Search results

hopefully this lets them lose the dead weight at the top that keep selling us out.

yup this thing called politics has inspired another scare , making the sheeple hoard stuff.

i use mine to shoot in excess of 1500yds also, but the clarity is phenominal when used up close at 2-300yds. unless the weight is an issue, its danged hard to go wrong with one of these scopes. if i could afford to have an NXS on every rifle i own, i would.

best of the cheap , would be the wolf match ammo.

if you have the $$, i personally would opt for the NXS. ive got both the BR, and an NXS and have found i can get the NXS clearer. my own opinion is that the 5.5-22 NXS is about the perfect all around scope.

for a factory rifle, cooper or anshutz. done somewhat cheaply look at a CZ.

why not, you pretty well insulted everybody that competes in BR shooting with your "hollow shell of competition" comment earlier. if you dont get it, fine, but then to insult the sport, your asking for it!

you can also have a barrel liner installed.

potterfield doesnt have anything to do with brownells.

i highly doubt it, sinclair has been owned by brownells for a few years now.

only ones ive ever seen for the 30mm rings are the inserts that come with the rings when new.

ill bet he pee'd his pants!! LOL

just thinking on what the above poster said, but even when lapping a normally rifled barrel, the grooves will grow, and the lands shrink. its the nature of the beast of lapping a rifled bore.

they are thinking they are gonna make a bunch of money off of folks that will probably never shoot them more than 200yds! one thing i figured out in life a long time ago is that need has nothing to do with wanting to own something.

very sad another great one is gone. ive always been a fan of Jenkins, and Ronnie Sox (whom passed away a few years back).

solid well made pistol, though they do beg for a trigger job out of the box.

you keep claiming facts, but have zero proof. when dealing with safety issues, opinions dont count.

well then, show us some proof. alot of people have seen things that dont exist. you say they chambered the 1896 mauser in 30-06, well it doesnt fit the action, so what else have you seen. you seem to want to prove everybody wrong about the strength of this action, but have zero proof. you think...

good, since you have no proof and admit it, quit giving questionable unsafe advice as to what a small ring mauser can handle. "so it would seem" is not any kind of factual evidence!

well you still havent shown any proof for what your claiming about strength of the small ring mauser action. i will straight up say, one wont just blow up when run hotter, but running hi powered modern loads in one uses up the actions safety margins for strength. with an action such as these...