lets see your thick bush guns!

jUnDp6F.jpg


I just assembled this one yesterday. Its a 1953 760 in 30.06. It was a little sad looking when I got it, so it got trimmed to 18.5", and parkerized. Not pretty, but slick and ready for many more years of use, but I might sell.
 
jUnDp6F.jpg


I just assembled this one yesterday. Its a 1953 760 in 30.06. It was a little sad looking when I got it, so it got trimmed to 18.5", and parkerized. Not pretty, but slick and ready for many more years of use, but I might sell.
Awesome work, you say shes not pretty, hell id take her for a dance!
 
If it is a factory made barrel for a factory rifle then you should be able to find FRT for that firearm with that barrel length. If you cannot find such FRT - then good luck. No one was able to prove legality of such alteration of your firearm so far here.

Lawyer up - join CCFR or get firearm insurance some other way if you don't have one yet.

Recent thread about Browning Bar......peoplegnutz loving their European chamberings of 9.3x62. I considered converting my 338 bar into a 416 Taylor before I bought my rigby. Check out the frt on armalytics, no mention of 9.3x62 or 416 Taylor, but there is 458wm,.another non standard caliber. But I suppose the frt doesnt state.it, so it's.wrong. But it isn't. The fry is wrong, but according to you it's biblical, riddle.me that. Maybe take it up with Murray Smith who stated under oath on the Jan 18 court date.that.the frt is an opinion, not law. Take it up with him, set him straight, get.back to us.
 
That old girl needs.a period correct tang sight.

Nice gun...but a Tang sight would be like lipstick on a pig, no?
I've a 94 Carbine with a Tang...looks great but is it really effective on a Pump action or Lever? they are perhaps a bit tighter than an SKS as far as groupings. But not that much that a Tang will make huge improvements I'd guess.
But if someone has an educated opinion to the opposite...I open to change my view.
 
Shield said their microsight could withstand 458 wm recoil “ absolutely” when I emailed them about it.

Would not fit on a weaver base so I filed and epoxied a pic sight base to a weaver base and put it in the front ring base of a rem model 7. Also had it on the weaver base on a rem 721 for the same sort of thing and the 220 grain loads didn’t bother it.

I had originally bought it to go with a S/S jury 458 wm that was going to finish at 20 inches and a ruger m77 mkII 338 wm. I was ultimately more concerned about any rails available for that rifle than the sight itself.

Vortex venom will work on a weaver base, shield dots are smaller and lower profile but have a thick “ recoil lug” in the middle of the mounting screw that only lets them fit a picatinny.

Using aimpoint mounts and certain sight bases will work for some rifles but position the sight in a forward position. I find on the rear base it’s more like using a peep, depends entirely on the stock I would guess.

burris is making a ruger base to make it a weaver thing if needed, it is covering the view of the sights on my alaskan-yukon one so need for me.
 
See...I'm listening to the input. I was under the impression that pumps, levers and semiautomatic's were intristically less accurate than a bolt action.
Regards
Tokguy
I have a Browning BAR that is as accurate if not more accurate than my bolt action in the same caliber. Same with my Ruger no1(2 of them) people always say that they are not as accurate.... well they are as accurate as my bolt action( that said my bolt d’action is no bench rest rifle, just a hunting rifle!! )
 
See...I'm listening to the input. I was under the impression that pumps, levers and semiautomatic's were intristically less accurate than a bolt action.
Regards
Tokguy
You are 100% correct , however the difference is more influenced by person behind the rifle .
 
Did someone say .44 thick bush gun?
JG1V2J8.jpg


I have a 10pt whitetail on the wall that fell to this one when it only had a williams peep....
 
Back
Top Bottom