where_I_point=Bullseye ± My_error
Where Rifle_error and My_error are random vectors in two dimensions which may further be broken down into systematic errors, corrected by adjusting the sights, and random errors, corrected by either practice or buying a better rifle, as the case may be.
And using a bench rest can reduce the My_error random variable essentially to nothing, so you can measure Rifle_error by looking at the grouping. I would want the rifle’s error to be small in comparison to mine, so that reducing my error will make a noticable improvement on the grouping when shooting free… So according to Beagle and japatlgt, any rifle will do that (since 1" at 25yds is small compared to my 3", or even more if I’m shooting standing or sitting), while according to DougC, a cheap rifle might have an error comparable to mine, at 2-3" at 25yds.
Any other votes/ testimonials/ personal experience?
It would be more accurate to say bullet_hole = where_I_point + sight_error + rifle_error.
Sights that are improperly set will create an inherent deviation from where the rifle is actually pointing. Or if the sight is perfectly set for a specific distance, but is used at another distance without proper adjustment, that can throw it off.
However, at the same distance, factoring out the shooter’s error, the sight offset is consistent. If they’re off by 1" high at 25 yards, they’re going to be 1" high at 25 yards every shot (excluding shooter error).
Anyway, you’ve got the basic idea, but that’s something to remember. If one assumes the sights to always be perfect, then you more or less have it.
If you’re using a bench rest, and a decent rifle with 3" groups at 25 yards, my first guess would be bad trigger pull. A lot of firearm newbies, without proper instruction, tend to pull the trigger in one swift motion like they do in the movies, ‘hitting’ the trigger back. For target shooting, a smooth, slow, steady pull is critical.
IMHO your money would be better spent on a secondhand bolt-action rifle in .308 Winchester (a.k.a. 7.62NATO) or .30-'06. Good candidates are Remington 700, Winchester M70, along with old surplus military rifles such as Springfield and Enfield.
If you want to get a rifle for hunting, the 10/22 has little value for practicing. The round is too small and gets blown around by the wind too much. Shooting at 50yards with this is totally different from shooting at 300 with a centerfire.
10/22 supporter chiming in…You’ll never have any problems with it, it’ll last you 10+ years easily, it’s cheap and so are the bullets. I picked up a used 10/22 for $75 and still use it after well over 5,000 rounds (god, probably more) that I put through it, not to mention what the previous owner shot.
After you have practiced with it for the next 9 months until hunting season, get yourself a .308 as mentioned above. Large variety of cheap-ish bullets allow you to customize it to shoot anything from fox to Grizzly bear. Practice with it for awhile at the range and have fun.
For learning to shoot, I would imagine that pretty much any .22 rimfire would be okay. Heck, I learned on my Dad’s old .22 Cooey that probably didn’t cost any more than $20 when he bought it in the 1950s.
As a beginner, it’s great (and satisfying) to be able to shoot small groupings, but IMHO, what you really need to do is get used to how the firearm feels when you hold it, when you settle into a shooting stance or position, and how it feels when you fire it. As SenorBeef points out, you also need to learn how to pull the trigger–I agree that it is not like in the movies. This you can do with pretty much any rifle, as long as it is safe to shoot.
Later, as others have mentioned, you will have to move up to some sort of centrefire for hunting, and practice with that. It won’t be exactly the same as the .22 (and will definitely have a bigger kick), but you’ll find, I think, that a lot of the skills and the “feel” carry over. This is what I’ve found, anyway.
What you do not want to do is go for the most expensive .22 out there. I had an Anschutz (I was an Olympic-style target shooter some years ago, although I never made it to the Games), and it was beautifully accurate–I could shoot into one hole at 50 meters. But it was, as DougC mentioned, expensive to purchase; the ammo cost a fortune, and it was impractical for anything but target shooting. Perfect for my target-shooting events, but pretty much useless for hunting.
I picked mine up at a gun show for $150, and it came with 1000 rounds of ammo. The ammo is corrosive, so if you spend 5 minutes shooting, you had better spend a good 45 minutes cleaning. But it is extremely accurate, legal to hunt with (If I took the bayonette off) and 1000 rounds will get you at least familiar with a gun.