Author Topic: Are Budget Bolt Action Rifles More Accurate Now Than In the Past (Read 4102 times)

Bart Solo · « **on:** November 20, 2011, 03:06:57 AM »

For most of my life sparkling accuracy was the differentuator between expensive hunting rifles used by the very rich and the budget rifles used by the rest of us. The local gentry would hunt with expensive rifles capable of consistenly shooting one inch groups at 100 yards. The rest of us would struggle to keep groups within 2 inches and then an inch and 1/2 at the same distance. We would go to great lengths to improve the accuracy of our turn bolts. Really serious gun guys, like we see on this forum, would glass bed their rifles to achieve that 1 inch accuracy. A lot of us would hand load to find the perfect round for our rifle. The average hunter would be content to hunt with a rifle that most of the time would shoot to minute of deer which is the size of a one gallon milk bottle.

Then suddenly over the last few years sub MOA has become the norm even among the budget guns. Now bragging rights don't start until you can group shots within a dime or single hole. The average hunting rifle has to be able to do sub moa or nobody buys it.

What has happened? Is the change related to improved technology? Has the wide use of the synthetic stock lead to a more consistent product? Are manufacturing techniques better? What has happened?

Am I the only one who has noticed?

Ranch13 · « **Reply #1 on:** November 20, 2011, 04:10:55 AM »

I think it's a combination of customer demand, and modern manufacturing technique. With todays machines making everything from the lock,stock and barrel to tighter and consistant tolerances it became easier for companies to market an accurate rifle with less cost.

LanceR · « **Reply #2 on:** November 20, 2011, 12:31:58 PM »

Add to that significantly better ammunition, designs optimized for modern manufacturing techniques, better sighting systems etc.

Lance

Swampman · « **Reply #3 on:** November 20, 2011, 12:50:00 PM »

Sub-MOA has always been the norm with Remington products but all rifles are more accurate than they use to be.

trotterlg · « **Reply #4 on:** November 20, 2011, 03:50:09 PM »

I also think there is a healthy dose of selective target publishing and exagurated distances. I only have one rifle that will always shoot under an inch, a Savage 10 in 17 Remington, and it took a lot of work to get it there. Even though a lot of people tell you they have a sub MOA gun, just go to the range watch them put the first five shots down range and see what they really get. I do think rifles have gotten better, but the marketing has also. If you shoot enough 3 shot groups you will, at some point, get three touching. Larry

hunt-m-up · « **Reply #5 on:** November 20, 2011, 11:08:10 PM »

The Rem 788's and Savage 340/840's I've been around were pretty accurate and I think they would fit the budget description. Mostly marketing hype with the current offering.

Brithunter · « **Reply #6 on:** November 21, 2011, 02:17:03 AM »

Actually it's quite simple the bullets are better than they used to be. If he bullets are made better and more uniform it has to improve downrange precision.

I don't buy into the CNC is better crap ..................................... most of the time manufacturers they cut corners on the tooling or the actual operating systems and have one person looking after several machines and that person is often just a minder and is not skilled. Quality CNC machines cost a bundle and the tooling is extra and EXPENSIVE. If the base machine is not precisely made then no CNC control system can be expected to achieve repeatable results add in cut price tooling as well except for needed a skilled or semi skilled operator one might as well have a manual machine.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #7 on:** November 21, 2011, 02:20:55 AM »

Ammo is better today from commerical loaders than ever before.

Swampman · « **Reply #8 on:** November 21, 2011, 02:21:52 AM »

CNCs stopped Harleys and Triumphs from leaking, they also build much more accurate firearms.

dks7895 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 21, 2011, 02:28:51 AM »

My Marlin XS7 in .308 is a sub MOA rifle with cheap Federal 150gr factory ammo. I can easily cover groups with a nickel and some shots are touching.

hunt-m-up · « **Reply #10 on:** November 21, 2011, 04:38:35 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on November 21, 2011, 02:20:55 AM

Ammo is better today from commerical loaders than ever before.

Very true

mdwest · « **Reply #11 on:** November 21, 2011, 05:01:16 AM »

its a combination of a lot of different things..

technology advancements in manufacturing...

technology advancements in the materials used..

technology advancements in ammunition (both manufacturing and in the materials used)

rise in demand for aftermarket products that are both affordable and improve accuracy (everything from triggers to stocks)..

technology advancements in manufacturing that allow lower cost optics to actually be better in performance than many "high dollar" optics were even just 20 years ago..

put all that together.. and you have a more consistent and accurate rife, that can easily and affordably be "ugraded" to an even higher level of performance, that shoots ammunition that is more consistent and accurate, that is sighted onto its targets by clearer, more reliable, and more consistent optics (whether we are talking about peeps, red dots, or adjustable scopes..)..

all at a relatively low price..

honestly, with the exception of a couple of true precision, custom rifles I had built back in the late 90's by a true master gunsmith.. as a general rule, any of my "budget" rifles (mossberg, handi's, etc..) can shoot just as well as my completely tricked out "high dollar" bolt guns..

as a result, I often choose to take one of my $350 rifles to the woods to get it wet, knocked around, and beat up on a hunt as opposed to taking one of my $1000-$2000 cool guy guns.. for the most part my high end guns have become safe queens these days and only get taken out occasionally.. my "cheap" rifles get shot all the time though..

Brithunter · « **Reply #12 on:** November 23, 2011, 06:38:32 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on November 21, 2011, 02:21:52 AM

CNCs stopped Harleys and Triumphs from leaking, they also build much more accurate firearms.

What Harley's leak

Nooooooooooooooooooooo!

Triumph does not exist anymore those things with the name on are just Japanese re-brands. The original Triumph Co-operative at Meriden was killed off so property developers could get their hands on the site.

Personal attack removed by Graybeard. CNC's are not the be all and end all as I pointed out they needs lot's of other things to make them work as claimed.. Cost cutters often skimp on them to increase profits and folks like you swallow it all up

.

mannyrock · « **Reply #13 on:** November 23, 2011, 08:27:12 AM »

Back in the 1970s, the Remington 700ADL with walnut stock was considered a "buget" rifle. It cost $150 brand new. If you wanted a 700 BDL, they were $175. In a magnum caliber they cost $185.

The 700 ADL was an incredibly accurate rifle.

The really really cheap rifle was the Model 788, which sold for $125 at KMart. Again, with a walnut stock. It was really accurate as well.

I don't think that any of the current budget rifles shoot any better than the 700ADL or the 788 of the 1970s.

A possible exception is the Stevens 200. But then, of course, you are getting a piece of crp plastic stock.

Mannyrock

Bart Solo · « **Reply #14 on:** November 23, 2011, 03:00:06 PM »

I will grant that the 700 and 788 were very accurate for the time. I bought one of those $125 Remington 788s because rumor had it that they were as accurate as a high priced Remington 700. The rumor was accurate, and Remington 700s stood heads and shoulders above the competition. Still I don't think they were as drop dead accurate as your average budget gun is today.

Swampman · « **Reply #15 on:** November 23, 2011, 04:31:07 PM »

Almost all the rifles I've ever owned shot MOA or better. Most were/are much better.

pastorp · « **Reply #16 on:** February 20, 2012, 02:19:59 AM »

Well said Brit, "trouble understanding english" indeed....

Regards,

scootrd · « **Reply #17 on:** February 20, 2012, 03:41:31 AM »

A lot of the "Chain store" rifles back in the 1960's - 1970's were very accurate, and cost lots less than "Name brand" for the consumer on a budget. Sears / western Auto / Wards for example.

The Sears Model 53 (win 70) Model 54 (win 94) or JC Higgens Model 50 (98 Mauser), model 52 (Sako) model 54 (Browning) were great bargain's just to name a few.

I still think someone looking for an old Win 70 should look at Sears mod 53's. Unless you just absolutely have to have it stamped Winchester. You can usually find Mod 53's on the cheep , they have same inherent accuracy, minus the uplift on the used Market.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #18 on:** February 20, 2012, 03:56:19 AM »

I had a mod 70 3006 from around 1972 . at 100 yards it will give 2-3 inch groups . I had a 788 from about same time it would do about the same. Had a 700 from early 80's that would keep 5 shots in a nickle size circle at 100 yards. Have a ruger 300 win mag that is about 6 years old that will shoot around 1 1/2 " at 100 yards , a 204 that will shoot with the rem 2506.
Its probably safe to say as a group most production model guns made today shoot better than guns made years ago. It also might be safe to say the lesser expensive guns show the most improvement. But each gun stands on its own and there are good ones and sorry ones made now just as back in the day. It might be better to look at the construction of a gun you want to buy with an eye on how its made and if it will wear easy. What metal is used ? Not all bbls are made equal

quatroclick · « **Reply #19 on:** February 25, 2012, 03:31:14 AM »

I don't own any of the newer budget rifles, mostly because I don't like the cheap plastic stocks. However, I do own a rifle that was about as cheap as you could get 30-40 years ago. It's a Coast to Coast marked Savage 340 in 30-30. I got it with a Weaver 4x already mounted. It looks to have been shot very little, so I think it is very representative of a new one. I only shot the gun one time, those 5 shots just a touch over 1" at 100 yards with some random box of 30-30 ammo I grabbed at Wal Mart.

Another gun I have is an old 700 ADL in 270 that shoots 5 shots of Federal 130 grain WM ammo in to less than an inch pretty regularly with an occasional group a bit over that. I am not sure that I would say that this was a budget gun however since Remington usually had a gun lower on the rung.

JPShelton · « **Reply #20 on:** February 25, 2012, 05:03:47 AM »

I have a "budget bolt action" from the past. Back in November, I bought an N.I.B. condition Remington Model 721 in .270. When this rifle was new, it was one of the cheapest new bolt action rifles you could buy. It had an MSRP of $85.00, which sounds cheap to us today, but $85.00 had ten times the buying power then that it does today. In other words, this "budget bolt action" of yesteryear cost the equivalent of $850.00 2012 dollars.

It has absolutely no trouble at all shooting sub 1" five shot groups. It has a very smoothly rifled barrel that cleans up fast. I think this is part of the reason why it is accurate.

Today's "budget bolt actions" might be AS accurate as bolt actions of yore but I doubt they're more accurate than the typical Remington 721 or 722 was when new.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #21 on:** February 27, 2012, 03:06:58 AM »

With less expensive guns you have to ask how ? Machine work is where you get what you pay for . So if your bolt is made of few parts it will take more time to machine. Look at the bolt face etc . A bolt with alot of parts might bewak sooner . Then look at the company making the gun ( not the company selling it) can you get parts ? Remington imported guns from Russia are parts aval. now ? So you need to be aware of what you are getting . If you don't have funds to keep buying guins then a gun such as a ADL 700 costing a few dollars more may be your best deal . But if you want a cheap gun to hun in the rain or just to have around then a less expensive gun might be your best bet. One consideration is resale and guns that are bargin basement seldom skyrocket in value .

Swampman · « **Reply #22 on:** February 27, 2012, 04:29:29 AM »

The parts are available and the guns are still being made.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #23 on:** February 27, 2012, 05:15:15 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on February 27, 2012, 04:29:29 AM

The parts are available and the guns are still being made.

how much trouble though ? and for how long ?

Swampman · « **Reply #24 on:** February 27, 2012, 06:00:32 AM »

Those particular guns have been imported by one company or another for many many years and they are still being imported. I suspect the parts will be around awhile. Remington quit simply because the exchange rate meant they couldn't make a profit on them.

bobg · « **Reply #25 on:** February 27, 2012, 06:07:12 AM »

I have to agree with trotterlg on this one. Seems to be alot of people that think 35 yards are 100 too.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #26 on:** February 27, 2012, 08:16:02 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on February 27, 2012, 06:00:32 AM

Those particular guns have been imported by one company or another for many many years and they are still being imported. I suspect the parts will be around awhile. Remington quit simply because the exchange rate meant they couldn't make a profit on them.

My thought is if your gun breaks a few days before season which will get fixed first a rem 700 or imported gun ?

Swampman · « **Reply #27 on:** February 27, 2012, 10:53:53 AM »

The 700s were cheaper and more accurate than the Remington imports. That's why I bought one.

Brithunter · « **Reply #28 on:** March 16, 2012, 03:49:08 PM »

Stop the personal attacks. Stick to discussing the subject at hand NOT personalities of members. Address topics not other members. Graybeard.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #29 on:** March 16, 2012, 06:30:32 PM »

Dispite what world Swampman lives in,
I think the accuracy of the cheap rifles is fine.
The B line rifles that the major companies are putting out are hunting rifles.
They are a great way to start hunting.
They shoot minute of Deer or pig at 100 yards.
Most deer are shot less than 100 yards and the calibers are more than enough for North American game.
Personally I would shop the used racks for an unwanted not neglected A line for the same amount of $.
But the B line rifles that come with a scope mounted are great rifles, allowing you to spend more of your budget on bullets than on the bullet thrower. Throwing 100 bullets down range is going to make you a better shot than having a rifle that costs 10X and only being able to have a single box of bullets and shooting 5.