MD or anyone else,
A few years ago i saw a question list posted and was curious if we could start one up? would anyone be up for it?

Why not? I just can't guarantee every question will get answered. It seems each year I go to SHOT, I spend more time talking to people in general and less time finding stuff out!

JB

Great Idea!

I would like to know if the Combined Technology XP3 bullets are ever going to be sold as components?

Thanks.

Is Kimber planning on doing any LH centerfires?
Is Leupold thinking about doing any long tube 3x scopes?
Is Leupold's work on a shorter turret making progress?
Can Remington do some short run LH 700s in something other than plain Jane calibers (maybe in stainless?)

And...please beg Burris to go back to a normal power adjust ring rather than that stupid rotating eyepiece that knocks your focus out everytime you use it. Not to mention no flipup cover options with that design. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> (one can dream)

we should get this put sticky up top!!!

+1,000!

How about any new lefty chamberings/versions from manufacturer's.......

+10,000

Will someone make a 25wsm or 25saum?

Since Ruger uses investment castings for a lot of thier rifle parts. Why don't they use titanium? It would seem they could make titanium rifles easier and cheaper than the competition.

Whatever happened to Remington's economical double rifle?

MD,

For Ruger: I'd like to buy some of their Full Stock Internatioal rifles in other calibers than they make now (243, 270, 308 and 30-06): 7x57, 257 Roberts, 250-3000, 280 and 284 Win.
If you run into Clint Starke, ask him if he's ever gonna make bullets again. His 35gr, 40gr and 45gr 22 cal. bullets work the best of any in several rifles I have.. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I'd be willing to pay him WELL for a couple hunderd, or more, of each. After I developed loads with his bullets, he stopped making them... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Thanks, and have fun at SHOT!!
Make sure that you and Eileen wear good, comfortable walking shoes. Those days get kind of long, and hard on the feet..

Don

Put me down here also. + 100,000 !

When is ruger gonna put a heavy barrel on the mini14 and price it cheap for rednecks like me so you can get a sub 2moa out of it?????????????????

DixieFreedom,

Thought I'd throw in my bit on the Mini-14 prior to the SHOT show. Ruger has made a number of improvements on their late model .223 rifles, including the incorporation of new production techniques that tighten tolerences significantly. With tighter tolerances and more uniformity from gun to gun, groups tighten, too.

I recently conducted a field test on one of the new Mini's and was impressed with the results. It's my opinion that in purchasing a new Mini-14, you'll have a sub 2MOA gun.

As for the price, I'm not able to say whether they're in your range or not. I can say that the improvements on the Mini are substantial.

By the way, for the sake of the naysayers, I'd like to add that I'm not getting any special deals from Ruger for touting the new Mini-14. When I see significant improvements in a product, I don't hesitate in saying so.

Bart Skelton

I believe I can at least partially answer some of these questions before the show:

1) Leupold held some writer tours of their plant in July, and I asked them then, once again, about plans for a long-tube 3x. All they would say was that is "on the list" of considered projects--which is what they always say.

That doesn't mean they don't mean it, however. I used to ask the same thing about a multi-coated 4x, and lo and behold, they make it now!

2) You are not likely to see any vast increase in the calibers available in left-hand rifles (or long-forend Rugers), just because there isn't much market for them. They would be making rifles for a very small subset of all shooters--left-handed rifle loonies, and the relative few who buy full-stocked Ruger rifles. The marketing attitude is probably to let you rebarrel the rifles yourself, if it means that much.

3) I mentioned the Burris eyepiece problem to them last summer, on a prairie dog shoot--specifically citing the Bausch & Lomb scopes that had the same design about 12-15 years ago, and presented the same problems. I don't know if there will be any changes.

4) Who would bring out a .25 short-fat magnum? Winchester should have, instead of the .25 WSSM, but they have other problems right now. Remington got burned bad in their short-fat introductions. The Ruger/Hornady partnership seems to be bringing out cartridges right and left, and maybe they'll get onto it. I always believed that a .25 WSM or SAUM, something that would beat the .25-06 and approach the .257 Weatherby, would be a natural--and still do. Instead we got the .325.

5) I was promised a Remington double rifle for testing two SHOT Shows ago, and haven't heard a word since.

JB

MD,

Please tell Remington that I would be glad to be the guinea pig for their "new" TI or LSS mnt rifle in .257 SAUM when they have it ready. I'm such a hell of a nice guy that way! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

How could that not sell?
It seems so obvious.

Oh, and tell them they don't need a magnum contour too!

Any chance that Remington will be bringing out stainless versions of the 798 or 799? I think Charkes Daly had them listed on their website, but they were never actually available for purchase.

Could you beg or demmand that Savage start making the Model 99 again? I would buy one in stainless and one in blue/walnut. No detachable mag please....please....seriously, no detachable mag. A brass counter would be nice. Chambered in a nice selection of the standard 308 family rounds, but especially .358 Winchester! Maybe chambered for the WSM's as well.

Savage already tried to bringing back the 99 once, and hardly anybody seemed interested.

As I understand it, there are several problems:

1) It would be VERY expensive to produce the classic brass-rotor 99 again. It just does not lend itself to modern manufacturing.

2) Many shooters go into sticker shock when any rifle is priced $1000 or more--especially something that is not a super-accurate bolt rifle. And that would probably be the price of a "classic 99."

3) Most of the people who want a brass-rotor 99 can find one for less than $1000. In fact, probably most people who want a brass-rotor 99 would prefer an older one.

As for a .358 99.... Despite the admiration many rifle loonies (including some gun writers) express for the .358, it has never sold well. Never. Even Browning keeps periodically dropping it from the BLR line-up.

I believe it would be impractical to chamber a rotary magazine 99 to the WSM's. They are a LOT fatter than the .284. And even if it were possible, how many people who want a WSM are going to buy a 99 chambered for one?

I will ask if I get the chance, but I doubt there is much hope.

JB

Mr. Barsness,

Can you hazard a guess how many units a major manufacturer has to be able to sell to make a new chambering in an existing rifle and/or a new rifle economically viable for them to produce? Thanks for any light you can shed.

I really have no idea about a new rifle, but it's really pretty cheap to do a new chambering, as long as they don't have to do extensive work on the magazine. This is assuming that the cartridge has already been invented! Witness Remington's practice for many years of introducing a Classic 700 chambered for some older round.

JB

Regarding the new Ruger Hawkeye rifle - would you please get one in your hands and give it a quick "once over". Then report back to us regarding your impression of the gun.
Thanks

Could you ask remington if they are going to add the .243 or 6mm chamberings to their LVSF? I think a .243 LVSF in praire ghost or mossy oak brush finish would be a dandy coyote calling rifle.

hotsoup--

Just got word from a local sporting goods store that they have a Hawkeye in stock. The guy who called (who I trust) is initially impressed. Will try to see it before it is sold.

JB

Another vote for a short fat .25. Stainless with a decent synthetic stock please. I'm also interested in the new Rugers... are the factory synthetic stocks stable enough? Are the new triggers good enough as is? If so I think I may need one in.... .358 Win<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> I have had more fun with my Whelen over the past 2 years than any other rifle that I have owned. Cast bullet bunny loads, pistol bullet varmint loads that are...well effective in the extreem and more bang flops on deer than anything else I've shot deer with. I'd buy a good short action .358.

It already sold.......but not to me. I did get to look at it though.
.375 Ruger, decent wood, nice matte finish, decent pad, the good open sights. Quite impressive actually. Looked like a "work" rifle should.
I'm sure "Mule Deer" will be able to give you a more definitive evaluation <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
It was on display less than 2 hrs........and they don't even have any ammo to shoot in it yet.

elkjaeger

On which end of the range would you be standing as the guinea pig? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I am disappointed in what Ruger calls its' lightweignt rifle - the new Hawkeye Lightweight weighs in at 7 pounds. I like under 7 pounds WITH the scope mounted. Perhaps a titanium cast receiver might get the weight down.

How about asking Remington if they ever plan to revise their extractor setup. If perception is at least part of reality, they should have already made a change. Or will they wait for Savage to upgrade theirs like the trigger and then be forced to cave to lost sales pressure.

Gmack,
It only took Remington 2 or more decades ( and a bunch of lawsuits) to introduce a new trigger. It'll be at least that for a new 700 extractor. While I never had a problem with their extractor, (or their trigger for that matter) you are right in that perception is at least a part of reality.

Besides, Remington can now sell you a 798 at an inflated price. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Wouldn't matter, because they would never have enough sense to build one in the first place. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />