Cost of building F open and F/TR, is there much difference

A

Arizona78

Guest
Is there a big differnance building a F open gun vs a F/TR gun? This is pretty much dictating what I'm going to build. I wish F/TR wasn't limited to 223 308. It should be anything in a short action. Anyway's If I can do an open for the same price as a F/TR then that is what I will do.

Thank's
 
Arizona78

Build what you want! Do not build a rifle based on what costs less. Assuming you are planning on building a top level competitive rifle there should be little difference if any change in the cost. Look at it this way. The action, trigger, rings, barrel, stock and scope cost the same using the best available materials. The bed job and stock finishing will cost the same. I shoot F Open, but if I were to build a rifle for F/TR I would use the same components I use for my Open rifles.
 
Arizona78,

Have you considered buying an F-Class rifle? Savage makes four models of rifles which are suitable for F-Class. The BR and F-Open models are suitable for Open Class, while the 12 F/TR and the Palma rifles are suitable for F-T/R. Prices listed on their webite (http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/models/) are MSRP, actual prices can be lower. Hope this helps.
 
LarryBartholome said:
Arizona78

Build what you want! Do not build a rifle based on what costs less. Assuming you are planning on building a top level competitive rifle there should be little difference if any change in the cost. Look at it this way. The action, trigger, rings, barrel, stock and scope cost the same using the best available materials. The bed job and stock finishing will cost the same. I shoot F Open, but if I were to build a rifle for F/TR I would use the same components I use for my Open rifles.
Click to expand...

X10 to what Mr. B said!! Either go full custom or factory. Dont go half a$$, you will regret it.. I saved my pennies till I had enough to get the top shelf custom stuff & I have plenty of factory rigs. So what if it took an extra yr or two. No regrets and no half a$$ rig either....

I think it was Jim Carmichel who penned an article in Outdr Life yrs back that highlighted benchrest. He said somthing similar to; "See those rifles? Those are the hot rods these guys never got to build in high school"... Remember how the one 1978 baby-blue Ford Fairmont 4-dr looked after they put some keystone classics? = Half A$$

Time to build your hot rod maybe..... ;)

Rod
 
One thing i have learned over the past few years is that no matter how much you spend on a custom rifle that doesn't guarantee you it will be a shooter. It will shoot better than any factory rifle, yes but no matter how high end the parts are or even who puts everything together it may or may not be the golden rifle we all hope they will be during the build and planning process. I have had a few really really nice custom rifles built that only shot just ok. Might be best to see if you can find a real nice used proven rifle if cost is a concern. there out there if you look hard enough. Best shooting rifle i have was bought second hand. Good luck!! Lee
 
Arizona78 said:
Is there a big differnance building a F open gun vs a F/TR gun? This is pretty much dictating what I'm going to build. I wish F/TR wasn't limited to 223 308. It should be anything in a short action. Anyway's If I can do an open for the same price as a F/TR then that is what I will do.

Thank's
Click to expand...

Building costs - no, running costs - yes. However, a decent joystick front rest for Open Class will be a bit dearer than a bi-pod.
Vince (UK)
 
nhkuehl said:
Weight may dictate a difference in some components, plus a bipod included in the 18.2# F-T/R vs 22# Open. But, then you already knew that. - nhk
Click to expand...

Ouch! LMAO

A fellow club member is about to convert a match winning RPA built target rifle, into a F/TR rifle. Minimal costs involved.
 
Arizona, the only difference in cost I see, is the price of a quality front rest for F-open, a Farley or SEB aren't exactly cheap compared to a bipod.
 
VinceB said:
Building costs - no, running costs - yes. However, a decent joystick front rest for Open Class will be a bit dearer than a bi-pod.
Vince (UK)
Click to expand...
Agreed. And I suspect a 308 barrel will last longer than a 6.5-284 or a 7RSAUM and a round of 308 will cost less also.
 
steve_podleski said:
Agreed. And I suspect a 308 barrel will last longer than a 6.5-284 or a 7RSAUM and a round of 308 will cost less also.
Click to expand...

Steve,

That was what I mean't by 'running costs'.

Having said that - we are finding that 308 barrels do not give anything like the 3 - 4000 rounds we used to get, once you start pushing bullets in excess of 3000fps.

Vince (UK)
 
Vince

Is there a real practical reason or is it just a theoretical trend behind this need for speeds of 3000+fps?
 
Hambone said:
Vince

Is there a real practical reason or is it just a theoretical trend behind this need for speeds of 3000+fps?
Click to expand...

In the UK, our 'serious' F Class shooting is at ranges 800 - 1000 yards. 3000 fps (or more) m/v is desirable with the 155gn bullet at 1000 yards. Our top shooter, Russell Simmonds, is World Champion and European Champion - it works for him!

All the top guys are pushing above 3000fps with the 155 bullet. These velocities are easily achievable with a 30-32 inch barrel and a casefull of Vithavuori N540 powder - but don't expect 3000 rounds from your barrel!

Vince (UK)
 
Vince

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. If its ok I'll try again.

I know they are doing it and how. My question was why?

I have a partial understanding of the theory behind the desire to remain supersonic at a given distance, and I'm sure that has something to do with the 3000+fps quest. I'd just like to understand more.

Or am I barking up the wrong tree entirely?
 
The better 155gn bullets available today will stay 'supersonic' @ 1000 while starting at speeds considerably less than 3000fps - some even as low as 2850, depending on your local atmospheric conditions (and some luck). What that extra bit of speed gives you is a bit of a buffer - so that the bullet hopefully stays well *above* the speed of sound while crossing the 1000yd mark. The general idea is that as the bullet slows down towards the speed of sound, there is a 'trans-sonic' region where some turbulence begins to build. If you can keep the bullet above that, then it should (in theory) be somewhat more accurate as the bullet isn't getting buffeted around by the turbulence. Generally that trans-sonic region is considered to start around 1300fps or so. If you run the numbers for say, a Berger 155.5BT (Litz) @ 3000fps thru JBM, using standard atmo conditions... you'll see it should cross the 1k mark at just a tick over 1300fps, even though the speed of sound for those same conditions is approx 1116fps. Plus, shorter time of flight means less time in the wind = less wind drift.
 
milanuk said:
Plus, shorter time of flight means less time in the wind = less wind drift.
Click to expand...

Come on Monte, you know better than that. And in a post where you cite Litz no less. Time lag, time lag, time lag (nag, nag, nag)

Your bud,

Greg
 
Greg,

I meant all else being equal i.e. same bullet, same bc, higher velocity, less TOF, less drift.

Work with me here ;)


Monte
 
OK Monte, a poor excuse is better than none. I'm work'n with ya.

Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top