Thanks.
One more question. I did a search on it and actually got a result or two (I tried a long time ago and got nothing on it...spelling error maybe). There are comments that the round was inaccurate (one foot groups vs. 1.5 inch groups)....that seems odd to me. Do you think that Remington would even market a round that was that ridulously inaccurate? They must have tested it. Wouldn't you think?
I saw the "lack of rifling marks" argument as the main reason for it's demise. What's your take on that?