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

[ChrisF]

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

BB,

You are a troll , are you a gun smith , Opps , maybe NO , their are comments from a Brit & German gunsmiths , both use to real mil weapons , both donot like them , and have put forward vaild reasons , as to why .

If you actually look at the pics of the rifles that have blown up , the ONE thing that impresses me is that all rifles that are NOT Blasers , ie the Sako Finnlights & the AI AW50 , the action/bolt HELD , and did not let parts be driven rearward , the barrels split etc BUT the action HELD.
The Sako problem was traced to the barrel lube used in making the barrels , effected around 200 rifles and Sako recalled them all ASAP , the AI issue was they think a fragment of cloth used to clean the barrel , that remained in the bore , and this set off the explosive projectle when fired .
But you did not want to hear that ,


In the cases of the Blaser , the bolt did NOT hold , Opps , all the rifles failed , BUT only one design injuried or killed its owner , that for the termally blind was the Blaser 93 .

And Mate , just because the Aussie army use it , does not meant its the best thing since sliced bread , they like others make mistakes ( Opps , will will not talk of the M60 GPMG and other **** weapons the Aussies have adopted over the years ) .

If you are real interested in 338LM sniper rifles , you need to look at what MOST armies are using , and you will find , that its usually an AI AWSM or Sako TRG-42 .

Also being a Fan Boy & owner you have a vested interest in defending your rifle , even when its crap .

Also , IF you actually knew anything , you would know , a few things about the Howas , like they are very well made , the only bad thing you could say is they are not Lite , most also think of them very similar to a the old Sako actions , and most shooters LOVE the old Sakos ,

The bolts on the Howas , are also 1 piece , no handle of bolt head to come OFF .

BUT you did not want to know that either , is its at odds with your prefect BLASER world you live IN .

Later Chris

 

[Blaser Boy]

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

BB,

You are a troll , are you a gun smith , Opps , maybe NO , their are comments from a Brit & German gunsmiths , both use to real mil weapons , both donot like them , and have put forward vaild reasons , as to why .

If you actually look at the pics of the rifles that have blown up , the ONE thing that impresses me is that all rifles that are NOT Blasers , ie the Sako Finnlights & the AI AW50 , the action/bolt HELD , and did not let parts be driven rearward , the barrels split etc BUT the action HELD.
The Sako problem was traced to the barrel lube used in making the barrels , effected around 200 rifles and Sako recalled them all ASAP , the AI issue was they think a fragment of cloth used to clean the barrel , that remained in the bore , and this set off the explosive projectle when fired .
But you did not want to hear that ,


In the cases of the Blaser , the bolt did NOT hold , Opps , all the rifles failed , BUT only one design injuried or killed its owner , that for the termally blind was the Blaser 93 .

And Mate , just because the Aussie army use it , does not meant its the best thing since sliced bread , they like others make mistakes ( Opps , will will not talk of the M60 GPMG and other **** weapons the Aussies have adopted over the years ) .

If you are real interested in 338LM sniper rifles , you need to look at what MOST armies are using , and you will find , that its usually an AI AWSM or Sako TRG-42 .

Also being a Fan Boy & owner you have a vested interest in defending your rifle , even when its crap .

Also , IF you actually knew anything , you would know , a few things about the Howas , like they are very well made , the only bad thing you could say is they are not Lite , most also think of them very similar to a the old Sako actions , and most shooters LOVE the old Sakos ,

The bolts on the Howas , are also 1 piece , no handle of bolt head to come OFF .

BUT you did not want to know that either , is its at odds with your prefect BLASER world you live IN .

Later Chris

Oh dear .........
Chris, I am always amused when a reply to a post starts with a personal insult.
A: It gives a good indication of the country the reply is coming from.
B: It also provides a indication of the poster's character, personality and general intellect, or lack there off.
At this point. I usually hit the delete button, and move on to the next post or subject.
But as your a Kiwi, I have decided to give you the benefit of my 30+ years of employment, with Australia's largest military contractor.
That's right little buddy, the company that refurbed the Aussie Skyhawks before selling them to the NZ Air Force. The company that built the ANZAC class frigates for the NZ Navy. And the very same company that supplies small arms and ammunition to the NZ Army.
Now lets start with some of your rantings.

1. Were you present, at the destruction of any of your above mentioned firearms ? What NO, I didn't think so ........
You see for every lame, uninformed quote that you can trot out, I can provide factual evidence of the exact opposite. Look up the Swedish army's small arms destruction tests on YouTube. In said test, half of the conventional bolt action rifles are destroyed, the Blaser R93 was not one them.
I am also aware of the Raufoss round failure in the AI ..... would you like some footage of the testing ?

2. "The **** weapons the Aussies adopted" ...... that ones a bit rich isn't it !
I seem to recollect, excluding the above examples already provided, that the NZDF, adopts the same weapons as the ADF ...... something to do with the ANZUS treaty may be ???
And further more, NZ purchases are usually tacked on to the end of an Australian contract and or licence agreement. AUS steyr ring any bells.
So if you want **** weapons, just hang about, because the NZDF buy ours when where finished with them.

3. Now the Howas. I'm well aware of the history of Howa, it's predecessor, the CMC Mountaineer and the Sako L series, that the Howa's have been alleged to be copied from.
When I purchase a firearm, the last consideration is price.
Price is what makes them attractive to gunsmiths as a base rifle, and I would hardly consider a one piece bolt as a rifles strong point.

Now Chris, I would be most grateful if you did not reply to this post ..... as then, I would be able to continue on, in my perfect Blaser world, safe and secure in the knowledge, that I have provided, yet another dumb as dog **** Kiwi with just a slither of hope, that one day they may make it out of the third world ........... Take my advise, find a nice sheep, and settle down ...... and stay the **** off the Internet and forums. gun)

Kind Regards
Blaser Boy

 

[Korhil78]

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

Im sorry, I couldn't resist.



Take it easy guys, its just a gun.

 

[ChrisF]

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

Its funny you donot address any of the points I actually brought up , and go off on a rant about boats planes & other crap .

Rifle of the Century , NO not in my World .

I pointed to the fact , that you holding up the Aussies adoptaion of the Blaser in 338LM as a validation of the worth of the design , and I said one single use does not mean thant much , as people do make mis , so do countries , opps , and by the M60 , other than the USA , I think Aussie was the ONLY other country to adopt ( and PAY for IT ) this flawed design , virtually all other users did not buy them , they where basically given them under US aide .

We in NZ , adopted the excellent British made GPMG which is basically the world famous MAG58 .

Now even the US & Aussie run MAG58s over the M60 series GPMG .

In reguards to Armies world wide that use the Blaser in 338LM , the list I think would be very small , most seem to use AI or Sako in n the 338LM calibre , and thats a FACT , Opps , you donot like facts do you .

My understanding of the Blaser Aussie Army issue is it was a quick purchase off the self ,and as such , I donot think any actual prooper trials where run .
In actual Trials done in 97-98 in Aussie , where they had more than one rifle under consideration , they adopted the AWF in 308 from AI , and the AW50 in 50BMG as well .


I see the Blaser as the Fosters of rifles , ie a triumph in marketing over substance , in simple terms a big fantastic marketing campaign & an The Brits must remember the Fosters Beer ads , for those unfimialr , Fosters is a Lager beer , and not a good one ,

Most people I know who have had a Blaser93 have sold them and moved on to better systems , one guy used a 93 Tac model for a while in comps , but sold and uses , Barnard & Nesika etc type actions now .

I donot hate all Blaser products , I liked the 84 action , but not this collet bolt head type , from what I gathered when I was interested in the Tac version ( I did some research & chatted to 2 good gunsmiths about the system , and on their veiws , decided I did not want one ) , the failling of the system , usually happens went a primer leaks or is pierched , the hot gasses vent down the firing pin hole and destory the washer thats holds/cams the locking splines closed .

This washer on std models was a type of plastic back then , and the company must have known it was an issue , as the bigger 338LM model of the same time period used a steel washer .

Also the std saddle type mounts donot seem to holdup or retain a zero that well , as a German police unit returned their Blaser Tacs 3 times due to not retaining their zeros , in the end they got rid of them , the pitcanny rail on the newer Tac models holds up better I think .

AN I believe their are much better rifles out their than the Blaser 93 , thats why I have AIs , Sakos , Parker Hales , Tikkas , Surgeons , Badgers , PGW etc .

And YEAP , In my world it is BLASER FREE .

Later Chris

 

[ChrisF]

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

I also forgot , as well as 3 or more Blaser93 bolw ups that caused injury or death , one Kiwi Hunter had a blow up , he was very lucky in that he was not hurt , most 93 blow ups actually have injuried the shooter involved .

The shooter was a well known international hunter , who owns the Swazi clothing company , he has a need for compact take down type hunting rifles as he hunts all over the world .
The Blaser93 was I think chambered in 300 Weatherby mag , and happened while hunting in Canada , I beleive , he had the barrel rapture on him .
He thought Blaser would make right on it , ie replace etc , instead they offered a barrel for hme to buy & a cheap bottle of booze , NICE .

He does not use a Blaser rifle any more .

If you want more info on his experience of the Blaser 93 , he mentions it in his last hunting book , Opps another FACT .

Later Chris

 

[Blaser Boy]

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

Its funny you donot address any of the points I actually brought up , and go off on a rant about boats planes & other crap .

Rifle of the Century , NO not in my World .

I pointed to the fact , that you holding up the Aussies adoptaion of the Blaser in 338LM as a validation of the worth of the design , and I said one single use does not mean thant much , as people do make mis , so do countries , opps , and by the M60 , other than the USA , I think Aussie was the ONLY other country to adopt ( and PAY for IT ) this flawed design , virtually all other users did not buy them , they where basically given them under US aide .

We in NZ , adopted the excellent British made GPMG which is basically the world famous MAG58 .

Now even the US & Aussie run MAG58s over the M60 series GPMG .

In reguards to Armies world wide that use the Blaser in 338LM , the list I think would be very small , most seem to use AI or Sako in n the 338LM calibre , and thats a FACT , Opps , you donot like facts do you .

My understanding of the Blaser Aussie Army issue is it was a quick purchase off the self ,and as such , I donot think any actual prooper trials where run .
In actual Trials done in 97-98 in Aussie , where they had more than one rifle under consideration , they adopted the AWF in 308 from AI , and the AW50 in 50BMG as well .


I see the Blaser as the Fosters of rifles , ie a triumph in marketing over substance , in simple terms a big fantastic marketing campaign & an The Brits must remember the Fosters Beer ads , for those unfimialr , Fosters is a Lager beer , and not a good one ,

Most people I know who have had a Blaser93 have sold them and moved on to better systems , one guy used a 93 Tac model for a while in comps , but sold and uses , Barnard & Nesika etc type actions now .

I donot hate all Blaser products , I liked the 84 action , but not this collet bolt head type , from what I gathered when I was interested in the Tac version ( I did some research & chatted to 2 good gunsmiths about the system , and on their veiws , decided I did not want one ) , the failling of the system , usually happens went a primer leaks or is pierched , the hot gasses vent down the firing pin hole and destory the washer thats holds/cams the locking splines closed .

This washer on std models was a type of plastic back then , and the company must have known it was an issue , as the bigger 338LM model of the same time period used a steel washer .

Also the std saddle type mounts donot seem to holdup or retain a zero that well , as a German police unit returned their Blaser Tacs 3 times due to not retaining their zeros , in the end they got rid of them , the pitcanny rail on the newer Tac models holds up better I think .

AN I believe their are much better rifles out their than the Blaser 93 , thats why I have AIs , Sakos , Parker Hales , Tikkas , Surgeons , Badgers , PGW etc .

And YEAP , In my world it is BLASER FREE .

Later Chris

aaaarrrrrrrrrhhhhhH ........... Now see, that's what happens when you don't hit the delete thread button !
Chris, I addressed ALL of your points, but as you have crafted a sensible and insult free reply, I am going to through caution to the wind, and have one more go.

The Blaser Tac did go through the normal ADF adoption criteria, and no problems were detected. In fact, it did extremely well with regards accuracy and durability. However, the "regiment" that uses the TAC, gets what ever they like ( within reason ) when ever they like.
I'm afraid the PIG ( M60 ) was a little before my time, but given the ADF's purchase of refurbed M1 Abrams ( about as useful as an ashtray on a motor bike and you'll get them in 10 years time ) I would concede, these individuals do have form.
With regards to minority users, I would point out, that the Canadian Army uses McMillan's of all things, and it does not appear to hinder there operation.
There are currently eleven Army's ( not police forces ) using Tac 2. Ops, Ops, ******* Ops ....... there's another fact.

Who drinks Fosters ??? only Poms and tourists. Not valid, move on.

Blasers statistically, are no more safe or dangerous than any other firearm.
All firearms have there positive and negatives aspects.
Blaser R93 is now the highest selling sporting firearm in Europe, of all time.
Ops, Ops Fact ! They must have done something right.
If design engineers and technical developer do not further and push the envelope. We would all still be using Rem 700's, and still be thinking, that "They the ****" ( There's another, delete twenty threads right there )

I have used / tested most of the firearms you have listed, including one very special DSR ( think about it ) all of them have there good, and bad points.
I would not say any of them, are any better than my Blaser, for my particular application.

Now the Swazi man ( I have read book ) ...... I think it was most generous of Blaser to give the Swazi Man a bottle wine, considering that, that particular incident was caused by a barrel obstruction ! ( some say it was wool )

I just get a little ****ed off, when so called experts, or German gunsmiths, get on a forum, and shoot there mouth off, about a respected German trading company.
Particularly, when his disciples jump in on the bashing and he pushes Howa rifles as a creditable tactical or competition option. And I know, that not even you would swallow that one !
I wounder what his drinking buddies think of him now ........

Kind Regards
Blaser Boy.

 

[Blaser Boy]

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

Im sorry, I couldn't resist.

View attachment 8995

Take it easy guys, its just a gun.

That was a cruel and cheap taunt, and not worthy of your Silver Member status !!! LMFAO.
Please refrain from such ridiculous outbursts in future !
I'm going to have to lie down now ...... my guts hurt ......

 

[slowvak]

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

I am a hunter, but admit I probably lack the long-range experience of many here. I have hunted in Africa, Europe, Alaska, and cont-48. I grew up with guns, mostly for varminting. Got married to a girl from europe whose dad was an avid hunter; and had always used blaser guns. I am now a blaser gun owner.
I do not reload--I only use factory ammo, and same is true for wife's family. I have never had a misfire, and neither has he. I have probably only shot a few hundred rounds, but father in law hunts at least 100 days per year for at least 60 years now. Nearly alwyas with a blaser--sometimes a k95, sometimes r93.
I guess every gun has 'issues'--you can look at recall lists to see that.
I can say that the gun is accurate, including the first shot after I arrive to a new coutnry, and put the gun together and mount the scope. I shoot the test shot for me, not because the gun is not reliable on first shot.
For wild pig, the striaght pull bolt is a BIG advantage. I have shot 3 pigs as they ran within a few seconds. A traditional bolt action would have been a challenge. I own barrels including 243, 257 Wby, 30.06, 300 Wby, 9.3x62. They will be handed down to my sons, just as father-in-law got one gun from his father, and his son has already gotten one from him.
They are great guns. Not perfrect. Made for hunting, particularly in european style.

 

[Dalebow]

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

I know Iam coming into the conversation late, but my 2 cents. Most people who have comments have never shot much less held a blaser. Yes a couple R93 blew up, but they were ALL loaded with bad ammo that had been loaded to higher pressures or some other operator error.

If you search the You Tube video on barrels/guns blowing up, yo will see that the guns that held together were the german and finn rifles, Howa, and the Remington blew up, the gun exploded into pieces.

How many people have died because of a bad trigger safety?? I love all guns, have sako, remington, winchester, blaser, savage, browning, and all but 3 have been sent for trigger work, bedding, mcmillan stock, action truing, lug lapping, re crowning..................the one is the Blaser R8 and my blaser R93 the other is my accustock Savage that is a freaking tack driver.

Rifle of the century.......probably until the R8 came along, now the R8 earns that title in my book. If I could change barrels on my Sako 85 300wsm it might be rife of the year, that darn thing is sweet

 

[ExSako]

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

My first post on this forum; I'm amazed at the levels of passion/hostility regarding the R93

I have owned my R93 and 3 barrels for about a year and have shot several deer and a couple of hundred rabbits and goats with it. I've also spent many hours developing accurate, safe, hand loads for each calibre; so far I haven't had any reason to question the safety or reliability of the R93; it's accuracy is equal or superior to any of my other currently owned firearms

In my 30 plus years involved the various shooting sports, I have witnessed a few examples of so called 'firearm failures'. None of the examples proved to be anything other than human error or in one case 'absolute human stupidity' the causes ranged from barrel obstructions to an idiot that should never have been allowed anywhere near a reloading bench. I guess what I'm saying is that we humans are more likely to cause injury to ourselves than the tools that we have been provided by the arms industry.

I'm sure there will be people on this forum able to correct me on this; but I can't remember any recent examples of shooters/hunters being injured or killed by their own firearm where they didn't play a significant part in their own demise e.g carried a loaded rifle [with an owner modified trigger] inside the cab of a moving pick up, failing to keep a weapon pointed in a safe direction, filling a magnum cartridge with shotgun powder, clearing a barrel obstruction with..... [you guessed it] a 180 grain cleaning rod, etc etc.

If the R93 is as inherently unsafe as some have suggested and given that over 100,000 units have been sold around the world, I would have expected Blaser to have been successfully prosecuted for criminal nuisance or sued for amounts of money that would repay the national debt of some countries.

Personally, I like the function and accuracy of my R93 but wouldn't rate it as being the 'Rifle of the Century' I have other much less expensive rifles that I like more, for emotional reasons rather than function or design, but I also don't claim to be an expert judge.

It seems to me that it doesn't matter how well a firearm is designed or manufactured; someone will manage to find a way of injuring or killing themselves with it.

Just my 2 cents worth, I hope I haven't offended anyone

 

[Blaser Boy]

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

Yes ExSako ........ mass hist-aria is alive and well.
The thing that really gets me going, is the willingness of uninformed individuals to post opinions and second hand comments as fact.
They to not check there sources, they do not undertake even the most rudimentary investigations or questioning ........ its just bang, there it is posted !
For a scientific / physics based subject and forum, I expect better.
There are even known individuals ( and businesses ) posting comments that are not only untrue, but are down right slanderous !
How these businesses or individuals have not been sued, or at the very least, shut down, has me thoroughly amazed !
I wouldn't worry to much about offending anyone ( see my comments above ) if you wish to have an honest and factual exchange of ideas ....... it bound to happen, somewhere along the line.

 

[Blaser Boy]

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

My first post on this forum; I'm amazed at the levels of passion/hostility regarding the R93

I have owned my R93 and 3 barrels for about a year and have shot several deer and a couple of hundred rabbits and goats with it. I've also spent many hours developing accurate, safe, hand loads for each calibre; so far I haven't had any reason to question the safety or reliability of the R93; it's accuracy is equal or superior to any of my other currently owned firearms

In my 30 plus years involved the various shooting sports, I have witnessed a few examples of so called 'firearm failures'. None of the examples proved to be anything other than human error or in one case 'absolute human stupidity' the causes ranged from barrel obstructions to an idiot that should never have been allowed anywhere near a reloading bench. I guess what I'm saying is that we humans are more likely to cause injury to ourselves than the tools that we have been provided by the arms industry.

I'm sure there will be people on this forum able to correct me on this; but I can't remember any recent examples of shooters/hunters being injured or killed by their own firearm where they didn't play a significant part in their own demise e.g carried a loaded rifle [with an owner modified trigger] inside the cab of a moving pick up, failing to keep a weapon pointed in a safe direction, filling a magnum cartridge with shotgun powder, clearing a barrel obstruction with..... [you guessed it] a 180 grain cleaning rod, etc etc.

If the R93 is as inherently unsafe as some have suggested and given that over 100,000 units have been sold around the world, I would have expected Blaser to have been successfully prosecuted for criminal nuisance or sued for amounts of money that would repay the national debt of some countries.

Personally, I like the function and accuracy of my R93 but wouldn't rate it as being the 'Rifle of the Century' I have other much less expensive rifles that I like more, for emotional reasons rather than function or design, but I also don't claim to be an expert judge.

It seems to me that it doesn't matter how well a firearm is designed or manufactured; someone will manage to find a way of injuring or killing themselves with it.

Just my 2 cents worth, I hope I haven't offended anyone

Just did a little research, and found that the total sales for Blaser R93, is now a staggering 2.2 MILLION units, world wide. ( German Internet source ).
Now if we allow a failure / defect rate of .05 % ( acceptable in most manufacturing circumstances ) that would equate to a total of 1100 firearms ???
I think you can see my point ........

 

[ExSako]

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

I found the following response from Blaser regarding an 'accident' in 2004 which some people seem to use as a basis for challenging the safety of the R93

Quote:

Dear Sir,

As you are aware of, on January 10, 2004, at a shooting range near Koblenz, Germany, a Blaser R93 was damaged and in that accident the shooter was injured.

Unfortunately this issue has been taken and exaggerated from various people in order to discredit the R93 in an un-objective and dubious way.

On January 22, 2004, the CEO and Technical Directors of Blaser Jagdwaffen GmbH were able to look at the rifle in question, with three police officials with the permission of the public prosecutors office Koblenz.

The steel showed deformation in the lockup area as well as two definite cracks beginning at the rear end of the chamber. Powderized brass was found in the lock-up area. There was deformation on the bolt head as well as deformation on the bolt head elements. The cam plate, which supports the assembly in locked position, and the right rail were broken away from position while the assembly was in a closed and locked position.

In a series of tests through DEVA (Deutsche Versuchs- und prufanstalt fur Jagd- und Sportwaffen.V.) measurements of the gas pressure were increased to almost 8.000bar/116,000 psi, whereby under this pressure there was no measured deformation to the outer contour of the chamber area in the barrel. There were also no deformations to the bolt head.

Without wanting to anticipate the results from the public prosecutor and after examination we have concluded clearly the damage was caused through extreme overloaded gas pressure. With consideration to the above mentioned DEVA examination, it is our opinion that the cause of this accident is without doubt due to the ammunition and cannot be related to the rifle. (my note: the independant agency DEVA later confirmed this as their findings also).

At this point we would like to clearly state, that the technical design of the R93, with more than 100,000 rifles supplied (and now more than 160,000 as has been mentioned in a post above), has not been found responsible for any accident where the rifle has been damaged. Every single R93 is controlled and tested by the state/county proof-house according to the C.I.P. regulations using proof cartridges exceeding the maximal allowed gas pressure by a minimum of 30%. The R93, however, withstands loads/gas pressures way above proof-level as our in-house/combined DEVA-tests clearly documents.

In the test reports from DEVA it was confirmed that there is no reason to doubt or fear the R93s strength and durability. DEVA states, "In the case of destruction to a rifle with an (illegal) gas pressure of 8.000 bar or above, this eventually may result in injury to the shooter. This cannot be related to the rifle."

"There are no reasons for us to doubt the safety of the technical design of the R93."

Unfortunately, it happens in individual cases that the use of defective or incorrectly loaded ammunition results in damage to the rifle and/or shooter, no matter what brand or type of rifle is used. For example, in 2003 we were aware that in Austria alone, three cases of destroyed bolt-actions rifles occured due to incorrectly loaded ammunition with three different rifle manufacturers being involved.

Even through there are enormous numbers of R93s on the market there are extremely few cases occuring through inadmissable, well overloaded gas pressures where a rifle is damaged or destructed. For this there are appraisals from different institutes with clear statements: In none of these cases a weapon-lateral cause of the damage was determined.

The Blaser R93, through its extremely safe and practice-suited technical design is one of the most popular hunting rifles offered on todays market. The straight fact is that with the enormous numbers of the R93 in the field today it is extremely rare that a rifle is destructed through incorrectly loaded ammunition. This is argument enough for the R93.

End of quote.

I haven't been able to find any information regarding any legal action [civil or criminal] relating to the previously described 'cases' involving Blaser or the other 3 unnamed manufacturers.

 

[Blaser Boy]

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

Well ExSako ....... that just about said it all.
I also, was unable to find any legal action ( civil or other ) relating to Blaser, or any of the holding companies ( AG ) relating to any of there products, in any country in Europe or the USA.
There is a high volume shooter / blogger on You Tube ( Norwegian ) by the name of Thomas Haugland, who I think is on his third 6.5 / 284 barrel.
Its worth watching his series, he achieves excellent accuracy with standard weight barrels, and fairly flogs an R93, with hard and fast action.