Pls check Vol 1 No. 5

The matter of the idealized bolt-action keeps coming up. None such is available today, probably because very few people understand the bolt-action rifle, and the manufacturers are unwilling to take a chance on the production of anything unusual.

Not that there is anything mysterious here. It would indeed be odd if we were unable to improve upon a concept which was basically a creation of the 19th century. It is certainly true that a dozen or more "modernized" bolt-action rifles have appeared in the last couple of decades, but oddly enough they do not seem to have been designed by people who shoot much.

Let us consider a few of the desiderata which should be available in a bolt-action designed for the 21st century.

A bolt-action should be glassy smooth and instantly operable. The bolt should have a 90 degrees throw, but it should start at 45 degrees below horizontal, as in the Krag, thus obviating the need for a bent bolt handle to stay out of the line of sight. Reduced rotary movement offers illusory advantages in that it increases camming pressure and sacrifices ease of operation.

A modern bolt-action should be instantly convertible from right to left-hand operation. About one customer in six is left-handed, and should not need to put in for special consideration.

The bolt-action should use two, horizontally-opposed locking lugs. Its extractor should not interrupt the circle of the bolt-face, nor should its ejector. (Again, note the Krag bolt-face.)

The modern bolt-action should include a magazine cut-off, a device which I have found eminently useful all my shooting life (which goes back a long way).

The modern bolt-action should feature a rotary box magazine with a shoulder detent to avoid masking soft-point spitzers flat while waiting their turn. (Personally, I would prefer something on the order of Savage 99, but the Mannlicher-type - if made of steel - would do as well.)

The modern bolt-action should permit direct feeding into the chamber without use of the magazine.

The modern bolt-action should feature a strong, simple, single-stage trigger, releasing without apparent motion at 50 oz or a bit less.

While I have certain reservations (along with my good friend and mentor Ian McFarlane of Okavango) about mechanical safety latches, it would be impossible to sell a rifle that did not include one. It should be operable with either hand. It should not extrude from the rifle to catch on things (as is the case with the Winchester three-position safety.) And it should disconnect the trigger and sear from the striker, while at the same time positively locking the striker. (People who count upon a safety latch to render a firearm inoperable are living in a dream world.)

The modern bolt-action should be available in three lengths - short (308), standard (30-06), and long (505 Gibbs).

And last but not least, the modern bolt-action should be factory-fitted with an integral ghost ring aperture sight mounted in the receiver bridge, as was the case with the old ZKK. Telescope sights are here to stay, but they do not invalidate the need for reserve iron sights, and those iron sights should be efficient, as opposed to the V-shaped arrangements now considered factory standard.

There are a couple of extra considerations involving the fitting, bedding and trigger adjustment of the modern bolt-action, but they go into the shop manual.

I don't suppose anyone is going to pay any attention to this sort of thing. Marketing will always be a more important factor to the manufacturers than excellence of design. Besides, the weapons we have been using since the turn of the century have given us excellent service. Still, it is nice to speculate upon the search for excellence, Even if nothing comes of it, it makes good campfire conversation.

Good hunting!

Very interesting post.....it causes thinking.....painful as that may seem.

My thoughts: (not worth much but it's a free internet)

quote:

A bolt-action should be glassy smooth and instantly operable

Hard to debate that,,,,,Agreed

quote:

The bolt should have a 90 degrees throw,

Guess the disagreement starts here. This hunter wants a 60 degree throw.

quote:

A modern bolt-action should be instantly convertible from right to left-hand operation. About one customer in six is left-handed, and should not need to put in for special consideration.

Interesting comment. none are like this today.....and the number is more like 1 in 11 are left handed not 1 in 6.

Making right and left hand models is one thing but making it convertible would detract from the stock design and be objectionable. I'd stick to right and left hand models.

quote:

The bolt-action should use two, horizontally-opposed locking lugs

I can think of no good reason to saddle the engineering staff with this requirement. It's the result of design and not the requirement of such. Totally disagree

quote:

Its extractor should not interrupt the circle of the bolt-face, nor should its ejector.

Generally I'd agree but this precludes a round bolt face and that's not necessarily a requirement. Traditional yes.....but not a requirement.

quote:

The modern bolt-action should include a magazine cut-off,

Great idea.....love it.

quote:

The modern bolt-action should feature a rotary box magazine with a shoulder detent to avoid masking soft-point spitzers flat while waiting their turn. (Personally, I would prefer something on the order of Savage 99, but the Mannlicher-type - if made of steel - would do as well.)

This is a great thought. The Savage 99 magazine is a very good idea.

quote:

The modern bolt-action should permit direct feeding into the chamber without use of the magazine.

Absolutely.

quote:

The modern bolt-action should feature a strong, simple, single-stage trigger, releasing without apparent motion at 50 oz or a bit less.

Are we willing to listen to 40 Oz?, no perceivable creep and after travel adjustable?

quote:

mechanical safety latches should be operable with either hand. It should not extrude from the rifle to catch on things (as is the case with the Winchester three-position safety.) And it should disconnect the trigger and sear from the striker, while at the same time positively locking the striker.

We've already stricken the ambidextrous feature as too cumbersome to design so the ambidextrous feature here is also deleted. Sorry! The rest is agreed.

quote:

The modern bolt-action should be available in three lengths

We're not designing for cost.....remember
It will be designed for
1. .222 family
2. .308 family
3. 7 X 57 family
4. .30-06 family
5. .375 H&H family (non belted)
6. .416 Rigby size

quote:

the modern bolt-action should be factory-fitted with an integral ghost ring aperture sight mounted in the receiver bridge,

Ah....wellllll lets try this.
The barrel shall have an integral front sight that is insertable such as the NECG banded sight.

The receiver shall be formed for attachment of telescope in a fixed manner such as the Ruger, Sako etc. Mounts shall not be attached with screws or added on. They will be integral to the action and matched to scope mount rings which are easily demountable and a ghost ring peep to be mounted in the front receiver ring at a moments notice in the event of failure of the scope.

Let me add a few more considerations.
1. the barreled action to be fitting the stock so correctly as to not require glass bedding even if that means glass bedding full length from the factory.

2. The barrel to be uncrowned. The customer dictates the length required to the nearest 1/4" and the barrel cut and crowned to that need.

3. McMillan style stock or English walnut at the option of the customer. (or both if requested)

4. barrel band swivel on all calibers with over 4,000 ft-lb ME

5. Rubber but plate standard with decelerator style pad on models over 3,000 ft-lb ME

6. Rear swivel to be M-70 supergrade style.

7. two stock bolts standard in models over 3,700 ft-lb energy

8. All designers using the term "plastic" to be terminated immediately.

quote:

Marketing will always be a more important factor to the manufacturers than excellence of design.

True but one cannot look away from this. It's of little value to design a gun that no one can afford and worse yet to prostitute the design such that everyone can afford it. It's well known that cost and volumes are highly related and serious balance is a must here.

Regardless of this issue the quality standards of function, feeding, extraction, ejection, accuracy, correct functioning of the trigger and safety and overall aesthetics of checkering, stock finish, metal polish and bluing must be under strict quality control.

I see no reason why this can't be built and put in the hands of a customer for under $1,250 (USD) in todays money. All you need is about $100,000,000 in cash to start the factory.

quote:

The modern bolt-action should feature a rotary box magazine with a shoulder detent to avoid masking soft-point spitzers flat while waiting their turn. (Personally, I would prefer something on the order of Savage 99, but the Mannlicher-type - if made of steel - would do as well.)

With all due respect to the late Jeff Cooper...what he is describing sounds like a "peoples rifle" that would be designed in a communist country with a "one size fits all" mentality.

All of that convertability might be handy for a military rifle that would be used by hundreds of different people over its lifetime...however, the bolt action feature would be just a wee bit out of place for that purpose.

quote:

With all due respect to the late Jeff Cooper

The colonel is going to be very upset when he finds out he is dead, last I checked he was still alive.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
Very interesting post.....it causes thinking.....painful as that may seem.

My thoughts: (not worth much but it's a free internet)

quote:

A modern bolt-action should be instantly convertible from right to left-hand operation. About one customer in six is left-handed, and should not need to put in for special consideration.

Interesting comment. none are like this today.....and the number is more like 1 in 11 are left handed not 1 in 6.

Making right and left hand models is one thing but making it convertible would detract from the stock design and be objectionable. I'd stick to right and left hand models.

I got the impressuon that Cooper was discussing the ideal bolt action, not bolt action rifle. Therefore an instantly convertible bolt wouldn't affect stock design, the stock would be designed for right or left hand but not both, (although it could be).

I think if Cooper was discussing the ideal bolt action rifle he would have had a few thoughts on stocks and none were given here.

Rob

quote:

I got the impressuon that Cooper was discussing the ideal bolt action, not bolt action rifle. Therefore an instantly convertible bolt wouldn't affect stock design, the stock would be designed for right or left hand but not both, (although it could be).

I think if Cooper was discussing the ideal bolt action rifle he would have had a few thoughts on stocks and none were given here.

Rob

Excellent point. Thank you
Vapo

quote:

Originally posted by bwanajcj:

quote:

With all due respect to the late Jeff Cooper

The colonel is going to be very upset when he finds out he is dead, last I checked he was still alive.

Forgive me...I thought he passed away.

Jeff Cooper is the only reason I subscribe to Guns & Ammo. This doesn’t mean I always agree with him though. This is not the first time I’ve read about his affection for rotary magazines, I really don’t understand it and wish I could get some elaboration from him on this preference. I have a Savage 99 and have owned Rugers with rotary magazines. I realize they are functional and are “neatâ€. I just don’t see a great advantage, especially versus their complexity, both in manufacture and operation. You can nit pick any thing Mr. Cooper says but most of the time he gives good sound reasoning for his opinions. It doesn’t always je-haw with my on reasoning but that’s probably why I like him.

Think of a bolt action design like the current Savage and Lazzaroni(sp) with the handle on the very rear of the bolt and you can in vision an ambidextrous bolt action fairly easily.

Tang safety is the only way to go. How many block the sear and hold the striker?

Shawn

Shows you how often I read Gun Magazines. I used to read them allot...but I don't really care for "fiction."

quote:

Originally posted by bwanajcj:

quote:

With all due respect to the late Jeff Cooper

The colonel is going to be very upset when he finds out he is dead, last I checked he was still alive.

the rumor of his demise has been greatly exagerated.

Bluetick, his point is that the magazine should be designed so as to allow the shoulder of the case to supplant the bullet point as the bearing surface in the magazine, thus eliminating mashed lead tips due to recoil. IMO it is a long overdue feature. Other than that I see no particular advantage to the design.

quote:

Originally posted by DigitalDan:
Bluetick, his point is that the magazine should be designed so as to allow the shoulder of the case to supplant the bullet point as the bearing surface in the magazine, thus eliminating mashed lead tips due to recoil. IMO it is a long overdue feature. Other than that I see no particular advantage to the design.

Exactly.....mushed over bullet tips shoot just fine for me.

quote:

Posted 04 September 2005 16:44


quote:
A modern bolt-action should be instantly convertible from right to left-hand operation. About one customer in six is left-handed, and should not need to put in for special consideration.



Interesting comment. none are like this today.....and the number is more like 1 in 11 are left handed not 1 in 6.

Think Cooper's number of 1 in 6 may be closer to right. The 1 in 11 number is the number that is usually quoted for the population as a whole. Cooper's number of 1 in 6 reflects his seventy years of dealing with shooters worldwide. Lefties are more likely to be shooters than righties. Lefties are also more likely to be good looking, intelligent, witty, and able to handle adversity.

Hammer

Cooper has had this list together for his perfect rifle for over 20 years now. It is such a great idea that most manufactureers have gone that route and now make perfect rifles. This is because a knowing public demands it. Wait a minute, none of that has happened in the past 20 years. I don't know why, but it is not because HE is wrong (that has never occurred, just ask him). He is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing to G&A a decade ago. I believe everyone should have an opinion, and I also believe I don't have to listen to those self-riteous bards of the gun world

quote:

Exactly.....mushed over bullet tips shoot just fine for me.

Vapodog, they do for me too, but the resultant change of BC is significant for long range shooters that use magazine rifles.

quote:

Think Cooper's number of 1 in 6 may be closer to right. The 1 in 11 number is the number that is usually quoted for the population as a whole. Cooper's number of 1 in 6 reflects his seventy years of dealing with shooters worldwide. Lefties are more likely to be shooters than righties. Lefties are also more likely to be good looking, intelligent, witty, and able to handle adversity.

I'll accept all that. We also know they don't live as long.

quote:

Vapodog, they do for me too, but the resultant change of BC is significant for long range shooters that use magazine rifles

Digital, yes I understand this. However it's always been a little thing to me. I agree that it would be nice if the mooshing of soft points was eleviated.

I'm not at all against the improvement.....

quote:

Originally posted by DigitalDan:
Bluetick, his point is that the magazine should be designed so as to allow the shoulder of the case to supplant the bullet point as the bearing surface in the magazine, thus eliminating mashed lead tips due to recoil. IMO it is a long overdue feature. Other than that I see no particular advantage to the design.

I wish there was a little more insight as to his reasoning. The good Colonel mixes hunting with DG hunting with survival/combat in all of these recommendations and some are just gingerbread unless you want all your rifles to fulfill all those requirements. DD, your right about the BC but I just ain't gonna shoot at game that far away.

If men that far away want me dead, I am sure as hell not gonna shoot at them to tell them where I am. I think I'll run instead (prolly walk at a brisk pace these days).

I would also argue that though I am a Mauser kind of guy, the extra camming torque required in a 60 degree bolt is so negligible it's silly to criticize it. I base that on owning many of both for many years, two lugs, three lugs, six and even 9 in my Sauer 200 and rem Model 760. The only difference is on paper to me.

If I remember right, some years ago Fred Wells made a "combination" Mauser action with a Mannlicher-Schonauer rotary magazine. I wonder if anyone has a picture or any information about it. Thanks and good hunting!

quote:

Originally posted by mehulkamdar:
The modern bolt-action should feature a rotary box magazine with a shoulder detent to avoid masking soft-point spitzers flat while waiting their turn. (Personally, I would prefer something on the order of Savage 99, but the Mannlicher-type ... should be available in three lengths - short (308), standard (30-06), and long (505 Gibbs)....

What size hands do you all think a fellow would need to fit around the stock of a "Rotary magazine 505 Gibbs"? Or one made for a regular old Belted castridge, or a WSM?

Seems like you would need some really BIG hands to me.
---

Not real sure the Col. has been doing much more than "Theory" for the past few decades or so. If he had bothered to ask any Grunt what he thought about his "Scout Concept" rifle for actual military use, the Col. would have been embarrassed. Really dislike talking bad about a fellow MARINE, so any Grunts that have handled one of "his" actual Scout Rifles will understand.

Seems the "ideal" bolt action rifle is a little like beauty, it's all in the eyes of the beholder. We each have our "needs" and "wants" in a bolt rifle. That's why they sell Winchesters, Savages, Remingtons, Brownings, etc. It's the shooter, and his skill, that makes the difference, not the design of the rifle. Buy what you like, practice with it and you'll be the shooter everyone dreads shooting against.

As several posters here have suggested, one of the Colonel's problems is that he didn't say what type of shooting his ideal bolt rifle was ideal for.

For hunting most game, I pretty much agree with him, though even there I would prefer a Mannlicher-Schoenauer type magazine to that of the Savage...because the M/S magazine is easily removed from the rifle, without disassembling the rifle. Makes the magazine easy to clean, dry out, lubricate, whatever one wants to do with it.

For long range target work (800-1,400 yards), I personally much prefer a 4-lug, symetrical, front-lugged bolt in a single-shot action (solid bottom = stiffer action) such as is found on the Paramount series of high-power target rifle actions, using Belville type washers rather than a mainspring to power the striker. Does away with much of the vibration produced by the mainspring, and makes it possible to tune the "weight" or "speed" of the striker blow by experimenting & using different combos of washer tension.

Supposedly (and I have no idea if this is REALLY a fact), the symetrical 4-lug bolt and action tends to reduce the size of vertical groups, by not leaving any quadrant of the brass case head, either upper or lower, relatively less supported during firing.

Anyway, I find it a nice bit of work, as there does seem to be a certain amount of logic to supporting the case head as evenly on all sides as possible. Can't hurt, at any rate.

As to the .505, I could not possibly care less. First, there are few pachyderms in my garden here in Oregon, whereas there are lots of deer and elk; Second, If I were to hunt them in earnest somewhere like Africa, I'd likely take a double rifle; and Third, one really doesn't need that cartridge to do in one of the "heavy-skinned" animals. Doesn't mean I'd never want to own a .50 (though I'd personally prefer the .500 Jeffrey), just means I wouldn't expect my one "Ideal" rifle to be ideal for everything from mouse to elephant.

Those are just my preferences (this week), though. Might not be anywhere near ideal for anyone else....

I note that this piece was written by Col. Cooper in 1993 just prior to the release of the Blaser R93 to the shooting public. My comments are in red.

quote:

A bolt-action should be glassy smooth and instantly operable. The bolt should have a 90 degrees throw, but it should start at 45 degrees below horizontal, as in the Krag, thus obviating the need for a bent bolt handle to stay out of the line of sight. Reduced rotary movement offers illusory advantages in that it increases camming pressure and sacrifices ease of operation. The Blaser straight pull anticipates and satisfies, or obviates entirely, this requirement.

A modern bolt-action should be instantly convertible from right to left-hand operation. About one customer in six is left-handed, and should not need to put in for special consideration. Again, the Blaser is instantly convertible, simply by exchanging bolt assemblies.

The bolt-action should use two, horizontally-opposed locking lugs. Its extractor should not interrupt the circle of the bolt-face, nor should its ejector. (Again, note the Krag bolt-face.) The Blaser violates the two lug rule, but does it so ingeniously as to make the rule itself unnecessary.

The modern bolt-action should include a magazine cut-off, a device which I have found eminently useful all my shooting life (which goes back a long way). Sorry, Colonel. Neither the Blaser nor any other modern bolt action preserves this 19th century conservative general's device.

The modern bolt-action should feature a rotary box magazine with a shoulder detent to avoid masking soft-point spitzers flat while waiting their turn. (Personally, I would prefer something on the order of Savage 99, but the Mannlicher-type - if made of steel - would do as well.) The Blaser uses a rotary magazine. It is very similar to the Mannlicher type, but, alas, is not made of steel. Also, the front of the Blaser's magazine well is padded with a thick rubber insert that protects the bullet tips (for those who worry about such things).

The modern bolt-action should permit direct feeding into the chamber without use of the magazine. Again, the Blaser R93 easily accommodates this.

The modern bolt-action should feature a strong, simple, single-stage trigger, releasing without apparent motion at 50 oz or a bit less. The R93 has the simplest (no sear at all), most reliable and crispest out-of-the-box single stage trigger mechanism on earth. It is so reliable that a 32-40 oz. pull is entirely safe and satisfactory, not to say standard.

While I have certain reservations (along with my good friend and mentor Ian McFarlane of Okavango) about mechanical safety latches, it would be impossible to sell a rifle that did not include one. It should be operable with either hand. It should not extrude from the rifle to catch on things (as is the case with the Winchester three-position safety.) And it should disconnect the trigger and sear from the striker, while at the same time positively locking the striker. (People who count upon a safety latch to render a firearm inoperable are living in a dream world.) The Blaser de-cocker is ambidextrous, snag-proof, and completely de-cocks the firing mechanism.

The modern bolt-action should be available in three lengths - short (308), standard (30-06), and long (505 Gibbs). Sorry Colonel. The Blaser comes in only one length, but still can handle anything from .222s to .416s.

And last but not least, the modern bolt-action should be factory-fitted with an integral ghost ring aperture sight mounted in the receiver bridge, as was the case with the old ZKK. Telescope sights are here to stay, but they do not invalidate the need for reserve iron sights, and those iron sights should be efficient, as opposed to the V-shaped arrangements now considered factory standard. Again, no go. But the QD Blaser saddle mount, I am sure, could be rigged for a ghost ring aperture rear sight, if demand were there.

Small wonder that Jeff Cooper was one of the first to recognize the virtues of the Blaser R93 and has continued over the years to be lavish in his praise.

quote:

Seems like you would need some really BIG hands to me.

My wife's always commenting about how big my hands are...

Tigger, I agree. From a practical standpoint it is of small consequence, the magazine thing. If I have anything in common with the Colonel it is a small streak of anal retentivness that says, "I hate mushed bullet tips." Too, it just seems like one of those small unfinished design features...like most everything else he is talking about. I think the ambidexterous bolt would be the hardest to work out, and being able to single feed a CRF w/o using the magazine one of the most useful.

I find many of the good Col's ideas here very interesting. I get VERY peeved with smashed bullet tips. The primary reason I first began shooting Balistic Tips. For this reason I have had vertical rails welded the the sides of the magazine in some of my rifles. They hold all but the top cartridge against the rear of the magazine.

I used to shoot a lot of ground squirrels with my 30-06 Win 670. One fires a round or two and then tops off the mag again. Before you know it that last round in the bottom of the mag has been subjected to recoil thirty or forty times. And the point of that Speer Hot Core spitzer bullet has been flattened clear back to the jacket. Nobody wants to put one of those back into the ammo box for the trip home.

I agree that an easily dismounted scope ring system such as on the Ruger or Sako can be replaced with a presighted NECG peep sight.

A rotary mag would be an attractive idea but probably price the weapon out of reach of most hunters.

I like 54 and 60 degree bolt throws, I do not see the need for a full 90 degree sweep to extract a cartridge or cock an action.

Some have mentioned a decocker device. That is not enough. The safety must positively lock the striker. Some bolt action rifles will still fire when decocked, if struck upon the buttstock. Such a strike can easily happen during a fall. Most of us attempt to protect the muzzle and the stock finish of our rifle. therefor in the event of a fall we often slam the butt pad into the ground to save the rest of the rifle.

On many rifle actions, the safety will not engage if the rifle is decocked. I once thought that my Wea Mk V was safer decocked than on safe, until I slammed the butt pad into the ground and the firing pin had enough inertia to compress the spring and rebound into the primer, which of course caused an unexpected discharge.

Fortunately Col. Coopers advice "Never let the muzzle cover anything you do not wish to destroy" paid off.

Do people really buy Blaser rifles?

I considered that was just a myth.

I called on Col and Mrs. Cooper last month after a Gunsite rifle class, and I can assure you he has not passed. His back is bothering him (three fractured vertebrae), but he is still sharp.

We discussed rifles in the library, and moved on to the armory.

I am impressed how close Stuart Otteson's ideal bolt action postulated in his book, and Jeff's ideal bolt action from his experience in the field and teaching people to shoot the rifle.

As to lefites my research shows hunters are about 20% left-handed, as compared to the 16.67% (one-sixth) for shooters and 10% of the general population (# depends on how LH is defined).

jim

I was agreeing with some of what he said until he got to the safety catch. Is he really suggesting a rifle without one?

Mikelravy,

If you have a rifle without a mechanical safety combined with Col. Cooper's gun handling protocol, you will have a safe combination.

It sounds goofy at first reading, but if you put it in context it is not so goofy after all.

jim

I see little reason for having a safety. I never chamber a round till I am ready to final stalk or shoot.

Hot core,
You ought to try shooting one! I've shot a couple of them. I know two people who own them and I'm sure impressed with the accuruacy!

It's just a different rifle!

I'll be sellin' pretzels and beer for this one guys, let's sit back and watch the show!

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty:
...You ought to try shooting one! I've shot a couple of them. I know two people who own them and I'm sure impressed with the accuruacy! It's just a different rifle!

Hey Rusty, Thanks for filling me in on that. I've seen a few at some Gun Shows and never could warm up to them. Just seemed like some kind of Rube Goldberg contraption "to me". Not saying they are, just saying they appeared that way.

Been trying to think if I've ever seen one at any of the Ranges I've been to. If one was there, I just don't remember it. Nice to be able to hear an unbiased opinion about one of them. You all know I don't go for that rifle bias stuff at all.

Did you get to shoot it yourself?
How was the trigger?
Did you try shaking it like a dog to see if things moved around or rattled?
Did the barrels change on the one you saw?
Does the Bolt lock into the Barrel or the Receiver?
Had the owner(s) killed anything with it?
---

Hey DD, Looks like a fine opportunity for me to "learn" about a rifle I've never shot.

Oh yes, I'll take a nice cold PBR as you are handing them out. And a S.C. Lowcountry BBQ sandwich would be nice too.

I am unconvinced that a rifle without a safety is of much utility to me. Maybe if you only hunt open country but I don't see how you could jack a round in a rifle without scaring off anything within 100 yards.

Years ago participated with Cooper on his Babamkulu Trek to Africa. Another one of the participants had been a trainer at Gunsite since its founding. His rifle scope developed problems. Switched over to the Blaser rifle. He had no prior experience with the Blaser. It was quite a difficult transition for so many programmed reflexes which had been engrained for so many years from conventional turnbolts. He did get all his game though.

Like the Blaser. But like a transition from a 1911 to a Glock or vise versa, would hate to transition in the middle of a fight.

Hammer

Gentlemen

The best bolt action designs was invented long time ago.

Mauser 66 is to my opinion superior compared to such pedestrian product as Blaser R-93.

Cheers
/JOHAN

I can see the reasoning behind each of Cooper's requirements, even the left/right changeover. I'm right-handed and my dad is a lefty. It's a bit odd for us to use each other's guns. With a quick-change system, we could bring one backup rifle on a trip, and either one could use it. I'd also add a requirement that the stock be ambidextrous as well. The Blaser is a unique rifle with lots of good features, but I just can't get past the styling.

Couldn't a normal turnbolt action be developed that used a smaller angle, like 50 or 60 degrees, for normal operation, that was then reversible through clever lug and raceway orientation, so that all you had to do was pull the bolt completely from the rifle, flip it over and slide it in again to make it operate from the other side. The handle would have to be 'switchable' or 'reversible' as well, preferably without tools. It would be nice if this was a simple process. I'm sure someone could engineer this - we can put rovers on Mars, for cryin' out loud.

I'd also prefer shoulder stops in a standard magazine. The rotaries never did much for me. I do agree that a magazine cutoff would be nice.

There will never be any such thing as an "ideal modern bolt action" that contains any plastic of any kind or any moving parts made of sheet metal.

He should include that in his criteria.