275 Rigby

#21
Tusker, I would love to come across with a classic 275 needing TLC. You won't be disapointed at all with the 275, my BSA was built some time ago when they were a significant force in industry, but I would love to have a Rigby, I did a google search and there are some good posts about Rigby rifles and the 275 calibre. deerwarden
 
Last edited:
#22
I have a BSA sporter in 7x57 I bought 20 odd years ago, it came with an old box of DWM bullets, marked round nose 139grs, load 43.6 grs index no 7036, that I won't shoot. I reload so no need to, this was reportedly a rifle that someone in the forces had, it is marked with the BSA 3 rifle logo. I have used it in Africa, and killed a big kudo with it but the tragetary is somewhat loopy at long ranges. Bell used one on most of the tiger he killed, but at short range, I have all his books, and wanted a 275, so I bought one, no mod will ever be put on it by me, it has just a smallish Leopold, and iron sights. deerwarden
Sorry to appear pedantic but it was Corbett shot tigers with one. He also used a 450/400 double a lot.
Bell shot elephants with one but he also used a 303 and a 256 Gibbs (6.5 x 54 Mannlicher), He also shot Lions and plains game with the 256.
 
#23
Course it was, I have books by both of them and a great read they are, also Kennith Anderson wrote some great tales as well, he used a Winchester 1895 in 405, another great hunter. You not being pedantic at all, I'm waiting for surgery and the tramadol kicks in every 2 hours and then I'm up there with the fairies. deerwarden
 

deeangeo

Well-Known Member
#24
I have just got a 7x57 Rigby. The wood work is a bit tatty so will be on its way to my mate to refurbish. It was built in the late 60,s and I do have all the provenance. It comes up to the eye a treat and will be picking up some ammo soon. I will put a small scope on it but never a mod:eek:. I just need to locate a side mount for it.
Tusker
A side mount? If it’s a MSch .. don’t do it .. have proper bases & rings fitted.
Sooo much nicer and great if you get the claw mount QD bases/rings.
Costs more though, but IMO, well worth it.
 
Last edited:
#25
I have just got a 7x57 Rigby. The wood work is a bit tatty so will be on its way to my mate to refurbish. It was built in the late 60,s and I do have all the provenance. It comes up to the eye a treat and will be picking up some ammo soon. I will put a small scope on it but never a mod:eek:. I just need to locate a side mount for it.
Tusker
Send me a photo - I know where there are a few side mounts sitting in a drawer.
 
#27
Course it was, I have books by both of them and a great read they are, also Kennith Anderson wrote some great tales as well, he used a Winchester 1895 in 405, another great hunter. You not being pedantic at all, I'm waiting for surgery and the tramadol kicks in every 2 hours and then I'm up there with the fairies. deerwarden
I sincerely hope all goes well with the surgery, I am still recovering (15wks) from my last bout of it. Oh and joy of joys I have an internal investigation next week, that's always good fun. :lol:
 
#28
I've used the 7x57 (or .275 if you prefer) for decades. Still have two left out of five that have come and gone. The Fraser stutzen has a 1903 MS action rebarreled to 7x57. The modern beast is a Schultz & Larsen Victory in 7x57 (plus a 25-06 barrel - I like the quarter bores too!). Accuracy is very good (especially with hand loads) and it's gentle on the shoulder. All the previous arguments regarding cost are doubtless valid, but at the end of the day it's still all down to personal choice. You can still get a BSA in this calibre for very little money, or you can buy a Rigby or a Purdey for very serious money!

As the years roll by, I find that I prefer a simple approach - the ballistics of the 7x57 are pretty well imprinted on the remaining brain cell, and with a fixed mag scope I can be be confident about hitting what I shoot at without rangefinders, variable magnification or other distractions.

Yes, I'm biased....I just like my 7mm :old::stir:
 
#33
A side mount? If it’s a MSch .. don’t do it .. have proper bases & rings fitted.
From recollection DEEANGEO you can't fit a top of rear receiver ring traditional claw mount to some if not most of the MS rifles. The bolt handle position doesn't allow for it. The 1903 included I think. You have to use a flying rear sidemount. The way the bolt is inserted into the receiver vis a vis the bolt handle being forward of the rear receiver ring won't allow it. I may be wrong but that's how I recall it.
 

deeangeo

Well-Known Member
#34
From recollection DEEANGEO you can't fit a top of rear receiver ring traditional claw mount to some if not most of the MS rifles. The bolt handle position doesn't allow for it. The 1903 included I think. You have to use a flying rear sidemount. The way the bolt is inserted into the receiver vis a vis the bolt handle being forward of the rear receiver ring won't allow it. I may be wrong but that's how I recall it.
That’s right. The rear base is offset & you can see it in the pic of my M1903 Takedown in my gallery.
It’s the split rear bridge makes a ‘straight line’ rear mount impossible, but the rear offset leg works just fine, so you can have front claw & rear QD mount.
I will shortly be doing the same to my M1903 stutzen, previously fitted with a crappy side mount.
Absolutely the pits.
I’ve had the drilled holes plugged and finished, repaired the stock, a section of which was cut away to allow the sidemount to be fitted and soon, it will be a beautiful stutzen again.
 
#38
That’s right. The rear base is offset & you can see it in the pic of my M1903 Takedown in my gallery.
It’s the split rear bridge makes a ‘straight line’ rear mount impossible, but the rear offset leg works just fine, so you can have front claw & rear QD mount.
I will shortly be doing the same to my M1903 stutzen, previously fitted with a crappy side mount.
Absolutely the pits.
I’ve had the drilled holes plugged and finished, repaired the stock, a section of which was cut away to allow the sidemount to be fitted and soon, it will be a beautiful stutzen again.
I had a side rail mount on my 6.5 x 54 1903. I found it worked very well and kept zero ok. Yes maybe a little unsightly but "Handsome is as handsome does". :D
 

deeangeo

Well-Known Member
#39
I had a side rail mount on my 6.5 x 54 1903. I found it worked very well and kept zero ok. Yes maybe a little unsightly but "Handsome is as handsome does". :D
Yup, I understand they do work & it’s a simple quite inexpensive solution to mounting a scope on a MSch.
I personally would far rather have a mount system which doesn’t interfere with the original engraved stuff on the action, top & side.
However, on my stutzen the side engraving has already been spoiled. Hey ho, it shoots though!
 

Top