I can't believe how good the "Inexpensive Rifles" are nowadays !

[JimP.]

my most accurate hunting rifle is a Remington Model 710 chambered in 300 Win mag. This rifle shoots 3 shots inside of 1/2 all the time at 100 yds. Very accurate, son kills deer with it. Doesnt want to borrow anything else.

[liliysdad]

A 710? Damn...thats a whole 'nother lever of cheap right there.

[Jpholla]

I hear you. It sure would be nice to see some of the old designs that were so labor intensive come back. Besides the Masuer 98 control feed, M70 etc.

I would love to see some really nice single-shots (NOT break actions!) at lower prices, but the fact of the matter is it probably won't happen. The laws of supply and demand will continue to trump machining technology for the foreseeable future. You would not believe how many phone calls a store gets asking (often in the strongest local accent) "What's the cheapest 'deer rifle' you guys have in stock?" All the masses care about is price. Not quality. Not something to pass down in the family. They want something as cheap as possible (and already sighted in, no less) so they can go hunting when modern-gun season opens the next day. A lot of these people buy a gun every year and then hock it after they get their deer. The gun industry knows this, and plans accordingly. There simply isn't a large enough customer base for superfluous quality to bring the price down. Looking at these new "bargain-bolts," they look to me to be designed to be easier for CNC machines to automatically turn out. If a CNC machine can crank out a bargain receiver every 3 minutes or a classic receiver every seven minutes, which can make them more money considering the available market?

On the other hand, consider that a Ruger #1 (one of the classiest rifles made in America) costs less today than when it was introduced--considering inflation. I'm sure there are many others. But on the other hand a Savage 99 made with modern machinery would cost well over $1000, according to Savage . Sometimes we just have to count our blessings about what we have available and just hope for even better in the future. And buy old, used guns when we see them at bargain prices.

[lightload]

In the old days of desirable yet affordable firearms, labor costs were modest. As they increased over the years, so did tool costs. This fact made Winchester take a sacred line of rifles and shotguns and develop the cursed post 64 products that did not sell. Today, the talent to do any hand fitting is gone. Anyway, labor costs prohibit it.

After WW2, the very strong dollar allowed Americans to buy a host of fine European firearms at bargain prices. I've seen Sako and other similar European rifles in discount stores next to Rem 700s for the same or lower price. Ditto for Beretta double shotguns. A plain Browning Auto-5 sold for the same price as a Rem 1100.

Tastes change. Many don't know the difference between quality and the lack of, and some don't care.

[dk17hmr]

I actually bought a Ruger American 30-06 brand new for $197 at Walmart. Haven't shot it yet so can't really comment on them from the bench. If it shoots better then my Kimber 8400 I might be a little mad.

On a side note an American in 300 blackout to shoot supressed would be a lot of fun. If I could find one for the price of my 30-06 I would buy one.....the brake for my suppressor would cost over 1/2 what the rifle did but it would be worth it.

[W.R.Buchanan]

To be clear CNC machining is not the end all for gun making. Some designs lend themselves well to manufacturing buy these new methods. Most older designs generally don't.

A Mauser Receiver has two big giant slots cut lengthwise called Bolt Races. These must be done on a specialized Broaching Machine as a separate operation. There really isn't another way to do it.

Ruger got around this operation by "Investment Casting" the receiver with the bolt races in tact, thus eliminating this operation and the machine. Thus Ruger M77 style rifles cost 10-15 times less than new Mausers

There are four ways to make a square hole in a part. 1. Broach it. 2. use an EDM machine to burn it, and 3. make the part two pieces and machine both sides with half the hole in place. 4. Or the way they did it originally,,, Drill a hole and use a file to make it square.

Lately I have seen AR lowers made by the first three methods. The most common is the casting with a broached Mag Well. Wire EDM is too slow and costly, but produces a perfect hole. And lately I have seen several two piece receivers where the Magwell was cut in each side using an Endmill, then bolted together. Haven't heard of anyone filing one but I'm sure some fool has tried it.

Virtually all of the Ruger American Rifle's Receiver and Bolt were designed to be done on a CNC Turning Center that has milling capabilities . That way the part can be completed in one pass thru the machine. Thus eliminating "Handling" and subsequent second operations which are the most inefficient parts of the entire process. Less time =less $.

The point here,,, it is the combination of Design and Manufacturing that yields a superior and less expensive product. This is not only true for guns, but virtually everything we buy nowadays.

#1 Fact in the machine shop. The less Human Hands contact a product,,, the better that product will be.

I have know this since about the third day I was a machinist!

Randy

[Artful]

So Randy if one wanted to take an older Design like the Savage 99 and update it so that modern CNC machines would be able to make it efficiently, what would have to be changed?

[W.R.Buchanan]

I would have to see the gun apart. I would doubt the overall design lends itself very well to automated production or else Savage would have already done it. They did update the design back 20 years ago, and got rid of the Rotary Magazine which was labor intensive, but it only lasted a few more years before they stopped producing it.

I'm sure that the design could be made other ways. If Ruger got ahold of it, the receiver and bolt could be Investment Cast and many of the internal parts could be made using MIM (Metal Injection Molding) That could bring the price down, but the gun itself was never "that" popular so I doubt it could compete with newer designs.

But if you look at the difference in price between a Ruger M77 and the American Rifle you can see that there is a big difference. The M77 has an Investment Cast Receiver and Bolt with a nicer wood stock and is around $1100 The American is $350 because of the simpler design, less expensive materials and machining.

Pretty big difference in price between the two.

What you have to understand is that these new rifle actions are being designed around a piece of Round Bar Stock with a hole in it, and some cutouts for the Trigger and Mag Well. You could probably make one with a Manual Engine Lathe and Bridgeport Mill. The bolts are made from a piece of bar stock as well and the bolt lugs are simply milled into the end. They are very simple and the design was done with respect to how they were going to make it happen on a CNC Machining Center.

Previous Designs were drawn up by the designers and then the machinists figured out how to make them. This is what I used to do for a living. Engineers with no shop experience design things and then expect machinists to make them, and in some cases what they designed was not possible to make with the tools we have. IE: You can't get there from here!

Now with 3D printers you can concoct just about anything because the printer can do all the internal work that you wouldn't be able to get to with a machine tool.

It is only a matter of time before the Star Trek "Replicator" is developed to perfection. The current 3D Printers are only the 2nd generation of that machine. I saw the 1st Gen Machines at Westec 20 years ago.

Within 20 years we will have a working Replicator. We are that close. Then anything is possible,,,, and affordable!

[FergusonTO35]

As far as hand fitting goes there are bunches of unemployed and underemployed machinists and manufacturing technicians in business friendly states. I think that is the largest reason Remington and other manufacturers are migrating south.

[oldblinddog]

From what I gather, I would stay away from the Remy brand, but I really like the looks/action of the others. I even have 4 of the H&R single shot models as well.

I have four Remington 700's that I bought within the last year (that have the new trigger), all from Sportsmans Warehouse, that will each shoot 1/2" groups with the factory ammo they like. I have three more that are <10 years old (that have the old trigger) that will do the same thing. In fact, I have owned more than 20 700's of various configurations, all factory stock, and every one of them would do that! Most often with Remington Corelokt ammo bought from Walmart. How anyone has anything bad to say about a Remington 700 is beyond me.

And I have owned a Handi Rifle (.22 Hornet) and a couple of Rugers (Number 3 in .223 and 77 International in .308) that sprayed bullets all over the countryside...

My ex wife killed the unluckiest whitetail buck in Texas with a shot to the neck from that Number 3 and it's open sights.

[Artful]

and a couple of Rugers (Number 3 in .223 and 77 International in .308) that sprayed bullets all over the countryside...

My ex wife killed the unluckiest whitetail buck in Texas with a shot to the neck from that Number 3 and it's open sights.

Love my #3's - this might help your's
http://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech...ch_notes.htm/4

http://www.varminthuntinginternation...ngnoruger.html

https://www.riflemagazine.com/magazi...i51partial.pdf

[oldblinddog]

Oh, both of those rifles are long gone. Thanks anyway though.

[Garyshome]

Crappy Chinese steel.

[northmn]

Found this thread interesting because I kind of got an itch for a 257 when I saw a sale bill that had 3 of them. Could not find any ammo in the stores and reloading suppliers were limited. Ended up picking up a Mossberg bolt action 243 for $200 that came with loading dies, cases and bullets. It shoots about as well as I need it to and I took a nice little eating buck with it this year.
Thing is that if I like the 243 it gave me an inexpensive sample of the cartridge, such that if I wanted to I could move up to something better. I do not know if it would stand up to a lot fo shooting but I expect to maybe shoot a few varmint loads through it and maybe a few deer loads. Some of my deer rifles have gone a while seeing 2 shots a year fired out of them. One to see if they still are sighted in and one for the deer. My 35 Remington is like that. At the price of the Mossberg if I wanted I could save the trouble of sighting in for different loads and have 2 of them.
By the way a couple fo the 257's at the auction went for around $800. I had an old Remington 722 in 300 Savage for a bit and I am darned if I would pay $800 for one. It was not a bad rifle but definitely not worth that. I had a duck gun with one of the black plastic stocks and it worked. It could double up as a canoe paddle if I dropped one overboard. There is something to be said about not worrying about scratching up a pretty stock. As I used to build muzzle loaders, complete with very nicely finished wood stocks that I had to baby I kind of appreciate the black plastic durability.

DEP

[oldblinddog]

Was that a Remington 700 Classic in .257 Roberts? If so, that was a bargain price. It was the very first limited edition in 1982.

[wingspar]

I bought a Savage Hog Hunter in .308 last year for $450. The trigger is a consistent 3 lbs 6 oz and the barrel is threaded for a muzzle brake or suppresser. I put a nice stock and scope on it and I now have one fine shooting rifle. Till I bought this gun, I had never shot beyond 100 yards before, but this thing impressed me at 300 yards this summer.

[northmn]

They were not 700's but the older 722. I don't do collectors either. The other reason I did not jump for a 257 is that I could not at the time get commercial either locally or on order. There are no calibers so effective or desirable that I cannot find a more common alternative that will work. As others have mentioned, for half that price I could get a more usable rifle. A person I worked with asked me about reloading. He had a 257 Weatherby. A box of ammunition cost him around $100 or $5.00 a pop. I told him to sell it and get a 25-06. Of course the Weatherby has some sort of magic over the 25-06 that made that seem unreasonable. Later on he asked me if I knew where he could get a scoped 308 or something like that.

DP

[jonp]

I hope the cheaper rifles shoot ok. I bought 2 Savage Axis today. $250 each OTD and if I had signed up for a Cabela's card they would have been $235 each. Do I expect target grade? No, but I expect 1in since I'm going to reload for both. I bet I get it too

[JeffHolt]

I just picked up a Howa 1500 in 308 Win 20 heavy barrel. This one came tricked out w/Hogue over molded, pillar embedded stock, a Nikko-Sterling 4-16x44 1 inch scope, a match grade 2 stage trigger that breaks like glass, Buffalo tilting bipod and the detachable mag upgrade for 10 rnd capacity mags. The whole gun and scope was dipped in Kryptek Typhoon. $750.00 for the whole shabang. These things are supposed to shoot sub MOA out of the box. I thought the fit, finish was excellent. Was looking for a Savage but I think these Howas should make comparable shooters AND they are good looking!

[glockky]

I bought a Savage Hog Hunter in .308 last year for $450. The trigger is a consistent 3 lbs 6 oz and the barrel is threaded for a muzzle brake or suppresser. I put a nice stock and scope on it and I now have one fine shooting rifle. Till I bought this gun, I had never shot beyond 100 yards before, but this thing impressed me at 300 yards this summer.

Is that a bell and carlson stock ? Looks Nice !