TargetTalk

I’m looking for a rifle to fit a 5’2”, fit, short arms, small hands, slight build female shooter. Price is not the issue. She is currently shooting an Anschutz 1803 in wood stock which weighs about 11 pounds as configured.

She has tried an Anschutz 2013, 500mm barrel with tube and feels this is more weight than she wants to deal with. Note: She hasn’t had a professional coach to help her with the 2013 weight which is about 14 pounds.

We were considering the Anschutz 1907, 66cm light barrel in a Precise stock which weighs 12.34 pounds according to written specs. For her the advantages are, Shorter Length of Pull, more adjustable. She hasn’t actually handled one yet.

I read the specs on the new Anschutz 54.30 and was surprised to see (from a fit point of view) the 54.30 is shorter overall by about an inch, weighs about 1 pound less (11.24 pounds), has the same barrel length, loading port moved closer by 30 mm (she has difficulty reaching port with 1803 wood). These seem like steps in the right direction for her. Again, ignoring price.

I’d appreciate some comments and recommendations. This looks to me like the 54.30 may be a better choice than the 1907/Precise. Either of these rifles are well over her shooting ability and I fully realize that she isn’t worthy but life is short and she’s past the top of the bell shaped curve.
I’m also aware that there are rumors of another Anschutz in the works.

Double post, didn't call it!

At my rifle club we have a shooter very similar. She shoots an Anschutz 1907, and the stock had to be shortened around 2". It's still somewhat too long.


Have you considered the 1903? (64 action, I know....)

She is an adult woman and this will probably be the last rifle she purchases. I was hoping to get her into a 54 action. I've also heard of some shooters going with the 1907/Precise, cutting the barrel down to about 20 inches and adding light weight bloop tube. I think the Precise stock will give her an acceptable Length Of Pull. Moving the loading port back would really help her but that pushes us into the 54.30.
Thanks for your comments

If an 1803 leaves room for improvement, then a 1903 won't be leaps and bounds better. The 1903's cheekpiece is adjustable without wedges (at least on new models) but the basic shape and size of the stock is much the same as the 1803. A 1903 Junior would be shorter in the butt, and lighter overall although it's still the intermediate 64 action and trigger (which may be better than the 1803's, but not as good as the 1907 or 54.30).

From memory the Precise can be set very short in the butt, and the grip can be moved fore-aft, so there would be less stretching to reach the grip or to load than with the 1803, or a 1907, or full-size 1903. The Precise stock has the whole action set further back, nearer the grip, and is much lower in the hand than an 1803 or 1907 anyway, so there would be less weight in front of the left hand and a shorter reach to load for the same length of butt. Use a 54.30 and the breech is closer still.

Would the 1914 stock be suitable? I don't know how short it is compared to the Precise, but it's shorter than any 1907 or 1913 I've seen. Being wood I'd suspect it can be modified more easily.

If funds allow have you thought of the System Gemini stock? These are also very short butted. Mine at its shortest is a tad over 9in from the rear surface of the buttplate to the front of the grip. These can be inlet for an Anschutz 1907 or 54.30, but also the Walther KK200/300, and others. Going off-topic slightly the Bleiker Lady is short-stocked (and at the front too to reduce weight), and has a very short breech. The new Walther KK500 has a similarly short action, although I', not sure how short the stock can be set.

A budget suggestion would be a BSA Mk IV ISU with 2in off the butt. The stock is very basic, but the breech is very short.

Thanks for your reply Tim S
The Precise hand grip does not allow front to back adjustment. At least the one I have access to. It's Length of Pull is very slightly over 11 Inches. All the wood stocks list the LOP as 12+ inches. The G&L stock sounds like it may take care of everything. 9 Inches is really getting down there. That may take care of her without having to go to the 54.30.
Hopefully the G&L modification to allow 1907 barrel action install is straight forward and doesn't compromise accuracy.
Thanks again for you help.

Don't mention it.

I measure LOP from the rear of the buttplate to the front of the grip, since many more rifles allow the trigger blade to be moved than the grip. Anschutz may measure from butt to trigger, so subtract 1in+ from their measurement to make a fair comparison.

Do you mean a G&E (Grunig & Elmiger) stock? Their wood/alu CS stock will I think take an Anschutz action with an adaptor. The butt certainly looks quite short, and the fore-end is not too square (an issue for small hands).

Yes, I meant G&E. Looking into their site now. Do you know if Anschutz accessories will fit on G&E rail, and sights on 11mm dovetail?

Correction Tim. I am looking at the System Gemini Site

System Gemini stocks use a standard Anschutz t-slotted rail. I've seen most types of Anschutz handstops fitted, as well as the common MEC, not to mention the System Gemini stop. I think the Grunig has the same rail.

Most German rearsights can be ordered to fit an Anschutz receiver dovetail.

Tim, thanks for all the good information.
I have some good options to look at now
I'm pretty sure some of them will help her a great deal.

George, Is this for Lynn?

Dont be too hasty to purchase anything, Edd has some of the G&E stocks if you need to try one on for size. Also Our club should be getting some new rifles for their Juniors that may fit her well, if thats the case you could try one for a day before purchasing. I just returned from Colorado and am setting up a new rifle for myself too, Im making the switch from FWB 2602 to a Precice 2013/69cm. that makes my FWB open for borrow also, but im sure mine will be too heavy, plus the heavy sight tube.

Cameron
Yes, it's for Lynn. No hurry, just starting the process. I'll PM tomorrow

Have you looked into a 1914?
The 1912 in used is even a bit lighter.

Also have a former shooter using a FWB 2700lite and she loves it.

Thanks for tip jhmartin, I'll check into it.

Just noticed they posed a photo of her here:
She is a small gal and a 2013 was just way too heavy for her.

http://www.goracers.com/news/2016/1/16/ ... path=rifle

This lady is 5'2". Do you think the girl in the picture is in that range?
Thanks for help

If Alathea is 5'2" it would surprise me.
I'm 6' and she barely gets to my shoulder.

Last year she shot her JO Qualifier here in NM and struggled to fire a 548. Not because of her ability ... it far exceeded that, but the gun was just too heavy for her, even in prone tipping her forward. Got the 2700lite before Nationals and has just excelled with it. ROUTINELY now shoots in the 580s. Now I'm sure a bunch of that is also her current coach, but she was right at the 580 mark as she entered college.

I have recently shot the KK500 Walter it is short in the butt compared to my current rifle 1913. I had the butt close to fully extended, I'm about 5'9 . Personally I would try this lady on as many of the new rifles that are about now days. I loved the Walther balance and the short loading is (once you get used to it) absolutely awesome.

yea! .... I was right ... Alathea is 5'1".
So this should really be one you should check out.

Just an FYI looking over the rifle spec sheets:
A FWB2700 is about 12.7 lbs
The 2700lite is 11.2lb
An Anschutz 1914 is 10.8