|
|
|||||||
I couldn't agree more with 9ThreeXFifty7. In the era between WW I and II, there was a huge upsurge in interest in converting war trophy Mausers and DCM Springfields to elegant sporters, for the most part in the absence of any competition from really well designed commercial bolt action sporters. The same was less true immediately following WW II, but the huge influx of war trophies and the hundreds of thousands of military bolt actions being cleaned out of arsenals around the world and being brokered through big corporations like Firearms International and sold to the general public at unbelievably low prices stimulated the interest in "sporterized" military rifles again. By then, the military rifles had stiff competition in really well made and stocked commercial sporters, such as the Model 70 Winchester and the Model 725 Remington. Even the post '64 Model 70's and the 721-722 Remington series had features which the military rifles could not duplicate for the same price. Add to that the fact that many military rifles were produced under wartime conditions and were of questionable quality. "Sporterizing" a miltary rifle makes sense nowadays only if you are qualified to do most of the work yourself and value your time at 0. Worn out rifles with perfectly good actions can still be had for a reasonable price, including pre-64 Model 70's and commercial Mausers, like the FN and the Mark X. Post '64 Model 70's and 721-722-700 Remingtons are also a good buy, if you don't mind the push feed and questionable extraction. In particular, the Remington policy of using sweated on bolt handles is not one I approve of in a rifle for DG. In my day, I converted a number of military rifles, primarily Springfields and Enfields, and had I the chance to do it over, I would not have used a one of them. I enjoy the elegance of the old Springfield sporters, including my beloved Wundhammer and Neidner Springfields, but they would not be my first choice to take to the field. Neither is equipped with a scope, and my eyes simply are nor trustworthy enough without one. |