Blaser....

Right I didn't want this t turn into an example of why I made this post.
I was curious as to why it seems t get brought up so much.
And now I know why....nobody is wrong!!
 
I'm wrong all the time (just not about blasers :D) (I might also be wrong about timbrayford being a princess?)

I like the fly picture , he gets it!

short of landrover owners blaser owners are the easiest wind up there is............

peace and love everyone x
 
Buy it , try it and enjoy it



from an engineering and design point of view there a good idea and something different

id give one a try with a .308 and .223 barrel with a z6i on each mmmm nice
 
short of landrover owners blaser owners are the easiest wind up there is............

Or more equitably, people with an opinion on Blasers are the easiest wind up there is...........

As Thomas More said, "It is only natural, of course, that each man should think his own opinions best"
 
Serious question, not manipulating leavings, but why have Blaser rifles seperated this forum into two camps?

I'm new to this forum so please excuse my naivety but havent there always been rifles some didn't like?
I've heard them called 'the dark side' but why? Good rifle by all accounts.

Genuinely interested. Is it an in joke?

Tis indeed curious that the usual forum convention when discussing kit...most people just talk about their own stuff and say how good it is goes by the board.

Blasers and Lawrence Titanium Moderators seem to bring out the negative in many people…the need to rubbish someone else's choice rather than just give positive reasons why they like their own.

Alan
 
Tis indeed curious that the usual forum convention when discussing kit...most people just talk about their own stuff and say how good it is goes by the board.

Blasers and Lawrence Titanium Moderators seem to bring out the negative in many people…the need to rubbish someone else's choice rather than just give positive reasons why they like their own.

Alan

both your examples are over priced for no real advantage over more traditional offerings , That might be the point of contention?
 
both your examples are over priced for no real advantage over more traditional offerings , That might be the point of contention?

Q.E.D.?

What you say may well be true, but the thread is about why that should upset some people so much that they feel a need to state a dislike on a public forum?

There are other things which can be described in much the same way which do not tend to generate such irritation.

Alan
 
Q.E.D.?

What you say may well be true, but the thread is about why that should upset some people so much that they feel a need to state a dislike on a public forum?

There are other things which can be described in much the same way which do not tend to generate such irritation.

Alan

I don't 'dislike' them, I just don't 'like' them. There is a difference.
 
IMHO contributors to threads about Blasers don't have HO's.

Dom, whats HO's? A quick google gave me a range from prostitute through santa to higgs bossun. Never shot a blaser or a number of other rifles but as I say its the nut behind the bolt (turn or straight pull). Hope your well chap.
 
I don't 'dislike' them, I just don't 'like' them. There is a difference.

And yet you still feel the need to post that you "don't 'like' them"…have you expressed a similar view about any other inanimate objects that you feel neutral about?

Dom, whats HO's? A quick google gave me a range from prostitute through santa to higgs bossun. Never shot a blaser or a number of other rifles but as I say its the nut behind the bolt (turn or straight pull). Hope your well chap.

HO=Humble Opinion

See what he did there? :)

Alan
 
Last edited:
And yet you still feel the need to post that you "don't 'like' them"…have you expressed a similar view about any other inanimate objects?

No, I don't feel the need to post 'I don't 'like' them'

I am involved within this thread, and am stating, after your post, and I quote,

'What you say may well be true, but the thread is about why that should upset some people so much that they feel a need to state a dislike on a public forum?'

So, I was stating that I wasn't posting my 'dislike' of them, but, just because I don't like them, it doesn't mean I dislike them.
I am pretty neutral.
A rifle, is a rifle.
Just because I wouldn't go out and buy one, as I 'like' my Sako's, and would buy one of those first given the option, does that mean I 'dislike' blasers ?
No, on a scale of 1-10, 1 being 'like' and 10 being 'dislike' I'd put the Blaser at a '5', as in neither like OR dislike.

So, please don't try to twist my words to suit your argument.

Just remember, I DID state, that I 'DONT DISLIKE' them too
 
regarding the blaser , it's a solution to a problem that isn't there!

technology for technology's sake isn't always an advantage......

It isn't technology for technologies sake. It is called advancement. The advantages are obvious.
Like I said some people are scared of technology and change...Lol!!
 
I have no opinion either way on the matter, but quite enjoy reading these threads when bored and waiting for students to show up.

The following is all speculation, and meant in the spirit of thoughtful enquiry, not criticism (which I think was the OPs origonal intent). So I'll start with an observation. People generally become more sensitive when their choices (about anything - kit, music, books, food, cars etc) become associated with their general sense of 'self'. So, for instance, I couldn't give two hoots what you said about my computer becuase it was issued to me by the department, and it's just a tool. But I do feel the need to bite back if you make comments about my fishing rods or rifles.

I suspect that, in the case of Blasers, for most people buying one is a major investment and an inescapable statement - so it is necessarily invested with a lot of emotion, and is very closely linked to the person's sense of self. I speculate that this has two effects:

(i) it may mean that owners seek validation that they've made the right choice by attemtping to convince others to get one as well, leading them to be more vocal in praising their qualities. This might be amplified if they're a bit uncomfortable about having spent so much, so need to convince themselves it was the right choice (I know I do this when I make expensive purchases of any kind).

(ii) it may lead them to be more sensitive about any percieved criticism.

Both of the above will encourage the more provocative non-owners to tease, and since there is often quite a strong reaction, they're rewarded for this teasing.

From the other perspective, conspicuous Non-owning is itself a statement: it seems to have become a sort of touchstone among some for traditonalism and simplicity. Again, their choices (older bolt gun, second hand guns lovingly restored etc) are closely associated with their sense of self, and much the same as the above applies.

I think it's inevitable, then, that there will be a clash. Which is fine, because it does produce some entertaining rows.
 
HO=Humble Opinion

Exactly that.

This is one of the few subjects (along, perhaps, with the whole DSC thing) where opinions are not so much humbly offered as presented as facts.....and then defended vigorously as though someone was actually questioning your parentage.

The same protagonists appear in almost every one of these threads, often repeating the same opinions.

It's a rifle, not flesh and blood, so how can people get so worked up about it? You might as well argue over a pint of milk and whether bottle, carton or straight from the cow is best. At the end of the day it delivers a bullet to the target so that it can perform the designed task.

The psychiatrists could have a field day on this site sometimes.
 
(i) it may mean that owners seek validation that they've made the right choice by attemtping to convince others to get one as well, leading them to be more vocal in praising their qualities. This might be amplified if they're a bit uncomfortable about having spent so much, so need to convince themselves it was the right choice (I know I do this when I make expensive purchases of any kind).

You can avoid this by doing what I do and choosing rifles than hardly anyone else likes. Then it's a given that no-one much agrees with your choice so there's not much point in arguing about it.
 
It isn't technology for technologies sake. It is called advancement. The advantages are obvious.
Like I said some people are scared of technology and change...Lol!!

I'd be all for technology , all for modern materials but used correctly. As an engineer I see good and bad with a blaser. A very good point would be that the chamber is hammerforged while making the barrel.(if this rumour is true) I recon this is a reason why many actually shoot quite well. But then quite a few do not shoot. I would be more comfortable about say a Lothar Walther barrel in such an expensive rifle however I recon Blaser would not want to spend more than maybe 40quid on a barrel.
Plastic stocks are also of very cheap mass production and often lead to problems off bipods or if rested far forward. We sometimes get Blaser owners asking to reinforce the stock. Aluminium action with a stiffness of only 1/3 of steel? The noise when closing, overcomplicated safety... and all this at a price where one could get a proper custom rifle with a really good stock and barrel.
At say £500 the Blaser R93 could be considered...not more.
The whole straight pull has been around for roughly 100years ...and has always been troublesome, nothing new.

edi
 
Back
Top