BFR shooter-

I think the really good point you make is that some new guns shoot poorly and some old ones shoot great....but we must always remember vice-versa is also true.

The real thing that strikes home to me is that with everything in guns, you have to try it to see well how the particular combo you have can work. Relying on popular generalizations doesn't work worth poop.

Folks are always asking me at the range, "If I do "Xxxx XX" to my rifle, will it shoot better?" My answer is almost always the same. "Maybe." "But you can't tell until you try it. And WRITE DOWN how it works out. Don't rely on your memory even if you only have one gun."

Speaking of Model 70's, since 1959 I have owned a Pre- WW II War Model 70, SN 19,XXX that Roy Weatherby rechambered to .300 Wby. I bought it from a friend in Indian Forks, Utah. Using plain vanilla 180 gr.. Hornady spire point hunting bullets and 83 grains of the old original Hodgdon's 4831 it always has and still will ahoot 3/4" 3-shot groups at 200 yards, on demand. I also still have a pre-'64 Model 70 .270 FW which will do the same with both 130 gr., Hornady Spire Points, and 150 gr. Nosler Partitions...61.5 grs. of the same 4831 behind the 130's,and somewhat less Dupont 4350 (IMR nowadays) behind the 150's. Both of those loads are more than just "warm" with the current iterations of those powders, so I don't recommend them to anyone, and I don't fire more than 3-shot groups with them for the sake of barrel-temp and bore life. Traded a M/S .270 for that gun, at the 1974 Calgary Gun Show. The M/S was worth much more money with its scope and mount, but wasn't as handy to use in the deer woods.

Also just sold a couple of years ago a standard-weight Model 70 .220 Swift which would shoot 5 Norma factory 50-gr. loads into less than half an inch more often than not, and it was also made before WW II.

So, yes, there are some nice new guns that are very acurate, but that's the kind of experience that tells me there were a bunch of older guns that were accurate too. One often has to use his head for more than a hatrack to find out what they like, but sometimes ye olde ones are real diamonds in the rough. Oh, and I bought NONE of those three guns new, and none of them has worn a scope of more than 8-X, The .300 Weatherby M70 has an old 6-X Lyman in a Stith Master Mount; the .270 has a BalVar-8 in another Master Mount, and the .220 Swift had an ancient 8-X leupold with 7/8" tube on it.

I've had and still have many rifles like that.... I still have an early Ruger 77-RS Flat-bolt in .257 Roberts. Took it out to the range just to have an excuse to clean the bore, about this time last year. The local wise-ass spotted it and immediately started bad-mouthing Rugers. But after I fired 5 consecutive sub half-inch 5-shot groups with it, I noticed he was at the other end of the range, and being rather quiet. That gun was also bought used, but ANIB, and has a 4-X Leupold M-8 on it. It has had absolutely nothing done to it in the way of rifle-smithing. It just likes to shoot. I will grant you I had to try about a dozen different combos of powder and bullets before I found what it likes to feed on, but once found, it just "eats" X-rings at 100 yards.

Once had a Model 70 "Bull-Gun" in .300 H&H. Took it out on the Palomino range at Sarcee (a Calgary range) with a friend of the time, RCN Commander Jim Jamieson. I think the year was 1978. He and I were both members of the King's Own Calgary Regiment Military Rifle Association at the time and both competitive hi-power ("full-bore" in Canadian lingo) shooters. We shot at short range (400 yards) and between us, with iron sights, racked up over 25 successive bulls with it that afternoon. We then switched to something else as it was obvious we could bore our socks off shooting that bull-gun. I had bought it used from the J&G Rifle Ranch which was then just outside Turner, Montana...the same outfit old Joe DeSaye moved to Prescott, AZ and which now goes under the moniker J&G Sales. J & G, are the initials of Joe and Grace Desaye, the founders/owners.

Enough of this, it could go on almost forever and would put us all to sleep.

Anyway, good acurate rifles have been around a long time.

Alberta Canuck, Interesting thread, if you have not read it I suggest getting a copy of “Modern Accuracy†by L.R. Wallack (The story of benchrest shooting) Greenberg Publishing 1951.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
Some of you can slip over my results ...

Hey bfrshooter, Having read the post of yours on the Black Powder Board that I responded to, I realized then that you really just don't have information from a large enough experience base to interest me. So I "sliped over" your post without responding directly to you, in an attempt to avoid an argument with you.

Not saying you didn't shoot a small group or two in your life, it is just that people who have similar characteristics as "some of the ones allen day exhibits"(self-aggrandizing, loud-mouth, blow-hard, braggart) just don't impress me. The only people they normally impress are fools.

So, being the amiable fellow that I am, I just decided to try and avoid a confrontation. I can actually agree with a couple of the things you posted.

I don't see where the following helps any point you are trying to make:

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
Take the Ruger 77! One is fantastic and the next off the line barely hits paper. Barrels are not wasted, only a hunting rifle, the boob buying it will never know the difference! You have to spend thousands for a custom rifle that shoots good today. ...

Your first portion berates ANYONE buying a Ruger, as if by saying it you achieve some superiority over those folks.

And your last sentence is so wrong it is beyond ignorance and falls into pure Stupidity.

Perhaps that better explains why I initially "slipped over" responding directly to you.

Thanks a lot Horcore. Here's another good thread shot to hell with name calling and inuendo, personal attacks and self serving posts.

I've come to have a lot of respect for many of the posters on this board and yes, I agree that we have a few that ought to be relegated to the sandbox to play some more, we really don't need you to point that out for us as we can see it for ourselves.

When I said the boob buying the rifle will never know, that is my opinion of what some factories think when the rifle coming off the line does not shoot as good as it should, those are not MY views and I wish the factories would get away from that line of thinking. I have read too many bad stories about what Ruger will do for you if your gun IS bad.
Personally, I have had great luck with Ruger and they have always done right by me, but I just use their revolvers.
I have worked on many Ruger 77's and only owned one. Mine had a bad chamber (Out of line with the bore.) and was very inaccurate. I did not want to invest in a new barrel so I sold it. The ones I had to repair had split stocks at the tang where it was touching wood. I would have to bed the action and install a steel rod down into the grip, then leave a gap between the tang and stock. None of these guns should have left the factory! You can't tell me they care once the gun is in it's box to be shipped. None of the big factories test each gun for accuracy except maybe Weatherby and I don't know if they still do.
I have been reloading, shooting, gunsmithing and shooting all forms of competition, except benchrest, for 51 years. I have owned many, many different guns and have repaired and tested thousands.
On the average, most old guns that would not shoot good were either rusted out or worn out. You could go to the store and buy a good rifle and with a small amount of work and almost no money, make it shoot tiny groups. I no longer find it true and some will never go under 2" no matter the work or loads. Yes there are some that are exceptional but it is hit and miss today. I have had new rifles that took over 200 load combinations to make shoot and the load was sub velocity with a rainbow trajectory. Nothing else would shoot. It was a very expensive, highly touted rifle too.
I had a Savage in the shop with the barrel out of line with the reciever and could not be sighted. The owner said it shot good and didn't want to do anything other then get it on target. I shimmed the scope and bases, sighted it and my first 5 shots cut a 1/2" group. The owner was so happy he gave me a nice tip. (Bottle of Jack.)
I have had bad guns and have shot some bad groups, but the good ones and the exceptional ones are worth remembering and talking about. I am not bragging. Only accurate guns are interesting! Others go away.

quote:

Originally posted by duikerman:
Thanks a lot Horcore. ....

Feel free to look at the "left" side of your screen and skip over any posts I make.

Best of luck to you.