Letters - 09/96

Reader Praises Bushnell For Speed-Of-Lyte Response

Your review of the laser rangefinders in the June 1996 issue (Rangefinders: We Pick The Lytespeed 400 and Laser 70) prompted me to order a Lytespeed 400 from Cabela’s. I hadn’t bought it previously due to some concern about its low cost compared to the competition. After seeing the Performance Shooter article, I ordered it immediately, hoping to have it before hunting season. I was told there was a four-week backorder delay, but I received it three days later, at a cost of $249. The Lytespeed turned out to be a marvel of simplicity and accuracy. I am extremely pleased with the instrument. Thank you for the article.

-Mike Murphy
St. Louis, MO

Coming soon: We test the Industrial Light & Magic laser field rifle versus the ArnoldCo handheld rail gun.

Kudos and Comments
I’m using Accurage Arms #5 powder in small loads (6.0 grains) in .45 ACP cases with 185-grain bullets. I frequently notice after firing these handloads that the inside of my gun, and magazine too, has an accumulation of grit that appears to be unburned powder particles. Is this grit abrasive on the gun parts? Is this a sign of poor-quality powder? I would appreciate your opinion on this.

It’s about time that someone supports and protects gun owners as consumers. I hope this magazine becomes the Consumer Reports of shooting equipment.

-Gary McDermott
Syracuse, NY

If the grit looks like unburned powder, it probably is. However, the powder isn’t necessarily at fault. A primer mismatch can also be the culprit when ignition isn’t complete. Doublecheck your favorite loading guide to pick another .45 primer, or get the May 1995 issue for championship .45 ACP bullseye loads. Yes, the unburned particles should be removed from the gun, like any other contaminant.

Rings and Things
First, you guys are the best in your field. I’ll subscribe for life. Now for a few requests. I’d really like to see the following articles:

Please test the Springfield Armory Government rangefinding scopes Gen. I-II. Put it through the works, I love mine!

In your opinion (which I trust), who makes the best and strongest rings? I like Millett, if money isn’t a factor.

In hunting and varmint scopes, who do you like the best: Burris or Leupold? What are the weak points in the Browning MKIII .40 Hi-Power? I’ve shot over 600 rounds in mine now, and have had no jams. Also, it’s accurate, now that I had a trigger job done. I love the gun. But because I shoot a lot, I’m wondering if there’s anything you might beef up? Once again, keep up the good work.

-Charles H. Andrews V
Wilsull, MT

We’ve found that most manufacturers’ products vary in quality from category to category, so we are going to weasel out of your questions on rings and scopes and say it depends on which specific niches you’re interested in. We have limited experience with the Browning MKIII .40 Hi-Power, so we can’t say if it needs upgrading in any areas. Also, thanks for the tip on the Springfield scope.

Lever-Action Blues
I am writing you concerning an accuracy problem I have had with a Marlin Model 39AS .22 rimfire rifle.

My wife purchased the aforementioned rifle as a gift to me. Needless to say, I was elated. I have two other Marlin rifles that perform exceptionally. The 39AS is a fairly expensive firearm, and I would expect that it would also perform extremely well. I was unable to get the rifle to pattern. I used a new scope, an older scope that has proven true, and also iron sights. I tried every type of .22 rimfire ammunition I could get my hands on. At 50 yards the patterns ranged from 3 inches to 7 inches. The testing was done on a bench with sand bags.

I returned the rifle to Marlin, and they returned it with a new barrel. The problem persisted, and I had basically the same results in testing the new barrel. I spoke to Marlin, and they asked me to return the rifle. They willingly replaced the rifle with an entirely new rifle. Much to my chagrin, the new rifle performed as bad as the previous ones had.

I have returned the rifle again to Marlin, and I am waiting for their action on the matter. Marlin Firearms has been extremely accommodating throughout the whole process, but customer service will not make up for a poor product.

My question to you is this: “Is accuracy an inherent problem with the Model 39AS? Have you had other subscribers with similar problems? Or have I just had an unbelievable string of bad luck?” I am fond of lever-action rifles, but if accuracy is a common problem with lever-action .22s, I will shop for something else. Thank you sincerely for your time.

-Ronald D. Gillund
Sunburst, MT

To answer your question elliptically, we’ve never seen a lever action used as a competitive firearm. Bolt actions are the accuracy standard in rimfire rifles. If you are expecting MOA performance out of the Model 39AS, we don’t think you’ll ever get it. However, we doubt you will see that kind of performance in any other lever .22 LR either. In our view, Marlin has gone out of its way to satisfy your concerns. Maybe it’s time to count your blessings: You have a wife who was thoughtful enough to buy you a fun plinking rifle. Maybe you should invite her out for a day of nonstop hulling with your gift.

Scope Insights
Since I own a copy of each of the scopes that were tested in the May 1995 issue of Performance Shooter, I would like to offer my observations on all three models. Being an old varmint shooter and a more recent addict of benchrest shooting, I feel I have some qualifications about evaluating scopes.

The first scope purchased was the B&L Elite 36x. The reason for choosing this model was result of talking to several highly regarded benchrest shooters as to their preference of scopes. It was felt that the B&Ls had an edge over the Leupolds in ruggedness and also the fact that they would adjust at 1/8 inch instead of 1/4 inch for the Leupolds. This latter feature is a decided advantage if one to shoot benchrest for score. Anyway, the scope never worked properly and was returned to B&L for repair. After being returned, it shot somewhat better but still tended to shift point of impact all by itself. It is currently on its way back to B&L for further repair and adjustment. Also, the parallax has always been quite difficult to adjust properly. This scope is also the heaviest, making reaching weight all the more difficult.

The second scope I bought was a silver Leupold 36x. The jury is still out on this one. The parallax is a bit hard to adjust, and the crosshairs are so fine as to almost render them unusable in certain light conditions. But it has on occasion turned in a creditable performance at the target. I suspect that if this cope is reworked by one of the experts in the field, it will prove to be fairly satisfactory. The latest addition is the Weaver 36x, the only one of the three with an 1/8-minute dot reticle. Using this scope during the winter league matches at our local range, I was able to significantly lower my group size and overall aggregates. It was good enough to propel me from an also-ran to a contender for top place.

The Weaver certainly has more positive adjustments than the other two, even though the click adjustments are harder to move. Maybe that is what makes them less apt to wander than the others. Anyway, this scope has been like a shot in the arm to my shooting efforts of late.

My shooting style does not require that a scope be able to be adjusted all around the horn, so to speak. It only requires that the impact point remain as nearly the same as possible and be fairly fine in its adjustment. It is very rare for me to move the adjustments more than two or three clicks, if any. I believe that it is possible to move the impact point of a slightly sloppy group all around and then have it come back somewhere near the starting point. The problem is that the group is still sloppy, no matter where it is aimed. This, I believe, is more to the point of all of this discussion than anything else. Consistency is more important than how the thing adjusts. A hunting scope has much broader limits, but still requires that it be consistent. A bullet an inch off in any direction from the previous one will still do in a deer in good shape, but a bullet even a quarter inch away from an earlier one raises hell with one’s overall agg.

For a very long time the only high-power scopes available were the Leupolds. That is why one still sees a lot of them showing up in the top ten equipment lists for the various shoots. A careful perusal of these lists also indicates that a substantial number of Leupolds are being reworked/converted by outside technicians. This would indicate that shooters might be less than happy with the out-of-the-box performance of their scopes. If a scope was working well, why would one try to fix it? The fact that they are being reworked seems to be more important to me. The editor of NBRSA News has been heard to remark that a local craftsman makes a conversion to a scope “and shims the slop out of it!” Slop in a precision instrument? Whoa now fellas! One thousandth of an inch movement at the scope is slop no one needs. There is such a thing as a scope that just does not work properly.

-Peter Thorne
West Haven, VT

Most scopes (particularly Leupolds) are reworked to put in custom reticles and/or power bumps.

Competitive Instincts
First, congratulations on Mr. Anderson’s two-part article on the Anschutz 2013 versus 1913 models (September and December 1995). They were useful, specific, and very well done.

Now, two suggestions. Use Mr. Anderson’s expertise to compare currently available .22 target rifles (e.g. Anschutz, Feinwerkbau 2602/3 Walther KK2005, Weihrauch HW660), air rifles (Anschutz 2002, Feinwerkbau 300/602, RWS Diana models 100 & 755T01), and even centerfire rifles (such as the M1, M1a, etc.) and target air pistols.

Large numbers of senior and junior shooters participate in various disciplines using these arms; certainly they’d be interested in head-to-head comparisons.

I coach a high-school varsity and junior-varsity riflery team: three-position .22 at A36 targets using primarily Anschutz 1413 through 1913 rifles and 10-meter air rifle-Feinwerkbau 200s. We compete in a nine-team high-school league that encompasses the northeastern third of New York state as well as Junior Olympic and NRA Sectional and National Sectional competitions out of Albany.

-Mark A. Duper
Queensbury H.S. Rifle Coach
Queensbury, NY

Gary Anderson, who served as the shooting competition venue manager at the just completed Atlanta Centennial Olympic Games, has had a full plate of late. However, we hope to use his talents to examine a number of competitition products now that the Games have been completed.