Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Wieland: "Dangerous Game Rifles"

  1. #1

    Default Wieland: "Dangerous Game Rifles"

    First of all, I wish you all a very happy new year!

    My GF gave this book for Christmas. I'd class it as one of the more interesting I have read. A lot of quite detailed information on specific makes and models and calibers, cartridges, loads & bullets.

    A couple of things I really found of interest: (Words in quotes are mine.)

    On Remington:
    "...word is that the machinery on which the (Remington) 700 is built is on its last legs, with a resulting drastic slip in quality. Jarrett (Beanfield Rifles) told me in 2003 that he would no longer build a rifle on a 700 because the new actions are so ramshackle"

    On Ruger:
    Since its introduction, the Ruger 77 has established a reputation in several different ways. For one, there is no question about its durability and reliability. The Ruger 77 in .338 Winchester has Largely displaced the Model 70 .375 H&H as the standard bear-guide rifle in Alaska. Partly this is due to one Anchorage gun dealer who brought in these guns by the carload and sold them for a couple of hundred dollars apiece; many guides of my acquaintance would use a rifle for a couple of years, not worry about the salt spray as long as it worked, and then scrap it and buy another Cost was certainly an advantage, but bear guides do not try to save money at the expence of reliability The rifle's success in Alaska added, however, tn the Ruger's somewhat bargain-basement" image."

    Your thoughts?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    It is an ok book. I bought it in Novemeber. The author seemed to rehash a lot of information that was already printed by other people.
    I was disappointed the author discussed double rifles at length but he didnt even touch on Searcy double rifle's which are made in the USA and are known to be top quality at a good price. He also failed to mention some of the top bolt action manufactors in the USA. Leads me to believe he just compiled the book from accumulating data from others instead of doing a lot of research himself. Still, the book was good reading.
    I would rate it a 7 on a scale of 1-10.
    Tennessee

  3. #3
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,428

    Default Dangerous Game...

    [QUOTE=Kalispell Jim;51575]

    On Remington:
    "...word is that the machinery on which the (Remington) 700 is built is on its last legs, with a resulting drastic slip in quality. Jarrett (Beanfield Rifles) told me in 2003 that he would no longer build a rifle on a 700 because the new actions are so ramshackle"

    I agree as to quality don't know about the cause. Jarrett told me the same thing some years ago, he doesn't use Remington, no specific reason. I would say it has more to do with attitude than machinery.

    On Ruger:
    Since its introduction, the Ruger 77 has established a reputation in several different ways. For one, there is no question about its durability and reliability.

    I agree. Not from the beginning but for todays Rugers, that is true.

    I haven't seen this book nor am I familiar with the author, but that's my thoughts on the quote.

    Rifles for Africa by Gregor Woods and Safari Rifles by Boddington are both very good books by very experienced dangerous game hunters. Doubles are well covered as are types of actions and appropriate calibers and bullets.
    Colonel Craig is supported by some bias as he still writes for American magazines whose advertisers pay his salary, but he is very knowledgable and experienced. Woods is from RSA and is more objective yet opiniated about equipment and technique.

    Both books are top shelf and entertaining to read.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  4. #4

    Default

    Murphy can you elaborate on your opinion concerning the earlier Ruger vs those of late?

    I have never had had any mechanical issues with the Ruger 77. Not even with the early ones. I did own some early ones that would not shoot particularly well. I don't think I am the only one that experienced that problem either. To this day that reputation hangs over the 77s even though todays off the shelf 77s will shoot with any factory offering by any other name. If Ruger were to improve on anything it would be their trigger. However it takes less than a half hour with a fine file and a stone to cure their factory trigger!

    As for Remington....I gave up on them when they started going with the flimsy stamped follower that that rattled around in the magazine well like a bb in a snuff can. I have had numerous 700s that were jam masters, particularly the short action version. Remingtons service department advised me to run the bolt slower and more deliberate. I told them that I could do that if they could get the ****ed coyote to run slower and more deliberate! A Ruger 77 cured the problem!

    In my opinion the smartest thing Remington has done in years was when they bought out the Zustava mausers that Charles Daily promised but never delivered on or what they did deliver was in limited quantities. It also seems that the folk at Remington would pick up on the fact that the most sought after poduction rifle they ever offered was their then entry level 788. If they were to bring that rifle back into production and clean it up from its original design...polish it and stick it in walnut rather than hard maple, maybe even stainless synthetic then they might be onto something. Two of the best shooting guns that I ever owned cost less than 150 bucks. Both were 788s! I might add that the stiff reciever that the Tikkas wear remind one of a very dolled up 788! Could have something to do with why they shoot so well!

    I was in Sheels sporting goods in Des Moines this afternoon and saw a beat up 788 in 243 setting in the rack with a price of $400 on it. You'll never see a 700 Remington in that shape that will be offered at 3 times its original price. In fact there were several of their brand new synthetic ADL's at Sheels that were priced less than that old 788. Probably because their new entry level gun is crap when compared to their bottom ender of 30-40 years ago!

  5. #5

    Default

    Been guiding brown bear hunters on the alaska peninsula and kodiak since '78. the model 70 375 h&h is still the backup rifle of choice in the camps I've been too. Furthemore it seems to be the most popular choice of the clients at least in recent years.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,428

    Default Rugers...

    Quote Originally Posted by elmerkeithclone View Post
    Murphy can you elaborate on your opinion concerning the earlier Ruger vs those of late?
    EKC,

    Just the normal growing pains od the company for the early years and the evolution of the M77 rifle. I prefer the CRF and the bolt mounted safety. I think their barrels have improved and are finally at a dependable accuracy level.

    The rifle never was failure prone but they did suffer some in quality control. Remingtons have always been trying to make a cheap rifle cheaper(I think the term is manufacturability) The fluctuating financial stability over the past 25 years of Winchester (U.S. Repeating Arms) was reflected in their quality. The pre-64 and for the most part, the post-94 M70 was a very good design and that carried them through for many years. They stopped manufacture because the couldn't make a rifle cheaper than Remington or better than Ruger, and they couldn't decide which way they wanted to go. If they had concentrated on building a quality rifle of a good design and sold it at a profit, and scaled their facility to accommodate that market niche, they would still be with us.

    Ruger was able to develop innovative manufacture techniques to allow them to build a quality , well designed product, that could be sold at a reasonable price. They then set about to improve the designs until the American rifle market prefered this rifle over everything else in the price range. They are a better rifle than M700 by design and a better rifle than the M70 due to better quality control. I still dislike the angled bedding screw but life is a compromise. The best bolt action rifle in the world would arguably be the M76 Dakota, but for that kind of money, anybody could make a good rifle. The challenge has to be to make a good, reliable, accurate rifle and sell it for under a grand and make happy customers and a profit. Ruger arose to that challenge.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  7. #7

    Default

    A few years ago in Alaska you could buy a ruger SS syn. 338 wm with open sights for about $ 479.00 and now the local dealer wants $795.00 for the same rifle but no open sights. If I needed another 338 wm now I would buy a stevens 200 long action and play switch brl. with it, very easy to switch the brl.,bolt head and magazine.

    45north

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •