Let's discuss long guns

[oldman45]

Have you noticed that the beautiful rifles of long ago have virtually vanished?

No longer can you find the quality rifles of yesteryear with the lovely wooden monte carlo stocks. Almost all the rifles today uses composite stocks or just plain plastic stocks. If you do find a wooden stock, it is virtually an ugly piece of pine that was carved into a rifle stock.

The gun barrels of today are going more toward stainless instead of blued finishes. The sun reflects off the stainless barrels and people can see your gun from hundreds of yards away. Then too, so can the game you hunt.

The actions of today are no longer the finely machined parts that worked so smoothly in years past. Now a person pays hundreds of dollars for a gun with an action that has to be filed down to get the burrs from it and then has to be lubricated to prevent rust and sticking.

I bought a Remington rifle last week in a caliber I did not already own a gun. It ran me almost $500 and looks cheap. Most of my rifles are either Sako, Browning, Weatherby or Kimber. My Remingtons are the older, nicer looking, smoother actions of the 60-70's.

Since MY rifles spend more time on the walls being looked at than being shot, I want a rifle that looks like it was worth the money I spent for it and not just a gun that shoots. I do not like to think that the guns of today are not being made to the quality and beauty of long ago.

Many years ago, those of us old enough to remember, everyone wanted a Belgium Browning gold trigger 12 gauge. Even back in the 50's, they were running several hundreds of dollars and had features now only found on the highest dollar shotguns. I have one that was made in 1953 and was offered $1200 for it a few weeks ago but it is not for sale and will not be as long as I am breathing American air.

Anyone else feel as I do?

 

[BarbC]

I just ordered my Cimarron 1873 in .357 and it should be here by the weekend. I think they're gorgeous - walnut and blued metal and a case hardened frame. Great shooter, too. $1200 for it, though.

 

[feralmerril]

Amen bro! Now its about cheap, black, tatical, and they get away with it by the newer generation being clueless and brain washed by modern writers and magazines.

 

[Len]

I agree. But, when you think about what people are interested in these days, e.g., tactical long arms, weather resistant hunting rifles, what we're seeing is a change of market, and more pragmatic approach to hunting guns in general.

I also think you see a trend to guns that are easier to maintain, resulting in the composite stocks and stainless finishes.

Regarding machining, I don't have an opinion, since I have not purchased a new hunting rifle in years.

For what it's worth, a neat thing I've done with several nephews who want to start out in the shooting sports, is to take a basic 10/22, show them how to operate it, and start off refinishing the dismal wood. [And you really don't have to worry that you're ruining an expensive rifle with "custom" work!] A little sanding, shaping, and refinishing takes a very cheap look to a more "old school" wood look.

They all treasure those rifles now, and I have to admit, they look pretty slick.

Len

 

[rimfired]

I'm taking this one shooting this afternoon. Course I'll have the 66-2 snubby along for protection. It's a Sako L57 .244.

 

[desi2358]

I would agree that plastic has taken over. The synthetic stock, stainless or dull finish blue guns dominate sales and I don't think it's just a price issue (though many are cheaper). I think it's partly marketing (the latest super-weatherproof wondergun) and an adlustment in peoples attitudes about what is acceptable as a quality gun.
The current guns certainly work well enough and for many people that is all they need. In addition when I was young folks owned lovely glass fronted gun cases or hung their guns on the wall for people to see and admire. Nowadays that is viewed as an invitation to be robbed in most areas. If they are all stuffed in a safe or buried in the back of a closet nobody sees them anyway and at least modern materials are more tolerant of neglect.
Sadly the world has changed but that's another subject. You can still get fine wood and beautiful finishes with smoother actions but you're going the special order or custom route to do it. Remember those beautiful Belgian Brownings were made at a time when the US dollar was worth more then the Belgian franc. High labor costs have made such guns simply not affordable for many people.

 

[Skeeziks]

Other than my Rem. Nylon 66, all of my long guns have wood stocks. When you hold in your hands a gun with a wooden stock you're holding something alive. You can feel the warmth of it...it has its own personality.
When I hold a gun with a synthetic stock...it just feels cold and dead. With a synthetic stock you can't lovingly rub in a few drops of linseed and watch it come alive!
A synthetic stock has no stories to tell. It has no history. I have a lot of guns that are now 95 to 100 years old and I look at them and imagine where they've been and who may have held & shot them.

No...I'll take a Live gun over a dead one, any day.

 

[FrankD45]

I feel your pain. I miss the days of good quality blued rifles with real furniture. That said, last week I scored a CZ 550 American that has a very nice looking wood stock. To me the real attraction was that it is chambered in 6.5X55 Swede, a caliber I have lusted after from when I first saw it mentioned in a Stoeger catalog (I think I just dated myself). The rifle reportedly had 30 rounds through it and came with 50 rounds, a hard case, and a Nikon ProStaff 3X9 scope, all for $525. I took it to the range and got three round groups of less than 3/4 inch at 100 yards. I LOVE old school.

Frank

 

[Dan Cash]

Two of my favorites. The 1895 was built in 1900, the Savage in 1952. The Bore on the Winchester is mint despite the lack of finish on the outside. Some old Montana/Dakota cowboy had a real rifle in his scabbard.

 

[Boxhead]

That is why almost all of my rifles are old. Few are willing to pay what it would cost to have that same level of quality today. That said, most of the new rifles are damn accurate and reliable so the functionality is there. Here's a couple of Walther Mauser's I picked up a few years ago when I was living in Canada, a 7x57 (left) and 8x57.

 

[Frank237]

Same thing goes with handguns today...everyone wants plastic and stainless. The manufacturers cater to what sells.

I'm in the same boat with many of you; sixty yrs old, grew up with REAL wood and blued steel guns. But I have to say I have warmed to quality glass stocked rifles, have 4 or 5 of them. Two of them are THE absolute most accurate rifles I have EVER owned in 40+ yrs as a rifle nut too. The .220 Swift will do .15 to .2" for five at 100 yds all day long.

The other a Rem .280 Lt Wt Mtn type rifle, 7 pounds with scope, ammo, sling....will do 1/2" grps at 100 and 1.5" at 300 yds for 4 shots with 150 gr Nosler partition hunting ammo. I will give up the blued steel for rustoleum matte blk painted stainless...for that sort of accuray.

FN in MT

 

[Wyo]

I would mostly agree with you though I have to say - I bought a Kimber M84 in .243 Win. a few months ago and that is a wonderful little rifle. Very fine work and finish on the metal and a terrific piece of wood in the classic style. They're not cheap, but they're out there and can be found if you look hard enough and are willing to part with the coin.

 

[feralmerril]

I cant let this go without showing just a couple of mine!

 

[feralmerril]

Couple more.

 

[Jellybean]

I think the same thing happened with rifles that happened to handguns. You had quality and you had junk, then a manufacturer makes junk, calls it quality and sells it at quality prices. The quality manufacturers lose money so they follow suit just to survive and make high priced junk of their own which makes the quality firearms worth more to the discriminating shooter and their price goes way up. Then some of the manufacturers get greedy, cheapen out the quality firearms and turn them into junk too, but still charge the high prices for them which makes good quality firearms cost a small fortune. So, in the end, I don't buy new guns anymore either.

 

[2152hq]

At a show or in a shop, I walk right by the tables/piles of what I consider modern mfg rifles. Most anything made from the 60's on just doesn't do much for me. Unless it's somewhat of an obscure mfg or something that still looks and feels like an earlier mfg'd piece, they're all pretty much the same to me.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with them, they do what they are supposed to do and most are accurate as hell right out of the box.
But I stop and look, sometimes buy, earlier stuff.
I don't have a strict list of likes and don't likes. A Mannlicher Schoenauer from 1913 and a Remington 08 automatic from 1933 will each get my attention,,,,and money sometimes.

The last 'new' rifle I bought was a Ruger#1 in 30-06 in 1970. Lost interest in the new rifles after that I guess.

 

[Gary]

I agree with most that has been said. All blued steel and walnut rifles were not attractive though. The Weatherby rifles and their copies from the 50's and 60's were ugly then, and to my eyes, remain ugly today. Bill Ruger brought taste back to the industry when he introduced his rifle with it's classic stock. Just my opinion though.

 

[gizamo]

Not to mention Smoothbores....

 

[Vulcan Bob]

I can appreciate the new tool's of the trade such as the AR's and AK's, sporting rifle's with the synthetic stocks's and such and do own em, but a blued steel and walnut stocked rifle with a fine leather sling on it just does something for your soul!

 

[bigolddave]

I've developed a real fondness for Savage 99's; nearly all fine quality, and generally affordable compared to the new stuff. Walnut and blued steel forever!

 

[FlYFiShErMaN]

I can appreciate the new tool's of the trade such as the AR's and AK's, sporting rifle's with the synthetic stocks's and such and do own em, but a blued steel and wanut stocked rifle with a fine leather sling on it just does something for your soul!

I agree 100% and owned many of the blued steel and walnut stocked long guns from circa 1900 through 1950s. I did not own anything newer than that, but I sold every long/smooth bore I owned. That $$ has been applied to my handgun collection. I can get more of them in my safe

 

[Kanewpadle]

Obviously you haven't taken a good look at CZ rifles.

But I know what you mean. Friend of mine has a Colt Sauer rifle that's just awsome. He won't sell it to me the son of a gun.

 

[BOB THE PALINDROME]

Well, I do have a Ruger 10/22 rigged out with black stock and EoTec sight but my next "newest" rifle is an M1 Garand, then a Remington 1917, and an 1898 Kraig. Yep, I appreciate real wood.

P.S. I did save the walnut stock for the 10/22.

 

[gregintenn]

You are preaching to the choir with me! My ol man sees it your way too, and still builds rifles the way a rifle should look. Here are a couple of 257 Roberts he built for each of my children.

 

[Skeeziks]

Those are beautiful, greggintenn.
The .257 Roberts is one of the sweetest shootin' rounds there is.

 

[GatorFarmer]

Wood is affected by moisture and temperature. Blued steel meanwhile tends to rust more quickly.

A stainless rifle ought not be shiny. If it is, paint it or get it treated, but most are useful as they come.

Machine labor tends to cost more today than hand labor, at least in developed nations. People also forget to factor in the cost of inflation.

Bespoke rifles are still readily available today, both in modern guise and in black powder. Prices start about a grand or two and up. Probably not far from what the price of a nice Remington from 1960 would be if inflation and other factors are taken into account.

A blue collar working man's rifle like a Mossberg 800 would be nicely fit out in ye olden days. But for the guy actually using it, and not just wanting something to look pretty, it would tend to rust and the wood would warp. All that for a 3 MOA rifle. Spend the same money today on the latest synthetic wonder and you get a rifle that might not be as smooth, but is probably more accurate and more durable.

 

[BlackSky]

I just bought a brand spanking new Browning X Bolt Hunter in .30-06 and it fits all the criteria the OP mentioned as qualities of old. Awesome blueing, action smooth as a baby's butt dipped in butter, gorgeous walnut stock with fine checkering. Incredible rifle.

 

[mr.magnum]

my best looking rifle is my cz 527 prestige chambered in .223. for the longest, i contemplated selling it. i am a pistol guy and don't often shoot rifles. last weekend my little brother came home and we had the best time shooting targets with it. my respect for it is great now and i would never part with it. and big old dave is right. even a pistol guy knows to respect the savage 99.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

A stainless rifle in a synthetic stock makes sense in a very damp or humid climate. But in long guns as in handguns I am a Steel and Walnut man.

 

[oldman45]

Again, long guns spend more time in the cabinet being viewed than in the field being used.

A viewer will appreciate the looks of a beautiful gun than one in camo or plain.

As to the accuracy of the newer guns, I do not buy that. I have a Browning A-Bolt in .270 that I can place a shot in a two inch target every time at 200 yards. I have a Sako 7mm mag that I can virtually stack the bullets at 200 yards.

I have to say that I paid more than $1,000 for each of these guns over 15 yrs ago and then put another $500 in a scope for each.

A person can buy accuracy in a good gun but few are willing to do so or even justify the added expense. I do not need a gun that shoots a 1 inch group at 200 yards but I feel buying quality is well worth the added money and I can write the cost off my income tax.