Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Benelli Forums
clubster

What is the deal with the R1....

Recommended Posts

I have been wanting an R1 since they were first released but have held off getting one every deer season since. I have heard mixed reviews on these based on accuracy and reliability so I just cant decide what to do? I want a high end semi-auto deer rifle that is light and has a synthetic stock. I currently am using Sauer 202 Supreme's to hunt with so you can see what I am used to in quality. Any suggestions on what to do, brand, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An accurate, lightweight, reliable semi-auto hunting rifle is an elusive beast.

 

If you're willing to sacrifice some weight for accuracy, consider and AR from DPMS in .308, .260, 6.8 SPC, .300, or .243.

 

If you want to maximize your chances at getting a decent shooter in a more traditional design, then your best bet is with Browning and the Shortrac/Longtrac line.

 

The R1 is coming along, but it's not there yet.

 

I hope Benelli will stay on it and continue to improve the R1 line with better triggers, better accuracy, and more reliability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An accurate, lightweight, reliable semi-auto hunting rifle is an elusive beast.

 

If you're willing to sacrifice some weight for accuracy, consider and AR from DPMS in .308, .260, 6.8 SPC, .300, or .243.

 

If you want to maximize your chances at getting a decent shooter in a more traditional design, then your best bet is with Browning and the Shortrac/Longtrac line.

 

The R1 is coming along, but it's not there yet.

 

I hope Benelli will stay on it and continue to improve the R1 line with better triggers, better accuracy, and more reliability.

 

I looked into the Browning but will have to pass since my father has one and it is an OX. I may look into the new Sauer semi-auto that is out and see if I can get it imported to the US..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clubster,

I would agree with Tucker. Go with the Browning Shortrac. My brother has the gun and it shoots really well and has not given him any problems. He has had it for two hunting seasons. Not sure what you mean by it being an OX. I assumed you meant weight. An R1 comes in at 7 lbs 2 ounces, the Shortrac at 7 lbs 4 ounces. Hardly and issue. The Sauer 303 comes in at 7 lbs 3 or 6 ounces depending upon model. Maybe your Dad's unit is the older BAR design. The BAR was reworked 3-4 years ago and I know they used lighter metal in the new design. You can go to Browning's website and see it. The Shortrac is a nice gun, and not troublesome to carry.

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clubster,

I would agree with Tucker. Go with the Browning Shortrac. My brother has the gun and it shoots really well and has not given him any problems. He has had it for two hunting seasons. Not sure what you mean by it being an OX. I assumed you meant weight. An R1 comes in at 7 lbs 2 ounces, the Shortrac at 7 lbs 4 ounces. Hardly and issue. The Sauer 303 comes in at 7 lbs 3 or 6 ounces depending upon model. Maybe your Dad's unit is the older BAR design. The BAR was reworked 3-4 years ago and I know they used lighter metal in the new design. You can go to Browning's website and see it. The Shortrac is a nice gun, and not troublesome to carry.

Jim

 

By OX i meant real heavy as compared to my Sauer 202 Supreme. I will look at the Brownings again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tucker,

It took me a moment to figure out the 1/20/09 close. Couldn't agree more.... I don't know how anyone, anywhere, could say anything other than he was a big mistake. Ironically, I know some followers that to this day still stand by him. You have to wonder what it would take to actually get them to see him for what he is.

 

Couldn't agree more

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm one of them, I can't say I agree with a lot of things, but he did a damn better job then Al Gore or John Kerrey ever would. Don't you value your gun rights?

 

What kind of a report card on a President is it to say that, theoretically he was better than the opposition would have been?

 

Please point out to me the Bush administration's list of accomplishments and we'll go from there.

 

Gun rights?

I had all the guns I wanted for the entire time the democrats controlled the executive branch. Nobody came to my house and confiscated a single one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says George W. Bush has done "nothing" for conservatives?

 

That wasn't quite what I asked.

This nation is not comprised of just conservatives and liberals.

A fact which seems to have eluded the politicians.

 

I was wondering what Bush had done for ALL of us.

 

This was a good one from your list.

"Successfully executed two wars in the aftermath of 9/11/01: Afghanistan and Iraq."

 

Wow!

They may want to update that information?

 

Mission-accomplished.jpg

 

Oh yeah, he cut taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you want from a president Tuck? I never said he was perfect, but decent enough. He has done and exceptional job as president. Way better job then a John Kerry or Hilary Clinton will ever do. You seem to have a lot of links supporting John Kerry I noticed, what did he get those purple hearts for? A scratch or two? John Kerry is one of the biggest traitors on this planet. He does not have the right to live and should get a bullet in the head. Yet you send me a link of John Kerry trying to find anything he can to bring down Bush. Here is one on Kerry. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1114125/posts

 

Now we are not pitting Kerry against Bush now are we, we are talking about how bad of a president Bush is. All my point is, most of your links that showed how bad Bush was, were written by traitors of this country. I have a hard time believing anything written by traitors.

 

No, you did not a get a knock on your door, and no one came to take your guns, but presidents are somewhat limited. Clinton did though get the assult weapons ban through, meaning you couldn't buy most semi-autos. Luckily it expired and when the issue came up again, Bush did not sign it. So that means there is nothing wrong with you owning that sweet little AR you have. You most likely wouldn't have that right had you voted for the opposing party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!

 

The links I sent you were to documented facts and points of history concerning Bush, Cheney, Arbusto, James Bath, Salem bin Laden, Haliburton, and so on.

 

Anyone can go to Google or wikipedia and come up with the same information simply by submitting those names in the search boxes.

 

I didn't realize there was anything about Kerry even in them :confused:

 

Are you sure you're not running a browser hijacker written by right-wing extremists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, he is not a perfect president. No one ever will be. But, he is not a terrorist, he is not evil, and he isn't a bad president.

 

I didn't realize there was anything about Kerry even in them

Heres one.

Click here for a side-by-side comparison of publicly available military records of both GW Bush and John Kerry.

And another.

(By the way, here are the ribbons John Kerry earned during his naval career.)

These are from the AWOL post. Its just John Kerry followers trying to put down Bush.

In 2004, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry released a political ad which claimed that during his tenure as Vice President, Cheney received nearly two million dollars from Halliburton. John Edwards, also made a number of attacks on Cheney's record as CEO of Halliburton. During the vice-presidential debate, Cheney claimed that "Factcheck.com" refuted those claims. He meant Factcheck.org, which monitors the political accuracy of statements in speeches and TV ads. Users going to Factcheck.com were re-directed to GeorgeSoros.com[citation needed], which contained material attacking Cheney's record[citation needed], although Soros maintains that he did not target Factcheck.com at his website.
And one from the PM.

 

Now, one reason

He is in the pockets of big oil and foreign (particularly Mexican) interests
Is because this world runs on oil. The metal from your gun was mined with oil. It was transported with oil. The shotgun shell hulls were made from oil. The decoys you use are made of oil. Your boat runs off of gas rendered from oil. Your car runs off of oil. Do you see where I am going with this. We need it, he is getting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a difference between a civil debate and an argument.

You've handled yourself well and have stated your points articulately.

It's been a pleasure ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...