Ruger Gunsite Carbine

[rbt50]

seen one at cabela's on Saturday.

[NVScouter]

With my thinner air I usually beat max reload data numbers by a good measure and lose less fps. You are spot on that calculated numbers are a great start but BC is different over different ranges as is fps loss. Its a true curve not a straight line like most BC Calculators lead people to believe. Shooting and hitting are the only real way to prove that. I've had better results with Palma style bullets in my 308s then 168s out to 1K and bought a box of Berger 155s to try this year in the carbine. I've never had luck with 147s except in machine guns.

I'm lucky I can shoot 100/150/200y from my patio and 1K from patio to hillside.

NV Scouter: My standard load is 147 gr M80 ball Pulled/recycled bullets against 45.0 gr of IMR 4895. The 2600 fps quoted has been verified by the trajectory of the bullet. As you know there are several ways to deduce velocity.. Obviously the Chronograph is one, however it can be done with a ballistic calculator as well, by working backwards from a known trajectory with a known bullet. The velocity will produce a specific trajectory for a known Bullet's BC.

I got 2780 fps off my Chrony with this load and knew this was a bogus number. This specific load per Lyman 49 should generate 2800 fps in a 24" bbl. I was figuring 25 fps loss per inch, based on input from some well informed people at Ruger. These guns seem to lose less velocity than other guns do, and I personally attribute this to the Hammer forged barrel which started out smooth and is now like looking thru a twisted glass tube.

I estimated 2600 fps and plugged that number into the ballistic calculator which gave me the elevation offsets for every 50 yards out to 600 yds. using a 200 yard Mechanical Zero. Each of the offsets were verified by shooting off a rest at 200, 300 385 and 500 meters and the calculator predicted the offsets perfectly for each distance.

Your altitude maybe what is affecting your readings, but irrespective of that we are very close to the same conclusion. My lighter bullets may be the difference.

We are all in agreement that the bullets will go that far,,, It is simply up to the shooter to make it hit something when it gets there.

There are many forces working against you , but it is possible to counter act them. First you must know that they exist. That's what you go to school for.

One of my fantasies is to go back in time to the Alamo. With my rifle and 20 rounds of ammo I could have ended that massacre before it ever started. One shot for Santa Anna, one for his Generals, That's it! Hell they were only 400 yards away A Sharps Rifle with Iron Sights could have ended it.

Just bet Texas would be a Sovereign Country now.

Randy

[NVScouter]

Prior to me purchasing my first RGS, I read as many reviews as possible. There were several that listed velocity data of factory loads with 24" barrels vs the RGS shorter tube. My recollection was that the most velocity loss was 180fps, and most was in the 125-150fps range.

While the Scout doesn't have a heavy barrel, it isn't skinny either. The fact that its short lends it to being stiffer to a similarly contoured barrel of longer length.

I'm certainly happy that I didn't KNOW that I couldn't shoot 200gr cast from my 30-06 to 1000 yards or I would never have tried it....

Shorter barrels do add stiffness but at the loss of burn time and powder selection. As your numbers show are fairly close to my predictions.

Nobody said it cant be done, just that it would be harder considering the configuration.

[Lefty SRH]

NVScouter, what carbine do you own?

[NVScouter]

I used the Ruger American Compact 18" .308 VS the full size version 24" barrel for comparison.

[Whit Spurzon]

In my RGS a 165 gr Hornady averages 2573 fps over a Max (Hodgdon) load of IMR 3031. It also happens to be my most accurate load.

We shoot rifles (Iron Sights) in old calibers regularly out to 1,050 yards. It is MUCH easier to do with my GSR than my Marlin 1893 (made in 1899) or Marlin 336 Cowboy in 38-55, which is jogging along at half the speed of the 308. More fun and challenging with the Marlins. If score was all that mattered, I'd pick the GSR. I guess I don't understand why the GSR isn't considered a long range gun.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Nice Shot Whit! Some people have trouble with the concept of "Rifleman." Obviously you don't!

On another note:

This showed up at my Local Gunshop Today.

Yes it is a RGS with a normal wood stock. It was,,, You guessed it,,, From Lipsey's.

Damn good looking gun in person. The wood in the stock was nothing special and looked a lot like other Ruger Rifles I have seen, but the overall look of the gun was outstanding.

Randy

[Lefty SRH]

Nice Shot Whit! Some people have trouble with the concept of "Rifleman." Obviously you don't!

On another note:

This showed up at my Local Gunshop Today.

Yes it is a RGS with a normal wood stock. It was,,, You guessed it,,, From Lipsey's.

Damn good looking gun in person. The wood in the stock was nothing special and looked a lot like other Ruger Rifles I have seen, but the overall look of the gun was outstanding.

Randy

Wow thats different!

[Artful]

Damn good looking gun in person. The wood in the stock was nothing special and looked a lot like other Ruger Rifles I have seen, but the overall look of the gun was outstanding.

Randy

$$$?

You can't put that up with out the rest of the story - did it go home with ya?

[W.R.Buchanan]

Art: no it didn't, I already have one. I just posted it because it was something different.

I took the pic with my Smart Phone and emailed it to my computer, which is really what the big story here is.

Randy

[Love Life]

I like the looks of the laminate stock better. This thread is dangerous. The more I click on it, the more I get the itch to own one. I handled one in Sportsman's Warehouse and it handled really well. The bolt was a bit rough though, but I'm sure that would work out over time.

[MGySgt]

I like the looks of the laminate stock, but if I hunt with this rifle I want an all weather stock that is a LOT lighter to be carrying around.

[BruceB]

The bolt was a bit rough though, but I'm sure that would work out over time.

My left-handed GSR is now several years old, but little-used due to medical difficulties. However, it's going to the range in a day or two, along with my M1 Carbine and Garand (thirty-caliber day!).

The action on this GSR is so smooth that just tipping the rifle will allow the bolt to slide back and forth, like a Krag or Mannlicher-Schoenauer. It was like that on arrival as a new rifle, and the trigger is a very nice and crisp 2.5 pounds straight from the box. I was impressed.... and pleased.

It's never been out of the stock, and that is very unusual for one of my rifles.

I like the grey laminate too, and the weight seems just about right (an old "infanteer's" opinion there).

I think it's a nice concept, and well-executed in my example at least.

[Love Life]

The rifle is definitely on my short list. Hopefully when I go gunshow shopping this year I'll have the opportunity to handle a few more of them and pick the best feeling one.

[HawkCreek]

The weight of the GSR is not in the stock. The only readily available stocks for these dont drop any appreciable weight. One guy did manage to cut weight through a lighter stock but as I understand it that was a custom proposition and the stock cost him over 10 bills.

[Lefty SRH]

I like the looks of the laminate stock, but if I hunt with this rifle I want an all weather stock that is a LOT lighter to be carrying around.

Ive hog hunted with mine a few times and didnt find the weight to be an issue. The short barrel was great in the tight woods i hunt.
No hogs though

[MGySgt]

A common wood stock is lighter than a laminate sock. I have a Fajen for my Mod 70 that added appreciable weigh to the overall weight of the rifle.

When you get to be an old man like me even cutting 1/2 pound is a help.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I am a big proponent of lightweight guns especially .223's. One thing to consider is that ALL Battle Rifles were designed to be humped around by 19 year olds! Few of us here are 19 or even 59!

AT 64 I feel the effects of carrying a heavy gun around quickly. My lightest Carbine is a Kel-Tec SU16 CA weighing in at 6 lbs 1 oz ready to go with two loaded 10 round mags in the buttstock, a Bushnell TRS25 and a Streamlight on the fore end. It also has a 1.5" wide sling on it to spread the weight out even further.

My AR is a Bushmaster Carbon 15 (Carbon Fiber upper and lower receiver) it also has a TRS25 as well as Magpul Furniture and a Blueforce Tactical adjustable sling. It weighs 6 lbs 7 oz. with no mag in place.

My Mini 14 with the TRS 25 weighs more than my Scout rifle at 8 lbs 9 oz. The advantage of the Mini 14 over the other two plastic guns is the durability and reliability. Also if you run out of ammo you have a pretty decent club. It has an 1 1/2" sling as well. (I make these for my guns out of 5.11 BDU Belts.)

The Scout is right in there weight wise with the Mini14 when the scope is mounted. When the Bushnell TRS 25 is mounted it is just over 8 lbs. All of these guns with the Red Dots mounted are good to 300+ yards and the Scout with the Scope mounted is good to 800 yards although the furthest I have gotten to shoot it has been 600. It follows the Computer generated trajectory like it was on a string.

I have approaching 1000 rounds thru mine and am still reloading the same 100 Federal American Eagle cases that I bought when I got the gun. 45gr of IMR4895 against a 147 gr FMJBT M80 Ball pulled bullets I paid .11 cents each for. Consistent 7/8" groups! Which is damn decent performance from an $800 gun.

Love Life: These guns are pure winners! This thread has been running for over 3 1/2 years and has 33+ pages and over 650 posts. You don't get that much of a response if the product is faulty. Most of the guys here that own one wouldn't let it go easily.

My gun is one of the best store bought "Generic Guns" I have ever owned, and rates easily in the top 5 guns I currently own. If I had to leave town it would definitely be going with me along with my Glocks and my Mauser .22 and a pellet gun that I am quite fond of. Maybe throw in my A5 as well.

This is one of those times when I have to just say "don't think about it, just do it!" You won't regret it.

If you do regret it,,, they sell quickly.

Randy

[UBER7MM]

I am a big proponent of lightweight guns especially .223's. One thing to consider is that ALL Battle Rifles were designed to be humped around by 19 year olds! Few of us here are 19 or even 59!.....Randy

Funny how that works.....

[Lefty SRH]

Update, me and two friends made it out to the private land that allows us to shoot 850yds. We planned on setting up three stands, 300 (6" plate), 600 (8" plate), and 850 (12"x20" mini me plate). Due to a roll in terrain and taller grass than anticipated we were only able to set at 300 and 600. We had to use the larger stand for 850 at 600 inorder to get the target over the grass. The plan was later to move the larger stand to 850 if time permitted. We didnt get to shoot 850, we ran out of time. My buds had a hard time connecting at 600 which burned a lot of valuable time.
They egged me on to go first so i loaded ten rounds in my GSR mag. Ran my numbers into a ballistic app and dialed up for 300. I connected 3 out of 3 at 300yds on the 6" plate.
I then dialed for 600yds (8" plate) and let one go, HIT! Let the second one go and it was a HIT! The third i unfortunately missed. I was quite please. I then let my two buds shoot. It was nice to do a little coaching and teaching and of coarse they appreciated it aswell.
they had a hard time getting hits at 600 so we switched to the mini me plate for 600.
My turn again, i didnt notice or realize the slight breeze from the right. I missed the first shot. But connected on the next three. It was cool to use a little hold over to correct for wind (about 1 MOA) and see the impact go center mass on the plate.
We had a lot of fun and cant wait to get out there again. Im also ready to be done building my long barrel Savage and get it out there.