Buying a more expensive rifle vs a project rifle

[Cee Zee]

You're ready to go out of the box.

Which is why I have a CZ 453 and a Savage 12 LRPV. Both hold their value while my Savage MkII isn't going to bring me back what I've put into it swapping stocks and modifying that stock to make it better. Plus most people wouldn't take the time to shim the scope the way I did and check the action screws for the proper torque every time I shoot it. It's the best shooting rimfire I own but it needs lots of TLC to make it that way. It is picky about ammo and even switching ammo. If I shoot one type of ammo and switch to another type that I know works in the rifle it still takes it a while to settle in to shoot like it can. The CZ is pretty much good to go from the start. No tinkering is needed to get it going. Better rifles from the start make sense to me.

 

[Bronden]

Tikka t3 light has a better accuracy, bolt trow, trigger, silent safety, than the others you are looking at. Its super reliable and you have a lot of upgrades available. Save up for a mc millan stock ( like the htg) No matter what you choose get the action bedded to the stock.
For 300y the 308 will do just about anything. But the 7-8 is also a good choice.
The 308 works great with 17-20 inch barrel. Optimal With powder like the norma201.

 

[Averageman]

All of my guns with very few exceptions are "projects". I tune and change things until the suit me, there are very few off the shelf guns that fully fit my needs.

 

[Teachu2]

I did a project rifle recently - bought a .308 ADL from Dick's, with rebates and sale it was right about $400. Plastic camo stock, 4-12 Remington-branded scope, X trigger, matte finish, mid-weight varmint barrel.

Decided to try it before making any changes. The stock was so flimsy that the bipod caused it to touch the barrel. The trigger was awful. The included scope was typical.

Ultimate Sniper stock was ~$200.
Jewell Varmint trigger was ~$225.
Nikon 6-18 Buckmasters scope was ~$325.
Leupold base and rings ~$75.

So for a little over $1200, I got a .308 set up the way I wanted, and initial tests with good ammo gave me a 5 shot group that a nickel would cover completely. I could easily sell it for almost half of what I'm into it....

 

[FiveInADime]

I think the OP question was whether to improve a less expensive rifle NIB or purchase a more expensive NIB.

I would (and have) done both. With casting aspersions on ANY manufacturer, there are reasons why a $1000 rifle costs $1000 and a $250 rifle costs $250. That is an extreme comparison but valid.

Take a Ruger American for $250, or Marlin or Remington and a CZ 527 $600+ or so. It has been my experience that no matter what you do to the less expensive rifle, i.e. new stock, pillaring, bedding or whatever, it will never shoot as well as the CZ.

If you truly enjoy working on the rifle and don't care what the budget is for improvements, by all means, work on it to your heart's content, BUT you won't make a silk purse ......

If you include a new match barrel from any of the various quality barrel makes, I totally disagree with your sentiment that you can't make a cheap rifle shoot with a CZ.

People take Stevens 200s, Remington ADLs, Old Savages, even Axis rifles and screw on match barrels, bed the actions in better stocks and proceed to turn their "budget" guns into 0.25"/100yds rifles.

Yes, you've spent more on those guns than a new CZ but CZs are still mass produced and not every single one is going to shoot sub-MOA.

Personally, I'm done with buying cheap guns and any rifle I get from here on out will be a personal heirloom. Maybe a Kimber or a Cooper in the future. I'd settle for a new Model 70 in the right config.

 

[hq]

My question is, does it make more sense to buy the more expensive rifle up front, or to work on a project rifle?

Depends. If everything you want in a rifle can be had as a regular production model, even if it costs a bit more, it usually is the most sensible choice. On the other hand, if you enjoy working on a project and intend to keep the rifle for a long time, there are few things more satisfying than customizing one exactly the way you want it.

A number of times I've realized that customizing a rifle is far more expensive than you've originally thought it would be. Even when you do most of the work yourself and especially when you need a gunsmith to do custom work. Sometimes I've ended up spending thousands of dollars on projects that were supposed to be easy and simple minimum budget fixups; projects have a bad habit of escalating and eventually getting out of hand completely...

 

[urbaneruralite]

Another point to consider might be durability. If you try to run a lot of rounds through a rifle in a short amount of time, rather than just slowly punching paper for groups, you might be surprised to have it break down where a more expensive rifle would not.

I'd sure hate to build up a rifle and have it break down in the middle of a rifle class I paid hundreds to attend.

 

[Cee Zee]

It is certainly true that people take Stevens 200 or Savage 110 rifles and make super shooters out of them. But some things will never change about those cheaper rifles. When I look at the quality of the receivers and the way the bolts work with those receivers compared with my Savage 12 LRPV it quickly becomes obvious there is a difference. I have a 110 also. It's a fine rifle and I'm sure a new trigger and barrel could make it shoot great. But to shoot as well as my 12 it would take a lot of money. The trigger than came with my rifle is available for example. It costs over $500. And to get a barrel that is equivalent to the one on my rifle is going to cost at least another $400 (it's a stainless bull barrel 26" long). So already you are in the same price range as the 12 and you don't have the extra lug on the receiver among other things. It just won't be as good as the 12 LRPV IMO. It may shoot well and it might not. With a stock Savage if it doesn't shoot right you send it back to the factory and they fix it.

You will have some parts left over you can sell for scrap I guess. There isn't much call for a stock Stevens 200 barrel or trigger.

So you've paid about $400 for a 200 these days, you added $500 for the trigger and $400 for a barrel and now you need a stock that is equal to the H-S Precision that came with my Savage. Trust me my 110 stock is nowhere near the same level of quality. A H-S Precision stock runs about $400. So you have $1700 in a rifle that isn't as good as the $980 LRPV. It would have to be some serious personalized advantage to get me to go the upgrade route trying to get in the ballpark of the 12 LRPV. Remember you still only have 2 lugs instead of 3 and the bolt is much heavier and smoother.

This is why I buy my rifles already built to be good. I've modified a few and it is fun work. But there's no logic to it other than the fun of doing the work.

 

[FiveInADime]

It is certainly true that people take Stevens 200 or Savage 110 rifles and make super shooters out of them. But some things will never change about those cheaper rifles. When I look at the quality of the receivers and the way the bolts work with those receivers compared with my Savage 12 LRPV it quickly becomes obvious there is a difference. I have a 110 also. It's a fine rifle and I'm sure a new trigger and barrel could make it shoot great. But to shoot as well as my 12 it would take a lot of money. The trigger than came with my rifle is available for example. It costs over $500. And to get a barrel that is equivalent to the one on my rifle is going to cost at least another $400 (it's a stainless bull barrel 26" long). So already you are in the same price range as the 12 and you don't have the extra lug on the receiver among other things. It just won't be as good as the 12 LRPV IMO. It may shoot well and it might not. With a stock Savage if it doesn't shoot right you send it back to the factory and they fix it.

You will have some parts left over you can sell for scrap I guess. There isn't much call for a stock Stevens 200 barrel or trigger.

So you've paid about $400 for a 200 these days, you added $500 for the trigger and $400 for a barrel and now you need a stock that is equal to the H-S Precision that came with my Savage. Trust me my 110 stock is nowhere near the same level of quality. A H-S Precision stock runs about $400. So you have $1700 in a rifle that isn't as good as the $980 LRPV. It would have to be some serious personalized advantage to get me to go the upgrade route trying to get in the ballpark of the 12 LRPV. Remember you still only have 2 lugs instead of 3 and the bolt is much heavier and smoother.

This is why I buy my rifles already built to be good. I've modified a few and it is fun work. But there's no logic to it other than the fun of doing the work.

I mostly agree but you made a few leaps. (A) The Target Accutrigger isn't the only good trigger out there although it is VERY VERY nice (B) Savage barrels are not Krieger, Rock, Bartlein etc. and it would be shocking to me if a Savage repeater action didn't shoot as well as your LRPV with one of those barrels and a good bedded wood stock.

My next door neighbor (an accomplished old benchrester who was on a first name basis with Walt Berger and other legends) has and loves several Savage 12 LRPVs (all with Krieger barrels).

 

[benzy2]

In reality, neither a $600 factory rifle or a $300 factory rifle with $300 in parts are going to be more than a $600 rifle. Not to look down on them (as it's mostly all I own/shoot). But the truth is top quality parts and labor, which separate you from typical production rifles cost top quality money. I wouldn't think you would see a tremendous difference between the two options you listed in general.

There are things to look for on a cheaper rifle that may make it less desirable to upgrade. I think the biggest being the trigger and magazines. The ultra budget rifles typically have a bad to average trigger. Some have decent ones that will do for most hunting purposes, but none have a trigger that is outstanding. I'd call them more than good enough for typical use but not something I'd wish were on every rifle I owned. Then is the magazine. Some with a blind mag aren't bad but for the Ruger American it is what has kept me from buying one so far. They are just a bit too unreliable in their feeding and seem to have just a bit too high of a failure rate for my desires. That's a deal breaker for me.

In the end, I'd rather buy a $600 rifle than a $300 and spend $300 in parts. To build a rifle I want, it will easily be over the $1000 mark to really get quality that outshines your run of the mill production rifles. The Ruger American is a fairly solid rifle at it's price, but the mags do it in for me. Had they made the mags a bit more durable and reliable (especially in .223 where most of my interest lies) I would have had at least one if not a couple by now.

All of that said, it's your money and your enjoyment. If you like the gun to be the way it came from the factory, buy that. If you like to swap parts and make it your own, buy that. Nobody else is going to enjoy your rifle but you. My opinion on what you enjoy just doesn't matter. And unlike the Civics with a coffee can, nobody else has to listen to it on a daily basis to have any complaint for the choice you make. We aren't talking about altering a rare historic rifle that people have deep attachment towards. If you make a choice you enjoy, then it's the right one.

 

[Cee Zee]

The Target Accutrigger isn't the only good trigger out there although it is VERY VERY nice (B) Savage barrels are not Krieger, Rock, Bartlein etc. and it would be shocking to me if a Savage repeater action didn't shoot as well as your LRPV with one of those barrels and a good bedded wood stock.

I didn't say the Target AT was the "only" good trigger out there but most triggers in it's class cost about the same amount of money. I was basically using it for an example. As for the quality barrels you're that they will shoot "as well as" my LRPV. I don't dispute that. But the price of the rifle built up from a Stevens 200 level to being "as well as" my 12 is way higher than just buying the 12 outright. You can still upgrade it. You just start with a better taking off point. The receiver, bolt, bedding (they are essentially bedded from the factory) are all going to be there and getting to the same level as those parts is going to require a lot more money. You can make a cheaper receiver work but I don't think it will be as good as the LRPV receiver although there are differences from year to year in the LRPV so this isn't a one size fits all issue here. I think I got one of the better models and that the quality has actually dropped some since they built mine (as has the price). And the Savage barrels are pretty darn good too. They may not be the best but again we get back to a cost / benefit ratio. Would a person be better off going ahead and buying a better rifle than the 12 LRPV rather than upgrading the barrel? There are some mighty nice rifles out there including models by Sako and others that have outstanding quality. I don't really have enough experience with those rifles to know how much different there is but I'd like to know. I do know that the local range has 600 yard competitions that are dominated by the LRPV according to the rangemaster. I haven't been to one but I was talking to the rangemaster about getting started there and he said I would be right up there with the best shooters as far as my equipment goes. He told me that nearly all their events were won by that rifle. Of course the shooter has a little to do with that too so I'm not saying I could walk out there and beat those guys. It is a very well known club too with ranges all over the area and a large membership. My health took a bad turn last year about this time or I would be in that club now. I may try to join again next spring.

At any rate the key here is that you can get a build to shoot great but IMO you spend more money that way and you really don't get a rifle that is quite as nice as buying a package deal right out of the box. Savage has done a lot of work into putting the best modifications shooters are doing to their rifles into the next generation of factory rifles so that you don't have to do a lot of the changes. Your rifle comes with them.

Again I'm sure people can build rifles that will do the same level of shooting. My main concern is the price plus I can take my rifle and probably sell it for very nearly what I paid for it if not more. I bought it used so I didn't take a hit on that. If I find someone that knows the way the LRPV's have run I can probably make money on my rifle. My rifles I have modified and tweaked myself into better shooters than they started out being are not likely to bring the price that I have in the parts and the rifle. I don't expect them too. You can tell someone that your pillar bedding made the rifle shoot better than the off the shelf model but lots of people won't believe that and almost none of them will pay for the upgrades you put in it. So instead of me upgrading my Savage MkIIFV into what is essentially a MkIIBTV with pillar bedding and a lot of tweaking work that makes it shoot much better I would probably been better off to buy a CZ 453 in varmint form. I could re-sell the CZ for what I had in it. Not so for the Savage. Not even close. My only chance of getting my money back would be to put the original stock back on the rifle then sell the stock and rifle separately. And the work I put into tweaking it and tracking down problems is a lost cause now to pretty much everyone except me. I'm not complaining mind you. But I wouldn't even think about selling my MkII because I made it shoot better than the out of the box FV and I don't want to give that up for nothing.