Hi-NV Shooter
Member
Wow you sure are full of yourself follow you nope never did and never will. argue with you nope just pointing out facts. Paladin must be defying physics!
Lee
Rimfire Benchrest rifles (Calfee SPEC rifles)
- Thread starter tonykharper
- Start date
Wow you sure are full of yourself follow you nope never did and never will. argue with you nope just pointing out facts. Paladin must be defying physics!
Lee
mwezell
Mike Ezell
You keep missing my point. Testing new lots is the exact same as testing new loads. I don't know why that's hard to comprehend. If you're not following me around, why do you reply to my posts on just about every forum? Full of myself? No, just pointing out the obvious. Lee, just do you, whatever works for you and don't pay any attention to my posts. That'd be great! Bet ya can't do it, though?
Probably for the same reason, every time the word “ tuner” gets posted you seem compelled to post your usual bulls..t, which would be fine If you actually shot RFBR and could prove it to the class there Mikey.
If this was a fight your trainer would be throwing in the towel.
You keep insisting CF & RF exactly the same……baloney.
I’m Mike E….I ‘ve sold hundreds of tuners. They must be like Sasquatch’s , cause nobody has ever seen one on a competitive gun.
Last edited:
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Are you two dating? I'm not the one who brought up tuners, except to say, didn't cf guys tune by changing the load before many started using tuners.
Here's how I see you and your boyfriend...I spend a lot of time explaining how tuners work and my method for making them work. I back it up with actual science , physics and with results. You and your boyfriend say I'm wrong but neither back it up with anything other than a small group and "my other boyfriend does it a different way, so that's just how it is", nonsense. So, neither of you can explain why your method works, scientifically, nor why mine doesn't. In other words, you don't know or you'd say it. I wish you would. Please, give me something based on physics! I'd love to learn something but you two are definitely not willing to share or you just don't know, so I'm not putting much faith in either of you coming up with anything. You two act like typical libtards and rather than making a case for your point, you try to diminish my credibility. You got nuthin", just nuthin...but two big mouths.
I don't care either way but Wilbur banned Calfee from posting on here and this thread is a lot of bs copied from his site and posted here, since he can't do it himself. I would've deleted it based on that but I don't care either way about that. I didn't come to either of you. You both came to me. Infatuated and illiterate of the subject describes both of you. If this were a fight, huh? Ok.
Can't you two just disagree with my posts and move on. I'm not gonna change your minds and you're both too dumb to learn, but surely you can just sit back, laugh and let me be wrong! Nobody is forcing you to do anything.
Last edited:
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Are you dense or dunce, or both? How many times have I related changing loads/lots to moving a tuner? That's the answer you keep acting like I've never told you! You are like talking to a rock and dumber than a box full! You keep bringing up sporters and acting like I haven't answered your question but that is your answer. Changing loads is just like changing lots. You might say, well that lot wasn't good but in reality, maybe it just wasn't in tune with a sporter that you can't move a tuner on. I promise you this much...there is NO magical spot on a tuner or a sporter that shoots everything to it's potential. And that's based on science, not some theoretical bs or a single small group. Rather, it's the result of vibration analysis testing and real world targets. So, where is your explanation of why I'm wrong OR where you are right? Still got nothing? You never have offered anything so why would that change now? I'd bet it won't but you'll just run me down with no explanation that agrees with science as to why. Same goes for why you'd be right...You have zero explanation for your own claim, regardless of mine. Forgive me but I call bs! You've not once offered anything to prove your point nor disprove mine. Same for your boyfriend! All either of you can do is badmouth me without anything scientific to base it own. Please, again, give me something...anything that is scientific to help me learn. Stop saying I haven't answered you. I did in this and many posts on just about every forum. My answer hasn't changed...look it up. You're just sooo far lost that you don't even recognize the answer staring you in the face, in plain english because you don't understand the first thing about tuners...nada! You don't even look at my posts with an open mind, but only to argue.
I would truly appreciate qualified conversation but you and Lee both fail with that one stipulation. You can't tell anybody why you're right and you can't tell anybody why I'm wrong either. That explains it all. It means you don't know squat! At least take a position that you can back up with science or you're just an idiot looking to cause trouble. I think they call you a troll. These posts get far more attention than you can troll up because you are a known trouble maker wherever you go and you go without any facts to support your case. Basically, you just suck at this.
Nevertheless, I can back up what I claim and I do just that. You and your girlfriend have nothing to offer because you don't know what you're talking about..period.
Are you dense or dunce, or both? How many times have I related changing loads/lots to moving a tuner? That's the answer you keep acting like I've never told you! You are like talking to a rock and dumber than a box full! You keep bringing up sporters and acting like I haven't answered your question but that is your answer. Changing loads is just like changing lots. You might say, well that lot wasn't good but in reality, maybe it just wasn't in tune with a sporter that you can't move a tuner on. I promise you this much...there is NO magical spot on a tuner or a sporter that shoots everything to it's potential. And that's based on science, not some theoretical bs or a single small group. Rather, it's the result of vibration analysis testing and real world targets. So, where is your explanation of why I'm wrong OR where you are right? Still got nothing? You never have offered anything so why would that change now? I'd bet it won't but you'll just run me down with no explanation that agrees with science as to why. Same goes for why you'd be right...You have zero explanation for your own claim, regardless of mine. Forgive me but I call bs! You've not once offered anything to prove your point nor disprove mine. Same for your boyfriend! All either of you can do is badmouth me without anything scientific to base it own. Please, again, give me something...anything that is scientific to help me learn. Stop saying I haven't answered you. I did in this and many posts on just about every forum. My answer hasn't changed...look it up. You're just sooo far lost that you don't even recognize the answer staring you in the face, in plain english because you don't understand the first thing about tuners...nada! You don't even look at my posts with an open mind, but only to argue.
I would truly appreciate qualified conversation but you and Lee both fail with that one stipulation. You can't tell anybody why you're right and you can't tell anybody why I'm wrong either. That explains it all. It means you don't know squat! At least take a position that you can back up with science or you're just an idiot looking to cause trouble. I think they call you a troll. These posts get far more attention than you can troll up because you are a known trouble maker wherever you go and you go without any facts to support your case. Basically, you just suck at this.
Nevertheless, I can back up what I claim and I do just that. You and your girlfriend have nothing to offer because you don't know what you're talking about..period.
Last edited:
Hi-NV Shooter
Member
Ok back up what you say go shoot some RFBR matches ARA or ir50 prove to everyone that those who do shoot and not touch the tuner are all wrong!
can't get to the matches Sniper hide has a postal match go shoot that and post your scores there.
Mr. Parsons just agg. 2391 in a match in Nebraska under some unfavorable conditions. you going to tell him he is wrong in not adjusting the tuner on Paladin when a lot won't shoot to his standards. after he gets up off the ground from rolling around laughing at you, I sure would like to hear what he tells you!
Go back to CF where you know what you are doing. until you start shooting RFBR you aren't going to convince those who know.
Lee
mwezell
Mike Ezell
I have shot Ara and psl but you're avoiding my question. Just give ONE PIECE OF scientific evidence to supports your position or denies mine. Let's not lose track here. You know nothing..period. Simply put, you are illiterate of this subject and again, you're trying to deflect the question rather than giving anything you can scientically support, because you're fos. That simple.
Last edited:
Hi-NV Shooter
Member
You sound like that Fauci guy, and all the others listen to the science BS. I may be illiterate but I know how to read my scores so that is all I care about.
No matter how much science you know you will never disprove Bill Calfee plain and simple you have no record on shooting, building and tuning a RFBR rifle.
I know it really bothers you that all the scientific knowledge you have and you can't build or tune a rifle that could prove Mr. Calfee wrong. that's life live with it.
Lee
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Still no answer..just more gibberish.
Hi-NV Shooter
Member
tonykharper
Well-known member
The most accurate rimfire rifle in the world!!!!
SPEC 5, Back Death was proclaimed to be the most accurate rimfire rifle in the world when it was first built and before it ever went to the first purchaser.
When Bill Calfee made that claim all hell broke loose in the RFBR world.
All types of statements were made about how this was "over the top", "impossible statement to back up", "no rifle is the most accurate it is the shooter and rifle and bullets and barrels, etc etc."
One thing for sure, it caused a lot of excitement, a lot of haters were born, and doubters created.
Who would have ever thought that rifle would still be shooting in competition with the best in the world today and still holding its own.
As far as being the most accurate rimfire rifle in the world? Who knows?
But can you name other rifles with a record equal to Black Death?
TKH
SPEC 5, Back Death was proclaimed to be the most accurate rimfire rifle in the world when it was first built and before it ever went to the first purchaser.
When Bill Calfee made that claim all hell broke loose in the RFBR world.
All types of statements were made about how this was "over the top", "impossible statement to back up", "no rifle is the most accurate it is the shooter and rifle and bullets and barrels, etc etc."
One thing for sure, it caused a lot of excitement, a lot of haters were born, and doubters created.
Who would have ever thought that rifle would still be shooting in competition with the best in the world today and still holding its own.
As far as being the most accurate rimfire rifle in the world? Who knows?
But can you name other rifles with a record equal to Black Death?
TKH
I'm not sure how many major matches BD has won but will take a stab at if there's been equal.
Tony, you've won a bunch with your rifles. How many major matches have you won with Tack Driver or TDX?
Chuck has with his over the years.
B.Brandt has won his fair share comes to mind.
And then there's Bruce's rifles.
How about in the early days of rfbr. Was there anyone dominant so to speak that would be in the mix?
It would be interesting to see the actual number of them all.
Last edited:
tonykharper
Well-known member
linkin,
You are right there have been others with impressive records.
One point I was trying to make was naming a rifle allows one to track the rifle's record even when there are different owners/shooters.
Bruce and B. Brandt have many, many very impressive wins. While it is possible to track their record(s) we don't know how many different rifles they may have used?
I would point out that Tack Driver (TD) and TDX each won an ARA outdoor and ARA indoor National. Each have won multiple PSLs, and they were my 10.5 lb and 13 lb. rifles used in many IR 50/50 three-gun National wins. But again, I don't know how that compares with unnamed rifles that have impressive histories.
Another point I was trying to make was just how long Black Death has stayed at the top of the game. It still wears the original barrel although I think it has been de glazed.
Chuck has a very impressive record with Uncle Tom. It would be interesting to see that complete record.
TKH
Last edited:
\
Tony:
Since I'm not 12 years old I've never felt the need to name my rifles. I've shot the same Sporter and 10 1/2 pound gun since I won my first Nationals.
My Sporter came to life after I replaced the defective Don Stith stock with a Pippin stock. The barrel is the same Benchmark that Kent Owens put on in 2013.
My 10 1/2 pound gun was originally Bill Hinegardner's gun. The barrel was replaced about 3 years ago by Gordon Eck and it has continued it's success.
Bruce H.
Last edited:
tonykharper
Well-known member
It's been a long time since we have been 12 years old, some longer than others. You are right about that MaxxPower.
TKH
George Atkins
Active member
Names
Tony,
When did Mr. Calfee start naming his builds? I have seen several of his older builds, that sport the name Calfee on the barrels, but no name on the stock. I will say that most of the ones I saw, were not full-on customs, more like 40X's and the like. I noticed just lately, he holds LBK very dear and his MD-PAS pistol, which does not seem to have a name, other than MD-PAS pistol.
I am not much into naming objects or cats, neither one will come to you when you call their name. But I understand why you may want to, as you said, you can track their records better. I guess if I were to name one of my 52"s, I would go with Minimally Involved. I don't shoot many sanctioned matches, so it kinda fits.
Tony,
When did Mr. Calfee start naming his builds? I have seen several of his older builds, that sport the name Calfee on the barrels, but no name on the stock. I will say that most of the ones I saw, were not full-on customs, more like 40X's and the like. I noticed just lately, he holds LBK very dear and his MD-PAS pistol, which does not seem to have a name, other than MD-PAS pistol.
I am not much into naming objects or cats, neither one will come to you when you call their name. But I understand why you may want to, as you said, you can track their records better. I guess if I were to name one of my 52"s, I would go with Minimally Involved. I don't shoot many sanctioned matches, so it kinda fits.
tonykharper
Well-known member
George,
I'm not sure when Bill started naming rifles, but I believe it predates the SPEC rifles.
Many people including me feel guns, all guns, are kind of a special tools, so much so they can be more than just tools.
If you look at the rifles, double rifles and shotguns built in England, Germany, and Italy, they were true works of art not just tools. In this country we have taken a more utilitarian approach. They were still held as special but more tools than art. Naming a rifle doesn't make it shoot any better, but it does indicate that it is special to the owner.
Bill always wanted his rifles to be special to the owner shooter. He offered to do custom artwork including a name on all of his builds. Many opted for nothing more than the "Calfee" name, others came up with something more personal.
Naming a rifle is a two-edge sword. If it shoots it gains a reputation, if it doesn't, it also gains a reputation, but not one you desire. This may be the reason many don't want a name on their rifle.
Of course, this naming business was mocked by the haters. Even to the point of naming their rifles "Turd guns". The most famous of these was the "Holy Turd". A 20 plus pound monster that met its match in Indiana. Haters naming their Turd guns has died out now, but the haters are still there. The amusing thing about the haters. The loudest ones have never met Calfee, or shot one of his rifles, or even know the history of the sport.
The PAS/SAP thing is a good example. Many people have said Calfee promotes PAS because that is all he knows. They think if he had spent time with SAP actions, he would see they are just as accurate as PAS.
I make no claim of knowing if one is better or more accurate than the other. I've been beat many times by both. But the truth is Bill has probably built more SAP actioned rifles and pistols than he has PAS. Morale of the story Bill believes what he believes and is in a position of knowing. Most of the haters have never built a winning rifle of any kind. But that doesn't keep them from disrespecting people that have.
OK, I've said too much.
Bring on the haters!
TKH