cal30_sniper
Member
Cee Zee, that's what I was trying to tell you a little earlier when things got out of hand. No worries though, I should have made the break clearer. I went from my first point to talking about my Savages not because I was trying to goad you, but only because they're the only bolt rifles that I own made since the 50s.
Good points all the way around. Yes, the accurate rifles of yesteryear were much more expensive back then than it costs to get a well made accurate rifle today. There also was a WHOLE bunch of junk made back when, a lot of it by companies no longer in business, but some of it from reputable companies too.
What I look at is the dollars in vs dollars out. Yes, quality rifles used to cost a lot of money back in the day, but most of them can be had for less than the cost of a new entry level rifle today. Yes, it's a crapshoot, and you get a bad one every now and then, but I'd say overall I've gotten WAY more quality made and accurate guns per dollar spent since I started buying than if I'd saved up the money to buy new rifles along the way. Much like buying a brand new car, it's fun for a little while, but once the brand spanking new feeling wears off, you've generally lost a good bit of your investment.
And, much like cars, they just don't build them like they used to.
I'll throw one more thing about the Savages and then I'll shut up about them. I've owned 110s made as far back as the 60s. They are all very accurate once the stocks have been bedded. The weak point of any Savage bolt rifle I've ever picked up was poor stock inletting. Their cost cutting measures really showed up there, much more than in the action itself. I had a 110 in 7mm Rem Mag that was produced the first year Savage offered that chambering. I believe it was '63 or '64, I can't remember. I bedded it into a Boyd's laminate stock (the original stock was garbage), and threw a vintage Weaver K6 on top. That rifle was almost always good for MOA 3 shot groups, and a good number were less than half that. I never fired any longer strings out of it, that pencil thin barrel just got too hot. Fit and finish wise, it was better than any of the Savages that I've seen since. Smoother action, better bluing, and it actually had a metal follower. I never realized how much the plastic followers in my other Savage rifles bothered me until I sold that one. The 10s and 110s have always been accurate rifles. Crude, ugly rifles, but accurate. Perhaps the average accuracy of the Savage rifle has come up in the last 10 years, but I'd say that it would be a very, very slight increase. Most of what people see as more accurate Savages today is really because a lot of Savages have moved up in price range in the last 10-15 years, and they build a lot more pretty expensive rifles today than they did then. Not exactly entry level though.
Good points all the way around. Yes, the accurate rifles of yesteryear were much more expensive back then than it costs to get a well made accurate rifle today. There also was a WHOLE bunch of junk made back when, a lot of it by companies no longer in business, but some of it from reputable companies too.
What I look at is the dollars in vs dollars out. Yes, quality rifles used to cost a lot of money back in the day, but most of them can be had for less than the cost of a new entry level rifle today. Yes, it's a crapshoot, and you get a bad one every now and then, but I'd say overall I've gotten WAY more quality made and accurate guns per dollar spent since I started buying than if I'd saved up the money to buy new rifles along the way. Much like buying a brand new car, it's fun for a little while, but once the brand spanking new feeling wears off, you've generally lost a good bit of your investment.
And, much like cars, they just don't build them like they used to.
I'll throw one more thing about the Savages and then I'll shut up about them. I've owned 110s made as far back as the 60s. They are all very accurate once the stocks have been bedded. The weak point of any Savage bolt rifle I've ever picked up was poor stock inletting. Their cost cutting measures really showed up there, much more than in the action itself. I had a 110 in 7mm Rem Mag that was produced the first year Savage offered that chambering. I believe it was '63 or '64, I can't remember. I bedded it into a Boyd's laminate stock (the original stock was garbage), and threw a vintage Weaver K6 on top. That rifle was almost always good for MOA 3 shot groups, and a good number were less than half that. I never fired any longer strings out of it, that pencil thin barrel just got too hot. Fit and finish wise, it was better than any of the Savages that I've seen since. Smoother action, better bluing, and it actually had a metal follower. I never realized how much the plastic followers in my other Savage rifles bothered me until I sold that one. The 10s and 110s have always been accurate rifles. Crude, ugly rifles, but accurate. Perhaps the average accuracy of the Savage rifle has come up in the last 10 years, but I'd say that it would be a very, very slight increase. Most of what people see as more accurate Savages today is really because a lot of Savages have moved up in price range in the last 10-15 years, and they build a lot more pretty expensive rifles today than they did then. Not exactly entry level though.
