Anschutz centerfires?

Pricy as hell but very very nice. I fired one last week and five 55gr polytips went into a ragged hole at 125y. Pretty little cloverleaf.

FF
 
Every Anschutz centerfi're that I've seen has been a rimfire style rear locking lug action. This will probably be no issue when using factory ammo, but you may run into case stretching issues when handloading.
Ivor
 
Last edited:
owlowl said:
Anschutz 1780 and Anschutz 1770 are front locking 6 lugs bolts.

Just saying

By the way, it seems to me that 1780 is in fact the same rifle as Haenel Jaeger 10. Which now belongs to Merkel. Haenel has forged reciever, but bolt, action, safety mag is the same on both.

More interesting is that:

http://www.wolverinesupplies.com/details/15447/Merkel-Jaeger-10-Varmint-Sport-223-Rem-22.aspx

which is about 2.5 times cheaper that I was quoted for new 1780 in .308.
Click to expand...

Must be some new kids on the block. I remember looking at one a bunch of years ago, and not buying it because of the bolt design. It also looked like the barrel was press fit.
Ivor
 
I was in fact talking about the Anschutz models 1780 and 1770 that where spoken of as the "New kids". I'm fully aware of the fact that Merkel is over 100 years old.
Ivor
 
Ivor's observation regarding some Anschutz having rear lugs and pinned barrels is true .... and it puzzled me for a while. However I dont think Max and Rudolph's parents raised any idiots. Their reputation (and use by well regarded shooters) for accuracy is a fact. The decision to employ a press fit and pinned barrel was obviously done because, if accomplished with the right precision, it could result in consistently better alignment and stability (with low pressure rounds) than traditional threaded barrels and receivers.

The rear locking of the Match actions (54) is accomplished with only two lugs and they are the bolt handle root and a lug incorporated in a collar at the rear of the bolt -- oddly the the bolt root is at approximately 4:00 and the lug at 8:00 (approx.) which is curiously asymmetrical. You would think that the firing pressure would push back on the bolt and force the bolt face to tilt up under pressure. I believe that this is in fact what happens HOWEVER I believe Anschutz specifically accomodates for this and has designed the bolt face to fit snugly into the breech with particular attention to the 12:00 engagement AND its relationship to bolt face angle to the chamber - essentially achieving THREE points of stability for the bolt face which is quite symmetrical -- we may not understand all of the dynamics at work ...however it is very difficult to find fault with the accuracy of Anschutz rifles with match 54 actions chambered up to (and including) .222 Remington. I have a single shot Anschutz .222R with 54 action which surprises me routinely

Rear locking actions have often been identified as causing case stretching and while this may be the "case" ... some very accurate rifles have been based on this design ... Remington 788, 541, Steyr SSG (also a press fit barrel) Steyr pre-SBS (with threaded barrel other than SSG) Schultz and Larson .. and of course Anschutz .. so apparently they are not entirely without their merits?!?!
 
Last edited:
owlowl said:
I misunderstood, my apologies
Click to expand...
That's OK. I'm actually wondering if Anschutz is teaming up with other companies to get a solid foundation in the centerfire market. They've been very successful in making and marketing rimfires, and I think the reason that they built the older centerfires the way that they did, is that it's what they knew how to do. The new stuff might even be manufactured by another company, and simply marketed under their name. That would not be a bad thing at all. If a factory knows what it is doing, why try to re-invent the horse if you can reap the benefits of their knowledge.
Ivor
 
Last edited:
Anschutz has been making CF rifles since Christ was a corporal. The oldest one I have personally seen was an early 80's vintage Anschutz Classic. As for outsourcing, while it hasn't hurt Weatherby or Browning, the Anschutz name is by far their most valuable asset: more than the steel or machinery or even the technical expertise of their staff.

I can't see them risking that on a third party.

FF
 
Yes, in fact the first 1770 I owned was the 1/11 twist they have since switched to a 1/9 twist. Extremely light trigger, once sighted in first 6 shots at 100 m measured under 1/4 inch. Had the nicest wood of any rifle I owned, sold it to someone who wanted it worse than I did, now I want it worse than he does, but not that much worse as he won't sell it back. I speak only of rifles I sell. In any case you will be in no way disappointed with either a 1770 or 1780. I have yet to find a real user who is disappointed.
 
ivor said:
Every Anschutz centerfi're that I've seen has been a rimfire style rear locking lug action. This will probably be no issue when using factory ammo, but you may run into case stretching issues when handloading.
Ivor
Click to expand...


I bought a Anshutz 1430-1434 in .22 Hornet back in 76, the chamber is a bit oversize and with the back locking lugs case life is not good even with neck sizing, but it is very accurate none the less with 45grain pills. The bore is .224 and the twist is 1-16 I am sure. Still got it and is the rifle I pick up for leisurely walks varminting. I got it for $250 from Ray Long/ Fort Erie back then, the prices I see them going for today I would probably not pay, nice gun with a 2-7 Leupy compact.
 
dave524 said:
I bought a Anshutz 1430-1434 in .22 Hornet back in 76, the chamber is a bit oversize and with the back locking lugs case life is not good even with neck sizing, but it is very accurate none the less with 45grain pills. The bore is .224 and the twist is 1-16 I am sure. Still got it and is the rifle I pick up for leisurely walks varminting. I got it for $250 from Ray Long/ Fort Erie back then, the prices I see them going for today I would probably not pay, nice gun with a 2-7 Leupy compact.
Click to expand...


I've been wondering what the bore is on the Anschutz hornets. I have a 1433 and have been shooting the .223 45 grainers. The rifle appears to cycle better than the Brno ZKW 465 it replaced. Accuracy about the same.
 
AP said:
Ivor's observation regarding some Anschutz having rear lugs and pinned barrels is true .... and it puzzled me for a while. However I dont think Max and Rudolph's parents raised any idiots. Their reputation (and use by well regarded shooters) for accuracy is a fact. The decision to employ a press fit and pinned barrel was obviously done because, if accomplished with the right precision, it could result in consistently better alignment and stability (with low pressure rounds) than traditional threaded barrels and receivers.

The rear locking of the Match actions (54) is accomplished with only two lugs and they are the bolt handle root and a lug incorporated in a collar at the rear of the bolt -- oddly the the bolt root is at approximately 4:00 and the lug at 8:00 (approx.) which is curiously asymmetrical. You would think that the firing pressure would push back on the bolt and force the bolt face to tilt up under pressure. I believe that this is in fact what happens HOWEVER I believe Anschutz specifically accomodates for this and has designed the bolt face to fit snugly into the breech with particular attention to the 12:00 engagement AND its relationship to bolt face angle to the chamber - essentially achieving THREE points of stability for the bolt face which is quite symmetrical -- we may not understand all of the dynamics at work ...however it is very difficult to find fault with the accuracy of Anschutz rifles with match 54 actions chambered up to (and including) .222 Remington. I have a single shot Anschutz .222R with 54 action which surprises me routinely

Rear locking actions have often been identified as causing case stretching and while this may be the "case" ... some very accurate rifles have been based on this design ... Remington 788, 541, Steyr SSG (also a press fit barrel) Steyr pre-SBS (with threaded barrel other than SSG) Schultz and Larson .. and of course Anschutz .. so apparently they are not entirely without their merits?!?!
Click to expand...
Hey AP
I wonder if the big merits are a slightly shorter action with the case entering into the chamber directly, reducing feeding problems.
Being a did hard reloader, I've always avoided rear locking actions due to the case stretch issue.
Ironically, I was reading some past issues of mags, and I found an article with the new Anschutz centerfi're in it. The writer gave it a bit of a lukewarm review. I generally don't pay too much attention to their opinions though, as they never seem to give any gun much of a workout.
Ivor
 
I had a 1700 deluxe in .222rem years ago. Sure was a pretty rifle!

I regret selling it at times! But I am left handed, and this rifle had a roll over cheek piece.
 
I wonder if the big merits are a slightly shorter action with the case entering into the chamber directly, reducing feeding problems.
Click to expand...

My Anschutz is single shot (and the only center fire Anschutz so designed that I have ever seen) so case feeding is a non-issue. I can tell you that there is no difference between the case feeding on my Model 1950 Mannlicher Schoenauer 30/06 (front locking lugs) and a Steyr Mannlicher Model M. 270W (rear locking lugs) BOTH are slick! Because both are designed and built properly and BOTH feed from the excellent rotary/spool magazine. Don't over exaggerate the issue of case stretching in a rear locking action. They employ very strong action sidewalls to prevent this and their typical accuracy is excellent

edit to add .. I think much of the ease of case feeding in the rear locking actions is related to the fact that most of them employ a single row feed from the magazine: 788 does and both the older Model 1950 and the newer Model M feed from the spool magazine in such a way that a single cartridge is presented from the same position every time .. as opposed to staggered feed magazines that feed alternatively from one side then the other...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom