Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the "Rifle of the Century"

[davyd]

Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

I would appreciate informed views

I am looking at a Blaser R93 intially with .223 Match Barrel in professional stock. I am hearing a mix of views on wheter this is a good route.

Would appreciate answers on

1. Is it accurate? i.e consitently sub moa with match and standard profile barrels (the store indicates that a standard barrel will give significantly sub moa with lighter weight and reduced cost)
2. Can it take down and set up with really negligable chnage of impact?
3. Is it robust?
4. Are there better equivalent price options?

My Situation
In Melbourne Austrralia, typically going varminting on bunnies. Currently have Remmington VS.223 which I use Remmington Accutips with and is more accurate than I am. Nailing a Rabbit first shot at 480 paces a couple of weeks ago. That is probably about as far as I will be likely to shoot. I don't want to lose that accuracy - but
- it is heavy to do offhand shots when you walk up on top of a bunny
- dominates the back of the car when travelling with the family and is also not discrete - in Australia Guns are not advertised
- is a little heavy for lugging around all day
- I also like the idea of getting one good system and scope - and then swapping barrels as my needs change. And being able to travel with effecitively multiple calibres in one rifle with limited space.

Would appreciate tapping into the collective wisdom

 

[ds]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

Hi Davyd,

I had a Blaser LRS2 in 6.5x55. 1. It was accurate. MOA to 1000m ten shot group. 2. You could take the barrel off, replace it and shoot same POI. 3. No it was not robust when compared to say an Accuracy International. 3. There are better custum options, for the same money, eg RPA Interceptor, or in your part of the world something on a Millenium or Barnard action.

Main issues with the Blaser are the lack of a secondary lock, if the expanding shell blows you eat the bolt. At least with a conventional action you get a rear lug as on Mauser actions or the bolt handel in a recess.

Also on a conventional action you can get a custum barrel made to what you want. With Blaser you are stuck with factory barrels but there is a good range of calibers.

The guarantee is 10 years but they say not to use hand loads.

After having one I would not go back to the Blaser action.

Hope it helps,

David.

 

[3sixbits]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

Neat idea, lot of money and for me only down side is "It's got the UGIEST safety button in the world" What a handsome rifle, but goodness that safety button has got the uglies! I told this to the U.S. REP at the Shot Show in 1996 and it's never gotten any better? It reminds me of a cheap .410 shotgun I had as a kid. come to think of it, it was made in Austria. I used to think of it as HITLERS revenge. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[Brown Dog]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

Davyd,

I've copied across a couple of posts I made in answer to Torsten's reloading questions for the R93 that may be of interest(see quote box below).

As regards the qualities of the R93 design itself: The R93 is a really, really neat idea –straight pull bolt, convenience for travel, weight, calibre interchange etc.

As indicated below, I've owned 2. A sporter 308 that shot 0.75 and a jagdmatch 243 that shot sub 0.5. But....

They've both ended up going back to the factory………


Two major drawbacks:

1. Ask any R93 owner how often his R93 fails to fire.

Compare that to your own experience of 'conventional' rifle misfires.

In my experience, Blaser owners seem to put up with misfire rates between 2 and 4%.

(My 1st Blaser took this to 40% due to the fact that the rifle's chamber had been cut too short!! The 2nd misfired at about 4%. Blaser owners seem to think that 4 out of a hundred is OK /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif. Interested in a Dangerous game calibre?!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif).

2. [When reading this point bear in mind that the previous point could suggest that they ain't got the design or engineering quite right]

As ds said above,

unlike most conventional rifles, any sort of breech failure is going to put the bolt body through your head –there's nothing to stop it if the collet fails!



So, whilst R93s may be very accurate, ...........they certainly give you two things to think about each time you pull the trigger /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif!

[ QUOTE ]
I've owned 2 R93s in the last few years and am very familiar with their design (I bought the second to demonstrate that I had a horizontal learning curve following all that went wrong with the first. It had the same problems but to a lesser degree .).

I believe, but would stand correction, that because of the 'collet' style locking mechanism of the bolt head you should reload ammunition for the R93 in the same manner as for a semi-auto; ie; full-length resizing and not just neck-sizing so that your reloaded ammo is always returned to factory dimensions. Because of the nature of the collet's lock up under pressure (it allows the cases to elongate slightly), you will have to pay particular attention to ensuring that the case shoulder is returned to factory dimensions. If you allow the cases to 'grow' the R93 will start to fail to fire due to light primer strikes.

Because of the peculiarity of the R93 bolt head (I can't think of any other design (except maybe the HK G3 etc series of assault rifles) that allows the bolt face to move back slightly whilst the round is fired. The critical length that changes (in the R93) is from case head to shoulder. It is this 'case head to shoulder' length increase that will cause the R93 (again, because of its unique locking system) to start to strike light.

The OAL of the case is not the critical dimension to prevent this (ie trimming the case mouth will not address the problem).

You will need to ensure that you 'bump' the case shoulder back to factory spec.

Bottom line is to return your ammo to factory dimensions; if you just neck size, or fail to bump the shoulder when full length resizing, the R93 will start to light strike your ammo after 2 or 3 reloads

Hope this makes sense!

[/ QUOTE ]

 

[Brent]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

There's a recall on them I believe. They blow up in little pieces is why. Lots of info all over the place about them coming apart here the last year or three...

Wouldn't catch me owning one or setting next one being fired.

 

[ds]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

Brown Dog,

Spot on with the reloading problems. I had the same failure to fire problems, F/L resizing worked and to some extent so did cycling the action firmly. The Blaser rep advised me to cycle it as firm as possible.

Lesson learned I like my Redding neck bushing die and a rifle that works 100%.

 

[Aussie]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

davyd ,
The Blasers cost a packet . You could keep your Remington (which is a "known quantity" in terms of accuracy) and buy a Sako (the pick of sporters IMHO) or two for the price of a Blaser .
Having one rifle and one scope sounds great but you'll find the need to resight the rifle every time you change barrels will be a pain in the guts .
Keep your "specialist varmint rifle" and buy yourself an accurate sporter if you want something more portable . Having had both light and heavy varmint rifles I can tell you it is a lot easier to shoot a heavy rifle accurately over a rest than it is a sporter . There's a case for having one (or more ) of each .
I had a switch barrel set up for a while and wouldn't go back that way unless I was going on an overseas safari and wanted to save luggage space .
If I haven't convinced you then perhaps you should check out an SHR or Schultz and Larsen . Blasers don't seem too popular here . /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[rdash]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Cent

I use a R93 in 7x64 for African plains game and red deer in UK.Never had a misfire. It's a neat travel gun. BUT: not cheap, but it certainly feels cheap to me. Not much pride of ownership. I would not buy another, nor am I interested in extending collection of barrels.
The recall (IIRC) was because the safety catch could fail to function properly. I have hunted with one PH who preferred me to use another gun for just that reason pre-recall.
I briefly considered an LRS2 before ordering an RPA. Ignoring their looks for a second, the RPA has a much better feel, but so much for objectivity!

 

[sullijr]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

The blow-up rifle is a SAKO 75 AS stated the Blaser had a safety malfunction and was recalled and repaired.There are multiple references on this website to the blowup,but it was interesting to read your response.

 

[Ian M]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

There are absolute horror stories about both the 75 stainless lightweights and also the Blazers coming apart (recent nasty story about a 93 bolt coming through the side of a shooters jaw in Germany) . How factual is internet-info - no doubt some is correct and some is bull-droppings. Pretty hard to dispute when there are photos with a rifle in pieces tho.

I get the willies when I close the bolt of an R-93 and think about how much metal (and the collet design) that is holding the bolt shut during 50-60,000 pounds of chamber pressure. No doubt it is designed not to fail, but machines fail all the time.

 

[Brent]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

Ian,
I'm surprised noone else here has read about the R93 blow ups. The gent in Germany with the bolt through his head... that survived... is the one I really remember, the other stories seemed to follow from all over the globe soon after that one hit the press, definitely brought some attention to the problem with the R93.

 

[Brown Dog]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

This prompted me to do a web search;

Translation of a Spanish article:

http://www.deportiro.com/english_articles/al10_english_version.shtml

The pics in the article only show on the Spanish version:

http://www.deportiro.com/armaslargas/bl10.shtml

Ouch /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif!

 

[Ian M]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

Brown Dog,
That is a striking image. Is it just me or would you agree that there are a hell of a lot of parts involved in that action. Does not look like a good example of the "keep it simple" principal /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
I have shot the 93's on several occasions and really did not like the fact that the flat-bottomed bolt sits on a flat surface that more or less pointed the bolt right at the side of my face. Lot of trust in that little interchangeable bolt collet-thingy that has to expand outward to withstand the pressure. Plus the bolt handle "cams" or moves a bit to lock and unlock stuff - did not enjoy that extra movement.
The rifles shot well, were very quick to cycle but not sure how well they would function if they got really dirty. Found them to be "gadgety" - neat design engineering to enable bolt-face, barrel, stock configuration changes but not as simple and tough as a M-70 or 700.

 

[sullijr]

Re: Blaser r93 - is it accurate. Did it deserve the \"Rifle of the Century\"

I am glad that I saw this I for one have lusted after one of these for years.Maybe it should be forwarded to Jekk Cooper at Guns and Ammo he has beeb praising the Blase4r for a couple of years.Thanks for changing my mind. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif