Desert Dog
Member
So, Art... Mr. Eatman,
You wouldn't spend $5K for a good used M2 Browning?
Mike
You wouldn't spend $5K for a good used M2 Browning?
Mike
The sorry state of the American Rifleman
- Thread starter Cosmoline
- Start date
- Status
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
I think that Browning Ma Deuce might be a half-price sale or even better, at a "mere" $5,000.Funny how all that goes. When I was a kid in the Philippines in 1949, folks were still acquiring BARs and Tommy Guns for a carton or two of American cigarettes and a few bucks. Before the 1986 ban on machine guns, when there was generally less interest in them, you could buy a BAR for around $1,250, and a brand new Thompson was $700 or so.
I think that before I put several thousand dollars into an existing rifle, I'd take the money and buy a lathe and a mill and do it myself.
Art
My 1/50th of $1...
I prefer to keep my Mil-Surps as working pieces of history, doing nothing more than making sure they are safe and functional, and cleaning them up as needed.
If you want to spend $5K or so 'customizing' your K-31, Mauser 98, Mosin-Nagant, fine with me....knock yourself out. Your rifle, your choice, your bucks. Not my "cup of tea", thanks.
I prefer to keep my Mil-Surps as working pieces of history, doing nothing more than making sure they are safe and functional, and cleaning them up as needed.
If you want to spend $5K or so 'customizing' your K-31, Mauser 98, Mosin-Nagant, fine with me....knock yourself out. Your rifle, your choice, your bucks. Not my "cup of tea", thanks.
oldfart
Member
As I pointed out earlier, Henry Ford 'bubbaized' a perfectly good buggy and now we're up to our armpits in the fallout. Obviously, he came up with a winner.
But what about his earlier tries? If he was a normal tinkerer, he probably put together a few lemons on his way to success. We don't hear much about them though, just as we seldom read about the boo-boos that Paul Mauser made. I doubt John Browning walked into his shop and turned out an M2 in an afternoon either.
We all make mistakes-- hell, that's what we learn from. The people who bubbaized that Swiss rifle made_several, not the least of which was writing about what they did. I've got a Mosin in my closet that I screwed up but this is about the only mention you or anyone else will ever see of it. While that Mosin is a dog now, I did learn something from the experience and won't make that mistake again.
But what about his earlier tries? If he was a normal tinkerer, he probably put together a few lemons on his way to success. We don't hear much about them though, just as we seldom read about the boo-boos that Paul Mauser made. I doubt John Browning walked into his shop and turned out an M2 in an afternoon either.
We all make mistakes-- hell, that's what we learn from. The people who bubbaized that Swiss rifle made_several, not the least of which was writing about what they did. I've got a Mosin in my closet that I screwed up but this is about the only mention you or anyone else will ever see of it. While that Mosin is a dog now, I did learn something from the experience and won't make that mistake again.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
I read the article, and it's actually a good looking rifle, and the article made no mention of accuracy problems or any of that.
were i them, i'd have rebarrelled it in .308, and made it into a scout rifle.
were i them, i'd have rebarrelled it in .308, and made it into a scout rifle.
Guess I'm one of those illiterate clods who butchered those priceless relics of our glorious past - the M1903A3 Springfield. Let's see, I rebarreled one to .270, another to .30-06 (liked the Douglas barrel countour), and a third to .338/06. Am I sorry? Nope, not even a little. I paid for every one, and I guess I subscribe to that quaint old idea that if I paid for something I can do what I want to with it. Do I care if anybody approves of my having done this 40 years? Not in the slightest.
By the way, I still have the .338/06 which sports a great looking American walnut stock and will shoot into 1" regularly. Another 03-A3 resides in the security vault in 100% new never-issued condition. Guess I'm doing my bit to preserve our heritage after all. Of course, it could serve as the basis for a project I have in mind to build a .25/06.
By the way, I still have the .338/06 which sports a great looking American walnut stock and will shoot into 1" regularly. Another 03-A3 resides in the security vault in 100% new never-issued condition. Guess I'm doing my bit to preserve our heritage after all. Of course, it could serve as the basis for a project I have in mind to build a .25/06.
The funny thing is...
Norm and Rocky Chandler are people who seldom take "no" for an answer. And they do have the money to make one-off sporterized K-31's.
They may have, in fact, done that gun and article just to play on people's sensibilities. There was a firestorm created when they did an article about the "new" Designated Marksman Rifle. They got the last laugh, because they're known in the business for building accurate M14 variants, too.
Norm and Rocky Chandler are people who seldom take "no" for an answer. And they do have the money to make one-off sporterized K-31's.
They may have, in fact, done that gun and article just to play on people's sensibilities. There was a firestorm created when they did an article about the "new" Designated Marksman Rifle. They got the last laugh, because they're known in the business for building accurate M14 variants, too.
cracked butt
Member
Whatever people do in their own bedroom is fine with me, as long as they are respectful of others and don't go into intimate details on what they do with their tools.
Sorry, that quote was too perfect not to comment on.
Joe Demko
Member
As well it should have been, since I put some time into wording it. Congratulations on being the first one to notice my smarmy double entendre. Great minds must work alike...
Schmit
Member
We have a fully transferable M2 at our store... however we're asking somewhat more for it then $5K.
Cosmoline, I'm not sure the "we" your talking about but my last rifle purchase was a Steyr Scout. Ifin I had $5 to spend I would have also picked up a Blaser K95 in .308 to go along with it.
Why .308, well it will do everything I need it to do on the type of game I usually hunt if I place my shot and use an appropriate bullet. If the game is at longer range then I feel I'd be comfortable trying with the Scout (say over 250 yards) I'd just take my precision rifle or, more likely, stalk closer.
But that's just me.
Cosmoline, I'm not sure the "we" your talking about but my last rifle purchase was a Steyr Scout. Ifin I had $5 to spend I would have also picked up a Blaser K95 in .308 to go along with it.
Why .308, well it will do everything I need it to do on the type of game I usually hunt if I place my shot and use an appropriate bullet. If the game is at longer range then I feel I'd be comfortable trying with the Scout (say over 250 yards) I'd just take my precision rifle or, more likely, stalk closer.
But that's just me.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,510
I let my subscription lapse after a year or so when it stopped being The Tactical Rifle. Just not as fun anymore. As for converting military guns to sporting arms, that was the big thing of the '50-'70s. Use to be a lot of articles on it and in the '90s, we started going back towards preservation. Me, I'm a preservationist - unless the gun has already been butchered.
Cosmoline
Member
Once again
I'm not attacking the idea of sporterization. I actually like a lot of old sporters, done by someone who knew how to listen to the rifle. This hacking of a K-31, though, is something very different. As I said, it throws the sins of the American rifleman into stark relief.
I would have been far happier if they had done something genuinely radical with the rifle. Some new approach that utilizes the potential of the straight pull in some new and interesting way, even if it destroyed the existing rifle. But as it is, they just tried to make it look and function just like every other rifle. Standard scope, ported barrel, standard stock. Same old, same old.
What a waste!
I'm not attacking the idea of sporterization. I actually like a lot of old sporters, done by someone who knew how to listen to the rifle. This hacking of a K-31, though, is something very different. As I said, it throws the sins of the American rifleman into stark relief.
I would have been far happier if they had done something genuinely radical with the rifle. Some new approach that utilizes the potential of the straight pull in some new and interesting way, even if it destroyed the existing rifle. But as it is, they just tried to make it look and function just like every other rifle. Standard scope, ported barrel, standard stock. Same old, same old.
What a waste!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
