Fellas, I'm trying to work out the details on my upcoming order with Melvin. He and I have not spoken yet, as I'm still in the information-collecting stage. I'm leaning toward the following, and I'd be interested in some feedback from those who own NULAs:

- .284 Winchester, 7mm-08, or .280 Remington? The short action rifle goes 1/2 pound lighter, and I like the idea of the .284, but brass is a little tougher to come by (or must be necked up from 6.5-284). This will be a deer rifle almost exclusively, as I have others for larger game.

- I know I'm going with a stainless barrel, but, try as I might, I'm having trouble warming up to a button-rifled Douglas barrel when there are so many good cut-rifled barrels out there. Would you be inclined to let Melvin use what he wants, or would you opt for a Hart, Bartlein, etc?

- #1 or #2 contour? I'd be willing to give up a little weight savings for a #2 if it would serve me well in the balance or accuracy department. Thoughts?

Can't see the long action on a well thought out light deer rifle. Would also toss the 708 or one of the 6.5's in the running for a almost exclusive as you say deer rifle.

I'd go #2 stainless Douglas and I can't imagine not doing a 7mm08

When it comes to NULAs, you would get more value from talking to Mr. Forbes for 10 minutes than soliciting input via this venue for 10 years. There is only one actual expert when it comes to ULAs, NULAs, and CLR/NULA hybrids, Melvin Forbes.

I have a model 20 in the 284 winchester...

It has a #2 taper and I prefer it to a #1 I have models with both
tapers...douglas barrels get a bad rap here but it WILL shoot regardless of what others will say and Melvin will stand behind it...THEY SHOOT with all the other brands of barrels I have

As far as brass bullets.com has 284 brass made by Norma....buy all you want if this is what you want and be happy.....

Of course. And that will be the last conversation I have on the matter. In the interim, I'm looking for feedback from folks who don't happen to be Melvin Forbes.

Very helpful...thank you. If you were doing it again, would you still go with the .284, or would you go 7mm-08?

If you want a 7 mm for deer, I'd go with the 7-08. I went with a .260 Rem. in a #2 at 23" and it balances very well. I wouldn't hesitate to do it again, or to go with the barrel manufacturer that he's settled on. I'm thinking he gets very few bad barrels from Douglas. And if he does, they go on the scrap heap.

Assuming you hand load, if brass makes a difference to you Lapua makes both now, and Norma 7-08 brass has been very good for a while.

7-08 NULA was my first one, but I also have a CLR/NULA hybrid in 7x57.

donsm70

I have a Nula in 30-06 with the #2 contour Douglas barrel. It is 24 inches long,and is stainless with cerrakote.

It is a tack driver,and balances great. I wanted it to be an all around rifle for anything in North America.

For a deer rifle,the 7mm-08 would be about perfect.

I wouldn't hesitate on a .284 Win if that is what you want, as far as barrel's go I have two ULA's with Brux barrels and one with a douglas...use whatever you want ! If I was going to call Melvin today and order a rifle I would just use the Douglas and be done with it especially if he had one in stock..

For what it's worth... I had a NULA 260 with a #1 Douglas stainless barrel. I could not shoot it worth a flip. I sold the gun to someone who proved it to be capable of sub .5 MOA. I likely would have been happier with a #2 barrel. I think that the light weight and "perfect" balance exposed my technique and possible flinch. I may order another in the future. If so, it will be a 7-08 or 284 Win. with a #2 barrel. I would probably do Douglas again. Bartlein and others will not make a #1 or #2 barrel in stainless. I loved the gun and wish I had spent more time working up loads and learning to shoot it. Melvin's stock fits me better than any other that I have owned.

Model 20 with a #1 for me, in 260 or 7-08, slam dunk.

Just FYI, Bullet.com carries Norma brand .284 win brass. It is their exclusive and in stock, so brass is no longer an hinderence for a .284. 100 rd or 1000 rd quantities.

Norma Brand .284 win brass

I would lean toward the .284 in a NULA since he has the extra mag space in a short action. It seems like a match made in heaven. Take this with a grain of salt since I don't have the cash to try it out. You can always down load a .284 to 7-08 specs, but you can't push a -08 to .284 specs if you have the mag space his rifles allow.

I've had three NULAs

308 with #1 contour, 30-06 #2, 257 Bob #2. All with Douglas barrels and all have shot very well. If you have any problems Melvin will make it right.

Personally, I would definitely do a Model 20 with #2 contour. It's a joy to carry. The 30-06 kicks too much for me to enjoy sitting around at the range shooting for fun but has never bothered me on game.

If Douglas barrels weren't accurate in his guns, Melvin wouldn't use them. However, he'll use whatever maker you won't.

I would talk to him about the 284 win. Last time he seemed to steer me towards the 708 because of brass which sounds like that it may be easier to find good 284 brass now. I would do the 708. For me, the difference in ballistics between the two is just a mental exercise. Practically it doesn't make a difference to me in the field because I don't shoot animals at long distances.

The model 20 has a three inch magazine so that gives a lot of flexibility when handloading. The 260 Remington with Lapua brass and a 3 inch magazine has all the right ingredients.

if I were to do it again I would go 284 winchester I load up the 120 grain ballistic tip to around 3000-3100, recoil is minimal and brass last longer...it kills whitetails just fine for me

if I want to throttle it up a bit i can always go up from there

I'm all about not wasting time on speculation and if there is anything that this place, and those like it, specialize in, it is speculation. A rifle is a pretty person thing, in that attributes that are optimal for me are likely to be sub-optimal for you or anyone else on this site. If you're going to spend $2K on a custom rifle, it seems to me that you'd get better, more useful, input from Mr. Forbes, despite his obvious bias, than from anybody here.

Mr. Forbes is probably the most pleasant and accessible custom rifle builder who I've spoken with, 180-degrees opposite his competition in Pleasanton, TX.

Richard

I currently have 4 of them. I like the balance of the 24" barrels. I have had no issues at all with the Douglas barrels. Accurate, clean up well. I have one Lilija on a .264 but can't say it's better than the Douglas barreled ones.

Lefty

richardca99,

I've probably owned or fooled with at least a dozen NULA's over the decades, and only one would not group three shots in half an inch or so with the standard Douglas barrel. I sent it back to Melvin for rebarreling with another Douglas, and it immediately started shooting tiny groups, long before most people would consider the barrel "properly" broken in.

Several of those barrels have been #1 contours, including the one on my wife's first NULA, a .270 Winchester, which would put three 130-grain Nosler Partitions under 2" at 300 yards. None of the barrels have been foulers, and in fact most haven't fouled much at all. But if you would feel better about another brand, then Melvin will be happy to put one on. (By the way, Hart barrels are button-rifled, not cut--though they're lapped, and Douglas barrels aren't.)

As somebody else already noted, Norma is making .284 brass. I hadn't heard it was an exclusive, but Melvin told me about it a couple months ago. Personally, I would lean toward the 7mm-08 for the purpose you describe.

Some people do prefer the forward balance provided by a slightly heavier barrel on NULA's. My own .257 Weatherby and .30-06, for example, have 24" #2 barrels and I prefer that on those rifles. But also had a Model 20 in 7x57 for a while with a 22" #1, and had no difficulty shooting it in the field, even offhand. It depends a lot on you.

I would try to get my mitts on a couple variations and see what suited me. A lot of money for a rifle, I would worry more about feel than barrel brand. If you trust Melvins reputation, let him pick the barrel maker.

Melvin is at the 30 year mark with building rifles....and he still uses and prefers douglas barrels...with NULAS accuracy reputation and Melvins 30 day love it or send it back policy how can you go wrong

I'll also agree with others here that there is nothing at all wrong with the Douglas tubes, they are damned fine.....especially when they get screwed on at Melvin's shop.

Although I have a .243 (love it) as well as a 7mm-08 from Melvin, if I had to choose one for deer it'd be the 7mm-08.

More importantly than barrel contours and chamberings, how will it be painted?

How about glass??

I picked up a used 260 several years back and it is just a stunningly accurate little rifle. I'd be hard pressed to spec out a better deer rifle than a 22" 260 or 7-08 NULA. The one and only thing I'd like mine to have that it currently does not is a threaded muzzle for my Ultra7. May look for a way to get that done before it's over with....

Hello Richard.

I currently own 5 Melvins:

1. 708 22" #2
2. 257 Bob 24" #2
3. 30-06 23" #2
4. 250 Savage 22" #1 (my pop gun)
5. 22 LR on a 22" #1

I really like the feel of the 708 best of of the bunch (I am 5'9" and thin. The 257 is the easiest to shoot due to recoil and a bit more weight ad the 250 hardly kicks at all.

If I am holding the gun right they will average .6-/.8 for a three shot groups (usually closer to .6 if I am on that day)TSXs, TTSXs, NBT, Partitions (for the 257, not the 708), and Bergers with scopes that top out from 4X to 8X depending on the gun. )Probably other bullets as well). The barrels, all stainless except for the pop gun (a story in itself due to some foul weather conditions and some rusting, but it still shoots well) clean with ease and are certainly accurate enough for my purposes.

In 2001 when I bought the 708 I had the same conversation with Melvin that you might, and that is where he steered me, and I'm glad he did.


PigGuy

There seems to be lots of love for a Model 20 in 7-08 in this thread, and the #2 contour seems to be popular as well. As for glass, it'd be hard not to go with a VX-3i 2.5-8x32, Z3 3-9x36, or something similar. I don't like to overscope a svelt rifle such as this one. For reasons I can't really explain, the paint scheme I've always lusted after was this one:

Thank you. I am a huge fan of the .260, but I like the ability to shoot the 160s and 168s in the 7mm. Interesting that you went with 23"...I would have thought a #2 at 23 would have been a little front heavy and might have opted for a 22"...I'll have to keep that in mind.

It's a terrible reason to make a decision like this, but the 7-08 is just a little "ho hum" for me as a cartridge. The .284 has always intrigued me, and I'm strictly a handloader anyway.

Thank you. It sounds like a damned versatile cartridge. Do you happen to know how that barrel is twisted...1:9.25 I assume?

Thanks PigGuy...great info. I wonder what Melvin will say about .284 vs. 7-08 now that quality brass is widely available.

I guess with Melvin's reputation for customer service, there really isn't any reason to sweat his choice of barrel. That seems to be the consensus...

Thank you John...much appreciated. My mistake on the Harts, as I could have sworn they were cut rifled barrels. The overwhelming consensus is to let Melvin use his Douglas, so I'll go that route. On barrel contour, I have a Kimber Montana that, depending on how I'm doing on any given day, is a 3/4 MOA shooter. I'm not making a comparison between a Kimber and a NULA of course, but that rifle has left me with the distinct impression that there is such a thing as "too light." I feel like I'd be a little happier with the #2.

Thank you Lefty. Much appreciated, and many thanks to all who replied here.

Nice choices.....

For what is to be primarily a deer rifle I don't see the attraction. A 260 with a 3" magazine should be the right stuff.

He's got a good point.

I wouldn't be skeerd to line up on an elk with a 6.5 140 Partition either.

I still can't grasp picking the 284 over the 7mm08, of the two, but people like to complicate sheit.

A M20, #2 SS in 7-08 with a VXi3 2.5x8 is prezactly how I'd roll - and with that paint scheme too.

But if the 284 is calling your name - load up on brass and scratch that itch.

If you ever decided to move on from the rifle, IMO the 7-08 chambering is likely to be more attractive to prospective buyers.

What is so complex about the .284 that the 7-08 makes easy?

7-08. I have had a few NULAs and they are absolute quality, but they recoil hard for the cartridge as confirmed by me and friends that have shot mine. You'll probably love the gun because they are consisently accurate but they are better in smaller cartridges in my opinion.

Also, I would go 22" number 2 in 7-08.

richardca99,

I had a conversation with Melvin a couple months ago, specifically asking about how he felt about the .284 these days. For a while he didn't recommend a .284 to anybody except hard-core handloaders, because of all the hassle involved in "uniforming" Winchester brass.

But with all the good .284 brass available today, whether 6.5/.284 or Norma's recent "straight" .284's, he is happy to chamber it these days. In fact he said that these days about half the rifles he makes are .284's.

the only advantage i see with the 7mm-08 over the 284 in this case is if you need ammo on a trip....since you are a handloader load up and move on just make sure you have your ammo when you leave.....

I couldnt decide on a 22 or 24 inch barrel so I just split the difference at 23...Melvin ordered the twist rate so I can only assume it is a 1-9...

LOGISTICS


Then tell me what a 284 is gonna do that a 7mm08 ain't.

bullet.com says it's their exclusive, so that's where the info came from.

I dont see any logistics problem with the 284 at the present time

you buy brass/bullets/powder/primers for either its the same thing

granted the 7mm-08 brass may be easier to find but when you find the 284 brass which is available now just buy a gross and be good to go for a long time...

the model 20 comes with a three inch magazine why not take advantage of it with the 284 cartridge

I'm scratching my head over the #2 preference at the Campfire. When it comes to the 308 based cartridge, I share Melvin's opinion, why in the world would you want to do that?

PRESENT ain't tomorrow.

Again, please tell me what a 284 will do that a 7mm08 will not?

Hell, whilst we are at it, why not a 7mm WSM? That will get you even more.

Regarding the 284 vs 7-08 debate, the 7-08 will always, always, feed better which is reason enough. The 7-08 also has less powder, Lapua brass, and there will be no practical field difference in performance.

well if he doesnt purchase enough brass presently and was in a pinch he could easily use 6.5-284 which is one of the most popular rounds in the long range game so really no brass issue at all or for the future that I can see.........

as far as what a 284 will do that a 7mm-08 wont I will ask you the same question what will your 250 ackley do that a standard 250 savage wont...basically they are all the same when it comes to taking game animals...

I would think if a guy can afford a Nula he can easily buy 200-300 cases that are presently available and if he uses the gun as a hunting rifle that will last he for as long as he needs

as far as feeding issues after owning two nula rifles in 284 trust me there will be no feeding issues with a nula coming from Melvin....

I would bet Melvin has built more 284 winchesters than any one in the country

boils down to buy what you want and makes you happy....

Balance, more pleasant to shoot and more steel for heat dissipation. The action and stock are light enough that a little more weight in the barrel doesn't hurt, and the barrel is the one place where a little more weight is useful.

Jewell or Timney?

Smoke, I hear you, I just can't stand the thought of adding 1/2 lb to the most popular fly weight rifle ever made. That said, I throw a 20 oz scope on it, so what do I know. Seriously, add a 1/2 lb for the scope and a 1/2 lb for the barrel and suddenly your flyweight rig is a pound heavier, which is significant. I recon I choose to add the weight in glass that gives me comfort.

There is no wrong answer, just personal preference.

I know you roll with both. Its all good.

I debated over a #1 and #2 for a while and it makes no sense to buy the ultimate lightweight rifle and add weight to it but that is what i did...I think it is actually more like 4oz in weight when you compare the weights douglas list on their chart...they list their #1 at 22 inches and their #2 at 24

Gene, I've handled and shot a NULA 284. Yes it fed good, surely sufficient enough, but still not as smooth as the 308 based cartridges, in my experience. I've grown to really appreciate butter smooth feeding.

i would agree with you on that when comparing the two...but my 284 feeds great with no issues unlike some of the stories you here from others concerning this catridge

About 150 fps nominally, give or take. Important in the overall scheme of things? Not really...I concede that.

I'm a Jewel man myself, but I could rock a Timney.

Listen to Smoke. Have a 7mm-08 and wish I would have went with a 2 for a little forward weight. Good balance as is, but easily could have been better. Weight in the middle isn't the same as a little at either end.

I had a 308 with #1 contour and 270 and 257 with #2 contour. I preferred how the #2 contours handled.

I've a decent grasp of what works for me. Pass the #1 please.


https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...1128343/1/Not_your_everyday_long_rang_ri


https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth..._your_everyday_long_range_r#Post10996512

I've a 243AI FULA with a #1. It is accurate but noticeably tougher for me to shoot offhand....if doing it again I'd add the 4oz's and use a #2.

If you like a jewel trigger then by all means use a jewel ! I have one with a jewel and love it !

Jay, you don't count. A 6 lb rifle in my hands is like a 3 lb rifle in yours.

lol....that ain't right. I don't notice the #1 as much with a rest/prone...offhand it gets me.

Great shooting!!!!

#2 all the way. The balance will be better and the rifle will easier to shoot well in the field.

I got that backwards. The insinuation was meant to be that you are much more mighty than us mere mortals, and you could pick your teeth with even a #2.

I would have to agree that for free hand shooting a little more weight in the front is more better. The chances of me shooting free hand with a rifle wearing a long range scope is slim to none. I realize few set their flyweights up as such.

....and then you make fun of the space between my 3 good teeth... Rough around here today.

Speaking of teeth, currently sitting in dentist chair. Broke off my top front tooth at the gum a few minutes ago horse playing. LOL. Dentist says he's never seen a tooth break like that before. Story of my life.

I hope she was good-looking...

Melvin threatened me with putting lead in the buttstock if I went with a #2 over a #1. So you might want to clarify with him or add a few more ounces to your weight difference estimates.

That's funny - your text earlier stated you chipped it while shooting your ULA.
A #2 would not have recoiled that hard.

Dang it Scott, I told you to keep that on the DL.

Smoke, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Bone, Its transparent Melvin hates a #2 on his rig. I'm with him.

Got to have the nub surgically removed tomorrow. Strangely enough, no pain as of now. Biggly concerned that might change at about 2AM.

Never owned a NULA but I would listen to Forbes if I ordered one.

A #2 contour on a NULA seems like a club in a standard chambering.

I've been using two of these rifles for several years.

They are quite different, a Model 20 .308 with 22" #1 barrel (about six pounds with scope) and a Model 28 7x61 Sharpe & Hart with 26" #3 barrel (about seven pounds with scope mounted and some lead in the stock).

Balance is exceptional on each rifle and this may be one reason they handle very similarly in the field. The #1 barrel on the .308 is not at all whippy and steadies easily and very quickly. Took a while to learn to shoot this one off the bench, however, but that's no fault of the rifle.

While I would consider a #2 contour if I were to buy another such NULA, I'm pretty sure the difference in weight and handling would be of no consequence for field use. Also doubt there would be any accuracy difference shooting from the bench.

Anybody know the muzzle diameter of a #1 and #2 barrel contour? One showed up at lgs in 30-06 and I'm interested - somewhat.

NULA uses Douglas barrels.

http://www.douglasbarrels.net/dimensions/index.html

Hey thanks mathman! That was quick. I'm going to get the s/n and call Melvin to
see what I can learn about the consigned '06 - in traditional NULA colors.

Make sure it's a legit NULA/ULA and not a Colt Light or Forbes rendition.

Ouch... Better get it fixed quick or you might not be able to hold your mouth right as needed to get the #1's to shoot.

My Model 20 in .308 has a 22 inch, #2 contour barrel. Weighs 5 pounds, 3 ounces. Not much of a weight penalty and balances very nicely.

Not really, actually it handles pretty well. But again, it's all personal preference. Hopefully the OP has gotten enough varied opinions to weigh.

Thanks for that reminder.

Bob,
Have you ever handled one?

"2 is my favorite..not club like at all. I have four of them.

Lefty C

Lol...kinda insulting isn't it? Make sure the gun you think is a NULA/ula doesn't say something entirely different on it...haha

My NULA 308 has that paint scheme and I love it. Talk to Mr. Forbes, tell him your concerns and take his advice. He has been building them right for many years. He will build it right for you too. BTW my NULA handles like an upland bird shotgun. Carries easy, points right and quick.

A tale of the tape and scale.Top rifle is a 257 Imp. 24" #2 Douglas, 14" LOP, 6.5 lbs, .600 @ muzzle. Rifle balances 1" in front of action screw.

Bottom rifle is 260 Rem, 22" #1 Douglas, 13" LOP, 6.0 lbs, .560 @ muzzle. Rifle balances 1/4" in front of action screw. Both rifles wear a 2.5-8 Leupold.

My 308 has a 1-10 twist, 22” #1 barrel and a Leupold 2.5-8 scope. It is a 1” rifle from the bench in my hands. I will be 73 this August and I am sure a younger better man could get it grouping better. To shoot it’s best from the bench, you need a soft front rest (towel) and firm holding for the best grouping. When hunting it I hang it upside down on my left shoulder with my arm in the sling so when I bring it up to shoot, I have it with a “hasty sling” wrapped around my left forearm and pulled into my right shoulder. Like I said before it comes up like an upland bird shotgun. It has always been “minute of deer” hunting!

I have only fired factory ammo in it so far. But I am going to load up some Barnes M/LE RRLP 150 GR fragmentation bullets and try them out this summer on the jackrabbit population that have exploded this year where I hunt in West Texas. With me walking and shooting at running jackrabbits, I may find that I am not “minute of rabbit” even thou the NULA is! My tall trigger stick will be with me for those long setting shots.

I had a bit of range time yesterday with my previously mentioned .250, 257 Bob, abd 30-06 . The 06 did .53 with 168 NBTs and .61 with TTSXs, the 250 did .7 with 75 VMax and .54 with the 100 BTs, and the Bob shot .38 with the 115 VLD and the 115 Partition did about.6, all three shot groups. This was a very good morning for me, as I am usually ot that consistent.

Anyway, enjoy your new rifle, whichever you choose.

Courtney

Hey bud - dibs on the .260...grin...

Maybe I better re-think the #1?

I'm sure at 13" LOP it won't fit you, but leave it to a 6.5 bore to wake your ass up.

As long as we're showing photos of NULA stocks, here's mine:

Lefty yes...I have handled them,and shot a 270 and a 7x57 as I recall. But I have never owned one.

But I have had a LOT of #2 and #1 barrels in 7mm and 270....even a 30/06.

A #2 is ideal to me on a 7 Rem Mag. If I were buying a NULA in a 7mm Magnum that's where I would use a #2.

A #1 is what I put on a light 270-7/57-280 etc.

I found the closed grip on the Forbes 24 could come back to wrap the back of your middle finger. I assume the NULA's are the same, so will have to check that tomorrow.

Dang. Silver or gold on the replacement? Sorry you're having to deal with it.

Man bigwhoop, I wish you would take those two pictures of #####s down!!!

Of the four ULA/NULA guns I have (243, 7mm-08, 300WSM and 50cal ML) the only one that whacks my middle finger knuckle is the 300WSM and that's only from the bench.

sir;

ive had 2 nula a 6mm remington and a 7mm-08. wish i kept the 6mm.

both had #2 22" barrels on them balanced very well.

i discovered i don't shoot fly weight rifles very well and sold them.

don't overlook the 6.5 creedmoor for your chambering

i have a hand full of melvins also


1. 22lr 18" #1 stainless
2. 250 savage 20" #1 stainless
3. 6.5x284 24" #2 stainless
4. 338 federal 22" #2 stainless


with a 6.8spc and a 450 marlin on the way

also have a clr 280rem 22" #2 stainless

all shoot great with factory or handloads

great guns very accurate

What a joke..... Please do tell what is inherently superior about a short action?

He's probably not kidding. Stick is so short that he has problems running a long action too. Must paddle in the same boat with the poor short bastid... You know those munchkins have to stick together.....

bsa: You read the stupidest things on here.... you have to laugh.

Yes Bob, some of this chit is too funny!!!! I guess some of these guys hang out at their local Cabela's and Sportsman's warehouse to get their information and knowledge. I've heard some good ones there too...

Lighter weight, shorter bolt throw, handier rifle, more scope mounting latitude.

It's about like most arguments here on the fire- purely academic with little practical value.

And then there's the guys that are not quit what they would like you to believe.

Add to your list; less powder, less recoil, and with ballistic difference so minute they're only seen on paper.

For me, I'd never consider a long action for a dedicated deer rig.

BSA and Bob, no need to get personal with it.

Bullets have more to do with killing deer than action length.

And if action length is that big of deal for some,well......

Most of what we talk about on here makes no practical difference and is no big deal, but we all make personal gear choices for what we each do and how we hunt.

For a NULA or a rifle I'm packing, I'm firmly in the SA camp for reasons listed by Jordan, and CTSmith...

Guess my NULA .257 Weatherby is disqualified as a deer rifle, even though the Model 28 action weighs almost half a pound less than a Remington 700 short action.

Yeah John it was not particularly "well thought out" either.....

Looks like all rifle design wisdom now emanates from Tennessee....hilarious.

Happy Fourth!

I've been using short and long actions longer than some on here have been alive, and right now have short action rifles heavier than the long action rifles and vice versa. Depends on the cartridge and how you build the rifle.

After a few decades of use I would rate the current rancor over short actions as a lot of noise with little advantage and the cartridges that fit as "ho hum".

I like stuff with some legs and my back has never been broken by a sub 7 pound rifle nor one going 8.5#'s where called for.

I notice first thing these short action guys do is look for a longer box....so they can seat bullets longer in the shorty magazines....what's that all about?

The short action thing is a lot of silliness......

Man, you guys sure get worked up over a couple inches in action length... If we start talking about backpack size, is somebody going to put a hit out on me...?

The M24 weighs 1/2 lb. more than the M20....

John, I could make a good case for 257 Weatherby on a MPBR rig. There's a significant range advantage. As for the 30-06 based cartridges, I will always opt for their little brother.

For backpack hunting- sheep, elk, etc, I'll take all the light/handy-dandy I can get. For truck/horseback/ATV, etc, or day hunts, I don't much care whether my 7Mag is a RM or a WSM...

Bob,

The ONLY hunters I've known who've had minor difficulties with running a "long" bolt action have been severely height challenged. One in particular was a woman who claimed to be 5 feet tall, but I believe was actually 4' 11". She had to use a shorter length of pull, and a long bolt came back so far that she had to pull her head off the stock to get out of its way. Because her arms were proportionately short, she had a much easier time handling rifles with barrels no longer than 20". Both of which were major reasons why her favorite rifle was a Remington Model 7 in 7mm-08. But I know several women around the average American woman's height of 5' 4" who can easily run a full-length bolt while keeping their face firmly on the stock, even if they do use a slightly shorter LOP that the standard 13-1/2".

Poconojack,

"The M24 weighs 1/2 lb. more than the M20...."

Really?

The model number of NULA actions is their weight. Do the math: A Model 24 weighs 1/4 pound more than a Model 20, when fitted with the same contour barrel.

John, just a guess, but is there a weight difference between the 24 and 20 stocks? Another 4 oz there would make up the rest of the half pound.

Jordan,

No, there's not. The M24 action is only 3/8" longer than the M20, and the part of the stock that's lengthened is through the magazine area--where there's slightly more "cut-out" for the longer magazine.

I've weighed a bunch of Model 20, 24 and 28 NULA stocks, and they vary more due to the fact that they're individually made than the action length. And that's rarely more than an ounce or two--which can be due to the particular paint used.

Read what was said you stupid old bastsrds. I said a well thought out..so tell me why you'd choose a long action while dreaming all this chit up for a light deer rifle. No reason to don't need to. Now I never said better you made that chit up idiot.

I'm not even responding to the bitch that turns everything into something about stick. Screw stick who why bring him up?...lol

John,
Right off the website, unless the 5.5 lb listed weight for the M24 is 5lb. 5 oz.

Not sure they'd put a hit out on you, but you might cause a few to have a stroke cause they've never had a need/want for the same backpack.

Only reason I mentioned action length is the guy is thinking of ordering a new light deer rifle. He said that not me so I can't see a advantage for a long action....for the op and what the op said he wanted. My light rifle is a long action but I didn't order it from NULA either. Long action isn't a big deal but sure can't see it being an advantage for the purpose this whole thread was started about.

Poconojack,

Yeah, I've seen that number, but have weighed a bunch of NULA rifles and haven't seen that difference, and suspect the listed Model 20 weight is from one of Melvin's early .284's, perhaps the first very first one.

Once owned a M20 in 7x57 with a 22" #1 which with a 7.5 ounce 4x28 Leupold Compact weighed 5 pounds 10 ounces. My wife had a M24 .270 Winchester with a 22" #1 that weighed 6 pounds on the nose with a 11.5-ounce Bausch & Lomb Compact 2-8x. The barrels would weigh just about exactly the same, due to the similar calibers. Subtract the difference in the scope weights and the difference in the rifles themselves was only two ounces.

My present M24 .30-06 with a 24" #2 barrel also weighs 6 pounds on the nose with a 6x33 Leupold weighing 8.5 ounces. My wife has a Model 20 .257 Roberts with a 24" #2 barrel that weighs 6 pounds 10 ounces with a 12.5-ounce 3.5-10x40 Leupold VX-3. The VX-3 weighs 4 ounces more than the 6x33. Subtract that from the .257 and it still weighs 4 ounces more than the .30-06. Half of that is the approximate 2 ounces of difference between the .25 and .30 caliber barrels, but the fact is that Eileen's .257 Model 20 actually weighs a little MORE than my Model 24 .30-06.

I could provide other examples from actually weighing a bunch of NULA's, but the truth is a Model 20 does NOT weigh half a pound less than a Model 24, and sometimes doesn't weigh any less. The scope mounts on all those rifles, by the way, are the standard NULA rings.

Whatsamatter Cupcake?


You want to be the self anointed expert on what constitutes a well thought out deer rifle and tell the world it has to have a short action, which by implication means that any deer rifle with a "long" action is not "well thought out".

What a stupid thing to say.

So you get called on it and your panties get bunched. Poor baby.



Watch who you call a stupid old bastard you ignorant, young ,impudent dick head. I bet that super duper short action POS you hunt with didn't go a mile from the truck last year.....you kill any deer that dressed over 75 pounds?



BSA and I will hunt your ass into the ground if you're not careful LOL.....

What a tool.

Holy sh it, we've gone from beat downs to hunt downs.

This place is the best entertainment EVER!

Curious I am. How many Nula's have you handled or shot?

Lol....a man asked about ordering a NULA to hunt deer. I don't see an advantage for a long action for a light weight deer rifle. I never said a long action is a poor choice as I have light weight long action rifles. If starting from scratch which he is I see no advantage in using a long action to build a light weight deer rifle.

I'm sorry action length means so much to you fellas. Try sex horseback riding fishing or having friends outside of the Internet?

I guess about a half dozen or so. Never fired one. I'm curious as to why you feel a long action would be better? I doubt Melvin would suggest a long action for this application either. I know he told me he built his daughter in law a 260 for Africa.

For the life of me I can't figure out how me thinking a short action for a ligh weight deer rifle is a better choice than long upset so many....lol.

So to all you with sand in your vaginas.....why would you choose a long action since you feel the short is such a silly choice?

You never fired or hunted with one, yet the subject is Nula Rifles and I seem to remember the OP asking for opinions by those who have actually used them. So, not sure WTH your opinion is worth.

I've been around a few, shot them and carry them hunting on a frequent basis.Mine are short actions, however if you re-read M.D. comments, and he has been around them more than a little....




....when it comes to weight there is an insignificant difference between the short and long when it comes to Nula's. In which case there is a point to be made for going with long. The reason if I was getting another, I would perhaps give additional thought to the long.

Nice move, Kaleb. First you strongly imply anybody who choose anything except a short action for a deer rifle is semi-stupid, then you claim they're the ones obsessed with action length.

Please do tell me what is inherently superior about a long action?

Unless of course it's a 10 pound pre-64 in 243, that one is skookum.

I still don't understand how I'm such a bad guy for recommending a short action for the op's new deer rifle? I get it that the way I worded things I hurt feelings. I'm sorry.

All this was started because I recommended a short action rather than a long action for a new light weight deer rifle. I could have and should have been more polite(sorry again) but I still don't think I'm wrong about the actions.

Heck I think one in a 270 would be great but I don't think it would be better than a 243,250,260,any creed,the x47's,708,308. Big difference in what I said and the way it all unfolded.

So I've answered all the questions the best I can about why I said short is a better choice. Now why would the long action be a better choice?

Because it accommodates the 270 WCF..

dave

You're awful quick to put words in someone's mouth aren't you? You really took what I typed the wrong way. When I said well thought out I meant spending time thinking or dreaming this hypothetical rifle up. If you were dreamin up a deer rifle build would you use a long action over a short?

I never meant to imply a long action deer rifle was not well thought out. I have them myself. If starting from scratch and thinking it out I don't see any advantage to using a long.

Seems everyone that got hurt feelings needs to keep in mind things typed can be took the wrong way. I've apologized for the last time about this. I'm sorry my statement was took the wrong way by some but I still don't see how it turned into such drama.

See above grin

On second thought if me saying "I can't see using a long action on a well thought out light weight deer rifle"......y'all take it as me implying semi stupid it's on you.

If you really want to go for a lightweight rig, get his 'super short' action and chamber it for 223/AI.

They are lite light.

I talked to him about that in length at that show in Nashville. It was very cool to meet and talk to him very nice man. I was going to order just that but things came up and I guess I chickened out and got a Montana. I like the Montana just fine but still have that itch for one from Mr. Forbes. I doubt if I had got the NULA I'd wished I bought 3 kimbers. Maybe some other time.

Kaleb,

What is the opposite of "well thought out"? I can think of several possible meanings, including poorly thought out, dumb, semi-stupid, etc. etc. Just because you didn't plainly state it doesn't mean you didn't plainly mean it.

I'm not one to insult people or be rude for no reason. I've been very polite to many here over the years. Lots of drama over me implying you made a poor action size choice....if you took it that way.


no I don't think the oposite of well thought out is retarded stupid idiots making poor choices. It seems you do?

Are you saying that it would be a much lesser choice by picking a 280...

I could do everything I need to do with a 270 and 130gr Winchester supremes. I kill deer with custom rifles and handloads just as well as I did with factory 243's and 270's....grin

So what you are saying is that you couldn't kill sheit with Remington ammo?

For somebody who implies he thinks "well" you apparently don't think much: The opposite of "well thought out" is indeed some version of NOT thinking well.

You apparently also have reading comprehension problems. Here's my first post to you again: "First you strongly imply anybody who choose anything except a short action for a deer rifle is semi-stupid, then you claim they're the ones obsessed with action length." You still apparently are.

No, I wasn't offended because of thinking you'd insulted my choice in deer rifles. In fact, I've killed deer not only with rifles having short bolt actions (some of which were deliberately built on short bolt actions), but medium-length bolt actions, long bolt actions, lever actions, pump actions, semiautomatic actions and even single-shot actions. And the vast majority of the single-shot actions were even shorter than any centerfire short bolt action. Do I get some sort of gold star for using an even shorter action?

Instead, I was offended because, again (in case you missed it here) YOU brought up action length for a "well thought out" deer rifle, and then suggested other people were obsessed with action length because they didn't totally agree with you.

lol THANK YOU. This has turned into the silliest conclusion jumping to thread I've ever seen. I chose to build a 280ai with my dad's old o6. So I guess I'm saying anyone who didn't build a 280AI made a poor choice...Laffin.

John that was too much for me to read and comprehend. I'm done apologizing for hurt feelings over me thinkin a well thought out light weight deer rifle would use a short action. I would sure hate to know I jumped to conclusions that quickly. Hell I built a light 280ai but I don't think it offers anything over a 708?

So if something isn't or wasn't well thought out it means the person is a fool and should just die?....I didn't realize I meant all that

You're an idiot if you don't use a short action NULA for a lw deer rifle....well, unless you want the rifle chambered for a long action round.

For what the OP first listed, it would be hard for me to go with the long action if starting from scratch.

That's exactly what I meant. Only a bunch of drama queens would turn it into such a mess.

Does that mean kings wouldn't.....

Nope.
Not me.

dave

If that was your first impression
Everthing after that was foopoo.
dave

Are you saying someone else is saying that.....

Pretty amazing rants.

I don't think you can go wrong with any NULA although I saw one in 8mm Rem. Mag that only tempted me for about two minutes.

I don't think Mr. Forbes would build a bad rifle or not without trying to talk you out of it first. All of them will balance well as they are adjusted if they don't.

Still can't decide? Then get a 6.5x284 with a 23" #1.5 contour barrel and go shoot stuff. The 6.5, 140-155s have about the same BC as the 7mm 160-168s. Or split the difference between .260 and .284 and go 6.5x55 SM. Same thing with the 7x57 on the .08 vs .284 debate.

I think the original poster is showing good judgement and well thought out choices by ignoring everything after about post #5.

So you are saying that your post doesn't matter?

Kaleb,

Would love to know what deer-hunting experience brought you to the conclusion that a short bolt-action is the BEST for a deer rifle. I know what kind of deer and where Bob has hunted, but don't know about you.

I'm more curious on how action length trumps bullet/placement.

Does a GOOD bullet from a 270 through the shoulders kill a deer mo better than a bullet from a 7mm08 through the shoulders?

I'd love to hear how a long action is better and a short is such a terrible choice and why those who choose short actions are so foolish? See this chit goes both ways.

To answer your question I've deer and elk hunted with a good friend just outside huson Montana. I'll be their next week to pack in the bob for a week and fish. Oh didn't kill a elk did kill a little buck. That was a long action 280AI. Next year I went to Texas shot a larger buck and used a short action 22-250AI. So by expierence you must use a ackely chambering but short actions have produced larger deer for me. That's the only 2 deer I have ever shot....lol.

So back to my original statement. I feel like enough is plenty sometimes. I think a 280 is swell but how do you argue a 708 isn't? I think the 708 is a great round with a little less recoil. That could result in a more pleasant rifle to shoot? Might shoot the rifle a few more times? Might end up shooting it a little better? Might give more confidence? Might make better shots?

Why would a long action NULA be a wiser choice than a short? I mean while we're to opposites and putting words in each other's mouths and jump to conclusions about people and over react and get all upset about rifle advice on the Internet with strangers....lol

So if you shoot through the lungs you are a bad shot...

All jokes aside as soon as I first used and killed deer with the 708 and 120's I thought this is about just like a 270 with 130's. Less powder less recoil. I get 3000 with 708/120's and just shy of that with 270/130's.

Couldn't tell any difference in the deer killed.

This thread has become a poor showing of what I consider to be some wise, logical, and mild-mannered individuals. As a spectator, I see a guy getting gang-banged for saying he'd recommend a short-action rifle if given the choice. He made some offensive remarks, and apologized for it several times, but the recipients have responded with remarks at least as offensive, if not more-so. It's like a high school drama club in here, and Scott has capitalized on it.

We all have different preferences, and should be able to discuss and debate the different advantages/disadvantages like men, without resorting to name-calling and personal attacks over rifle preferences. Especially something as trivial as action length for a dedicated deer rifle that has no special application criteria like backpacking, extreme weather conditions, LR shooting, etc.

I've never carried or killed deer with a .243 (given an appropriate bullet) and felt like I wished I had a .280 instead. And visa versa, as well. Deer, even big deer like the ones we get up here, are just simply not that hard to kill, and don't require any special rifle to get the job done.

[/quote]

So you are saying that your post doesn't matter? [/quote]

1. Yes exactly.

2. Go with what Melvin recommends even though I value your opinion.

Kaleb,

So you've hunted deer mostly in Tennessee, killing a couple others elsewhere. Thanks for the information, that's what I wanted to know.

the only thing i could get out of the last few threads that pertain to this post are the words A WELL THOUGHT OUT RIFLE.....so with that in mind I dont think you can find a better well thought out rifle for what its intended purpose is ....a light weight rifle, so short action or long #1 or #2 taper 7mm-08 or 284 winchester buy what YOU want you cant go wrong with any of those combinations the rifle will shot sub MOA easily and will handle great no matter the barrel taper from my experience....

I'm beginning to think my short action 260 NULA and 243 RI is a dumb idea. LOL

Deer die differently in other places?...lol you know I'm correct and now it just bugs you.

Melvin himself recommends the 284 on a short action and told me the 708 and 260's are excellent choices too. Maybe you missed the part about he built his daughter in law a 260? You'd know better than he would though.

By the way you've still not said why long action are so much better deer rifles. All you've seemed to do is pick apart my statements and opinions not to mention jumping to conclusions and taking stuff the wrong way getting all butt hurt.

So to the great gun writer....please explain why those who hunt deer with short action rifles are so stupid and a long action is such a superior choice.

As long as it wasn't well thought out to use short actions all is well. I never thought recomending and saying a short action would be a well thought out deer rifle would cause such a stink. Glad I didn't speak to the #1 or #2 contour debate. I really like your light weight setups ct. Seems you have them figured out.

What I should have wished I had and really meant was while a person is going through the mental part of coming up with this "ideal" rifle...likely the one he we already have is fine...dreaming it up I can't see a reason to use a long action? Doesn't mean it's a bad choice I never entended for it to be took that way. Poor way for me to have written it(I'm not a professional). In my opinion if ordering a NULA for deer hunting I can't see a reason to opt for a long action. That's all I ever meant to imply.

Wow, enlightening thread.

Yeah - some true character came out on this one. Enlightening indeed...

Bizarre thread.

Need a short bus imodicom. Only problem is it would get used on most/all my post.

I can understand when the Brewsky's are controlling the key board but how do you keep that up for days?

Kaleb,

It's not so much that deer "die differently" in other places, as the hunting itself might require something other than your idea of an ideal Tennessee deer rifle.

However, deer do get considerably larger elsewhere. I've personally taken two mule deer bucks as big-bodied as a mature cow elk. That doesn't make them harder to kill, but between where they live and how much deer a bullet might need to penetrate, your notion of an ideal rifle might not be ideal.

Jump to conclusions? If you really want to discuss this further, you should go back and read my posts again, slowly and carefully. I NEVER said "long action are so much better deer rifles." In fact I never said anything one way or the other about long actions or short actions--except that Model 20 NULA's aren't as much lighter as Model 24's (or even Model 28's) as many people think. Please point out where I posted anything slightly resembling "those who hunt deer with short action rifles are so stupid and a long action is such a superior choice."

Once again, YOU were the one that brought the idea that short actions are the ONLY actions for "well thought out rifles." I might be wrong, but can't recall any of the rest of the posters saying long-action rifles were the only way to go, and KNOW I didn't.

You have shot some bigger deer than I have no doubt. You e also traveled to more places for sure. Keep in mind the state I hunt you can kill more than 3-4 deer a year. Not all those are 50lb fawns.

I've only shot one mature cow elk. Was pagosa springs 2 years ago. She was much bigger than any deer I've shot. Was a very fun trip with good folk.

I believe well thought out is no different than an opinion. Wouldn't you agree? So yes my opinion on a light deer rifle is using one of Mr. Forbes short actions. I didn't mean to bother him but a good friend and I probably got to talk with him atleast 45min(I know you've know him 45years or so). He told us the story of hunting caribou with Mr. Steve Timm in Canada and he took a 308. You might have been there too I don't know.

My opinion is a short action is a better choice for a light weight deer rifle. I also have long actions myself. I don't consider one a fool for choosing a long action even though I don't see the need in it for a deer rifle. I stand by this statement and do not mean to insult anyone. I don't think you'll find a better deer rifle than something based off a 22-250,x47,or 308 case pick caliber you prefer.

I hope you all have a good evening.

They're both ridiculous. I'd unload 'em quick, before word gets out. Of course you'll have to slash the price.

PM sent.

Kaleb,

OK! Glad we got past that.

I know you can take a lot of deer in Tennessee, and don't discount your experience there at all. I would probably choose something similar to your suggested choice--and actually have, since for a long time I hunted several states a year, including some in the South, though unfortunately not Tennessee.

Among other short-action cartridges I've used have been the .243 Winchester, .250 Savage, .257 Roberts, .257 Ackley Improved (in a NULA), .260 Remington, 6.5 Creedmoor, 7mm-08 Remington, .300 Savage, .308 Winchester and .358 Winchester (both in a Savage 99 and a NULA). have used the .243 and both versions of the .257 Roberts more than any of the others, and took my biggest whitetail buck with the .257 AI. Have also had a Model 20 NULA in 7x57, which does work in the 3" magazine when handloaded, and even some factory loads will fit.

But have also used the .308 quite a bit, and over the past 12-15 years have come to really like the two 6.5's and 7mm-08 as well. Though right now my 7-08 is on loan to the daughter of a friend for deer and elk. (It's actually pretty popular as an elk round here.) It's a nifty little rifle, one of the tang-safety Ruger 77 Compacts rebarreled with a 22" #1 Douglas.

I don't consider a long-action cartridges necessary even for really big-bodied deer, but do kinda prefer them for hunting big deer in open country, partly because they can push bullets with higher BC's faster. Those cut down on wind-drift considerably, and it does blow out here now and then, both on the plains and in the mountains.

You have a good evening too!

That ought to be a sweet little number.

It is, since the Compact stock was so slim compared to the standard-weight stock. With a 6x36 Leupold in the factory Ruger rings it weighs 7-1/2 pounds.

This thread reminds me why I don't participate much in the 24HCF these days. It's kind of like everyone is drunk on a different kind of booze.

My good friend Johnny is apparently the only one with good sense and that's a bloody-damned fact.

Anyway, the long action/short action argument is all sillyshit. It simply gets down to killing critters and that's what counts.

Blessings,

Steve

PS. By the way, I hunted in Quebec with Melvin Forbes once. He was using a ULA .30-'06 which I bought from him later and I was using a .280 Ackley. Mel killed a lovely webbed-tined bull whose rack was later eaten by turtles in his fish pond

I killed an ancient heavy-antlered bull by shooting him in the face at twelve FEET and a HUGE/WIDE bull at fifty yards or so. Both were glorious bull caribou, killed within about five minutes of each other and chosen from an incredible number of animals that surrounded us.

Mel and I seemingly were apparently the only guys with sharp knives on the hunt ... we gutted twelve of the bulls that the gunny-writers shot together. Mel held caribou legs and kept shoving Red Man in my mouth while I was using my George Herron Number Two and pulling guts.

Layne Simpson was on the hunt and I believe it was the first for his 7STW. He got powder burns on both of his bulls ... killed them both at less than fifty yards Hell, a .30-30 would have worked as well.

ST

Seriously? So BobinNH has killed some sheit in other places, mostly all guided, and he's a stud.

I hear you and wife ain't too good on southern turkeys....

$3500!

This got guys that worked up?

Changed to:

This led to all that?

(More of a declaration of surprise with disappointment, not wanting to claim anyone was worked up, or not. The above statement seems rather benign to me.)

Apparently Kaleb mostly hunts Tennessee, so he's pretty clueless.

The guy that kills one deer every 6 years in Maine knows far more about killing sheit than someone that piles up 20 poodle sized deer a year in the south.


I guess when you want to know about f&cking you ask a virgin...

Where the f*ck have you hunted...........

Sweet Jesus, WTF are you talking about. You don't write for a living and you sure as hell ain't got esquire after your name.


You must get your info from Cabelas..........

Have you paid for as much pussy as you have 'hunting experience'

Yeah, that's exactly what they are saying. I'll bet Bob can mail you something to cure that hurt.

You need a vacation.

Why, because so many on here are showing their asses?

I think a time out could be useful here. Study this for a moment...

OK, I studied it. Now I have to go throw up!

Bob, John, BSA,
Thanks for taking the time to post those well thought out responses. If you guys were going for entertainment value, you knocked it out of the park.

Just to mellow things down:

A Melvin Story

I forget what year it was, but in the mid-1980s, I got an invite to a gunwriter's hunt in Quebec. The George River caribou herd was at an all-time high and the prospects were excellent.

So I went.

One guy I going in was Melvin Forbes and though I'd visited him at the SHOT, I'd never hunted with him. Anyway, we got along well and had a lot of fun together.

Before the hunt was over, I bought that very rifle from him. Killed a sh1tload of elk with that .30-'06 and it was my one of my prime hunting tools for over a decade a decade. I never missed with the ULA and never shot twice on either elk or deer. Hell of a rifle.

A 24HCF member owns that fantastic ULA rifle now ... great guy from down Roseberg/Grant's Pass way.

True story.

God Bless,

Steve

Well....Thanks for that Mr. Timm. I was in a position to buy an NULA 4 years ago, and life being what it is it fell out of that position promptly. Used what I had left to get greydog to build a bug hole shooting .350RM to satisfy the last build desire of a friend that was losing to the big C. That gun shoots unreal so no regrets, and I carried it on my last hunt with that friend.

That said, I surely hope to be able to squeeze out the coin to do a NULA one of these days and I honestly want it to be a .284Win like many before, but the 30-06 sure is hard to beat when thinking about a 6lb everything chaser. Hearing your story adds to that!

Mr. Forbes thought process and design was very unique and truly flies in the face of what people think should go into a light build today. Even mentioning a full length bed in any circle garners looks as if you said you like curry in your coffee.

I am looking forward to whatever maelstrom the 24 brings next......

If I was going to have Melvin build me a big game rifle today, I'd probably opt for the .25-'06 with a twenty-four inch barrel. I've killed several pickup loads of prairie goats and big-eared deer and even a half-dozen elk with the big .25. Always found it to be superb.

I simply love the flat trajectory and lack of recoil of the .25-'06 with 100-grain bullets. It just plain works.

Johnny Buffalo's .257 Roy is even more of a GREAT thing and may be even better than Mr. Neidner's wildcat.

Blessings,

Steve

Steve, just a quick question. That rifle that was your prime hunting tool for over a decade, is this one right?

Steve's 30/06

Agreed. A 25-06 would be great in a NULA. I had one in .30-06 and it was too much of a good thing for me. I had a .340 in a Fibermark at the same time and found the recoil to be similar between the two.

25 Elk would be a lot of Elk in a decade.

Gee, look at that. You edit your thread after I called you out and it doesn't even show as being edited.

And crickets

"Call Out?" Have fun with that.

I guess it never occurred to some that I've owned a fair number of ULAs. Several .30-'06s, two .284s, a .308 (or possibly two), a .338-.284 and a .243. And maybe a few more that I've forgotten.

Quite possibly rifles I owned twenty and thirty years ago have grown foggy in my mind.

And if that makes folks here unhappy ... so be it. Minutiae is not something I fixate on, especially this late in my life.

Anyway, have fun with that and make of it as you will.

Bye,

Steve

What a great read just when I thought my Monday night was going to be boring..