As many know from my posts here, I purchased a stainless M70 300 WSM last October when they were still scarce as hen's teeth. After shooting some factory loads and taking one Mulie with it, I had the barrel cut and recrowned at 22."

Regarding particular's, my rifle wears a matte Leupold 2x7 in low Weaver stainless rings/bases. With three rounds and an Uncle Mike's "Mountain Sling" the whole rig goes 8 lbs. 5 oz's. I plan to re-stock the rifle this winter (more time) in glass to get below 8lbs "all-up."

I've recently been playing with Hornady 180 FBSP's and H4350 and RL22. I use WLR primers with both. With both powders and varying charges on two different days all three-shot groups were just under 3/4"... velocities run (depending on powder and charge weight) 2,880 to 2,930.

Today I tried the 180 Failsafe's that I hoped would group good enough to use for antlope, deer and elk this fall (simplicity). I loaded the FS's on top of H4350 (WLR primer's) and once fired (and trimmed) brass (w/ Redding dies). After cleaning down to bare metal with CR10 and JB's, I went to the range. The wind was very stiff... in fact it blew over my sand-bagged chrono twice! Still, I adjusted my shooting so the wind was blowing at my back toward's the target.

After one fouling shot, I shot my first three-shot group... it went .470" at 2,882 fps. I let the barrel cool and shot the next group with .5 gr's more powder... it went .880" at 2,900 fps. All nice clover-leaf's just like with the Hornady's... I'm a happy man, loaded and ready for this fall!

Brad

PS... my 12 yo daughter just completed and passed hunter's ed and will be deer hunting with me too!

I read you need to send that rifle to a super special gunsmith. No matter that it was windy. All the groups should be under 1/2" no matter what.

Brad,

Sounds like you have a winner. Sure is nice to get tight round groups with and tuff bullet.

Good luck to you and you daughter, I'll be tagging along with my two this year, and looking forward to it.

Now that you have that rifle well on the way to being sorted out whats next.

HBH

Hey, Don, did you ever look up those articles I directed you towards, or did you have the stomach for it?

If you think that a tight cluster of holes on a piece of paper off a bench is the single, overriding reason to get fine custom rifles made, you are even less familiar with the subject than I thought you were in the first place. Fine accuracy is a given, and it's only one aspect of the performance of these rifles.

Brad, that brand of accuracy will surely do the job! I suspect you'll get a lot of use and a lot of pleasure out of that rifle. It sounds like a keeper!

AD

Brad, whats your COL with those failsafes. I just ordered some 165s to try in my WSM. Did you moly coat your bore also? Sorry to bomb you with a bunch of questions but do the WLRs seem to seat slightly loose in even new Win. brass?
Not that you need to make any changes but if you have a desire to shoot lighter bullets I have had very good luck with both RL19 and Varget over some old CCI 250 primers. Ive been messing with 140 grain Barnes and 150 grain SSTs for use on eastern Whitetails.
Dave Jenkins

Don, not sure, but why the sarcasm?!? Did I miss something?

HBH... I'll continue running stairs and fast-walking to keep in shape for those steep elk hills!

Allen, I concur... tight groups do not a functional hunting rifle make!

Dave, I seat the Failsafe's at exactly 2.820"... that's exactly .015" off the lands. No bore prepping... I'm really not familiar with using Moly, so maybe I'm missing someting?.?. However, I did scrub the barrel down to bare steel with CR10 and JB's before shooting the FS's as I assumed the Moly'd FS's would work best that way. My loads (*warning* safe in my gun but over most manual's max loads *warning*) were 66.5 gr's and 67.0 gr's of H4350 with the WLR's. I did notice the lighter loads had minor pressure signs while the heavier load did not... I assume this was from getting the bore "slicked" with moly?.?. Is pre-prepping with Moly a "cure" for this? Yes, most primer pockets seemed loose with the WLR's... I had assumed this was from poor brass QC, not from poor primer QC. Did your CCI's fit snug? All I've tried are the WLR's. Have you chrono'd any 180's in your rifle (factory or handloads)? Is your's the 23" bbl'd Browning or the 24" bbl'd M70?

I'm quite certain I have a "slow" barrel as most factory stuff (180's) went at around 2,975 when I had mine the full 24"... I had read a lot of reports of 3,000-3,050 fps with factory 180's. Regardless, mine is a nicely accurate and consistant shooter... handy weight and length too for all-around hunting.

Now I've bombarded you with question's!

Brad

BTW, I get a real kick out of the guy's that are building custom WSM's on long actions to "get more" from the case... what a load of rubbish. Even with the M70's 3.00" magazine, I don't seat the bullets out that far with max loads and there's still plenty of powder room in the case with max loads.

Brad,

The sarcasm was directed at allen day and he did not miss it. I was saying that you bought a stock rifle and you seem very satisfied.

Allen,

If you recall I had/have a signature here and at 24Hour that read "the best group is a single shot".

If that does not address your concern then please explain. However I can inform you that I have recieved emails about "our" topic and the gist of them is that you are just bragging. That while the riflesmith you champion no doubt is exellent that it's redundant.

I did answer on reseaching thru all of the Rifle mags that you painstakingly listed. I said that I started thru the piles and found copies with numbers close to #151 which may be one of those that has the articles and I got sidetracked.

Don, whoever is writing you e-mails may or may not know what they're talking about. All opinions aren't created equal. It's my opinion that you're intentionally ducking the issue, and that you would rather remain firm in your own ignorant conclusions which are based on guesswork and conjecture - not a working knowlege of the subject at hand. You have the gall and audacity to throw sarcastic barbs at me, and yet you're not all versed in the subject you're clumsily trying to debate. In other words, you're shooting blanks. You didn't even have enough gumption to look up the material I directed you to. So if you think you're being all cute with your snide remarks, the only person you're kidding is yourself. But I guess if you want to look in the mirror and tell yourself sweet little fibs, that's your perogative.

AD

[ 09-04-2002, 03:22: Message edited by: allen day ]

I don't want it, believe I need it or can't afford it, therefore it's redundant and unnecessary!
Even though I've never had it I know I'd never want it.
Mine is good enough for me, and should be for you too.
Isn't good old American logic a wonderful thing.

My copy of Rifle #151 has a front cover credit that say's "The David Miller Co. and D'Arcy Echol's best quality bolt action rifles are featured in "Functional Art by Hunters".

The article on page 20 is by David Miller and is quite pompous in it's tone thru out. Miller say's that while British gunmakers made "best" quality double rifles their bolt rifles were 2nd, 3rd and 4th quality. That only in America where the bolt rifle is appreciated in terms of function and form could a "best" rifle be created.

Miller goes on reading like a Academy Awards show with each complimenting the other. He fails to acknowledge any riflemakers before him as being in his (and Echols) best catagory.

The article has pictures of very poor quality. The rifles pictured are of classic style and may have fine wood. Little detail can be seen. There are no pictures of targets or mention of performance.

Don,

The reason that the article did not include targets is that the rifles shoot like a piece of shit and they did not have the facilty to fire some groups on 100 yard targets placed at 15 yards

You seem unable to grasp the fact that some people want something, not just guns, that is better than the normal or average etc.

I would like to relate a small story to you.

Sometime ago a chap I know was involved in a business transaction with a woman who I have aslo met. This involved the chap buying a business from the woman.

As things turned out the business was not at all what the woman had described and the man had not really checked out anything. A couple of us offered the opinion that the man had got caught out because he had been thinking with his dick. Some other blokes said to me that would not be possible and asked me if I had ever seen her and what a crook sort she was.

I said I had met her but asked them if they had ever seen any of the women that this chap had previously had as girl friends and if they had, then they would understand why he was carried away with the woman in the selling of the business deal

Mike

Mike,

That someone what's something finer is not the point at all of this discussion. You are trying to reframe the argument as such. The point of the discussion is two or three people here saying that only a D'Arcy Echols rifle is good enough for function. The vast majority of us on the other hand find standard rifles, tweaked by ourselves frequently, to be satisfactory.

Let's leave the art component out of this discussion. While it adds to the enjoyment of a gun nobody has posted a pic of a Legend rifle yet so I don't think their looks are the point.

Don,

There is function and there is function.

If you went away shooting with a rifle that only averaged 2 inch grouping and especially if you did not know the accuracy of the rifle on paper, then you would shoot all the same game as someone else with the same caliber that grouped half inch.

But which rifle would you rather have?

Ask yourself why are people paying $6000US for these rifles. The reason is simlple and that is because they are better than a standard M70 in all respects.

Now one of the supporters of the Echols rifle, John S, I know quite well, have spoken many times on the phone to him. I can assure you that he has not measured the Echols rifle against what are pieces of shit, as did our chap in the business transaction.

If I remember right you have a pre 64 in 300 H&H. If that was in good condition you could sell it and a buy a used M70 in 300 Win and put some money in the bank. Why have the pre 64.

Also consider that buying the Echols will not be about bragging rights. If you wanted to that you would be better off buying a use H&H bolt action.

Or you would be better off to get a lower price custom gun with high level wood.

I think you are similar in some ways to the chap in the business transaction as all our enjoyments and appraisals are based on the position where we are standing.

Mike

Brad, I will email you in order to avoid this off topic bickering/discussion.
Dave

Dave,

Why don't you just email Brad rather than announcing on this thread that you will email him.

Mike

Yeah, Dave, you do that..........

Don, that article was the least significant of any on the list I outlined. But I don't think that matters with you one way or the other. What does seem to matter is that all of your pre-conceived notions remain unchallenged, and that the sanctity of your gun budget remain secure. In other words, the economic/conceptual line you've draw in the sand for yourself is the same line that the rest of the world had better stand behind as well, or else you'll strike back with inuendo, comments about stupidity, wisecracks, etc. You must deal with a lot of security issues...

Anyhow, my dad's wise observation was that 'a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still', and he was right. With that in mind, I'm through debating anything with you.

AD

[ 09-04-2002, 18:55: Message edited by: allen day ]

The effort and work required to get to a higher orbit is only exceeded by the effort and work required to remain in a low orbit.

[ 09-04-2002, 19:01: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

Allen,

You were "through" debating this long ago when you suggested that a 21 year old or myself buy a rifle from DE for $6,600 extra. This was bad advice. If you had made a argument that for a man of means who did not have the time, ability withstanding, that a DE rifle was a way to go you would be correct.

But to even insist that it's the only way to go for a man of means flies in the face of common sense.

Now that I have read the article in Rifle #151 I can understand why you say it's the least of them. It really does make a bad impression. I really doubt DE would say those things to vault himself to #1? by saying that the rifles of John Rigby, Holland and Holland or a miriad of other outstanding smiths are 2nd rate compared to himself.

I am disapointed that someone would accuse me of calling them stupid. We are all riflemen here.

[ 09-05-2002, 07:03: Message edited by: Don Martin29 ]

Don, I'm not sure why you were compelled to include me in your reply posted above. Allen is a very good friend who's opinion's I consider very carefully as I know those opinions have been arrived at through a lot of unrelenting questioning, observation and trial and error. Certainly a guy could hunt the world adequately armed with a "stock" rifle from any number of manufacturer's. However, the difference between a factory rifle and what the likes of D'Arcy Echols is crafting is the difference between WalMart Tasco's and Leica's... both will let you see a bird but one will make the experience a pleasure. Not all things are created equal, as not all opinion's are created equal.

Brad

Brad, Sounds like you got yourself a winner there. YOu should be ready for anything.

Tell your daughter congrats from us all here And to the proud papa. Congrats

Brian

Thank's a bunch Brian... I'll let her know... that'll put a smile on her face!

Brad

Brad,

I removed your name from the post that you objected to.

Allen Day's opinion is no more valuable than mine. He somehow needs to use a $7,000 rifle. It's almost funny when you step back from it.

When that DE customer gets his "Legend" in March I may get to see how he can shoot.

I doubt that any customer of D'arcy Echols, David Miller or any other big name 'smith "needs" one of their rifles to hunt with, in the strictest sense of the word. But, if someone is making a lot of trips around the globe after rare and/or costly species a rifle built from such makers can and does make a lot of sense. Why? Well let's see now. Absolute reliability in feeding and functioning, scope mounts that cannot and will not fail, accuracy that compares very favorably with a match rifle, and a stock that will not shift or warp or have it's finish melt in a rainstorm. Sounds like something a serious hunter would certainly be interested in, at least to my way of thinking.
I hate to tell you Don, but your opinion isn't worth as much as Allen's on this subject. Why? Because you have no basis for comparison, as he does. You have never handled, shot or hunted with one of these rifles! Why should anyone pay any attention to a darned thing you have to say about them, or their suitability for ownership by anyone, wealthy or not?
Maybe when the gentleman you referred to gets his Legend he will allow you to shoot, handle and examine it thoroughly. Afterwards you will at least be able to offer a first hand opinion of the gun, which might lend some credibility to your opinions on this matter. Until then, I'd seriously consider talking about something else.

Don, I've never seen/read/heard Allen say anyone, himself included, "had" to hunt with an Echol's rifle. The $450 Ruger at WalMart will get the job done for most hunting purposes. The difference is "good enough" (well, sort of) vs. "near perfection." For the full-blown rifle loony who really understands what Darcy Echols is producing and why... well, I for one, can understand the desire to own one... or two, or...

My binocular example is, IMHO, a good example. I used "mid-priced" Japanese made (Nikon) 8x30's for about twelve years. When I finally allowed myself to spend some time (I knew what was going to happen) with some high-end Teutonic optics, I was ruined. I bought a pair of Swarovski's and will probably get a pair of Leica's in the future and give the Swaro's to my wife and kids. My real real interest (in some ways) is actually optics more than rifles. They go with me everywhere and I use them all the time. I derive immense pleasure using them. Because of my training and background, I'm very picky about good optics/binoculars and honestly can't understand anyone not finding a way to finance the very best as good optics are every bit (in many instances more) important than one's rifle. Still, I'm realistic and understand not everyone has my level of discerment regarding optics and/or don't really see the "need" for spending the equivelent of a house-payment on quality glass. The $125 Pentax is "good enough." Personally, I live in one of the richest corner's of God's world, and I can't fathom "good enough" when it comes to exploring this corner. You could argue spending the extra on "the best" is a diminishing return... for me, I wish the "best" was even better!

Brad

In one of the first discussions of the Legend rifle concept I said that it was a complete surprise to me that there is a market for a rifle that is supposed to function.

Of course we have all seen rifles for decades that are fine works of art from the pre war smiths thru todays riflesmiths. In fact the Rifle #151 that was referenced was a review of nothing but wood stocked rifles that seem to have very fine wood. Such rifles have been made since the first kings had firearms and are still a source of pride to most of us. And I was pleased to see that D'Arcy Echols made/makes such rifles (wood stocks). It's been assumed that such a rifle was "slicked" also and would operate really well besides looking great.

But now we have, in my opinion, a solution to a non problem with the exception of hunters who can't go over their own rifle or don't have the time. So that's my point. I never even thought that someone else would have to mount my scope or tighten up my rifle but I can understand that some people are so busy making money so they can go on safari's that why should they bother.

For myself I get the pride of doing it myself. I expect that the great majority of riflemen do the same.

I kind of hoped that this subject would die. As we are talking about the skilled output of only one man compared to the output of dozens of factories with thousands of workers.

Now I see that there will be no end to it as it is advertising (which is fine with me as I don't have to read it) and we have some here to want others to know that their stuff is better according to them!

Don,

Can you recontour the top of the action and recut the receiver threads and then make one piece mounts?

What you appear to be saying is that you can buy your new car and check that oil levels are OK and make the sure the car is all clean, tyre pressures are fine all around etc. Different deal completely.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Mike

Don,

What would you do in these circumstances.

Sometime ago a friend of mine brought over his Rem 700 for me to bed, fit a Jewell trigger and put on his Leupold Dual Dovetails.

As is quite common in recent times, the scope was so far out when mounted to ve virtually unusable, but he did want to stick with Dual Dovetails and avoid windage mounts.

So I ground out the insides of the right hand side of the rear rings, which then allowed me to swing the scope across so as things would be lined up. Of course there was a gap around the scope in the rear ring. I then remove the scope so as to be able to bed it to the rear ring with Devcon Titanium.

Woudl that be as effective as what Echols achieves with what he does. probably yes.

But which setup would you rather own?

I know John S quite well and I think he will agree that I have the capability to fiddle about with guns to a greater degree than he can. But I come anywhere near an Echols rifle. What I can do is make a turd smell nicer.

Mike

[ 09-06-2002, 05:53: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike375:
[QB]Don,

Can you recontour the top of the action and recut the receiver threads and then make one piece mounts? <----Solution to a non problem.

Why should I? My rifles shoot fine!

Don,

I explained what I did with the Rem 700 and asked you which rifle you wold prefer, what I did or the Echols treatment. Both will shoot and both will have the rifle sighted in with a scope that is close to the center of its adjustment.

Mike

Brad,

I think it was about 1998 that I first saw the gun forums and it was this site, different software then. I got the internet and with searching on calibres it turned up Saeeds loading data.

Probably the most benefit I have gotten from the sites is that Australia is not too bad to live in. I often show the threads to a bloke I work with in our business. He is not a shooter, but he has had the same gain as I have had. I am sure you know what I mean. In other words, before the internet, I always thought the loosing type views put forward by the DM29s were exclusive to Australia

I spoke to Echols about just doing up an M70 action. He only wants to make complete rifles, although I think if there was not the problems of shipping to Australia etc, perhaps you could have just the action done.

Your mate Chic Worthing has a thing in his signature about something to do with ugly rifles, I can't remember what it exactly says, but it does cover everything.

I must say that at different times I don't know whether to envy the DM29s of the world or feel sorry for them.

But I think the verdict would be to feel sorry for them.

DM29s limitations are shown by him thinking the Echols stuff is expensive. If he gets into the H&H prices at $27000US for field grade bolt action rifle he will have a stroke. Deluxe wood is an option

But you know, if you are like a bloke out here that has the number plates on his car 500Nitro and 700Nitro, with what that cost with the new H&H doubles, the bolt actions are cheap. They are through away material.

I would like to think with my business that the day is not too far away where I will be able to buy the H&H and it will not be a big expenditure.

When I can do that, I will also be able to pay Echols enough money to do the work on the M70 and override all other problems.

It is a shame that DM29 has not caught onto what the American ideal is about.

I think he knows what it is about which is why he trys to avoid postings I have put to him, like on his Pre 64 300 H&H.

He is just expending so much energy to stay in the lower orbit.

There is a saying that goes along these lines "the world steps to one side for the man who knows what he wants"

That of course cuts both ways. That is, if don't want much, the world will allow you to fulfill your dreams

Mike

So Mike375,please tell us all about the american ideal,especially since you've allowed your goverment to take away most of your guns. About the only american ideal that exsists anymore is cold cash. Wether it be the commercialization of every holiday in order to make big business rich,the hosing by hospitals for medical care,the media maggots that exploit every tragedy for profit and ratings which lead to more money,or the dogshit that feel they deserve millions because some family member died in the world trade center. The list goes on and it's all based on the american ideal of money.

Like it or not the only thing that makes a echols or miller rifle worth the price tag it carries,is the dipshit that is willing to pay it,and judging by what echols has said over the last few months,people aren't breaking down the door to get one of his rifles. In fact he was crying rivers about other smiths who are offering his black rifle for half the price. I know I know the other guys don't offer all the refinements and the secret echols decoder ring with their rifles.

As for somebody who doesn't own a echols or miller rifle,not having a "basis of comparison". Actually the guy that doesn't own one of these rifles but may have shot or handled one of them,has the means to make an even better comparison of the rifle,since they don't have any vested interest in trying to defend and justify why they spent 6 grand plus for a fuckin' M70.

Lord

Hey Brad,

I liked my 300 WSM and wish I had kept it--it shot about the same as yours right out of the box. Sounds like you've got a winner!

Good Hunting,

[ 09-10-2002, 05:20: Message edited by: ACRecurve ]

Andy, I'm having a difficult time trying to figure out any other rifle I actually need... the 300 WSM sorta covers all big game here in the West!

Brad

RMK,

From your posting:

So Mike375,please tell us all about the american ideal,especially since you've allowed your goverment to take away most of your guns.

Apart from the fact that your statement is incorrect, what do gun laws in Australia have to do with American ideals?

The list goes on and it's all based on the american ideal of money.

It sounds is if you would like to live in some type of commune.

Mike

Brad,

If I was limited to just one rifle for hunting in the lower 48, the 300 WSM would fill the bill nicely. Sometimes I wonder how much better I would shoot if I didn't shoot so many different rifles!

Good Hunting,