Anyone ever fire one of these Remington M700 electronic primed rifles???

Are they as dead as Hogan's goat????

BEAR

BEAR wrote: Are they as dead as Hogan's goat????

Dead as dead can be, from what I understand.  Never heard of anyone that was even remotely interested in one.  You'd think someone out there's gotta have one but I've sure not heard about it.  Would be interested in a report from them, too. Later.  >>  klallen

Never seen one in person, let alone fired one.  Remington still lists them on their website, in either 22-250, 220 Swift or 243.  It says the primers are available for reloading too, but I've never noticed any when looking at local suppliers.  For 2 Grand I think I'll pass.   Heck, if I had one I'd probably get to the range and find I'd left the battery at home.   Ha.

Since it's an "electronic pulse" that ignites the primer, I wonder if static electricity could possibly fire one off?

In my  last distributor catalog they were dumping them. Around $600 dealer cost.

DD

$600 could be a collecable?????

I could put it with my Tround rifle.

BEAR

$600?????     At that price it might be worth it.  Like Bear says, a collectable.  I'm still not to sure about starting a rifle with a key, like starting a truck.  Do you have to have the parking brake on to turn the key?  I hope Ford isn't the maker of the ignition system on this thing. 

I wonder if any other rifle manufacturers will be coming out with new and improved ignition systems.  Or some other system to make the bullet magically fly to it's intended destination, faster than the speed of light.

Sam,

Just add a night-vision scope with the electronic ignition in-line and you would have the perfect primitive weapon system.

Sorry Ron

BEAR

I know.....it's a bit much to deal with, but in an inline is where the electronic ignition just might work. I am aware of the feelings between tradition and inline and I'm not trying to roil the water about that. I know you're joking Bear.

Other than being a muzzleloader, the inline developments are edging the capabilities of the term muzzleloader way beyond the boundries of the flintlock and precussion blackpowder muzzleloading systems. Similar to the difference between the direction of telephone communication today compared to the dial phones of the 60's. It is a whole new realm of capabilities we are entering with the new inline innovations. So....this lays the type of format that can foster the discussion of an electronic ignition for an inline.

Ayuh Bear, I agree that this throws muzzleloaders into a sort of distorted Matrix situation. Flexible minds need to be stretched to remain flexible.

Sam, since this topic is NOT muzzle loaders maybe we could discuss those in-line rifles without alot of heat from others.  The electronic ignition would be a big improvement.  Id suggest a fixed igniter that could be used over and over.  The only reason for the one time igniter of the ExtronX, is that the case is going to be ejected and thrown away.  A fixed igniter, like the one on your gas grill, furnace, or gas range would be easy.  And let us add some "improved " BP substitute powder Black Magic "27" or "7777777".  Now we got a 50 cal shooting a saboted 358 dia  jacketed bullet weighing 250 grains and moving at 2500 fps.  A very impressive muzzle loading rifle.  With a good 6x scope. it would be the ultimate front loader for elk. 

But it would merely be a Ruger No.1 in 35 Whelen, that we reinvented (and added a battery to boot).  It is pretty easy to improve on the BP muzzleloader, history has done that already.

Personally I don't see any reason to shoot a modern rifle that has all the inventions of the M700 type, uses advanced modern ignition, and powders.  The only difference is that it loads thru the muzzle and it is a single shot.  Shooting a 30-30 that loads down the front wouldn't be any fun for me.  Shooting relics or replicas are trying to experience what earlier generations of hunter, soldiers, or shooters did when they shot.

I think that the rear loading paper cartridge rifles were great.  Used a percussion cap, and the bullet engraved the rifling upon firing.  It is that engagement of the rifling upon firing that make the bullet/bore accuracy good.  The Minnie ball, the patched RB and the REAL Lee conical all try to get that while still loading from the muzzle.

Don't get me wrong....we all should shoot what we want, and variety is the spice of life.  I'm going to hate to see the gov't make us give up those 50 BMG guns, even though they serve little practical civilian purpose.  So the more guys that buy and shoot the in-lines great.  The more shooters we have in the shooting/hunting fraternity.  They might move on to heavy barreled 22-250 or other fun stuff.

I just don't see the reason to try to re-invent from the bottoms up on the BP guns.  I can see going backwards in the progression, like shooting a wheel lock.  That would light my fire for sure.  I even liked the look of the recently listed photo of the blunderbust.

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I doubt any of the modern muzzleloaders would exist in the market place except to try to hunt primitive hunting seasons with a weapon that duplicates a 35 whelen.

I's really appreciate your views and thoughts.  Maybe I am just missing out on a good thing; for years I don't drink scotch nor eat lobster.  I was wrong on those and I might be wrong on the modernized front loaders.

BEAR 

Bear, I have come to believe that the difference between the "traditional" muzzleloader and the inline is the difference between apples and oranges. They are not really the same thing. Personally, I have no problem separating the two and appreciating them both, on their seperate merits.

[ "I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I doubt any of the modern muzzleloaders would exist in the market place except to try to hunt primitive hunting seasons with a weapon that duplicates a 35 whelen."]

I agree with with this to a degree. I think the Knight was first developed to make a better muzzleloader for elk hunting. The idea caught on and developed from there, and in the process, caught the "fancy" of many who welcome the opportunity to hunt an extra season. It has nothing to do with the aura that surrounds hunting with a period style flintlock. The potential power of the inline appeals to many in that it offers the "confidance" of the power of a modern rifle in the guise of a "blackpowder type" rifle. I believe that this makes it easy for the average hunter to transition into muzzleloading. I also believe that once exposed to the "realm" of "blackpowder muzzleloading", the inherent educational process/experience that takes place can teach many individuals about the capabilities of the "old style" muzzleloading rifles and instill a confidence in their capabilities as an effective hunting weapon. This is how it has been with me and I can only assume that is how it is with others.

I also think that there is a different psycology and subconcious working in the mind of those hunters that go into a season "really having" to get a deer versus those who go into the season thinking about how to enhance the hunting experience. The difference between the two might explain, a bit, some of the motivation for buying inline or traditional. In the end....there's room for all.