The 17 is a much better battle rifle than the 03. The sights on the 03 are really only good on a range while the 17's are good for battle in the trenches.
Mack
The 17 is a much better battle rifle than the 03. The sights on the 03 are really only good on a range while the 17's are good for battle in the trenches.
Mack
From a guy that works on them, I hate them. I find them to be a giant piece of #$!&. The assembly and disassembly, serious takedown is what I'm talking about, is a joke. The looks of the rifle are terrible, they feel terrible in my hand, there's absolutely nothing sexy about them. I'd take an 03 any day over the 17 just because I find it far simpler.
So how do you really feel Tim????
"I am the master of my unspoken words, and a slave to those that should have remained unspoken. ...
"Official 2010 Mini-G & 2011 Summer Postal Shoot Biggest Looser"
I agree, they are the ugly duckling
"I am the master of my unspoken words, and a slave to those that should have remained unspoken. ...
"Official 2010 Mini-G & 2011 Summer Postal Shoot Biggest Looser"
I picked up a sporter winnie on sunday. With a weaver k scope and a new barrel for 300.
1917's tend to be as or more accurate than 1903's, easier to sight due to the rear peep being close to the eye ,cheaper than 1903's and yes not very attractive. but beauty is as beauty does. I picked one up the last time cmp had them (early 2009 -a gift to myself on return from Afghanistan) and this one has only a fair bore and doesn't shoot well. my brother has one with an excellent bore and he can get groups out of it out to 200 yards that rival his winchester model 70 national match. You do have to look for cracks in the reciever ring if they are a ww2 rebarrel.