Time for a new rifle.

[Greyfox]

I agree that the Savage LRH is a hard rifle to beat when it comes to raw accuracy and features in a factory rifle. Having won mine in 6.5x284 at an Egg Shoot over 5 years ago it was totally surprised by its consistent accuracy. With a muzzle brake, adjustable comb, decent trigger, and nicely weighted barrel, the LRH is pretty much ready right out of the box for long range work. The only thing I did was to relieve the pressure point at the forearm tip with a bit if sandpaper. This shrank my groups from .5 to .25MOA. The on/off muzzle brake has been frozen in the on position since I first fired it. I suppose a little brake cleaner would take care of it but I haven't bothered. I have since acquired a couple of more Savages, a Predator in 22-250 for coyotes, and a LRP in 260 Rem for 300 yard eggs shoots(and it wins). All of these rifles shoot .25MOA or less, and have proven to be totally reliable. They are nowhere near as nice as my customs, but they will get the job done, take a beating, and the price is right.
This is pretty typical of what my 6.5x284 has delivered since initial load work. It still delivers this accuracy after 5+ years and hundreds of rounds.

 

[Mike 338]

Steyrs are AWESOME rifles. When I worked at the gun store, we would sell them by the truckload, and everyone that came back in raved about them. Part of my job on Saturday mornings before work was to sight-in customer's guns for them, and I've shot a lot of them. I always wanted to get one, but they were a bit out of my price-range back then...Now they carry an even heftier pricetag, like everything else these days. I wish I could still find a brand new 26" 7mmRM stainless Pro Hunter for $499 (what we used to sell them for back then)...I'd jump all over it.

You can get a Pro Hunter straight from Steyr USA for $699 (stainless $100 more). Buds has some for a little less. Not in 7mm though. Not say'in a person would like theirs as much as I'm getting to like mine but it seems like a fair price on a hunting rig you can man handle without remorse, assuming it does all you ask of it.

 

[Kamptown]

So I really appreciate all the positive feedback on the rifles. There are a couple rifles I have been looking at that don't offer the 7mm, only 300. I am hesitant about even bringing it up as I have read all 15 or 16 pages of the great debate. I was 14 when I inherited my first deer rifle, old ruger m77 in .243. I really liked shooting it and it was pretty accurate. Fast forward to 1996 and my first elk hunt in Idaho. I didn't know much about ballistics to say the least. Ended up carrying other people's rifles on that hunt because I was certain the .243 would not be capable to put down an elk. I started looking at published ballistics and decided on the 7mm, I actually wanted an STW, but finances wouldn't quite facilitate that purchase. Finally picked up my ruger at a drug store in Idaho wholesaling their firearms as they were going to stop selling. Wouldn't you know it they had a ruger in 7mm for $379. Sorry for the long winded reply, but I purchased what I could afford back then and not exactly what I wanted. I wanted stainless even back then. So I guess between the 7 and the 300, ballistics aside as they are too close and in fact shine each in their own right, would you switch caliber to get the rifle that you wanted?

 

[Kamptown]

So I hope I haven't pushed this into rifles and ballistics. It was a toss up. I'm just new.

 

[jpd676]

The 7mm and 300wm are both great calibers; I have both and having both I much prefer the 300wm. If you are stuck on the caliber, you'll have to build or buy one that is close enough. If the rifle is more important, I'd get the 300wm.

 

[MudRunner2005]

So I really appreciate all the positive feedback on the rifles. There are a couple rifles I have been looking at that don't offer the 7mm, only 300. I am hesitant about even bringing it up as I have read all 15 or 16 pages of the great debate. I was 14 when I inherited my first deer rifle, old ruger m77 in .243. I really liked shooting it and it was pretty accurate. Fast forward to 1996 and my first elk hunt in Idaho. I didn't know much about ballistics to say the least. Ended up carrying other people's rifles on that hunt because I was certain the .243 would not be capable to put down an elk. I started looking at published ballistics and decided on the 7mm, I actually wanted an STW, but finances wouldn't quite facilitate that purchase. Finally picked up my ruger at a drug store in Idaho wholesaling their firearms as they were going to stop selling. Wouldn't you know it they had a ruger in 7mm for $379. Sorry for the long winded reply, but I purchased what I could afford back then and not exactly what I wanted. I wanted stainless even back then. So I guess between the 7 and the 300, ballistics aside as they are too close and in fact shine each in their own right, would you switch caliber to get the rifle that you wanted?

No... But I have bought rifles in calibers I had no interest in for the sole-purpose to build the rifle I wanted in the caliber I wanted.

Also, I've always preferred stainless to blued, as well. So I understand the curse of paying more for the same thing, just to get what you want, and not always being able to find what you want.

If you can't find what you want, build what you want. It's what I've been doing for years. I've still bought some factory rifles with high-hopes, and so far, no issues, but for the most part I buy them strictly for custom-build donors.

 

[WildRose]

So I really appreciate all the positive feedback on the rifles. There are a couple rifles I have been looking at that don't offer the 7mm, only 300. I am hesitant about even bringing it up as I have read all 15 or 16 pages of the great debate. I was 14 when I inherited my first deer rifle, old ruger m77 in .243. I really liked shooting it and it was pretty accurate. Fast forward to 1996 and my first elk hunt in Idaho. I didn't know much about ballistics to say the least. Ended up carrying other people's rifles on that hunt because I was certain the .243 would not be capable to put down an elk. I started looking at published ballistics and decided on the 7mm, I actually wanted an STW, but finances wouldn't quite facilitate that purchase. Finally picked up my ruger at a drug store in Idaho wholesaling their firearms as they were going to stop selling. Wouldn't you know it they had a ruger in 7mm for $379. Sorry for the long winded reply, but I purchased what I could afford back then and not exactly what I wanted. I wanted stainless even back then. So I guess between the 7 and the 300, ballistics aside as they are too close and in fact shine each in their own right, would you switch caliber to get the rifle that you wanted?

In the case we have here with your needs yes I'd switch to the .300wm and not look back.

This is coming from a guy who spent his first twenty plus years shooting a 7mm 700bdl Remington and most of the last twenty plus shooting primarily the 7mm STW which is and always will be my true love.

As I often say here, "The .300wm is never the wrong answer" because it is just so ridiculously versatile.

You can load 150-165gr bullets for a 300-400yds laser to dust coyotes and vermin or 200gr and heavier bullets for the toughest game North American can offer at any range you and the rifle are comfortable shooting at.

 

[Mike 338]

The 7 has a little less recoil and yes, the 300 can sometimes be downright punchy to shoot but as a hunting rig in your neck of the woods, the 300 is a solid fit. Don't get rid of the 243. It's way funner to shoot.