Best Bolt-action Deer Rifles Under $400

[shaggy430]

A 243 will "burn up" a barrel (start loosing accuracy) as early as 850rnds but usually by 1500rnds you'll notice.

Not really.

 

[jpwilly]

A 243 will "burn up" a barrel (start loosing accuracy) as early as 850rnds but usually by 1500rnds you'll notice.

Not really.

Yes really. The throat and lands get tore up. The 243 has a sharp shoulder, a short neck, and small bore plus it shoots it's pills at a good clip all are factors as to why the .243 will wear out even good barrels much more quickly than the 308. The first inch of lands are usually gone by 1500rnds. Will the barrel still shoot, yes but it's going to start loosing accuracy.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

There IS a market for an inexpensive, iron-sighted American bolt gun.

Yip, for me they are called Mil Surps or C&R's. I have quite a few and can shoot them all. Nice rant though.

Me too, but I would certainly rather support new production.

 

[jpwilly]

Me too, but I would certainly rather support new production.

Agreed putting some iron sights on the rifles couldn't cost much at the factory. They could drill and tap for scope mounts and let us decide...I would be in for seeing some selection in the low doe section with irons. But since they don't exists my Mil Surps do a fine job of it.

 

[natman]

Entry level rifles are better than they have ever been before, and perfectly serviceable. I still defy anyone to show how one sub-$400 rifle is significantly better than another (except the cheapo Remingtons which are junk). Yes, small variations exists in features but they all work and all have acceptable deer popping accuracy.

Glass on the other hand is a different story. With that budget, I'd be looking for a $150 beater to put a $250 scope onto, and I would expect a reliable weapon. The more I learn about glass, the more I see how little the gun matters and how much the scope does.

I think if you compared a Mossberg and a Marlin side by side you'd see the difference in quality. I agree that the Remington 710/770 family is junk. Given that Remington owns Marlin I can't understand why they are still offered.

The scope is important. I'd much rather have a Marlin and a Leupold than a Remchester with a cheap scope..

 

[jpwilly]

^^^
Yes, the Mossberg ATR is a step behind the Marlin XL7 and if I were buying today the Marlin would get a good look vs say a Savage or Stevens. (Allegedly the Savage barrels will screw onto the Marlin actions and barrel nuts)

I've gotten decent performance out of the Centerpoint scopes. And because the factory claims .416 Rigby proof + Airgun rated. The scopes must be reinforced against recoil in both directions. My 2 have held zero and the adjustments have been repeatable.

That said there is no comparison when it comes to the glass. Nikon (Prostaff, Buckmaster, & Team Primos) Bushnell 3200 and a few of others offer scopes with good clarity & contrast with 90% and better light transmission in their inexpensive lineups.

 

[Art Eatman]

"Deer rifle". That says to me that it's a rifle which will get sighted in and then fired a very few times during the season. Further, anything inside 1.5 to 2.0 MOA is adequate accuracy for 90% of deer killed.

Does anybody know of a brand-name rifle that won't last a lifetime with that sort of use, and which won't be adequately accurate?

 

[natman]

"Deer rifle". That says to me that it's a rifle which will get sighted in and then fired a very few times during the season. Further, anything inside 1.5 to 2.0 MOA is adequate accuracy for 90% of deer killed.

Does anybody know of a brand-name rifle that won't last a lifetime with that sort of use, and which won't be adequately accurate?

I see your point, but I still rather buy a Marlin rather than take a free Remington 770. Besides it would be hard to hit the deer with the 770 in a paper bag, which is the only way I'd be seen with one.

 

[bang_bang]

I like my "budget" deer rifles. Out of the 3 rifles I use for deer season, the most costly would be my Remmy 700...around $430 brand new several years ago. The least expensive, my Stevens Model 200, happens to be my favorite.

These are not "cheap" guns. The Remmy 710s or whatever have had horrible reviews, but my hunting buddy owns one. It seems to be reliable and accurate enough for him to drop deer after deer. I just don't like the action on those rifles. The action on my Stevens is almost as smooth as the Remmy, but both don't even come close to my Winchester Model 70.

 

[jpwilly]

"Deer rifle". That says to me that it's a rifle which will get sighted in and then fired a very few times during the season. Further, anything inside 1.5 to 2.0 MOA is adequate accuracy for 90% of deer killed.

Does anybody know of a brand-name rifle that won't last a lifetime with that sort of use, and which won't be adequately accurate?

Agreed the practical nature of a hunting rifle even a P.O.S. provided it goes bang and can hit what your aiming at will work.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't make comparisons. $350 will still buy you a Marlin XL7 and cheap scope...WHY would anyone then go out and get the Reminton 770 for the same money?? Buyer beware!

 

[jmr40]

The only problem with buying a cheap rifle that you only plan on using a few times a year is that people often decide they like hunting and shooting a lot more than they thought they would. After a few months they end kicking themselves when they realize that for only a few dollars more they could have had a much better rifle.

Or they decide that they no longer want to hunt and shoot, and when they try to sell a rifle they no longer use, they find it is virtually worthless.

 

[snakeman]

stevens 200

 

[crazy-mp]

A 243 will "burn up" a barrel (start loosing accuracy) as early as rounds but usually by 1500 rnds you'll notice. YMMV

The average deer hunter will die, or upgrade to a better gun before they shoot that many rounds. Yes I am sure you have personally fire 10K rounds of .243 in a years time, but the average hunter will only shoot their deer rifle a few times before the season begins, (if they are smart) and then 5-10 times while hunting, so lets just say 40 times in a year, 2 boxes right? That works out to be around 20 years, if the hunter goes every year and fires 2 boxes each year. Most hunters that I know only fire the gun when there is a deer in the cross hairs.

If they are looking for something to get them by for a few years and they are not a competitive shooter, the 770 is hard to beat, especially out of the box, I didn't know that savage made a bolt action center fire gun under 400.00. Then if you wanted a scope that would cost even more.

 

[jpwilly]

The average deer hunter will die, or upgrade to a better gun before they shoot that many rounds....
...Most hunters that I know only fire the gun when there is a deer in the cross hairs.

That's too bad. Many people I've know who shoot .243 also use them for varmints, punching paper, and therefore load development etc etc. 1500rnds isn't hard to do.

I get out and shoot around 12 times a year and generally bring 3-4 firearms. I shoot a couple hundred rounds per firearm mostly my reloads. I'm by no means a professional shooter.

I didn't know that savage made a bolt action center fire gun under 400.00

You can purchase Savage combos with cheap package scope and Accutrigger at Wal-Mart for $399. Maybe the wally worlds in your state don't sell firearms but here in AZ many do.

 

[skoro]

At the top of my price range, Weatherby Vanguard.
Interested in a Tikka T3, but I think it tops my price range.

Yes, the Tikka is a very nice weapon. The action is buttery smooth.

I was in your position a year ago. I wanted the Tikka but it was just out of reach. I got the Vanguard and have no regrets. I really like this rifle. Don't scrimp on the scope. This rifle deserves some good glass. I got a Nikon Team Primos that I'm very pleased with.

 

[jester_s1]

Agreed that barrel life is simply a non-issue in cheap guns. If you are too tight to buy a quality rifle, then you are too tight to practice with it.

Where the cheapo stuff lets you down is a few years down the road when something comes out of adjustment or breaks. The Rem 710 is a prime example with the plastic bolt part. In others, the flimsy stock is going to be unstable which can be a big deal on longer shots, and cheap glass is a well documented failure point.

For low cost and high performance, the old .30-30 lever gun is still tought to beat. I wish someone made one with a peep sight in the rear, but even still it's a 150 yard gun for anyone with talent.

 

[crazy-mp]

You can purchase Savage combos with cheap package scope and Accutrigger at Wal-Mart for $399. Maybe the wally worlds in your state don't sell firearms but here in AZ many do.

I thought wally world was an amusement park from National Lampoons?

Actually my state does sell guns at Wal-Mart, well most do except for the ones that were not making enough money. Sorry I cant quote all the gun prices from Wal-Mart the best I can do is give a ball park price for the ones I have bought there.

A 243 will "burn up" a barrel (start loosing accuracy) as early as 850rnds but usually by 1500rnds you'll notice.

If you use a slower burning powder like H1000 and heavier bullets 95-100 grain, it will put less wear on your rifle, and not loading to the max helps too.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

The Mossberg ATR and 4x4 sounded like a decent/good rifle, UNTIL some of them released their bolts into a few people's cheekbones. Scary stuff, and allegedly a serious design flaw.

The T/C Venture is out because I think it will come in just a smidgeon over $400 street price; otherwise this would be the winner of the question.

So like others have said, Marlin XL7 or Stevens 200 - either of those is your answer. Wait, also the basic basic Howa 1500 should come in under $400, so it's every bit as good as the Stevens or Marlin I do believe - tough call. If you can get the Stevens-Plus (Savage) for under $400, then that's your answer, definitely.

And yes, the Rem 710/715/770/Sportsman/Whitetail hunter, or whatever they're calling it now, is inferior, but it's not THAT bad for the one-weekend a year deer hunter. It's reported to have good accuracy.

 

[podedwards]

I have a Remington 700 in 7mm.08 with a Nikon scope. I use it out west for long shots and it'll take down most anything. I paid $300 for it and $200 for the scope.

I like it because it's light, weather resistant and well made-shoots great with Hornady 180 grain bullets. Being light is very important, at least at my age, in hiking in and out of mountains.

 

[oneounceload]

I have a Remington 700 in 7mm.08 with a Nikon scope. I use it out west for long shots and it'll take down most anything. I paid $300 for it and $200 for the scope.

I like it because it's light, weather resistant and well made-shoots great with Hornady 180 grain bullets. Being light is very important, at least at my age, in hiking in and out of mountains.

Hornady doesn't list a 180 gr in 7-08. My 7-08 personally prefers 140 gr bullets


OP - if $400 is your limit for the rifle, what's your limit for the scope and mounts?

 

[MikeBoyd]

SHusky57, did you make a decision yet?

I own a 700 BDL that I bought in 1969 for a little over $100. Academy here in Texas has the ADL with syn stock for $439. Mine is a .30-06 and still shoots very well and looks almost as good as it did the day I bought it.

I recently purchased a Marlin XS7 in .308 for my grandson and let the silver tongued man at Academy talk me into a Pentax Gameseeker 3-9X50 scope. I already had the rings, so it was less than $500 out the door. Academy did the rough bore sight and mounting for nothing. I put a laser round in the bore that night and tuned it in at a little over 100 yards, then took it to the field the next day.

My first shot using Rem Core Lock 150 gr was 1/2 " left of center, with the next two rounds, after barrel cooled touching the hole of the first round. UNBELIEVABLE for stock ammo, new gun and using a picnic table and shell boxes as rest.

My thirteen YO grandson's first shot was a couple inches left and high of center, but definitely good enough to put meat on the table.

The Marlin was test fired from the manfacturer and I don't think they cleaned it. I always field strip and clean new guns before and after firing them. I am so impressed with the XS7 that I am thinking about picking up an XL7 in .270 for myself, when money drops from the sky soon.

I have read too much first hand negative problems with the ATR 100 to even consider it. The Marlins come with an adjustable trigger, fatory set about 3.5# which is nearly perfect for a hunting rifle. The syn stock seems very rugged and the finish and bluing on the metal work is excellent, not quite 700 quality, but still decent. I have not read one single negative, first hand experience from anyone considering the Marlin and highly recommend it. especially since Remington now owns Marlin!!

Please let us know what you got and share the experience with us. Also, I highly recommend the Nikon ProStaff 3-9X40 scope, if you want to stay in your price range, I do like the Pentax and it's lower price if you're on a budget.

Happy Hunting,
Mike and Jonathan Boyd

 

[jmr40]

Walter,

You bought a quality rifle at a good price. I was referring to the Remington 770 series and the Mossberg. We at least agree on the 770. While I have my favorites I could live with any of the others on the list.

 

[Dr_2_B]

good information. I think we in the US are accustomed to very good stuff. Frankly, I believe we could get by with many standard rifles that aren't all that costly. But a nice scope is worth the money.