For those who followed my last posting on the Jack O'Connor rifle, well things have changed. Maybe my last experience was for the better. I got to actually handle a few featherweights the other day and it left me stewing on a couple issues. A Winchester featherweight in a classic caliber comes with a 22" thin barrel. From all the reports I've read and people I've talked to, there seems to be a great disparity in out of the box accuracy results from these rifles. A WSM in a featherweight, however, sports a 24" heavier barrel. So then started my thinking about the vast research of the WSM featherweight accuracy. All the independent reviews I read reported nothing but stellar accuracy with these guns. Though I think this accuracy comes not from the reasons they provided (powder placement, "inherent" accuracy from short fat case, blah-didi-blah) but rather an issue of harmonics control from a stiffer, heavier barrel.

And there was that all so ever beat to death hypothetical question, "What if I can't get ammo at the local mom & pop store out in Zambia?" Even if I were out in the sticks, I'm a reloader and never leave for a hunt unless I have an ample supply of my own recipe. Plus I always bring a back up rifle, or three, and have plenty of ammo for each. So, this unforeseen event could really only transpire if I forgot all my back up guns and the ammo for all my guns. If I forget that much, I might as well not get out of bed in the morning, commit me to a nursing home!

Here is the bought and paid for new rifle:









I thought the grainage was nice looking.

Picked it up from Steve @ the Exchange Gun Shop in SD. He advertises on gunsamerica.com and is a hell of a nice guy, willing to provide great customer support. I should have just ordered from him in the first place, but he didn't have a 270 WIN during the time I was going that route. He will search his distributors to find the lowest cost too.

That rifle topped with this scope:

Burris Signature Select 1.75-5X33


With Safari Post reticle

Traitor or no, I think you did fine. My old man used our safari to Namibia as an excuse to buy a new rifle. He ended up with a M70 laminate in .270 WSM, which he used to handily dispatch a variety of critters. Try some Barnes TSX (140) over H1000 - works like a charm in his.

Enjoy!
A good rifle is a good rifle.

lawndart

What kind of a bolt are you going to get?

Actually not being a traitor but being an informed consumer. Congratulations and Welcome to the club. You’ll not be un-happy with the .270 WSM. I’m getting to like mine more everyday. Lawdog

That's a fine combination! The .270 Win is one of my favorites, as is the .300 Win Mag, but I'm thinking of getting a .270 WSM or .270 Weatherby Mag not because I need one but just because I'm curious. Keep us informed!

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:
What kind of a bolt are you going to get?

LMAO..............Savage99 made a funny

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:
What kind of a bolt are you going to get?

You've heard of "Controlled Round Feed", "Push feed", and "Controlled Round Push Feed" actions, I got so confused between them I just bought a "No Feed" action.

Congradulations on the rifle! Currios why you chose that scope and power? Ive never had a burris. Almost bought one once but noticed the weight was alot more than a luepy.
I stick to luepolds because of the eye relief and weight. If tryed other scopes but they are always harder to look through or have the perifial black ring of death .

quote:

Originally posted by GSP7:
Congradulations on the rifle! Currios why you chose that scope and power? Ive never had a burris. Almost bought one once but noticed the weight was alot more than a luepy.
I stick to luepolds because of the eye relief and weight. If tryed other scopes but they are always harder to look through or have the perifial black ring of death .

I've got two Leupolds, VX-1 + VX-II, and two Burris, Fullfield II 3-9X40 and this 1.75-5X33.

Out of the four scopes, my Burris Fullfield has the sharpest image and reticle. However, my Leupolds provide a larger sight picture and have the same brightness.

I think my Leupolds might be a little lighter, but my Burris scopes are a little better quality. They both have comparable eye relief.

Why did I pick the 1.75-5X33? A few reasons:

1. I already owned the scope. Took it off a BAR .338 WINMAG I sold to buy the new featherweight.

2. I really like that post reticle. It is quick and reminds me of all the years I shot with a square front sight post. Now I have a magnified front sight post!

3. I like to zero the gun so that the round impacts right on top of that post. Gives me a better sight picture on the target. The animal appears in the top half of the scope. It also aids follow up shots and for picking up puffs of dirt if (when) I miss.

4. I think magnification is highly overated. I can place 10 for 10 in a 10" cricle at the 500 yd mark with my AR-15,using iron sights, and did so 7 times consecutively in the Marine Corps.

Ill have to check out a Burris scope in the flesh. I dont think Ive ever realy handled one.

I have 2 varixIII 3.5x10x40 ,1 4.5x14,1 vari x1 3x9x40, 1 VX2 3x9x40 , 2 weaver V series,a bunch of pre 1950 weavers, a Bushnel 3x9. the later came on used rifles.

I recently got a VX1 2x7x33 and like the smaller compact scope. Im going to get another 2x7 for a project Model 30 rem im restoring.

I just set up a 12 steel plate hanging from a small tree on a ridge were I hike. I hike across to another ridge almost every afternoon and started doing some off hand practiceing . The plate is about 300 yards across a canyon. Ive been shooting my 1953 winchester featherwieght 308 with a 2x7 leupold. Pretty fun and good practice. Its good practice after hiking up the ridge and winded ,heart beating ,breathing hard, and take a few off hand shots . good exercise too.

quote:

Originally posted by GSP7:
Ill have to check out a Burris scope in the flesh. I dont think Ive ever realy handled one.

I recently got a VX1 2x7x33 and like the smaller compact scope. Im going to get another 2x7 for a project Model 30 rem im restoring.

For the money ($175-$190), and for the features, those are dandy little scopes. I bought a 2-7X33 VX-1, liked that one so much, I then went out and got a 2-7X33 VX-II. The first sits on my .308 A-bolt, and the second on my Rem 700 .22-250. I should have got another VX-I because the only difference between the two scopes is the VX-II has click adjustments. Though the clicks are nice, I could have settled for another VX-1. I think 2-7 is a perfect size power for coyote size and bigger. Scopes in that size has are proportional between the bell and eyepiece.

quote:

I just set up a 12 steel plate hanging from a small tree on a ridge were I hike. I hike across to another ridge almost every afternoon and started doing some off hand practicing. The plate is about 300 yards across a canyon. Ive been shooting my 1953 winchester featherwieght 308 with a 2x7 leupold. Pretty fun and good practice. Its good practice after hiking up the ridge and winded ,heart beating ,breathing hard, and take a few off hand shots . good exercise too.

That is fantastic training. You’re a realist like me. I set up a metal IPSC plate out in one of my bean fields and shoot form various positions, practicing using the available cover I find. I'll usually walk to the target and back across the uneven ground or in the snow to get my heart rate up and then start firing again. I shoot at metal so much, I once found myself waiting for a dinner bell sound when I shot at a coyote!

brings yet again credibility to a state police academy phrase: "You don't step up for the occasion, you reduce to your training"

When comparing three 3X-9X-40mm scopes(which I own) the weight of the Burris Fullfield II (serial number 203039) is 12.7 oz. and two Leupolds, VXI serial number 321622J) and VXII (serial number 324263J) both weight 12 oz.. Which leaves me wondering, does 7/10 of an oz. really mean all that much? Both Burris and Leupold carry the same guarantee and are of equal quality. One won’t go wrong buying either brand of scope. Lawdog