Guys,
I'm not really a varmint hunter ... prefering the over 30cals ... but a Rem700BDL in 17Rem in the safe is wailing to be used!
Reading some old literature last night I see that varmint rifles used to be built on Enfields M17s, M98s etc etc in the "good ole day", including HiWalls etc.. Many of those old rifles also shot well!
Now I can get stainless everything, black, pink and yellow stocks ... etc etc ... so where has the progress been made in varmint rifles? Or has "the nut behind the butt" always been the limiting factor in making long range hits on small targets?
Just wondering ....
Cheers...
Con

My first CF varmint rifle was a Rem 722 in 222R. It was a very heavy rifle but I was young and it was all that I had. The biggest problem with it was the low comb and I know I can shoot better with a decent cheek weld. I sold the gun and am glad that I did.

Later I got a M70 with a monte carlo and a custom High Wall that really fits me. Somewhere along the line a hunting buddy mentioned that he can see a bullet hit game from even a 270 but not a 358. I had never seen a bullet hit game.

Then I got a Kimber Montana in 243 and they have a very high comb. I can see the effect of a 58 gr bullet hitting varmints. This is my newest varmint rifle. Hope this helps.

Among other things huge progress was made in optics, range finding equipment and manufacturing processes. These all compliment the 'gun' which equates to "progress" at least as much as making it easier to come up with an extremely accurate rifle for not alot of $$...comparatively.

Well, smokeless powder cartridges are still pretty much the same as they were 115 years ago, although the chemistry of the powder and primers is a little improved. And you're right that, although there's a plethora of actions now available, none of them are really much better than the 108 year old Mauser '98.

What is better?

1. Optics. Even just a few years ago a 10 or 12X fixed scope was pretty much the top of the line for a field varmint rifle. Now some excellent variables with top ends up to 24x or even higher are available, and you can turn them down to locate your target or adjust for conditions like excessive mirage. On top of that, good optics are relatively cheaper than a couple of decades ago.

2. Bullets are better. Many of today's bullets are more consistent, more aerodynamically shaped, and some even use a polymer tip that raises BC and eliminates potentially detrimental tip deformation. There's also a greater variety, so you can "shop" for a bullet that shoots well in your gun.

3. Powders. There is a much wider variety of powders, allowing you to better match the burning speed with the cartridge and bullet. Powders are also cleaner burning and less corrosive.

As far as stainless metal and synthetic stocks, they can be made to shoot okay, but not necessarily any better than a good chrome moly barrel and a well-fitted wood stock. I doubt there being any longer "life" in a stainless barrel, but a synthetic stock can be cheaper and easier to bed and hold its zero. If you're not repulsed by their look and feel, they're very usable.

quote:

Originally posted by Con:
...Reading some old literature last night I see that varmint rifles used to be built on Enfields M17s, M98s etc etc in the "good ole day"

Well I suppose I better get my cane and try to remember my way home. Where is that damn cane anyhow.......??

I have two varmint rifles built on M17 actions and two others built on 98 actions.

I think the powder (and selection) has improved the most. Optics, of course........

I agree with Stonecreek on the bullets. Specialty bullets have pushed the far edge of varmint shooting to incredible distances.

I know my barrels are much cleaner than they ever have been before.

Jim

I figured that the only real progress is in factory affordable accurate rifles (?). I've seen and shot SMLE 303-22s and Martini single-shots that were amazingly accurate ... but at the time they were custom rebarrels. I suppose now we can buy a varmint rifle off the shelf that will do the job, with minimal tweeking.
Cheers...
Con

quote:

Originally posted by pdhntr1:
I have two varmint rifles built on M17 actions and two others built on 98 actions.
Jim

I've also got a butt ugly single-shot M17 target rifle ... which I'm trying to justify into eventually rebarelling to probably a bull-barrel 6mmRem or 6mm-06.
Cheers...
Con

The word that you're looking for is "consistency".

Just about every manufacturer making products and component parts for firearms have improved the consistency of their products to levels that could only be done by the most very skilled custom makers of decades ago.

The bullets, barrels, powders, primers, actions, optics' etc. mass produced today are huge leaps ahead of the products of the 1950's and 60's.

Con, these guys are right. The biggest improvements are the use of technology to enhance durability and consistency and to lower the cost of a really great rifle and selection (competition) in the marketplace.

Just look at how many quality .224" bullets are available today. There are more available from Berger than was probably available marketwide 40 years ago. And that is just one manufacturer.

You can go down to your local gun shop (or outdoor store) and buy a rifle (for less than $400) that will shoot less than MOA with factory ammo. Try that 115 years ago...