G-MAN

I broke down and bought an LCR today. I've had my carry permit now for over a month and have faithfully carried my Glock 26 every day, but depending on wardrobe there are times when even the relatively light weight 26 is just uncomfortably heavy. The LCR is a puff of air by comparison and you can slide it into a trouser pocket with virtually no imprinting (not that I'd every carry it that way except in a pinch). Weather permitting I'll take it to the range on Wednesday and see how it does. DA only will take some getting used to, but the trigger pull is very smooth and linear--about the best DA revolver trigger I've ever tried.

We have a winner! The guns in the photo are not the actual guns used in the movie, BTW. I'm still doing some research to find out who made the Farquharson in the movie. I think I've narrowed it down to either Gibbs or Jeffery. I'm still curious about the round the Farquharson in the movie was chambered in. Judging from the cartridges in Val Kilmer's belt, and if the gun and cartridges are period correct (1898), I'd say it's a 450/400 Nitro Express 3-1/4". The 450/400 NE 3-1/4" is second from the left. The 450/400 NE 3" is first on the left, but was not introduced until 1902.

Well, you know the bottom two rifles are classic "big game" rifles used in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in Africa and India. So that's where you start.

I always enjoy movies where interesting firearms are prominently featured. For 5 points name the movie these three rifles were featured in. For a bonus name each rifle.

I just got the target out and measured. I should have said the best three shot group was about 2". The worst group was about 3". Plenty accurate for deer hunting in the woods around here.

I took the No. 1 to the range today. Wow, what a show stopper. I thought my Weatherby Mark V drew a crowd, but it was nothing like the No. 1. The range was crowded today and everyone that was there stopped by my bench to look at, comment on, admire, fondle, etc., the No. 1. I didn't realize what a "cult gun" the No. 1 is. It didn't do too bad for open sights. Only shot it at 50 yards to get used to it. Best three shot group was about 3". [should have said 2". See post below.] First two shots were touching and then I had a flier. I think it will improve as I get used to the gun. Trigger on the No. 1 is fabulous. And it's a very light gun, so I was expecting some punishment from the 30-06, but it wasn't bad at all.

Shh...don't tell JayPee that. From what I've been able to gather from "Internet research," the No. 1 can be very picky about ammo and it sometimes doesn't shoot its best groups from a rest. It also seems that most of the horror stories about the No. 1's accuracy come from around 25-30 years ago, which is when JayPee had his bad experience with a No. 1. For what I want to use it for (deer hunting in heavy woods), so long as it will keep three shots in three inches at 75 yards it's plenty accurate for me. I'm not even going to put a scope on it. (A Farquharson rifle just does not look right with a scope on it, IMO.)

I've been watching the auctions for a No. 1 for some time. Prices on these rifles are usually pretty high, so when this one popped up and was in my price range I grabbed it. Serial number puts production in 1999-2000. Described as like new. And it's chambered in my favorite round, 30-06.

That's the pits, but there isn't much you can do when faced with the weather. Glad you finally made it back safely.

I took this gun to the range today, and man did it shoot well. I'll post pics of the targets later. Here's a brief video review from the Gun Talk blog that JayPee and I author:

JayPee and I are co-authoring a gun blog at guntalkers.blogspot.com. This is the first video gun review on our blog:

The title of that web page is very misleading. The time line is really a history of 22 caliber centerfire cartridges, of which the .223 Remington/5.56 NATO is just one part. I mean, saying that the 22-10-45 Maynard in 1882 is the beginning of the "development" of the .223 Remington is patently ridiculous.

I was using about the cheapest 30-06 ammo you can buy: Golden Bear by Barnaul. It's about $12 a box. 145gr FMJ, 2850 fps and 2614 ft-lbs.

I took my new (to me) Ruger M77 to the range yesterday to sight in the scope. The scope that came with this gun is an old Tasco that appears to be a fairly good quality scope. Unlike the new Tascos, which are made in China, this one was made in Japan. It took awhile to get the thing dialed in and on the target at 50 yards--largely because the wind was blowing so hard down the concrete pipe you have to shoot down that it was making my eyes water. Here was my final 3-shot group at 50 yards. I'll move out to 100 yards next time and see how it does.

My used Ruger M77 MK II arrived today. I'm quite pleased with the condition of this rifle. It's been well used, but well cared for. I was a bit disappointed when I unwrapped the bolt and immediately noticed a recessed bolt face just like the original M77 had. Hmmm. So I did a little more research and as it turns out the fist MK IIs were not controlled feed. The only change made to the bolt over the first M77s was the switch to a blade type ejector (Mauser type). Ruger made the switch to controlled feed as a running production change. And since my M77 is one of the very first MK IIs, it's not controlled feed. Oh, well...

I just don't like the 1911-looking slide on the FMs. Ruins the good lines that the classic Hi-Power has.

Nope. This is a Weatherby 300 Magnum built on a FN commercial Mauser action. Serial number puts the build date in 1957. Prior to introducing his proprietary Mark V action, Roy Weatherby built his rifles primarily on FN and Brevix Mauser actions.

Douglas MacArthur. He probably was concerned about the number of Springfields and 1917s still in service, the amount of 30-06 ammo warehoused, and the logistics of not only moving to a new battle rifle, but a new cartridge as well. If the 276 had been adopted it would probably still be our standard rifle round.

276 Pedersen Case type: Rimless, Bottleneck Bullet diameter: 0.2842 in (7.22 mm) Neck diameter: 0.313 in (8.0 mm) Shoulder diameter: 0.385 in (9.8 mm) Base diameter: 0.450 in (11.4 mm) Rim diameter: 0.450 in (11.4 mm) Case length: 2.023 in (51.4 mm) Overall length: 2.855 in (72.5 mm) Primer type: Large rifle 7mm-08 Case type: Rimless, Bottleneck Bullet diameter: 0.284 in (7.2 mm) Neck diameter: 0.315 in (8.0 mm) Shoulder diameter: 0.454 in (11.5 mm) Base diameter: 0.470 in (11.9 mm) Rim diameter: 0.473 in (12.0 mm) Rim thickness: 0.050 in (1.3 mm) Case length: 2.035 in (51.7 mm) Overall length: 2.80 in (71 mm) Primer type: Large Rifle

True or False? The 7mm-08 is virtually identical to the cartridge that the M1 Garand was originally designed to shoot.

I haven't had time to take any pics. This is a bolt action rifle.

I think so, too. (The Russian ammo has the correct .311 bullets.)

My 799 in 7.62x39 arrived yesterday. Man was that thing gobbed up with grease! It took me about 4 hours to get it clean. I got the scope bases put on last night and then mounted the scope this morning and took it to the range. I bore sighted it at 50 yards and fired a few rounds through it to loosen up the action and get it grouping under 3". Out of the box the action was very stiff and rough. But much to my delight after about 20 rounds not only did the action loosen up and smooth out, so did the trigger. Once I moved out to 100 yards and readjusted the scope, my groups quickly went from 3.5" to around 1.25". Here was my best 3-shot group at 100 yards: I think with handloads and .311 bullets, this could easily be a sub MOA rifle.

I vote to can it.