Daystate ֍ Huntsman Revere —vs.— ֍ Wolverine R

JungleShooter said:

֍ Huntsman Revere —vs.— ֍ Wolverine R​

Just recently I stumbled onto another thread that continued to give me the impression that the
Daystate Huntsman Revere
was somehow magic.


So, how does the Huntsman COMPARE to the Wolverine R?

And why does the Huntsman elicit so much reverence and adoration — but the Wolverine does not?


Please, enlighten me!

Matthias

Click to expand...

I think some people don't like bottle guns. The rifles both have the same action I believe.

Revere follows "HUNTSMAN" design architecture. ( tho side lever )
Wolverine follows "Redwolf" design architecture tho a conventional hammer system ( Non electro )

There is more to this, but the basic era of the basic design, size & weight, trigger etc ... does make them handle and shoot differently

Also want to add, I have a couple bottle guns, and the forward weight makes for offhand shooting and stalking not the easiest.

The revere is just super handy and has some.of the best ergonomics I've felt on any rifle.

The original Huntsman was the classic, fortunately the later models that followed still retained the magic.
Once held, the hand automatically goes into the pocket, either for the cash to purchase or a alternative short term release.

I have a Huntsman Regal and a Wolverine Hilite. The Regal is light and easy to maneuver. Works great off the deck or in the woods. The Wolverine is long and heavy. Much better for the bench or a blind. Silly quiet for a 100 fpe rifle.

I have 2 reveres and will never get rid of them they are beautiful and accurate. Had a wolverine didn’t care for the stock and low shot count. I get as many shots in 177 out of my revere if not more than I did out of the Wolverine! Oh just so you know im not a snob I have a pair of ghosts too

I had a .22 Regal for several months. I'm one of the few that sold. Quality is top notch. But I find my self shooting less and less and couldn't justify having two nice PCP's. My other PCP is a Taipan Vet .25 Compact. It was a coin flip. Taipan won.

There's also the Wolverine Type C (Cylinder). I like the sleek look of it compared to the bottle version. I'm curious how many shots it gets in the FAC version. It's hard to deny though that the Huntsman Regal/Revere is an all around gun.

JungleShooter said:

֍ Huntsman Revere —vs.— ֍ Wolverine R​

Just recently I stumbled onto another thread that continued to give me the impression that the
Daystate Huntsman Revere
was somehow magic.


So, how does the Huntsman COMPARE to the Wolverine R?

And why does the Huntsman elicit so much reverence and adoration — but the Wolverine does not?


Please, enlighten me!

Matthias

Click to expand...

I have 2 Wolverine in 22 cal and 25 cal. The Wolverines have longer barrels than the Huntsman which is made to be a carry gun in the bush so the shorter barrel.

eulrichb said:

I have 2 Wolverine in 22 cal and 25 cal. The Wolverines have longer barrels than the Huntsman which is made to be a carry gun in the bush so the shorter barrel.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have said that my Wolverines have the longer barrels.

Mr.H said:

I had a .22 Regal for several months. I'm one of the few that sold. Quality is top notch. But I find my self shooting less and less and couldn't justify having two nice PCP's. My other PCP is a Taipan Vet .25 Compact. It was a coin flip. Taipan won.

Click to expand...

I was the fortunate recipient of the Revere. Handles perfectly. Will use it hunting this fall.

Peskådot671 said:

There's also the Wolverine Type C (Cylinder). I like the sleek look of it compared to the bottle version. I'm curious how many shots it gets in the FAC version. It's hard to deny though that the Huntsman Regal/Revere is an all around gun.

View attachment 478651

Click to expand...

They could at least carbon fiber wrap the bottle. So it would look as classy as the stock.

I think the difference is ergonomics and personal preference. I've had a Revere for a couple of years. It's been totally reliable, very accurate, and handles perfectly (for me). It reminds me of my RF sporter rifles. I had a Wolverine for one day. I knew immediately that the stock would not work for me, so I returned it. IMO, in terms of fit, they are almost mutually exclusive. I'm sure I could have worked on the Wolverine stock and scope mounting position and come up with a workable combination. But the Revere fits me so well I didn't see the point. Almost anything can be made to work from the bench, but if shooting from position, the rifle really needs to fit without unnatural effort.

Dr. Kralenstein said:

I think some people don't like bottle guns. The rifles both have the same action I believe.

Click to expand...

ding ding ding ding . . . give the man a cigar!

Going on looks, the wolverine stock just doesn't do it for me. The revere looks, feels, handles, and shoots like a dream.

It's kind of like a woman. If I don't like the way she looks, why the heck would I want to touch her?

I have a Revere regulated in .177 Cal....

I have Wolverines HP and non HP.

I have a Red Wolf non HP.

Revere is lighter and shorter.

Red Wolf non HP is the must comfortable to shoulder.

Wolverine non HP is really comfortable, gives many shots per fill.

Wolverines HP are bulky.

I tried to find this model when I was shopping for a Wolverine. I really liked the cylinder look. Could only find the bottle rifle.