late model axle sizes

[D Critchley]

The simplest rifle that I have ever had, ( other than my muzzleloader), is the H&R Buffalo Classic, in .45/70. I compare that to the KLR with regularity. We don't have gun threads very often, nice change. DC

[Shane]

A nice KLR style unit is the KelTec SUB 2000. Folds in half to something like 16"x7"! 16" barrel for better pressure from 9mm than a hand gun. Uses Schlock or Beretta clips, up to 33rd.! Then to keep with the KLR theme, it costs less than $400.-! Comes in .40 or 9mm. Real KLR versatility.

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, D Critchley wrote: > > The simplest rifle that I have ever had, ( other than my muzzleloader), > is the H&R Buffalo Classic, in .45/70. > I compare that to the KLR with regularity. > We don't have gun threads very often, nice change. > DC >

[Sniper One]

Ok Fred, you've prodded me enough and the work day is over, so I'll weight in... IMHO, having worked with several of them, a rifle in a pistol caliber is like having a KLR with a 1 gal gas tank. Not enough range (or thump in this case). While I like the concept of the KelTec folding rifle, and agree that it would make a tidy package on the back of a KLR, if I were going to spend $ on one the better option seems like the 223 version for the open spaces of the SW US where I live and ride. Back to Fred's original question: Unfortunately the new Ruger Scout has not been in stock for me to lay hands on one. I started my affair with the Scout concept after encountering it in Col. John Dean (Jeff) Cooper's missives in my early 20's. I followed his original path by building my 1st one on the Rem 600 with the Leupold 2x pistol scope, then I tried my hand at his "heavy scout" and built a 35 Whelen on a '98 Argentine Mauser - though it didn't make weight with the longer action. Remember, all this was way before anything scout type was available commercially - so everything was a custom build. Gunsmiths and prototype machinists made a fortune off me. Years later when the industry began to embrace the Scout concept with commercial offerings, I made the trip through the Steyr, Savage and other type scouts in 308, 350 and 376, even tried a few pseudo scouts in 223. Oddly, I never managed to fund a big scout design on the level of the 460 G&A that Cooper named "Baby", but then I never had the funds for a safari in Africa to put one to use. All had their advantages and disadvantages of utility / game taking ability. There are some things I like about Cooper's design that are missing on the Ruger piece and the Ruger includes some items that seem needless to me. While the bare rifle makes weight with the wood composite stock, by the time you get a scope and rings on it you're likely to be overweight. A synthetic stock makes a difference. The protruding magazine of the Ruger unit makes it rather unhandy to carry at the midpoint of balance and pokes hell out of your back when slung conventionally. I have yet to find a picture of the Ruger that shows a sling mount position just forward of the magazine, and a proper 3 point sling is essential to the design's readiness. Moving on to the scout scope concept, as I indicated, I started with the same Leupold 2x pistol scope Cooper started with. It worked well enough but I found it lacking for magnification under certain situations. I tried a Burris 2x-8x pistol scope after a ton of research to find one with enough eye relief for the scout position. It worked well enough at low power (seems after about 2.5x the brain has trouble equating the image in both eyes), but parallax/exit puple was a major problem as the magnification was increased and you had to have almost the exact same cheek weld for every shot -- very difficult. A few years after that Leupold came out with their 2.5x scout scope and that was a nice scope, still lacked magnification for some situations. I tried the Burris version of the scout scope in 2.75x and again a good piece of glass, lacking magnification for longer range and/or small targets. I think if I were to build a "do most things well" (KLR type) rifle I'd likely wind up with the Steyr Scout design for all its attributes (even though there are some missing items) and I'd scope it with the very expensive new Leupold 1x-8x Mark 8 tactical scope. I find in the 1-1.5x range my brain can acquire moving targets almost as fast with both eyes open as is possible with the forward mounted scout design, plus 8x seems to be enough magnification for my aging eyes under most conditions. I will offer one more opinion in the arena - there is zero substitute for having the best quality glass, even if you have to skimp on the rifle to buy it. I'd rather have a $400 rifle with a $2500 scope than the other way round... Randy

--- On Mon, 9/24/12, Shane wrote: From: Shane Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Re:KLR-type rifles nklr To: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, September 24, 2012, 2:32 PM A nice KLR style unit is the KelTec SUB 2000. Folds in half to something like 16"x7"! 16" barrel for better pressure from 9mm than a hand gun. Uses Schlock or Beretta clips, up to 33rd.! Then to keep with the KLR theme, it costs less than $400.-! Comes in .40 or 9mm. Real KLR versatility. --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, D Critchley wrote: > > The simplest rifle that I have ever had, ( other than my muzzleloader), > is the H&R Buffalo Classic, in .45/70. > I compare that to the KLR with regularity. > We don't have gun threads very often, nice change. > DC > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[RobertWichert]

Swarovski, Nikon, or other? Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 9/24/2012 6:15 PM, Sniper One wrote: > > Ok Fred, you've prodded me enough and the work day is over, so I'll > weight in... > IMHO, having worked with several of them, a rifle in a pistol caliber > is like having a KLR with a 1 gal gas tank. Not enough range (or > thump in this case). While I like the concept of the KelTec folding > rifle, and agree that it would make a tidy package on the back of a > KLR, if I were going to spend $ on one the better option seems like > the 223 version for the open spaces of the SW US where I live and ride. > Back to Fred's original question: Unfortunately the new Ruger Scout > has not been in stock for me to lay hands on one. > I started my affair with the Scout concept after encountering it in > Col. John Dean (Jeff) Cooper's missives in my early 20's. I followed > his original path by building my 1st one on the Rem 600 with the > Leupold 2x pistol scope, then I tried my hand at his "heavy scout" and > built a 35 Whelen on a '98 Argentine Mauser - though it didn't make > weight with the longer action. Remember, all this was way before > anything scout type was available commercially - so everything was a > custom build. Gunsmiths and prototype machinists made a fortune off me. > Years later when the industry began to embrace the Scout concept with > commercial offerings, I made the trip through the Steyr, Savage and > other type scouts in 308, 350 and 376, even tried a few pseudo scouts > in 223. Oddly, I never managed to fund a big scout design on the > level of the 460 G&A that Cooper named "Baby", but then I never had > the funds for a safari in Africa to put one to use. All had their > advantages and disadvantages of utility / game taking ability. > There are some things I like about Cooper's design that are missing on > the Ruger piece and the Ruger includes some items that seem needless > to me. While the bare rifle makes weight with the wood composite > stock, by the time you get a scope and rings on it you're likely to be > overweight. A synthetic stock makes a difference. The protruding > magazine of the Ruger unit makes it rather unhandy to carry at the > midpoint of balance and pokes hell out of your back when slung > conventionally. I have yet to find a picture of the Ruger that shows > a sling mount position just forward of the magazine, and a proper 3 > point sling is essential to the design's readiness. > Moving on to the scout scope concept, as I indicated, I started with > the same Leupold 2x pistol scope Cooper started with. It worked well > enough but I found it lacking for magnification under certain > situations. I tried a Burris 2x-8x pistol scope after a ton of > research to find one with enough eye relief for the scout position. > It worked well enough at low power (seems after about 2.5x the brain > has trouble equating the image in both eyes), but parallax/exit > puple was a major problem as the magnification was increased and you > had to have almost the exact same cheek weld for every shot -- very > difficult. > A few years after that Leupold came out with their 2.5x scout scope > and that was a nice scope, still lacked magnification for some > situations. I tried the Burris version of the scout scope in 2.75x > and again a good piece of glass, lacking magnification for longer > range and/or small targets. > I think if I were to build a "do most things well" (KLR type) rifle > I'd likely wind up with the Steyr Scout design for all its attributes > (even though there are some missing items) and I'd scope it with the > very expensive new Leupold 1x-8x Mark 8 tactical scope. I find in the > 1-1.5x range my brain can acquire moving targets almost as fast with > both eyes open as is possible with the forward mounted scout design, > plus 8x seems to be enough magnification for my aging eyes under most > conditions. > I will offer one more opinion in the arena - there is zero substitute > for having the best quality glass, even if you have to skimp on the > rifle to buy it. I'd rather have a $400 rifle with a $2500 scope than > the other way round... > Randy > > --- On Mon, 9/24/12, Shane > wrote: > > From: Shane > > Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Re:KLR-type rifles nklr > To: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com > Date: Monday, September 24, 2012, 2:32 PM > > > > A nice KLR style unit is the KelTec SUB 2000. Folds in half to > something like 16"x7"! 16" barrel for better pressure from 9mm than a > hand gun. Uses Schlock or Beretta clips, up to 33rd.! Then to keep > with the KLR theme, it costs less than $400.-! Comes in .40 or 9mm. > > Real KLR versatility. > > --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com > , D Critchley wrote: > > > > > > The simplest rifle that I have ever had, ( other than my muzzleloader), > > > is the H&R Buffalo Classic, in .45/70. > > > I compare that to the KLR with regularity. > > > We don't have gun threads very often, nice change. > > > DC > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[SniperOne]

Apologies for the delayed response on your scope question Robert, long rowdy day. You are on the right track in the categories of "good" and "outstanding" glass. Nikon is hard to beat for the money, good glass and coatings, well built, and decently affordable depending on the model. This level is also available in some american lines, though they tend to cost a few dollars more. If someone is spending in the $400~$600 range they are likely in this category. Its interesting the other brand you mention is high end European glass. This level is typified by brands like Swarvoski, Zeiss, Leika, Schmidt und Bender. Some of these manufacturers have lower end models (for them) that compete in the above category of 400~600 with very good glass/construction and coatings. Then they have there high end optics, and this is where the differences are subtile yet astounding. I took my first adventure into this upper level 20+ years ago with a Zeiss 3x-12x 56mm. I noticed the differences in a lot of areas and under several difficult conditions - then on an antelope hunt I learned why I spent so much for that scope. I was on a ranch in the Texas panhandle hunting antelope, when the buck I wanted showed up right at sundown and stood 232 (rangefinder after) yards away exactly in front of the setting orange sun on the horizon. When I pulled up through the Zeiss I expected to be blinded, but what I saw was the individual blades of CRP grass in front of, plus sharp headgear and distinct colors/markings of the antelope's body, with an orange sun behind. The resolution under difficult conditions was impeccable. The scope was worth every penny paid. I've worked with Schmidt und Bender, Leupold Mark 4, NightForce, and US Optic's tactical lines, plus some of the hunting series from Zeiss and Swarovski. All were in the exceptional category. Optics (scopes/binos/etc) are one of the few areas where you truly do get what you pay for. A $1500 scope really is that much better than a $500 scope when conditions are challenging. I pulled up a friend's new $2700 Swarovski binos a few months back and was seriously impressed at the difference between them and my $1100 Swarovski binos. (nope, can't afford them, rather have another motorcycle) On the far end of excellence is where scope prices range well over $4k. This is an arena most of us can't afford to play in. The government does play here. While I've only had a few opportunities to see some of this stuff, and none to actually work with it - I have to give credit where its due. Our government is furnishing the very best our money can buy for groups of our military personnel. And those particular tax dollars I'm personally happy to pay for properly equipping someone to do the dirty work in a foreign hotspot. Randy Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone -----Original Message----- From: RobertWichert Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:34 AM To: Sniper One Cc: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSN_KLR650] Re:KLR-type rifles nklr Swarovski, Nikon, or other? Robert Wichert P.Eng. LEED AP BD&C +1 916 966 9060 FAX +1 916 966 9068 ===============================================

On 9/24/2012 6:15 PM, Sniper One wrote: Ok Fred, you've prodded me enough and the work day is over, so I'll weight in... IMHO, having worked with several of them, a rifle in a pistol caliber is like having a KLR with a 1 gal gas tank. Not enough range (or thump in this case). While I like the concept of the KelTec folding rifle, and agree that it would make a tidy package on the back of a KLR, if I were going to spend $ on one the better option seems like the 223 version for the open spaces of the SW US where I live and ride. Back to Fred's original question: Unfortunately the new Ruger Scout has not been in stock for me to lay hands on one. I started my affair with the Scout concept after encountering it in Col. John Dean (Jeff) Cooper's missives in my early 20's. I followed his original path by building my 1st one on the Rem 600 with the Leupold 2x pistol scope, then I tried my hand at his "heavy scout" and built a 35 Whelen on a '98 Argentine Mauser - though it didn't make weight with the longer action. Remember, all this was way before anything scout type was available commercially - so everything was a custom build. Gunsmiths and prototype machinists made a fortune off me. Years later when the industry began to embrace the Scout concept with commercial offerings, I made the trip through the Steyr, Savage and other type scouts in 308, 350 and 376, even tried a few pseudo scouts in 223. Oddly, I never managed to fund a big scout design on the level of the 460 G&A that Cooper named "Baby", but then I never had the funds for a safari in Africa to put one to use. All had their advantages and disadvantages of utility / game taking ability. There are some things I like about Cooper's design that are missing on the Ruger piece and the Ruger includes some items that seem needless to me. While the bare rifle makes weight with the wood composite stock, by the time you get a scope and rings on it you're likely to be overweight. A synthetic stock makes a difference. The protruding magazine of the Ruger unit makes it rather unhandy to carry at the midpoint of balance and pokes hell out of your back when slung conventionally. I have yet to find a picture of the Ruger that shows a sling mount position just forward of the magazine, and a proper 3 point sling is essential to the design's readiness. Moving on to the scout scope concept, as I indicated, I started with the same Leupold 2x pistol scope Cooper started with. It worked well enough but I found it lacking for magnification under certain situations. I tried a Burris 2x-8x pistol scope after a ton of research to find one with enough eye relief for the scout position. It worked well enough at low power (seems after about 2.5x the brain has trouble equating the image in both eyes), but parallax/exit puple was a major problem as the magnification was increased and you had to have almost the exact same cheek weld for every shot -- very difficult. A few years after that Leupold came out with their 2.5x scout scope and that was a nice scope, still lacked magnification for some situations. I tried the Burris version of the scout scope in 2.75x and again a good piece of glass, lacking magnification for longer range and/or small targets. I think if I were to build a "do most things well" (KLR type) rifle I'd likely wind up with the Steyr Scout design for all its attributes (even though there are some missing items) and I'd scope it with the very expensive new Leupold 1x-8x Mark 8 tactical scope. I find in the 1-1.5x range my brain can acquire moving targets almost as fast with both eyes open as is possible with the forward mounted scout design, plus 8x seems to be enough magnification for my aging eyes under most conditions. I will offer one more opinion in the arena - there is zero substitute for having the best quality glass, even if you have to skimp on the rifle to buy it. I'd rather have a $400 rifle with a $2500 scope than the other way round... Randy --- On Mon, 9/24/12, Shane wrote: From: Shane Subject: [DSN_KLR650] Re:KLR-type rifles nklr To: DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, September 24, 2012, 2:32 PM A nice KLR style unit is the KelTec SUB 2000. Folds in half to something like 16"x7"! 16" barrel for better pressure from 9mm than a hand gun. Uses Schlock or Beretta clips, up to 33rd.! Then to keep with the KLR theme, it costs less than $400.-! Comes in .40 or 9mm. Real KLR versatility. --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, D Critchley wrote: > > The simplest rifle that I have ever had, ( other than my muzzleloader), > is the H&R Buffalo Classic, in .45/70. > I compare that to the KLR with regularity. > We don't have gun threads very often, nice change. > DC > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Fred Hink]

What are the sizes of the axle and axle front and rear of the late model KLR650? Fred http://www.arrowheadmotorsports.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]