How have hunting rifles changed as you've gotten older?

It is kind of tiring to hear how good it used to be. Let's see, we had no money, my father worked his rear off, I did too, nobody had much and we were paid squat. What has changed?

If "back in the day" was 1940 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $5,956.

If "back in the day" was 1950 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $3,459.

If "back in the day" was 1960 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $2,817.

If "back in the day" was in 1970 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $2,149.

If "back in the day" was in 1980 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $1011.

If "back in the day" was in 1990 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $638.

If "back in the day" was in 2000 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $485.

We can still buy wood stocked rifles that will split and soak up water and with ugly blue barrels that will rust and weigh 10 pounds with an inferior optic that cost 4 times more than what I can get an equivalent optic for now. But, why, when for that same money I can get a composite stock that will hold zero and a carbon wrapped or stainless steel precision barrel that will not rust and the the rifle will weigh under 6 pounds?

What was so good about them "back in the days" again? Good stuff cost money "back in the day" just as it does now.

3C

“Back in the day” it was common knowledge that if your stock had white diamond shaped inlays you were a rifleman of uncommon discretion and distinction…….

3Crows said:

It is kind of tiring to hear how good it used to be... What has changed?

Click to expand...

I'd say the two biggest changes as far as hunting goes is #1 there are A LOT more deer now with very liberal seasons in most of the country and #2 most hunters today are not rural folks. With these two changes we have seen a marked departure in hunting styles and equipment. I grew up hearing about the ubiquity of lever guns while rarely if every seeing them used by anyone. After my folks settled in the Midwest farm country, shotguns were everywhere. I do strongly agree with others who said most hunters only had maybe a couple of guns which tended to be, let's say, not top shelf deluxe models. Now it seems hunters are more specialized rather than generalists. Big game hunting, especially deer, has a lot of gear devoted to it. Most hunters I know probably qualify as Fudds however they all seem to own multiple hunting rifles, all with optics, in wide range of calibers. Each one has some specific usage -- early season brush guns, late season long range guns, light recoil ones for kids/spouses, super magnums for the rut, and on-n-on. I think people are much more invested into hunting rifles now because it is a lifestyle hobby rather than country folks adding some meat for winter.

* I think most hunting rifles are bought by shooters who also hunt if that makes sense(?).

Rifles are cheaper now than ever but the quality doesn't seem to be quite the same (no lack of performance, though). Great optics are definitely less expensive and more numerous these days.

Regardless of the advantages of synthetic stocks and stainless steel, I'm guessing that like most guys my age, I prefer walnut and blued steel in a hunting rifle. (And also in shotguns, although I did buy a camo synthetic-stocked duck gun a while back.)

We're a diminishing breed, those of us who grew up with, and much prefer, blued steel and walnut...and scopes, if necessary to the task at hand.

Days were longer then, up with dawn, for a big breakfast before pheasant season opened, and no respite from the corn fields and fence rows till dark overtook us. 15 years old, with an ancient Lefever broken over the handle bars of my Schwinn, I was never stopped nor hassled by the local gendarmerie. And that was in western NY state. Permission to hunt was needed but never denied, and it was rare to find a farm that was posted.

Through high school, for several years, I kept myself clothed and shod by picking off woodchucks from neighboring dairy farms and trapping muskrats and raccoons in the mornings. A .22 did most of the work, (a Marlin model 57 lever gun) but later bought my first centerfire, a much loved and carefully tended Remington 722 in .243 Winchester. That, my friends, was an elegant rifle; deadly out to nearly 400 yds with a good sitting position, and relatively cheap to feed. Hell, Sierra 80 gr JSP's were less than a nickel a piece, with primers going for $.50 a box. And I got 50 cents for each 'chuck' I dispatched. .22's BTW, were also less than $.50 a box.

Later, while in college in Colorado, I killed a bunch of mule deer and marmots with that old Remington...and wish to gosh I'd never sold it...it was and still is in my memory, the only rifle/cartridge I've ever shot that resulted in DRT hunting.

Easier, & more satisfying times then, but I wish the same memories for our younger shooters...and I fear that those long lost days are now gone forever...treasure those that are left...

The very best to all of you...Rod

They got cheap and hide it behind tactical hi tech looking sillyness. When thats not enough they slap paint on them and get some celebrity to endorce it........ then they get recalled. I get the appeal of synthetic stocks though. People like to be rough on their equipment and neglect it. When I was younger it was a given that you cleaned the gun when you took it out. People smoked cigarettes in public those days too though so it was a different time. Blued steel wasnt a big deal because we always waxed it.

desmobob said:

Rifles are cheaper now than ever but the quality doesn't seem to be quite the same (no lack of performance, though). Great optics are definitely less expensive and more numerous these days.

Click to expand...

That brings up a great question which might almost need a thread which will quickly get shut down for bickering: when we say quality what does that mean beyond performance unless it's purely a matter of looks? I recall all the crazy work people used to put into hunting rifles trying desperately to get a 1-inch shooter that more often proved out to be double or more that when you saw them at a range.

I like nostalgia as much as the next guy, Hokkmike. However, when you’re talking about hunting rifles, not everything was all that different, much less better back in the “good ol’ days.”

Hokkmike said:

1. A good hunting rifle could be bought for under $300 EASILY. My 94 for around $100...

Click to expand...

I have a 1962 Winchester-Western catalog sitting in front of me. It lists a Model 94 for $83.95. On the other hand, I was making $1.00 an hour working in the apple orchards back then. Sure it was a minimum wage job, but I remember my dad was only making $2.65 an hour, and he was a boiler operator.

Hokkmike said:

2. Blued steel and good wood were the offerings for the time - pretty to shoot and look at, No plastics.

Click to expand...

My retirement rifle, my custom built 308 Norma Mag is stainless with a granite-grey synthetic stock because I ordered it that way. I’ll take stainless and synthetic over blued and “good wood” in a hunting rifle every day of the week. I actually prefer the more “utilitarian” look.

Hokkmike said:

3. Few or none of the weirds calibers like the 6.5 Mongoose, or 7mm TV Channel, or any other of those high pressure over bores.

Click to expand...

The 1962 Winchester-Western catalog I have sitting in front of me also lists a barrel burning, Model 70 “Westerner” 264 Winchester Magnum ($154.50).

Hokkmike said:

4. Fewer mountain rifles, floating rifles, or other "gimmick" guns were available.

Click to expand...

I’m thinking of getting a lightweight “mountain rifle” myself. Now that I’m older (73) I’ve noticed the mountains have grown steeper and taller, and my beloved Montana Rifle Company 308 Norma Mag has gained weight.

Hokkmike said:

5. No plastic butt plates.

Click to expand...

My Model 100 Winchester (my first big game rifle) purchased in 1962 or 1963, has a plastic butt plate.

Hokkmike said:

6. No pink camo patterns.

Click to expand...

Yep, I think you’re right about that. I don’t care for pink guns, and my wife absolutely hates them. She doesn’t think there should be anything “girly” or “cute” about a gun of any kind.

Hokkmike said:

7. THE cleaning agent of the day was Hoppes #9. (country girls used it for perfume where I lived)

Click to expand...

Hoppes #9 is still the gun “cleaning agent” in this house. I DO kinda miss the smell of Hoppes #9 mingled with the smell of Hubbard’s shoe grease in the pickup truck as we drove up to our favorite deer hunting canyon in the wee hours of the morning of opening day. Gore-Tex linings have pretty much eliminated the need for greasing our hunting boots the night before, but they keep our feet dryer.

Like I said, when it comes to hunting rifles, I don't think things were all that different much less better back in the "good ol' days.

Edited to add: We still use "stiff" cleaning rods. One of our grandsons gave me a bore snake for Christmas a few years ago. I've never used it.

My main hunting (deer) rifle hasn't changed much as it's gone from a Marlin 336 in 30-30, to a Sporterized 1942 Long Branch 303 Enfield, and now back to a 336 in .35 Rem or a .444 Marlin.

Going back to one of my Grandpa's . . . the days after he got educated and got a career after WWII, he had a commercially sporterized Argentine Mauser, chambered in 7.65 Argentine. That was his only hunting rifle and it had a glossy finish scope on it. He also had a shotgun, but I rarely saw it so I can't remember anything other than it was called "The 12 Gauge". His only handgun that I knew of was a surplus Enfield revolver chambered in .45 ACP. I got to fire the rifle and revolver in my 20s, so I remember them pretty well.

My dad didn't have a hunting rifle as he'd borrow from others if needed. He did have one pump action 20 gauge with a polychoke on the muzzle. I want to say that scattergun was a Mossberg. The only real hunting I did with my dad was quail hunting, otherwise he was primarily a fisherman. Plus he had a Marlin 60 that we'd bust bottles with, back when busting glass bottles seemed like an okay thing to do.

As a kid, my dad got me and my brother one break barrel .410 shotgun of some brand I can't remember, probably a department store brand. We'd go out with that one gun to share while walking the fields.

I didn't see lever guns carried on a hunt until I was in my 20s. I viewed lever guns with a sense of awe back in the day and never fired one until I bought one for myself in the early '90s.

Yes, all of the above were wood and steel. Not plywood, but maybe a step above lumber. Nothing fancy finished or fancy checkered except for the Argentine. My first 12 gauge (break action single shot) had pressed in "checkering" and roll marked "engraving" on the receiver. Ooooh . . . Ahhh.

My Dad hunted with a lever action 30-30. One of my nephews hunts with it now. My brothers and I all hunt with lever actions. That covers about 60 or so years and those rifles haven't changed much.

I shot my first deer, a muley buck in Colorado, in 1962 with a CMP Springfield 1903-A3 in full military configuration.

I shot my second deer, a whitetail doe, in 1997 with a 50-year old Winchester Model 94 in .30/30.

Two whitetails, one very big 9-point buck and one very fat doe, were taken with a T-C Hawken, in 1999 and 2000.

The other 23 whitetails have been taken with a Ruger #1 in .270 Winchester.

At age 77, it’s getting difficult to justify switching deer rifles, particularly with the history of one-shot kills that the Ruger has provided.

Hokkmike said:

This is another one of those "for older hunting duffs" threads - but anybody is welcome, of course, to chime in.

So the question is, how have hunting rifles changed since you have started hunting?

I became a serious hunter for the first time just after 1968, the bloodiest year of the Viet Nam War (thank you Veterans!). My FIRST rifle choice, not knowing anything about shooting was a Winchester Model 94 in .32 WS. It was a handy little gun with a small kick and a burr in the butt plate that kept ripping my cheap plastic jacket. I wised up and filed it off.

Back in the day:

1. A good hunting rifle could be bought for under $300 EASILY. My 94 for around $100...
2. Blued steel and good wood were the offerings for the time - pretty to shoot and look at, No plastics.
3. Few or none of the weirds calibers like the 6.5 Mongoose, or 7mm TV Channel, or any other of those high pressure over bores.
4. Fewer mountain rifles, floating rifles, or other "gimmick" guns were available.
5. No plastic butt plates.
6. No pink camo patterns.
7. THE cleaning agent of the day was Hoppes #9. (country girls used it for perfume where I lived)
8. We used stiff cleaning rods - no cables. (what is a "bore snake?"....)

Now don't get me wrong. Some of the newer stuff is great. Really great. I got a friend who bought a 6.5C package and he really loves it. Lightweight mountain rifles are the cat's meow. So, I am not slamming new stuff - juts reminiscing and having a little fun.

Feel free to add if you like.

Click to expand...

Started in 68 w a 94 in 32win spl also stopped using it 15 yrs ago why simple my son started hunting he is still using it. So it’s taken more trophy bucks and non trophy bucks and several does than any other gun in the safe. And never missed a deer w it neither has my son. That said On and off I’ve used several different rifles. A mod 70 in 06 a 20ga 870, a BLR in 358 and a Henry lr in 6.5..

We can still buy most of the guns we could buy back in the day, but there are a lot more choices on top of that. My back in the day started in the 1970s when I was a kid.

There are a lot more guns that are just plain fugly to my eye. A new generation has grown up being sold on a different taste in firearms. It's all about marketing. The media, movies and magazines, and now of course the web tell people what's in vogue. Most people run falling all over themselves for the latest trends. As long as they do, marketing folks will keep doing what they do. There have been real improvements in some cases and in other cases not so much.

I think the biggest change I've seen is the prevalence of "Black Rifles" or in other words, contemporary military looking rifles. It's hard to tell by looking if a group of friends are going deer hunting or going on maneuvers.

All of my long guns are still sportin' wood stocks. I bought a black synthetic stock for my Ruger Mini-30 just to have around along with other spare pieces and parts, but I've never used it. My Mini still wears the original wood stock it came with when I bought it new 32 years ago. It works for me.

Growing up in the Midwest, my state and a lot of other nearby states had shotgun and muzzle loader only for deer hunting with long guns. Illinois is still limited to that. Other nearby states have unsissified hunting laws over the years. I can hunt with My Mini-30 or CZ 527 in Missouri, Iowa, and Indiana, but not in the Land of Lincoln. If we put a fence around Chicago and returned the rest of Illinois to Virginia, that would greatly improve the situation.

1972 - wandering around in the woods with a beat up milsurp rifle hunting wild deer.
2022 - paying somebody to kill a farm-raised deer inside a high-fence with a gun from a SCI-fi movie.

illinoisburt said:

That brings up a great question which might almost need a thread which will quickly get shut down for bickering: when we say quality what does that mean beyond performance unless it's purely a matter of looks? I recall all the crazy work people used to put into hunting rifles trying desperately to get a 1-inch shooter that more often proved out to be double or more that when you saw them at a range.

Click to expand...

Quality can mean more than performance... machined parts vs. stamped or cast parts, for instance. Or hand-cut vs. imprinted checkering.

But then, who knows what quality really means? (Ever read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"?)

twarr1 said:

1972 - wandering around in the woods with a beat up milsurp rifle hunting wild deer.
2022 - paying somebody to kill a farm-raised deer inside a high-fence with a gun from a SCI-fi movie.

Click to expand...

Almost too true to be funny...

twarr1 said:

1972 - wandering around in the woods with a beat up milsurp rifle hunting wild deer.
2022 - paying somebody to kill a farm-raised deer inside a high-fence with a gun from a SCI-fi movie.

Click to expand...

Should we look at the various ARs as modern day sporterized milsurps?

Hokkmike said:

So the question is, how have hunting rifles changed since you have started hunting?

Click to expand...

One thing is for sure, I won’t be carrying a bull battel anything soon unless i really have to.

I still use the same few rifles. My three favorite hunting rifles are a Remington BDL 700 in 6mm Remington, a Remington ADL 700 in .22-250 and a Winchester Model 70 in .30-06. I guess you could add my Marlin 336's in .30-30 as well. I have tried a few other calibers but default back to these after the romance wears off.

I like a lot of other calibers and have fun trying new rifles and cartridges though. Some favorites are the .223 and the .357 (loaded in a rifle).

My most weirdest one is the .256 in a Marlin 62 Levermatic.

Actually it looks like I have quite a few favorites!

chicharrones said:

Going back to one of my Grandpa's . . . the days after he got educated and got a career after WWII, he had a commercially sporterized Argentine Mauser, chambered in 7.65 Argentine. That was his only hunting rifle and it had a glossy finish scope on it. He also had a shotgun, but I rarely saw it so I can't remember anything other than it was called "The 12 Gauge".

Click to expand...

My dad had one of those though probably not as nice as your dad's. He shot a buck and killed a doe that was standing on the other side so perfectly in alignment he did not see it through the poor little 3X Weaver he had cobbled on atop.

3C

3Crows said:

It is kind of tiring to hear how good it used to be. Let's see, we had no money, my father worked his rear off, I did too, nobody had much and we were paid squat. What has changed?

If "back in the day" was 1940 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $5,956.

If "back in the day" was 1950 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $3,459.

If "back in the day" was 1960 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $2,817.

If "back in the day" was in 1970 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $2,149.

If "back in the day" was in 1980 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $1011.

If "back in the day" was in 1990 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $638.

If "back in the day" was in 2000 in 2022 dollars $300 is now $485.

We can still buy wood stocked rifles that will split and soak up water and with ugly blue barrels that will rust and weigh 10 pounds with an inferior optic that cost 4 times more than what I can get an equivalent optic for now. But, why, when for that same money I can get a composite stock that will hold zero and a carbon wrapped or stainless steel precision barrel that will not rust and the the rifle will weigh under 6 pounds?

What was so good about them "back in the days" again? Good stuff cost money "back in the day" just as it does now.

3C

Click to expand...

You've been reading all the advertising from back in the day but not looking much at the prices, or so it appears to me.

Wood stocks are not nearly as susceptible to warp and moisture as those 60's magazine article pitching the DIY bedding methods would have you believe or the composit stock salesmen either.

Jack Ryan said:

You've been reading all the advertising from back in the day but not looking much at the prices, or so it appears to me.

Wood stocks are not nearly as susceptible to warp and moisture as those 60's magazine article pitching the DIY bedding methods would have you believe or the composit stock salesmen either.

Click to expand...

At 67yo I was in the "back in the day" or at least the later part of it. I remember it all very well enough. I think one thing that could make everything better is to lighten up on the pervasive cynicism. There are plenty of very fine firearms available today and, no, your not going to get them at $300 1960 money. But unlike then, I can afford them now.

As to wood vs composite vs stainless vs blued each to their own. We all have opinions that are valid to our purposes.

3C

duplicate

When I was young, a “hunting rifle” was a Sporter barreled rifle in blued and walnut. Then it grew into a stainless and synthetic rifle, then a composite stock under a heavy stainless barrel, and now a short and fat stainless barrel in a composite stock with a suppressor out front.