Differences in the Blaser line?

[sierra11b]

I tried searching two years worth of threads but could not find any direct information on the subject. As posted before, I am in the market for either the Blaser, Sako TRG, AIAE or custom 700 build and want all the information I can get before making a decision.

So what are the differences between the Blaser Tac2 and R93 LRS2? Is the Tac2 the newer model or is it the more affordable, less customized cousin? From what I gather the Tac2 is to the AIAE and the R93 LRS2 is to the AW in terms their line of rifles (not necessarily in terms of specs vs. the AI line of course).

Can someone please school me on both in as much detail as possible, please?

 

[sierra11b]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

No biters?

 

[MinorDamage]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sierra11b</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No biters? </div></div>

Maybe it is because the precision shooting community here doesn't have many users of that product. That might tell you a little about the system to begin with. As for the others, do a search using the link below. It will offer you better quality search results than the search organic to the forum.

Sniper's Hide Search

Bottom line, you may get few biters or many...The Sako TRG and AIs are PURPOSE built military precision weapons platforms. The Remington is not. It can be built into a fine shooting rifle. You have to choose what you NEED and how YOU are going to use them.

The Blaser is not a worthy option for a tactical rig, but I am sure someone may disagree with me.

Josh

 

[71firebird400]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

Tac 2 replaced the LRS2. With the LRS2, the 338LM was on its own specific chassis and could not swap barrels with the smaller calibers. With the Tac 2 you can swap the 338LM down to a 223 REM if you desire. Also, the Tac 2 has an integral rail. Check blaserpro.com, this question just came up. Based on my friends experience with a Tac 2 338LM I would look elsewhere (TRG, AI, or custom).

 

[David Hagmann]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

Just bought a lrs2 today and after 10 calls to blaser,sigarms, 4 or 5 distributors and a couple dealers the best I can tell is sigarms used to be the importer for blaser. Then a while back blaserusa started to set up and do their own importing. They left the tactical rifle known now as the tactical 2 with sigarms. The guns are all made at the same blaser factory. But sigarms imports the tactical 2 and blaser imports the lrs 2. The big differences that I have been told are 2. The tactical 2 can accept the 338 lapua along with .223, 308, 300 winmag. The lrs 2 accepts 223, 256 norma,308, 300 winmag and 6.5x59. Or something like this. Anyway the tac2 is more mil ammo and the lrs is more traditional hunting ammo. The other big difference is the tac2 has a picatinny rail for mil based optics and the lrs has saddle scope mount for tradional hunting based optics. Hope this helps

 

[hoguer]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave-O</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The other big difference is the tac2 has a picatinny rail for mil based optics and the lrs has saddle scope mount for tradional hunting based optics. </div></div>

lol. The LRS2 is not a "hunting" setup. I have one with the Picatinny Rail saddle mount and it is a Bad Ass long rang MOFO. its built in 308, and like you said if you want one in 338, it does have a different chassis, but the 308 chassis is interchangeable between all other available calibers. Also the Tac has the Integral rail, and it honestly IS a better design. It is longer extended to the rear, a problem i have dealt with for a long time on the picatinny rail mount for my LRS2 untul i finally sent it to Murphy Precision and had a custom rear extended rail for it. Now it is perfect. These things are very comfortable, but to some they are not so get behind one and play with it. The straight pull bolt is BAD ASS. I love it. It is so cool. Very cool. Check them all out and see what feels best to YOU.

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

I have limited time using the Tactical 2 on two different occasions.

To even mention the Blaser Tac-2 and any AI rifle in the same post makes me shiver.

They are cool because they are straight pull. That's about the best I can say for them. One I shot was complete shite. It ejected rounds when a magazine was inserted. It was inaccurate and just an ergonomic mess. One I shot was acceptably accurate.

If I could get one for about half of what they are going for, then I would have it for the novelty of the design. At the asking price there is no way I would buy one over a AI or TRG.

 

[300ATT]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

The Blaser Tac 2 has a slightly wider/longer chassis than the Blaser LRS to accommodate the .338 Lapua. Otherwise the Blaser LRS 2 and the Blaser Tac 2 are almost identical - the barrels are not Interchangeable between the two.

The LRS has more caliber selections if you like the one gun/switch barrel concept and you can get any LRS barrel drilled and tapped for their pic-rail but this is something you have to request from the dealer.

 

[gamedogs4life]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

Wow I am surprised to see negative reviews on the blaser I've had minimal amount of time behind a tac 2 in 338 I must say there wasn't much recoil so that a plus but I can't say much about any other aspect of the rifle I did notice the bolt was noisy and required substantial amount of momentum to close properly if I was gentle with it it would miss fire I do like the way it looks I must admit though ... ow well i can't wait to get my dta srs and do a comparison

...

 

[fish30114]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

I've shot the Blaser a lot. cool looking, the straight pull bot is a novelty to me, didn't really care for it one way or the other much I suppose, with a slight leaning against just cause it's so uncommon--reasonably accurate, and so-so ergonomically in my opinion.

As others, I agree that it is not in the league with an AI or TRG. I have had both of those by the way, and still have the TRG. There is always a trade off, and the Sako factory accessories are retardly expensive, but this is true for the Blaser stuff too, with the added negative bonus that the Blaser stuff is probably harder to get than the TRG stuff, which is hard enough. The TRG is awfully easy to find a load for that shoots superbly, and this is a common experience with TRG's. The new folder stock on the TRG is abusively priced, (mine doesn't have one) but they are the shiznit! I shot one recently with it, and it is nice, but dang it's hard to justify the extra $2k plus....All in all, for the price, it would be awful hard to beat a fixed config stock TRG (around $2600 nowadays) and rock and roll--it is simply a better mousetrap than any of the blaser stuff, I think this is a pretty universal opinion.

Good luck on your choice.

 

[71firebird400]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

gamedogs4life & fish301-

Did either of you experience great accuracy with the Tac 2 338LM using factory ammo?

Thanks!

 

[fish30114]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

Firebird, the only ammo I shot through the tac 2 was factory, and it was Lapua factory ammo. I do not recall the bullet weight, but the bulllet was a Scenar, I would guess it was a 250 gr since my buddy likes mid to light for caliber weights, but it may have been a 300....

The rifle was reasonably accurate, but by way of comparison, he has a TRG 42 also in 338 Lapua Mag, and with the exact same ammo it was consistently far more accurate. In my TRG 308, now I know that's apples and BIG apples, but it was/is way more accurate than the TAC 2. I am sure that you can tweak a load and get accuracy you would be satisfied with, but in a nutshell, I think it is pretty universally acknowledged that a TRG or AI, will shoot a lot of different loads really REALLY well, without having to tweak them (the load or the rifle

)

I will also say that the felt recoil with his TRG was much less than the TAC 2, both shot prone with rear bag and off of Harris bi-pods front. My AI in 338 was a real shooter as well, but definitely showed a preference for 250 grain pills, and even shot the 225 Accubonds really great--I had originally set it up for a blind sitting rig, capable of really reaching out there for Elk. Never shot an elk with it, but smoked a couple of mule deer WAY out there, and frankly, it's TOO much gun for them--and by way out there I mean 450-500 real (lasered) yards. I really like the styling of the Blasers to be honest, but I really think the serious guys will tell you to go the route of an AI or TRG every time.....and that would include me--maybe I qualify as a semi-serious guy--with a fair bit of experience!

 

[71firebird400]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

THanks a lot, fish. I have a friend with a Blaser that he is trying to get sorted out and the 250gr Scenar's seemed hit or miss.

That is strange that the felt recoil was very different between the TRG and the Blaser- they are approx. the same weight and use nearly identical muzzle brakes.

Thanks for the info!

 

[gamedogs4life]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

The Australian army uses them.. so that's a plus.. I think I'm not 100 % on this though that they are a .6 moa gun but id much rather have a dta srs for the price from what I have read (and I'm no professional) theye aren't bad but there's much better out of the box rifles out there for the price they are easy on the eye though I must admit but looks mean nothing

 

[fish30114]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 71firebird400</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is strange that the felt recoil was very different between the TRG and the Blaser- they are approx. the same weight and use nearly identical muzzle brakes.
</div></div>

Firebird, I hear you on that, and I actually thought the same when firing the rifles. I really didn't expect a diff to amount to much, but after about 20 rounds through each in alternating sessions, 4 of the TRG, 4 of the Blaser, and back and forth and so on, it became clear that the TAC 2 was a sharper recoil, both of them were using their respective factroy brakes, which as you say are very similar. It could be as simple as stock fit, the TAC 2 was set to fit my friend well, which is pretty close for me, as was the TRG, however the TRG is the fixed stock variant--so I don't know what difference that was, but it was definitely noticeable. I am not very recoil shy, many of my friends state that a certain rifle of mine kicks a lot, and I always think--not so much IMO, with the exception of my Sauer 202's in bigger cals, like 375 and 416--those kick like mules! But point being, I could defintiely tell a difference, it was not un-shootable or anything just more---interesting, one previous poster mentioned how well his TAC 2, or one he was shooting handled recoil, so that particular thing is clearly pretty subjective. I will say that I actually liked the way my buddy had his TAC 2 set up for fit, maybe cheek weld was better/tighter or something, and that increased the felt recoil.

Good luck on your choice, I will say that also like a former poster, the reason the AI and TRG's are so popular probably has a lot to do with their known consistent performance in the harshest operating theatres over a good bit of time--that is always a factor to me in assessing perfromance!

 

[gamedogs4life]

Re: Differences in the Blaser line?

Well put . Fish