Anschutz 1700 series sporter

Eo1n8wrd

Does anybody out there own one of these? I just want a general opinion on it as i am going to order one shortly in .17hmr but will not get to see it as it is not in stock from the dealer i will be going through.
I would appreciate any comments or reviews on this model, i have a fair bit of googling done but there is just a few articles from retailers and the like, looking for the end-user opinion.
Cheers folks.

Traumadoc

I have one , lovely looking rifle, but groups are only so-so. I had a heavy barrel .22 Ruger that shot better groups.

It may be a scope problem , and I only recently got a decent cleaning rod so I will give it a go with a new scope on Friday.

Sparks

DURC has three of these, if I've got my model numbers right. Nice rifle to shoot, quite accurate even compared to an anschutz match rifle. I find them a bit awkward with head position but that's probably because I have a weird head (you should see the air rifle setup I have to use). And they're robust - DURC's been using them since the early 1990s at least, and they're still going strong with minimal (ie. almost none at all) maintenance and higher-than-a-singel-user-would-ever-get usage levels.

Cass

Not sure if this is what you're after, but I have an Anschutz 1710D in .22lr. Its a little tack driver. The scope is an old Tasco that i'm hoping to replace shortly, but i cannot fault the rifle.

She is heavy(ish) barrel with the open sights still attached. I sometimes take off the scope for a bit of open sighted shooting. The action are great as you would expect from Anschutz. Overall she is a little heavier than other .22s such as CZ, but even at 100yds she is capable of 1" or less groups of 10 shots.

I have never owned one in .17, but if the .22 is anything to go by you will not be disappointed by it.

eireshot

I have the 1717D .17 hmr, superb rifle, Very accurate , you get what you pay for, pure class.

Traumadoc

My bad, I have a 1517 - apologies.

IRLConor

Sparks wrote: »

still going strong with minimal (ie. almost none at all) maintenance and higher-than-a-single-user-would-ever-get usage levels.

To give you an idea, one of DURC's has been averaging at least 100 rounds per week for the last 10 years and to the best of my knowledge has been cleaned about 5 times in that period.

If I was in the market for a rifle like that I'd probably buy one.

Eo1n8wrd

Thanks for all the replies, but i must admit the number of views compared to posts is a bit surprising.
Traumadoc; i was originally looking at a 1517 also, can't rightly remember what made me look at the 1700 series. i would be very interested to know if it is just a problem with the scope of if you got a bad egg, i daresay everyone else would like to know as well! hopefully you will post a few group shots in the coming days.
Thanks eireshot and ezridax for the photos, what i am looking at is essentially a combination of both of your rifles, the 1717 .17 hmr heavy barrel with the monte carlo style stock. Can you tell me ezridax if this style of stock is comfortable to use? i would imagine that it would be a great help on a scoped rifle or is it just down to personal preference?
Sparks and irlconor, i must admit i am a newbie to the shooting scene and i actually had to go and google DURC, i had no idea what you were on about :-) I would like to know what you mean by a 'wierd head position' though sparks.
I will let you all know how i get on with it, Assuming of course that my licence comes through :-)
Thanks,
Eo1n8wrd.

IRLConor

Eo1n8wrd wrote: »

I would like to know what you mean by a 'wierd head position' though sparks.

Sparks is from Kerry and hence a bit funny looking.

Seriously though: rifles which have a fixed cheek rest (i.e. most/many sporter/hunting-style rifles) suit some people better than others. Depending on the design of the stock, the height of the scope mounts, the shape of your cheeks, the length of your neck and the way you naturally hold the rifle you might find that the cheek rest is too low or too high for you.

If the cheek rest is too low, you can compensate with something like this but if the cheek rest is too high you may have to contort your head to get your eye behind the scope.

Cass

Eo1n8wrd wrote: »

............... Can you tell me ezridax if this style of stock is comfortable to use? i would imagine that it would be a great help on a scoped rifle or is it just down to personal preference?...............

IRLConor wrote: »

............Depending on the design of the stock, the height of the scope mounts, the shape of your cheeks, the length of your neck and the way you naturally hold the rifle you might find that the cheek rest is too low or too high for you.................

I think IRLConor summed it up nicely there. As with a shotgun try before buying where possible. The Anschutz suits me perfectly with no stretching, or strainng. Though it may not suit everyone. Hate to be so "neutral" but there is no right answer.

Sparks

Actually, I'm pretty sure they've never made a non-adjustable stock that would fit me, apart from maybe the tyrolean stocks:



Some folks are just cursed with a long distance from the underneath of their cheekbone to the pupil of their eye

time lord

I have an Anschutz 1517 .17hmr. Before it I had a CZ .17hmr. Out hunting i found no difference between them. The CZ was a lot cheaper to buy. When I got the Anschutz first as with the CZ I did a lot of 5 round grouping at Midland. I was using the same ammo as I had with the CZ. As I said I grouped a lot and only after grouping umpteen times did the Anschutz pull away from the CZ.

It didn't get better the more I fired, more the overall groups as a whole scored better than the CZ ever so slightly. Not every group or even every second group just slightly better overall the day. I'm glad I own it but its not much better than the cz and certainly not better enough to justify the price difference but that never stopped BMW or Mercedes selling their products:D

Tackleberrywho

time lord wrote: »

I have an Anschutz 1517 .17hmr. Before it I had a CZ .17hmr. Out hunting i found no difference between them. The CZ was a lot cheaper to buy. When I got the Anschutz first as with the CZ I did a lot of 5 round grouping at Midland. I was using the same ammo as I had with the CZ. As I said I grouped a lot and only after grouping umpteen times did the Anschutz pull away from the CZ.

It didn't get better the more I fired, more the overall groups as a whole scored better than the CZ ever so slightly. Not every group or even every second group just slightly better overall the day. I'm glad I own it but its not much better than the cz and certainly not better enough to justify the price difference but that never stopped BMW or Mercedes selling their products:D

Like all things with rifles, you pay for the slighest improvements

Scopes the same, to get 3 or 4% better light transmission you could pay a grand more than it's nearest competitor.

I love BMW's too:D

A sako is a huge price diff than many of the competitors also in centrefire also