Did you drive your air cooled rear engine car to the range?

Bet the kids would get a hoot out of that!

I envy you guys who have outdoor ranges nearby :(

I think your rifle is just too old, archaic, obsolete, whatever the term.

How many young guys on a new Ducati know what a Black Shadow was?. How many young guys on modern shaped skis know anything about wood skis and bear trap bindings, or recognize the name Jean-Claude Killy? How many young guys driving new performance cars are familiar with the MG-TD? In my own hobby, how many young guys riding all carbon bikes with electronic shifting would know anything about a 1950 Bianchi, other than recognizing it as some sort of old bicycle?

TL-DR version - you're an old man, and he wasn't.

Plus, of course, many people who are very good at a sport are not gear heads. Perfectly possible to be a very skilled competitive shooter in one particular discipline, while having little interest in other kinds of guns that are irrelevant to your event. I'm imagining that if you talked to the top ten scoring shooters at an Olympic target pistol event, and showed them some old obscure pistol (a Borchardt, Webley, etc), most or all would have no idea what it was and several wouldn't care either.

^^^this. I'm sure there are kids that could shoot circles around the old farts. Eyesight, depth perception, reaction time, etc. I'm not a shooter but am frequently exposed to young people at work that impress the heck out of me in so many ways. Yet not a one would have a clue about rejetting a carburetor. But that's pretty irrelevant in their world...and in the modern world

Case in point..."rejecting'" is the word my spell checker insists on using. Sorry, no such word as rejetting...apparently.

Now that I think about it, my club's monthly gun show has become dominated by the "tactical" crowd as well. Not that our bench rest competitor really fits into that niche, but I guess he is a lot closer to that segment of the shooting sports than he is to mine. His rifle sported a stainless barrel and action, and the stock was grey plastic. Eminently practical, of course, but completely lacking any soul. And yes, I did drive my '72 911 hot rod to the range... I assume he arrived in one of the nondescript SUVs adorning the parking lot. Certainly "different strokes", but we both had a great day.

I guess I'll never fully appreciate the "utilitarian" approach to life, or at least to our hobbies. To me, while it may be less practical, a rifle of blued steel and oiled walnut will always find favor over the "tupperware" rifles. I've used them my entire life, often under extremely harsh conditions in the field (like a non-stop, two week long driving rain on the coast in Southeast Alaska while hunting out of a wall tent) with no ill affect - if properly looked after.

I guess I also a find a bit odd the guys who are really into shooting, but have no interest in hunting. The shooting becomes and end unto itself, with no purpose. I see all manner of insanely impractical rifles at the range that would be utterly useless anywhere else; they appear to have followed the same evolutionary path as Top Fuel dragsters or something.

And, finally, I find the "tactical" crowd the most bewildering. Their rifles are very practical, very useful, and certainly quite effective at getting lead in the air (it seems actually hitting things might be secondary, though). That's all well and good but, unlike the hunter or competitive shooter, they really don't have any kind of goal, or purpose, other than having fun. Which is good enough, I guess. I do, however, worry about the ones who appear to be living out some sort of fantasies...

Guns are sorta like women - I can appreciate each and every one of 'em for what they are. Some (quite a few?) just aren't "my style". Most others, I simply can't afford (used to drive 30 miles to sit and stare at Harry Beckwith's collection of Purdy and Parker shotguns) or are too limited in purpose for what I like to do/have a place to do. But guns are a tool. So there is always the practicality part, which makes me laugh at the tacticool crowd with decent rifles that have had all sorts of tacticrap added to them.

Best of both worlds - nice walnut, emminently utilitarian, sleek and good looking. Don't need no stinkin' rails.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...Criflemang.jpg

So an interest in any firearms other than old timey Jeff Higgins stuff and for any reason other than hacking a moose apart in the rain is illegitimate?

I mean you could not possibly protect your family with something that isn't exquisitely color case hardened.

No one could have genuine appreciation for the elegant simplicity of modern innovations like a glock.

Right?

Awesome rifle - quite possibly on my short list as I continue to stick a toe into these (to me) uncharted waters.

My first foray into the world of high-capacity autoloaders has enough walnut and steel to help ease my way in, although the steel is parkerized:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1452135079.jpg

I've since removed the forward "Scout" rail and replaced the hand guard with a solid one. Had no use for the forward rail, but I did like the shorter barrel.

This is a tough rifle to use at my club range. Rules are that all rifles are single loaded, no matter what they are. This one is easier to do that with than most modern "assault" style rifles, in that the whole top of the action is open. Pretty easy to just leave the magazine in and thumb a round down in from the top. As a matter of fact, it even has a guide for stripper clips, so it is meant to be loaded that way.

Anyone ever hear of a "rail gun"? These are current state-of-the-art in the unlimited benchrest class. The shooter stands next to it and releases the sear with a remote camera shutter thing on a cable. They never touch the rifle once the shot is aligned - they stand there and watch their wind flags. We see these at my club's range, being somewhat of an epicenter for benchrest enthusiasts. Many of our members have held world records in various classes at various distances.

Anyway, pretty cool stuff, but one might question its practicality:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1452135998.jpg

I have learned more about guns and ammunition from Mr. Higgins than from any other source. My wording, "guns and ammunition", probably sent him to the fridge for another beer, however.

I have learned to shoot more deliberately, with more accountability, from his posts.

I wouldn't believe it either, but there it is: old dog, new tricks.

I appreciate firearms, but am very limited in my hunting experience. It's not a moral objection, I just didn't grow up doing it. Short of dove I've never hunted live game in my life. But I still enjoy shooting as a hobby, challenge, and a mutual experience with my sons.

Wow. The idea of a firearm that you don't actually hold seems - like not really a firearm. There is the "fire" part but where is the "arm" part?. A big part of target shooting is the mastery over body movement, respiration, tremor. Without that, it seems more of an exercise in ultra precise mechanical accuracy.

As for the wind, they could install anemometers every 25 yd and program an Arduino plus stepper motors to automatically calculate windage, aim the "rifle", then either automatically fire it, or prompt the shooter to push the remote release. Images of Maverick shouting "I got tone" then "Fox One".

Heck, why not use liquid cooling, thermocouples, and another Arduino to control barrel temperature.

why not use a crossbow?

I grew up around guns, and we hunted as a means of filling the freezer. Duck, pheasant, deer, turkey - using firearms was a means to an end, not ends unto themselves. Now that I make enough money to not have to sit out freezing my ass off in a high blind, I don't hunt any more. And I really don't desire to. But I still like to shoot. Yes, that Remington .30-06 was a fine machine, and about the smoothest bolt action rifle I've ever shot. But my sport utility 5.56 semi-auto does a pretty good job of putting holes in paper, the ammo is cheap, and spare parts plentiful. Easy to clean, fun to shoot, cost of entry pretty low - heck, even my kids like shooting it. No, there's no wood, and no bluing. But if I get it wet, I'm not worried that it will be ruined. Luckily, I've never had the desire to dress it up with a bunch of accessories. It's a rifle, not a Barbie.

I haven't actually seen one but have heard people talk about them. Small bore aren't they? Guys talking about single hole groups with them.

FWIW I own a handgun and a shot gun but just for home defense...
Back in the day I had some mail order catalogs (dating myself) for old black powder firearms.
Maybe some day I will retire out to the country and have an assortment of rifles to play with.
IMHO black powder is like listening to vinyl... a lot of people appreciate the simple elegance of preserving the older things.
As an example most of us here love old cars when a new Hyundai can probably do everything better. :cool:

Thank you Paul, that's very kind of you.

I think like most of us and our favorite pastimes, I thoroughly enjoy sharing what I have learned, and sharing my often very opinionated observations about this wonderful sport. It's all just good clean fun.

Yeah, isn't that something? Not my cup of tea, but what the hell - they are having fun.

We actually owe an a great deal to this somewhat deranged (and I mean that in a good way) lot. Their pursuit is the ultimate in mechanical accuracy, removing the human element as much as possible. Their matches are won in the machine shop, not on the range. As such, the things they have discovered, then taught the rest of us about accuracy have improved the breed immeasurably. We now expect the most pedestrian off-the-shelf rifles to hold minute of angle accuracy with factory ammo; a generation ago, such accuracy in a dedicated match rifle shooting carefully tailored hand loads would have been winning benchrest matches.

Anyone remember Roy Weatherby's guarantee of 1 1/2" three shot groups at 100 yards? This was for his premium Mark V, a very spendy rifle then and now. Seems almost laughable today - most of us would return a rifle that shot that "poorly". We've come a long ways since then, with these crazy benchrest rifles leading the way.

Ed weatherby no?

I forget.

It was a game changer when the target stuff trickled into hunting. Not my thing at all. Never will be. But the gear is there.


Sent via Jedi mind trick.

Ed is Roy's son. He brought Weatherby back to California, where it all began. Weatherby rifles are now entirely American made. That said, I still wouldn't own one, for a number of reasons.

One rather weak reason is the nine locking lug arrangement. Any competent machinist will tell you how hard it is to get equal contact between two opposing bolt lugs, despite lapping them in until your arm gets tired - and the rest of your family and friends as well. Nine have to be well neigh impossible. That doesn't seem to hurt performance, though, but it does lead to the next point...

Weatherby rifles seem to attract the kind of shooter who think nine lugs just have to be better than two, and who pronounce Porsche as "poorsh". They want, and can well afford "the best", but they cannot elaborate why it is "the best", and resort to telling you how much it costs. They seem to believe money spent equals a fast track to skill and success. Normally not such a big deal, but when real blood is shed, we owe it to our prey to know what the hell we are doing. No puffed up chests or "do you know who I am's?" make up for some poor critter that slinks off to die a suffering death. Yeah, I know that is unfair, but that stereotype was cast before I was born.

I guess the real reason, though, is they have nothing that interests me. I do not believe in their "magnum" philosophy. To Weatherby, "magnum" = velocity. To me, "magnum" = bullet weight at "standard" velocities. I don't care how "flat" it shoots, unless it's a dedicated varmint rifle. To me, 200 yards is a "long" shot, bordering on too far to call "hunting". In a lifetime of big game hunting, my average shot still hovers under 50 yards... even factoring in some embarrassingly long shots on pronghorns and one or two mulies...

Probably shouldn't mention I shoot a 257 weatherby mag then? :)


Sent via Jedi mind trick.

Are the unlimited bench rest guys developing new shapes and surface treatments for the bullets?

I'm imagining golf ball type divots, weird stuff like that.