|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,469
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,469 |
Weren't Douglas barrels in the early ones, Wilson a later contractor? I've read that the Douglas series was more consistent than Wilson, which was said to be more hit and miss. When you got a good one, you had a good one. That seems to be the case with the '85 vintage RSI #1 I posted. I wrote '87, but looking at my records, based on the serial number 132-715XX, it's an '85 model. DF Yes, Douglas barrels were used in the early No. 1 rifles. I don't know when the switch was made to Wilson. From what I understand Wilson has improved their QC.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,224 Likes: 9
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,224 Likes: 9 |
Weren't Douglas barrels in the early ones, Wilson a later contractor? I've read that the Douglas series was more consistent than Wilson, which was said to be more hit and miss. When you got a good one, you had a good one. That seems to be the case with the '85 vintage RSI #1 I posted. I wrote '87, but looking at my records, based on the serial number 132-715XX, it's an '85 model. DF Yes, Douglas barrels were used in the early No. 1 rifles. I don't know when the switch was made to Wilson. From what I understand Wilson has improved their QC. Seems when Ruger went to hammer forged, in house barrels, consistency improved. Most all their current rifles seem to shoot very well, no hit or miss like some of those Wilson's. I'm glad mine shoots. They say when you got a good one, you got a good one. I did. DF Edited to add, I once had a four digit, early std. #1 in .243. I'm sure it must have had a Douglas barrel. I should have kept it, but you know how a Loony thinks, I traded it .
Last edited by Dirtfarmer; 04/28/20.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 8
New Member
|
|
New Member
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 8 |
Glad I came across this post as I'm waiting on my Interarms Mark X mannlicher stocked rifle in 3006 and wondering what scope would look good and functional. I was thinking either Leupold 2-7 or 2.5-8 gloss.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,224 Likes: 9
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,224 Likes: 9 |
Glad I came across this post as I'm waiting on my Interarms Mark X mannlicher stocked rifle in 3006 and wondering what scope would look good and functional. I was thinking either Leupold 2-7 or 2.5-8 gloss. Either one, I’d think. What rings and bases? DF
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,224 Likes: 9
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,224 Likes: 9 |
For whatever reason I prefer the look of a straight tube scope on a full stock rifle .
I have a Zeiss 1.5-4.5 and a Swarovski 1.25-4 but have had good service out of similar Leupold , B&Ls , and Weaver V3s Zeiss 1.5-4.5 is a classic. The very long straight tube makes it easy to adapt to far spaced rings and quarter ribs. DF
|
|
|
|
|
504 members (270cowboy, 1beaver_shooter, 10gaugemag, 12344mag, 01Foreman400, 222Sako, 50 invisible),
1,691
guests, and
1,224
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,125
Posts18,523,041
Members74,026
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
