gun nutty

You can get lighter after-market barrels even from A&B. http://www.midwayusa.com/Content/Legacy/barrel_barrel_blank.htm I'm seeing an F14 contour listed... Is that close in dimensions to the Mark X? The Mark X barrels have historically been softer than their commercial counterparts. A lighter barrel could also mean a less rigid barrel. You'd need a Mark X with a .458 barrel to perform a valid comparison against the F44. Look at: http://www.ershawbarrels.com/scb-contours-and-weights.php Shaw won't sell you a .45 barrel unless it's their #3 or higher (3, 3.5, 5). For the slimmer barrels, Shaw feels that there isn't enough meat left for either rigidity or safety. I'm not sure what Shaw uses as "standard" for barrel weights. 30 caliber? A #3 barrel in .30 caliber will weight more than a #3 barrel in .45 caliber. Look at: Volume of a cylinder = pi X radius squared X height = 3.14159 X r X r X h v308 = 3.14159 * 0.154 * 0.154 * 24 = 1.788144 in^3 v458 = 3.14159 * 0.229 * 0.229 * 24 = 3.953958 in^3 Difference in Volume = v458 - v308 = 2.165814 in^3 Density of Steel = 490 lbs/ft^3 = (490 lbs/ft^3)X(1 ft^3)/(1728 in^3) = 0.283565 lbs/in^3 Weight of difference = 0.283565 lbs/in^3 X 2.165814 in^3 = 0.6141 lbs = 9.8 oz. If my numbers are right, for a given contour contour, a 24" 0.308 barrel will weight 9.8 oz more than the same length 0.458 barrel. You can cut a little weight by setting the barrel back. If you look at the Shaw table, a #3 contour starts its first taper at 2.750 inches, while the #1.5 starts at 2.250 inches. You can chop .5 inches off the barrel shank, setting the barrel back for a sportier contour.

Barrel length has little, if anything to do with accuracy; for a 7X57 Mauser barrel, a 28" length is no more or less accurate than an 18". The only way that I am aware of in which barrel length could potentially affect accuracy is with the sight radius. With open sights, by shortening the barrel you reduce the distance between the front and rear sights. With a scope, there will be no difference. Accuracy has more to do with barrel harmonics, rigidity, and temperature than any other factor. Now muzzle blast and velocity are completely different issues. 22" for non-magnums seems the norm, and 24" in for magnums. For a 7X57, I'm guessing you'll lose 50-75 fps for every 2 inches removed from a barrel. My first shotgun was an old Winchester Model 12 with a 30 inch barrel. Chasing pheasants through brush was miserable; I will not do it again. My Remington 870 has a comfortable 24". They didn't have 22" barrels at the time I bought the Hastings barrel for it. For a bolt action, handy carry rifle, 20" for a non-magnum is nice. Easy to move through through the thick, lighter to carry, not much of a sacrifice on velocity.

You can have someone weld a new handle on it for you. It costs a little more than forging, but you get a handle that's a little longer and more choices of handle styles.

I think for $330 you got a steal.

I think Finn Agaard spoke highly of him. That is a beautiful rifle! I love the lines... so clean and classic.

You could always build a .221 Fireball Rimmed using .357 Maximum brass. That .357 case should fit the Carcano bolt face well. You really wouldn't need a magazine; as a varmiter; it would work dandy as a single shot. I'd just fashion a plate to fit the underside if the receiver with a shallow slot for the cartridge. The .221 Fireball makes fine prairie dog medicine. Hornady 40 grain V-Max bullets work well. Just sayin'....

An IER (intermediate eye relief) scope would look splendid on the front ring. Pistol scopes are generally IER by definition, no? I have a Burris 4X compact in my collection... Don't see those listed on their current price list, or any fixed power Burris rifle scope for that matter. http://www.burrisoptics.com/handgun1.html#15x4x That 1.5X-4X looks like a dandy with a nice range of eye relief.

It's not complete: You need to add a scope and punch some paper! You've done a great job indeed! What kind of scope mount are you looking at?

FC beat me to it!

Wouldn't a used bow from a garage sale or pawn shop serve the same purpose? I remember seeing bow fishing rigs that will do almost exactly what you are asking.

I have to rely on our legal system and law enforcement. To suggest otherwise implies anarchy. The bar HASN'T been lowered. A Court Justice says "hey, that makes sense that a policeman would have done that in order to protect someone else... it was reasonable... it was fair...". No judge has said that unlawful searches are now legal (other than the sheriff in your article). From your article, the only issue was whether citizens were allowed to resist police entering their homes. As stated, it's a bad idea. The other case listed police finding illegal drugs while pursuing a suspect. The cops involved were performing their duties, and stumbled across someone with a significant stash of drugs. I'm assuming that it was evident that they were pursuing a real suspect, or this case would have fallen apart from the get-go. Sailorman2, I'm not disagreeing with you; the cases are just a poor examples. I won't stand behind a moron who pushes cops and a drug user/dealer who had enough supply to land an 11-year sentence. I also think folks are reading WAAYYY too much into it. I'm more concerned about the police breaking into my home at 2 AM, holding me and my family at gunpoint and terrorizing us: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42740201/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/ You think they would have grabbed the guy at his workplace and executed the search warrant during the day... His kids will be scarred for life. They'd be burying him if he decided to get "pushy".

http://shop.armorforensics.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=RedWop&Category_Code=EVP_EVD_COL_BOXES http://www.forensicssource.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductName=1007864 http://www.uline.com/BL_433/Rifle-Box Now for my $0.02... If I had MANY to transport... It's not that hard making a wood rack from 2X4s and plywood, provided you have the tools and time. Time is the bear though.

I'm in agreement, for the most part, with the Indiana Supreme Court. I wholly disagree with the Indiana Sheriff's idea that "random searches" are now justified. Resisting law enforcement with physical force is futile and absurd; it's also guaranteed to escalate an already volatile situation. Policemen deal with thugs on PCP and crystal meth on a daily basis. Our law enforcement officers are fully equipped with plenty of toys to dispose of very bad boys. I would never want to be on the wrong side of a beat-down from a well-trained cop. No one has ever told me that I shouldn't lay a hand on a policeman; a holster, baton, and handcuffs speak volumes on their own. The case presented to the Indiana Supreme Court was hardly "pristine", and the claimant was no angel: a couple had an argument outside and a 911 call was made. When the police arrived, the couple slipped inside, and the male blocked entrance to his home and refused the police entry. Cops respond to domestic battery cases on a regular basis, and have seen much physical abuse. They entered the home to access the severity of the situation. My guess is that the woman was unharmed and nothing more; that's not always the case. Should the police have accepted the man's word that "they were not needed" and just left? Common sense says "no". Were it my sister or my daughter behind the door, I'd want someone to at least look in and make sure she was alright. The man may very well have given his lady an "attitude adjustment" and - by not letting the cops verify her condition - was dismissing them to cover his abuse. Why would the idiot try and push the officer? Any excuse of his behavior would beyond "reaching". I don't know that I could be a policeman. While wearing a military uniform the rules of engagement (ROE) are relatively straightforward: when in doubt, shoot. I only have to have a reasonable feeling that either my life - or that of my comrades - is in danger and I can react with full force and extreme prejudice. A law enforcement officer can save a man's life and get sued in court by the very man he saved. My thinking is that Justice David was making a valid point: policemen sometimes have a very strong, legal reason to enter a residence. Assaulting an officer while he or she is performing their reasonable duty benefits none. A bad search is a bad search. We have a legal system to address abuses of power by law officers. Taunting or intimidating offers puts all citizens at risk. Getting to the point made by Sheriff Hartman... He's guaranteeing that criminals will get a free walk. If a policeman knocks on my door for a "random search", I will tell him that he doesn't have my permission. If he enters anyway, anything he finds at that point is ill-gotten. I will not resist; I will contact my lawyer and let him know what transpired. My guess is that sheriff will cost the taxpayers in his county a great deal of money. If they want to keep him in office, it will be with great pride and even greater expense that they will get to keep him.

Winchester 70 barrels have 16V threads as well with a major diameter of 1.00. At least in theory, for a post '64 model 70 barrel (recessed extractor, flat breech face, not coned), there should be no reason you couldn't rescue it. Just sayin'....

Per De Haas: RH, 16 V, 0.980 major (shank) diameter, 0.937 shank length.

If the stock is in "great structural shape" and actually has the tiger stripe pattern, it might be of interest for someone who likes mil-spec rifles. You could raise the dents and get the oil out of the stock... Would someone be willing to pay a "Jackson" or two for it? That would go well towards a second from Boyd's or Richards. Would save some time too.

I'd make sure that it is tiger striped. I'm not saying it isn't, I'd just verify. I seem to remember a trick or two about wrapping the wood with cord or rope and... it was either burning or chemically treating the rope. Looking at the stock, it looks like it could have been wound with cord/rope.

Wow! A nice piece indeed. I'd be very proud to have that in my collection. I love what you did with the handle. My experience with custom knives is limited. I would normally expect two separate scales/panels; pinning a single panel from the underside is both novel and elegant. That handle just "looks" like it fits the hand comfortably.

Nothing to apologize for with a 25'06. The ones I've seen were quite accurate, at least with 120 grainers. Despite its lack of a belt, it is in every way a "magnum" cartridge, requiring a selection of the slowest powders. I think in many ways it tends to be underrated. Compare it to a .264 Win Magnum with 120 grain or a .270 Win with 130 grain bullets; that long 120 grain .258 bullet is a rocket with some punch. You will want every bit of barrel you can get away with. I'm a big fan of 20"-22" barrels; with the 25'06, I'd target 24"-26" to wreak every bit of velocity out of that case.

Not sure why she keeps calling you... once again, guilt? She made a choice, and it's time to move on. If you want to stop her from trying to track you down, send her a brief text message letting her know that you need your space and you will reach out to her if and when you're ready. If she really respects you, an "OK" should be all that is replied. Breakups suck, and closure is painful. Hang in there.

I'm no psychologist, but I have stayed at a Super 8. If her kids are running her life for her, she's an enabler. Her guilt of being a single mom is an ugly mess, and she'd rather be "Friend" than "Mom" to her kids. That will never, ever change. You will always take a back seat. Her children will always (ALWAYS!) have a home in her home. You are more like a piece of furniture than a companion: useful when needed, but conveniently out of the way when "more important" issues arise. Good moving on now. You like to build guns, and she's willing to pay for parts for you to do so... Dilemma indeed. Was your motivation for building a gun for her to please her, or an excuse to tinker? I'm guessing the latter; it's OK to be a little selfish. You can always work on it and drop it off in six months when you cool down. Maybe by then she won't want it, and (GASP!) you'll have another fine toy to play with.

George Hamilton IV? http://www.georgeiv.net/ Al Casey played with Johnny Cash during that time, and appears "fair-haired". http://www.rockabillyhall.com/AlCasey.html Luther Perkins also played with Johnny Cash, but he appears dark-haired. http://www.rockabillyhall.com/LutherPerkins1.html Of the above, only George Hamilton IV is given credit on www.imdb.com: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057153/fullcredits#cast

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/sid=26148/pid=9969/Product/47157_JR_MK_1_PC_BASE #750-511-138 http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/sid=19991/pid=7863/Product/51263_STD_M96_MATTE_2_PC_BASE #526-512-630 http://www.sporterexpress.com/Leupold-Mauser-96-2-Piece-Scope-Ring-Base Sporter Express has a very good price. '91 to '96 should all use the same bases.

http://daytraco.com/Products/Speed-Lock-Kit-M93-96-Mauser__DSL93.aspx http://daytraco.com/Products/Mark-II-Safety--M93-96-Mauser__DMS93.aspx You get everything at once, for about $100. You can keep the existing shroud. The Dayton is an all-steel unit. I don't own one personally, but I've not heard any negatives. I like the minimal dimensions (much less wood to remove). Maybe someone here has played with one.

http://www.sporterizing.com/index.php?showtopic=4956&st=0 Some beautiful pics on page 2 of the above link. I am truly awe-inspired by the work that Don does. There's a wonderful shot of Don's square-bridged conversion; it gives a good sense of the amount of metal that needs to be removed to make a 1917 into a sleek sporter. Sometimes I think it would be easier just starting with a block of steel.