Modern hunting rifles versus older hunting rifles?

[Pinkbunny]

Hello. Complete newbie here. I've been shooting rifles for years, but always whatever was on hand, for fun. Never with any real serious thought in mind.

I have wanted to get a good rifle, a go to hunting/range shooting rifle. I have always loved the mauser action. However, I wanted something with the modern metallurgical advances and fit and finish found in post-WWII guns. Plus, I find the idea of sporterizing a k98 abhorrent. =p

I saw a good FN commercial mauser on gunbroker(http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=329718281) from the 1950's. Though I don't plan on getting this rifle(the guy mentions "rusting," but doesn't mention where, so I don't know if I trust this guy, or the gun, not to have a rusty bore), it got me thinking.

Correct me if I am wrong, please, but I thought I'd read that, before the 90's, a rifle shooting MOA or better was a rare thing, but nowadays, a Remington 700, Savage, or Howa, I am told, can pretty much do that out of the box. I am sure that I am not able to shoot to that level at the moment anyway, but it gives me something to work towards.

Is it worth it to buy hunting rifle a few decades old, or has technology progressed to an extent that it is not worth it?

 

[josiewales]

Yes it's worth it! An FN Mauser is hard to beat even today. I hunt with a original 1930 Mosin Nagant.

 

[browningguy]

Keep in mind a commercial FN Mauser was a pretty expensive gun in the 50's and 60's, considerably higher than the typical remington/winchester of the period.

 

[PokeyOkie]

I personally would rather have one a few decades old over a new one. I use a 30s vintage 03 that shoots better than the operator. I don't think the metallurgy has changer all that much in the last few decades.

You can find sporterized mausers just about any pawn shop or gun show if you like the old guns. If you are looking for new, CZ makes a nice modern mauser action and I think zavasta does as well. It all depends on what you want. I prefer a old gun with history and class to the new plastic fantastics but that is just me.

 

[I6turbo]

I have a 1920's era Mauser and it has a great feeling of quality and craftsmanship combined with the old-school feel of the early-mid 1900s guns. I have a CZ 550 with CZ's modern Mauser action, and it has a lot of the same feeling of old-school quality combined with a great single set trigger and excellent accuracy. If you don't find the vintage gun you are looking for, you might want to check the CZ 550. It's produced in various styles, including the full stock.

 

[dubbleA]

Correct me if I am wrong, please, but I thought I'd read that, before the 90's, a rifle shooting MOA or better was a rare thing, but nowadays, a Remington 700, Savage, or Howa, I am told, can pretty much do that out of the box. I am sure that I am not able to shoot to that level at the moment anyway, but it gives me something to work towards.

The internets as we know it today wasnt around before the 1990's, just about every OTC rifle made today will shoot "1/2moa all day long if I do my part"... about like my blind date I found on the internets is a french model TV commercial.

CZ makes a decent mauser based rifle today

Dont forget that Mauser is alive and well today and they offer a few options in a modern M98 as well as the newer M03 model. I recently talked with a USA rep and was told that they dont stock much here and they are pretty much made to order then imported.

 

[Robert]

It you want a Mauser action get a new Winchester M70. Everybit as good and maybe better than the old rifles.

 

[Pinkbunny]

Thank you. Those are all great idea's.

I am busy salivating over that CZ with the mannlicher stock.

 

[josiewales]

I am busy salivating over that CZ with the mannlicher stock.

Me too! That is an awesome gun!

 

[Jim Watson]

The ammunition has improved more than the rifles.
Shoot fresh ammo or careful handloads in an old rifle and it will serve you very well.

 

[Pointshoot]

I have CZ Mannlicher stocked rifles in 22LR, .308, and 9.3x62. There's something about that kinda rifle that I really like

If you get one, you won't be disappointed.

 

[Float Pilot]

I hunt with old and new.... I have a lot less problems with the old....
here some examples....from 1957, 1987 and 2007-8... all weigh about the same....around 7 pounds with a scope.

The most reliable is the 1957 Husqvarana. It never needed any work...
the 1987 vintage M-70 needed all sorts of work to make it operate when it was new.... the same for the Remington M-700 Mountain Rifle which needed all sorts of work to make it shoot well.

The Remington cost me $1,100 new
the Winchester around $650 new
the 1957 Husqvarna cost me $450 on THE HIGHROAD

 

[dak0ta]

Old rifles, way better than new rifles because they have 'character'! Hand made in the post-WW2 era is my favourite. The metallurgy and designs post-WW2 are fine, we learned a lot about it trying to kill one another.

My Husqvarna FN98 Commercial Mauser in the 8x57 Mauser.

German engineering, Belgian receiver, Swedish barrel (best of everything!)



Birmingham Small Arms CF2 6,5x55 SE MADE IN ENGLAND

Similar to the early SAKO ie. Finnbear that has the bolt guide rib for ULTRA smooth feeding. You think a Remington 700 is smooth? It feels rusty compared to this. This was the Scandinavian export model.




So all these old rifles have integral front recoil lugs, whereas Remington advertises the 3 rings of steel and the round receiver etc. Meh. Remington is made for mass production, so the recoil lug is sandwiched between the receiver and barrel. Cheaper. But hey, they designed a rifle for cheaper and shot accurately too as the older rifles. However, I can't really understand how they can charge so much today for their product. Anyways, SAVAGE came along and beat them at their own game with the barrel nut and Accutrigger, and made more accurate out of the box rifles 'on average' for cheaper. Winchester is essentially FN/Miroku so it's going to be good.

Now, I know you guys hate Chinese firearms, but they are a good base product that you can work on yourself to make into awesome pieces. Especially their M14, 870, and 1911s. The steel quality is above our domestic steel and it's so cheap to buy due to the cheap labour. Fit and finish suck, and cause the steel is so thick and strong, handling can be off a bit, but if you fix that up yourself you're golden. If they just got their QC more consistent and higher up that would be better. Heck, even Remington is selling an 870 clone via the H&R Pardner.

 

[Pinkbunny]

I6turbo,
You got me really interested in the CZ 550. One thing though. I know that, yes, a synthetic stock is the better stock for bad weather. But...I just think that, compared to wood, it has no soul. I'd rather be extra careful, and take a hit in accuracy, and have a beautiful stock.

I saw several CZ 550's. Some had that stock, some had a plainer stock. I see no options for a finer graded stock. Were you able to ask for a better stock from wherever you got it, or was that stock a happy accident? It's beautiful.

 

[Ash]

I use a Pedersen 3500 in 30-06 and a Western Field 730 in 7mm Mag, both are excellent rifles, both 40 years old.

 

[Kachok]

It you want a Mauser action get a new Winchester M70. Everybit as good and maybe better than the old rifles.

^ This. Love old rifles, grew up shooting them, my new Winchester 70 is every bit as classy as an old rifle, and shoots with the best of the new ones. One of the only rifles I have owned that loved a factory hunting bullet, shoots cheap 150gr core-lokts just under an inch, handloads nearly cut that in half. Not shabby for a little Featherweight, few more trips to play with the length and I think I'll have it running with my Tikka.

 

[B!ngo]

'Character' notwithstanding, the combination of modern materials technology, computer-aided design with automated machining and chemistry improvements on the ammunition front together yield a firearm system that, on average is far superior to anything made 20, 30, 50 or 100 years ago.
Maybe the 'feel' of a modern design is not as fulfilling, whether the tactile sense of old and fine wood, or the heavier feel of the bolt or the hand-felt thermal properties of different metals in the barrel, but it's all in ones head, not proof on target.
How many pro's - marksmen, hunters, military are using decades old technology? And yes, there are always exceptions but, overall, it's no contest.
Which is not to say that there aren't good reasons to buy an older design. I just bought a 50-year old (or more) design in an MP5 clone. The roller lock is excellent, but more modern bull-pup PCC's (the FNH PS90 for example) are far more evolved than the MP5. But I've always wanted an MP5 and so satisfying that urge was more important than the improved and evolved designs of the day.
B

 

[Ash]

What ordnance steel are they using today in commercial bolt action rifles that was not in use 60 years ago?

Firearm system far superior to what was fielded in 1993? Really?

Have we reached that point where I can get a phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range?

 

[Kachok]

40 watt? My plasma rifle is 1.21 gigawatts, and will slice a deer in half in under .18nsec, the only thing that limits my range is the curvature of the earth, still prefer my 6.5x55 though

 

[Skyshot]

Of all my rifles, an early made model 700 Remington is the most accurate factory rifle I own. Which will shoot 1/2 MOA with most loads put through it. But, having said that, I also own a 96 Carl Gustafs Swedish mauser with a 1915 mfg stamp. With Iron sights, this rifle will shoot 1 MOA with my reloads. My newest Savage will shoot just a tad under 1 MOA. So, in one centuries worth of riflery, I think there have been great improvements in materials and the machining process. But good craftsmanship is timeless. I think bullet design and propellents have made the modern rifle better out of the box.

 

[jmr40]

Want to look at or use it.

A QUALITY modern rifle will be more accurate and reliable. Too many of the newer guns being made are designed to sell at the lowest price point possible. But there are examples of current production well made guns. For a rifle to actually take out and use I'd take a current production Winchester, Kimber or Sako right out of the box over any of the older guns. Or even a 1994-2006 Winchester after a little gunsmith tweaking.

The older guns were hand fitted and we will likely never see the quality of workmanship in a factory rifle. Labor costs are just too expnsive. You can still get it with a custom rifle, if you're willing to pay for it. But when it comes down to performance, the newer guns will beat an older production gun 9 times out or 10.

 

[Ash]

Newer rifles are no more reliable than older ones. Indeed, I would say the other way around. But, accuracy is going to be better in newer rifles as a general rule - but that remains merely a general rule. Check out run-of-the-mill Remington 700's these days for accuracy.

For hunting, there is no real advantage brought by newer guns at all. Competition? Sure, but older rifles are both reliable and accurate. Indeed, in total cost, other factors like trigger and glass also come into play. An older rifle with a better trigger and glass will beat a newer rifle with decent trigger but inferior glass.

 

[Kachok]

Of all my rifles, an early made model 700 Remington is the most accurate factory rifle I own. Which will shoot 1/2 MOA with most loads put through it. But, having said that, I also own a 96 Carl Gustafs Swedish mauser with a 1915 mfg stamp. With Iron sights, this rifle will shoot 1 MOA with my reloads. My newest Savage will shoot just a tad under 1 MOA. So, in one centuries worth of riflery, I think there have been great improvements in materials and the machining process. But good craftsmanship is timeless. I think bullet design and propellents have made the modern rifle better out of the box.

Yep the old Mausers were WAY ahead of their time, high quality Swedish and German manufacturing and a good design made for rifles that could compete with quality rifles 100 years later, and impressive feat if you think about it. If I did not mind a little extra weight/size in the field I would not feel handicapped at all with a good K98 or M38, never shot a K31 or Enfield but they are supposed to be really good too.

 

[Sam1911]

Modern metallurgy (yes, we've learned a few things even at this late date ) and certainly treatments, durable finishes, and such are indeed better, but the real test is accuracy. You can buy quite a few different models of off-the-shelf hunting rifle that will guarantee you sub-MOA accuracy, and some of those aren't even "high quality" expensive rifles, either.

That certainly was not the case 50 years ago.

Having said that, pure accuracy is not the only reason a person might buy and use a rifle. A well-made, beautiful, reliable, smooth-operating hunting rifle that will "only" shoot a 2-3" group at 100 yards, is plenty accurate for most of the hunting that we in many parts of the US will do. Many life-long hunters wouldn't know and couldn't care whether their favorite hunting iron would print 2", 1", 3" or whatever groups. It hits the deer they aim at, and they've got full freezers and a wall full of mounts to prove it.

Long story short -- if your primary goal is to get into rifle shooting and be able to shoot nice tight groups, with practice, a carefully selected new rifle will get you there cheapest/fastest.

If you want a really lovely rifle with lots of character, good balance, and great looks -- and it just has to kill the game you're likely to shoot at -- you can find any number of older rifles that will fill that bill.

If you want an older rifle, with great looks, fantastic balance, and bug-hole accuracy -- get out your checkbook, find a great rifle-smith, and prepare to wait.

 

[jim243]

Is it worth it to buy hunting rifle a few decades old, or has technology progressed to an extent that it is not worth it?

That depends on your personal tastes. As I see it there are two kinds of rifles.

The ones you like to look at and the ones you like to hunt with. I am not a fan of what I call antique rifles (ones make before 1995). Are there some beautifully made older rifles, without a doubt. Are they as accurate as the ones made today, I don't think so.

You have to understand that the min you put a round into the chamber and pull the trigger you are reducing the life of any rifle. Throat wear, bolt face wear, flame cutting, wear and tear on the lines and groves start the min you pull the trigger on any rifle. The older the rifle the more wear and tear it has seen.

On the other side the stocks of the older rifles will far surpass the stocks seen today on modern rifles. The wood that was available to gun makers 50 years ago was far more plentiful and cheaper than what is available today, far too many trees have be cut down to make paper grocery bags and new homes. Yes you can still get some nice wood today but at a cost that would choke a horse.

With today's CNC machining and much better steel, most common (not custom made) rifles will shoot better than those of yesterday and provide you with a better platform to go hunting with.

So, do you want to look good at the gun club and keep that rifle in the closet most of the time, then get an older rifle. Or, do you want a rifle that you can knock around in the woods, shoot sub-MOA right out of the box and not worry about nicks and scratches, then get one of the modern ones.

Your choice, your money, your time to decide.
Jim