Author Topic: Help with H&R Consumer Survey... (Read 2381 times)

Fred M · « **Reply #30 on:** September 01, 2004, 08:48:03 AM »

handirifle.
The conversion to extractor still does not address stuck cases. The spring still pushes out the case when you open the the action. The conversion only removes the ejector trigger. A totally different system would be required for mechanical extraction. This would mean the whole action would need to be redesigned, and that is very unlikely.

With only limited room under the scope the ejector is just fine when it is working. Fred M.

handirifle · « **Reply #31 on:** September 01, 2004, 10:10:54 AM »

Yea Fred I see your point, I still would rather have the ejector. They just need to fix it so it is consistant for ALL barrels.

gwhilikerz · « **Reply #32 on:** September 01, 2004, 01:11:38 PM »

I don't understand the complaints about the ejector? Even a reloader should be able to use the hand that depresses the break latch to deftly catch the ejected shell. My NEF's eject, my Rossi's extract. I like the eject better as it is faster when you need to be fast.

Mac11700 · « **Reply #33 on:** September 01, 2004, 07:44:11 PM »

That's why I said " Extractor Option"....that's for all of those who would choose to go that route...I've never hunted DG before...and I can't honestly say I would attempt it with my Handi's...and I know if I did I wouldn't want to be fumbling around trying to pull a spent case from the chamber...but...trying to be logical for a moment ...if you do a lot of bench shooting and can't do the hand over the chamber routine,or if you don't want to go chasing the brass...it makes some sense...but for me it should be a available to switch back and forth...owners choice and all of that...

Mac

handirifle · « **Reply #34 on:** September 01, 2004, 07:46:46 PM »

Mac
Agreed!

TeePee · « **Reply #35 on:** September 01, 2004, 09:31:47 PM »

:-) YES all above are good OPTIONS! They all would be of some improvment and or of use. But I bought mine because of what it is and I like it being what I get for What I paid for as in cheap price= a really good almost great gun for much less than most others. DON'T make changes that cost more, just make them options that cost more. Sometimes it's beauty is in it's own. :wink:

MSP Ret · « **Reply #36 on:** September 02, 2004, 02:27:10 AM »

Your so right TP, we all squawked, and rightly so I feel, about the new "price increases" associated with accessory barrel program.

I'm with you, add nothing that would cost more, just clean the actions better, also a bit better quality control costs nothing, employee training or supervision, maybe just a memo to employees should cure those problems. A redesigned hammer should not cost any more either, just bend it back a bit!! keep these guns affordable and fun. We don't need another "Encore" at a high price....look at the fun we would lose tinkering with and talking about them....<><.... :grin:

Fred M · « **Reply #37 on:** September 02, 2004, 09:17:45 AM »

There are several items that H&R should look after, because they are accuracy killers.

The latch seat needs a lot better fit with more purchase. The latch definitely needs a stronger spring. A steeper latch angle would be better but that would be a redesign.

The trigger needs to be a lot lighter, but that is easy to fix by the home tinkerer. Also the trigger could have more forward slag so the safety bar does not get out of the way when there is not a complete follow through.

Myself I would be completely happy with a rebounding hammer without that sliding bar which only adds complexity and is a very questionable safety feature on the Handy rifle.

There is no reason why the underlug can't be the same size from one end to the other. After all it is only a square piece of bar stock. The action well should fit the underlug snug, without any side play.

No reason either for over size barrel bores and throats. Free bore is ok if it makes them feel good but not over size. Fred M.