What's the attraction to cheap rifles

I don’t understand buying rifles just because they are cheap. I do see that they represent a good value.

I know a lot of people that have 3-5 Axis or similar rifles “because they are a good deal”.

Personally I would rather have a nice .223 and a nice 30-06 than 5 rifles in .223, .22-250, 7-08, 308, and 30-06.

But hey its their money.

For a long time, mil-surp rifles were as cheap as anything else. Lots of fun, lot of history. I like a good bargain to boot!

Cheap has a couple meanings in my mind, basically:

1. Inexpensive or
2. Junky

Back in the 70’s and 80’s when the Remington 700 BDL was the “nice gun” and their ‘cheap” 788 was being made properly, that cheap rifle shot every bit as good or better than its much more expensive sibling. I had one in .243 and .308 and they were very accurate.

I have no use for junk guns, to be clear. But inexpensive guns thrill me as a frugal person.

Nothing is more fun to me to win a clay pigeon shoot with my $425 CZ 712 when I’m shooting against guys with $2500 OU’s or Benelli’s.

I do believe you generally get what you pay for. I hate paying for junk I will have to replace. But I also don’t see a reason to buy a $2000 rifle when I know there are plenty of good guns under $700 that will do the job I need.

Your money....your choice. And as always, YMMV

HB said:

I don’t understand buying rifles just because they are cheap. I do see that they represent a good value.

I know a lot of people that have 3-5 Axis or similar rifles “because they are a good deal”.

Personally I would rather have a nice .223 and a nice 30-06 than 5 rifles in .223, .22-250, 7-08, 308, and 30-06.

But hey its their money.

Click to expand...

I get what your saying, I have a few inexpensive rifles, but more and more with the amount of time I get to shoot; I end up saving up for something that has more intrinsic value as well.

But, hear me that I'm in no way saying that these budget model guns performance are junk, I've seen enough of them shoot very well with the recent technology changes.

It's why I used the comparison to hand tools, because I have firearms that fit in all the categories, and they all have purpose.

I have a Ruger American in 308 Win. When I got it I threw the stock away and dropped it in a Boyd's stock. It's a nice shooting rifle now. The trigger is decent. The action has smoothed out with use. The barrel heats up fast but also cools down fast. I hated the original Ruger magazines that came with it. I swapped out to Ruger 450 Bushmaster magazines and they worked much better.

I enjoy target shooting with rifles. I didn't have to spend much money and I ended up with a rifle that's a joy to shoot.

South Prairie Jim said:

I do enjoy being a minimalist

Click to expand...

I get what you are saying, in the beginning my desire for guns was such that any good deal was considered for purchase and many were. Anymore, I'm selling a lot of those "deals" and making money over what I paid but "fine tuning" my guns into keeping what really makes sense and I enjoy shooting. I have one 26 gun safe it helps me keep myself honest in what I buy, in that it has to deserve a space in the safe. Now milsurps are another animal, many of them don't go in the safe but are cleaned up and displayed, but get pulled down to get shot from time to time.

I believe, you are just at a different point in your gun buying, or maybe have always been that way.

I would have been the one to go and snatch up 2-3 of the $50 Savage Axis rifles back in the day, but not anymore, I'll leave those smoking deals to those who it serves their needs and desires better.

South Prairie Jim said:

I'm not sure I agree with this totally, I would say affordable at first" frustrating vs fun when considering FTF or FTE etc.
Not sure how cheap guns put cheap food on a table? hunting license cost the same, no special discount on ammo, gas cost the same.
Gunsmith training I suppose could be part of the equation.

Click to expand...

I don't think any of this is founded in reality.

It would probably help to know what you consider "cheap".

el indio said:

You shoot what you can afford. I have a Remington Sportsman 78 that I bought new in 1986. Put a Tasco 3x9 scope on it. Total around $300.00. Still have it complete and with my hand loads I've put 3 rounds in 3/4 inch. Did that about five times. Will never get rid of it.

Click to expand...

According to the fedgov inflation calculator, that $300 in 1986 is about the same as $700 today. That's what makes rifles like the M18 and Sauer 100 in the other thread so exciting. Bargain prices for rifles that are very accurate and high quality.

wombat13 said:

According to the fedgov inflation calculator, that $300 in 1986 is about the same as $700 today. That's what makes rifles like the M18 and Sauer 100 in the other thread so exciting. Bargain prices for rifles that are very accurate and high quality.

Click to expand...

They are great deals for a fine rifle, but my pickiness needs the wing safety.

For some folks, a $400 rifle is a week's pay

South Prairie Jim said:

I do enjoy being a minimalist

Click to expand...

That's an interesting theory or concept. I'm as basic as a peanut butter and jelly sammich, myself... I just don't see the need for what I consider frivolous extras, so to speak.

I have 2 Kimber 1911's... love the things. Yes, they were expensive (to me, anyway...) but I consider them worth every penny, and I 'got what I paid for' as far as I'm concerned. I would never in a million years shell out the money for an Ed Brown or Les Baer 1911.... there is no way in my mind I could justify the cost. That is not to say they are not fine firearms, or worth what they are asking for them... craftsmanship is craftsmanship, and if they weren't worth it, they would very likely have a pile of them setting unsold. On the flip side of that coin, I've also owned 2 Taurus PT1911's... budget 1911's with a fair amount of features, like a forged frame. Even though they were only $400, they were NOT worth $400 in actuality... I had serious issues with both of them... and eventually sold them off. I mean... how can you go wrong with a $400 1911?!?! ...but Taurus found a way.

Everyone has a threshold of value.

Nature Boy said:

For some folks, a $400 rifle is a week's pay

Click to expand...

Exactly, and what people get for $400 nowadays will make them proud at the range when the targets come back to the bench; if'n one can shoot.

I guess at my point in life, it's as much about the craftsmanship as it is the performance; and it was by no means always my thoughts. I really enjoy shooting, but I also enjoy cleaning, improving and showing my firearms.

For instance I bought a R51 2nd generation, not because it was cheap (that helped) but because of it's Pedersen action. It was different, and different is something that makes me tick; so when other striker fired autoloaders (glock clones) that were bought at very good prices get sent packing the R51 gets kept.

But I probably don't have as many firearms that most do on this board. But most I try to keep unique items.

"If they can't afford bread, let them eat cake."

Cheap is relative, depending on income. Cheap to a middle class person may not be cheap to someone getting close to minimum wage.

There are also "cheap" versions of the same gun. Winchester did it with their Ranger line, birch stock instead of walnut. Same gun, different furniture. Depends how important aesthetics are to you.

Aside from people who just want utility, I think most buy what they can afford at the time.

My first center fire long gun as a poor college student was a used dept. store brand 12ga single. I really wanted a Citori. lol

Now that I can afford one, it's just isn't that important to me anymore.

What do you call cheap ? If you mean low cost, poorly made, and barely functional, then I'm not sure either. If you mean cheap, and inexpensive as the same then I guess I disagree. To me there are many good inexpensive rifles. I like my Ruger American in .243, and at the time for $300 was a win/win. It allowed me to try another caliber for relatively low cost and experiment reloading for it. I would not hesitate to buy another Ruger American. I only use that model because I have experience with them, there are others. I own a couple more expensive rifles, but to be honest they do not shoot any better.

I think there are a lot of inexpensive rifles that are very well suited for many people. Does a guy really need a $1000 rifle with a $900 scope to go deer hunting one or two weekends with his buddies or family ? Probably not, but some of the inexpensive rifles allows them to do that and that is good for everyone. If he wants to spend the money on something "better" then that is his/her choice.

IMHO its a great time to be a firearms enthusiast. There are more good options than ever before. If you like to shoot you can likely find a good option no matter your budget.

-Jeff

Look, when I'm hunting big game in Africa I have no use for a cheap rifle.....

As Col Whelen said "Only accurate rifles are interesting." A pretty rifle is nice, but not nearly as interesting to me as an accurate rifle. Sure I'd like to have both and would be willing to pay for it, but there is a risk to buying an expensive, pretty rifle. What if it's not accurate? Now how much am I going to lose selling it? Now if I buy an inexpensive rifle that's not accurate, how much can I lose reselling it? I can't lose more than the few hundred I paid for it.

Here's an example with two rifles that I bought. The first is a Ruger Hawkeye stainless/laminate in .25-06. It's accurate enough, but it is too heavy and long for my daughter. Paid $700 for it. Tried to sell it to Cabela's Gun Library and they offered me $275. Still have it because it is worth more than that to me as camp rifle (in case anyone has a problem while at hunting camp). I bought a Savage Axis II XP for $250. 1 MOA with 100 grain bullets and it is a nice size and weight for my daughter. But if it wasn't, I would only be out $250 if I gave the gun away!

I have always believed to buy quality things (tools, guns, cars, etc.), but at the best cost or value. I have a used .270 Remington 700 BDL made in 1967 in pristine shape and must have spent it's time in a safe, for $230.

But, as a counterpoint, I also have a 1884 Belgium Flobert single shot .22 rifle that was $2.75 when new and even the warning over these rifles in the Sears and Roebuck catalog back then warned not to buy them as quality rifles could be had for just a little more - ha! But, it has a beautiful Walnut stock, nice heavy octagon barrel, and decorative trigger guard - plus, shoots damn accurate for a ~125 year old rifle using the tiny .22 CB ammo. That is about as cheap as it gets but I enjoy it.

South Prairie Jim said:

They gotta go bang every time right ?

Click to expand...

A gun is a tool... if the tool doesn't work, it's worth is diminished.

I love nice wood and shiny blue metal, but all of my field guns (except my CZ 22) are matte metal and black synthetic. They are utility tools that I don't mind banging around. I had a 700 Classic in 6.5 Swede that had gorgeous fiddleback. I kept it in the safe for 5 or 6 years and finally decided to hunt with it. While pulling it up to my tree stand I dinged the butt on a screw-in tree step. Nearly cried. My plastic guns don't stir up the emotion when they get scratched, plus, they don't cost an arm and leg like nice wood.

Well, I've hunted with guys who've paid $400 for scoped rifles from Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Bi-Mart or wherever... and they've killed some deer and elk. And I will pick one of these up in .243 or .270 to start the grandkids out with (not gonna have them learn on a Super Grade with the VX-6HD)... One of my first rifles (bought as an adult) was a Savage 110 that was dirt cheap but had a great trigger and very accurate.

Being 15, my mom had to sign for me to buy my first new rifle...a Stevens semi-auto, tubular magazine. I shot that rifle at rats in dumps and only sighted-it-in once, then didn't shoot for groups until about 4 years later, when at 25 yards or so, it barely kept all shots on a 50-foot pistol target!!! It was traded That Day! Now, I'm a pretty good shot and never noticed the reduction in accuracy over all the rounds I shot through it. I also didn't try other ammo, to see if it made a difference in accuracy.

I traded it on a Marlin 39A Mountie and was very happy with the accuracy, being able to group close to 1/2" at 50 yards with a receiver sight. I didn't kill any more critters with that than with the "shot-out" Stevens and it didn't hit aerial targets very well, but everyone who shot it was amazed at its accuracy. My wife-to-be even used it to fend off a drunk who was banging on her apartment door one night. He was a neighbor who just got the wrong house.