Crossfire letters to guns

Crossfire letters to guns

Letter Of The Month

I was extremely pleased to read the recent article on Savage bolt action rifles. I have several of these fine 110 series rifles in my collection, all in different calibers, and find as you did that for the money they are the best around.

The last one I bought was a .30-’06 with synthetic stock and scope package. I bought it because, with a limited budget, it was all I could afford. I was not disappointed. Out of the box, it placed its first round in the center of the bullseye at 100 yards.

I have been preaching the benefits of Savage arms for many years to my friends; it was just good to see it in print.

Robin Wood

Thurmont, Md.

Quick Change Act

Tell me the truth — you actually have only one photo of John Taffin that you’ve been using all these years, and you just Photoshop in the hand cannon he’s writing about each month. Right?

John Payne

Oakland, N.J.

Timely Information

While watching news coverage of the horrific hostage taking at the Moscow theater, I was interested to see footage of a Russian special operations trooper carrying an SV-98 rifle.

Of course I would have had no idea what this weapon was, had I not just finished David Fortier’s excellent article in the December GUNS Magazine. Fortier’s articles are among the best and most interesting I’ve seen, and I hope you will see fit to continue with them.

Given the current glut of surplus military rifles on the American market, how about asking Fortier to give us a little report on these? Yes, we all know the basic facts about the Mauser and Lee-Enfield, etc., but Fortier’s in depth take on any subject would be sure to make for interesting reading. What do you say?

Randall Clark

Montrose, Colo.

Whatever We Please

Thanks for a great article (High-Tech, No!/Yes!, December 2002). I was happy to see both authors express flexible opinions.

I used to wonder if we haven’t lost our way when black powder rifles sport Leupold scopes, synthetic stocks, in-line ignition and fire the latest premium bullets using plastic sabots. The fact is, we have the right to design and shoot whatever we please and I have to admit it’s fascinating to watch high-performance black powder rifles in action. I suppose the next step will be for Remingtons’ Etronx to “go black.”

Can we expect an article on black powder match rifles anytime soon? I’d like to see just how well they can perform.

John Snover

Monument Beach, Mass.

Voice Of Authority

On Page 21 of your November 2002 issue, Glenn Barnes says, ‘The Ruger MK1 .22LR, also known as the “Standard Model.”‘ This is an incorrect statement.

Ruger originally introduced the Standard Model with fixed sights. The adjustable sight models, released shortly thereafter, were called the “Mark 1.” These terms are not interchangeable, as they designate different models. Otherwise, I agree wholeheartedly with author Barnes about the fun of plinking with any .22 — and especially a 50-year-old designed by Bill Ruger.

Tom Fetzer

Via e-mail

Fortier Fan

For the last four years or so, I have noticed the name of David M. Fortier in more and more publications. I share Mr. Fortier’s interest in all firearms and the old Soviet block weapons in particular. My interest goes back to being a paratrooper during the end days of the Viet Nam war. The first time I touched an AK-47 or an SKS, it was placed in my hands by the U.S. Army. Anyhow, enough of that.

Fortier has a to-the-point way of writing that I enjoy very much. It is usually different than the mainstream and usually correct. Please keep him on as a writer.

It’s kind of hard for critics of your magazine to claim you provide only favorable articles on guns in return for advertising revenue, when I seriously doubt the SV-98 is even available in this country. Ask him to do an article on the Russian .22 LR target pistols and target rifles.

Name Withheld By Request

Via e-mail

Salad Days

At age 77 and now a city dweller, my shooting days are well behind me.

I did some shooting in the ’50s and ’60s; mostly woodchucks with a Remington model 722 chambered for the .222, with a Weaver 6x scope. Didn’t realize that the rifle and load had become obsolete along with the shooter until I read your article in GUNS Magazine! All of this because I wanted to know what a .223 was. Thanks for a fine article.

Simon Kleeger

Via e-mail

Eye Of The Beholder

I’m writing in regards to Charles Petty’s article in the most recent GUNS (Navy Arms 1892 SS, December, ’02).

I’ve been reading your magazine for years. One constant I have appreciated is the exquisite photography of Ichiro Nagata. It struck me just recently how much all of your photography is generally superior to what I see in the other gun magazines. This recent article by Charles Petty is just another example.

The photos were sharp, large enough to show good detail, and carefully lighted. Other than a couple of “hot spots,” which are extremely difficult to avoid, I was impressed.

I say this as a rather dedicated amateur photographer with many years experience. I’ve shot many photos of my own guns, and I know it is damnably difficult to get good results. Nice work. Keep it up.

James Winthrop

Orlando, Fla.

COPYRIGHT 2003 Publishers’ Development Corporation

COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group