I find nowadays it is almost impossible to find the "perfect" rifle. It doesn't exist. You can't go to a store and buy it. It was killed off long ago by lawyers and accountants and CEO's more concerned with liability and the bottom line than with building perfect rifles. "Quality" and "quality control" are two things that seem to be lost on a majority of makers out there.
Thankfully, on one hand, with each generation of CNC machine presses, the technology improves slowly and steadily in terms of precision and speed. Why this benefits the shooter is simple, few rifles are really, truly "hand finished" these days, so the more precise they are rolling off the assembly line, the better it is for the consumer, ultimately.
However, at the same time, these actions are being assembled with parts designed to cut costs in any way possible. Cheap stocks that cost mere dollars to pour into a mould. Triggers needing trigger jobs right out-of-the-box due to excessive creep/pull weight/overtravel. Plastics throughout. All in the name of saving money.
I own both a Weatherby Vanguard in .300 Winchester Magnum and a Weatherby Mark V Fibermark in .300 Weatherby Magnum. Okay, so I don't really NEED two .300's, but I have them. Shooting them side-by-side is a very... special... task. The Vanguard easily matches and sometimes bests the Fibermark from the bench, which costs 3 times more! But at the same time, the Vanguard sock is nowhere near the quality - it just feels cheap and unsubstantial. The trigger is rougher. The metalwork is rougher, the bolt isn't as smooth nor does it lock up as nicely, the feed rails aren't as nicely finished, the recoil pad doesn't match the contours of the buttstock as well, you can "feel" the cost cutting measure in practice every time you handle the rifle, but at the same time, it's really hard justifying the extra expenditure for a higher level of fit and finish.
Here's another example - compare a brand new Tikka T3 to a Sako 85. Big difference. The Tikka reeks of cost-cutting measures just holding it. The Sako, though not nearly at the level of refinement of previous models, is manufactured to a much higher standard. I mean, even the trigger guard on the Tikka is plastic. But lay it over a rest and watch it punch paper - sweet Jesus can they rock a target something fierce. But how long will those plastic bits and pieces hold up to years of hard shooting and hunting? It's like Tikka set out to make the most accurate rifle they could for as little as possible, cutting costs wherever possible. And people are using them satisfactorily in the field, they aren't breaking into pieces when the plastic freezes, they're maintaining their accuracy, and they are far, far less expensive than the Sako.
On the reverse side, I've seen now 5 Kimbers that can't shoot worth poop at the range and heard reports of many others on the Internet. These are marketed as being some of the finest off-the-shelf guns on the market. They are not cheap. But with the way they shoot, you'd think they were priced right in line with the cheapest Stevens on the shelf, except the Stevens is probably more accurate. The bedding job on the Kimbers in question is horrible. I had to lend one hunter a rifle of mine so he could go on a sheep hunt because his Kimber wouldn't shoot. Imagine dropping the money on an expensive rifle and a very expensive scope only to find you could fit a butter knife on one side of the barrel and a playing card would bind on the other! Meanwhile my old M700 Mountain Rifle did just fine for him at around half the cost with a really cheap scope. He's still fighting to get his gun fixed.
Pretty much across all price ranges, I've seen my fair share of turds and gems - an M70 Featherweight I sold in 6.5mm was an easy .5 MOA rifle out to 300 yards right from the factory. Nothing else done to it, even had the rough factory trigger and (gasp!) walnut stock. Likewise I've seen a few Rugers that have had to go back to the factory for repairs due to stringing shots or cracking stocks. My Browning is super smooth and slick but can't hit the broadside of a barn from the inside unless shooting 140gr or lighter bullets, which stinks for a 7mm Remington Magnum! It's been bedded and checked by two smiths and adjusted every which way but shoots 3" groups at 100 yards with 150's, and it gets much worse as the bullets get heavier - but is a long range tack driver with 140's. I can't bring myself to sell it to someone else because of that. I've seen a Sauer 202 bring an owner to tears of frustration and a cheap sporter built on an old Enfield P17 action come in 3rd place in a 300 yard shooting match. You just never know what you're going to get.
And speaking of the Stevens 200, wow, what a deal. It's a cheap rifle and makes no excuses about it, but succeeds brilliantly and every one I've seen at the local range has been a minute-of-whitetail rifle. As expected, stocks and triggers are junk, but like I said, they don't pretend to be more than they are - cheap, decently built guns. At the same time, I can't get over how much I dislike the Savage Accutrigger - what a great idea! Safety AND functionality - now that's progress! Unfortunately it's about the ugliest thing I've ever seen, as are Savage rifles in general. The barrel nut is hideous, the stocks are junk, and the metalwork is somewhat lacking in spit-and-polish. But they seem to really have it where it counts price-wise and accuracy-wise, those guns deliver far above their price point would suggest, far unlike a Mossberg - who in God's name let these guys build the 4x4? It's the biggest heap of junk I've ever seen.
I've seen Remingtons go both ways as well. A few cheap SPS rifles thinking they're Custom Shop target rifles while others are too busy throwing their shots all over the paper to remember that they're Model 700's, not shotguns. Again, hit-and-miss within the same range of rifles. With the heavy rebates being offered by Big Green they are very affordable, and are a decent gun overall but still, I can't help but think about the pile of junk that was the 710 and is the 770. First time I saw one fired the factory mounted scope actually came flying off the rifle. I mean, the shooter is definitely partly to blame for not double checking them after shipping and sitting in a warehouse for however long, but I'd expect something a little better than that from Remington, which is a massive company and any bad press spreads like wildfire.
It is a real crap shoot as the subject would suggest. It's almost like I don't know what to buy anymore when I walk into a gun store. Do I save for a Weatherby or Sako? Do I drop the money now on a Remington/Savage/Tikka? Do I bother fighting with the manufacturer if I get a dud? Or do I just tune it myself or with the help of a gunsmith? I've actually started to sell off a bunch of my rifles as I just don't need that many of them. In fact I could easily be a .30-06 and 12ga. kind of guy and be perfectly happy shooting geese, deer, moose, and black bear, but ultimately, which .30-06 would I be happy with? Any? Many? I just don't know anymore.
