ir 50/50 Sporters
- Thread starter GordonE
- Start date
IMO, the 6 power scope makes the rifle more difficult. I don't think the rounded bottom and 7.5 lb vs. 8 lb make any difference. The way most shooters have the front bags set up there is no real difference with rounded bottom.
The 7.5 lb weight is more difficult and usually more expensive to build than an 8 lb gun as component selection is more important
Dave
The 7.5 lb weight is more difficult and usually more expensive to build than an 8 lb gun as component selection is more important
Dave
Last edited:
F
Fatback
Guest
I don't see a weight problem. I have one that is 6 14 and 1 that is 7 7. One Pippen stock Maple and 1 Stith stock western cedar, both 2 step barrels. Plenty of areas to save weight with adjustments in stock, rings, scope or barrel. From the looks of the record scores we may need to go to a 4 power scope. Weight of the stock has little to do with accuracy in my opinion.
Last edited by a moderator:
F
Fatback
Guest
Gordon My Hall weighs 6-14 with a Mark IV 4-14. You are correct with most wood choices. This gun stock is western cedar. The other gun is maple and paloma (sorry for the spelling) and made by Bill Pippen. It a 3-9 Leupold. Weight was close, light rings and I still had to remove wood from the channel to get within 1 OZ. As for shooting that depends on me and the ammo. I have shot numbers with the sporter that equal the big guns. Its just easier and more consistent to do with the big gun because of the scope. It does take a lot of planning to build a sporter within weight limits.
Sam
Sam
I don't think my heavy gun out shoots the lighter one. But I do think the sporter is harder for me to shoot with the 6x. I have more confidence in my sporter for some reason.
Keith
Gordon, 1 oz or 1 lb doesn't seem like it would make any difference. I think the biggest difference is scope power myself. For me my eyes are my worst enemy. I've always felt that if I miss its my eyes fault & I apologize to the rifle for steering it that way.
Would I like to see a change to a higher scope power? Absolutely Not. Its what makes it a challenge.
Keith
Any change to the Sporter rules means freezing existing World Records and starting fresh. Not saying it's a good or bad thing but it's a reality.
D
Doug
Guest
I have 2 Sporters that are 1 & 3 OZ under weight - it was a struggle!
Would 1 oz made a difference? Nope!!
But 6 Oz would have given me a lot of leeway on the Scope & Stock I used.
I vote to keep all the same! Let all Struggle like I and A lot sporter shooters did over the years.
Would 1 oz made a difference? Nope!!
But 6 Oz would have given me a lot of leeway on the Scope & Stock I used.
I vote to keep all the same! Let all Struggle like I and A lot sporter shooters did over the years.
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Quit using heavy stocks and actions
It's pretty obvious, considering a certain Annie Sporter I know of, that we don't need either bulbous stocks or actions to have winning rifles.
No reason why there can't be light weight both. Make em weigh 7 pounds or even less, they'll shoot just as well. No reason not to make aluminum RF actions. Pandas and Vipers seem to do OK in the CF arena. They can take the strain of 30 Cal cartridges no sweat and don't wear out; none that I have seen anyway. Cedar wood looks pretty to me, if that's what it takes.
Perhaps someone who knows about the weight of metals can tell us what the difference in weight would be between a Turbo clone made from suitable aluminum vs. stainless?
Thanks,
Pete
Pete
It's pretty obvious, considering a certain Annie Sporter I know of, that we don't need either bulbous stocks or actions to have winning rifles.
No reason why there can't be light weight both. Make em weigh 7 pounds or even less, they'll shoot just as well. No reason not to make aluminum RF actions. Pandas and Vipers seem to do OK in the CF arena. They can take the strain of 30 Cal cartridges no sweat and don't wear out; none that I have seen anyway. Cedar wood looks pretty to me, if that's what it takes.
Perhaps someone who knows about the weight of metals can tell us what the difference in weight would be between a Turbo clone made from suitable aluminum vs. stainless?
Thanks,
Pete
Pete
Last edited:
Pete
Flash Ebert made several aluminum turbos. The last one that was for sale could have been bought for about 300.00. Don't see many people selling their Turbo's and 2500xs to buy Halls. It might be easier for some people to practice and test ammo with a variable power scope. Sure you can make weight with common wood. Hell i saw a sporter stock the other day that had a hole in it that looked like a crows nest with the bottom shot out. Some people want a gun that looks good some don't care. Gunsmiths can only do so much. We need to keep people shooting not run them off.
Flash Ebert made several aluminum turbos. The last one that was for sale could have been bought for about 300.00. Don't see many people selling their Turbo's and 2500xs to buy Halls. It might be easier for some people to practice and test ammo with a variable power scope. Sure you can make weight with common wood. Hell i saw a sporter stock the other day that had a hole in it that looked like a crows nest with the bottom shot out. Some people want a gun that looks good some don't care. Gunsmiths can only do so much. We need to keep people shooting not run them off.
Pete Wass
Well-known member
I agree with you Gordon
It's the gun owners who want what they want. Then folks like you have to try to make it happen. The shooting population should, perhaps, re think what they want.
I will say that I think my Hall gives up nothing to any of the other action. My rifle, in the hands of someone with good eyes and patience can shoot with the best of them and has done so. I remain convinced it's what's ahead of the action that makes the difference, the barrel and what's in it. All one has to do is to look at Bill Schertz rifles since the Hall firing mechanism were installed to see how sometimes notions can be wrong. Bills rifles have performed well and I think he is very happy with them. Also, Paul Volbecky's Hall seems to shoot pretty well. I wouldn't hesitate at all to own another Hall or a flock of them. I don't see any for sale at fire sale prices. If anyone wants to trade two Halls for either one of my 10.5 rifles, You're on.
The only thing wrong with them and many other actions is they don't eject on the off side. That is a feature all actions should have, IMHO. I don't like having spent brass mixed up with ammo I am trying to load. Once I've shot it, I don't want to handle it again until I'm finished shooting.
Pete
It's the gun owners who want what they want. Then folks like you have to try to make it happen. The shooting population should, perhaps, re think what they want.
I will say that I think my Hall gives up nothing to any of the other action. My rifle, in the hands of someone with good eyes and patience can shoot with the best of them and has done so. I remain convinced it's what's ahead of the action that makes the difference, the barrel and what's in it. All one has to do is to look at Bill Schertz rifles since the Hall firing mechanism were installed to see how sometimes notions can be wrong. Bills rifles have performed well and I think he is very happy with them. Also, Paul Volbecky's Hall seems to shoot pretty well. I wouldn't hesitate at all to own another Hall or a flock of them. I don't see any for sale at fire sale prices. If anyone wants to trade two Halls for either one of my 10.5 rifles, You're on.
The only thing wrong with them and many other actions is they don't eject on the off side. That is a feature all actions should have, IMHO. I don't like having spent brass mixed up with ammo I am trying to load. Once I've shot it, I don't want to handle it again until I'm finished shooting.
Pete
Last edited:
You simply don't seem to understand those to be the exception and not the rule. Why do you suppose the vast majority of the sporters based on that platform are no longer in service? You want to build something based on maybe, or you want something based on probably?
You also don't seem to be aware of the fact that as those bolt internals wear, so your ignition will change. Way too many of the actions no longer in service, and it ain't to be trendy.
Why the hell do you suppose so many tremendous scores being laid down the last few years? it ain't rocket science Pete, it's data.....based on fact.
You've "tinkered" with a couple, Gordon has built dozens and lots of them have been on fire.
Do you ever....I mean EVER listen to somebody more qualified?
You also don't seem to be aware of the fact that as those bolt internals wear, so your ignition will change. Way too many of the actions no longer in service, and it ain't to be trendy.
Why the hell do you suppose so many tremendous scores being laid down the last few years? it ain't rocket science Pete, it's data.....based on fact.
You've "tinkered" with a couple, Gordon has built dozens and lots of them have been on fire.
Do you ever....I mean EVER listen to somebody more qualified?
Last edited:
Pete
I also agree with you on barrels. But don't leave out ammo. I haven't seen or heard of any one burning up the shooting community with Halls Turbo Conversion. I read Bills Report on it but no one else chimed in. A bunch of internet crap doesn't make it a reality. See some people need hard facts not it worked for me. I don't know whose sporter shoots the best . But in the year 2015 they shoot a hell of a lot better than they did when i started shooting sporter.
I also agree with you on barrels. But don't leave out ammo. I haven't seen or heard of any one burning up the shooting community with Halls Turbo Conversion. I read Bills Report on it but no one else chimed in. A bunch of internet crap doesn't make it a reality. See some people need hard facts not it worked for me. I don't know whose sporter shoots the best . But in the year 2015 they shoot a hell of a lot better than they did when i started shooting sporter.
Pete Wass
Well-known member
I think the ammo has been better
the last test lots I had were better than previous stuff. That said, I had a round that poofed and fell 12 " Sunday. Thankfully I was in a sighter on the left hand side. I have also had a few miss-fires in the new lot I bought (2015 vintage). I also found several very good lots of CenterX that I have shot all year. Both rifles like one of them; shoot in the same hole as the Black Box.
I don't know what to say about barrels. Two of mine are those Rocks you put on and are still shooting well. Neither have been freshened up. They both look sharp in the borescope. I scrub the heck out of them and keep the lap lines straight in them. I have a Wilson on the Myers now that is OK. They are cut barrels, like the Rocks. The Ratchet I had put on it in the build is a dud; big tool mark about 2" behind the crown. Looks like the button slipped or something. I have been able to make it better by lapping it a bit but it is a dog, really.
The Hall conversion works. I have shot with Bill a number of times. He has shot a few 250 with his Sporter as you can see by the results, his 10.5 as well. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the Anschutz based ignition system, from my experience and from what has transpired this year. My Hall bolt is as he made it, without weights, etc. I think Alan got a bum rap, personally.
I think the herd mentality regarding everything that is sold; the next best thing is and has been alive and well. Stiller's tests have proven to anyone who thinks at all that much of what I have just said is true. It's mostly about barrels, tuned well, good ammo, coupled with a reliable scope, not much else to it. Chamber and install enough barrels and good ones will come to the front. My barrels ain't killers but they will shoot in conditions I can read and if execute properly. I'm too old now to worry about being firstist with the mostist. I have fun shooting now. It's no longer work for me.
Pete
the last test lots I had were better than previous stuff. That said, I had a round that poofed and fell 12 " Sunday. Thankfully I was in a sighter on the left hand side. I have also had a few miss-fires in the new lot I bought (2015 vintage). I also found several very good lots of CenterX that I have shot all year. Both rifles like one of them; shoot in the same hole as the Black Box.
I don't know what to say about barrels. Two of mine are those Rocks you put on and are still shooting well. Neither have been freshened up. They both look sharp in the borescope. I scrub the heck out of them and keep the lap lines straight in them. I have a Wilson on the Myers now that is OK. They are cut barrels, like the Rocks. The Ratchet I had put on it in the build is a dud; big tool mark about 2" behind the crown. Looks like the button slipped or something. I have been able to make it better by lapping it a bit but it is a dog, really.
The Hall conversion works. I have shot with Bill a number of times. He has shot a few 250 with his Sporter as you can see by the results, his 10.5 as well. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the Anschutz based ignition system, from my experience and from what has transpired this year. My Hall bolt is as he made it, without weights, etc. I think Alan got a bum rap, personally.
I think the herd mentality regarding everything that is sold; the next best thing is and has been alive and well. Stiller's tests have proven to anyone who thinks at all that much of what I have just said is true. It's mostly about barrels, tuned well, good ammo, coupled with a reliable scope, not much else to it. Chamber and install enough barrels and good ones will come to the front. My barrels ain't killers but they will shoot in conditions I can read and if execute properly. I'm too old now to worry about being firstist with the mostist. I have fun shooting now. It's no longer work for me.
Pete
Last edited:
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Barrels and Ammo Tim
It's all about barrels, ammo and scopes. What's behind the barrel and what's in it makes little difference as long as it works reliably.
The only reliable expert I listen to and believe is Jerry Stiller. Jerry is an educated professional and does the math. Hard to argue with the math.
Pete
It's all about barrels, ammo and scopes. What's behind the barrel and what's in it makes little difference as long as it works reliably.
The only reliable expert I listen to and believe is Jerry Stiller. Jerry is an educated professional and does the math. Hard to argue with the math.
Pete
Last edited:
That is a GREAT point. Why don't, for instance, you ask him why he designed the firing pin on his 2500, the way he did, specifically as to the mass.