.308 FTR Rifle build

[jeffo1960]

I am going to get the above built,30" barrel 1/10 twist,i am looking for some advice as i am thinking of having it built for the
Berger 185 grain juggernaut,for 1000 yards,would appreciate any advice,thanks in advance.

​

 

[Meyersmp]

Seems you're off to a good start. Just stick with known top components. Most important decision is gunsmith. I've used Juggernauts for last year and am happy with them, but now that 200.20x are available I'll probably switch. Good luck

 

[Dgd6mm]

Do you have any parts purchased yet? Or are you completely starting from scratch?

 

[6bra1k]

Do you have any parts purchased yet? Or are you completely starting from scratch?

based on this question, consider a savage 308 ftr.
shoot it for a year to ensure this is what you want.
have one built at that point and sell off the savage
a lot of gun for the money

 

[D-4297]

Excellent choice on barrel length and chambering for the 185 Jugg . Would recommend having your Smith use a 2013 F-TR reamer , or similar dimensions , so you could go to a 200.20x Berger , also . It was the prevalent bullet used in TR at the SWN 600 by competitors this year . I shot the 185 Jugg Target , and in hind-sight , might have been better off with the 200.20x . Might also add that if you're going to do a new build , my personal choice on a barrel is a 5r , but that's a personal thing . Bartlein , Brux , Kreiger .

 

[Ned Ludd]

I'm in the same camp as D4297. Unless you know with certainty you will not try any other bullet besides the 185 Juggernaut, leaving yourself the option to try the 200.20X bullet at some point is just good long term planning. With the 0.170" freebore cut by the US F-TR (2013) reamer, you would have the option to load 185 Juggernauts, 185 Hybrids (a better choice in 185 gr bullets, IMO), or the 200.20X bullet.

Along the same line, if you know with certainty you will never use anything but the 185 Juggernaut, an 11-twist barrel would be sufficient. In fact, you can run the 185 Hybrid or the 200.20X bullet out of an 11-twist barrel, although you'd be giving up a very small amount of the intrinsic BC of the 200.20X bullet as opposed to the 10-twist barrel. I ran the 200s out 11-twist barrels for several years before switching to 10-twist and they shot just fine. I'm a believer in not using a faster twist rate than necessary. Doing so can increase the amount of torque produced and makes gun handling just a tiny bit more critical. However, these are very small considerations in the grand scheme of things. A 10-twist barrel will work with any of those bullets. So I wouldn't be thinking 11-twist unless you're absolutely certain you won't ever be shooting the 200s.

Regardless of the twist rate, a 30" barrel is good length for the types of bullets and powders typically used in F-TR rifles. Adding an inch or two of barrel length isn't really going to change much in the bigger picture. The other barrel consideration is contour, but that can really only be addressed in light of the other components used in the build, and is only critical if the rifle has a weight limit such as for F-TR competition. Various contours are used in F-TR rifles from Heavy Palma at the lighter end of the spectrum, to MTU or Heavy Varmint at the heavy end. Any of them can work well, just factor in contour and weight if you need to.

 

[Ned Ludd]

That's a very nice setup. You should be the limiting factor, not the rifle, which is exactly where you want to be. I think you have the potential to do very well with that setup. Best of luck with it!

Couple suggestions/things to think about:

1) Your setup would be well-optimized for the 200.20X bullet. It's generally a much better choice than the Juggernaut, although many F-TR shooters have done well with Jugs and continue to use them. Just don't rule out the 200s based on perceived differences in recoil, which isn't bad at all. Alternatively, you might give the 185 Hybrids a whirl if you're set on that bullet weight. Also a good choice.

2) I'm assuming from your primer choice that you're running standard .308 Win brass (large rifle primers). Edited to add: I see you confirmed that with the Alpha brass listing. Over the long haul, you will be better off switching to small rifle primer brass. I understand that making the change entails not only buying new brass, but potentially having to obtain sufficient quantities of SRPs to use. Nonetheless, I would consider making the transition whenever it is feasible for you. You won't regret making the switch. I waited a very long time before switching to SRP brass. Once I finally did, I kept wondering why I had waited so long. LOL.

 

[willbas]

Thought I'd post my new (hasn't been to the range yet) .308 F-TR build see what folks think

MPA Hybrid Chassis - Blue Smoke w/ weight tuning kit
Bartlein Heavy Palma 30" 1:10 - 0.175" freebore
Terminus Zeus action w/ quick switch option
Trigger Tech Diamond
Nightforce Competition 15-55X52mm
Tier One Bipod
Current weight - 17lbs 11.6oz
Planned Load Components:
Berger 185 Juggernauts
Alpha LRP brass
Federal GM210M primers
Varget powder

I like your set up, I just need a few more cleans to make HM at mid range

 

[Dub]

F TR is a great category to shoot in. I love the challenge of it

 

[Medic505]

Hi Guys,
I've been searching the site and haven't found an answer to this question.
Is an adjustable rear bag rider mounted to the rifle allowed in F-TR?
Example would be: https://www.adjustablebagrider.com/

Would be just like an adjustable cheek piece, I would think anyway. I know the rear rest can't be adjustable, but this isn't the rest.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Thanks Medic505, I was unclear with this sub-section of the F-TR rifle rules,
"No portion of the rifle’s butt or forend shall rest directly on the ground or any hard surface. A rear rabbit eared bag, small sandbag or a gloved hand may be used to support the rifle’s butt. Any rear support employed shall not be attached, clamped or held to the rifle in any manner. The rear support may not be fixed to or protrude into the firing point. Mechanically adjustable rear support is not allowed."

Wasn't sure if this applied to the rest/bag, or to a part of the rifle. Obviously the adjustable rider weight would become part of the rifle max weight since it is attached, and moves with the rifle during recoil.
And perhaps that is where the distinction is, a mechanical adjustable rest would be fixed, it would not move under recoil. The adjustable bag rider would move under recoil and possibly require repositioning following the shot.

The bag rider is attached to, and therefore part of, the rifle. I can't imagine it would be a problem, as most (if not all) F-Class shooters that have a chassis-type stock are using one. If you're still concerned about it, just call and/or send a picture of the bag rider setup to the NRA Competition Shooting Programs Highpower Division (https://competitions.nra.org/competition-resources/directory-contact-information/). Sometimes the response can be a little slow, but they'll answer the question definitively.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Would be just like an adjustable cheek piece, I would think anyway. I know the rear rest can't be adjustable, but this isn't the rest.

I'm going to take the contrarian view and say that device is illegal as it goes against the intent of the rule. The whole thing about F-class set up is no automatic return to battery, everything is supposed to be done by hand, not by device. It specifically states that you can't have a mechanically adjustable rear support. Whether it is from a rear rest or the ground is not, in my estimation, a difference; it's mechanically adjustable with a thumbscrew so it's against the rule.

@Ned Ludd suggests you send a picture to the NRA and try to get a ruling. That is a good idea, and if you do get a reply that it is OK, make sure you have that with you in your shooting bag.

 

[Medic505]

I'm going to take the contrarian view and say that device is illegal as it goes against the intent of the rule. The whole thing about F-class set up is no automatic return to battery, everything is supposed to be done by hand, not by device. It specifically states that you can't have a mechanically adjustable rear support. Whether it is from a rear rest or the ground is not, in my estimation, a difference; it's mechanically adjustable with a thumbscrew so it's against the rule.

@Ned Ludd suggests you send a picture to the NRA and try to get a ruling. That is a good idea, and if you do get a reply that it is OK, make sure you have that with you in your shooting bag.

I dunno. I'd like hear what the NRA has to say.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I dunno. I'd like hear what the NRA has to say.

I agree.

 

[Ned Ludd]

I'm going to take the contrarian view and say that device is illegal as it goes against the intent of the rule. The whole thing about F-class set up is no automatic return to battery, everything is supposed to be done by hand, not by device. It specifically states that you can't have a mechanically adjustable rear support. Whether it is from a rear rest or the ground is not, in my estimation, a difference; it's mechanically adjustable with a thumbscrew so it's against the rule.

@Ned Ludd suggests you send a picture to the NRA and try to get a ruling. That is a good idea, and if you do get a reply that it is OK, make sure you have that with you in your shooting bag.

Edited to add: unless you're masochistic or really bored, just skip forward to the last paragraph.

Rear "support" by definition is not part of the rifle, it's support for the rifle. It's what sits between the toe of the stock and the ground. I can't believe a metal bar (i.e. bag rider) attached to a rifle chassis, adjustable or not, would be illegal. It's not at all the same as a monopod or other similar devices, which directly contact the ground with no intervening rear bag and are specifically designed to be continually adjusted while shooting. It's just a metal bar meant to ride in between the ears of the bag in lieu of the butt stock "toe" found on traditional stocks. Adjustability of the stock so that it can be can be optimized for different people's body sizes/shapes is a very different animal than an "adjustable rear support".

Yeah, it's adjustable. So what? It's not like most people would ever be adjusting it while actually taking a shot. How is that any different functionally from the mariner wheel-type adjustment found on commonly-used ski-type bipods? I'm not even sure the thumbwheel of the bag rider in question could be easily adjusted while it was sitting in an eared rear bag. A stock cheekpiece is also often adjustable, as are some of the other monstrosities people have screwed/glued into the rear of the buttstock that are designed to mitigate recoil. Some of those devices even contain hydraulic shock absorbers or liquid mercury metal. Which do you think would have better fitted the notion Mr. Farquharson had in mind for F-Class, an adjustable metal bar meant solely to ride the rear bag in lieu of a traditional buttstock toe, or a 3-way adjustable, hydraulic shock-absorbing, Rube Goldberg-looking, NASA spaceshuttle, 1.21 gigawatt Flux Capacitor buttplate? If someone is really in need of something to complain about, what about the forward adjustable bump stops on F-Open front rests? Those devices are used by pretty much every F-Open shooter on the planet and they most definitely help with return to battery. What about ski-type bipods that are used by the vast majority F-TR shooters these days, which are specifically designed so the rifle tracks more like it's in an F-Open front rest? Pretty sure Mr. Farquharson didn't have those in mind either when he created F-Class. Maybe we should start a new discussion about carpet, LOL. I'd personally put an adjustable bag rider pretty far down the list of "rule" concerns.

Nonetheless, the best news is that neither Denys' nor my opinion on the topic carries any official weight when it comes to legality in F-TR. I'm sure you're all breathing a sigh of relief at this point . Simply contact the NRA Competition folks as I suggested above, send them a picture and description, and get get an official ruling on the subject. If it is ruled "legal", make a copy of the NRA affirmation as Denys suggested and keep it in your range box at future matches in the event anyone challenges you on it in the future.

 

[Bc'z]

Here's a picture or 2 of a McMillan I painted for a fella, I believe this was a prototype. I go back through some Emails and see if I still have his contact information.
This was installed on a McMillan Fclass stock, but you can clearly see the pic rail on the forend for mounting a bipod.

 

[Ned Ludd]

An adjustable toe? The horror. The terms "fiend" and "arch-villain" just popped into my head. LOL

Another beauty, as we've come to expect!

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I would not have thought "arch-villain." The moniker that popped into my head was "super-villain."

I do agree with "fiend," that fits well also.

 

[Bc'z]

Ok i just looked in my Email archives.
It's the same outfit and product.
Looking at thier gallery they've changed the design to be a exterior application versus cutting, milling and reinforcing a composite stock.
Of course none of this means that it's legal for FTR, a call to the NRA is definitely in order.
Looking through all thier photos I noticed it mainly being used on chassis rifles and ELR.

 

[Bc'z]

@Ned Ludd looking back at you previous post you were questioning weather or not it would be easily adjustable sitting in a eared rear bag.
Looking at location of thumb wheel should put it forward of ears when sighting. I believe the "Screw" is a fine thread making it easier for fine adjustments on target.
I'm not affiliated with this company nor am I pushing thier products.
Just contributing to the discussion.

"Fiendish Arch-Vilan"
I might have to put this in my signature. Lol