If you accessed this page directly from a Search Engine, please click here to go to our home page.

FAQs - General Questions

What accreditation do we have?

Australia was supposed to have achieved ‘Uniform Gun Laws’ in 1996. Most Aussies grumble that it never happened, that the laws remain different from State to State.

In this they are quite correct. In Australia, much legislation including industry licensing is controlled by the States, including firearms licenses. Sometimes overseas enquirers have trouble understanding the situation, however that’s the way it works.

Except, before I forget, if I want to export some guns. In that case my customer has to provide simple paperwork to help me process an ‘Export Approval’ through the Federal authority. The State licenses we hold satisfy the requirement of Federal Authorities on those occasions.

The documentation -
Queensland - Firearms Dealer’s License
Queensland - Armourer’s License
Queensland - Weapons Act - Ministerial Exemption

This accreditation, so we are reliably informed, affords us the ability to legally purchase and sell firearms, and broker sales of firearms - also to manufacture, recondition, repair and modify firearms and related equipment.

The Ministerial Exemption, Queensland Weapons Act - legally authorises our Defence/security work, essentially permitting us to address all those projects defence, security, special applications, etc. that are usually restricted in some way by firearms legislation.

How and why did we begin making rifles?

Most people enjoy making things. I always have - and if you wish to take a look at a fellow’s sum total of experience back to an earlier age - I used to enjoy the usual construction sets and model kits. I enjoyed an earlier age of being able to build, but not often fly, my own design model aircraft.

You can laugh (and any younger people reading this may take note before known civilisation collapses) but the techniques of construction and the discipline of application towards difficult and complex projects were learned then (most often to the detriment of school & homework). The basic concepts of interlocking, interdependent, engineered componentry - control and utilisation of dynamics and harmonics followed by the often mindnumbing task of packaging the whole thing into an operable unit was, for a young bloke in sixties Australia, of similar technical risk as putting a man on the moon.

A thing I have noted with interest over the years - many people involved with the technical side of the firearms industry are also well known in other fields - aeronautics (model and fullsize), motorcycles, electronics - you name it. Seems that technology is the core of their being and that there is not enough room within the one field to absorb their talents. I shall not even mention Sir Hiram Maxim.

Many people tend to follow some sequential path through life. I went on to gain engineering qualifications which, I guess, give me the skills and accreditation to continue building things - these days, as Vulcan permits - heavier, stronger, tougher, and in our particularly focussed field, infinitely more capable.

Australia seems to have no regard for such skills - or at least lacks the environment to harness such, Nationally, as effectively as we could. One of the most critical problems associated with engineering/manufacturing in Australia is the continuance of chronic ‘boom and bust’ cycles. Our ‘experts’ give all sorts of excuses for this. The most jaded is ‘not enough population to generate sufficient economies of scale’. This is, by any account, a pathetic and specious argument.

So, as it happened, during one of those ‘bust’ parts of our ongoing ‘boom and bust’ cycles quite a few years ago an associate in the shooting sports asked me if it were possible to build ‘a better match rifle’ - in fact - ‘the best match rifle’.

Like many good ideas this one started life at the kitchen table as a few sketches. At the time my pal Vernon had well over thirty years competition shooting experience, however his school teaching career offered him little in the way of engineering knowledge.
To cut the story short we had a team; Vern, an expert marksman with profound (I kid not, profound) reloading and load development skills wanting a superbly accurate ‘new generation’ match rifle, and myself, an engineer looking for an interesting and hopefully profitable project.

That rifle has had a career like the proverbial farmer’s axe, has had three barrels fitted, has been re stocked once, been re bedded a few times.

This original prototype has more recently had a new 21 lug multi thread breech fitted (a new bolthead and locking ring) not because of wear, rather as the result of a particularly wooden headed and officious range officer who took it into his head to attack the rifle with a hammer and various other tools of destruction when an out of spec cartridge was accidentally jammed in chamber (I hope that character tries that trick with a live round jam again one day. If he blows his pecker off - justice will be done).

Cut the story short, eh? Oh well, I tried. Let’s round off the later part. That first prototype was a conventionally bedded - last generation match rifle - timber stock, bonded alloy bedding block with pre stressed/ tensioned ferrules co-axial with the bedding screws, flat bottomed action, and all the trimmings. We built a few more like that though the action design became more refined alongside the development of front and rear locking actions, multi lug breeching adaptation to different calibres/chamberings and (when required) magazine feed.

We developed our third last bolt action concept to satisfy the Australian Army Sniper Tender. The modular construction/commonality of componentry concept was developed from our early experimental work. Since we had sufficient notice of the upcoming tender (for once) we were able to refine the concept in time.

We offered OZArmy superbly accurate, reliable rifles with commonality of stock components, triggers, springs and fasteners, accessories, accoutrements, layout, ergonomics and sighting equipment. The only thing we could not do was make a Big 50 rifle and a 7.62 to the same size and weight.

We have refined this concept quite some since then.

Images of rifles appear on the PRS. page. The content appears to be MilSpec. What is the idea behind these rifles? Are they the only sort made by PRS? Why do we make them that way?

We set up the page as originally formatted to pass on our message to the defence/security sector of the world market. Perhaps this was not such a bright idea since a few months after becoming electronically up and running those unconscionable events happened in the U.S. on September 11.

We certainly do not have the resources of some huge corporation. We lack staff devoted to ‘polishing our image’. Therefore, for some while, our ‘page’ has been - our page. The time has come to add some information - to tell a little more about what we can supply and how we go about it. The ‘plus’ for the customer is that all the information here comes direct from the ‘Rocket Scientist’ himself - not his advertising team.

People have contacted us about our original information. The enquiries tend to be concerned about whether the MilSpec configured rifles have the same accuracy potential as other more conventionally configured products, whether a more conventional looking rifle will perform better - and all sorts of queries from countless directions about cartridge/projectile/load combinations, rifling twist, sights, accessories, et cetera and ad infinitum.

This is a reasonably complex situation to analyse. The best way to put it goes like this -

Firstly we have to stress that PRS. side magazine, alloy stocked MilSpec rifles are superbly accurate. Benchrest accuracy is what we are talking about - and there is evidence from testing indicating that the symmetrical cuts for magazine and ejection ports (the side mag. rifles) make for a better stressing solution over the single shot (ejection port on the side) action. In other words - more accuracy from a lighter, handier, more versatile, package.

Tolerancing (the closeness of fit) of operating parts can be slightly neater in our civilian firearms. This has infinitely more to do with presentation and cosmetics than function and accuracy. Other than a few critical areas (cartridge headspace, chamber tolerance, bore dimensions, would be the prime examples) the increased operating clearances given to the MilSpec rifles actually have a minimal effect on accuracy. One item we do NOT stint on is barrel quality - only the best quality match barrels are used.

We make our civilian rifles the way the customer wants them. Nice and tight and clean and slick for target usage though sometimes other applications require something closer to MilSpec ‘Mud Clearance’. Yes. We actually give our customers the choice. We find this better than the lucky dip others offer.

Where OUR MilSpec rifles have it over the conventionally stocked rifles is the method of construction, the action bedding system utilised, our unique modular construction, and the configuration of the rifles. In other words, the package is modern - not just how we go about making them or the materials we use - the total package is designed to provide a complete solution to a centuries old problem - how to reliably place the next bullet into exactly the same spot on the target as the previous shot.

So - other than those illustrated - what other firearms do we make?

Our core activity is manufacturing our range of bolt action Match/Sniping rifles - those illustrated on the home page. These rifles come in different size options to suit the individual chambering. Front, mid, and rear locking actions are also available. Left and right handed actions are available - as are magazine placement options.
All these products may be supplied to the traditionalist with optional laminated timber stocks fitted with an aircraft grade aluminium alloy action bedding sub frame.

We began live fire testing of our second automatic rifle design a few days after Anzac Day this year (April 2002). We achieved an initial cyclic firing rate of 750 rounds per minute straight off the prototyping bench. Consistently repeatable ‘double taps’ could be achieved with the two stage trigger with the selector set to auto fire mode.

The prototype rifle is chambered to 7.62x51 mainly for convenience and economy during development and live firing tests - and though plans are in place to trial 338 Lapua and 50 BMG versions - a significant part of the project is to assess accurate placement of multiple bullet strikes at long range for the anti materiel role.

And, yes, it IS possible to group to one half MOA. with burst fire.

What else do we do? Want a Brown Bess? We’ll make you a Brown Bess! It’ll be more accurate than the original and have a more reliable lock; It’ll cost much more than the original did in 1800 and certainly be better finished. The trouble is - all you’ll have for your money is a Brown Bess.

Let us look at this in more detail. Ballistics, as applied to conventional small arms has not progressed much in a century. We have certainly left the age of the flintlock behind (except for thousands of grand people round the world who love their Brown Besses, Kentucky rifles, Enfields, Bakers, Fergusons, Jaegers, their Eggs, their Nocks - and so on). Industry has gone light years REFINING the technology - has just not achieved much by way of improving it.

We are caught in a similar trap. We have to offer accurate rifles (since that is our specialty) chambered to commonly available conventional ammunition (since otherwise ammunition costs are usually too great for most customers). This cramps our style - very much limits our ability to help the customer achieve the best outcome if the customer relates to us the wrong idea about what he wants - his user requirement.

So, for instance, for most of last century (the 20th.), a certain firearms industry worked hard (I cannot say colluded here) towards offering their customers literally millions of rifles with too short magazines, slow twist barrels, and all the other combinations and niceties that guaranteed the only way to achieve accuracy was with miniscule bullets.

Why? ‘Cos the rifles would tear action from bedding if asked to fire the right weight pill to suit the cartridge. Those that were set up to fire decent sized cartridge/projectile weight combinations had to be set up with additional under barrel recoil lugs, stock cross bolts, reinforcement screws/pins, extended tangs and all manner of hidden trickery in the hope of getting out a few dozen (what used to be rationalised as ‘hunting accuracy’) shots before either the stock split or the sight reticle vibrated apart. This scenario influenced the way several generations of sportsmen selected, even talked about, their firearms. The wealthy, the lucky, or the very knowledgeable managed to acquire custom equipment or one of the more sound military rifles. The rest of the sporting population usually had to make do with what was commercially available from retailers who often were less than knowledgeable about ballistics.

Okay. So if you have read all the above you most probably have arrived at the conclusion that we -

are not all that impressed with the reliable performance of ‘traditional’ firearms fabrication methods
have worked long and hard towards creating a comprehensive technology that affords us the ability to provide accurate reliable hardware
encourage our accuracy and performance oriented customers to purchase one of our PRS. ‘new generation’ rifles
continue to provide a service to the traditionalist - ‘old’ rifles manufactured new, old rifles restored to new, and old rifles blueprinted to a level of targetting performance their original makers never dreamed possible

Are we Q.A.’d?

We usually take this question to mean, “Have we created, implemented, and continue to operate a Quality Assurance programme complying with acknowledged standards”. The answer is, “Yes”.

Like many people in industry who have gained accreditation in the subject; Q.A. does not interest me in the abstract sense at all. The PRACTICAL implications of Q.A. however are another matter, especially when we at PRS require some solid verification of maintenance of standards from OUR suppliers of goods and services.

So, when you live and work in Australia maintaining standards can be a problem. So, for instance, you try to order in some plastics sheet material and the guy you phone says - “No problem mate, she’s U.V. proof. It’s all been stacked outside for two years, and it’s still okay”. Try gaining Q.A. documentation from that source!

What systems have we devised and implemented?

For the Defence/Security customer and for the commercial customer - compliance with AS/NZS/ISO 9001 - affording the customer assurance of compliance within our process of operations, medium and low risk projects. Complex projects requiring extensive outsourcing of services and materials, especially when technical risk, timeframe, and through life support are of concern may be coordinated, if necessary, through third party management.

For the individual customer - We’ve implemented quality management procedures for the daily operation of business and process of operations as well as meeting contractual obligations to major customers. We have instituted a flexible system able to be adjusted to the exact requirement of any project.

Which is another way of saying - the process is implemented, in operation; offers advantages and security to the customer - also provides this without dumping unwarranted extra expense upon the individual customer.