Are these the best times

[Kansashunter]

I have been riding a tractor some and it gives me a lot of time to think about things. Recently I got to pondering about guns and in my opinion this might be as good as it's ever been. I know it is not the giant leap from black powder and single shots to six shooters and lever actions but today you can still buy reproductions of old guns and the newest thing on the market. Some will say that in the old days things were hand fitted, well you can still buy them if you want to spend the money. You can still buy a blue gun with a walnut stock, or synthetic or whatever you want. My lgs has a new rifle I have been looking at in 6.5 sweed, a round that has been around for over a hundred years and right next to it is one in 300prc. I just think there are so many new guns and calibers coming out that it is better than ever. Heck there are those that buy glocks. What does everyone else think?

[breamfisher]

The old guns were built using more hand tools, and gunwriters were happy if it got 2 inch groups at 100 yards with handloads in a bolt-action hunting rifle

Nowadays most folks won't be happy unless their CNC-built bolt-action sporter gets under an inch at the same distance with factory ammo.

[Wambli Ska]

The old guns were built using more hand tools, and gunwriters were happy if it got 2 inch groups at 100 yards with handloads in a bolt-action hunting rifle

Nowadays most folks won't be happy unless their CNC-built bolt-action sporter gets under an inch at the same distance with factory ammo.

Ammo has certainly never been better. I have a pile of those guns that in the 50s and 60s gun writers would be giddy if they got a 1.5” group with hand loads, and the same gun today with a modern scope and quality commercial ammo will lay them into groups well under 1MOA today.

What I’m not happy about is that the new “high end” factory rifles (let’s call it the $1k plus club) still feel “cheap” to me judged by the old standards. I don’t care how good the parts are MIM and plastic will never be forged steel and there is virtually no forged steel in production today.

Nothing comes even close to a 1950s commercial FN Mauser in modern production. Hell I’m hard pressed to find anything that puts a smile on my face like a JC Higgins Model 50 for any amount of reasonable money. And those were working man guns.

There are zero S&W at any price coming out of the factory that make my pulse quicken. The new Colt snakes are nice but they are no last century Python or even Anaconda/King Cobra.

So in general these are great times and you can get nice guns for cheap nowadays, but pretty and forever quality are in our rear view mirror at working man prices.

[breamfisher]

The Remington 700 was introduced in 1962 for $114 for the ADL and $150 the BDL. Both numbers MSRP.

They translate to $1,160 and $1,424, respectively, when adjusted for inflation.

[CPJ 2.0]

Its a great time for options, even though the marketing wanketeers get too far involved with every niche round. But, those get weeded out fast if they dont really do anything. Manufacturing is more accurate than its ever been, and more repeatable. Whether or not thats taken advantage of by the makers or if they sacrifice some tolerance for speed of production is another issue.

Which this is kind of the rub, while they COULD do better, its more profitable to get by. The bolt raceway finish on my Ruger American was garbage. The feed per revolution of the cut was too coarse. Think fine thread VS coarse thread of a screw. Same theory, but WAY finer threads. (thats how a lathe cuts. every part is essentially a fine pitch bolt) Anyway, it could easily be fixed....but it may add one minute cycle time. Not acceptable to some carpet person who wants production.

"BUT CHRIS! Thats a $400 gun! What do you expect?"

Lets say I roll with that. Cool. Now why is the $1300 Ruger Precision the EXACT SAME? Because profit.


Unpopular opinion.... hand fitting is fine, but its also window dressing that adds to the cost. Aside from the fact it should (could) have come off the machine to near perfection. Not saying its bad, but a hand fit, older than a Kansas tractor riding farmer Smith and Wesson isnt functionally better than a new one. I hear all the cries for my head, blah blah blah.
Doesnt mean Im not right. Well I know Im not right. Im talking about the guns. Not my brain.

[breamfisher]

A JC Higgins Mauser that sold for $125 in 1950 would be $1,622 now.

[Wambli Ska]

The Remington 700 was introduced in 1962 for $114 for the ADL and $150 the BDL. Both numbers MSRP.

They translate to $1,160 and $1,424, respectively, when adjusted for inflation.

True but over $1K rifles today are not built like those old Mausers. They are CNC, MIM and plastic. Good guns! Just not 100 year old heirlooms.

[CPJ 2.0]

The Remington 700 was introduced in 1962 for $114 for the ADL and $150 the BDL. Both numbers MSRP.

They translate to $1,160 and $1,424, respectively, when adjusted for inflation.

True but over $1K rifles today are not built like those old Mausers. They are CNC, MIM and plastic. Good guns! Just not 100 year old heirlooms.

Please explain how a CNC machine is bad.

[Diver43]

The old guns were built using more hand tools, and gunwriters were happy if it got 2 inch groups at 100 yards with handloads in a bolt-action hunting rifle

Nowadays most folks won't be happy unless their CNC-built bolt-action sporter gets under an inch at the same distance with factory ammo.

Many do. My new rifle gets 1/2 moa out of the box. Not that I can repeat that over and over. The machines of today are more accurate than most people

[Japhy]

I love seeing and shooting classy wood and blued anything. I loved the wood to steel fit of my Browning 78. I loved the old LC Smith doubles.
But are those pieces “better” than the current products?
Do the perform their intended function measurably better and by what metrics
Thinking about the then vs now the current product are really miles ahead of what was available a few years back. But the trade off is that today’s products lack the hand built charm

[breamfisher]

A lot of the products we wax eloquently about were just built to be used, not heirlooms or nostalgic.

A 1911 in 1950, or most Smith and Wesson revolvers, were the equivalent of a modern Glock.

Heck, a 1957 Chevy was just a car

[CPJ 2.0]

A lot of the products we wax eloquently about were just built to be used, not heirlooms or nostalgic.

A 1911 in 1950, or most Smith and Wesson revolvers, were the equivalent of a modern Glock.

Heck, a 1957 Chevy was just a car

Except the Glock is superior.

#TWOWUHLDWAHS

[Diver43]

A lot of the products we wax eloquently about were just built to be used, not heirlooms or nostalgic.

A 1911 in 1950, or most Smith and Wesson revolvers, were the equivalent of a modern Glock.

Heck, a 1957 Chevy was just a car

Except the Glock is superior.

#TWOWUHLDWAHS

Glock? That's debatable

[jaywapiti]

Just for comparison in 1960 i bought new M-70 ftw .358 retail cost $136.00, A Savage M-99EG also .358 $95.00
In 1960 a FN Mag Mauser .300 H&H for $120.00

JAY

[Zsarvashere]

Nowadays most folks won't be happy unless their CNC-built bolt-action sporter gets under an inch at the same distance with factory ammo.

Mine do. I have 3 walmart adls priced at $349. Every one of them shoots under an inch with factory ammo. I only cleaned them, added triggers and tossed the bad glass included. I never understood the disdain for the 700 at the end. They are ugly, have a bad finish, come with a crappy stock and scope. They will also outshoot most people's multi thousand dollar heirlooms. I for one am very happy with modern cnc manufacturing. I understand a desire for beauty, but function must come first.

[Wambli Ska]

The Remington 700 was introduced in 1962 for $114 for the ADL and $150 the BDL. Both numbers MSRP.

They translate to $1,160 and $1,424, respectively, when adjusted for inflation.

True but over $1K rifles today are not built like those old Mausers. They are CNC, MIM and plastic. Good guns! Just not 100 year old heirlooms.

Please explain how a CNC machine is bad.

Not bad at all. Just does not look/feel TO ME as well finished as a hand finished action. I’m not arguing utility at all. I carry a Glock and not my 1940s Remington Rand. I just bought a Kimber Hunter and it’s an exceptional rifle even with all the plastic and sharp edges. Not against modern manufacturing at all. Just don’t personally enjoy the feel of the new guns as much as I do the hands on craftsmanship of the old ones.

So I’ll use Glocks and other new guns and enjoy the advantages of the newly manufactured stuff, but I’ll pass on the classics as heirlooms to my kids. They can sell the Glocks and all other plastic if they want. They are basically disposable consumable goods to me.

[Wambli Ska]

And by the way there is a way to do both. And the Italians have figured it out. Modern manufacture has given us affordable, shooting classics. There is no way I could swing an original Winchester 1876 Centennial, and if I did I would not in good conscience shoot the hell out of it. But I’m certainly enjoying the hell out of my Italian modern made rifle and it does not feel cheap. Wood to metal fit and finish is as good as anything made 100+ years ago in the USA and the internals are made of better stronger materials. American manufacturers have mostly lost that art.

[CPJ 2.0]

True but over $1K rifles today are not built like those old Mausers. They are CNC, MIM and plastic. Good guns! Just not 100 year old heirlooms.

Please explain how a CNC machine is bad.

Not bad at all. Just does not look/feel TO ME as well finished as a hand finished action. I’m not arguing utility at all. I carry a Glock and not my 1940s Remington Rand. I just bought a Kimber Hunter and it’s an exceptional rifle even with all the plastic and sharp edges. Not against modern manufacturing at all. Just don’t personally enjoy the feel of the new guns as much as I do the hands on craftsmanship of the old ones.

So I’ll use Glocks and other new guns and enjoy the advantages of the newly manufactured stuff, but I’ll pass on the classics as heirlooms to my kids. They can sell the Glocks and all other plastic if they want. They are basically disposable consumable goods to me.

Maybe I/we/you should specify CNC machining, verses hand finished.

Because CNC machining is exactly like manual machining, but with more consistent results.

[Wambli Ska]

Please explain how a CNC machine is bad.

Not bad at all. Just does not look/feel TO ME as well finished as a hand finished action. I’m not arguing utility at all. I carry a Glock and not my 1940s Remington Rand. I just bought a Kimber Hunter and it’s an exceptional rifle even with all the plastic and sharp edges. Not against modern manufacturing at all. Just don’t personally enjoy the feel of the new guns as much as I do the hands on craftsmanship of the old ones.

So I’ll use Glocks and other new guns and enjoy the advantages of the newly manufactured stuff, but I’ll pass on the classics as heirlooms to my kids. They can sell the Glocks and all other plastic if they want. They are basically disposable consumable goods to me.

Maybe I/we/you should specify CNC machining, verses hand finished.

Because CNC machining is exactly like manual machining, but with more consistent results.

Manual machining and manual fitting/finishing are not the same or interchangeable terms, and I’m specifically referring to the second, not the first. I understand CNC is more precise than manual machining, I’m sure everyone gets that. But no CNC today will produce a hand finished Holland and Holland or Westley Richards gun which are hand fitted and finished.

At a more mundane level, there is no modern S&W revolver that has a grip fitted to the frame as their pre-war guns. And no Colt today has the ball bearings feel of the trigger pull of an original Python. These guns were hand fitted/finished.

That is what I’m referring to.

[Gila]

A lot of the products we wax eloquently about were just built to be used, not heirlooms or nostalgic.

A 1911 in 1950, or most Smith and Wesson revolvers, were the equivalent of a modern Glock.

Heck, a 1957 Chevy was just a car

Except the Glock is superior.

#TWOWUHLDWAHS

Glock? That's debatable

I agree.

[CPJ 2.0]

Except the Glock is superior.

#TWOWUHLDWAHS

Glock? That's debatable

I agree.

You agree the Glock is superior?
Good choice.

[Kansashunter]

My lgs has a wilson combat 1911 that is beautiful but it is not in my price range just like a colt python wasn't 40 years ago. There are guns out there that function reliably and cost very little in todays money. How many new guns come out every month. You may not like them, sometimes nobody likes them but there will be something different next week. How many new rifle calibers came out last year? Some people don't like anything since 30-30 or 30+06 but some people like to try new things. We have a lot of choices. I think that's great and cpj everybody knows you are not right but you are certainly entertaining.

[Wambli Ska]

And just so I don’t get taken the wrong way, I love the variety and quality that’s out there for reasonable prices. And as I said, we’ve never had better ammo, so while I agree with the premise of the OP I wish Winchester would figure out a way to build a 1892 of the quality and fit/finish of a Uberti or Rossi here in the USA

[shotgunshooter3]

I admire the craftsmanship of the classics, however the performance of the modern guns has set the bar high. For my personal uses I prefer the more modern ones, between the better performance and the weather resistance I worry a lot less about dragging them through high mountain snowstorms for days on end.

[Zee]

I can spend my money on pretty things. Or, I can spend my money on things that work and get the job done, regardless the circumstances.