Anschutz 1710 (Picture Links Provided)

[jumbuck]

I have had mine for 5 years now and love it still. Mine has the Meister stock upgrade, a very nice bit of figured wood but it still gets used as a working gun Has a SAK and a Burris Fullfield II 4.5-14x42AO which makes for a nice combination!!!!I liked using the 1710 so i bought the 1517 too!!!!

[pintosal]

Sounds like the ideal combination. The Meister stocks are lovely.

Did you get the barrel screw cut for the moderator?

[pintosal]

Lapua Center-X test

Today was a good day for shooting. Although the conditions were dull and drizzly, the wind was light.

At the shooting club I set up for 100 yards with a table, and a front bag (UK benchrest shooting does not usually allow a rear support).

The results were very pleasing, with the Center-X grouping well.

My best card on this link got 10 shots in or touching the 1" 10-ring. That's the first time I have ever done this.

I had it witnessed, and will be keeping this card.

Next I will strive for 10 in the 10-X centre ring.

[jumbuck]

Sounds like the ideal combination. The Meister stocks are lovely.

Did you get the barrel screw cut for the moderator?

The barrel was already cut as i bought it S/H and put the SAK Black on plus the Burris. Cost me abit of money getting it all together but well worth it

[pintosal]

Just being nosey, but what did the 1710 cost you? Mine was £725

[kips58]

i have the anschutz 1710 good rifle

[bigoak]

MI have a 1710 Also. Same stock as yours with the roll over cheek peice. Very accurate, I use mine for Field Rifle and Rimfire Silhouette. It has never ventured into the paoock. I have a Brno for that.

[tacfoley]

My 1937 Mauser ES350B shoots like that.

It cost me £80.00 and has a x2.5 scope with a cross-hair larger than the appearance of the 8" Shoot-n-See target at 100 yards.

tac

[silva]

My 1937 Mauser ES350B shoots like that.

It cost me £80.00 and has a x2.5 scope with a cross-hair larger than the appearance of the 8" Shoot-n-See target at 100 yards.

tac

I'm not surprised, the Anschutz is its direct descendent, didn't the Anschutz design originate in the Mauser factory in Oberndorf and was originally intended to be the new post war Mauser action. After the fall of the reich the model 54 action design drawings were saved before the French destroyed the factory and later used by Anschutz.

[tacfoley]

I'm not surprised, the Anschutz is its direct descendent, didn't the Anschutz design originate in the Mauser factory in Oberndorf and was originally intended to be the new post war Mauser action. After the fall of the reich the model 54 action design drawings were saved before the French destroyed the factory and later used by Anschutz.

I'm not arguing with you, but my pre-war .22 Mauser bolt looks exactly like a miniature Mauser bolt, right down to the side-mounted long-spring extractor, and left-side latch to remove the bolt, just like my two pre-WW1 7x57 Mausers. In contrast, my Anschutz bolt looks very like my 1936 .22 Walther DSM.

I was also unaware that the French destroyed the Mauser factory. I was under the impression that the French had dismantled it and later, under the Allied Forces Control order, had rebuilt it.

tac

[Muskett]

My three .22's; the centre one my 1710. It cost me £775 in the 80's, plus mounts, plus scope, plus sling, plus 10 round mag, which make it add too quite a sum. But it is worth every penny and accounted for hundreds of rabbits. Accuracy is as accurate as the .22LR allows; at 25m I have to aim off to get the bullet hole to enlarge. It seems to be very un ammo fuzzy though I use Eley which complement this rifle. I don't have a moderator because this rifle seems to shoot "quiet" anyway and the target end thunk seems bigger. Just love mine:

http://i820.photobucket.com/albums/z...9/IMG_0430.jpg

One day it will need a stock hand oiled refinish as the stock coating isn't traditional enough for me. The flag safety I can live with as the bolt is quiet enough to carry "made safe" most of the time. The fine Leupold cross plex and up to 16 power mag complement it it too. The only bug bear I have is that the stock is traditional open sight orientated and when used with a scope you have to shoot german head up style. Its not too bad but a varmint style scope stock would make it even better. Bar a Cooper, nothing touches it for pure class and pin sharp accuracy. Pretty too.

[silva]

I'm not arguing with you, but my pre-war .22 Mauser bolt looks exactly like a miniature Mauser bolt, right down to the side-mounted long-spring extractor, and left-side latch to remove the bolt, just like my two pre-WW1 7x57 Mausers. In contrast, my Anschutz bolt looks very like my 1936 .22 Walther DSM.

I was also unaware that the French destroyed the Mauser factory. I was under the impression that the French had dismantled it and later, under the Allied Forces Control order, had rebuilt it.

tac

Hi Tac,
Your Anschutz is perhaps the 64 action. Its the 54 action the 1710 has, (hope I'm right) !

[tacfoley]

I was shooting a Model 54 last night at our club, and the bolt, which I inserted and removed and examined closely for defects, looks nothing at all like ANY Mauser bolt.

According to the J G Anschuetz site - the Model 1407 is based on the Model 54 action, but with a heavy barrel and thumbhole stock, non-adjustable pistol grip and the usual for the time aluminium butt hook unit.

Add to that the Unertl-type scope bases and you have my own Model 1407 rifle with the single-extractor claw bolt of the early Model 54 type action.

Best

tac

[silva]

Hi Tac,
I didn't mean the action was identical to the B series mausers, but that it was designed by Mauser. Check out page 161 of Mauser Smallbores by Jon Speed. It says that the Anschutz 54 action was based on the Mauser model 37 action, which was the most advanced .22 of its day and was intended to be the Mauser factories new post war action and was sold post war to the Anschutz factory by Walter Gehmann, who had worked closely on the design with the Mauser designer Herr Hausser.
Cheers

[tacfoley]

I see.

I, to, have Jon Speed's book, and you are correct. However, your posit was worded as though they were identical.

We move on.

tac