Anybody have one of these? These look like a lot of rifle for the money. I have been away for sometime and just recently got back on line but I have not seen this rifle mentioned lately. For the money, these would appear to be in the neighborhood of a Montana or Alpine.

http://www.legendaryarmsworks.com/product/the-closer/

Wouldn't touch one with a 30 foot pole. Do a search - been hashed out here a lot.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10545510/1

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10524122

I handled one at a local store. Felt and looked like a heck of a rifle. Was really tempted with it, but the remarks I've read here made me hesitant

I bought an LAW Professional in 28 Nosler and I could not be happier with it.
Quality of workmanship fit and finish are excellent and the Bansner stock fits me like a glove.
First trip to the range was strictly clean and fire after every round, the rifle put 10 rds. into a 1.2" group so the potential is there for serious load work.
Thankfully for once I did not listen to the criticism...

Why on EARTH would you want to clean after every round, and 1.2" isn't anything to crow about. Not in a bolt action rifle anyway.

How well does your absolute best rifle group 10 rounds jorgeI?

Not bad for a boomer and a 10 shot group. I'd LOVE to see the 10 shot groups to back up all the "1 ragged hole" claims you see on the internet.

Yeah, 10 rounds is a whole nutter critter.

The best I've done with anything bigger than a 223 is a ten round, half MOA group from a 308, a Rem 40X.

Ten into about an inch from a sporter is pretty darn good.

This.

Even more so, considering this was the first and only load that had been fed to the rifle for break-in purposes, cleaning between each shot. Most people on the forum would be dancing in their Underoos if their rifles did that well right out of the box.

How is that relevant to the shoot-clean-shoot question?

As to ten shot groups, it depends on the protocol I would think. Ten shots in a row I can tell you I would never do, now three, three shot groups, allowing to cool between each is something I have done and in that case, probably under half MOA.

All on the same target?

This is getting good.

I'd like to see a picture of the 1.2" 10 shot group from a 28 Nosler. What bullet?

It is of no relevance to your shoot-clean-shoot question.

Use any protocol you'd like at 100 yards, letting it cool will help. Just 10 shots at 100 yards on the same target. A 10 shot group under 1/2 MOA is quite impressive from a hunting rifle.

Doing it with a clean barrel, essentially 10 cold bore shots, is a twist on it if you must tie the shoot-clean-shoot in.....

I think we are talking different issues. My "tie-in" was not to an accuracy test, but in reference (or so I thought) to barrel-break in, which in my opinion, is nonsense.

As to the accuracy protocol, I cannot say I've ever shot TEN shots for an accuracy test for t reasons specified. For load development, if I get consistent accuracy with say three or four independent three shot groups (using identical but fresh targets for each group)and realistic velocities through a chrono, then the rifle and load have satisfied my parameters for what I expect out of a hunting rifle. And if and when I decide to take a rifle on a hunt, depending on the animal and distances, I will take it out to two hundred and all the way out to 370 yards, which is the limit of my place. That said, I'm sure someone (mathman) will chime in to tell me there is a difference between shooting ten shots at one target or three, three shot groups at three different targets..

With all due respect, there is a HUGE difference. Look what happens to group sizes when magazine writers (like John) go from three to five-shot groups to test rifles. Now double that.

Yep, I'm with you on the shoot-clean stuff. If someone else likes it then they are welcome to do it.

Your comment on the group size is what caught my attention, specifically in regard to the 10 round group. A 10 round group is a different animal in practice.

jorgeI,

In other words you are caught with no defence.

All you need to do is try it a few times.

I would just like to see how one can factually explain the difference between three shot groups shot three times at different targets and one ten shot group at the SAME target, but allowing cooling time between each three shot session, or maybe two five shot groups, but I have to tell you and you probably know this, if you are shooting overbore, a three shot group is about all you can do before the barrel gets way too hot.

As to Ringman, "caught at what'? that said, I'm sorry your reading comprehension is that of a single-celled amoeba, in an oxygen starved petri dish...

Try the empirical route.

As I began to shoot a lot more the last few years I moved from the camp you're in to the one I'm in now.

I can only suggest that you try it....

When you don't have an argument use ad hominem. Works every time.

Math: While I have no doubt your method is far more scientific (and precise than mine), I see no redeeming social value in shooting ten shot groups at a clip (even with cooling) when my established process has met my goals, modest as they might be, but it works for me.

Bud Gills,

Congrats on your purchase. It's always nice when things work out the way you hoped.

Ad hominem? (did you google that?) as in your OP to me.

That said, sn argument to what, that there is ZERO evidence that shoot-clean-shoot has ANY effect on rifle accuracy? For chrissakes you're obtuse.

I'll do what the mood strikes me,sometimes sitting there and grinding out a 6-10 shot group(certainly not every time. I only do something like that with a brand new rifle or load). But it doesn't take too much of this to get a handle on the measure of a rifles accuracy potential with a given load at that distance.

And sitting at 100 yards grinding out groups(whether 3 shots or 10) only tells you so much,as it pertains to hunting. It doesn't qualify as "practice" IMO except for trigger pulling. Of far more value to me are series of 3 shot groups at 300-600 yards. The faster I get off 100 yards with a rifle and load the happier I am.

Mostly because at any reasonable hunting distances,if you have to reach deeper than 3 shots the wheels have fallen off and you got other problems.

If it ( and you) do well at those distances, how it does at 100 yards becomes essentially irrelevant. If you aren't going to miss at 300-600,you certainly aren't going to miss at 100......or shouldn't.

This is from a hunting standpoint. These aren't target rifles we're shooting.

Precisely, but Ringdick, in his infinite "wisdom" not only can't comprehend, but decided to be a rectal orifice with his first post.

I guess I wasn't very clear in my post, all I was doing was breaking in the barrel cleaning after every shot, letting the gun cool down as I had six other rifles to shoot and the temp was 40 deg.
Every shot was made at the same aiming point on the same target so as not to waste targets, I was not trying to make a bragging group so I could come here and gloat.
I break in every new barrel whether anyone agrees or not.... why because its my nickel, if you want to do otherwise with your rifles have at 'er..
I did not post to start a fight over the pros and cons of barrel break-in..

I don't shoot them all the time either. With my sporters if I can consistently bust clay birds with a 6x scope out to whatever distance I want I'm good with it.

Bud, I think most of us knew that...

We just like to obsess over tiny nuances. Not just rifle groups...just about anything will do

jorgeI,



I actually took some lessons in laws of logic. That's where I learned about it. You are guilty.



I agree with you.



See response above.

Used three shot groups and no barrel break-in on this rifle. Seemed to do ok.

Winchester M 70 Featherweight 7x57 Mauser and a old 4x Weaver.

El bingo. A little messkin' lingo mixrd in...

Let me give it a whirl by asking you to conduct an experiment next time you shoot. Take three identical targets, each with a three-shot group and all with the same aiming point. Take the average group size of those three.

Next, lay those targets on top of each other so that all nine holes (I'll spot you the tenth) can be seen. You might have to use one target as a base and then lay each of the others on it individually and mark the hole locations on the base target with a sharpie. Now measure that group size and see how it compares with your first average. I bet there's a significant difference.

You can fling enough 3 shot groups to luck into a .5 group, and then claim you finally shot as good as your rifle, etc.... 5, or better yet 10 shot groups will tell you exactly the health of your rifle, bedding, load, optic, and mounts.

That's the only reason I shoot groups.. to make sure everything is doing what it's supposed to do.

Bud . . .

Some people do barrel break-in, and some don't. If it was clear that there were benefits to it, there wouldn't be so much discussion about it.

But we all know that cleaning after every shot isn't conducive to shooting the smallest groups, and I think that was your point.

A 1.2" 10-shot group from a new rifle, with no load tuning and under the barrel break-in routine you describe would make me VERY happy.

I was excited to see the LAW when they first came out, and your report has me looking at a LAW again. It's a lot of gun for the money.

I read all the negative regarding the rifle long before I saw it so the dealer sent it to me on a trial basis, don't like it send it back sort of thing.
After thoroughly examining it and shooting it I was totally impressed so I bought.
However, I mentioned it today on my home Forum Canadian Gunnutz and I was totally trashed by some clown that lives on Snipershide and LRH.
He claims that Rick Bins was offered money by LAW to muzzle any negative threads regarding the Legendary Arms Works Company.
I find that very hard to believe...

I still want to see a picture of a 1.2" 10 shot group from that rifle. What bullet?

Most of the negative stuff I saw was around twist rates, and there aren't many manufacturers that get that right all of the time.

There was one member that complained his 280AI had to go back a couple times, but that's all I remember.

I will re-read the posts before I buy, but I doubt it will dissuade me. I like the rifle a lot. It looks like a lot of rifle for the money.

Regarding the muzzling, I doubt it.

Bud Gills,



My dad used to be an actor in commercials. One time Carl's Jr wanted him to say something like "this pisses me off," in s commercial. He told them he was not going to use that filthy language. His grandkids might see him and be disappointed. After a little conversation the boss told him something like, "Everyone has their price." My dad got up and headed for the door and told him, "Well now you met someone who does not have a price." They caved. Maybe someone offered Rick money. That does not mean he accepted the offer.

Being computer-challenged I cannot post pictures, I can tell you the bullet used was a 139 gr. Hornady over a shovel full of H4831, a bullet I've never considered an " accuracy bullet ".

Now heres the interesting part... like you curiosity got the better of me and I had to try a 3 rd. group.
So I loaded the exact same load along with 3 rds. each of 140 Barnes TSX and 140 TTSX.
Barnes loads were seated way off the lands, the Hornady almost kissing same.
The 139 Hornady load made 0.66", the Barnes 140 TSX made 1.19" and the TTSX did 1.46"
I was surprised because I expected both Barnes bullets to group better especially because I want to hunt with them rather than hunt with the 139 Hdy. which are left over from when I had a 7X57 and a 280.
I'm not giving up on the Barnes, simply have to do more work with them.
Ideally I would like to try 160 gr. loads be they Barnes or Nosler but such bullets are impossible to find on this side of the Fence..

It can happen once in a while. I quit after 12 shots.