375 rifle which one?

[BigSteve57]

Hi BigSteve

WOW

It truly is an awesome rifle and shooting system. I flew to the St Louis NRA show in 2012 and saw the Blaser staff demonstrate going from .243 all the way up to the magnum calibers just by changing barrels, bolt faces and trigger assemblies. I was hooked.

But you don't have to spend nearly that much on a Blaser. The Kilombero had upgraded wood and the barrels I ordered were Safari grade. I was, after all, going to Africa and hunting potentially dangerous game. I wasn't messing around! Plus who wants to hunt with an ugly rifle anyway?

Part of why I got the Kilombero was availability; I couldn't get the less expensive models I wanted at the time without waiting weeks & weeks. There's also another hidden benefit to a take-down rifle and that's baggage costs. On my last hunt this past November I took the rifle in a Pelican iM3100 case. This cases meets the size requirements for ordinary checked baggage (L+W+H=62 in.). Had I taken the rifle assembled in my full-size Pelican 1750 case the airline would have charged me a $200 oversize baggage fee EACH WAY. Do that 3 times and you have the price of a darned fine hunting rifle! Granted not all airlines charge that much...still...many do charge some kind of fee for oversize baggage.

So while the cost of Blaser going in is high it's not so bad if you think long and consider you get a whole new rifle for the cost of a barrel. Also, an additional cost saving is that all the scopes detach & interchange so there's no need for me to buy another scope unless I simply want to.

Current prices are at EuroOptic.
EDIT: https://www.eurooptic.com/blaser-r8-kilombero-rifle.aspx

 

[HWL]

...and never, NEVER under any circumstances let someone hand you a D'Arcy Echols & Co unless your bank account (and marriage) can handle the stress.

Just another Mauser copy….



HWL

 

[2L8]

Hi BigSteve

WOW

Blasers are like Legos. You can pay under $3,000 for a complete Blaser R8 Pro S or $3,000 just for a barrel or engraved bolt assembly. On the other hand a basic barrel + magazine + bolt head can be had for $1600 or less if completely changing cartridge family if your taste are more pedestrian.

 

[2L8]

Just another Mauser copy….



HWL

Well seeing as how Mauser doesn't exist anymore (the current Mauser is just someone who bought the rights to the name) you are only going to get a copy unless you rebuild an older one and the vast majority of those are not Mausers either. I own a Commercial FN Action built in the '50's. It may be a licensed copy but it's still a copy.

I believe D' Arcy Echols builds off an in-house built Pre-64 Win M70 based action for the most part now (admittedly a lot of Mauser in the design). The Classic is pretty nice, of course the same could be said of the current Rigby, Jeffery and H&H "Copies".

 

[HWL]

Nothing wrong with the good mauser copys,.... but a R8 is something completely different.

HWL

 

[Dr Ray]

Bhfs300, IMHO it is the rifle not the scope that is responsible for sub MOA groups. Increasing the magnification on a rifle that groups 2 or 3 MOA will not make it a sub MOA shooter.

But if you can see the target more clearly you may (stress may) shoot better.

 

[Shootist43]

Somehow we are talking around each other. I totally agree that a sub MOA rifle with a 4 power scope shot at 100 yards is going to be at a disadvantage if 1,000 yard shots are attempted without increasing the power of the scope. But it remains a MOA capable rifle. Long range shooters take sub MOA rifles, put a 23 -25 power scope on it and make one shot kills at 700 yards and beyond. A 3 MOA rifle cannot be made to do this regardless of how powerful a scope is installed.

 

[Dr Ray]

Somehow we are talking around each other. I totally agree that a sub MOA rifle with a 4 power scope shot at 100 yards is going to be at a disadvantage if 1,000 yard shots are attempted without increasing the power of the scope. But it remains a MOA capable rifle. Long range shooters take sub MOA rifles, put a 23 -25 power scope on it and make one shot kills at 700 yards and beyond. A 3 MOA rifle cannot be made to do this regardless of how powerful a scope is installed.

Agreed. I was making the point that a good quality scope that is of “sufficient” power is good - you’re right about the rifles capabilities here and I agree.

 

[Von S.]

I wonder if anyone here actually owns a bolt action rifle with a scope, handloads for it and has a rifle that the best it can do off a bench, in a rest is 3 or more moa @ 100 yards?

I don't keep any rifle that is that piss poor in the accuracy department as there is something genuinely wrong with it. Of course that's after beddng and bullets.

So here we are, 53 votes out of 45,000 members voting on 4 rifles, all with good points and some with some flaws and the winner with over 50% of the votes trns out to be the Winchester.

A good choice. I have quite a few pre-64's in many calibers a few of which are 375's.

I use them for all kinds of stuff...deer, black bear, plains game, elk, moose, right on down to ground hogs, but absolutely not dangerous game as I care for my ass more than I do my shoulder.

I like this site and the vast majority of the people in it, but all too often I read where a fella shoots a cape at 50 yards with a fatal shot only to have the behemoth run 60 yards before dropping dead. Great shot, right? Sure it is, unless he's running in your direction and though not highly probable it is certainly possible.

And oh my......for those who might say, " Well that's what the pH is for" it makes me wonder what joy can there be putting horns on your wall that someone else put on the ground?

Want a good reliable dg rifle that don't rust, bust, or collect dust?

Get a 98 Mauser, put a 458 barrel on it, get the bolt face opened, put a 1x5 scope on it, a plywood Richardson microfit stock and leave the trigger alone, then paint the whole damned thing(other than the scope).

Enjoy.

 

[Red Leg]

Or an accurate .375 with a quality 300 gr bullet, Leica - S&B - or Swarovski optics, and a lovely piece of walnut. I even prefer a straight pull (very fast, very accurate, and very dependable) Blaser R8. Everything it hits seems to die very permanently and very quickly.

 

[wesheltonj]

Or an accurate .375 with a quality 300 gr bullet, Leica - S&B - or Swarovski optics, and a lovely piece of walnut. I even prefer a straight pull (very fast, very accurate, and very dependable) Blaser R8. Everything it hits seems to die very permanently and very quickly.

Stop it, you're making me want to buy one. And I am a SAKO man.

 

[Dr Ray]

Stop it, you're making me want to buy one. And I am a SAKO man.

Me too but in big calibers I think there are better choices.

 

[2L8]

But if you can see the target more clearly you may (stress may) shoot better.

I suspect resolution is considerably more important than power.
10" 10-Shot Groups have been done at 1000 yd with a 10x. Of course I'm not that shooter, don't own that rifle and seldom see the deadcalm conditions required for that.

Some evidence exist that the micromuscular contractions as you subconsciously attempt to steady the sight picture can be counter productive. However confidence trumps all and if you think you shoot better at 60x than 24x you will.

I find in the field use much over 6x tends to make the wobble worse as I tend to try to steady the crosshairs beyond my capability. Of course I seldom shoot beyond 300 yards because I'm not an adequate shot. My personal requirement for an ethical shot is when I can put 10 shots in a row from a field postion (from a cold barrel each on a separate day) on a 6" target. That puts the odds of wounding a Whitetail pretty low. I might be persuaded to increase that somewhat on an Elk with a larger target size. I think a PH in Africa might get tired of me asking, "Can you get me closer or a steadier rest".

I try not to pick on the long range hunting crowd to much but I have yet to see the guys that brag about 800+ yard shots on game that can even put 5 in a row on a 6" target at 600 yards. To me that makes a 900 yard a Hail Mary and it isn't ethical to me.

 

[BigSteve57]

But if you can see the target more clearly you may (stress may) shoot better.

I suspect resolution is considerably more important than power.
10" 10-Shot Groups have been done at 1000 yd with a 10x. Of course I'm not that shooter, don't own that rifle and seldom see the deadcalm conditions required for that.

I never realized how much picture quality meant until I purchased high-end Zeiss scopes. With my 1.5-6x42 Zeiss I can do as well or better than with my 3-9 Leupold VX II. With my 4-16x50 Zeiss I can do as well or better than with my Leupold 6.5-20 VX III. This is obviously not an apples to apples comparison as the Zeiss scopes run $2K US whereas the Leupold scopes run for far less.

The point being that somehow the much better optics with Zeiss means I need less magnification. I don't quite get what the science behind that is but I've seen it first hand.

 

[Dr Ray]

I suspect resolution is considerably more important than power.
10" 10-Shot Groups have been done at 1000 yd with a 10x. Of course I'm not that shooter, don't own that rifle and seldom see the deadcalm conditions required for that.

Some evidence exist that the micromuscular contractions as you subconsciously attempt to steady the sight picture can be counter productive. However confidence trumps all and if you think you shoot better at 60x than 24x you will.

I find in the field use much over 6x tends to make the wobble worse as I tend to try to steady the crosshairs beyond my capability. Of course I seldom shoot beyond 300 yards because I'm not an adequate shot. My personal requirement for an ethical shot is when I can put 10 shots in a row from a field postion (from a cold barrel each on a separate day) on a 6" target. That puts the odds of wounding a Whitetail pretty low. I might be persuaded to increase that somewhat on an Elk with a larger target size. I think a PH in Africa might get tired of me asking, "Can you get me closer or a steadier rest".

I try not to pick on the long range hunting crowd to much but I have yet to see the guys that brag about 800+ yard shots on game that can even put 5 in a row on a 6" target at 600 yards. To me that makes a 900 yard a Hail Mary and it isn't ethical to me.

Personally I would suggest that shots at live targets should be limited to 300 yards. Shots at varmints - well that’s different.
Target shooting - whatever distance you can.
I feel that shooting an animal other than varmints at very long range is not hunting.

 

[Shootist43]

Doc, I agree in theory, except that ranges on live targets are determined by the shooters ability to make one shot kills at the distance being considered. For some hunters long range shots are the only ones available. Have you ever read Nathan Foster' s book The Practical Guide to Long Range Shooting? It is one heck of an eye opener. Like you I limit my hunting shots to 300 yards because I hunt in the woods and or generally at short ranges. Guys that hunt in the mountains or out West routinely make killing shots at ranges much farther than that.

 

[sierraone]

It truly is an awesome rifle and shooting system. I flew to the St Louis NRA show in 2012 and saw the Blaser staff demonstrate going from .243 all the way up to the magnum calibers just by changing barrels, bolt faces and trigger assemblies. I was hooked.

But you don't have to spend nearly that much on a Blaser. The Kilombero had upgraded wood and the barrels I ordered were Safari grade. I was, after all, going to Africa and hunting potentially dangerous game. I wasn't messing around! Plus who wants to hunt with an ugly rifle anyway?

Part of why I got the Kilombero was availability; I couldn't get the less expensive models I wanted at the time without waiting weeks & weeks. There's also another hidden benefit to a take-down rifle and that's baggage costs. On my last hunt this past November I took the rifle in a Pelican iM3100 case. This cases meets the size requirements for ordinary checked baggage (L+W+H=62 in.). Had I taken the rifle assembled in my full-size Pelican 1750 case the airline would have charged me a $200 oversize baggage fee EACH WAY. Do that 3 times and you have the price of a darned fine hunting rifle! Granted not all airlines charge that much...still...many do charge some kind of fee for oversize baggage.

So while the cost of Blaser going in is high it's not so bad if you think long and consider you get a whole new rifle for the cost of a barrel. Also, an additional cost saving is that all the scopes detach & interchange so there's no need for me to buy another scope unless I simply want to.

Current prices are at EuroOptic.
EDIT: https://www.eurooptic.com/blaser-r8-kilombero-rifle.aspx

Big Steve...Which airline charged you $200 each way for a Pelican 1750 case?

 

[Dr Ray]

Doc, I agree in theory, except that ranges on live targets are determined by the shooters ability to make one shot kills at the distance being considered. For some hunters long range shots are the only ones available. Have you ever read Nathan Foster' s book The Practical Guide to Long Range Shooting? It is one heck of an eye opener. Like you I limit my hunting shots to 300 yards because I hunt in the woods and or generally at short ranges. Guys that hunt in the mountains or out West routinely make killing shots at ranges much farther than that.

Agreed and in particular I understand that there are timed when the hunter will not be able to get closer etc.
As an example I shot a red deer for meat whereby I held over the shoulders about 3 inches and the Nosler partition got the deer through the lower end of the heart. I grossly underestimated the range (obviously).
Anyway to all AH members, family. and friends I wish you all the best for Christmas and the new year!

 

[2L8]

I never realized how much picture quality meant until I purchased high-end Zeiss scopes. With my 1.5-6x42 Zeiss I can do as well or better than with my 3-9 Leupold VX II. With my 4-16x50 Zeiss I can do as well or better than with my Leupold 6.5-20 VX III. This is obviously not an apples to apples comparison as the Zeiss scopes run $2K US whereas the Leupold scopes run for far less.

The point being that somehow the much better optics with Zeiss means I need less magnification. I don't quite get what the science behind that is but I've seen it first hand.

You will often find that resolution is better at lower magnification in a variable. Your Leupold may shoot better groups with your VX-II at 6x especially since that's essentially the same glass as the VX-1. That's pretty similar glass to my Sightron (based on my own scopes only) and I shoot the best groups with it at 6x. I loose to much definition at 9x (Disclaimer: I only started shooting the Sightron a couple of weeks ago after giving my nephew the Leupold that was on it). The same might be said of the VX-III which is similar to the VX-2 and Freedon which might be better on 16x.

 

[2L8]

Get a 98 Mauser, put a 458 barrel on it, get the bolt face opened, put a 1x5 scope on it, a plywood Richardson microfit stock and leave the trigger alone, then paint the whole damned thing(other than the scope).

Von S. I thoroughly enjoy your posts but you sir are a Philistine!