Hot Core, in the final analysis, what I've said to you before still goes: No one wishes you ill, and no one here is against you. I'm certainly not, and I suspect Kute, Brad, John, and all the rest of us feel the same way.

Savage, I'm not sure you've paid any attention to anything that's been said here. No matter, the world's still going to turn, and most of us will be hunting come fall..........

AD

I've either owned or handled a good number of really nice $1500 to $7500 rifles, you can indeed sometimes get a nice rifle for $2500 but not always.
I have a Dakota model 10 with a $1500 wood upgrade that went "click" the first time I pulled the trigger on a live round. 2 trips back to Dakota finally got it a new firing pin and block. It was probably caused by dry firing in the gun shop but still that rifle shouldn't break by pulling the trigger. To replace it would cost almost as much as a legend.
I got to play with a John Rigby 416 Rigby. It wouldn't chamber a factory Federal round. This rifle would probably sell for 10K + but would have really sucked if you took it to africa without having it rechambered to the more modern specs for 416 Rigby's.
My Sako TRG-22 went click on about the 6th live round. The firing pin is held in by a roll pin. Again dry-firing probably sheared the roll pin but again on a $2500+ rifle it shouldn't happen.
I've messed with at least a half a dozen nicely stocked custom rifles in the $2000-$5000 range that wouldn't feed for beans, one of them a good buddy had got broken in half by Fedex on the way to Mark Penrod to get it to feed correctly.

I guess the point is you can spend a lot of money and be very dissappointed, when your pricey new toy doesn't work right. I've yet to hear anyone who was dissappointed with an Echol's rifle..................DJ

And a person can sometimes get lucky and get factory rifles that feed like butter. I have two Model 70 classics in .300 and .338 (both early ones when they first came out) and both of them feed extremely well whether you work the action slow or fast or whatever.

Some factory rifles really do shoot, feed and function well. I've had great luck with push-feed, post-64 Model 70s, although two of those needed to have their extractors replaced, which is about a three-minute job that you can do yourself.

If anyone wants the most rifle for the least money, the pre-64 Model 70 is almost impossible to beat, as is the old FN Mauser/Browning High-power ('Safari' grade). I've owned more of these than I'd care to admit, especially pre-64s, and almost every one of them shot well and fed perfectly. The pre-64s in 300 H&H and 375 H&H come with properly-engineered magazine boxes that hold four-down, and they are the ONLY factory rifles ever built and chambered for belted-magnums that have 100% correctly-dimensioned magazine systems. And you can bet that they feed like there's no tomorrow. The pre-64s in 270 Win. and 30-06 come with the right magazine systems as well.

AD

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
Hot Core, in the final analysis, what I've said to you before still goes: No one wishes you ill, and no one here is against you. I'm certainly not, and I suspect Kute, Brad, John, and all the rest of us feel the same way.

Savage, I'm not sure you've paid any attention to anything that's been said here. No matter, the world's still going to turn, and most of us will be hunting come fall..........

AD

Allen,

I enjoy your posts so much. You have become an Elmer Keith of the internet age. Keep it up and don't stay away too long.

As a very wise man once said:

The value and validity of an opinion is directly proportional to the amount that it agrees with that of the listener‘s.

or as my wife said: "Everyone is entitled to MY opinion."

Apparently Echols does not have a website or web address, and I don't want to bother a working gunsmith with a phone call, so let me ask you guys, does he prefer the pre64 or the current M70 action as the basis for a Legend rifle?

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
.... The pre-64s in 300 H&H and 375 H&H come with properly-engineered magazine boxes that hold four-down, and they are the ONLY factory rifles ever built and chambered for belted-magnums that have 100% correctly-dimensioned magazine systems....

Without speaking for ANYONE ELSE, I sure appreciate this kind of input. No doubt about it at all, ALL OTHER factory rifles built for a Belted cartridge are designed or built totally wrong.

So, any of us that have a current production M70, and any other factory rifle (Remington, Ruger, Savage, Weatherby, you name it) chambered for a Belted cartridge have wasted our money on something designed and built TOTALLY WRONG.

Might as well take them out to the garden and use them for Tomato Stakes. Especially if they are rusting blue and termite food, because they really never rust and of course the termite food would never warp.

It appears "we" ONLY HAVE two real options. In either situation "we" need to forgoe all hunting and shooting(of course practice is a total waste of time anyhow according to ad) and save "our" money until "we" can purchase either:

1. A rag Pre-64 M70 "Holy Grail" that "we" have no idea if it has been exposed to "Overloads" on a continual basis or if it is one of those that has the potential to explode due to "impurities in the steel" as documented so clearly in the book(s) written during that Pre-1964 time period, Mr. PO Ackley's (two volume) Handbook for Shooters & Reloaders. Of course it will be rusting blue and termite food and the stock may not be designed for scope use, but since accuracy just isn't all that important(according to ad) then having a good cheek weld won't matter at all.

2. Get on the waiting list for a GunSmith who has made it to "The (Holy Grail of GunSmiths) List", because they have never made anything but TOTALLY PERFECT firearms which will never need adjusting, won't rust, won't warp, and don't need to be practiced with. Just AMAZING!

Hot Core, no one has suggested that those are the only two worthwhile rifle options that are available. It's hard to please everybody, and I don't want to, and I don't try to!

You ought to start a custom rifle thread of your own, discussing gunmakers whose work pleases you, actions, cartridges, etc. Then I'm sure we'll finally have a thread that you approve of...........

AD

Why bother with Hot Core, he is simply what he accuses better men of being, a blowhard and does not know jackshit about this topic. But he has dealt with ...charging Elephants...and taken out four guys at once....yeah, sure......

Kute, I agree..........

AD

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
...You ought to start a custom rifle thread of your own, discussing gunmakers whose work pleases you, actions, cartridges, etc. Then I'm sure we'll finally have a thread that you approve of....

Ah yes, since someone "disagrees" or points out the total loonacy of ad's posts, the best thing that person could do would be to drop out of the thread. No doubt about it, that is the thing to do. I'll give it the exact same amount of respect and consideration I give all of ad's posts - non-at-all

Apparently ad has gotten the wrong impression about whether or not "I approve" of this thread. Perhaps I just didn't make myself clear to him. Brian made a great post which I enjoyed. I thoroughly "appprove" of Brian's sharing his thought's with us and encourage "Brian" to continue.

Is there any chance at all that ad is so arrogant that he somehow thinks that once he starts posting to a thread, it becomes "his" thread and all other posters should remain mute because NOBODY has more KNOWLEDGE about firearms? Any other input just isn't needed especially if it shows how he is wrong AGAIN!
---

By the way, if any of you are anywhere close to where ad resides, please help him watch-out when he sits down. I'm very concerned he will snap kutenay's neck.

I am sorry to tell you, tough guy, that I do not share your evident anal obsession....but, carry on, you demonstrate exactly what you are more clearly each time you post.

Alright, it is confession time...

Which one of you explained to kutee that I was talking about him having his head stuck up ad's "bradly"?!?!?!

Hey, Hot Core, I don't care if you respect my posts or not. Getting put-down by someone like you is about like having my foot run over by one of my little nephew's 'Matchbox' cars -- you know that SOMETHING tried to run over you, but at the same time you also know that it wasn't carrying with it any momentum..........

AD

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
Apparently Echols does not have a website or web address, and I don't want to bother a working gunsmith with a phone call, so let me ask you guys, does he prefer the pre64 or the current M70 action as the basis for a Legend rifle?

I believe that Allen and others have posted on this before, but my recollection is that the current Model 70 classic is preferred. Perhaps Allen could comment?

Charles, he uses the current Classic M70 action only for the 'glass-stocked 'Legend'. He will use a pre-64 for one of his wood-stocked custom rifles.

I sent him a Classic action one time to build a rifle on, but he rejected it because the action screw holes were crooked. That's one type of factory defect that can't be salvaged.

AD

Allen-
I, for one, appreciate your input and opinions. Thanks and please don't let any of the occasional unpleasantries discourage your participation.

Specifically, I have been building Mausers lately (and one MRC) but have been thinking of building a M70 375 H&H. Could you tell me why you and apparently d'Arcy think that the classic is inferior to the pre-64? I'm thinking functionally--I know that the fit and finsh on the best pre-64's can be wonderful and I have seen some bad Classics but if you high-grade the new ones it seems like the action design itself may be an improvement over the older design (in gas handling anyway). Nostalgia aside, why are the pre-64's a better project platform?

I might interject a comment here, based on actually using P-64s in much of the wilderness of western Canada from 1964 to date; this means carrying the same rifle every day for hours on end, during multi-month sojourns alone in the bush, far from any help in the event of an emergency. Of ALL of the factory rifles I have tried and that's most of them, the P-64s were, as they came from the factory, the consistently most trouble-free, easy to maintain and shot sub m.o.a. with Nosler PT. handloads....what more could you ask for in REAL life conditions?

The P-64 can have the original extractor collar changed out to the gas block version of the Classic and this will assist with the gas handling, not the best feature of this excellent action. I prefer it to the Classic as it has milled feed rails, integral bolt handle and works like dambusters every time, but, I understand why some top 'smiths prefer the Classic.

If, you have a good P-64 action and I have had lots of them and you want a .375 H&H, there is still no finer platform for such a rifle....as the scores of B.C., Alaskan and African professionals who did and do prefer them will attest. It's really about having actual dangerous game experience to base your opinions on and, two years ago, a guide, while standing over the warm carcass of a sizeable Grizzly tried to buy one of my P-64 .338s as he found it much better than his Rem. 700, a design that is wonderful for some things, but, a DGR ain't one of them....no, I did not sell!

Despite owning pre64s since 1953 (I bought an '06 promptly upon coming back from Korea) my hunting experience with them, or anything else for that matter, is very limited. Nearly everything I know about rifles comes from reading, collecting, and the range. I am glad to have people like Allen Day and Kutenay confirm my pro pre64 feelings and would have to rule out the Legend if it is made on a new 70 action, not for any logical reason, just simple plain irrational dumb prejudice.

<-----just lurking here watching this post.

My turn to talk? Let me preface this by stating that I have a Legend "on order", and am patiently waitng for D'Arcy to get back from Tanzania to finish it. Being a poor government worker, I had to save a while to pony up for a Legend, but I think it's worth it for a lifetime investment. I plant to whack a lot of game with this rifle. Do I absolutely need it? Not at all. But, since hunting with my two Penrod Rifles on my last safari, I've really grown to appreciate good rifles that feed, shoot, and function well 100% of the time. The legend I have ordered is a 300WM and I think it will be a good caliber I can use on a lot of game. Is it worth half again to twice as much as a Penrod Rifle? Im hoping so. After spending a few hours with D'Arcy at SCI Reno and really looking over the legends - I'm inclined to think it is. One thing I can say for certain - D'Arcy gave me a list of EVERY client he's ever made a rifle for, and being prudent, I called EVERY one of them. Not one person had a negative thing to say about either D'Arcy or his rifles. NOT ONE!

Like a lot of people here, I have to save to go on a safari (I've been on two) and can't afford to go every year. I think it's more important to get the best tools you can afford, and bitch once about the price, rather than risk the "maybe it's good enough" approach. Being left-handed certainly limits your options as well. Mark Penrod and D'Arcy were both highly recommended to me - and so far I've been pleased with my dealings with both of them. I've made a few expensive mistakes with a couple of other rifle makers in the past, and plan to stick with what works for me. Just my .02 worth.

Jeff

For the 'Legend', D'Arcy uses the current M70 Classic action only, and he'll make absolutely certain that it's fundamentally sound before he'll start work on it.

For his 'Classic' grade rifle with a walnut stock, he'll use a good Mauser 98, especially a 1909 Argentine (he has magazine boxes for those as well) if the client plans desires a short belted-magnum or standard, '06-type chambering and the client prefers a Mauser action. These actions are totally reworked and rehardened at a special lab for maximum strength and performance.

Also for the 'Classic', if the client prefers a Model 70 action, Echols prefers the pre-64 if something like a 30-06 or 270 is to be built. The factory magazine system is already perfect for those cartridges, although Echols will substitute his own magazine follower. He'll also use a pre-64 for short belted-magnums if the client is will accept nothing else buyt a pre-64. Pre-64s get tested for hardness as well (some are TOO hard), and if that's the case, these get reheat-treated at the same laboratory.

For longer belted-magnums, such as the 375 H&H, Echols prefers the 'Classic', because the receiver itself is a bit longer, but he will use a pre-64 at the client's insistence.

For a big magnum such as the 416 Rigby or 505 Gibbs, Echols gets modern, commercial Mauser actions from Hartmann & Weiss.

He'll also build a single-shot rifle on the fine Hagen (sp?) action...........

AD

Jeff, I know guys that have spent thirty-some years recycling "regular" rifles and spending far, far more over time than if they would have had a couple of great, no-compromise rifles built early on.

I've been there myself. But it takes a while sometimes before you finally get sick enough of it to do something about it..........

AD

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
Jeff, I know guys that have spent thirty-some years recycling "regular" rifles and spending far, far more over time than if they would have had a couple of great, no-compromise rifles built early on.

I've been there myself. But it takes a while sometimes before you finally get sick enough of it to do something about it..........

AD

I agree. But my safe is gonna be empty now. Three really good rifles instead of 15 mediocre ones. But the bright side is I've convinced my wife that I'm economizing.....hun..I'm gonna cut back to just three rifles.

Jeff-Allen,

I agree with the idea of having a few really good rifles rather than a safe full of lesser quality rifles. After going through 20 or so factory rifles and those built by "semi-custom" shops such as H-S Precision, I have exactly four big game rifles. Legends in .300 Wby, .338 WM and .416 Rem and a .30-06 built by Al and Roger Biesen on a 1957 pre-64 Featherweight. I have found D'Arcy's rifles to provide utterly dependable function and accuracy. Also, as a believer in the old "beware of the man with one rifle..." adage, I think that there is a lot to be said for being really proficient with two or three rifles.

Originally quoted by Jeff Alexander:

quote:

One thing I can say for certain - D'Arcy gave me a list of EVERY client he's ever made a rifle for, and being prudent, I called EVERY one of them. Not one person had a negative thing to say about either D'Arcy or his rifles. NOT ONE!

D'Arcy must have been holding back on you Jeff, as I don't remember getting a call from any fellow Government Workers.

Chet

Thanks Allen, Kut et al.

I spoke with three D'Arcy Echols rifle owners today (Allen, I'll get around to you last to shore up any thoughts or comments)- all of them 100% satisfied and in love with their rifles.

I will meet with a current owner of several of D'Arcy Echols' rifles next month- he just so happens to be passing through my Province on a Caribou hunt. This will hopefully give me even more perspective.

Those I have interviewed echo much of what Allen has described to us. D'Arcy Echols' rifles seem to provide PERFECTION. Perfection which no other riflemaker can duplicate in a Glass rifle. 100% reliability (total peace of mind), Best of everything: best stock, best reworked action, best mag. box, best quality components and metalsmith work etc... were all things that I heard during the conversations.

Those high-level comments were normally backed by some discussion and examples that showed why they made those comments in the first place.

Interesting...

CL, I told you!

Chuck

If there is a "skip the garbage" function on this program would someone kindly show me where it is?


I concurr with Brad. While I appreciate fine craftsmanship it is not a nessescity, it is a luxury. Is it junk if it doesnt feed? Yes! Is a Legend the minimum requirment for a rifle to feed flawlessly? Hell no!

Maybe Allen considers his Echols rifles not only a nessescity but totally practical as well, more power too him. I say they are a luxury and are more meticulously crafted than I need. That is not a shot at Allen either, just a differing view.

I dont work on other peoples rifles but I do build my own. Function and sound design is one, no THE reason I am so fond of Mausers and Springfields, lots of "junk" coming off of assembly lines today. I have several Mausers that feed flawlessly and once they reach that point I dedicate my efforts to other aspects, and yes, not unlike D'arcys "other" rifles, beauty is one of the aspects I work on.

Again, I applaud D'arcy for the state his craft has achieved. I stand in awe of it. I just dont subscribe to the notion that such perfection is needed to have reliable function.

Yes, you did-
Thanks Chuck.

Wstrnhuntr,

quote:

I just dont subscribe to the notion that such perfection is needed to have reliable function.

You're right- a couple of the D'Arcy Echols owners said point blank that perfection was not needed to have reliable function. They have all owned other reliably functioning rifles in the past, but NONE were perfect- some were even far from perfect. They also mentioned that reliable function is one thing and the D'Arcy Echols Legend rifle is another- 100% reliable function 100% of the time.

To me what was very telling was Allen’s comment about him declining to use an action because the receiver/guard screws were off. Not that many guys out there would even bother to check that, let alone refuse the work because of it.

Bottom line is unless you are an art fan, and/or quite well off, you don’t hire Michelangelo to paint your bathroom. Craftsmen, are not for everyone...but for those who want Craftsmanship and can afford it... why not. Just look at all the fun you could have sitting on the can and looking up at the ceiling!

Rick, one D'Arcy Echols Legend rifle owner that I spoke with today was told by D'Arcy to find an action that was produced within a certain year range prior to 64 if he really wanted a 30-06 rifle.

quote:

You're right- a couple of the D'Arcy Echols owners said point blank that perfection was not needed to have reliable function. They have all owned other reliably functioning rifles in the past, but NONE were perfect- some were even far from perfect

Exactly,while it would be nice to think that every component of every product that we use in our day to day life could be made perfect it simply is not necessary and the extra cost of trying to obtain total perfection is simply not worth it to most people.After all do you have you car torn down to the last nut and bolt and have it rebuilt perfectly before driving it?Yet the safety of you and your family rests with that car evey time you drive down the highway.

It seems clear from the comments that an Echols Legend occupies the same slot - the absolute very best hunting machine available - that a Griffin & Howe Springfield built up on a stargauged NRA Sporter occupied in, say, 1935. Cost, allowing for the immense depreciation in the value of the dollar, is roughly comparable. The difference is that the G&H is beautiful in the abstract as well as in function, and the Legend only in the latter. This is inescapable because of the glass stock.

quote:

Originally posted by CanadianLefty:
Rick, one D'Arcy Echols Legend rifle owner that I spoke with today was told by D'Arcy to find an action that was produced within a certain year range prior to 64 if he really wanted a 30-06 rifle.

I’m not “promoting’ or “demoting†any rifle over another...I just thought it was rather impressive that he rejected an action for something that would probably never be caught by most other people, and would probably also never have any real, measurable or practical effect on the function or reliability of the rifle.

I don’t own one of his rifles...have no intention of owning one...and don’t know anyone who ownes one. I just admire craftsmanship and people who take allot of pride in their work and pay attention to the small details just because. I admire and can appreciate allot of things that I would never consider buying.

Whether or not his rifles are “worth†the price he charges, to me, is irrelevant and a rather silly topic. As I stated early on, something is worth exactly what someone else is willing to pay for it, and I don’t fault anyone for capitalizing on that and making an honest buck. It ain’t like anyone has to buy one of his rifles if they don’t like them or think they are overpriced.

I have a $2,500.00 scope sitting on one of my rifles and allot of people thought I was crazy when I bought it...but since none of them were paying for it I didn’t bother to give them a vote in MY decision! Is this scope worth $2,500.00??? I think it is, and I don’t really worry whether someone else feels otherwise.

Personally, I doubt that he is getting wealthy selling rifles considering the time he puts into each one of them. Does anyone have an idea how many rifles he builds and sells each year? If profit was his true motive he obviously would cut back on allot of the “unecessary†stuff so he could cut his costs...and it doesn’t sound as though he is willing to to do that.

Stubblejumper, I do get your point- it is a very good one. Perfection does come at a price and it may never be needed or maybe someday in the B.C. wilderness or on the plains of Africa it might...

You have to take my full quote in context, including:

quote:

They also mentioned that reliable function is one thing and the D'Arcy Echols Legend rifle is another- 100% reliable function 100% of the time.

In other words, from what I understood, even though they had reliable function from the other rifles, they might not always be 100% reliable, 100% of the time- something that they felt that the Legend would provide.

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
It seems clear from the comments that an Echols Legend occupies the same slot - the absolute very best hunting machine available - that a Griffin & Howe Springfield built up on a stargauged NRA Sporter occupied in, say, 1935. Cost, allowing for the immense depreciation in the value of the dollar, is roughly comparable. The difference is that the G&H is beautiful in the abstract as well as in function, and the Legend only in the latter. This is inescapable because of the glass stock.

I think a more accurate comparison would be made between one of Echols' Classic guns and the G&H. if you want to keep it apples to apples. And, after having owned a few of the G&Hs and other "classic" names I can tell you that there is no comparison there. Work by Echols or several other top class 'smiths is simply worlds better than anything done pre/post-war by G&H and the rest. The old timers made decent guns but the gunsmiths we have today have them outclassed on all areas, IMO.

quote:

In other words, from what I understood, even though they had reliable function from the other rifles, they might not always be 100% reliable, 100% of the time- something that they felt that the Legend would provide.

No product no matter how perfectly it is made will perform perfectly 100% of the time.Take the space shuttles for instance.There have been failures despite the most rigorous quality control and very extensive testing.However a rifle built by a skilled gunsmith will usually be as close to 100% reliable as one can expect.Spending more money to have a better known gunsmith build the rifle may make the product visually more appealing,but it will not necessarily improve the reliability of the rifle.

John S, altho I grant you a Classic is as handsome as any G&H ever was, it is arguably LESS efficient as a hunting machine than the Legend, glass has to top wood for practicality. And no doubt the top current smiths have figured out refinements that were unknown by G&H in the old days, but they were the best of their time, and, relative to any other hunting rifle you could buy in 1935, stood on the same summit where Echols is today.

IMO, the Mauser sporters, the Rigbys and various other British sporting rifles were, in 1935, at the pinnacle of hunting rifles. The Springfields used by G&H were o.k., but, a '30s commercial Oberndorf Mauser was and is a superior action and the Brits/Germans also had far more experience with functional rifles and dangerous game than the Americans did.

Where the USA has really shone is in making very good, production rifles available to the average guy, the Savage 99, the Win. 54, the Remington 30S and, that piece of junk that any real expert knows is no good, the P-64 Mod. 70, which debuted in '35. The quality of the production rifles from that era and even in the early-mid '50s demonstrated what REAL hunting/working rifles should be and this was the American firearms genius at work. G&H, Hoffman, Neidner and Sedgley were really take-offs on the great British and European marques, but, the Yanks brought good guns to the masses...geez, that sounds almost Marxist, what a ghastly thought!