Well the search has ended!! After half a dozen (or more NEW rifles) I've finally found one that really is accurate. The AWFUL accuracy of the offerring by Remingtons (several), Ruger (several), Savage (Edge) and a motley crew of other BEAUTIFUL rifles that wouldn't hit a bull in the butt. I lamented the fact on this board that all the gun magazines are LIARS. And the last factory rifle I had fired that would really shoot was a CZ. Well,I found one that is still the "real thing" or as the box says "Is this the most accurate factory rifle? Damn Straight!". Well it is. I put a Leupold 4-12 on a $399 Thompson Center in .270 caliber. Bought 3 boxes of various 130 grain factory loads. All really will shoot about an inch with this rifle. A steady hand could probably shoot 1/2" with the Federal ammo. The trigger is absolutely wonderful. maybe too "wonderful" for hunting with gloves on (I'd guess about 2 lbs. or so). It is as good as most custom target triggers at paper punching and can be adjusted even lower. I was lambasted on this forum for not trying multiple loadings in the Savage etc. My defense was that in my experience a rifle that's built right. Will shoot throw the same weight pill to pretty much the same place. And it's been my experience, if it won't shoot Winchester Power Points - it probably won't shoot. Well, this inexpensive Thompson Center will throw all three brands of Walmart ammo into an inch (if you can do it!). I cheat and use a Lead Sled though. I am so pleased with this rifle I'd think it cheap for pretty much twice the price. Still doesn't explain why MOST other new rifles, beautiful though they are, are miserable shooters.
T/C Venture - Finally An Accurate Rifle
- Thread starter mes228
- Start date
I have the same rifle and agrees with your observations. No barrel break-in required, first 3 shots with Win 150gr, MOA. Next three with Federal, MOA. Next three with Remington core-lokt, MOA. I did some handloads and it really shines. For a sub $450 new gun, nothing comes close.
I share your raves for the Venture. I bought one two weeks ago in .30-06 and put Nikon Pro Staff 3 x 9 x40 on it.
The first 3 shots down the barrel with Winchester 150 gr went through the same hole....... I was absolutely amazed at the rifle. I can vouch that it must be a really good rifle because I'm NOT that good.
I shot about half of that box of shells and 6 Federal blue box. The groups opened a bit from the first three rounds but definitely still w/i the 1" guarantee.
The only other rifle I have ever owned that shot this well is my Weatherby Vanguard in .270. It will also consistently shoot 1" groups.
Now that I own these two, several others are for sale
The first 3 shots down the barrel with Winchester 150 gr went through the same hole....... I was absolutely amazed at the rifle. I can vouch that it must be a really good rifle because I'm NOT that good.
I shot about half of that box of shells and 6 Federal blue box. The groups opened a bit from the first three rounds but definitely still w/i the 1" guarantee.
The only other rifle I have ever owned that shot this well is my Weatherby Vanguard in .270. It will also consistently shoot 1" groups.
Now that I own these two, several others are for sale
pcardinal42
New member
I was looking into getting an Icon from T/C only because I wanted the new 6.5 creedmoor round but I'm hesitant because I don't know if this round is going to last. Sako/Tikka is another rifle that is accurate right out of the box, I've owned one Tikka before and I got 5 shot 3/4" groups at 100 yards shooting .338 win mag. I'll be looking into getting a Sako probably for a 6.5X55 SE only because of my doubts about the 6.5 creedmoor.
stillGHILLIE
New member
Good to know. I pick up my Venture in .243 today. I have a new, but lonely Weaver 3x9x40 to mate it with.
I had a Stevens 200 in .223, and after a trigger job, it shot really well. Wanting to go up in caliber a bit, I bought a Stevens 200 in .243, and it shot lousy. Stiffened the forend, trigger job, re-crown...still shot around 1.75" groups at 100 yds.
I sold it, and picked up a Howa in the Hogue stock. It shot better, but it was still difficult to get below 1.5" at 100 with most loads. It was also HEAVY.
After doing some research, I decided to give the Venture a try. I hope I have the same results as the other happy owners.
I had a Stevens 200 in .223, and after a trigger job, it shot really well. Wanting to go up in caliber a bit, I bought a Stevens 200 in .243, and it shot lousy. Stiffened the forend, trigger job, re-crown...still shot around 1.75" groups at 100 yds.
I sold it, and picked up a Howa in the Hogue stock. It shot better, but it was still difficult to get below 1.5" at 100 with most loads. It was also HEAVY.
After doing some research, I decided to give the Venture a try. I hope I have the same results as the other happy owners.
Omaha-BeenGlockin
New member
Another good shootin Venture here too--(.30-06).
There's only couple brands that are good to go out of the box.
TC
Browning
Sako/Tikka
Ruger Hawkeye---not the 77 or MkII
Savage
The rest are a waste of money---and ya--I've owned them all.
There's only couple brands that are good to go out of the box.
TC
Browning
Sako/Tikka
Ruger Hawkeye---not the 77 or MkII
Savage
The rest are a waste of money---and ya--I've owned them all.
warbirdlover
New member
My Mk II all-weather is a tack hammer. I have NEVER seen a factory rifle shoot better groups. But it might be an accident or also might have something to do with the stainless steel barrel.
And I see no Remington 700's on your list...
Omaha-BeenGlockin
New member
Remingtons are junk---no two ways about it. I've owned my share of them and none of them would shoot worth a damn-------sadly---because I took a beating on the $$$ everytime I dumped one of those P'sOS.
You are wrong about the Ammo thing....
I have had a few Sakos that have all been wonderfully accurate. I always tried at least four types of ammo and bullet weights, and have never seen the rifle that liked them all, Sako included. All of the Sakos I've ever had were capable of half inch groups with the ammo they liked and better with well developed handloads.
Worth knowing is that most of them did best with Federal match loads. A Sako .22-250 liked Winchester 55 grain to the degree it would shoot one hole as long at the tips were perfect, a slightly dinged tip would be a quarter inch off.
Even if a rifle is throwing lousy groups of two inches it may be capable of well under an inch with another bullet. I always try to give a rifle a chance with at least four different loads. My Anschutz 1517 MPR shoots three inch groups with 20gr FMJ bullets, it shoots 1/4 to 1/2 an inch with what it likes. I'd have thrown it away if the FMJ's were all I tried.
By the way, I've had a half inch 700 .243 with Federal match loads and a 700 BDL .223 that shoots half inch handloaded. The "Remingtons are junk" generalization is pretty weak.
I have had a few Sakos that have all been wonderfully accurate. I always tried at least four types of ammo and bullet weights, and have never seen the rifle that liked them all, Sako included. All of the Sakos I've ever had were capable of half inch groups with the ammo they liked and better with well developed handloads.
Worth knowing is that most of them did best with Federal match loads. A Sako .22-250 liked Winchester 55 grain to the degree it would shoot one hole as long at the tips were perfect, a slightly dinged tip would be a quarter inch off.
Even if a rifle is throwing lousy groups of two inches it may be capable of well under an inch with another bullet. I always try to give a rifle a chance with at least four different loads. My Anschutz 1517 MPR shoots three inch groups with 20gr FMJ bullets, it shoots 1/4 to 1/2 an inch with what it likes. I'd have thrown it away if the FMJ's were all I tried.
By the way, I've had a half inch 700 .243 with Federal match loads and a 700 BDL .223 that shoots half inch handloaded. The "Remingtons are junk" generalization is pretty weak.
Accuracy
Woodguru, I absolutely agree with you....to a degree. Yes, to "fine tune" a rifle try several makers ammo. The key here is "fine tune". I am speaking of new rifles that shot 3"-4" groups out of the box. Some shot 6'-8" groups which is ridiculous. That's "gross" inaccuracy not fine tuning. If you are looking for 1/4 or 1/2 inch improvement I'd say try another brand in that grain bullet. Also, when did it become acceptable to need to shoot 200 rounds to "break in" a barrel before the rifle will shoot? Well, that's not acceptable to me or my billfold. At today's ammo prices that could easily be $300 worth of ammo (could well be the approx. cost of the rifle!!). A rifle should shoot with acceptable accuracy from the makers box. From the "get go" the Thompson center and the CZ would put a round on the mark. I know the CZ comes from the factory with a hand lapped barrel(and it shows, they are EXTREMELY accurate from the FIRST round). I don't know what T/C is doing but whatever it is - please keep doing it!! As finances permit I'm probably be buying 3 more T/C Ventures to give away. I'm a firm believer that a high powered rifle with an optic should be a precision instrument in where it throws the bullet. Just an old curmudgeon's opinion.
Woodguru, I absolutely agree with you....to a degree. Yes, to "fine tune" a rifle try several makers ammo. The key here is "fine tune". I am speaking of new rifles that shot 3"-4" groups out of the box. Some shot 6'-8" groups which is ridiculous. That's "gross" inaccuracy not fine tuning. If you are looking for 1/4 or 1/2 inch improvement I'd say try another brand in that grain bullet. Also, when did it become acceptable to need to shoot 200 rounds to "break in" a barrel before the rifle will shoot? Well, that's not acceptable to me or my billfold. At today's ammo prices that could easily be $300 worth of ammo (could well be the approx. cost of the rifle!!). A rifle should shoot with acceptable accuracy from the makers box. From the "get go" the Thompson center and the CZ would put a round on the mark. I know the CZ comes from the factory with a hand lapped barrel(and it shows, they are EXTREMELY accurate from the FIRST round). I don't know what T/C is doing but whatever it is - please keep doing it!! As finances permit I'm probably be buying 3 more T/C Ventures to give away. I'm a firm believer that a high powered rifle with an optic should be a precision instrument in where it throws the bullet. Just an old curmudgeon's opinion.
MythBuster
New member
I don't see the point of requiring your hunting rifle to be able to shoot one hole groups on a bench when the majority of you could not shoot as much as minute of pie plate without your bench and sandbags.
Get a good rifle. Zero it. Forget that a bench even exists and learn to shoot. Then you can be a rifleman.
Get a good rifle. Zero it. Forget that a bench even exists and learn to shoot. Then you can be a rifleman.
Rifles
Mythbuster, I purchased at least two Remington Mtn. Rifles and one Classic that were pitiful. The Ruger Ranch Rifles were beyond belief, the Hawkeye and the M-77 less bad but still not up to par. Why would anyone keep a rifle that you would be unsure of hitting a groundhog at 100 yds? Why keep a Savage Edge mounted with a 12 power optic that I out shot with an AR that had a non-magnifying Eotech with about a 1" red dot? I have three 1911 pistols that I assure you will OUTSHOOT at least half of these rifles with optics (from a mechanical rest. After all the rifles were shot from a Lead Sled). Just my opinion but I don't care to own a rifle that can only be used for big game at a close range. Apparently some of these rifles MIGHT shoot after you WEAR the barrel in/smooth with copper & lead of 200 or so rounds down the tube. Manufactures must be churning out barrels at ten to the minute on CNC machines to be so rough that it takes 200 rounds to "break one in" (as some state about the Rugers). Now that I'm ranting - Whats up with today's rifles that change impact by INCHES as the barrel heats up? I've not had a military rifle do that and I've owned many vintage rifles. I've got AR's that you pretty much could shoot till they melted and they would shoot to the same place (FN and Daniels). Older Rem 700's and Win Model 70's could be shot with SMALL variences in impact as the barrel heated. Not so today, some of these modern wonders will change impact several inches in 4-5 rounds. I don't know the why of all this, I do know that something is wrong. Just my opinion but it'd based on owning and shooting a LOT of rifles.
Mythbuster, I purchased at least two Remington Mtn. Rifles and one Classic that were pitiful. The Ruger Ranch Rifles were beyond belief, the Hawkeye and the M-77 less bad but still not up to par. Why would anyone keep a rifle that you would be unsure of hitting a groundhog at 100 yds? Why keep a Savage Edge mounted with a 12 power optic that I out shot with an AR that had a non-magnifying Eotech with about a 1" red dot? I have three 1911 pistols that I assure you will OUTSHOOT at least half of these rifles with optics (from a mechanical rest. After all the rifles were shot from a Lead Sled). Just my opinion but I don't care to own a rifle that can only be used for big game at a close range. Apparently some of these rifles MIGHT shoot after you WEAR the barrel in/smooth with copper & lead of 200 or so rounds down the tube. Manufactures must be churning out barrels at ten to the minute on CNC machines to be so rough that it takes 200 rounds to "break one in" (as some state about the Rugers). Now that I'm ranting - Whats up with today's rifles that change impact by INCHES as the barrel heats up? I've not had a military rifle do that and I've owned many vintage rifles. I've got AR's that you pretty much could shoot till they melted and they would shoot to the same place (FN and Daniels). Older Rem 700's and Win Model 70's could be shot with SMALL variences in impact as the barrel heated. Not so today, some of these modern wonders will change impact several inches in 4-5 rounds. I don't know the why of all this, I do know that something is wrong. Just my opinion but it'd based on owning and shooting a LOT of rifles.
Hey mythbuster,
I like your thinking about being a rifleman! I plan on hunting not shooting paper. I've been shooting in several different real situation hunting positions with my new venture .30-06 and can shoot 2 - 2.5 inch groups. Of course I can clover leaf off my bench. That being said, I could shoot that gun all day long. No complaints at all. Now I have to fine tune my nikon prostaff at longer range. Anyone with some knowledge of the bdc, I would love some tips!
I like your thinking about being a rifleman! I plan on hunting not shooting paper. I've been shooting in several different real situation hunting positions with my new venture .30-06 and can shoot 2 - 2.5 inch groups. Of course I can clover leaf off my bench. That being said, I could shoot that gun all day long. No complaints at all. Now I have to fine tune my nikon prostaff at longer range. Anyone with some knowledge of the bdc, I would love some tips!
stillGHILLIE
New member
I can shoot rifles with irons just fine. I am not much of a bench and bag shooter myself, however, a great rifleman and a mediocre rifle still equals a mediocre rifle. I prefer my rifles accurate. Then, hunting or bench, I know the gun will outshoot me.
If you are happy with Ruger Mini 14's or 10/22s, by all means stock up on them. My M1A Match and CZs will outshoot you, bench or not.
If you are happy with Ruger Mini 14's or 10/22s, by all means stock up on them. My M1A Match and CZs will outshoot you, bench or not.
Rifle
I mostly bird hunt any more on Lodges and Preserves. I do though, like to keep an accurate rifle in the closet. I'll expand on this barrel heating up thing a little. Anyone here can go to a gun show and purchase ANY WWII vintage rifle and NONE will change impact (or at least very, very little) as the barrel heats up. An old Enfield is a 2-3 inch rifle at 100 yds when you start firing. Yet it will be a 2-3" rifle after 20 rounds in quick succession. Same with any military rifle. No free floated barrel, no modern technology, just consistency. Older hunting rifles WERE that way. I never had barrel heating problems until pretty recent times. Old rifles were consistent shooters, but no longer. Some of today's rifle pretty much, must be allowed to cool between rounds. Much less between groups, to shoot the same place. I have no idea why. Why do you think this is?? Was barrel steel better, Was it stressed relieved? Was the actions assembled more square where heat did not "torque" the action? Why will a CZ shoot accurately after two 5 round groups and the barrel hot? And a Rem. Mtn. rifle won't hit the side of a barn after after two rounds (at least the ones I had wouldn't)? Why will a military spec. AR shoot to point of aim until the barrel is so hot you can't touch it? I don't know, but I have experienced all of this and it's been "true" for me.
I mostly bird hunt any more on Lodges and Preserves. I do though, like to keep an accurate rifle in the closet. I'll expand on this barrel heating up thing a little. Anyone here can go to a gun show and purchase ANY WWII vintage rifle and NONE will change impact (or at least very, very little) as the barrel heats up. An old Enfield is a 2-3 inch rifle at 100 yds when you start firing. Yet it will be a 2-3" rifle after 20 rounds in quick succession. Same with any military rifle. No free floated barrel, no modern technology, just consistency. Older hunting rifles WERE that way. I never had barrel heating problems until pretty recent times. Old rifles were consistent shooters, but no longer. Some of today's rifle pretty much, must be allowed to cool between rounds. Much less between groups, to shoot the same place. I have no idea why. Why do you think this is?? Was barrel steel better, Was it stressed relieved? Was the actions assembled more square where heat did not "torque" the action? Why will a CZ shoot accurately after two 5 round groups and the barrel hot? And a Rem. Mtn. rifle won't hit the side of a barn after after two rounds (at least the ones I had wouldn't)? Why will a military spec. AR shoot to point of aim until the barrel is so hot you can't touch it? I don't know, but I have experienced all of this and it's been "true" for me.