Mr VJP

He has, but he has decided NY is where he wants to be, so I wish him the best. He's gonna miss the AR though. You can modify them to be legal though, but you will miss large cap mags.

Close range guns like my M1 Carbine, .30-30 and 20 ga slug gun have open sights. Even my Talkeetna .375 H&H is still open sights, and I hope it gets to hunt Grizzly in Alaska one day. I like the Williams Fire Sights the best as they really glow and are easy to see when action is fast. Some rifles just handle better without a scope. My regular deer rifles have scopes, as do my varmint rifles. Basically, any long range shooter has a scope on it.

Understood, but I don't think there will be any change for the better, in Albany or the attitudes of NY's gun owners. If you don't own any black rifles or handguns, you won't feel the pain as bad as those who do. But it must be a concern for you if you were living down south up to now.

I have to ask this question. Why are you returning to NY? I think most gun owners in NY are quite upset with the state at this time. Most would leave if they could.

The Ruger you have in 7.62X39 has power equal to the .30-30. It's a good deer rifle. I'm a Kimber man, but think the Montana is a better choice than the Adirondack for a mountain climbing deer rifle. With a compact scope and web sling it weighs less than 6.5 pounds. It can be had for about $1000. The Adirondack costs more, and I don't like the short barrel. It doesn't balance as well. I think 22" is short enough. The fluted bolt isn't as smooth either, as the ejector rides along it as you work it and makes it feel choppy. I would take a Kimber over any other rifle offered for the same price, and prefer it over quite a few rifles costing much more.

Just an update on the FN. I fired it for the first time since the cleaning and tune up. I put a paper plate @ 100 yards with a small spot drawn on it with a Sharpie. I took one shot and couldn't see any holes in the plate. I was starting to get annoyed. Then I took a look at the plate with my binocs. There was a .308 bullet hole dead center in the black dot. I raised the scope 4 clicks so it will hit 1" high @ 100 and decided the cold bore shot was the most important when hunting. My buddy will get the rest of his ammo back to practice with.

You’re right. My records indicate I bought it new in March 2006 for $425. I guess thinking it was a lot older was just wishful thinking, or perceived based on the vast amount of carry I’ve done with it since I got it. It does have the serrated trigger, so it wasn’t part of the recall, making me think it was older as well. I also see it was the only new Remington firearm I ever purchased. I wanted a 24” barreled walking varminter in .223 and the SPS, with the 24” matte finished, recessed crown barrel and standard black synthetic stock fit the bill. There is a noticeable difference in the quality, compared to the older 700’s. There are plastic parts that replace some of the metal parts used on the older rifles. Back then I hated the look of it, but it has since become acceptable looking as a hunting tool. The “lawyer” trigger was also too heavy, so that was brought down to 3.5 pounds. I’ve owned a lot of Remingtons over the years, but all the rest were bought used. I still have a 660, 742, 700BDL and 700ADL as well as shotguns in 48, 870 and 1100, but all are 1980’s manufacture or older. I’ve had some really old Remington SxS’s and even a rolling block in the past. My records also show I purchased my first Kimber, the 84M 7mm-08, in December 2003 after waiting close to 6 months for it to come in. They were new then with a long waiting list. Mine has a 2 position safety on it, not the 3 position they went to shortly afterwards. In contrast to the Remingtons, every Kimber rifle I own was purchased new. I rarely ever see them on the used market, unless they are asking too much for one. In any case, I was wrong and you are right. However, this doesn’t mean I will be buying a new Remington at any time in the future.

I own one of the first 700 SPS rifles to be made and I believe I've had it close to 20 years. Perhaps it just seems that way to me since I use it all the time. It was made prior to the one's that were recalled for trigger issues, so it's an old one. I will have to pull out my records to see what year I bought it, but it was well before Remington's quality went to hell. Lawdwaz, that Browning rifle was actually made by the same factory as the one I posted in the pictures. Browning contracted with FN in Herstal Belgium to make their Belgian made bolt guns, as well as most of their shotguns at the time. Belgian Browning guns are much more collectible and sought after than the Japanese ones. The bolt sleeve and safety on the Browning rifles were changed to meet Browning's specs, making the bolt sleeve more streamlined with a sliding safety on the stock rather than the wing type on the back of the bolt. Other than that, you can probably see the similarities between your rifle and the one I posted. Last time I checked values, rifles like yours were selling for $1500 to $2000 in that condition. They may be worth even more now. There is quite a bit of collector interest in them. BTW, the action cut out on the old FN measure 3 1/8". They also made a magnum length action during the same era, but it was for magnum chamberings only.

It's a standard length action. I believe the same one FN used for 30-06 and the like. It's longer than my short action Remington 700 SPS, but I forget what it measures. The magazine well is made for the .308 rounds though.

Let's see. What day and time does bow season open? BTW, I just use a sheet of white paper with a dime sized blaze or black dot on it. That small aiming point really proves the "aim small, miss small" adage. It's also real easy to see the bullet holes in the white paper, so you can adjust the scope accordingly.

Tell him he should give it to you. You never know what a man may do. LOL! Another thing about this vintage FN is the old non-detachable sling swivels. At one time it was considered a plus to sell a rifle with sling swivels on the stock to make putting a sling on it simple. You want to be able to take the sling off??? WTH is wrong with you? I may have a set of sling studs I can put on it for him so he can use detachable swivels. Now where did I put all those spare sling parts??

No. Where did you hear about it?

Nice view. You need a nicer coffee mug though.

No. But not good ones and a little too high IMO.

Yesterday a good friend of mine brought his newly acquired, but vintage, FN rifle, over to my place to zero the scope. It was made in the late 1950’s, or early 1960’s by Fabrique Nationale of Herstal, Belgium, and is a wonderful example of a quality bolt action rifle of classic design. It utilizes a Mauser type controlled round feed action with a barrel chambered for the .308 Winchester round, a popular cartridge today, but less common when the rifle was made. After a safety check, a visual bore sighting and a successful shooting session on my range, I asked him to leave it with me, so I could do a thorough inspection on it as well. The rifle’s in very good condition with an excellent bore, and appears to have seen little use for some time. It did appear to need some cleaning and detailing though. This morning, I disassembled the rifle’s major components. I cleaned, polished and inspected the finely hand checkered walnut stock. I scrubbed the bore until it was like new, cleaned the action and the bolt, while simultaneously cleaning and lubricating the trigger assembly and magazine components. After everything was cleaned, I reassembled the rifle. What you see here is the end result of about two hours work. The rifle once again shows the beauty and craftsmanship built into it, the way it did when it was young. I don't care for his scope, rings or recoil pad, but he says he's looking to upgrade those after this deer season ends. To me, a fine bolt action like this isn’t just a firearm, or a tool. To me, it is a beautiful work of art that enhances the thrill of deer hunting when carried in the forest. Some folks detail, or even restore, fine automobiles. I love the results of their labors. Fine firearms are worthy of the same type of labor. I love the results of that labor too.

I never said it was a scientific study. I made an observation based on the company's reputation, while adding my own experience and personal opinion. The documented credibility is all over the net, lawyer advised recall of 84M rifles not withstanding. If you think you can get a better rifle for the money, buy it. When you do, it will be my turn .... ha-ha-ha.

The best open sight for hunting is a peep sight. All you do is look through the rear peep and put the front bead on the target. It's great on game animals and much easier on the eyes than a rear v notch. It also give you a longer sighting plane between the two sights as the peep is all the way to the rear of the receiver. I have a peep sight set up on a couple of rifles and have taken deer at 100 yards with them many times.

Most older folks don't care because it may not become obvious to them before they die. They don't seem to be concerned with the issues their offspring will suffer with though. I hear a lot of grand parents telling their grand children what a great country this used to be. That's sad.

I never said anyone mentioned recalls. I mentioned them to prove the point. I was talking rifles, not handguns. But even if I was talking ALL guns, I still find Kimber firearms to be far superior in quality to any major manufacturer in the US today. BTW, the 84M recall was voluntary after it was alleged the rifle may fire when the safety is flicked off. Turns out it can happen, if the owner has fiddled with the trigger adjustment screws, which should never be done and isn't even necessary on a Kimber trigger. The recalled rifles have had the triggers tamper proofed, that's all. I find it sad that so many manufacturers of all types really suck, as far as quality and reputation go. Yet when one does a really good job, and just happens to be a company in NY State, people will still throw them under the bus the first chance they get. Anyone who thinks Remington is still a good gun company, hasn't been keeping up with their issues. Of all the American gun manufacturers, Remington's quality is hovering near the bottom of the heap today. They were a great company, but today, they are riding on their past reputation and loyalty from fans who don't know they've changed.

How about we compare their production in 2014? How many defective Remington guns were sold? How many defective Kimbers?

Please provide a link to any recall ever by Kimber, for any of the rifles it has made. Also, those of you who claim any Kimber rifles have been defective, please provide some evidence to back up your claim. I suspect those of you who bad mouth them, have never owned one. I own five of their rifles and stand by what I say.

Not Kimber

This is an opinion piece, but I agree with the authors reasons. I haven't bought a new Remington arm in decades. The one's I still have are all vintage. http://www.guns.com/2015/09/23/3-reasons-i-wont-buy-remington-anymore/

Since it hasn't been mentioned so far, look into the Ruger Mini-30 semi auto rifle in 7.62x39 chambering. It's short and fast. It also has ballistics similar to the .30-30 and the ammo is inexpensive. I've had one for years and it is well suited to close cover hunting.

Personally, I think hunters should be more concerned with eye protection while hunting. There are many things in the woods that can really hurt your eyes. If you are shooting in the open, the blast from the muzzle of your gun won't be as loud as it will be if there is a tree or a wall near it that reflects the blast back at your ears. One or two gun shots in the field isn't really a big problem for most people's ears. It's repetitive muzzle blasts over a short period of time that will most likely damage your hearing. Of course if your ears take a single hit from a very loud bomb just once, you may suffer hearing loss.