I'm sitting here looking at a group, gentlemen, which I fired yesterday with my new Encore. The Encore, though purchased as a "pistol", is currently set up with the rifle stock and a 24" .30-06 barrel. The current scope is a Leupold 2-7x (Vari-X II), on a "Weaver-type" TC base with two Weaver rings. Everything is stock and standard - trigger hasn't been tuned (it's quite crisp and about 3.5 lbs, perhaps a miracle for a modern factory trigger ); barrel has not been "prepared" in any way, other than being cleaned with Hoppe's #9 and a few patches to get the storage grease out of it before firing for the first time. I've had the rifle out once before, but it was on July 1st when we were primarily celebrating the San Juan Hill Centennial, shooting the Krag and Winchester '95 and so on, and I didn't have much time to spare with the Encore, so only fired about a dozen rounds (of an old 150gr handload, done for another rifle and not a very good load, but it was all that was handy at the time) and had not noticed anything spectacular for accuracy. Ah, but then yesterday (Thursday, 9 July 1998), I had several hours to devote to leisurely shooting and load-testing with the new TC toy... er, tool. And had brought quite an assortment of .30-06 handloads to try out.

I shouldn't hold you in suspense, gentlemen, about this group, but... :-)

The scope was just "sorta" bore-sighted, but I managed to get the first shot on the paper at 50yds - a mild handload using 180gr SPs (Winchester) and H4895 - and then got the scope adjusted with no problems. But the 180s were disappointing. Some vertical stringing, which might very well have been me, or the way I was resting the rifle over the sandbags. I tried different ways of resting the rifle, and finally arrived at a technique which has in the past worked well for me with Contenders - snugging the bag up against the triggerguard, beneath the back of the fore-end and front of the receiver. This seemed to minimize the vertical dispersion to a degree, but the 180s still weren't being too impressive. Also, I was having a bit of trouble getting comfortable with the buttstock - dimensions seemed a bit wrong for me for bench-resting, though I like the stock just fine for offhand shooting. And then there was the scope... which didn't seem to have quite enough eye relief or something, or perhaps I was crawling the stock a bit trying to adjust my head for comfort at the bench, but anyway on a couple of occasions when I held the rifle somewhat loosely, the rear of the scope bonked against my shooting glasses and kinda spooked me. But... in the long view, these are minor things which I'll learn to work around, or find a "fix" for.

Anyway, this group.... Ah, well, I started trying various different loads, including one I had high hopes for, which utilized Sierra 165gr HPBT MatchKings. It did okay, but still nothing truly spectacular. I was shooting mostly at 50yds, a range I prefer for preliminary load testing when I'm shooting rifles equipped with relatively low-powered scopes. It's tricky, at least for me, to take a real *fine* bead on a 100yd target at 7x with relatively thick "hunting" crosshairs. Of course, my choice of target styles may have something to do with it, and I'm working to develop a better target design. Anyway... the 165s weren't so hot, neither had the 180s been, and I was just about to try some 150s, when I remembered the old 220s - about 30rds I'd loaded up for my Browning '95 lever action, which *loves* the heavy bullets and shoots them much much better than anything lighter. These 30rds, btw, used "recycled" components - from some .30-40 Krag loads I'd done, and then decided were too stout for my old '98 Krag, so the Quinetics puller got used on 'em, and I reused the bullets and the H4895 powder (though not the same charge!) in these .30-06s. 40gr of H4895 with the 220gr bullet, and the bullet seated to the cannelure but not crimped. Okay, well, give 'em a try. I fired one shot - onto a target I'd just recently used to fire a Remington factory load (which had bonked me *bad* with the scope, so I'd opted not to fire a 2nd one!). Through the spotting scope, I saw two holes - one right in the bullseye, the other well-centered but about six inches high. Gee, which one was from the 220? I went downrange and put masking tape over both holes, came back to the bench and tried again. Fired one shot... then decided, not sure why, to go ahead and shoot a group. So, altogether for that string sent five shots down-range. Six if you count that first one that I'd taped over. Then looked through the spotting scope and... gee, the hits are on the bullseye, but... there's not enough holes there. Walked downrange.... okay, yeah, there's enough ragged edges there I can make out the individual bullet holes, sorta. One kinda elongated hole, and one naughty fellow not quite touching the others. The total span of the six shots, center to center, including that "flyer", measured 0.476" when calipered later. The best five shots (including the taped-over one), the "one big" hole, measured 0.272" center to center. YOW!!!

I shot a couple more groups with the "retread" 220s. Five shots into 0.35" and then five more - four into 0.31" and one "naughty boy" bringing it out to 0.45". Tried some 100yd groups after that but they opened up to a bit over an inch, I think because I couldn't get a real precise (repeated) "bead" on the exact same spot each time. Plus, I was getting tired. 220gr .30-06s kick just a wee bit, fellows - especially off the bench!

I can't readily explain why the 220s shot so well... but I have a suspicion. I think this Encore barrel must have a good long throat on it, maybe some freebore, I don't know. But methinks it likes its bullets seated *out* farther than most of my loads had them seated. The 220s, with their very long bearing surface, probably had their noses up close to "kissing" the lands, even when seated to the cannelure. The other bullets I tried were seated too deep, I think, for optimal accuracy. Next time, I'll have determined just how far "out" to seat these other bullets (using various methods) and then we'll see how the lighter bullets do. I also may put a higher-powered scope on the rifle... if I can find one with sufficient eye relief not to bonk me! :-)

Bottom line, gentlemen, I am VERY IMPRESSED with this Encore! In my experience, these 50yd groups are extraordinarily small for a hunting-weight rifle with a hunting-type scope - and with 220gr "bear loads", at that! Heck, I guess even the 100yd groups (for most loads, averaging between 1.10" and 1.5") are not too bad, but I've long-since been spoiled by my old Remington 700 bull-barrelled .308 and so view such groups as "huge". Anyway, I plan to be out at the range quite frequently with this wonderful toy... er, tool, from now on, refining loads and experimenting. I guess I'm hooked, gentlemen. I only wonder - have I lucked onto some "fluke" barrel which just happens to be super-accurate, or are they ALL this good?

Cheers,

Ben