What is wrong with rifles today?

[toivo]

Sako has made hunting rifles for a very, very long time.

That depends on what you mean by "very" and "long." Sako started out in 1921 and made only military rifles at first. (The name is an acronym for Suojeluskuntain Ase- ja Konepaja Osakeyhtiö, which means "Civil Guard Gun and Machine Works.") They didn't enter the consumer market until after WWII.

Still, they are very fine firearms, and I'm proud of "my people" for making them.

 

[Dookie]

I haven't personally seen that any of the major American manufacturers put out a rifle of significantly better or worse accuracy than another. I think most people with a strong opinion on the matter are working from an unforgivably small sample size.

Then you haven't been paying much attention.
Savage is KILLING in the accuracy department. Marlin is seriously stepping up. Remington is still good. Then we have a LOT of smaller but much more refined rifle companies like Cooper that are great. Ruger is, well.............decent at best. In the accuracy department.

When it comes to build quality Ruger is amazing, one of my favorites, and built like a tank. But if I want accuracy I can go buy a $300 Stevens 200 that will out shoot a Ruger hands down.

 

[stubbicatt]

Wow. There are some broad brush approaches to this topic posted here. Of the set of firearms owners, only a small subset regularly posts on these forums. Of those, I notice that most are simply repeating the tired old saws of years past, especially with respect to "Ruger being .... decent at best" or similar. These myths then perpetuate themselves to the derogation of any semblance of reality. Here's my broad brush then:

I will point out that I have not purchased an American made firearm in the last 15 years which did not need to go back to the factory for some QC issue. I am to the point now that I am tempted to purchase the firearm, roll down to the BBT depot, and ship it off to the warranty department before even dropping the hammer on the first shot.

I will also point out that I have not experienced this with any of the CZ firearms, Glock firearms, or others such as HK firearms.

IMO, this is a huge issue with American manufacturers.

And yet I still buy American made firearms, I just don't have very high expectations of them anymore.

 

[Offfhand]

From post above by Lopezni:

"Ruger's are just a name people like, they've never really made any great rifle. Remington is owned by foreign investor's that have brought the company down. If you want a decent american made rifle, try Thompson center."

Mr. Lopezni, this is interesting news. Which foreign investors? What is the name of their company and what country are they from? I think we should know more about them and I'd like to follow up. Wonder who owns T-C now? thanks

 

[Taurus 617 CCW]

Most major rifle manufacturers do a great job on their actions but cut corners on finishing and using a quality barrel. I hunt with a Howa 1500 that hits what I aim at every time. I did quite a bit of work to it though. Most rifles will benefit from a good glass bedding job. I also used pillars in the bedding process. I hand lapped the bolt lugs to achieve 90% contact and that also helped. I installed a Shielen barrel, also making a difference. The point is that most production rifles out of the box are pretty good but they require work to accurize. Savage, Tikka, and CZ shoot very well out of the box. It's also important to select a bullet weight for your rifle's twist rate. You don't want to shoot 45 grain (.223) bullets out of a 1/7 twist barrel. They over stabilize and won't group worth a darn. Working with your current rifle (Remington), you can have a smith bed the action and install an oversized recoil lug. If you're target shooting then you will probably want a free float bedding job. Otherwise go for a full length bed. The key is 1:1 contact around the rifle action. Good luck in your accuracy endeavors.

 

[BADUNAME37]

I think it would be a lot shorter answer if you asked "what's right with new rifles today?"

 

[dougw47]

Ruger

I had a Ruger HB Varmint that would put 5 .308's in 1/2 inch at 100. I got lucky.

I had a .270...well it was not very accurate.

I had a #1-S in .25-06 that would not stay on a paper plate at any reasonable distance.

I had other Rugers that were just as bad...when you call the factory, the have an attitude of, "Oh, well!"

Knowing that, I do not subject myself to the aggravation any more. Oh, I may buy another...if the deal is super...but if it does not shoot, I just get rid of it.

I have many of the 70's and 80's Winchesters...the worst of them goes 1 1/2.
Couple of 700 Rem.s that are the same or better...
a 600 Mohawk that is stellar.

I have a Rem. 742 .30-06 that does 2 inches on a good day...but it works on deer and hogs where I shoot.

Inaccurate rifles are a hassle regardless of MFG. If you want to pour a bunch of time, money and effort into one, it might get better...
but it may not. If you don't want a project...dump 'em. My 2 cents.

 

[lopezni]

Duh, know something before you post your resposnse. TC is owned by Smith and Wesson, an American company. Remington, Bushmaster, DPMS, Marlin, N.E.F.(now closed), and probably several others I forgot to list are owned by Cerberus Capital Management, which is HQ'd in NYC, but is controlled by foreign banks and investors.

 

[Robert Wilson]

Then you haven't been paying much attention.
Savage is KILLING in the accuracy department. Marlin is seriously stepping up. Remington is still good. Then we have a LOT of smaller but much more refined rifle companies like Cooper that are great. Ruger is, well.............decent at best. In the accuracy department.

I'm familiar with the internet lore. I just haven't seen it borne out in real life. I have a four MOA Savage, if you'd like to see it. I had a seven MOA Remington 700 (the stock put so much pressure on the barrel that when you removed the barreled action you had to be prepared to catch it as it came back down) but Remington wouldn't help me with it and an aftermarket stock still didn't get it below 3 MOA, so I don't have it around to show you anymore.

 

[R.W.Dale]

All this just tended to confirm my opinion that any manufacturer puts out some really good ones and some really bad ones and a whole bunch of average one

THREAD WIN


I go through a lot of rifles. when I get one that won't shoot well I'll go through the cheap basics of load development and minor dIY tweaks. If it still doesn't shoot to my somewhat strict standards it goes down the road. Life is too short to waste time trying to make an inaccurate rifle shoot. Besides If i'm going to invest part of my finite money supply into a gun to improve accuracy it's going into a gun that shows a initiate accuracy potential.

By this method of buy and sell I've acquired one of the most accurate factory bolt guns I have ever owned which also happens to be a ruger allweather 30-06 that box stock produces many 5 shot groups like this

 

[ranger335v]

" Remington is owned by foreign investor's that have brought the company down."

Rem clearly had some start-up problems with a totally new facility but that's normal. I don't consider Remington's new FN owners to suffer the killing mindset of US educated MBA-bean counter mentality nor does it seem the new plant's workers suffer the quality destroying lax work ethics of the previous plants. I expect Remington, as a brand, will do quite well for a long time yet. (Unless the Federal gobbermint destroys them, and that may well occur.)

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The newest centerfire rifles for deer and larger game that I have are a pair of flat-bolt, shotgun safety Ruger M77s -- one in .30-06, the other in 7mm Rem Mag.

Other than that I have a Swedish Mauser (sporterized by Kimber), a Winchester Model 94, a pre-64 Winchester Model 70 in .30-06, a sporterized Krag and a custom '03 Springfield in .35 Brown-Whelen.

 

[JWF III]

The craftsmanship and pride doesn't seem to be there anymore, unless you are willing to shell out big $$ for custom rifles.

IMO, this is a huge issue with American manufacturers.

DING, DING, DING, DING, DING, We have TWO winners.

It's not just in firearms either. We Americans used to take great pride in producing fine products. Now, most Americans take great pride in getting paid the most money for the least amount of work/effort. It doesn't matter what field it's in... autos, firearms, clothing, housing, technology, etc.... It's everywhere.

I, myself, blame unions. I may be wrong, or may be right. But when people get increases in pay based on length of employment, and not based on quality or performance, there is something seriously wrong. The best should get paid the most, regardless of how long they've worked there. Similarly, the worst should be looking for another place of employment, regardless of how long they've been there. If American companies got back to those roots, people would once again take pride in what they produce, and quality would go way up.

Wyman

 

[ggshooter]

I've owned several different brands and calibers of rifles, and some shot well, others weren't worth throwing away. I am not happy with a rifle if it will not shoot 1" or less groups at 100 yards. Now that being said, I have never found a savage that I wasn't pleased with (in regards to accuracy). I'm not a huge fan of the appearance of savages, but their accuracy is excellent. Thompson center rifles have match grade barrels and are also extremely accurate. Weatherby gaurantees 1 1\2" accuracy at 100 yards with their rifles and will send a target with a 3 shot group that was shot at the factory with the rifle that you purchase, that way if it wont shoot in your hands you know it isn't the guns fault. Just a few ideas for you.

 

[jmr40]

Ranger335v,

Remington is still American owned. It was Winchester that was purchased by FN

 

[toivo]

Remington and Marlin are both owned by Cerberus Capital Management:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerberus_Capital_Management

 

[USSR]

Personally, I don't care who owns the brand name of the rifle I own. An accurate rifle speaks to me in any language.

Don

 

[mes228]

Rifles

Thanks for all the reply's to my rant. Just for those that don't know, I work Gun Shows and trade a lot. Thus, own, and shoot many rifles regularly. I suspect I have owned more rifles, and shot more rifles, than the bottom 90% on these boards. Am I the worlds greatest shot? No, but I have no problem shooting 1-2 inch groups if the rifle/ammo combo will do that. Can I bed, work a load up and improve a rifles shooting? Yes, but the darn things should be USABLE from the box. You shouldn't have to do anything to make a rifle hit a rabbit at 100 yards.

I've not had a Browning A-Bolt that wouldn't shoot, nor a Howa, nor a Savage, nor a Sako. I've had many other rifles that would shoot (even Rugers), but I didn't particularly like the rifles aesthetics. I liked the concept of the Mountain rifle, The Ruger Mannlichers, and the Ruger Ranch. By the way I've had the Ruger Mannlicher in 30-06 & .270 &.308 and 7x57. The .270 was the most accurate, the 7x57 was the worst of the lot, even worse that the 6.8. The point I was making in the OP was that none of the rifles mentioned should have left the factory if they were USELESS as rifles.

 

[DIM]

And now you have your answer, no wonder why these riffles which can't shoot were allowed to leave the factory, when today's folks, can't even read and comprehend what was asked from them instead you got bunch of replies on how good this and that brand is, when in reality, all of them do produce lemon slips, just some produce more then the others, and yes they do get slipped through quality control at the factory...

 

[Dr T]

If you are trading a lot, you might want to consider why the original owner was willing to off load the gun onto someone else.

I made the mistake once of trading off an accurate gun (A Ruger Blackhawk 45 Colt with 7.5" barrel). I will not make that mistake again....

 

[Loggerlee]

funny thing about all the Ruger bashing,I've owned 3 of them,a Mini-14,a M77MKII and a SP101,they all were accurate as I think they should be.
The Mini was the closest to be a disappointment,it made 2-3" groups at 100yd...that was a problem if you were going to try and kill a thundering herd of coyotes,the first shot was always right on,I shot at exactly one coyote with it,170yds (rangefinder) and I dropped her on the spot,if I'd have missed I'd have had to let her go.

The markII shoots about MOA with federal 140grain,and I think it's a pretty rifle to look at.

The SP101 was the stubby in .357mag,and shot great,I never measured the groups,but they were better than I expected with that short barrel.

The best rifle as far as accuracy I ever had was a Mod70 "black shadow" .270, a ugly and poorly constructed rifle if I ever saw one,but that thing would make a group that you could not tell for sure how many rounds were fired,around .5 across,with a 4x weaver scope on it,but I kept the Ruger...

Really,if you want a tack driver it would be best to avoid Ruger,but I gotta say I've never really understood all the bashing,the Mini is not really as good as it should be,but if it were then I don't know why anyone would bother paying for a AR.

(As Mr.Wilson said,unforgivably small sample size,but I shoot everything I can get my hands on)

 

[RainDodger]

I've never been a Ruger fan at all, and then I made some trades and ended up with a very early Model 77, .30-'06 in a Bell and Carlson composite stock. It's in primo condition, so before trading it away, I took it to the range. Fantastic shooter. That's the only Ruger I've ever had good luck with and I'll keep it because it's an early one and it's in great shape.... and it shoots. I had a gorgeous #1 in .243 and I could barely keep it on the paper. They seem hit or miss... pun intended.

Most of my good shooters are older rifles too.

 

[Guncollector1982]

Bought a brand new M77 Ruger 270 4 years ago grouped shots horrible i traded it for a revolver. I have a Remington 700 Varmit special that ive heard they are hit and miss in accuracy, but i cant complain bout it other than i wish id gotten it in a different caliber. Knowing what i know now i wouldnt even look at a brand new hunting rifle rather buy a old Mauser or Springfield sporter thats been built right. Can see and fill great difference in quality between pre and post 64 winchester lever guns, therefore i only buy pre's. Qualities been slipping for awhile i think.

 

[NoAlibi]

What happened to the factory testing their guns before they leave the plant?

I have Weatherbys (circa 1962) in .300WM, .257WM, .378WM and .22LR - all of them came with test targets in the box. If I didn't like the way the test target looked I'd ask to see another rifle. There were no disappointments after I got the rifles home.

Apparently, most of today's rifles are a take it or leave it proposition and the manufacturers leave it it to the customer to cull out the inaccurate ones at the customer's expense.

 

[Guncollector1982]

And even if the company says send it in we'll fix it but the parts are less then the shipping and loss of time waiting to get it back from them how many even bother to send it back? So the consumer loses more often then the maker or he trades it to someone else and they have to deal with it.