These are used guns from the London Gun room. Multiply the price by 1.5 to convert to US Dollars

Magazine Rifles

Holland & Holland
.375 Best Quality magazine rifle
26"
CM 303
�21,000

Holland & Holland
.500 Jeffery Deluxe Magazine rifle
25"
CM 337
�24,000

And something you might need to know. If you are not happy with your Talley detachable mounts, then H&H Detachable mounts are $4100US

WOW

Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike375 (edited 10-30-2001).]

Mike, the funny part is that in terms of design, materials, and quality, Miller's bolt-gun is far and away superior to Holland's magazine rifle, or any other British bolt action, for that matter. Really, there is no comparison, and the disparity is so great that it's actually laughable to compare the two. The best American makers bypassed the British when it comes to best-quality magazine rifles quite some time ago. I even had a representative from a London gunmaking firm admit that very truth right to my face a couple of years ago, and in all candor.

Now, if you want to talk side-by-side shotguns or double rifles, it's a different story - the great British makers produce the best guns in the world in those catagories.

AD

Allen,
I used to say that, but after using and really getting into the British guns, I am no longer so sure thats true..and the re-sale sure doesn't back up the US guns....

A drop box Holland with a little cast off stocked in true French walnut is just damn hard to beat..I don't see that as laughable. I don't see David Miller in the same class as Holland and Holland or a lot of other smiths..Guess thats what makes a horserace.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

The H&H is surely a very field worthy rifle, and it's resale value is also top drawer. But, if one looks strictly at the workmanship and isn't biased I cannot imagine the English guns surpassing a best quality Miller or other US custom in most people's eyes. Again, this is what makes it a horserace!

John S & Allen,

I must agree with you both. The english guns are works of art ( and as such demand good resale). As such they sometimes suffer a bit in the function department relatively speaking. The relativity being when compared to a best grade US maker.

Todd E

Allen,

I don't know about the USA, but you would pass out if you saw some of the prices paid for H&H 375 rifles in Australia that originally came out from India. We are talking about rifles that are not in exactly good condition.

D'Arcy Echols would go down on his knees and ask God for mercy since he would feel he must have sinned at sometime in the past

Actually I like very much the H&H style of rifle and find the American style of straight stock not to my liking. But then I also like the Wby feel and I guess they are similar in distance beteen the bore and center of the butt to those H&H rifle.

As to resale I think Ray is right if you are out of America. For example in Australia most shooters would not have heard of a David Miller rifle or it would just be another name.

In Australia at least, big names like H&H and Winchester seem to command more value for a given level of rifle than do custom makers.

Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike375 (edited 10-31-2001).]

I have never seen or heard of a Holland & Holland, Westley Richards,or any high dollar English bolt gun jamming and I have been exposed to a lot of them and owned a number of them, as well as the old german Mausers such as my JP Saurs and Mausers B, M-21,22 Bronos....they just don't....and once you get inside them it will freak you out, if yo know what your looking at and why its that way....About every PH in Africa is packing one or a double rifle as soon as he can afford one..Until he can afford one, he will probably have a M-70 win. factory rifle in 458 or 375.

Just for the record I'll add the American Hoffman to this list, it is built in the true English design that I prefer....

I don't want to put ya'll in shock, but I detest the American classic design stock, it is too stright, has no cast off for the most part and can't be shot properly with iron sights and propaganda has surrounded it for years, forend is to long and too thick as is the cheek and cheekpiece, it has no drop at the heel, and has too much wood on it and was pimped by Jack O'connor, as gospel ad he packed a lot of clout, I even believed him for years, until I became a born again British gun child...I can shoot a low comb British rifle with a scope or iron sights, equally as well...Most of the folks that believe that malarky about the American classic do so because its excepted as fact, not tried....

If you hunt enough dangerous game with the big bores the light will soon dawn and you to will come into the fold....

Guess thats what makes a horse race

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Ray-
The last time I was in Tanzania my PH used such rifles. He had a vintage H&H 375 bolt rifle with scope and a 470 Rigby double. I wanted to try for a klipspringer and since I had no solids along for my 300mag he offered to let me use his 375. To say it handled and felt like shit would be polite! Yes, the action was smooth as butter and it fed and functioned perfectly. I'm sure with the scope detached it would have been fine with the iron sights too, but for scope use that low comb stock is a joke! I was taught to keep wood on wood when shooting a gun, be it shotgun or rifle, and this just isn't possible with a traditional low comb stock.
I will agree with you on some points about American Classic stocks, cast off being one BUT they still feel and function better for scope use.
The PH also wanted to try my 300mag, so he tried a few shots with it. He declared then and there if he were to have another rifle with a scope it would be stocked like mine! Hmm...

John and Ray,

Is it true that the cheek piece was originally designed so as to have the nice natural handling characteristics of a stock with lots of drop and also softer recoil but at the same time put the face near the stock for scope use?

Mike

Why do I get the feeling someone is trying to peck a fight.
I'll make it short.
Buy what you want, but anyone who picks a H&H bolt action over a Miller is crazy, if you are comparing function, reliability, resale, accuracy etc. Crazy, does not apply to someone who just prefers H&H, but there is NO justification if you use the above criteria.
Anyone who says that you can make a rifle to shoot both irons, and scopes COMFORTABLY does'nt quite get it. Does'nt happen and can't happen. Will it work? Yes, but it looks like crap, and it will never shoot as well as if you would have put one or the other. It's like having a cadillac with 4 wheel drive.All respected gunsmiths I know will not do this as they know it will not work well.

Just my humble opinion

[This message has been edited by Santa Claus (edited 10-31-2001).]

Santa,

Most of us will not have the money to buy an H&H.

However in the overall scheme of things it needs to remembered that the bolt action is H&Hs cheap option.

It is like talking about the very small Mercedes.

I strongly suspect that most people who buy these H&Hs are very well off and they are a just something to accompany the double rifle and shotgun. Kind of like a Kimber or Sako rimfire.

In fact it has even been said that they reserve those cheap bolt guns for us colonials down here in Australia as they think the Royal double is not suitable for us, what with our penal colony background and all

Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike375 (edited 10-31-2001).]

Santa, I agree with you 100%. Buy what you want....but a quality custom rifle from one of the "names" in this country compared to a british bolt gun is a no brainer. I've hunted a lot and shot even more and the american classic is for scope mounted rifles. Itis extremely rare to see open sights used anywhere other than Africa for close range dangerous game hunting. When shopping for a heavy rifle a few years ago I looked at everything on the floor at SCI and was frankly appalled at the prices asked for some british and continental rifles. For my money I'll take the Miller.

Atkinson,

When you see Miller Classic rifles, made in the 70's, that sold new for $3500 sell on the used market for $20,000 to $25,000 and his early Marksmen rifles which sold new in the early 90's for $7,000 sell on the used market for $12,000 then you have to acknowledge that the great European companies don't have a lock on the re-sale market.

Kirk Kelso

Noone is trying to pick a fight, were discussing guns and a difference of opinnions, thats what this board is about, is it not...

I grew up shooting low comb rifles with scopes on them,( M-70's) still like that set up, it works for me...its the best of two worlds, scope and irons...doesn't work the other way around

, can't get your head down on the irons if its a true American classic..

Kirk, your prejudice and with good reason..just kidding and your correct.
I am not knocking David Miller, he is an excellent gun builder, but I prefer Bill Hogue and a couple of others if I may be allowed, as their style is more to my taste, I like the British rifles for my use, they fit me...phyical build has something to do with choices also, some like the Weatherby style and it fits them...I would be tempted to say that design is laughable, had I not shot them, but its not and old Elmer liked them and he sure was a good shot and they do functional work, just not pretty to me....Elmer knew something about recoil too.

I sure don't agree with the terms laughable and that only one way or style is the way to go..there are definately two or three schools of thought on this subject, else it wouldn't have been brought up...

Guess that makes this a 3 way horse race...American classic, Monte Carlo to several degrees of variation, and British styling...take your pick.

If I went shopping today I'd buy a Reimer Johannsen Safari Rifle or one of Harold Wolfs guns....

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

What exactly makes a David Miller rifle so great. Most that I've seen have a laminated stock which is easy to come by,in any configuration you like. I've heard he uses krieger barrels,which are easily gotten or any custom barrel for that matter. He uses M70 classic actions,which rumor has it he buys directly from winchester,which is probably true since he's pimped off some stock designs to them,so they owe him that. Hell he might even buy Lt's and just throw away the stock and barrel,since its already covered in the price he's screwing you for on his finished rifle. He then tops it off with a 6.5X20 leupold,which are easy to come by. His rifles are accurate,but there are plenty of smiths out there,that build bench rest rifles and have the skill and knowledge to build as accurate of a rifle for a fraction of the cost. Then you have Holland & Holland,who sells a shotgun for $75,000,thats on par with a Berretta. In the end,any one who would pay these types of prices for a rifle or shotgun,should first be piss tested.

John,
That hurts, but you know you just might be spot on!!! every so often I come to my sences and sell all of them, then foolishly start all over....

The guns I hunt with are old friends and in pretty rough condition, on the outside...

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

John,

I am not 100% but I think David Miller gets the M70 action before Winchester has finished it (or f***** it up, take your pick ).

As to accuracy, for the sort of money a David Miller rifle costs, it could never compete against a rifle that has had the same budget directed to barrels and scopes.

I guess it is like the big budget car racing teams. They might have 20 engines to pick from.

The again, perhaps Miller does in fact try several barrels to get one that is right

Mike

John Holmes-
Miller gets his actions directly from Winchester. They are not heat treated, just raw actions. He is the ONLY gunsmith to have this arrangement with them. The reason he has this arrangement is because he helped them re-design the action when it was re-introduced in the late 80s. I imagine Winchester was satisfied with that result. So, they went to him again when they wanted to change the layout of their stocks.
We aren't talking about his Marksman line of rifles specifically in this discussion, his high grade Classic would better fit this comparison. They are truly a work of art and I can understand how any owner would be proud.
In any case, people will buy what they want and/or what they perceive to be the best for their uses. If Ray or anyone else thinks a low combed stock suits them best, power to them! If a buyer can afford the H&H and that's what he wants then why not? My opinion or anyone else's really doesn't matter.

[This message has been edited by John S (edited 11-01-2001).]

I always thought that there was much more to a fine quality custom rifle than tight groups on a piece of paper off the bench, but maybe I was wrong. Fundamental accuracy is just one aspect of rifle evaluation, a fact that seems to get lost in the shuffle these days, leastways, that's what I used to think anyhow.

I mean, if that's the only aspect of rifle quality and performance that means anything (or if that's all anyone needs to understand), then let's just forget about best-quality, hand-built custom rifles altogether (Holland's, Millers, or anybody else's). At those gawd-awful prices, they've just GOT to be a ripoff, right????????

Let's get smart for once! Let's all latch on to something like a Browning A-Hole or a Savage 110 in Oh-Six and call things good. After all, according to the clerk over at Wally's Shootin' Pit (he shot a Fork three years ago with his Browning), those guns shoot purty good right outa-the-box and off the bench. And that Browning comes with a genu-wine, engraved gold buck head on the triggerguard, don't it? Now THAT don't come cheap - no way! And shoot, Browning imports 'em clean over from Jay-pan don't they? And that Savage is made right here (and made real good, they claim) in the U.S. of A., and they shoot good, too..... Heck, I read a piece in the NRA magazine (the one that actor what played Moses talks in) a month or two back at The Doctor's Office what made 'em sound like you can't do no better, leastways, not with the kinda groups they were talkin' on. Only thing I can't figure........ How do that make a rifle that good that cheap, 'errrrrrrrr... inexpensive, anyways? Anyhow, my neighbor's Uncle Filo bought one back in '63, and he NEVER had no trouble with it a-tall. Not never! His boy Bobby-Ray's got 'er now from what I hear...

AD

[This message has been edited by allen day (edited 11-01-2001).]

Allen,

What you say about there being more to it than just accuracy is spot on.

Unfortunately the majority of shooters have not experienced either top flite accuracy, especially consistent accuracy over a wide range of loads and barrel conditions or the benefits of a full custom gun.

However, I guess it is reasonable to say the point of diminishing returns does show up and each individual will determine just how far he wants to enter the area of diminishing returns.

As to accuracy, frequently at the range a shooter will tell me his 270, 300 or 375 etc. shoots and inch. I look at his target and say "what are all those shots" and then he will usually answer they were his fouling shots or they were some other load etc. etc.

Mike

john-

If you really think a HH shotgun is on par with Beretta, you must be smoking something illegal. The value of anything is how much someone is willing to pay for it.

As far as the HH magazine rifle VS. the Miller Classic- they are both great guns. I wouldn't say one is better then other, as they both are made to function very well. What I don't like about the miller rifle is the mounts. I believe they are machined on- well you cant take them off. Theres a famous gun writer who has a Miller classic- he ordered the gun with iron sights, but has never been able to use them becuase he cant take the mount off. So basically what if you are deep in Alaska, your rifle falls and the scope is busted- you had better have a back up rifle or your hunt is over. With an HH you could take the mounts off and shoot with irons... Just a little tidbit. As to Millers resale value- that is to be expected when a few years ago he was selling his rifles for a bit less, and now that the prices are up, the current owners who want to sell their classics sell their guns at the current resale value, which is obviously more then what they paid for the gun new.

Sure HH charges a lot for things that are not standard on a gun, but that doesn't matter becuase you can get them after market for a lot cheaper.

As for their hunting purposes, i dont recall seing to many american customs with flip-up night sights.

I believe the bottom line in choosing one of these rifles it to pick what you like best as well as where and what you will be hunting. You wouldnt take a Miller Marksman on a Cape Buff hunt and you wouldnt take a HH with iron sites on a antelope hunt in new mexico. My prefered hunting style is to hunt and get as close as possible to where iron sites would be useful. So if I were going to buy a rifle of this caliber my choice would be an HH in 300HH....

buell

I'm with Ray on this one and Mike375. I quite like the H&H's but to be fair I haven't tried a Miller. For the money, I'd buy neither and direct the funds to a truely custom rifle and get something purrrfect!
For the sake of owning one though, I'd love a H&H double.If anyone wants to give one to a good home

Buell,

I'm not sure where you've received your information, but for the record, Miller's scope mounts are machined from solid bar-stock and are fully removable, if you choose to remove them.

Jim Carmichel, who you are alluding to, has not removed his because he has never had a reason to. He has told me, as well as written to the fact, that after some 20 years of owning his Miller rifle, and after numerous trips with it around the world, he has never had to adjust the zero.

Kirk Kelso

[This message has been edited by Kirk (edited 11-01-2001).]

Kirk-

I guess I was wrongly informed... I have heard that from a few places and have read that in several mags, but you never know do you? LOL... How are the mounts attached? Just the standard 3-4 screws?

Thanks,

Buell

I hate it when they let the chimps play with the computers, but in Montana I guess you have to do something to stay amused.
If you look at John Holmes's reply, you get the quintessential ignorant reply that just simply cannot be explained in plain english. Suffice it to say that if you have no idea what you are talking about, read up and come back and tell me how stupid I am when you are informed with some minute idea of what you are talking about.
If the first question out of your mouth is, what is your accuracy guarantee, then you need to buy one from a gunsmith that will pump your ass full of crap, because that is what you want to hear. You will get no such guarantee's from quality gunsmiths, because #1. its a stupid question, #2 It would insult a fine gunsmith, because it is a given when you pay that much money for a rifle that it will shoot. You cannot guarantee 1/2" groups from a rifle some moron just paid for, and can't shoot worth a damn. I know for a fact that a Miller of ANY sort will not go out of his shop unless it shoots to his satisfication. That is well under MOA. from 22-250-458lotts. Every single thing David does to a rifle is to improve accuracy, and fuction. IF it was so easy why isn't there 5,10,15,20 gunsmiths getting that kind of money for their rifles. How many are there, Lets say it together now "1". That is because he spends more time in the shop than any other smith I know tweaking things to enhance your rifle, and he spends more time in the field than any smith I know, testing it.
Mike375, if you look at the breakdown price of a Miller, a good portion of that is just for barrels, and scopes. He spends an inordinate amount of time on these 2 things, that is precisely why all Miller rifles will shoot small groups.
JohnS, you are right David is the only builder in the World that can get action directly from Winchester.
Everyone has their likes and dislikes about certain rifles, and I try not to say anything negative about their selection, but when some ignorant wise-ass tells me I'M stupid, it pisses me off.
I'll tell you what, all you guys that think you have a good shooting rifle, from a custom smith,bring it on down. We will go to the range and shoot the 600,700yd targets, and then we'll see where the bullshit stops. Bring it on I ain't skeeered.
Im going hunting in the morning, so don't show up at my door too early,as I will be gone. I know there will be so many gun experts that accept my offer that I need to figure out a number system so I do not lose anyone.Maybe by then Holmsee can read up and I'll give a pop quiz when I return. See ya next week

[This message has been edited by Santa Claus (edited 11-01-2001).]

Santa,

Re read one of my previous posts on this thread which I have pasted here.

John,

I am not 100% but I think David Miller gets the M70 action before Winchester has finished it (or f***** it up, take your pick ).

As to accuracy, for the sort of money a David Miller rifle costs, it could never compete against a rifle that has had the same budget directed to barrels and scopes.

I guess it is like the big budget car racing teams. They might have 20 engines to pick from.

Then again, perhaps Miller does in fact try several barrels to get one that is right

End previous post

HOWEVER your challenge at the range would be a losing deal with shooters like myself and I think David Miller will agree. David Miller would know if you test someone like myself at the range, then your Miller rifle will have trouble. By the way how many barrels will you be bringing. And we are talking 375 type rifles that weigh no more than 10 pounds with scope.

David Miller is supplying a very good product for people who are interested in accuracy and function but are not into the mechanics of the rifle themselves. Come to the range with shooters like myself and you will be left behind. But that is not to take away from the Miller rifle.

Perhaps the Miller rifle is the BMW and shooters like myself have the NASCAR and I think (No, I know, Miller will agree as will Echols) David Miller will agree.

If I had the money I would buy the H&H because I can't duplicate the H&H "thing". BUT having the money would mean I could take the 375 H&H bolt gun as an accessory to the Royal double and the cost of the bolt gun would not be an issue. It would just be a peice of shit.

For yourself, Allen and many others, David Miller gives you something that either yourselves or the fuckwits at the range can't duplicate and in addition you get a very well put together rifle that functions extremely well and nothing needs to be done to the rifle so as to meet your requirements.

Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike375 (edited 11-01-2001).]

As the miller gun is now more expensive than the H&H, no one can talk about how costly the H&H is anymore.

miller $37K (I've heard)
H&H $23K

You guys are all just loyal to the American style, because of your nationality I imagine.

At least Ray accepts what's best regardless of its origin. (I'm one of the only guys on his side this time)

Classic in my dictionary says: "Of highest class; being a model of its kind; excellent; standard; authorative; esablished."

Thus I feel miller's gun is the victim of a sad misnomer.

I'm sure the quality is there in both rifles, but I'd buy the H&H soley because the Miller looks like shit!!

If you want an american piece, go for the Hoffman like Ray suggested.

If you carefully examine the workmanship and quality of rifles built by great American craftsmen such as Gene Simillion, Don Klien, Mark Silver, Dave Miller, Curt Crum, or D'Arcy Echols, then examine any similar rifle from Holland & Holland or any of the other British shops, you'll see quite an apparent difference in quality and execution. The English rifles are not as well inletted, finished, checkered, or executed by any stretch of the imagination, and quite simply American accuracy technology is so far ahead of the rest of the world that there simply is no comparison. The great American makers combine great technical know-how with great materials and fine detail work better than any other makers on Earth - it's just that simple.

Jagermeister (where the duce are you from, anyway?), as far as I'm concerned, your comments are an obvious case of the pot calling the kettle black.

AD

Jagermiester,

If you think the David Miller Classic rifle looks like shit, then you must have some awfully beautiful shit on your side of the pond!!!!! LOL

Kirk Kelso

Mike 375,
"HOWEVER your challenge at the range would be a losing deal with shooters like myself and I think David Miller will agree. David Miller would know if you test someone like myself at the range, then your Miller rifle will have trouble. By the way how many barrels will you be bringing. And we are talking 375 type rifles that weigh no more than 10 pounds with scope."

Horseshit!

Mike, now let me get this straight...

You're saying that DAVID MILLER himself would know that going up against a shooter "such as yourself" at the range would mean that somehow Dave's rifle would come up short, or at least any currrent rifleman who owns a Miller rifle would come up short.......

Well just how the hell would you know that?

The truth is, I doubt that Dave would know you from anywhere, and I doubt like hell that you know what Dave's rifles can do, nor what some of the owners of Miller rifles can do with them under high-pressure hunting situations. To be frank, you're indulging in guesswork (read wishful thinking), and you're merely spittin' out words to see how they splatter - nothing more, and nothing less.

I agree with Santa's comment: "Bullshit"!

AD

Santa Claus,

Your comment only proves that you lack some real knowledge and experience when it comes to accuracy.

Without going into all details, if you and I meet at the range the first thing my rifle will have is the Jewell trigger adjusted down to 2 or 3 ounces, all of which takes a few seconds with an allen key up through the trigger guard.

Next, your rifle will be bedded and will be up against a "glue in"

Next,your loads will not have been developed to the same extent since you will not have had the barrel and loads tested on a bench gun.

No, that rifle will not look as good as your Miller or function as nicely.

And no, the additional accuracy could never be utilised in the field and the Miller would be a better rifle in the field.

But try and recognise that the Miller rifle is a very good compromise across the board.

But it can't win a pure accuracy contest and it can't match the H&H for name.

Mike

Allen,

I made no reference to the capabilities of the owner of a Miller rifle or what that owner could do under pressue in the field. All that is irelevant when the rifles are being compared.

When saying "shooters like myself" that wasnot to claim some type of ability but rather to point at that some shooters are extreme accurayc minded.

Next thing you or Santa will be claiming is that a Miller in 22 or 6mm is going to win a benchrest match. There is no doubt in my mind that Miller could make a match winning bench rifle, but that winning rifle will not be the same type of rifle that you and Santa own.

By the way, a bench gun in Sporter Class will weigh no more than 8.5 pounds including scope.

Mike

Sorry santa claus,I didn't mean to hurt your feelings and cut on your idol and boyfriend David Miller. Chances are your shooting skills are as fictional as santa claus,even though you probably believed in santa well into your 30's. As for the prices on a David Miller rifle,they are a joke. Miller gives a rifle to Carmichael,then gives one to Boddington,so he'll write about it in Petersen's Hunting and between the two of these guys,they pimp out enough articles and blow hot air up the readers ass,that you end up with a dumbass like Santa buying one and then try to justify the money he pissed away on the rifle. I don't care how much refinement,craftsmenship and accuracy goes into a Miller rifle,the rifle still isn't worth over $3000 and you can bet miller doesn't have that much money invested in time or materials,yet hoses the idiot buying the rifle for 5 figures.

I'll tell you who will win this shooting match...The best shot will and make of gun will have little to do with it as I'm sure both guns will shoot well....

I don't think you guys ought to be using David Miller as an example, instead you should be comparing quality custom American made rifles to British rifles...

David Miller is but one of a great many fine rifle builders, but some keep bringing Miller up and I don't think he should be singled out, thats fair to Miller, you are doing him a great disservice as opposed to helping him or at least it seems that way to me...My pappy always said if your going to get in a s--t throwing contest then you can expect to some s--t on you, right or wrong....very true.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Kirk, I'm sure the miller classic is a great functioning piece, and in the eyes of many, a great looking piece. It doesn't have what I need in a rifle though. The barrel contour looks mighty slim (for my likes). The american style stock doesn't work, and I can't say I love the mount. I'm more into the H&H magazine rifles. I like Jeffreys, and Rigbys, and Oberndorf Mauser sporters...things like that. To me, that is some awefully beautiful shit as you put it.

With how hard it is to convince you all of the finer points of the British rifle, it would be hilarious to begin schooling on the germanic style..not like Mausers (as they are british in style) but Austrian rifles, for example. No one can put down the unparalleled quality of such an austrian piece as a Fanzoj rifle.

That's another topic all together.

What does it mean to be a pot calling the kettle black? I've never head of that one.

I will see you all very soon.

Tot ziens

Ray, I find considerable room for agreement with your last set of comments. There ARE several excellent American custom riflemakers on the current scene - not just one or two. I'll also agree that the guy behind the rifle is a whole lot more important than the rifle itself. That is a factual statement that's pretty hard to refute.

Mr. Holmes, if your "boyfriend" comment is the best sort of backlash you can come up with, you're in sad shape.....

Now, I doubt like hell that you have ever held a Miller rifle in your hand, and I'm absolutely certain that you don't have any idea as to what sort of business Mr. Miller has had with either Jim Carmichel or Craig Boddington. So really, you have no idea whatsoever about the quality or value that goes into these rifles. Now why the hell don't you have enough guts to admit it? You're speculating, guessing, relying on bluster and bullshit (then vulgar inuendo, like an ignorant, untutored teenage kid) to salvage your weak arguments, and to strike out against things that frustrate you -things that you don't really understand or care to face. But then water seeks its own level, right...........?

Now, you just think about this: The guys who buy Miller or similar-quality rifles haven't exactly been saving their wages from McDonalds to buy a rifle. Most of them have long-since made their pile and established their credentials in whatever industry or profession they might happen to be in, so they've worked hard, taken their risks, and they've run the gauntlet in order to buy whatever sort of gun they damn well please, come hell or high water. A real group of idiots......... Yeah!

AD

Well allen its obvious that you've also wasted money on a Miller rifle and are now in defense of what you've tried to convince yourself of as a worth while investment. Miller rifles are designed for guys like you Allen. You know the type of guy that has a couple hundred trophy heads on the wall,all of which he had to pay a guide or landowner to get for him. I'm sure after spending thousands of dollars paying for the best animals money can buy,the price of a miller rifle isn't that outrageous,but there isn't anyway that their worth that price. As for the agreement between Miller and Boddington,it's fairly simple. Gunwritters enter the field at first wanting manufacturers or businesses to give them products for cost,then as their fame gets larger they want products for free,the last stage of this game is being paid to use a product that they are given for free. Now I doubt Boddington is being paid cash,but he sure as hell gets hunts and merchandise for free or at substantial savings.

[This message has been edited by john holmes (edited 11-02-2001).]

john holmes,

Before you run off at the mouth about something you obviously know nothing about, you might want to make sure that people who do know wont be watching. Your thoughts on Miller, Carmichel and Boddington are hilarious!! You probably wouldnt recognize any of the three if you saw them, yet you know how they do business. LOL

I know all three quite well, and have had all in my hunting camps several times, so keep your uniformed remarks for people who dont know any better!

Kirk Kelso

John H-

Your inherant arrogance makes me sick. You might as well quit while you hold onto your last shred of diginity. Just about any well known smith in the US makes a good looking and functioning gun. Miller goes further then the rest of them. Thousands of companies give out free things to promote their products. There is nothing wrong with that, and from a purely business sense that technique works well.

My style of rifle goes more along the lines of the British and other European sytles. I do not like strait american sytled stocks. They are too high for me to use well with irons. Besides they look plain and ordinary. Shoulder a fine British rifle and you cannot tell me that the irons don't line up perfectly. If I were to have a rifle that was going to be used with a scope, I'd have a monte carlo shadow line cheekpeice- they feel very good with a scope. Rifles are meant for a purpose and its a cheap ass that trys to kill two birds with one stone.

[This message has been edited by Buell (edited 11-02-2001).]