I must add another bitch here about gun magazines. This is about the guy who writes an articel, whether good, bad, or indifferent, then uses his word processor to rearrange the paragraphs, alters the title somewhat, then sells it to three or four of the rags over the next six months! This way, you get treated to the same verbiage several times, expecting some new info, and finding the same crap!

Another reason for NOT buying a gun magazine any more!

I also note there's no reason for such things as Shotgun News or Gun List any more, because everything in them and MORE is listed on the web somewhere!

As a splurge to the grocery budget last week, I picked up the May 2004 copy of Gunworld. The cover story advertised was Remington's Classic in 8x57. As a mauser nut, I couldn't resist.

There was nothing wrong with the magazine itself, but I must admit that I was impressed with neither the article on the rifle nor the rifle itself. Its not often I walk away from a magazine article with the impression that I know more about it than the author does. What I particularly liked were the accuracy claims, especially with the handloads. The author shot a bunch of milsurp ammo and then a bunch of factory stuff and then some handloads where the loads had to be calculated (Gee, why not go look it up somewhere instead?). None of these were particularly accurate. I'll give the author some leeway here because I know an unadjusted Rem. factory trigger is pretty tough. But, not as horrible as the trigger on my old M48 and I could put 2 Sierra 150's through the same hole, before I replaced the trigger! Sheesh!

Perhaps I am being too demanding here, but looking at the chart explaining the load and group size, I couldn't help but see a lot 2"-3" groups with a scoped rifle shooting handloads. I am unimpressed.

Sorry if I went a little long here. Is anyone else familiar with this article or am I alone here? What do you all think?

Tex

I'm glad you brought this up. I quit buying magazines years ago as I got tired of spending big money for garbage. How many times I bought one for an article about a particular rifle I was interested in that was being tested only to hear "I didn't have the right scope mounts"or "The wind was blowing 70 miles per at the range and I couldn't keep them on the paper but here is what I did", or "I only had one brand of ammo and it didn't like it".

Meantime they have my money, never again. I can walk right by all of them.

You are probably right, you do know more than them.

David

I have a classic in 8x57 but I haven't had a chance to do much with it. I haven't even adjusted the trigger but on the last two rifles I've bought from Remington, they seem to be doing a bit better in the trigger dept or maybe I just got lucky. I cobbled up some ammo just to test it for function and mine seems quite a bit more accurate than 3-4".
I haven't read the article and probably won't but if the guy posted some groups of 3-4", I'm proud of him. It gets kinda tiresome reading about how some writer got a say Ethiopian AK47, wiped a little of the cosmoline off it, used wolf brand ammo and shot sub MOA groups with open sights. Kinda like some of the post you read in here.

Its been my observation that the amount of energy and enthusiasm that a gunwriter puts into a given article can be directly proportional to his biased or unbiased veiwpoint of the subject. The 8X57 isnt real popular here and isnt going to get rave reviews from the majority of todays gunwriters. Ive seen articles on a number of cartridges that leave impressions falling considerably short of their true potential simply because of the lack of real knowledge on a given cartridge from the "experts".

Some more recent examples are articles on the 300 savage and another on the 35 Whelen where the "expert" was clearly just throwing an article together to fill a spot in the rag and didnt know jack about their real potential. Such articles written by those who have actually used those cartridges would much more informative.

I no longer purchase gun magazines. One of the reasons I stopped was the nonsense that was written in gun evaluations. Sometimes I think the writer never even fired the rifle. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

I still read them, While the wife is grocery shopping ahah. I susbscribe to Small caliber news and Varmit Hunter. American Rifleman comes here for free but a seldom even open it.

A $55 Czech M98/22 is a much better rifle than the Remington Classic!

Major Caliber,

Hey, be nice...I kinda like em!
The older ones anyway.

Rich Elliott

I agree. I have a 1982 Classic 257 Roberts that I'd put up against just about anything!