PDA

View Full Version : Anschuetz 1771 Article



lone-wolf
04-13-2017, 08:27 PM
I just want to pat you on the back cause that was an EXCELLENT read. Really enjoyed it till the price came up :p

Dewey Cox
04-13-2017, 08:51 PM
Nice cover this month too.

road kill
04-14-2017, 06:57 AM
So is an Anschuetz similar to an Anschutz.;D

lone-wolf
04-14-2017, 07:27 PM
So is an Anschuetz similar to an Anschutz.;D

website is anschuetz-sport.com, with everything on it reading Anschutz *shrugs*

Calibre
08-25-2017, 08:41 PM
Sorry for the delay there guys (moving houses sucks), but I appreciate the kind words! It's a pricey gun, but honestly if they made it in left hand, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. I really loved it.

And thanks for the cover compliment; we're trying to pretty things up in the mag! If anyone missed the review in print, it's here: http://calibremag.ca/best-hunting-rifle-you-didnt-know-existed-anschutz-1771/

http://i.imgur.com/fdBR0HQ.jpg

Booletsnotreactwell
08-26-2017, 10:20 PM
Hey I figured I drop in something on a slightly related but unrelated note.

I liked this new issue regarding the Type 81, it was very informative. What I liked even more were the honest accuracy/precision assessments on the T81 and APC223, especially regarding the methods you used.


I liked that you have gravitated towards starting to include the mean radius method and using multiple shot strings, this is a much more accurate and mathematically sound way of measuring a guns precision vs the age old gun rags cherry picked three shot group with "fliers" removed.


One thing I noticed is that at one point (p.36 above the Canada Ammo ad) you referred to the mead radius method being better than "the more familiar minute-of-angle group measurement." It should be noted that what you're really referring to is the "extreme spread" group measuring method vs mean radius, either or can be expressed in minutes of angle, mrads, inches or what have you.

Calibre
08-28-2017, 01:20 PM
Yeah; I thought about referring to it as "extreme spread" but was worried people wouldn't know the method we were talking about, and figure MOA might resound more. In either case, I'm glad you appreciate the change; we really want to make sure we're putting out the most reliable information as possible and as a bit of a nerd I really enjoy things like mean radius vs extreme spread and think it does a WAY better job of communicating a rifle's accuracy. It's amazing that technology makes this all so easy now, too.

Booletsnotreactwell
08-29-2017, 07:16 AM
Yeah; I thought about referring to it as "extreme spread" but was worried people wouldn't know the method we were talking about, and figure MOA might resound more. In either case, I'm glad you appreciate the change; we really want to make sure we're putting out the most reliable information as possible and as a bit of a nerd I really enjoy things like mean radius vs extreme spread and think it does a WAY better job of communicating a rifle's accuracy. It's amazing that technology makes this all so easy now, too.

Yea I figured for a second that might of been it as well, just so people would understand, but yea it's good stuff. That attitude is what makes your magazine different above the other gun rags, too many of them are like infomercials and there's always the supposed "accuracy" test at the end where somehow everything always ends up being MOA or sub MOA. I bet when you fired the T81 with Barnaul you might of managed a few MOA groups but even so at the end it seems like you ended up with a solid 3-3 1/2 ES MOA gun, that's probably a good realistic expectation of results that most users could duplicate.

Calibre
08-29-2017, 08:37 AM
Yea I figured for a second that might of been it as well, just so people would understand, but yea it's good stuff. That attitude is what makes your magazine different above the other gun rags, too many of them are like infomercials and there's always the supposed "accuracy" test at the end where somehow everything always ends up being MOA or sub MOA. I bet when you fired the T81 with Barnaul you might of managed a few MOA groups but even so at the end it seems like you ended up with a solid 3-3 1/2 ES MOA gun, that's probably a good realistic expectation of results that most users could duplicate.

I appreciate the compliment! It'll always be a work in progress, but it's nice to know people are noticing!