MagMan
Well-Known Member
James Messer. I'm sure LV will let me know if I'm wrong.
Allen magnum
- Thread starter harfman99
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
James Messer. I'm sure LV will let me know if I'm wrong.
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
Links,
Have no idea who his smith is. I do however know who he is! Well about 95% sure who he is.
I would agree, if your building a rifle specifically for BR shooting, its not overly hard to build a rifle to shoot into the .1's.
I believe he was referring to his big game rifles however and to build a big game rifle chambered in an extreme performance big game chambering that will shoot into the .1's is much more challanging.
Now if your big game rifle is a 15 lb rifle chambered in a 6mm PPC, I conceed, there should be no reason why it will not shoot extremely well. For me, a rifle chambered in a chambering such as a 7mm AM that will hold 1/2 moa or even 3/4 moa out to 1000 yards for three shots in good conditions impresses me MUCH more then a rifle chambered for a small chambering that will shoot into the .1's at 100 yards. Just the game I prefer to play personally.
Anyway, This is the guy I think he is, he has been proven to stretch a thing or two concerning the truth to make his point seem more authoritative when it really is not. He is trying to come off as an innocent contributor to this post, that is hardly the case, and I knew it as soon as I read his first post. That is why I replied as I did. I would give one of my rifles to have the chance to witness groups fired with all his 0.1 rifles. I have locals all the time, many of whom are BR shooters that tell me they have rifles that shoot into the .1's all the time. They tell me this because they expect every rifle built for them to shoot as well as these rifles. I tell them that I offer a 1/2 moa accuracy potential and ask them to bring up their rifles and shoot them on paper at my range just because I want to see this quality of rifle. Of the couple dozen guys that have bragged about such rifles, there have only been Three of these that did not do some serious back peddling on the performance of their rifles and did not bring them out to shoot.
The three that did bring their rifles out proved what I suspected. Yes the rifles shot very well, no doubt there, but not one consistantly shot better then a 0.4" average. I will also admit that there were a couple 3 shot groups that did shoot into the 0.1's but it was not common. I often hear from customers saying they have rifles that shoot into the .1's and first thing I ask them is what type of rifle do they have. I have yet to see a legit big game rifle that would shoot "Consistantly" into the .1's.
The key word here is "Consistantly". Not once in a while or the rifle once shot a 0.1" group and from that point on its labeled as a .1" rifle.
I do not say this to detract from any other smith out there. And I am not talking about BR rifles, nor was this post started asking about BR rifles. It was started asking a specific question about information about the AMs which are solely intented to be used as big game rifle for long range big game hunting.
If LightVarmint or whatever name he is now using has rifles that "Consistantly" print into the 0.1's, I highly doubt they are what we out west would consider legit long range big game rifles which is what we were talking about before he added his opinion.
Again, if we are talking rifles built for the specific purpose of shooting very tight groups at 100 and 200 yards, sure, this level of accuracy is not suprising but again, that is not the type of rifles we were discussing in any way.
Just because you have a small caliber, low intensity chambering in a moderatly heavy rifle that you shot a deer with, does not mean its a big game rifle by design. Means you have a BR rifle that you used to shoot a deer with. When I refer to "low intensity chambering" I am not referring to the velocity or chamber pressure generated by specific chambering. I am referring to the amount of stress the chambering imposes onto the rifle system. Getting a 222 Rem to shoot VERY well is not all that hard, in fact in many cases I have seen rifles that shot into the .1s chambered in similar chamberings that that had receivers no where near what would be considered square. That WILL Not happen with a large diameter, high intensity chambering. Everything has to be perfect in the rifle to get good results.
Again, is this hard to do, nope, there are alot of good smiths out there that do it all the time. Would they do it with a customer sitting there watching, that is laughable, unless the customer has the better part of a day to put in sitting on his rear waiting!!!
I suspect LightVarmint may have nothing better to do.
Kirby Allen(50)
Have no idea who his smith is. I do however know who he is! Well about 95% sure who he is.
I would agree, if your building a rifle specifically for BR shooting, its not overly hard to build a rifle to shoot into the .1's.
I believe he was referring to his big game rifles however and to build a big game rifle chambered in an extreme performance big game chambering that will shoot into the .1's is much more challanging.
Now if your big game rifle is a 15 lb rifle chambered in a 6mm PPC, I conceed, there should be no reason why it will not shoot extremely well. For me, a rifle chambered in a chambering such as a 7mm AM that will hold 1/2 moa or even 3/4 moa out to 1000 yards for three shots in good conditions impresses me MUCH more then a rifle chambered for a small chambering that will shoot into the .1's at 100 yards. Just the game I prefer to play personally.
Anyway, This is the guy I think he is, he has been proven to stretch a thing or two concerning the truth to make his point seem more authoritative when it really is not. He is trying to come off as an innocent contributor to this post, that is hardly the case, and I knew it as soon as I read his first post. That is why I replied as I did. I would give one of my rifles to have the chance to witness groups fired with all his 0.1 rifles. I have locals all the time, many of whom are BR shooters that tell me they have rifles that shoot into the .1's all the time. They tell me this because they expect every rifle built for them to shoot as well as these rifles. I tell them that I offer a 1/2 moa accuracy potential and ask them to bring up their rifles and shoot them on paper at my range just because I want to see this quality of rifle. Of the couple dozen guys that have bragged about such rifles, there have only been Three of these that did not do some serious back peddling on the performance of their rifles and did not bring them out to shoot.
The three that did bring their rifles out proved what I suspected. Yes the rifles shot very well, no doubt there, but not one consistantly shot better then a 0.4" average. I will also admit that there were a couple 3 shot groups that did shoot into the 0.1's but it was not common. I often hear from customers saying they have rifles that shoot into the .1's and first thing I ask them is what type of rifle do they have. I have yet to see a legit big game rifle that would shoot "Consistantly" into the .1's.
The key word here is "Consistantly". Not once in a while or the rifle once shot a 0.1" group and from that point on its labeled as a .1" rifle.
I do not say this to detract from any other smith out there. And I am not talking about BR rifles, nor was this post started asking about BR rifles. It was started asking a specific question about information about the AMs which are solely intented to be used as big game rifle for long range big game hunting.
If LightVarmint or whatever name he is now using has rifles that "Consistantly" print into the 0.1's, I highly doubt they are what we out west would consider legit long range big game rifles which is what we were talking about before he added his opinion.
Again, if we are talking rifles built for the specific purpose of shooting very tight groups at 100 and 200 yards, sure, this level of accuracy is not suprising but again, that is not the type of rifles we were discussing in any way.
Just because you have a small caliber, low intensity chambering in a moderatly heavy rifle that you shot a deer with, does not mean its a big game rifle by design. Means you have a BR rifle that you used to shoot a deer with. When I refer to "low intensity chambering" I am not referring to the velocity or chamber pressure generated by specific chambering. I am referring to the amount of stress the chambering imposes onto the rifle system. Getting a 222 Rem to shoot VERY well is not all that hard, in fact in many cases I have seen rifles that shot into the .1s chambered in similar chamberings that that had receivers no where near what would be considered square. That WILL Not happen with a large diameter, high intensity chambering. Everything has to be perfect in the rifle to get good results.
Again, is this hard to do, nope, there are alot of good smiths out there that do it all the time. Would they do it with a customer sitting there watching, that is laughable, unless the customer has the better part of a day to put in sitting on his rear waiting!!!
I suspect LightVarmint may have nothing better to do.
Kirby Allen(50)
linksmechanic
Well-Known Member
Right on. I wasn't sure that you were hinting that you new his supergunsmith or that quite possibly he was a troll. Now I get what your getting at. Just let to let you know I wasn't trying to ruffle your feathers just giving the guy a chance.
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
Not ruffled at all, just wanted to get the point out that this guy has been on here before under a different name and has caused trouble many times.
I have no problems being questioned, welcome it, thats what helpful discussion comes from. What I do not care for is when someone sneaks on under another name just to take personal attaches while seeming to be an innocent contributor to LRH.
Kirby Allen(50)
I have no problems being questioned, welcome it, thats what helpful discussion comes from. What I do not care for is when someone sneaks on under another name just to take personal attaches while seeming to be an innocent contributor to LRH.
Kirby Allen(50)
**** few BR rifles "consistently" shoot in the .1s, much less hunting caliber rifles. There are a lot more guns "capable" of being in the .1s than there are shooters capable of tuning, loading and shooting to that level.-
Very few "proprietary" cartridges today that really involve intellectual property. All kinds of variants almost immediately once a new case comes out, so just exactly who is the first and owner of the intellectual property. One year ago there was a 375/408 shot in the PA world open at 1k using prototype bullets and that gunsmith had already been building the 338-408 on his variation. Someone else had been playing with it before that even for long range sniper work, so can no one else build a 338-408 or 375-408?
You need look no further than what happened with the WSM family of cartridges, lawsuits and greed by one guy. He jumped on a patent on a case design that had been shot in NC and VA by 1k two different shooters and gunsmiths 3 yrs before he got on the band wagon, but he was the first to run to patent office. He has the patent, but was not the first with that case design. I am sure someone else in another area was doing the same thing also.
It is natural for experimenters to jump on every new case and see what and how the performance can be enhanced for accuracy, long range or KE.
Relax and enjoy the variety.
BH
Very few "proprietary" cartridges today that really involve intellectual property. All kinds of variants almost immediately once a new case comes out, so just exactly who is the first and owner of the intellectual property. One year ago there was a 375/408 shot in the PA world open at 1k using prototype bullets and that gunsmith had already been building the 338-408 on his variation. Someone else had been playing with it before that even for long range sniper work, so can no one else build a 338-408 or 375-408?
You need look no further than what happened with the WSM family of cartridges, lawsuits and greed by one guy. He jumped on a patent on a case design that had been shot in NC and VA by 1k two different shooters and gunsmiths 3 yrs before he got on the band wagon, but he was the first to run to patent office. He has the patent, but was not the first with that case design. I am sure someone else in another area was doing the same thing also.
It is natural for experimenters to jump on every new case and see what and how the performance can be enhanced for accuracy, long range or KE.
Relax and enjoy the variety.
BH
linksmechanic
Well-Known Member
Bounty: What is your idea of a few? A hundred? A thousand? I know that I'm gonna regret sharing this but I actually have a ruger that I have shot 4 5 shot groups in the .1's. Now I know that this is not normal with any gun but it happens. I have a few of the targets too prove it. I'm no professional shooter by any means but I tend to get to the range 2-3 days per week. This was with a box stock ruger vt .308 target grey in a hogue aluminum bed block stock. I shoot only 190 grn. bergers out of it. I'm starting to wonder alot about berger bullets. I shoot the 180's in a box stock sendero sfII that has shot consistent .2's. I recently switched over to berger's in my .204 and have shot a best of .375. This is crazy accuracy. Hell, my 7 mag doesn't even have a muzzle break. I starting to think alot of it has to do with jamming them into the lands. Not because of the design of the bullet but that when your jamming bullets into the lands your basically eliminating any unsquareness of the action or unconcentricity of the case neck. In my mind you are basically aligning the bullet as true as possible because it's pushed into the land. Just a theory of mine, might be hogwash. I just can't see how 2 box stock 700's and a ruger can shoot so good.
I've never owned or seen a single factory hunting rifle that would shoot .1s in the larger calibers (7mm & up). If you've currently got two that will, [Corrected 3/30/08 - linksmechanic stated that he was only talking about one factory rifle he owned. My mistake... I thought he was describing two different factory rifles printing in the .1s] then you better hang on to them because my guess is you'll never end up owning another one in this life. Heck, my guess is that if you change out a barrel and upgrade to a target quality barrel, you'll still lose your .1s. You've already had your streak of luck in factory rifles. 
Last edited:
linksmechanic
Well-Known Member
I didn't say I had 2 I said I had 1.
linksmechanic
Well-Known Member
Here some pics: http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/linksmechanic/DSC04199.jpg http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/linksmechanic/DSC04200.jpg http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/linksmechanic/DSC04201.jpg
http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/linksmechanic/DSC04202.jpg
Keep in mind the only mods too 2 of the guns were stocks the sendero shooting 180's is box stock. I have probably 10 targets from the sendero that are at least under .3"
http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o125/linksmechanic/DSC04202.jpg
Keep in mind the only mods too 2 of the guns were stocks the sendero shooting 180's is box stock. I have probably 10 targets from the sendero that are at least under .3"
Links
what is your idea of consistently?
It is subjective of course, but to be consistent, it means to me, more than 75% of the time.
Anyone that thinks they have a "consistent" hunting gun in the .2 range (much less .1) and below can go to BR central, post it. They will get plenty of opportunities to prove it at matches (obviously with $ involved). So far they have had no takers.
Nice groups posted for sure! However 3 of the 4 were at least 3 bullet holes wide. That probably puts them closer to .5 than to .1.
BH
what is your idea of consistently?
It is subjective of course, but to be consistent, it means to me, more than 75% of the time.
Anyone that thinks they have a "consistent" hunting gun in the .2 range (much less .1) and below can go to BR central, post it. They will get plenty of opportunities to prove it at matches (obviously with $ involved). So far they have had no takers.
Nice groups posted for sure! However 3 of the 4 were at least 3 bullet holes wide. That probably puts them closer to .5 than to .1.
BH
There was a discussion such as this on another site a while back. The folks involved in the discussion owned tactical weight rifles built by very well known smiths. A challenge went out to all members to produce proof of five consecutive five shot groups that measured under .25 moa. These groups were to be shot at 100 yds. and verified by another member. Nobody came up with the goods and the subject was dropped.
Clutch
If I had a rifle capable of shooting .1s, I'm sure I'd clutch and ruin the group before I could squeeze off 5 shots in one group, let alone five consecutive groups. Too many nerves and jitters. I start to get exited if even two shots fall that close together, let alone 4, and then 5!
Fiftydriver - Sorry what started out as the Allen magnum thread was hi-jacked. Wasn't intended.
If I had a rifle capable of shooting .1s, I'm sure I'd clutch and ruin the group before I could squeeze off 5 shots in one group, let alone five consecutive groups. Too many nerves and jitters.
I start to get exited if even two shots fall that close together, let alone 4, and then 5! Fiftydriver - Sorry what started out as the Allen magnum thread was hi-jacked. Wasn't intended.
Last edited:
ss7mm
Well-Known Member
It's strange that you just posted this as I've been reading the new posts on this thread this morning thinking the same thing.
I'd thought about also saying basically the same thing but it's not just this thread, it's just the nature of the beast that is the forum on the internet.
A post has a comment that initiates a thought about something else, a comment is then made that slightly diverts things and pretty soon, as has this thread, it takes on multiple lives. This can be good or bad depending on what you are looking for and what you expect when you try to read a new post on a thread such as this.
Not badmouthing anyone but I always get the feeling when this happens that the one that may, even accidently, send a thread off on a tangent, wouldn't start a new thread with the discussion they brought up, but will discuss it on a hijacked thread.
In the end, people go to a thread such as this and see the new, diverted comments, and the new tangent takes on a life of it's own.
I guess it's best to just read every post on every thread just to make sure you don't miss something.
