Armory Sponsor
Posted: 4/26/2008 6:10:16 AM EDT
| Anyone have experience with the State Arms 50s and the shell holder bolt design? Just wondering the advantages of the design and how quick you can reload the rifle. |
|
Not as quick as a bolt gun but then with practice you can get close. 50 BMG is typically not for rapid fire anyway but if you are trying to shoot a record string for group at a match shooting quicker is an advantage because if you shoot fast enough, hopefully the wind won't change between your shots. I'm not the quickest but I can fire all 5 record shots at 1000 yds with my State Arms in about 1 minute. That said, the current FCSA World Champion shoots a custom shellholder rifle, with a BAT Machine action, for at least one class of competition, Lee R. Also, the State Arms shellholder is likely somewhat quicker than a LAR Grizzly since you have to take the whole butt off the rifle to load it. But then i've never shot one so I can't make a solid comparison. Advantage of the LAR is short overall length related to the barrel. Tradeoffs, Tradeoffs. -David Edgewood, NM |
| hello. i have a lar grizzly, and have shot my friends state arms big bertha. neither of them are faster than the other in reloading. to me, they are pretty much the same. the grizzly does have the advantage of being alot more compact, but other than that, there really isnt anything advantagous to a shell holder design. kirk |
|
Kirk: Regarding your LAR Grizzly: You don't find that it slows you down to completely get out from behind your weapon to load it? If the entire butt portion of the rifle must be removed to reload, I can't see how you could stay in shooting position and reload at the same time. With the State Arms, the bolt is somewhat conventionally located, albeit unconventionally operated so you can stay behind the rifle, buttstock to your shoulder, as you reload. See what I mean? I do agree that the LAR Grizzly's bullpup design really makes it a lot handier than a conventional gun with the same length barrel. Those have a 36" barrel, don't they? -David Edgewood, NM |
|
I've got a SA Rebel. As I see it, there are two main advantages of a shellholder design. The first is that the overall length of the gun can be a little shorter because you don't need a large port to facilitate loading and unloading. The second advantage is increased strength/rigidity. Not having a 6" long slot in the receiver is certainly going to add some strength. One of the claimed benefits to all these short-action magnum rounds that are getting to be so popular is that shortening up the action means a shorter loading port, which increases rigidity and reduces twist, resulting in better accuracy potential. Now, I don't know if buy all that, but the fact remains that a shellholder action is going to be more rigid than a conventional bolt action. The only disadvantage that I see is that they are a little slower to load. And like David said, if you are shooting for groups at 1000yds, you'll want to load and shoot as quickly as possible to avoid changing conditions. If you are just plinking, I don't see any reason to be concerned with the amount of time it will take you to load the rifle. |
| hello. david, the grizzly loads very quickly. it is just a small rubber pad on a flat piece of stell connected to the bolt, not some big massive portion of the rifle. yes, you do have to pull away from the gun to load it, but i can easily fire it, unload it, load it again and re-shoot it all in around 10 to 15 seconds, maybe even a little faster, depending if im shooting it on the bench or on the tripod. is it as fast as a conventional bolt action? nope. but if you need more than one 50cal shot in 10 seconds, you either need a barret, a belt fed, or a damn bigger gun! kirk |
Armory Sponsor