I was reading the June/July issue of Outdoor life. Jim Carmichel (the shooting editor) had a panel of 5 accomplished riflemen, shoot the new rifles for 06' and write a review. Surprisingly few managed to impress the panel including such notables as Kimber's new 8400 in 270 Win, Sako's new 85, a CZ-550, Savage's M12, etc. The guns were generally, not acceptable in terms of their accuracy. Each gun writer fired two five shot groups with factory ammo with each rifle and the results were averaged. None of the rifles were capable of 1" or even 1.5" groups and most were 2-3" rifles and a few were 4-6" rifles at 100 yards. They mentioned the groups were 5 shot groups fired back to back with little time to cool between strings but they also mentioned that when they performed this test with rifles in the past they did much better than the current class.
Also, an interesting side note by John Snow in the same issue about the short mags and how they haven't lived up to their billing (in his opinion). Personally, my M70 featherweight in 300 WSM is the most accurate out of the box medium bore gun in my safe...but of course that's anecdotal.
Surprising to see such frank gun journalism. Most cynics think these guys are all whores bought and paid for by their advertisers.
Also noticed that Zeiss introduced some new models in their Conquest line. a 1.8-5 and a 2.5-8 power. I consider this power range of scope nearly ideal for a big game rifle and have been impressed with the one Zeiss Conquest I own. I can see a couple more in my future.

Ky Nimrod ----- I cut my shooting teeth on Carmichel's "Book on Shooting". He doesn't cull any of them, he tells the good, the bad and the ugly about all. It is quite dated now, with the big boys then Winchester, Remington and Ruger. ----- I am shooting a Winchester Model 70 in .270 WSM and while the accuracy is only fair with a few one holers (could be accidents) thrown in, the general rule is 1-1.5 inchs at 100 yards, the speeds are outstanding. My last five groups of 140 grain TSX's averaged 3330 fps and my best 130 grain North Fork's average 3400 fps. My 150 grain North Forks are averaging 3250 fps and are probably consistently the most accurate loads. If you like flat shooting chamberings, this rascal is just that. I have a 4.5 X 14 Ziess Conquest mounted on the rifle, one of five that I shoot. Good shooting.

Nimrod, I have no idea how old you are, but it comes as no surprise to me that Carmichel would tell it like it is. He is one of only a very few gun writers nowadays who is of sufficient stature that he doesn't have to kowtow to anyone. He is, as far as I am concerned, the very last of a dying breed, and I will miss him when he is gone.

I have a hard time believing that of four reputable rifle brands not one was capable of at least 1.5".

NBHunter I agree, but it did say 5 shot groups--I know the SAKO gurantees moa performance out of the box--probably 3 shots--I'm not sure. I won't keep a rifle if it won't shoot 1" or better with 5 shots, two or three minutes too cool between say #3, #4 and #5.

KY Nimrod, I like the Conquests a lot also, have a 4.4x14 on the way!

I don't have a hard time believing it. It is no longer unusual with a brand new rifle to have to rework or replace the trigger, bed the action, float the barrel, and sometimes even recrown to get a group under 2". Like Fish30114, I won't keep a rifle that won't at least do MOA with five shots, but the only way I have found them in the last few years is used. I don't mind spending time to get a used rifle shooting well, but I'll be damned if I'll spend $1000 or more for a new rifle that shoots patterns instead of groups. To be fair, most of the last dozen or so Savages I've seen are capable, but the favorite excuses of other manufacturers like "It's within our specs" or "MOA accuracy is unnecessary in a big game rifle" don't cut it with me, and I won't put up with it. It's a sad fact that you can often get better accuracy off of the milsurp rack for under $200 than you can buying new. I'd rather buy used and rebarrel, it's cheaper and more accurate. As long as they spend more on marketing than they do on quality control and customer service, they're going to follow Winchester down the tubes one by one.

Some times I think it is the luck of the draw.

My best shooter out of the box is a M70 416 Rem Mag. If I am on, the group is one slightly enlarged hole. My worst shooter is (was) a M70 300 Win Mag. Before bedding, floating, longer magazine and ejector work to increase OAL to get closer to the lands it shot 2+" groups on a good day. Now shoots 1" groups.

The factory target on a CZ Safari 375 was 3 1/2 inches After the panic subsided and a bedding and floating job, it shoots under an 1".

Nimrod, were they outfitted with wooden stocks? Sounds like a moot question but sometimes it makes a differance.

Some guns had wood stocks, The Savage had a synthetic. Maybe a couple more. The Remington semi-auto did better in the tests than most of the bolt guns.

I'm 44 and have been reading Outdoor life since I was 12 or 13 (Just as Jim started his career as THE shooting editor in O'Connor's wake) . I just posted this since I thought it was an interesting way to test some rifles and because I see so many cynics online who post drivel about gun writers being a bunch of hacks and whores. I travel to the tri-cities area in Tennessee for business once a month and sometime soon I intend to look Mr. Carmichel up.

quote:

Originally posted by Versifier:
I don't have a hard time believing it. It is no longer unusual with a brand new rifle to have to rework or replace the trigger, bed the action, float the barrel, and sometimes even recrown to get a group under 2". Like Fish30114, I won't keep a rifle that won't at least do MOA with five shots, but the only way I have found them in the last few years is used. I don't mind spending time to get a used rifle shooting well, but I'll be damned if I'll spend $1000 or more for a new rifle that shoots patterns instead of groups. To be fair, most of the last dozen or so Savages I've seen are capable, but the favorite excuses of other manufacturers like "It's within our specs" or "MOA accuracy is unnecessary in a big game rifle" don't cut it with me, and I won't put up with it. It's a sad fact that you can often get better accuracy off of the milsurp rack for under $200 than you can buying new. I'd rather buy used and rebarrel, it's cheaper and more accurate. As long as they spend more on marketing than they do on quality control and customer service, they're going to follow Winchester down the tubes one by one.

I am glad there are guys like you that won't keep those 3 inchers and put them on the used market. I currently have 5 model 70 classics that I purchased for very little money that are 2-3 inch rifles. I hunt with all of them and haven't missed what I shot at yet.