Finally got some new scope rings for my Marlin .22 wmr. It's been stored all winter scope-less because the rings I originally had were too short and the bolt handle wouldn't clear the eyepiece when I went to remove it for cleaning. Now I just have to go find some 40 gr. CCI Maxi-mag hollow points to put through it. With those rounds, I can basically give Lincoln a haircut on a penny. Hopefully Walmart still carries them.
I'm thinking they'd get in the way. You can put rail protectors on them when you're not using them but that'll still make the grip feel significantly wider. Then when you put an accessory on, like a flashlight, it's gonna get in the way big time. I'd try putting them on the upper foregrip. Other than that I think your options are pretty limited.
The guy I'm making the stock for served in Iraq as an Army Medic a couple years ago so he has a strong idea of what he wants but I'm not entirely sure of how to execute on it. It will be fitted perfectly to his body and shooting stance but he also wants a rail on the underside for a front pistol grip and maybe stuff on the sides. I've already considered how you could possibly put optics up top but without machining the rear sight off and installing my own block, I can't install a scope mount as forward as I'd want. Would a rail on the underside of the fore-grip and two on the sides of the top be better? Having the lower grip a little deeper and closer to the chest can't hurt, and the top rails would be away from fingertips. Then mirage might come into play with the heat from the vents between the foregrips. The rifle will be for shooting (because it's fun) and proving why it would be a poor choice to break into his house... if that makes a difference.
Since you obviously know what you're doing when it comes to shaping wood, could you make a wooden foregrip? Something like this: Keep in mind that I have no idea what something like this would entail, but if it can be done it would be a cool feature.
I'd rather ultimately give him the option of not having anything on the fore-end too, which boils down to how I attach the rails (and I think I've got a good solution to that). I'm already working on a sculpted wood pistol grip, and just one is enough work. The fore-grip pieces will also be a pain in the ass to inlet (seriously), so having a wood handle stuck out of the bottom won't help.
If he wants a vertical foregrip, then that solves the problem right there. That way you could put three rails on the lower foregrip. Command arms makes something like this: http://www.impactguns.com/store/814716011041.html Edit: I forgot to mention these things; http://www.google.com/products/cata...=X&ei=LLWMTZSQNIm90QHb5d2nCw&ved=0CG8Q8wIwAg# They work good and they're low profile.
Yeah whatever I do will be similar to that synthetic fore-grip, just laminated walnut and with full rails instead of short ones on the side. The solution I've got for quick, strong, and accurate (consistent) removing and adding of rails is stainless lugs installed into the fore-grip for the rails to screw into, with three screws (probably 10-32 or 8-32 low-profile socket screws) per rail. This way you wouldn't be screwing the rails into wood and removing them would be a snap with an allen wrench, and they'd look like cool stainless air vents when visible. I think I could make them strong enough to withstand a lot of impact force, like dropping the damn gun on the ground. This is one of those things that might make the most sense when completed. I'm putting the most thought into how the stock will fit the shooter with the right dimensions and angles so he doesn't have to fight the rifle to get it comfortable while blasting away and he can snap it up to his shoulder and be on point right away (like a shotgun).
You might want to think about some sort of backer plate so the lugs can't be ripped out of the wood. A lot of force can be applied to those rails, especially when there's a vertical foregrip attached to them.
I was considering that, like with flanged threaded spacers held back by a 1/8" or whatever aluminum plate mortised into the wood (invisible on the inside) or just leave it at wide flanges and a little thicker wood for more meat.
Alright experts, I need your help. I have been asked if I want to buy a Mossberg 100 ATR .30-06. It is synthetic. Pretty good shape, however, I haven't seen it yet. It has an NCstar illuminated scope on it. I have never owned that kind of scope, but I have heard bad things about it. The gun is American made. I know for a while they were selling them in Walmart. Mossberg didn't start selling them in their catalog until 2005. I've heard that Mossberg is a pretty good gun. The person is asking $350 for it. If anyone has had any experience with this gun, any feedback would be awesome. Am I being ripped the fuck off? Please shove me in the right direction. Thanks!
Can we assume you're going to use it for shooting deer, piggies, etc? I'm usually a fanatic about accuracy and precision, but you likely don't need to drop a ton on a rifle that will deliver sub-1" (at 100 yards) accuracy with whatever you feed it. Minute-of-heart/lungs is what you need, and almost every modern designed and manufactured bolt gun will have killing accuracy. What you need to pay attention to is 1. How well the gun fits you, 2. The trigger, and 3. How well it operates, and 4. If it's used, how well it has been taken care of. 1. Is the stock comfortable? Do you constantly "fight it" to get your head in the right place? Does the recoil pound your face? The wrong fit will make it much more difficult to shoot well and comfortably than one that feels natural as soon as you shoulder it and allows you to remain relaxed through the entire shot. This is a matter of finding the right gun to fit you rather than customizing an existing one 99% of the time. 2. Is the trigger a POS? Simple as that. Is it really heavy, has lots of creep (you have to pull it really far before it goes off), rough, or inconsistent? Having a good, adjustable trigger can help people shoot much, much better than otherwise, as the trigger pull can make or break a shot. Triggers can be adjusted and tweaked, but you probably don't want to mess with one out of the box. For this reason, I'd lean towards a gun that comes with a trigger designed to be adjusted like the Savage rifles and newer Marlin X7 guns (which I hear are very nice). 3. Does it feed shells effortlessly and reliably every time? Is the bolt smooth and slick? If I picked a gun off the shelf and tried feeding a handful of aluminum test shells through it and it jammed or had poor extraction/ejection, I would set it down. You can make a rifle operate beautifully by adjusting and polishing, but it often requires a lot of work and patience. For this you might want a used, broken-in rifle more than a new one. 4. Buying a used gun is perfectly fine, but you need to inspect the shit outta the gun before you buy it. Make damn certain the barrel doesn't have any rust or copper built up, and if there's excessive wear in spots or tons of oil/grease gunked up, I'd be concerned over potential issues or cover-ups. Also, if there's any rust anywhere, set the gun down. That is a red flag that it hasn't been used well and there could be more problems down the road. Ask how they cleaned the rifle... if they are methodical (use a good bore guide and cleaning rod, use a jag/patches/good solvent, etc.) vs. not (ramming a paper towel with WD-40 down the barrel with a stick). Also, I would stay away from the NcStar scope. When it comes to optics, you get what you pay for and brands do matter. In general, avoid the cheap Chinese-manufactured stuff. German and Japanese glass and coatings are generally best. $350 for a Mossberg sounds about what you'd pay for one new (as I wouldn't consider the scope part of what you're getting because I just wouldn't use it), so if it doesn't meet the criteria I laid out, I would pass.
Probably for deer. I already have a .270 that is my main hunting gun. I want to know anything about that gun specifically. I already know about buying a used gun.... I wanted to know if anyone had any personal experience with that Mossberg, but thanks anyway.
It's a simple, no-frills gun. I have a Browning A-Bolt in .30-06 that I bought new some 20 years ago, and it's still my main hunting rifle. I'm very, very happy with it's accuracy, especially with a quality scope on it. (Personally, I have a Leupold VX-7L 3.5-14x56mm that is insanely good). The ATR is very similar, based on when I fired one a few years ago. I prefer the A-bolt due to the short-throw bolt action, and it's got a better trigger feel than the ATR from what I remember, but it wasn't so different that I wouldn't buy one if a deal presented itself. It's an inexpensive gun with no frills... and I'm not sure what you're looking to find out about it other than it's a rifle of reasonable build and quality? What kind of information are you looking for? It'll shoot well enough, as will most modern bolt actions. It's not like most people's shooting abilities will be better than it can shoot, especially in a hunting scenario. $350 is stupidly expensive for a used one, I'd say, and katokoch's advice on the scope is bang-on, in my opinion; it adds nothing to the sale, so I wouldn't include it. Gunbroker is showing a couple as low as $260 "buy it now" prices, with a few in the upper end of $360. EDIT: Just wanted to add that I also have the synthetic stock on my .30-06, and while it makes it so much easier to bushwhack with, it does give you a fair bigger kick than if it had a heavier, shock-absorbing stock on it. You won't notice it when you're hunting and taking a few shots pumped full of adrenaline, but it's not something you will take to the range to shoot all day. A friend of mine developed a pretty good flinch by doing just that with a similar rifle with a synthetic stock, and he couldn't shake it... ended up selling the rifle.
Thank you. That was exactly what I was looking for. I wanted to know what kind of quality the gun was. Alot of cheap guns are exactly what their price is, cheap. The fact that it is synthetic won't bother me. A friend of mine has 7 mm that is synthetic, and I have shot it quite a few times. I know the scopes aren't good. If I get the gun, I am not even going to keep the scope. I am basically thinking that the $350 is for the gun only, since the scope is junk. Leupold's are amazing scopes. I bet you paid a pretty penny for it. You have been incredibly helpful.
The reason I said what I did is because the differences between inexpensive bolt actions are minute enough that it all comes down to those 4 things and not nearly as much the exact brand and model (quality, per se) itself. I wouldn't call them "cheap" either, they're just less refined versions of more expensive guns and can often perform just as well, if not better sometimes than the spendy ones. Savage sells a simple version of their model 110 rifles called the Stevens 200, and the only difference is a simple metal finish, simple synthetic stock, and the older trigger (not an Accutrigger). However, they still shoot like the devil and some incredible target rifles have been built off of them. Realistically, there isn't anything a .30/06 can do that a .270 can't, except lob bullets larger than 150 grains (which rules out target shooting and moose hunting), so I'd save your money and buy more ammunition for practicing or upgrade the glass/mounts/etc. on the .270. A note on Leupold... their warranty is king. If that shit breaks, you send it in and you get a new/fixed one, even if you bought it secondhand. So, I'd value any used Leupold higher than similarly priced new optics, considering you've got that safety net if anything goes wrong.
Same goes for Bushnell, in my experience. The original scope I bought for/with that rifle was a wide-angle Bushnell Banner 3x9x50mm, and after about 10 years it lost its seal. I called them up, told them the problem, and they said to send it to them. They then fixed it free of charge, and sent it back to me. No proof of purchase, no questions, just "send it and we'll fix it". Unfortunately, UPS lost it, and they had to send me a replacement. They didn't have that same model any more, so sent me one that was the closest to the original's specs. The problem was that they no longer made the 50mm, and they sent me a x40mm. Just wasn't the same. That's the only reason I got the VX-7L, really... I was so used to a 50mm objective lens on that Banner I had, and it was the closest replacement I could find. They've since brought back a 50mm Banner, as it was such a favourite of so many hunters. 52mm in dark light conditions makes an unbelievable difference.
This. I agree 100%. The only reason I got the .30-06 was because I knew I'd be moose and bear hunting as well, and only wanted the one rifle to do it all. I find that even 180 grains, which is what I use for deer, is overkill.
Piles and piles of deer have been killed by .22s shooting little lead 40 grain bullets going less than 1400 fps (in close range). If my cousin hadn't offered me his .270 this fall for a great price and if it hadn't been the rifle I used to shoot my first deer with, I would have passed in lieu of a .308 or similar short action that has good load flexibility and very manageable recoil. Shot placement = priority #1. Always.
The first two deer I had ever killed was with a .30-06. I am getting to the point that I want more than one gun I can use to go hunting with. I have a .22 magnum that I adore, but I don't really like to go deer hunting with it. If I screw up, miss a head shot, then I am just going to be pissed off. I am kind of weird. I like the really wide cross hairs. I have yet to come across anyone else that also likes that. The thin cross hairs annoy me for some reason. I have also discovered that scopes like that are also hard to come by.