I already have a nice little Burris 2-7 for it... Just need to decide which rifle to get. I like aspects of both.
I already have a nice little Burris 2-7 for it... Just need to decide which rifle to get. I like aspects of both.
I am buying both :-)
Hummmmmm........
Understand what they are trying to do (and kudos for doing so).
But aesthetically, it looks like crap...... proportions, lines, weight.... something just grates on my nerves with the design.
For those hovering over the keyboards in flaming anticipation.... I own two 858's (a -4V and -2V).
L
--------------------------------------------------
"If sense is so common ..... why is it in such short supply?"
the design? It's the same damn gun! Just a few different cuts in the reciever and a modified full length reciever cover. That it! (minus irons on the hunter) Arw you talking about the 18.5" barrel?
Anyhow.. let's talk calibers. 7.62x39 is a given. What's the possibility of .223/5.56, 5.45, or perhaps 6.8 SPC?
"There's a big ... machine in the sky, ... some kind of electric snake ... coming straight at us."
"Shoot it," said my attorney.
"Not yet," I said. "I want to study its habits.
Sorry guys, maybe I missed it, but.. Chrome lined??
Indeed. Why not? Its an arbitrary decision. Most complaints of Post Soviet designed weapons will always list the shorter sight radius and open notched sights as problematic.
The hunter (by name) is designed for accuracy rather than using the selector on full-auto to mow down imperialist scum in the back whilst riding on the top of glorious Russian tank.
Every week you hear about someone trying to retro-fit peep sights to the back of an SKS to gain the longer sight radius.
Why not fix two problems with one. Alternatively, create a modified version of #2 (2.5? - that moves the milling coordinates to the back of the receiver instead of the front.
L
--------------------------------------------------
"If sense is so common ..... why is it in such short supply?"