Actually have two Omega 50 caliber rifles and one Encore 209x45. Don't ask why two... long story and one is for sale.
The one I've been shooting is the stainless model in black synthetic stock. The action is a simple affair and the rifle is very easy to load, easy to clean, and has fairly nice lines. The scope mount arrangement is exactly the same as for the Encore - same narrow hole spacing and distance between the two sets of base screws. The same base fits both the Encore and the Omega. There are some good mount systems available for both rifles, but I find T/Cs insistence upon the short screw placement to create mounting problems with many scopes.
Positioning a scope on either can be a problem due to the physical dimensions of the scope, the constraints of the short distance between rings, and the location of the action's hammer beneath the scope. The Omega is only slightly more forgiving than the Encore as far as clearance between scope and hammer.
The trigger and hammer arrangement is both simple and functional, if not CHEAP in construction. There is no adjustment on the trigger mechanism and amateur smithing on the trigger can create some real problems (as I've just learned ) Triggers are generally reported to be fairly good, but my stainless had some rough creep followed by a too-heavy pull. I was able to hone contact surfaces of the engagement between those two pieces and achieve a very nice trigger pull, but in doing so I wound up with a hammer that does not always produce ignition. I've made further adjustments and may have corrected that problem but will need wait 'til tomorrow to find out. Bottom line is you may get one with a decent trigger or run into a stubborn one as I did. The Encore trigger is just as unpredictable and just as lacking in adjustment, but Mike Bellm's site and products go along way toward helping correct any trigger issues with that rifle.
When I say the trigger/hammer mechanism seems cheap that may be a bit of an understatement. There are two springs which provide the force for the trigger/hammer action. Those springs seem very cheaply made and the fit seems imprecise. Operating the lever takes a bit of force to snap the action open or shut. The shutting action in particular is noisey and would probably startle any animal that might otherwise have hung around while you reload. (It does happen. )
The action seals up better than the Encore's (which isn't bad in that regard) and there is very little gas leakage - scopes are fairly safe on an Omega. Recoil isn't handled very well by the stock's design - at least for my large frame, might be better for a shorter person - length of pull seems about 3/4" less than an Encore, and the trigger guard/lever assembly can really beat up your trigger hand with heavy loads.
The Omega is really a simple design that is surely MUCH cheaper than the Encore to manufacture. There are two sets of PLASTIC spacers that hold the trigger and hammer assemblies in place in the Omega and I've found nothing remotely close to that in the Encore.
To wind this long winded answer up, choosing solely between the Encore and the Omega - get the Encore and in particular get the Encore 209x50.
In either case I would avoid the laminated factory stock. There are several reports of cracked T/C laminate stocks floating about the net.
I would suggest you take a look at the White Model 98, the new Winchester muzzleloader, and/or the Remington 700MLS before jumping on either of those rifles.
UPDATE!! A little further honing and the ignition problem is fixed - went to the garage and fired five primers into some cardboard boxes. 5 for 5 with a light trigger pull (would only fire before if the trigger was pulled in a very particular way). Cool! Nice trigger now and the hammer block safety still works perfectly.
Underclocked you are sure hard on the boys at T/C , but maybe they need a little of your kind of stuff. Looks like you are still looking for a replacement for that T/C Encore 209-45 let me know what you want for it, maybe I can come up with some cash. :lol:
I don't think it hurts to make observations about a product's flaws just as it doesn't hurt to applaud the good. Both rifles are design marvels in many ways. The use of cheap springs and plastic internal parts is going a bit far IMHO on a hi tech, fairly hi dollar rifle.
Make me an offer I can't refuse David. I had the QLA cut off and an 11 degree target crown put on the 209x45 barrel. Thought it would allow me to shoot the conicals I want to shoot with accuracy. Nope! The good news is the sabots still fly just fine. Shot a 3/4" group with 180 grain XTPs at 100 yards.
Cutting the QLA off leaves the front sight screw too far forward to remount that sight without first drilling and tapping another screw hole. I can't use iron sights effectively anymore so that doesn't concern me but it might be a problem for someone else.
I hate it that I can't get that rifle to perform the way I want it to as I now have a terrific trigger and have gotten used to the compact feel of the rifle. Bellm hammer extension, 1x ovesized hinge pin, and an awful lot of time and effort but still........ Whatcha got to trade?
A forum community dedicated to the great outdoors and hunting enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about hunting, fishing, survival, archery gunsmithing, optics, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!