Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
300 WSM-Stiller, Surgeon, Defiance, or Badger?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MarcS" data-source="post: 797387" data-attributes="member: 64399"><p>Bart, with all due respect sir, I don't think you were paying attention to what I was saying. I said I "prefer" 700's. I stated personal opinions and preferences as just that. You stated yours as fact. </p><p></p><p>For example I never said the triggers on 70's weren't any good. That's because they're very good. I've tuned more than I can count and turned them into very sweet triggers without changing them out for aftermarket triggers. I still prefer 700 triggers, mainly because they're easier to adjust and it is mostly a single self contained unit that I can take it out without having a pile of tiny little parts. I didn't say that any certain things were "an issue". I didn't say that the skinny barrel tennons have a history of failure or that they can't handle pressure, or that the controlled feed will not function as an emergency top load, or that the claw extractor isn't reliable, the list goes on and on. </p><p></p><p>You also seem to talk a lot about what other shooters were doing and saying 40-60 years ago. You talk about what Army shooters were saying and using a long time ago. I was an Army shooter in the late eighties and early nineties and they aren't gods they're just shooters like us. I guess it always adds credit to any gun argument by saying it's what some military unit also likes <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I shoot and compete, today. I build rifles for a living, today. I build precision bolt rifles for F class, high power, tactical, snipers from law enforcement and some private contractors who can use what they want. From those groups I also build some lighter weight hunting rifles. Back in your day the pre '64 model 70 was the only rifle. The riflemans rifle. I get that. I grew up in a house hearing that from my dad for years and years. If he was here today I'm sure he'd blindly agree with you LOL. </p><p></p><p>The fact remains that in the world of custom action manufacturing where highly skilled and knowledgeable machinists and engineers strive to create the best receivers they are capable of building regardless of cost or level of difficulty, they use the 700 as a base design more often than any other by far. </p><p></p><p>Apparently you believe that you know more than all of them combined. You know more than all of the shooters winning matches today. You know more than all of the machinists and gun builders who will go to any length and pay any price for the best possible design and quality. You don't.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MarcS, post: 797387, member: 64399"] Bart, with all due respect sir, I don't think you were paying attention to what I was saying. I said I "prefer" 700's. I stated personal opinions and preferences as just that. You stated yours as fact. For example I never said the triggers on 70's weren't any good. That's because they're very good. I've tuned more than I can count and turned them into very sweet triggers without changing them out for aftermarket triggers. I still prefer 700 triggers, mainly because they're easier to adjust and it is mostly a single self contained unit that I can take it out without having a pile of tiny little parts. I didn't say that any certain things were "an issue". I didn't say that the skinny barrel tennons have a history of failure or that they can't handle pressure, or that the controlled feed will not function as an emergency top load, or that the claw extractor isn't reliable, the list goes on and on. You also seem to talk a lot about what other shooters were doing and saying 40-60 years ago. You talk about what Army shooters were saying and using a long time ago. I was an Army shooter in the late eighties and early nineties and they aren't gods they're just shooters like us. I guess it always adds credit to any gun argument by saying it's what some military unit also likes :-) I shoot and compete, today. I build rifles for a living, today. I build precision bolt rifles for F class, high power, tactical, snipers from law enforcement and some private contractors who can use what they want. From those groups I also build some lighter weight hunting rifles. Back in your day the pre '64 model 70 was the only rifle. The riflemans rifle. I get that. I grew up in a house hearing that from my dad for years and years. If he was here today I'm sure he'd blindly agree with you LOL. The fact remains that in the world of custom action manufacturing where highly skilled and knowledgeable machinists and engineers strive to create the best receivers they are capable of building regardless of cost or level of difficulty, they use the 700 as a base design more often than any other by far. Apparently you believe that you know more than all of them combined. You know more than all of the shooters winning matches today. You know more than all of the machinists and gun builders who will go to any length and pay any price for the best possible design and quality. You don't. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
300 WSM-Stiller, Surgeon, Defiance, or Badger?
Top