On 6/17/16 7:43 AM, justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:46:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:21:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/16/16 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:06:33 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/16/16 11:52 AM, Tim wrote:


2) if you're meaning the CZ is a more accurate rifle than the 10/22
then you should reconsider.


Why? The stock CZs under discussion are more accurate than the 10/22s.

The issue is whether the shooter is more accurate than the gun.


That's Tim's issue. Some firearms are inherently more accurate than
others. You should have watched the little video I referenced.using
ope
About a minute into the ad, I didn't care anymore.
opeThe caption says it shoots inside a 1/2 MOA but most shooters can't
accomplish 10 times that without a rest and a scope.


The guy was using a rest and a scope. I doubt a 10/22 could match that at
100 yards no matter what.

So what?
Most people do not sit at a bench with a scoped rifle trying to shoot
tight groups all day, particularly with a 22 rf.




Most folks would be happy if they hit what they are shooting at.
There might be some advantage to hitting the target at different
points.



I'm happy that I can shoot offhand and hit a target the size of your
belly button at 20-25 yards.

Keyser Söze
- show quoted text -
"I'm happy that I can shoot offhand and hit a target the size of your
belly button at 20-25 yards."


If Stinky's button is as big as his belly, or his mouth for that matter, I bet I could hit it at 25 yards and I don't shoot.

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/16/16 8:09 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/16/16 7:53 AM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:41:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/15/16 8:16 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/15/16 8:02 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/14/16 8:06 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 16:34:46 -0400, Keyser Söze

wrote:

You left your keys in the refrigerator. Again.
What the **** are you doing in John's fridge?
Looking for pie?


Naw...the fridge is on a web cam.


That's stupid. Did you just giggle or "LOL" when you typed
that dumb
remark?

Stupid? I'm not the one who paid $1100 for a $200 rifle.

I'll pay you $400 each for any you can get. Find 100 and I'll
happily
write that check for $40,000. Best investment you can make since
you
have a source for them at half the price.


The 10/22 is a $200 or $200 and change rifle. There's nothing rare
about it, even the "commemorative" model you bought, which is
just a
dressed up 10/22.




Great deal for you then. Put up or shut up. Go get them.



I already have a .22lr rifle, a CZ, that easily outshoots a 10/22.

Can you get the model he bought for $200 or not? You made the
comment, now put up or shut up.

Notice how you change the subject. Got caught again, eh?



I have no interest in an "old" new 10/22 or a "new" new 10/22 rifle. I
already have a .22 rifle that shoots better.

You said I overpaid for a $200 rifle and I offered to double your money
on any and all you could buy for $200 and sell to me for $400. Then you
STFU and ran. No surprise there.


There are plenty of $200 10/22's around.


Not like the one I bought. You keep ignoring that fact yet you knew it
when you typed your narcissistic post.

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/16/16 10:38 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:05:05 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I like cycling the bolt.

You do seem to have a fascination with 19th century technology lately.
I suppose next year it will be flintlocks. At least you will be able
to say it was the gun the framers had in mind. ;-)


I do like mechanical processes that involve the operators. That's
probably why I like lever and bolt action rifles and revolvers and on
cars and trucks, standard transmissions.


There's nothing wrong with that. I'm impressed with the craftsmanship
of older lever action rifles. They aren't any easy gun to make without
CNC machines and investment casting.

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/17/16 7:43 AM, justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:46:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:21:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/16/16 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:06:33 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/16/16 11:52 AM, Tim wrote:


2) if you're meaning the CZ is a more accurate rifle than the
10/22
then you should reconsider.


Why? The stock CZs under discussion are more accurate than the
10/22s.

The issue is whether the shooter is more accurate than the gun.


That's Tim's issue. Some firearms are inherently more accurate than
others. You should have watched the little video I referenced.using
ope
About a minute into the ad, I didn't care anymore.
opeThe caption says it shoots inside a 1/2 MOA but most shooters
can't
accomplish 10 times that without a rest and a scope.


The guy was using a rest and a scope. I doubt a 10/22 could match
that at
100 yards no matter what.

So what?
Most people do not sit at a bench with a scoped rifle trying to shoot
tight groups all day, particularly with a 22 rf.




Most folks would be happy if they hit what they are shooting at.
There might be some advantage to hitting the target at different
points.



I'm happy that I can shoot offhand and hit a target the size of your
belly button at 20-25 yards.

You are exaggerating, I'm sure.

True North wrote:
Keyser Söze
- show quoted text -
"I'm happy that I can shoot offhand and hit a target the size of your
belly button at 20-25 yards."


If Stinky's button is as big as his belly, or his mouth for that matter, I bet I could hit it at 25 yards and I don't shoot.

Wow, that's just dumb. Did Mrs. White review that post?

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 21:08:47 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/16/16 10:38 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:05:05 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I like cycling the bolt.

You do seem to have a fascination with 19th century technology lately.
I suppose next year it will be flintlocks. At least you will be able
to say it was the gun the framers had in mind. ;-)


I do like mechanical processes that involve the operators. That's
probably why I like lever and bolt action rifles and revolvers and on
cars and trucks, standard transmissions.


There's nothing wrong with that. I'm impressed with the craftsmanship
of older lever action rifles. They aren't any easy gun to make without
CNC machines and investment casting.

Actually CnC machines are dribbling their way out into the hinterlands
as long as old doesn't bother you.
I am trying to work a deal on Henk's "old" one.

Alex Wrote in message:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/16/16 8:09 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/16/16 7:53 AM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:41:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/15/16 8:16 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/15/16 8:02 PM, Alex wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/14/16 8:06 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 16:34:46 -0400, Keyser Söze

wrote:

You left your keys in the refrigerator. Again.
What the **** are you doing in John's fridge?
Looking for pie?


Naw...the fridge is on a web cam.


That's stupid. Did you just giggle or "LOL" when you typed
that dumb
remark?

Stupid? I'm not the one who paid $1100 for a $200 rifle.

I'll pay you $400 each for any you can get. Find 100 and I'll
happily
write that check for $40,000. Best investment you can make since
you
have a source for them at half the price.


The 10/22 is a $200 or $200 and change rifle. There's nothing rare
about it, even the "commemorative" model you bought, which is
just a
dressed up 10/22.




Great deal for you then. Put up or shut up. Go get them.



I already have a .22lr rifle, a CZ, that easily outshoots a 10/22.

Can you get the model he bought for $200 or not? You made the
comment, now put up or shut up.

Notice how you change the subject. Got caught again, eh?



I have no interest in an "old" new 10/22 or a "new" new 10/22 rifle. I
already have a .22 rifle that shoots better.

You said I overpaid for a $200 rifle and I offered to double your money
on any and all you could buy for $200 and sell to me for $400. Then you
STFU and ran. No surprise there.


There are plenty of $200 10/22's around.


Not like the one I bought. You keep ignoring that fact yet you knew it
when you typed your narcissistic post.


You might be giving him too much crédit. His knowledge is based
on his googleability and his interpative skills, or lack
thereof.


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Alex Wrote in message:
True North wrote:
Keyser Söze
- show quoted text -
"I'm happy that I can shoot offhand and hit a target the size of your
belly button at 20-25 yards."


If Stinky's button is as big as his belly, or his mouth for that matter, I bet I could hit it at 25 yards and I don't shoot.

Wow, that's just dumb. Did Mrs. White review that post?


Harry needs a Donnie as a sidekick. It makes him look smart (er).
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Alex Wrote in message:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/17/16 7:43 AM, justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:46:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:21:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/16/16 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 12:06:33 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/16/16 11:52 AM, Tim wrote:


2) if you're meaning the CZ is a more accurate rifle than the
10/22
then you should reconsider.


Why? The stock CZs under discussion are more accurate than the
10/22s.

The issue is whether the shooter is more accurate than the gun.


That's Tim's issue. Some firearms are inherently more accurate than
others. You should have watched the little video I referenced.using
ope
About a minute into the ad, I didn't care anymore.
opeThe caption says it shoots inside a 1/2 MOA but most shooters
can't
accomplish 10 times that without a rest and a scope.


The guy was using a rest and a scope. I doubt a 10/22 could match
that at
100 yards no matter what.

So what?
Most people do not sit at a bench with a scoped rifle trying to shoot
tight groups all day, particularly with a 22 rf.




Most folks would be happy if they hit what they are shooting at.
There might be some advantage to hitting the target at different
points.



I'm happy that I can shoot offhand and hit a target the size of your
belly button at 20-25 yards.

You are exaggerating, I'm sure.


Do ya think?
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/