The neatest rifle

chuck nelson said:
Then I guess that begs the question. Why aren't you doing it?
Click to expand...

Because doing it for other people makes it work, not fun.
I'm about the fun, when I work on gun stuff.

I enjoy making things for myself, as well as for gifts, but I am not interested in making this sort of thing to someone else's tastes. <shrug> That's me.
You?

I'm constantly appalled at what gets passed off as perfection, mostly by folks that think driving a deck screw is a dark art. I've seen an awful lot of really nice work done by folks that were too embarrassed to show it off, as well as a lot of heinous dreck that was being passed off as top of the line in whatever art it was. So color me a little jaded as far as exclamations of perfection goes.

And I've seen some really nice stuff put out by craftsmen, who, bless them for it, somehow manage to make the time to put their hands in motion and really make their chosen tools work for them.

So, without actually seeing the first rifle close up to see the metalwork, all I get out of it is that front sight looks like a afterthought, the stock, custom design or no, is still a stock that may or may not actually fit the client (and for that coin, it should be a custom fit, not just adjusted for grip length). To my eye, the rear sight looks like an even cheaper addition than the front. I'm not a fan of glass or plastic stocks, and sure wouldn't pay the kind of money for one that a well made wood stock would draw. Going by the description I found online, the package also includes custom or custom modified scope rings, which may or may not be any better or better looking than what else is available. All for $14K. It makes a pretty good hourly wage for the guy that makes them, I'm sure. The guy has a good racket going, and I hope he has continued success. If his work really is as good as his price structure, great! More good gunsmiths and gunbuilders is a good thing, I just can't get near as excited about that as I could about rifles like the two others posted in the thread, that were very likely actually fitted to the clients and came out looking like they are a custom built product, rather than looking like an assemblage from a catalog.

:D
Cheers
Trev
 
trevj said:
Because doing it for other people makes it work, not fun.
I'm about the fun, when I work on gun stuff.

I enjoy making things for myself, as well as for gifts, but I am not interested in making this sort of thing to someone else's tastes. <shrug> That's me.
You?

I'm constantly appalled at what gets passed off as perfection, mostly by folks that think driving a deck screw is a dark art. I've seen an awful lot of really nice work done by folks that were too embarrassed to show it off, as well as a lot of heinous dreck that was being passed off as top of the line in whatever art it was. So color me a little jaded as far as exclamations of perfection goes.

And I've seen some really nice stuff put out by craftsmen, who, bless them for it, somehow manage to make the time to put their hands in motion and really make their chosen tools work for them.

So, without actually seeing the first rifle close up to see the metalwork, all I get out of it is that front sight looks like a afterthought, the stock, custom design or no, is still a stock that may or may not actually fit the client (and for that coin, it should be a custom fit, not just adjusted for grip length). To my eye, the rear sight looks like an even cheaper addition than the front. I'm not a fan of glass or plastic stocks, and sure wouldn't pay the kind of money for one that a well made wood stock would draw. Going by the description I found online, the package also includes custom or custom modified scope rings, which may or may not be any better or better looking than what else is available. All for $14K. It makes a pretty good hourly wage for the guy that makes them, I'm sure. The guy has a good racket going, and I hope he has continued success. If his work really is as good as his price structure, great! More good gunsmiths and gunbuilders is a good thing, I just can't get near as excited about that as I could about rifles like the two others posted in the thread, that were very likely actually fitted to the clients and came out looking like they are a custom built product, rather than looking like an assemblage from a catalog.

:D
Cheers
Trev
Click to expand...

He's more than happy to build one in wood. As you see on this thread.

Here is some more of his woodwork.

Echols-416-FET.jpg

Echols-416-close-right-obl.jpg


Here is a set of the made from scratch rings and bottom metal.

IMG_0483.jpg

DSCF0146M.jpg
 
Same old, same old. Guys think that because THEY would never spend that kind of money on something (we'll assume for a minute they can afford it) that anyone else must be stupid for doing so.

Only on the internet do you see this much reverse arrogance. "Oh yeah, I dig ditches cuz I want to! You're stuck behind a doctor's desk, yeah!" ;)
 
RickF said:
Only on the internet do you see this much reverse arrogance. "Oh yeah, I dig ditches cuz I want to! You're stuck behind a doctor's desk, yeah!" ;)
Click to expand...


Lol! I actually know a lawyer who is pissed he went to law school and is stuck behind a desk. He said "I could be swinging a hammer and building timber frame homes, enjoying the fresh air instead of being cooped up in an office wearing a suit!"
 
Like I said, jawing. :rolleyes:
If I had the time to "get educated" and commit to the quality of work that those guys do, I would. Doing what you like to for work is fun.
Ignorant comments from ignorant people.
I wouldn't drop 14K on a rifle either, just cause I plain can't afford it. But heck, I'd dig ditches to own one.
 
Trevj is probably a Savage fan and will debate the merits of the "Accustock" next over the Echol special.

I shot a 25 with a Perrazi shotgun a few years ago that was like magic...see clay...boom...see clay explode, not break...explode...25 straight. This was pretty impressive to me being a hack trap shooter who had at that point been a total brain cramping choke artist with a personal best of 22, when I found out how expensive the gun was I handed it back fast. High Quality such as rifles like Sako's and optics like Leica just feel different, perfection in form and function is just something else again that most people never really get to experience and/or appreciate.
 
martinbns said:
High Quality such as rifles like Sako's and optics like Leica just feel different, perfection in form and function is just something else again that most people never really get to experience and/or appreciate.
Click to expand...

My go to rifle for the last two years is a Steyr-Mannlicher Luxus (the older version - pre-SBS - with the verticle stack steel magazine) in 7mm RM - the thing is slick and fit and finnish is very good indeed. The wood is also excellent. I remember a gun shop had one new one left about +10 years ago and it was $3999. Mine was about $2750 25 years ago, IIRC.

I've also owned numerous Sako products (no 75s or 85s) and they are good, certainly much better than Remington (I've owned custom shop rifles), Winchester or Ruger, but they are still way below some other European stuff.

How do these customs compare to the higher end European factory stuff? I mean other than the obvious work involved in making custom parts.
 
One more point not directed at anybody.

There are also those guys that can't see quality but think they can. The type that look at a gun and cannot see glaringly obvious oversights like that none of the screws have been timed. Then proclaim the workmanship to be "perfection" worth top price when it is not.
 
I could never call a synthetic stocked rifle beautiful, in fact I don't like the look of them, including that Echol's.

I much prefer a wood stocked gun, although I know synthetics are practical and functional.
 
Crankbender said:
One more point not directed at anybody.

There are also those guys that can't see quality but think they can. The type that look at a gun and cannot see glaringly obvious oversights like that none of the screws have been timed. Then proclaim the workmanship to be "perfection" worth top price when it is not.
Click to expand...

In know exactly what you are saying, but in this case the chaff soon becomes separate from the wheat. You can't fool the world for 40 years and continue to charge top dollar prices for sub par work. It will not happen. The cream rises to the top if only because that is exactly what it is.
 
martinbns said:
Trevj is probably a Savage fan and will debate the merits of the "Accustock" next over the Echol special.
Click to expand...

I like wood stocks, if I get to choose!

As for the Accustock, well, it's what it is, and is apparently reasonably suitable at what it does, for the price point. Meh. It's as attractive as the Echol's stock, and as likely to fit a randomly chosen customer. But neither really look like they are worth spending a couple paychecks on. Savages fit in the category of being a suitable tool for a reasonable price, but, not very inspiring. Sorta like there not being much chance of anybody getting all nostalgic about the 1990-whatever Grand Am they used to have, 20 years from now.

Cheers
Trev
 
trevj said:
I like wood stocks, if I get to choose!

As for the Accustock, well, it's what it is, and is apparently reasonably suitable at what it does, for the price point. Meh. It's as attractive as the Echol's stock, and as likely to fit a randomly chosen customer. But neither really look like they are worth spending a couple paychecks on. Savages fit in the category of being a suitable tool for a reasonable price, but, not very inspiring. Sorta like there not being much chance of anybody getting all nostalgic about the 1990-whatever Grand Am they used to have, 20 years from now.

Cheers
Trev
Click to expand...

I like your 90 something grand am analogy on the Savage.
 
chuck nelson said:
He's more than happy to build one in wood. As you see on this thread.

Here is some more of his woodwork.

Echols-416-FET.jpg

Echols-416-close-right-obl.jpg


Here is a set of the made from scratch rings and bottom metal.
Click to expand...

That wood stock by Echol is a pretty nice looking bit of work. The same rifle from the pictures posted earlier, yes? I'd love to see more of his woodwork. Not so keen about the treatment around the front of the trigger guard and the mag well area. Looks a little blocky to me, though he pulled off some nice clean lines on the transitions.The rosette engraved on the inlet swivel stud is a really nice touch too. Same motif on the crossbolts and pistol grip cap, or just the crossbolts?

Bottom metal. OK. Gotta have some, but it doesn't really stand out. Looks better in person? I'm not feeling the love on those rings, either, other than being able to say they were custom made by the guy that built the gun. Lots of ways to skin that cat, off the shelf and tough to improve on. Maybe they are an improvement. I don't think I'll find out first hand unless I build a set.:)

Someday my lottery tickets will come in. Or not.

When the day comes that I start spending that kind of coin, I suspect one of the first places I'll shop is at Martini and Hagn, if only because they make their actions, even if they are kinda, well, ungraceful looking, in a classical British and German sort of way. If not that, then a Winchester Higwall. Probably look for a Ron Smith barrel, and then to track down a stockmaker that has not died of old age or crankiness to make the whole project a Canadian one.

I have seen some really nice looking woodwork by Steven Dodd Hughes.
LoWall.jpg


Something like this would make a pretty nice gopher gun.

I have that particular picture pinned up on my wall as an example of what can be done with wood. If one has the eye and hands!


The day comes that I part with this kind of money, you can bet all of it, that there will not be any part of the project I look at and regret not having had it done the way I want it.


Cheers
Trev
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom