Scout21
Member
It's no secret that manufacturers have been making bolt action rifles, for better or for worse, cheaper and cheaper for a century now. The Remington model 721 was made into the cheaper model 700, which lead to the model 710, then the model 770, for example. Corners were cut at every interval in the name of saving money.
While overall I think that as consumers we have gained more than we have lost with the offering of inexpensive models, I'm curious how much cheaper manufacturers can safely make these rifles. I was looking at my Ruger American recently and I really don't know how they can make it any cheaper. It has a cheap matte blued finish with no discernable polishing, the stock is as cheap as they likely could have made it, the whole rifle was made up of easy-to-machine cylinders, it has a molded trigger guard, and it uses detachable magazines. I love the rifle for what it is, but as much as Ruger may want to flaunt these attributes as beneficial I know that the rifle was made that way to cut costs.
I struggle to see how manufacturers will be able to make the next generation of rifles any cheaper.
While overall I think that as consumers we have gained more than we have lost with the offering of inexpensive models, I'm curious how much cheaper manufacturers can safely make these rifles. I was looking at my Ruger American recently and I really don't know how they can make it any cheaper. It has a cheap matte blued finish with no discernable polishing, the stock is as cheap as they likely could have made it, the whole rifle was made up of easy-to-machine cylinders, it has a molded trigger guard, and it uses detachable magazines. I love the rifle for what it is, but as much as Ruger may want to flaunt these attributes as beneficial I know that the rifle was made that way to cut costs.
I struggle to see how manufacturers will be able to make the next generation of rifles any cheaper.
Last edited: