one of us
| 6,5x55 bbls. are available. Ol'Joe is correct about the alu receiver. It's not stressed at all since the bolt locks up directly in the barrel. You see Plateau, some fence posts can and are remodeled into works of art |
| |
one of us
| Well I took the plunge and ordered a 202 Lightweight in .270 Winchester. I debated on the alu versus steel receiver but decided the alu would be ok. The 202 is hardly traditional in any aspect anyway except for quality. I will round up a 6.5x55 barrel eventually. Are the magazines caliber specific(within reason) or would the 6.5 fit and feed properly from the .270 mag? Hopefully the accuracy will equal the workmanship. Plateau Hunter |
| Posts: 171 | Location: Cannon Co., TN | Registered: 17 October 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| What's the difference between the 200 and 202? |
| |
one of us
| The outdoor life write up on this gun showed that the groups averaged about 3 inches the worst out of all the guns tested. Seems like it should have shot a lot better for the kinda money it cost, one beautiful rifle though maybe they just got a bad one |
| |
one of us
| Congrats Plateau, you got yourself a fine rifle. Wait till you get to shoot it and then you'll be hooked. I've handled my share of 200-202's in various calibers and never met one that wasn't <MOA accurate right out of the box. Magazines are caliber-group related ; on mine in 7x64, I read 6,5x55 - 6,5x57 - 7x64 - .270 Win -.25-06 - .30-06. Dr Lou, the 200 preceded the 202. Changes were the safety and a few cosmetics but most components like bbl., magazines, etc. do interchange. |
| |