|
I'm going to get my butt kicked here and be the only guy who really did not care for mine.
I could not get the thing (223) to shoot less than a 6-8" group at 100 yards. I contribute most of it to the scope I got talked into putting on it.
The barrel seemed awful light and "whipy" to me. Again, not the guns fault so much. My 700 has a sporter barrell on it, but feels much heavier and solid compared to the 200.
The stock had some wierd warpage to it that I really didn't notice untill I shot it for a bit. Another contributory factor to the accuracy problem I believe, because the forearm was actually touching the barrel on the left side. (sopposed to be free floated)
Trigger was very poor. Albeit it had some adjustability to it, it sucked. Another accuracy pinpoint.
I didn't like not having a hinged floor plate. Again, spoiled by my 700BDL. Not the gun's fault.
So, why did I get rid of it? I could have bought a different stock, took a hit on the scope learning my lesson and getting a better one, replaced the trigger, put a heavier barrel on it. By then, I'd have blown the economical theory to heck.
I ended up trading it off for my Heritage Arms (Puma) .357 lever rifle. I have not looked back. I bought a H&R for my 223. It's not a great gun, but shoots WAY better than the stevens did. I think I took about $50.00 in the shorts on the trade. I call it piece of mind.
In summary. If your not too spoiled by other stuff & can live with a few possible faults it is a decent gun. I just did not like it.
Last edited by jerry; 11-12-2009 at 03:24 PM.
| 
