A buddy and I were talking the last night and this subject came up. He is purging all his rifles/scopes/handguns . . . , lets just say to finalize a bad divorce. He wants to buy two new rifles one for elk/deer, one for Alaska. These are to last lifetime. He then said “I will buy one now, and then later, when something better comes out, I will buy that”. Which got me thinking, has hunting firearms, with current laws and restrictions, reached their technological peak? Case in point: the pre64 are still a sought for their performance/design (or slight variance of them). Not want to debate caliber (cause we all know that the .270 is superior), nor the glass. But, on the metal part of a gun, is there room for improvement?

All improvement ceased in 1898.

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
Which got me thinking, has hunting firearms, with current laws and restrictions, reached their technological peak? Case in point: the pre64 are still a sought for their performance/design (or slight variance of them). But, on the metal part of a gun, is there room for improvement?

There is always room for improvement. Until the current cartridge/firearm formula is changed or legislated away I see us staying with the basic layout we've had since the Lebel was introduced. It would take something like going to caseless ammo or electro-magnetic rail guns to obsolete what we have, but unless they were outlawed we'd still use our cartridge guns. Remington tried electronic priming and that flopped. For Pete's sake, folks are still hunting with bow and arrow and muzzle loaders and they've been obsolete for over a century.

You'll see continuous improvements in manufacturing and materials, but I think cartridge guns are going to be around for awhile. Current trend seems to be going for more barrel nut or barrel lockup designs, but a 1893 7x57 Mauser sporter will still get the job done. MOA accuracy is MOA accuracy whether it is out of a '98 Mauser or a R9 Blaser.

The greatest improvementy may never come..."cold burning" propellant. Certainly in regards of military weapons.

In other words some form of propellant that does not immediately waste 80% of itself as "heat to the barrel".

That and maybe the recoilless hunting rifle like a miniature bazooka where there is a chamber behind (or as part of) the bolt to catch the back blast.

The "next big thing" will probably be in telescopic sights that automatically adjust and set the holdover as a back reading from an integral laser inside or on the sight.

Like a laser rangefinder on a modern battle tank.

I know that already laser rangefinder telescopic sights exist - Zeiss - but not yet one that once you sighted on your target automatically "knows" the range and internally adjusts the elevation on reticule.

Worked maybe through a "pad" that once you see the red dot you touch and it then dials in the correct elevation?

Hmmmm.... "cold propellent" and auto adjust scopes. Fascinating ideas.

I agree with Forrest that the '98 Mauser is still tops as a hunting rifle.

Although it was improved by Winchester for purposes of scope mounting.

Newer models, including the Blaser 93, for example, offer far more convenience and versatility.

But as a launching pad for a hunting bullet, the Mauser takes a back seat to no other.

Can not see any real need in hunting rifles. Of course now, if Ruger makes a technological break through and comes out with a factory accurate #1, that might count as the peak. roger

I believe hunters around the campfire agreed technology had peaked with Winchester's 1894 in .30-30!

I doubt any of us can anticipate the next innovation.

Most of the recent technology has been in Propellent like superformance by hornady, bullet design like the ttsx and semi auto rifles.

Back in the late 1800s a man at the patent office said that they might as well close the patent office as everything that can be invented has been invented!

Firearms have progressed very little in the last 75 years.....I don't see a big hurdle to overcome.....except the next generation of firearms won't use bullets!

Another question is just how much more technological improvement do you really want anyway? We've already gone a long ways down the road of taking the "hunt" out of hunting.

not even close
we are closing in on the limits of practicality, but are no where CLOSE on the limits of technology on arms.

in a word, No.

and I love mausers .. sure enough.. but not hooked on them, in any way shape or form, and certainly not a fanatic.

not even to mention sighting systems

Speaking from my point of view, I will say that weapon development is still forward moving. You would not believe what the military plays with trying to stumble into a new age military weapon that would blow the world away.

1 I can actually talk about is a Phosphurus(Spelling?) based propellant, and Aluminum projectiles. I will tell you this dont not work well for long range accuracy, the propellant burns too hot and melts the projectile resulting is a rifle shooting white hot aluminums buck shot.

quote:

Originally posted by Brando:
Speaking from my point of view, I will say that weapon development is still forward moving. You would not believe what the military plays with trying to stumble into a new age military weapon that would blow the world away.

1 I can actually talk about is a Phosphurus(Spelling?) based propellant, and Aluminum projectiles. I will tell you this dont not work well for long range accuracy, the propellant burns too hot and melts the projectile resulting is a rifle shooting white hot aluminums buck shot.

That could overcome the ban on the use of white phos !!!

Ouch is all I can say !!!

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

quote:

Originally posted by Brando:
Speaking from my point of view, I will say that weapon development is still forward moving. You would not believe what the military plays with trying to stumble into a new age military weapon that would blow the world away.

1 I can actually talk about is a Phosphurus(Spelling?) based propellant, and Aluminum projectiles. I will tell you this dont not work well for long range accuracy, the propellant burns too hot and melts the projectile resulting is a rifle shooting white hot aluminums buck shot.

That could overcome the ban on the use of white phos !!!

Ouch is all I can say !!!

Well that could come in handy with the 12 GFH and the aluminum slugs!!!

Will the next giant advancement in firearms be availible to sportmen?

Joe A.

quote:

Originally posted by Joe A.:
Will the next giant advancement in firearms be availible to sportmen?

Joe A.

Yep! Many years after the military is done with it.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:


The "next big thing" will probably be in telescopic sights that automatically adjust and set the holdover as a back reading from an integral laser inside or on the sight.

Like a laser rangefinder on a modern battle tank.

I know that already laser rangefinder telescopic sights exist - Zeiss - but not yet one that once you sighted on your target automatically "knows" the range and internally adjusts the elevation on reticule.

Worked maybe through a "pad" that once you see the red dot you touch and it then dials in the correct elevation?

No, that is already being developed, and it is a "constant variable"...that is, the scope adjusts itself in microseconds, not some length of time which requires any human interaction. As you "pan" across a vista, the scope will auto range and adjust for every object the reticule aiming point touches, as you move the gun. The one thing required to be really effective which we do not yet have, is 5-to-10 fps standard deviation factory ammo (for the longer ranges).

So then, the mechanical aspect of a bolt action, reached its technological peak in 1898? Wow, thats even before computers.

quote:

So then, the mechanical aspect of a bolt action, reached its technological peak in 1898?

No! As far as military rifles go it took a retrograde step in 1898! It had reached its peak in a fast operating quick opening military rifle system with Mr Lee's bolt rear locking bolt system in 1888!

I do my game shooting with a genuine Mauser 98 action and a Belgian FN commercial copy as well as Parker Hale's clone.

I did military training (and would choose it as THE best ever combat bolt action) with a Lee Enfield No4 and as a "war" rifle would choose that always over any Mauser 98.

Get a Blaser!
Peter.

quote:

All improvement ceased in 1898.

Well, that may be an overstatement. But not by a lot. The tweaks since Paul Mauser worked have gilded the lily on both rifles and cartridges. It's just been tweaks, nothing that would make a hunter or target shooter feel greatly out classed with a 98 and 7x57 or 8mm.

Given the practical limits on ammunition, nothing of great significance is likely to come up in the next hundred years either.

Sorry guys but have you read the blurb about the Blaser R8? When you get the Zeiss scope that is designed for it, the reticule lights up when the gun is cocked. The two talk to each other! Who would have thunk it? Sorry, but if you are waiting for American manufacturers for innovation, forget it!
Peter.

Military weapons will advance but civilian weapons will only advance a little. We're at a point where it is hard to improve. New designs and metallurgy could make a lighter rifle, but we can buy rifles now that are too light to shoot. Weight savings used caseless telescopic ammunition mean little to a sportsman.

Powder is what will advance. St. Marks makes some cool stuff I would like to see more of.

BTW tell your buddy to get a 30-06 and a .375 in stainless, scope both with Schmidts and go hunting.

Always room for change. Even with new laws etc., manufactures always find a work around to produce a superior product to keep the competition at bay. New metal formulas, powder chemicals, bullet design etc. The list can go on and on. The question is, will it provide a better method of take than what's currently availabe? For your friend that wants to aquire to rifles (one for deer and elk the other for Alaskan game) I don't think you will find anything in our life time that will out perform what is currently availabe. There are dozens of rifles and calibers on the market now that are more than, just perfect and to little for any game you hunt. Many here use hunting rifles that are 20, 30, 40 and 50+ years old that take game as good as any modern rifle currently being sold today. So that's my 2 cents worth..

...agree that most innovation occurred at the turn of the 19th century...

...seems like "what's new" is really "what's old"...

...for instance, the "new" blasers / sauers / merkels (with changeable barrels, take-down features, quick detach scope mounts, etc.) are nothing more than a break-open dr / dg / ss with multiple barrels and claw or pivot mounts, albeit in non-repeater format...

quote:

Originally posted by JHunter:
...agree that most innovation occurred at the turn of the 19th century...

20th...

Well the military has been searching for a bullet that will lock on to a target and seek it even after it is fired. That would be a pretty big leap forward but I'd actually be against it for a hunting bullet. I don't think it qualifies as fair chase.

I think some improvements we could look for in the sporting world are those that help us solve the problems that we face in an increasingly crowded world. How about a round that could deliver killing performance to, say, 300 yards but that would automatically come apart after a defined distance to lessen the danger to anyone down range. It would also have a fraction of the recoil and muzzle blast of today's modern rounds. I think quieter, softer and safer would be a pretty welcome improvement.

was done in the 70s .. 7,62x39 plastic core .. heavy copper, plastic core.. lethal and accurate to like 200M, then tumbles and falls out of the sky ..

quiter and softer? i'll pass, thanks .. i like big bores, and a 22 LR can be guided (not aimed) at up to a mile ...

safer? its a GUN not a pingpongball

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
A buddy and I were talking the last night and this subject came up. He is purging all his rifles/scopes/handguns . . . , lets just say to finalize a bad divorce. He wants to buy two new rifles one for elk/deer, one for Alaska. These are to last lifetime. He then said “I will buy one now, and then later, when something better comes out, I will buy that”. Which got me thinking, has hunting firearms, with current laws and restrictions, reached their technological peak?

Tell him to get the 270 now!

It will be all he needs until the technology for a electro-magnetic rail-gun rifle is developed for 10,000 fps MV.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
In other words some form of propellant that does not immediately waste 80% of itself as "heat to the barrel".

Perhaps a ceramic lined barrel?

I have not read all the responses posted, but in my opinion, hunting rifles reached their technological peak with rifled barrels and conical bullets.

Beyond that everything else is just glitz.

Few of us living today shoot our rifles enough to actually realize any advantage most or many of the so-called "New" improvements give us.

People are still hunting and killing animals with guns/cartridges, that are 100+ years old.

It is great that folks are interested in inventing "New" concepts, but how many of us, or the game we kill can actually differentiate between traditional and "New" in terms of field performance.

How many of us on here carry any of our guns and shoot them on a Daily basis?

I see a trend here that's very obvious... quite a few of the replies have stated that the 1898 Mauser was the end of technological improvement for the world of firearms. This is utter nonsense from a bunch of fanboys, and I seem to be the only one unafraid to say it plainly. If that's the case, then we should all still be driving Model T Fords and doing our computing on Commodore 64 computers. It's an obsession you have with a gun you think is perfect; sure, it was revolutionary and made the world of gun production move forward by a leap and a bound, but to say it is it, and that nothing has improved on it sense, is foolish. You fanboys are those who extoll the virtues of control feed, when the control feed is no better than a push feed. I'm sure this will make some of you swell with purple faces and rage on about how much better control feed is, and how necessary a Sako extractor is on a Remington 700, and how a straight razor is the only way to shave.

To those of you who have mentioned the Blaser R93, excellent, I say to you. I congratulate you on thinking for yourselves. A barrel-mounted scope, repeatable accuracy on a takedown rifle, and the ability to switch calibers in under a minute with only minor practice, are certainly technological improvements that need to be recognized. In the same vein, consider the Krieghoff Semprio. Yes, it is odd; but it is the only rifle that uses the natural movement during recoil to cycle what is essentially a reverse-pump-action gun. Add to that the repeatable accuracy and changeable caliber system, and you have something with about as much innovation as the Blaser R93 and a definite show from both in the way of improved manufacturing. Consider the idea of cold hammer forging barrels: no break-in period, out-of-the-box sub-MOA prowess, and slow-but-reliable method of manufacturing. Oh, so those are not developments, merely regressions? Sure, go back to shaving with your straight razor that you have to strop before every shave. I hope you're holding it at the right angle -- you wouldn't want to nick yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by Ohotnik:
"I see a trend here that's very obvious... quite a few of the replies have stated that the 1898 Mauser was the end of technological improvement for the world of firearms. This is utter nonsense from a bunch of fanboys, and I seem to be the only one unafraid to say it plainly." ..............................

" but to say it is it, and that nothing has improved on it sense, is foolish. You fanboys are those who extoll the virtues of control feed, when the control feed is no better than a push feed. I'm sure this will make some of you swell with purple faces and rage on about how much better control feed is, and how necessary a Sako extractor is on a Remington 700, and how a straight razor is the only way to shave."

"To those of you who have mentioned the Blaser R93, excellent, I say to you. I congratulate you on thinking for yourselves. A barrel-mounted scope, repeatable accuracy on a takedown rifle, and the ability to switch calibers in under a minute with only minor practice, are certainly technological improvements that need to be recognized. In the same vein, consider the Krieghoff Semprio. Yes, it is odd; but it is the only rifle that uses the natural movement during recoil to cycle what is essentially a reverse-pump-action gun. Add to that the repeatable accuracy and changeable caliber system, and you have something with about as much innovation as the Blaser R93 and a definite show from both in the way of improved manufacturing. Consider the idea of cold hammer forging barrels: no break-in period, out-of-the-box sub-MOA prowess, and slow-but-reliable method of manufacturing. Oh, so those are not developments, merely regressions? Sure, go back to shaving with your straight razor that you have to strop before every shave. I hope you're holding it at the right angle -- you wouldn't want to nick yourself.

That's a fair attempt at a TROLL, but you need to be a little more subtle to illicit the response you want. Of the 31 posts between the OP and yours, there were 2 in favor of the M98, 2 others and 27 recognizing techno-logic innovation. 7% hardly makes a trend. Your emotional and immature attack on people you don't even know(plus your Blaser gushing) tells me you have a vested interest in the Blaser - me thinks a dealer perhaps?

Innovation and new technology is a great thing, but it doesn't always pan out. Firearms development is littered with techno-flops. Take the Lee straight pull, Ross, Johnson, Newton, and Mauser 66(barrel mounted scope and easy barrel change) as a few examples. The Blaser is a great rifle and practical use is bearing that out. It's probably here to stay unless it gets so expensive it can't see broad usage.

The point is that it and every other CF/RF hunting rifle(old or new)consists of a stock, action, and rifled tube firing projectiles out of brass cases containing propellant ignited by a primer. That formula hasn't changed in over 130 years. Turnbolts, straight-pulls, lever actions, and pumps existed before the turn of the 20th century. There is nothing I've seen to suggest the Blaser is any more accurate than any other high quality sporter built on a military/commercial turnbolt. It is certainly neat to be able to change barrels quickly, but for what it costs, I could afford 2-3 turnbolts with scopes-that's a helluva lot more convenient! The Blaser may be a fraction of a second faster to cycle than a M98/Dakota/Rem700 etc., but I see that as having little practical significance in the vast majority of hunting applications. A West Texas deer won't be able to tell the difference.

So I say if you can afford it, get the Blaser or Mau 03, they are quality guns that do a great job and represent the zenith of current commercial technology. Just don't piss on everyone else's parade.

Very well put Bobster.


Von Gruff.

I'm not a troll. Let me clarify, as well as apologize for my words.

I've seen a lot of debates, a lot of bashing, a lot of naysaying in the gun community, and it's frustrating. Every time a new product comes out, there are people who want to, as you put it, "piss on their parade." And they do, continuously complaining because a particular gun doesn't have control-round feed or doesn't have Sako's extractor design. After seeing so much of this, it's hard for me not to simply have enough of seeing it. I'm a lurker here, and have been for a long time. I stay out of conversation, but this drew me out. I got emotional, and I apologize to everyone that it affected -- essentially, every participant in this thread and otherwise. If I have an opinion, it should be presented respectfully, not rudely.

To answer your theory on my orientation in the gun community, I am no more a proponent of Blaser than any other person who likes them; I'm not a dealer, either. I simply get annoyed when people ignore development, or bash it because they themselves are stuck in the past. There is plenty of room for advancement; it simply takes time, and someone to put their mind and money to it. Throwing up one's hands and declaring that we've peaked, and that there is nothing more to do, is stagnation and resignation, and it's an affront to the spirit of pushing the envelope.

In short, yes it was immature, and yes, I am sorry -- I apologize.

The advancements in hunting rifles has subtle. Much of it has been metalurgy. The metals used now are far superior to those use at the beginning of the 20th century, both in firearms and in bullets. The powders used now are much better. Stoner changed opinions on the accuracy of semi-auto rifles. Much has changed it's just not a paradin shift, that changes everything. I much prefer building a rifle out of a Rem. 700 or a new Mod. 70 than a Mauser, it's easier and more precise, in my opinion. I use a lot of Mausers, but prefer the other......Tom

quote:

Originally posted by Ohotnik:
Throwing up one's hands and declaring that we've peaked, and that there is nothing more to do, is stagnation and resignation, and it's an affront to the spirit of pushing the envelope.

The only envelope being pushed is that of manufacturing efficiency.

I would like to know how push feed or a barrel mounted scope is a technological advancement?

Same with the R93 and other switch barrel systems. Neat mechanical contraptions but hardly what I would call technological advancement.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
I would like to know how push feed or a barrel mounted scope is a technological advancement?

Same with the R93 and other switch barrel systems. Neat mechanical contraptions but hardly what I would call technological advancement.

I dunno, I'd say the advancement was in the machines and computers used in getting the R93 system to be repeatable from 222 on up. I'd rather carry one full R93 and another barrel or two with scopes than dragging two or three full dressed rifles along, that is one major convenience nowadays with airline weight, bag limits, and size restrictions. Slap on whatever barrel is the flavor of the day, no sighting in, go hunting. Tomorrow is a new ballgame and a new barrel.

I ain't no dealer either just a satisfied R93 customer. Until you actually use and wring out an R93, you will always doubt it, I know, I was the same. Two years later I can say it is one helluva system. Whether it is worth it or not is left up to the individuals using them.

Interesting topic, like said, I'd agree on powders and bullets to keep advancing, there's some really good stuff out there nowadays, Waidmannsheil, Dom.