This is, somehow, a response to the thread "Ruger sucks".

While not defendeding my own shopping criteria as is the customarily in many cases (big egos), I'd like to make my statement on Remingtons...

1) Poorly manufactured
2) The safe is at least... a joke
3) Triggerguard...non existent (if you want one good, you must go aftermarket)
4) ADL and BDL...why the need to charge for a better finished product?
5) Durability?
6) Rugged?
7) Stainless? even the SS versions are not 100% builded that way
8) A bolt made of several parts
9) The ejector/extractor?... another joke (go and replace it for a Sako-style)
10) Scope mounting system?...well this goes for others but a superseeded system, no doubt

As for Rugers

1) CRF action ( a true one)
2) Excellent scopemount solution (probably best in industry)
3) 3-position safety
4) One-piece bolt
5) Almost 95% stainless steel ( SS series )
6) Rugged as granite
9) Good stock design (british pattern)

As for accuracy, I've seen both, that's it Remingtons being very accurate and not, the same goes for the Rugers

In short, it's perfectly valid to have a brand preference, but please let's try to remain as objective as possible, we are not talking about a football match...

quote:

7) Stainless? even the SS versions are not 100% builded that way

sako finnlights rust too.

Stainless steel will rust. But at least Finnlights are almost 100% stainless and will rust far less readily than lesser rifles that aren't.

I like this thread........ .........DJ

I prety much like them all !
Of corse i like some better than others. I am fond of the model 70, but if someone offers me a good enough deal I,ll trade in hart beat.
I like Mausers alot two. Comercial and military 98s
I recently got my 1st sako. AN old browning .243.
I have a ruger and Its as likly to get you a deer inside 300 yards as any other rifle on earth at any price. (I did have to make alot of improvments though.)
I do not curanly own a remington, but I do like the CDL and the model 7 CDL.
Good and bad in all of them. But for my money right now the CZs are as good as anything on the market in its price range...tj3006

they need a good ammount of chromium in them to lessen the likelyness of rusting.

I've owned several Rem 700 rifles and never had a problem with any of them.

The extractors all worked, the safetys all worked, the triggers were all good, and they all shot very well.

Ruger has not made that record with me but Remington has. I have no complaints with Remington.

I stick by what I said on the Ruger thread. Had one 77VT and never again. I do love the 10/22.

looks to me like more people like remington over ruger..maybe that's just me...but i'll stick in another vote for remington. Have a .270 that's pretty old, just took it out to the range today with some new handloads and shot a 5 shot group coverable by a quarter, 4 of them by a dime. Now maybe the newer ones aren't so good. I do have a 700ML that's awesome. just my HUMBLE opinion, of course.

Remingtons suck, and so does Ruger

FORD vz CHEVY

Some of you get way too carried away, give it a rest, I own them all and enjoy each and every gun I own without pissing and moaning about something.

That Ruger thread must have been eating your guts out. I can only say your post is too funny. If you really want a good gun you're probably going to have to build it. Other words it's the luck of the draw.

If you looked into my gun safe right now you would see Remington's, Ruger, CZ, Benelli, Winchester, and an old H&R. Not one has EVER failed me. Never been to a gunsmith except to have a trigger adjusted before I ever shot it. And all but one has been dragged up and down mountains with me numerous times.
What in the hell are you guys doing to wreck your rifles?
KC

Gentlemen, just for the sake of objectiveness. we are NOT talking about accuracy, just DESIGN and CONSTRUCTION.

ZM

quote:

Originally posted by MajorCaliber:
Remingtons suck, and so does Ruger

MajorCaliber, this is off topic, but My wife's family has been in the Lafayette, St Martinville area for 200 yrs! Great place, and the best food in the world! their name is Peschier

As for this string, what rifles do you use, and what is the largest animal you hunt with it?

I for one have had a bolt handle break clean off a Remington 700 that was new -in less than 200-300 rounds.

COMPLETELY unacceptable.

I have not bought a new Remington in a LONG time.

Anyone actually owned a Ruger/Winchester/Sako or ANY other brand centerfire and had a handle break off without neglect?

What about extractors failing? Rare or not, some brands have problems others never have happen.

I would rather do a trigger job on a Ruger than have an extractor fail or a bolt handle break off in the field if my life depended on it.

Tell me otherwise, esp. if you had something that could eat and/or kill you coming after you! Of if you had one rifle to survive in the outback on, would you chance it?

Really?

Reliability has to be a top ranking in priorities for me. Bench accuracy is Remington's claim to faim, and that may be more reputation as I have seen many brands shoot well.

When hunting, I wonder how many shooters would ever know the difference in 1/4 or 1/3 difference in MOA. Stock fit, etc. will affect field accuracy. Good trigger, sights, ammo, and shooter is a must.

Targets/varmints are one thing, other types of hunting are another.

Good rem's shoot well, but so do other brands, otherwise they would not still be in business.

Poor rem's shoot bad, as do bad rem's break.

Murphy's law can afflict all, but higher dollar European brands often have less problems due to higher Quality Control. QC does vary.

6.5BR, great post!

Very explicit and balanced.

Remington is in my view a rifle that will do the job, but it's poorly designed and constucted.

I do not know of any PH carrying one, except the "great" stories some gunwriters are used to write about, especially when endorsing a paid hunt.

It's a fact that out there are many better rifles. CZ, Sako and Tikka are just an example.

Of course, Remingtons will bang and for the price, they are good guns, but nothing to write home about.

quote:

Originally posted by duikerman:
I've owned several Rem 700 rifles and never had a problem with any of them.

The extractors all worked, the safetys all worked, the triggers were all good, and they all shot very well.

Ruger has not made that record with me but Remington has. I have no complaints with Remington.

I've only owned two Remington 700's - one a .30/'06, the other a .222.

The extractor on the '06 never worked, and the rifle's accuracy was "acceptable for hunting", but that's all. The .222 was extremely accurate, and the extractor worked great, even on the occasion in which I managed to blow a primer.

I'd like to have that .222 back again!

I also once had the misfortune to own a 740 in .30/'06. It was like a Walther P-38 and the proverbial bolt of lightning - it seldom struck twice in the same place! Ditched it quick!!

quote:

Originally posted by Zeke:


ZM

I see that storm is in NY - naturally!!

El Deguello, sorry I don't get it...please explain further

Personally I think they both suck!

Hey pop,

If all brands were priced equal, I would likely buy everything mfg OUTSIDE the US.

I don't want to be viewed as anti-american, but the quality of finish, detail, wood, triggers, barrel consistency, ETC. ETC. inc. design, and often the twist rates say for 6.5mm's are correct, it would be hard not to choose a Tikka/Sako, CZ, Steyr Mannlicher, Sigarms bolt, etc.

For simplicity/reliability, I have NEVER heard a complaint about the plain old FN Mauser's, I guess that is why the basic design has not ventured far off the 98 pattern for most bolt rifles. Seems like the FN's always bang and extract, and keep on doing it. That may be routine for many Mausers.

I was amazed at the quality of the 1896 Swedish mausers I had bought at 69-89 bucks say 10 years ago......cut rifled if I am not mistaken and darned did those 6.5x55's shoot.

Old word craftsmanship, lots of hand labor and attention to detail. I wonder at today's labor rate what a new rifle with that level of work would cost to produce? More than a Ruger or Remington I would bet.

I guess in today's time, you get what you pay for.....sometimes, and rarely get more than what you pay for.

quote:

Remington sucks...

The thing that "sucks" about Rugers IMO is the fact that they are very inaccurate on average. You can usually find 10 Model 700s that shoot lights out for every 1 Ruger that shoots ok.

I happen to like the way Ruger rifles are built and the way they handle but, I've never shot one that could compare to a Remington on paper.

Reloader

I have to admit to owning/shooting 1 77 stainless/laminate '06

but owning 4 #1's in the past, comments on those on the 'Ruger sucks' topic

They did very well in the accuracy dept. I can see where Ruger's may be 'less commonly known to be as accurate in the bolt gun dept'

In fairness......I believe to compare fairly, one needs the barreled action of any brand tested to be bolted a good stock ie. HS that is floated and pillar bedded, then have triggers adjusted similar in weight, similar good optics, GOOD ammo, and a good shooter.

THEN one can compare 'built in accuracy', I have seen out of the box Browning's do well, my 1885 I had in 243 was a tack driver-amazing.

BUT, I have little interest in Browning as I like the tang safety, but the short throw bolt lacks leverage when you get a round that the bullet is into the lands, trying to extract it-difficult, not to mention the actions seem a little less rugged overall, many are 'alloy' receivers I believe, and the trigger components I am not sure of.....LONG term reliability.

Brownings shoot well 'as is' usually, but I would not choose it as my only or 'go to' gun if going off into the wilderness so to speak.

Accuracy is a must in my book, but I have other 'dimensions' I look at that I want/expect for whatever I need to depend on and carry in the field.

Custom Bench gun actions 'outshoot' Remington's usually, but lack of a magazine and 2oz trigger's do not lend well for a field gun.

It comes down to application and suitability I guess for each individual.

quote:

Originally posted by 6.5BR:
Hey pop,

If all brands were priced equal, I would likely buy everything mfg OUTSIDE the US.

Everyday of the week and twice on Sunday!

1994 Remington classic in 6.5X55- Awesome wood with great figure, and inletted perfectly, first three shots into 3/4" never a glitch or problem, this rifle is scary accurate and always puts its bullet where it counts.

Extractors failing, bolt falling off, sounds like a bunch of bull shit to me. You dont get a great reputation for accuracy with crap falling apart. Then again i've seen people abuse stuff pretty good and then complain like a little girl when it breaks. Im more apt to believe in user error than anythig else.

Ruger makes good guns but they got a bad reputation with their older rifles and their barrels. Supposedly they out-sourced their barrels and the quality just wasnt there which led to inconsistent accuracy.

Supposedly the newer Remingtons are not as finely crafted but i'll put a 700 titanium up against any euro rifle. No im not one who only buys American i will buy which ever rifle appeals to me and its hard to beat that titanium rifle for steep mountain hunting.

I presently own 4 Remington rifles all 700s. Addtionally I have 2 Rugers, one #1 and a model 77 all weather.
Must say all 700s have functioned without issues (no bolt handle coming off, no safety problems) have owned one since 1977. Good to great accuracy with all without a gunsmith.
The Ruger #1 is a pet of mine I like the rifle very much, might even say its my favorite. It has great lines but did require a little forend work to get the groups from stringing.
The #77 of course is a CRF, however it seems when you work the bolt it pushes the round into the chamber without ever grabbing it. (Anybody else notice this?). Accuracy is decent enough, but could use some work.
Usually stay out of no win arguements but the overall blanket statement Remington sucks doesn't fit. Sure there are lemons out there, everybody makes one.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BigNate:


[/QUOTE

What sucks, huh were we discussing here?

quote:

Originally posted by fgulla:
1994 Remington classic in 6.5X55- Awesome wood with great figure, and inletted perfectly, first three shots into 3/4" never a glitch or problem, this rifle is scary accurate and always puts its bullet where it counts.

Extractors failing, bolt falling off, sounds like a bunch of bull shit to me. You dont get a great reputation for accuracy with crap falling apart. Then again i've seen people abuse stuff pretty good and then complain like a little girl when it breaks. Im more apt to believe in user error than anythig else.

So you own 1 Remington and think you are the reigning expert on them? And just because you were lucky enough to have a good one that none of the others have problems?
I haven't had an extractor fail or bolt handle fall off but I have had a couple that wouldn't eject fired shell including 2 brand new ones. I've also seen several including new ones on the shelf that won't reset the trigger by lifting the bolt straight up and down.

Remington's can be made into nice rifles. The barrels are usually pretty good but often require pretty expensive gunsmithing to get all the of the accuracy that they are capable of. The older ones I had were better made than the newer ones.........................DJ

Hey, about MY 6.5x55, had one too. Nice wood, looked good overall, GUESS WHAT?

The barrel had tooling marks 360 degrees around the INSIDE of the lands about 2" from the muzzle. It grabbed copper and fouled and never shot but mediocre accuracy.

If you had seen the sh.t and spent the money I have for as many Remington's as I have GIVEN A CHANCE, you might understand.

If YOUR remington bolt handle fell off after you fired a shot, one of only 200-300 on a NEW rifle (the original 270 SS ADL made in the 90's that was rebarreled w/o having ever been fired to 338/06)

By the way, Rem was gracious enough to rebraze the handle free of charge and guess what? W/O my permission OR asking me, opted to jewel the original NON-Jeweled bolt handle, and DAMNED if they did not leave if FULL, SO FREAKING full of lapping compound that had gotten in there via the little openings in the bolt. Uf had been in the woods on my elk hunting trip ( I had just returned) when that happened, I swear to God that gun would have been wrapped around a tree so bad it might still be in Colorado.

The firing pin would hardly function, THANKFULLY for the guy who bought the gun from me later, I noticed it and cleaned the bolt, PRIOR having fired any rounds through my 500+ dollar Hart barrel.

Folks, pays your money and takes your chances. BTW, that 6.5x 55 was sold. Did I tell you about the 270 mountain rifle, mfg when they first came out? Nice wood......DEFECTIVE crown, seen others the same way, the OUTSIDE ridge on the end of the muzzle of the counterbore had two raised spots about 180 degrees apart.......Remington would not fix it, bitched enough, they said take it to a gunsmith and send us the bill, the shitty gunsmith goofed it, paid it, sent the bill in-reimbursed, still sloppy crown so I did it myself with a case chamfer tool in a couple of jigs I made, bedded stock properly, then lapped the lugs, THEN the MF would shoot 3 in a nickel with 150 BT and 52.5 IMR 4350.

Folks, the nasayers have not had the experiences I have had, perhaps I have gone through more rifles than some of these guys have ammo, but I have seen enough SHIT come out of Remington factory.

Are they all bad? I doubt it, but Remington put out enough sh.t, that about every other or so time I ended up with one, more or less, it stunk.

I bought an older BDL NIB 222, perfect finish, etc. Not one problem, SO I will be fair.

If you doubt me, then you have not had enough experience or as many as I had to have the statistics catch up to you.

I have seen and had reputable friends who had Sendero's that would not shoot 2 - 2.5" groups no matter what? Go figure, a HB with an HS stock and it would not do better than a 30/30 lever gun.

I will waste no more of my breath arguing or defending the experiences that I have had, but I can say, on a percentage basis, I have had 2 or 3 remingtons with problems for every Ruger and I don't own Ruger stock or have any interest in the company.

Tell me, if YOUR bolt handle broke off after less than 200-300 rounds on that gun, would you ever trust it? Would you feel good and confident about buying another?

Be honest? That is like trying to tell the girl above not to divorce you after you could not perform the first week you were married to her! Do you think she would settle for that crap?

Well I ain't settling for the sh.t Remington has made.

If you have or buy a good/well made Rem, new model or old, I am happy for you.

Me, I look elsewhere first and as I have said I have not bought a new Rem in a LONNNNNNNNG time.

They cut their throat selling all the trash they did, perhaps Ruger has done the same in the past, but I have to commend them on making improvements and mfg their own barrels now to control QC better.

If you buy or have a bad experience with a Rem and have not in the past, you will remember my post and say, ha, that guy was speaking the truth.

Funny, people think Leupold is the best thing since sliced bread and butter, yet other brands have the same and then some quality, at a lower price and I won't elaborate, and guess what, Leupolds fail too and get returned and are repaired w/o charge because they get their money up front with ever increasing prices.

Brand loyalty has blinded some people to reality, or being open minded enough to accept the fact that Remington and Leupold as well are not immune to having defective or shoddy built products leave their plants.

Before anyone flames me, yes I own a few Rems now, I have weeded out the bad ones and all mine are 'right' as of this moment. I may replace them all and I am considering seriously doing so with BETTER quality firearms.

Do Rem's have their pros, yes, but they are not always what some people think they are, and I know that first hand.

Is the pot stirred enough yet? Someone else jump in, I am out of this one. I'll stop now on this topic.

Oh, the 270 got sold also. I NEVER kept one that gave me problems, even after they were worked on.

One can look at individuals results and try to get some type of comparison or data set here, but the truth is that unless all of these rifles were tested under the same conditions etc etc etc,..all you really have is a testament to the law of numbers.

so you had a blah blah blah do some blah blah blah one time when you were hanging out with your cousin's, friend's, nephews', uncle's, friend's, next door neighbor,...these stories are a dime a dozen, no matter what brand.

I have them all, or had them, and I can say my journey has been for the most part positive. I have had issues with remingtons, as well as winchesters, baretts, HK's, etc. I have sent leupold MK IV scopes,...as well as a nightforce NXS, and similarly simmons and bushnell scopes and a burris or two. So what does that all mean???????? if you play a lot, you'll encounter more defects,..simply by law of numbers.

I like all my rifles,...but as a go-to rig, I depend on Remington 700 actions. Then again, I figure for the cash I save, I can have it trued and squared with a sako extractor and still have less in it than a lot of other domestic and foreign rigs.

Here's the general problem: Everyone wants a rifle that costs $500 but has the fit and finnish of a rifle that runs closer to $1500 or more, sometimes a lot more.

Reliability is a function of basic design. I've had some accuracy problems with Rugers, all of which were fixed by a gunsmith for a very reasonable amount of money. Never have I found that the safety on one of my Rugers, I own only tang safety models, in the OFF position because it caught on my clothing, this happened way too many times for my personal comfort on the Remington I've owned. I've never had a Ruger fail to eject a fired case, happened several times with two of the Remingtons I no longer own.

The slight advantage that Remington's have in accuracy is in theory and at the bench. In the real world I've killed and seen killed a hell of a lot of game with rifles that are 2 MOA on a good day. The kill zone on most big game is at least the size of a pie plate so if your rifle (and you) holds a 6 inch group at 300 or 400 yds how is that a problem?

I see Accidental Discharge because of a safety that may or may not be on and failure to eject a fired case as DEFECTS in design that are not exceptable. Yes, you can put a 3 position safety on a Remington and a Sako extractor, so why not buy a Ruger or Sako or what ever to start with? Sorry if I don't equate that with glass bedding my M77's, sine you might just have to bed the Remington anyway, I did with two rifles I owned.

I think HUNTERMONTANA hit the perverbial nail dead on the head. I also own Rugers, Remingtons, a M96 Mauser, a T/C, an A-Bolt, a Marlin, and a Savage. Thay all have seen HARD, HARD hunting use with many 100s if not in some cases 1000s+ rounds through them. Thay all have functioned with out problems or insident of failure what so ever. Thay all shoot far better than I had a right to expect or demand.

I think the sigle biggest problem this thread exposes and all others like it for that matter is like what M-hunter said. Every body wants Wal-Mart priced rifles but demands custom rifle fit and finish wich is simply not possable.

Over the last six or so years I have made it a point to examine rifles of all makes EVERY time I enter a gun store. For the life of me I simply have never found any real fit and finish issues with ANY of the major brands I have examined, when you consider the price of the rifle at hand. You can not expect a $250 Steavens to have the F&F of a $700 M700 or A-Bolt.

If you want IMHO the BEST bargin to be had in a new rifle I strongly suggest you give Kimber a look. When I buy my next rifle it will with out a doubt be a Kimber 8400 Montana. Best rifle for $1000 out there, in my IMHO.

HunterMontana, excellent post, and accurate and unbiased description of the REAL ISSUES, that is DESIGN.

Yes, Remingtons are not a good design, probably the best one around, and unsurpassed in many ways, is the Mauser 98.

Of this design, some mainstream manufacturers have it evolved into sporting variations, just by adding or improving some features, desirable on a hunter's gun.

Of these, most notably are the rifles from CZ and Ruger.

It's not a big secret that the Win M70 post 64 or even the Remington M700 were designs with a specific criteria spec : MANUFACTURING COST.

Mike Walker did exactly that and the great M54 died. Of course, it was a Mauser derivative.

This is not to say that Remingtons won't do the job, but please, popularity is not necessarily a measure of a great design.

I agree wholeheartdly with some of the foregoing posts, some issues like failure to extract or broken extractors ARE UNACCEPTABLE, plain and simple.

My 2 cents

Thank you for the post. Yes, I LOVE accuracy, but bench and field accuracy are two different things, you can never have too much, but one thing lots of shooters worry about, my gun shoots ... size group.

A 2" group means that your bullet should hit within 1" within a 360 degree area from the center of that circle. If that is the point of aim than you can be within 1" of your aim say at 100 yds IF your shot is perfect (and that is likely the most it will be off) as it might fall less than that distance from aim. An MOA accurate rifle can vary 1/2 " from the center of the group (and point of aim if so sighted), so the difference in the field in a 1moa and 2moa gun in my mind is really more like 1/2 moa. Does this make sense?

In reality, ONE shot is fired out of a cold barrel likely 90% or 95% of the time. Often if bedding is acceptable, stable, this one is close to Point of Aim if sighted in such manner.

More often than not, GROUP accuracy is not needed, FIRST shot accuracy/POI is what is needed in the field.

I believe I have only three times or so fired multiple shots on deer, it never mattered as the first was the best opportunity, and multiple rounds never mattered.

MOST times, game like deer(dangerous game is different I imagine-closer shots might be norm if danger is in the situation) is dropped on the first shot, so if a rifle, ANY rifle puts that first slug close to point of aim, then nothing else matters once that slug leaves the barrel-as far as accuracy goes.

To the people who true/barrel Rem's, yes, for accuracy and aftermarket parts they are like the 350 smallblock is to race cars.....but you sink LOTS of $'s in, and resale is not great if it matters, vs buying say a Sako or Kimber.

If you know what you want, and build the quality into it, then you will likely be happy and keep and enjoy it. If you know what you want/need and someone builds it to your taste and you can afford it, you can get after it, and trade it off later if your tastes change.

I am not ANTI Rem or other, but I am a realist, and they are not everything and a bag of chips as the saying goes. Some are great, some ok, and some you can cuss, I have.

Some of you may know that "SUCKS" is synonymous with Remington bolt actions on one particular message board.

IMHO ... that label is anything but bad when applied to either hunting rifles or ladies.

I really cannot complain. My 700 MTN .280 (that being a SUCKS PB&J for those that care) is spooky accurate out of a cold barrel. All I've done for it is work up loads, bubba smith the trigger, and put one of those overrated VX-III 2.5-8x36 scopes on it. One of these years I'll get around to apologizing to my venison for the disrespect shown it by my choice of equipment. ;-)

Art, looks like you like the classic 338WM and that is ALWAYS a smart choice on most game, proven.

I have looked and continue to evaluate Kimber.

I have a few issues:

1) twist rate i.e. 260 is 9, I want/like an 8.

2) Kimber would NEVER specifically answer my question as to if THEY mfg the barrel blanks, they say ALL their parts are built by them, but they could just chamber/turn the barrels, I would like to know I am getting true match grade barrel if paying that price, a Sako/Tikka and other European I have no concern about barrel quality, Kimber I am not convinced yet

3) heard they have had some misfires due to light firing pin strikers?

What I like: Fit/finish, action seems well designed, light, is some wobble when bolt is out, but nothing severe, trigger crisp, adjustable I do believe, and I like the stock

Oh, Barrel contour, they market as a lightweight and that they are, but FIELD accuracy is often defined by how well you can hold/stabilize your rifle and it seems a little 'too light' and I am concerned my field 'shootability' will affect my odds of connecting on game vs a standard or so tube.

IF Kimber offered a barrel that tapered to say .65 or .675 even .700, I would be MUCH more likely to buy one.

The build quality does seem to command what they ask for them. Most owners seem happy and the accuracy off the bench shows promise, but I do recall an article in a gun mag by a reputable person and they had a little trouble holding a Kimber steady on game. It made them shoot twice or so IIRC.

If I could get a stock and action for say 750, THEN barrel my choice of contour, that would work for me. I guess a pre-Winchester plant shut down SS M70 could have been had about for that, then rebarreled.

I DO like the most recent M70 actions in Stainless/claw, they seemed to be a good action design for a nice hunting rifle. I would assume properly stocked and barreled would give very good accuracy. Factory M70's can be fickle I hear, due to center screw, bedding, etc, but I am not concerned the basic design is at fault. Having owned a 6.5x55 Stainless fwt just before closing, I can say quality was as high as could be expected, it lacked nothing that I could see. SMOOTH, much more than a Rem. or Ruger. I was impressed.

If Browning had Japan mfg those actions for custom rifle builders, I believe there would be a market for them.

Remington sucks!
This is a fact written in stone.
Why deny it?
I hate Remington's so much that I am offering to buy said rifles just to rid the world of the hideous things.
Of course with all of the gross negligance involved with building the Remington the price will have to be severely reduced.
Not to mention the life threatening safety hazard the rifle embodies.
I should get hazard pay just for handling the rifles.
Anyway, my records indicate that the most dangerous, extractor breaking, bolt handle falling off rifles that need to be quarantined for the sake of humanity are in this order.
700 Classic 35 Whelen
700 Classic 8mm Rem mag
700 Custom KS Mtn Rifle (all calibers)
700 Sendero SF 300 RUM
700 Classic 220 Swift
I know there are others that need to eliminated, but one has to start somewhere.
If I save just one person it will be worth it. Bless you.
KC