So i got scope bit today......

[Spooln-Rex]

heres a link i found on the scope at swfa. looks almost identical but its a sportview 3x9 just like the one thats on my rifle.......

http://swfa.com/Bushnell-3-9x32-Sportview-Rifle-Scope-P258.aspx

says eye reilief 3.3" which i think isnt true but maybe i should measure it with me on the gun and looking through the scope.

 

[mmchambers06]

If comparing the same rifles, .270 will kick a good bit harder than .308. .270 Win is necked down from the .30-06.

I don't know about that...my shoulder disagrees.

I mean...they have nearly identical muzzle energies even with different bullet weights.

 

[ENC]

Did you check to make sure the rings are tight? It might have started moving closer to your eye with each shot till it was close enough to bite back.

Evan

 

[Spooln-Rex]

yea i double checked the rings before heading out to the range this morning.

 

[doctorjj]

So, if you are comparing .270 to home loaded .308 that hot, shouldn't you be comparing to hot loaded .270 with modern powder?

I'm no chemist, but sheer case capacity of the .270 would mean to me the .270 wins out.

I don't feel like getting into a lot of physics right now. My head hurts as it is.

I'm not talking about hot hand loads in the .308. I'm talking factory loads vs. factory loads. Look up the history of the development of the 30-06 and you'll see why the case is so big. For factory loaded, SAAMI spec ammo, the 30-06 and the .308 are nearly identical.

 

[streetglideok]

Think if I were you, I would invest in a better scope if it doesnt have at least 3.5-4" of eye relief. I can fire my 300 RUM or 7mm mag with no worry of getting hit by the scope. Once read, spend as much or more on the scope as you did on the rifle. Better to get a cheap Marlin XL7 that shoots good and put a $500 scope on it then a $900 Browning and a $150 scope.

 

[Spooln-Rex]

o i agree completely on putting quality optics on any of my firearms. luckily this was inherited and i have been just trying to get used to the whole bolt action rifle. But it does look like it needs some new glass. The bases and rings seem pretty solid they are savage factory pieces it looks like. at least the rings say savage on the sides. Either way thanks for the input everyone.

 

[ez bake]

When you laid down in the prone, was your entire body directly behind the rifle or was part of it off to the side?

Do you muscle into the rifle (i.e. "fight recoil")?

Was your cheek firmly laid down on the stock (improper cheek wield will allow a rifle to bite you badly - rings that are the wrong height will force you to "crane" your neck up off of the stock or put your jaw-bone on the stock instead of firmly underneath your cheek-bone)?

In the prone, you want all of your weight behind the rifle (not off to the side) and you want to push your weight down behind the rifle like a sack of potatoes - i.e. dead weight).

You can push into the rifle to load the bipod first, but when you dig in and load the bipod, you should drop all your weight and that will absorb the recoil (don't fight recoil).

 

[ewheeley]

I was at the range over Spring Break, and I ran into a friend's dad. He let me shoot his SKS. He must have really weird form (the guy is a dumbass to begin with) because with the way he did the scope mount, a way that I've never seen before and would have a hard time describing, I couldn't shoot the dang thing without getting bit.

 

[Shadowrider]

A looooong time ago I had a Ruger M77R in .270 Win. I put a Bushnell Banner 3X9 on it and I had the same problem. When I got a full field of view it was a touch too close. I really had to watch it. It got me a couple of times.