Thompson Center Contenders

Cheapshooter

New member
Make sure that .45-70 is a bull barrel! Can't stress that enough. Someone on this thread that "Super" denotes bull barrel-that simply is not true. My Super 16 .45-70 barrel is tapered. Don't make that same mistake. A huge hole in a tapered barrel means flyweight and that translates to horrendous recoil. If you don't want to be stuck with 405 gr factory loads only, make sure that sucker's heavy.

Oh yea, for sure the 14" Hunter with the Muzzle Tamer. Probably open sights.
What kind of loads can that barrel safely handle? Both factory, and handloads.

Sorry, I meant in 45-70
 

Sevens

New member
Who shoots a Contender in .223 Rem?

Here's the question -- what is your target and at what range do you shoot?

I'm no hunter, but I would love to go varmint hunting with mine one day. Problem that I have is that while it's accurate as hell, my 2-6x scope just doesn't magnify targets enough at 100 yards where it's most appropriate to shoot it.

I'm trying to do sub-MOA and at 100 yards, the bullseye is just too small to see. :(

I believe that Burris makes a 12x handgun scope... it's pricey but I'd do it if I hear some good things from other handgun shooters who shoot at 100 or more yards.

Or does anyone know of another long eye relief handgun scope with up to 12x magnification or beyond?
 
I have Burris 3-9 X pistol scope on mine... off a sand bag I'm fine with 9X but they are really critical on eye relief ect. on the higher powers a Burris ( fine scopes ) a 12X handgun would be tough to shoot in field conditions IMO...

BTW... my "older" 14" barrel shoots pretty nice, but must be a slower twist... I find most accurate results with 50 grain bullets... anything heavier, & my groups seem to start opening up... still even with my best loads, 2.5 - 3" groups are my best at 300 yards off the bench... newer barrels may have a faster twist...
 

Sevens

New member
I see what you are saying about eye relief being critical at higher powers, I do... but this is a 14-inch, bull barreled handgun, so no matter if it's off a bench at paper or off some kind of a rest at a prairie dog, there's no way I'm going to be able to hit ANYTHING without a dead-solid rest.

So other than the fact that the field of view at max power of 12x being very small (4 feet, I think, according to specs), I don't think it would matter about field conditions.

I suppose, either way, my chances of varmint hunting will be few & far between but my target fun shooting at 100 yards (or more) will be frequent, I think the Burris 3-12x is the one for me.

Problem is, I'm finding them at around $425 and no less.

Anyone have a good place for used optics, or does anyone know of a 10x or higher handgun scope other than the Burris 3-12x?
 

BluesBear

New member
I know some of you out there will make fun of me for this but I personally have had very good experience with Osprey scopes. (Yes thay are a "cheap" line but their local dealer has a big display at the Puyallup gunshows and a great money back if not satisfied guarantee.) I know they make some handgun scopes but I haven't personally tried one yet. However I have one of their 3x9 rifle scopes on one of my 5.56 uppers right now and I've also used their 4x12 on a 7.62 NATO. They're certainly MOA cabable and my 3x9 is holding up well to getting knocked around in a soft case.

Just a thought.
 

Stevie-Ray

New member
I'm trying to do sub-MOA and at 100 yards, the bullseye is just too small to see.

I believe that Burris makes a 12x handgun scope... it's pricey but I'd do it if I hear some good things from other handgun shooters who shoot at 100 or more yards.
You won't be wasting money on that Burris, IMO. My .30-30 Contender will one-hole at 50 yards. At 100, my groups open up, but that's the fault of the minimal Leupold (4X) on it, not the gun. I can't get a proper sight picture at 100 since the crosshairs practically cover the target.:rolleyes: Since .223 has a reputation of being one of T/C's most accurate barrels, I'd say go for it.;)

When I got the 4X, I was planning on IHMSA, not paper-punching, and it would have been fine for that.
 
Top