Hi Everyone,
This has been boiling up over a little while and I really need to vent. It is not out of anger it is just a list of things that every so often need/seem to be rehashed for 1 reason or another.
There have been a multitude of threads leading up to this.
This not hysteria nor personal these are inaliable facts;

Remingtons are built for price, they shoot but they will fail.

If a bullet is as good as a Nosler Partition, THEN it is okay.

Variable scopes are not as reliable as a fixed.

Scopes are not as reliable as irons.

The more gadgets on your gun, the more that will fall off( or fail )

A projectile in the vitals with cause death. Always.

Skill gets that projectile pointed right, not technology.

Practice gets the job done, not reading the latest article.

The easiest way to kill a big buck is to not shot a little 1.

The 2nd easiest way is to hunt where they are.

Hunting where they are not and really wishing hard will NOT make it happen.

Research gets you where the big ones are. Duh'

If you have a 5 second window to capitalize on a Muledeer and it takes you 30 seconds to get of the shot, you will not get the deer.

Sorry to say, well actually not sorry, it comes down to the basics. When it works it works. When it doesn't it is not going to no matter how much our self indulgent, me first, instant gradification, impatient, spoiled, pompous, demanding lives think that we can make it happen.

Whew..... sorry Guys I am just a plain guy who uses what works and really doesn't have much interest in fads or fantasy.

ED

Not much to argue with there, EO.

The only comment I might make is that a simple, rugged, fixed power scope, mounted low and in good quality rings may actually be, on average, more reliable than some iron sights. After all, fogging is no longer a potential with a quality scope, and some of the best peeps are a bit on the delicate side. I've actually seen more front sight blades or beads bent or broken off than I have seen good scopes that were fogged or mis-aligned. And a good, low power scope is a lot quicker for target acquisition and is a bunch easier for over-40 eyes to focus with than either peeps or open sights.

But I wouldn't have begged to differ with your statement 30 years ago when most scopes on the market would fog and hunters still regarded scopes as "accessory" options rather than primary sighting systems.

But hey, I'm picking at gnits here; I agree strongly with your observations.

I've managed to hunt Alaska with Remingtons, variable scopes, and (heaven forbid) Sierra bullets. Based on what I read on this board, I'm lucky to be alive.

Jab -I am as lucky as you.In over 30 years of hunting I have never had a remington rifle or a variable scope that I have owned fail.

E O - Hope you feel better----tell us what you really think!

Many Remington rifles are in use today, the glitch is how the company markets their product, the claims made are just not the facts. There is absolutely nothing wrong with telling it like it is. Remington claims excellent out of the box accuracy for a factory rifle. Yet if you call Remingtons hot line and report your not happy with the groups your getting from your stock Remington factory rifle they tell you that is well within our specs. Yes any stock factory rifle and the support components will take game year after year. It is very important to me that the company who produced that product tell the truth in their marketing of that product.

The fact that your very happy with the performance of your hunting equipment is admirable. Taking into consideration the numbers of Remington factory rifles owned. I own one Remington stock factory rifle and that 222 rifle is no tack driver by any stretch of the imagination. It should also be noted that the fine shooting Remington factory rifles had extensive rework done to them to achieve that result.

I prefer not to stick my head in the sand and that part of me sticking up in the air make my decisions for me. Many brands of rifles have passed through my hands through the years, and I did use those rifles. The facts are, my reworked factory rifles and custom made rifles are the most reliable, have produced tighter more consistant groups than any stock factory rifles I have ever owned.

The fantastic part about these shooting forums is speaking your piece, and feeling better after one does so. So much can be learned and we all benefit in the long run. It is certain no matter what factory rifle you use or abuse, this forum will help us all become better at extracting the very best accuracy that factory rifle has to offer us. It is not the car we ride through our trip through life that is important, it is how well prepared and enjoyed that ride.

Thank you 1 and all.

You listed a lot of solid and honest points, no question about it. Like 'most everyone else, I've shared some strong opinions myself on this stuff.

I will say that when it comes to hunting-related topics that involve bullets, scopes, and rifles, many of what we think to be hard and fast rules are, in all reality, anything but hard and fast.

For example, I went through an O'Connor-inspired phase where I only used fixed-power scopes on my hunting rifles, and yes, they worked well. Today, I almost exclusively use variable scopes, and you know what? They've been just as reliable as the fixed powers, more versatile, and I've hunted with them extensively - from Alaska to Africa - without a hitch or a glitch.

Likewise with rifles, I prefer controlled-feed actions (mostly Model 70s) to push-feeds such as the Model 700. But even so, ANY mechanical device can fail, including CRF actions. The potential for failure is not exclusively Remington's territory. In fact, out of some ninety Remington 700s I've personally owned over a thirty-year period, only the original ADL in .30-06 that I purchased at age fifteen has given fits due to feeding problems. The rest of them worked very well for the most part. I know this: There are dedicated Remington 700 fans who've litterally done it all with that rifle, and far be it from me to tell them they've made some sort of tactical error as far as rifle selection goes.

AD

[ 10-31-2003, 17:03: Message edited by: allen day ]

On a particularly tough elk hunt one year, I had a variable scope fail, then my rear sight fell off. My Remington 7600 still got a 6x5 bull with the point and shoot method.

It all comes down to confidence. If you trust your equipment and your ability you are way ahead of the game. This applies to and results from experience with bullets, scopes, rifles, age, practice, game taken, game missed, game lost.....

Chuck

I guess I've been lucky too. I've only hunted in the lower 48 but never had a gun, scope or bullet fail; the shooter did once or twice. I take that back: The only deer I lost to equipment was many years ago. Shot an Axis late in the day and couldn't track it alone so I went back to the landowner's place to get his dog. He was gone, dog was there so I left a note and went back to the spot, had hair and blood on the ground and off we went. After many hours up and down, up and down, up and down and more up and down in the Texas Hill Country a tired me and a happy but tired dog went back to the house. The landowner opened his door, looked at me and said "Wrong dog. Sure likes to run though, don't he?"

P.S.: Found the deer the next morning in the opposite direction and I'm not blaming the dog... just tried to drive a wood screw with a crescent wrench.

[ 10-31-2003, 19:40: Message edited by: tigertate ]

jd;

no censorship here, what brand variable failed on u under what circumstances?

i agree w/ everything eo said , except fixed v. variable. that was 30 yrs ago. today, w/ c.a.d. and q.c. the variable is as good as a fixed.

that is why most snipers in battle are now using variable power scopes, in a tactical/battlefield environment. more harsh than a hunting environment, thank god.

i have been all over the world and in every province of canada, ak., mexico. never had a variable fail yet. zeiss, swarovski, leupold, nikon,. m.h.o.

cold zero

Hey Cold,

The latest variable we had go to hell was a Steiner. These have not been a favorite of mine but do seem to be okay. I have all of the "less expense" variables out there fail on clients guns.I have had maybe 20 go bad in 20 years and 1000 clients. The worst of the big buck scopes has been Zeiss. In actual numbers there has been more Leupolds but there have been a hundred times more Leu's in camp. Precentage wise the failures are the bushnell/tasco/simmons/ variables that are 29.95 to 49.95 at wal-mart.

I will take a 4x Burris or old Weaver anyday.

ED

Cold Zero: On that particular hunt, it was a Burris 3x9; it was close to 20 years old. The focusing bell broke off in the scabbard when dragged against a tree. That's not the only scope I've had fail; I've had quite a few fail including Burris, Leupold, Weaver, and Nikon. Both the Weaver and Nikon were 4X's. All failed internally, except the Burris that got broke in half. In the past 3 years I've had 3 hunting partners' scopes fail, Simmons, Leupold, and Nikon.

Mickey LMAO !!!!!!

EO,

If thou must rave, then rave on!

I don't disagree with your points, and I have my own.

Technology is no substitute for skill: instead of buying a .XXX Short Magnum/Magnum/Ultra Magnum, spend the money instead on a rifle-shooting course at a place like Gunsite.

Factories don't test their products, and the mass-market gunwriters wear "golden manacles" when they write about the factories' products.

I use variable scopes almost exclusively, because they work reliably for me.

I have broken Remingtons two and a half times. One was an accidental discharge with a 7mm Mag on a hunt (the Walker trigger "bug"); one was an extractor break on a .416 Mag (on a range); and the one-half was me jerking the bolt handle off a bolt when my gunsmith asked me to test it (he put it on properly afterwards).

The more I shoot Nosler Partition bullets, the more I respect them.

jim dodd

Hey HunterJim,

You are so dead on with the statement of taking a course of study.
I rail on this all the time. Buy a good suitable rifle with the best optics you can afford and practice, practice, practice.
I hear from "friends" unending of how I have an inside track being a guide or I am rich because I hunt alot. No dumb ass I work non stop so I can hunt. I have 2 very, very good rifles (.30'06 & .375) that do most of what I want done. I have a "friend" of modest means who has 30 rifles and rarley has the money to hunt. Duh'????? He is a terrible field shot to boot as he never practices with a gun long enough to know how it works. At the end of ever deer season it is time for another rifle that will make up for his short comings. I really don't get it.
My 2 rifle cost me maybe $2000.00 to built. With that spent rest I shoot non stop and hunt nearly 50 days a year on my own plus guide at least that many.
As for variable scopes I personally have no problem with them duability wise today , I just see the trouble of hunters having them on 10x when we jump a buck at 15yds. Or I see the problem of them wanting to turn up the power when they should be shooting. If the scope is left on 3 or 4x and the deer is 150 200yds -SHOOT- don't crank up to 10x to decided which hairs to slip the bullet between. I guess this is my gadget haterd as well. As a guide I see all this nonsense and more. It is quite simple, there is a tube on top of your rifle with a x in it. Put the x on the -FRONT- half of the target and press the trigger. That is all, don't adjust the bi-pod because it is canted, don't turn up the power ring, don't worry about wind and range(I won't let you shoot far enough for that to matter) Just get on it and shoot.

ED

interesting diatribe going on in here... but I will admit that most of it is dead on, but EO really put it all in the proverbial nutshell: point, shoot, eat.

btw, I have a remmington, a crappy variable weaver, and I hate them both!!!! will trade for a wby vanguard in 257wby!

otherwise, carry on!

I think every point made here is right at one time or another! I also think most here are about 99% behind everything you said!

HOWEVER just when you think you have it down pat, that is when Mr. Murphy will turn it all, right UPSIDE DOWN, every time!