First and foremost,the fact that he "changed his mind" in going from a 7 RM to 375 H&H has absolutely NOTHING to do with the entire issue;it is, as we say in the law a "red herring",or an issue the other side to an argument tries to make important but which is, in fact, immaterial.This is akin to blaming victims for the "crime" imposed on them. The man paid for a 375;he should get what he paid for.To suggest otherwise is absurd.
This argument of yours I cannot understand? So if you agree to buy a Ford V6 car and park it in a garage so it is not used and 10 months later after an overseas trip change your mind and think you need more power and want a Ford V8. That's OK and the supplier should go ahead and replace the engine for nothing. That is your logic? I think some credit should be given to MRC for agreeing to help 7mmrem. It's unfortunate that it did not work out but then go back to your first point and remind yourself what you have let yourself in for.
