Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by clockwork_7mm
On average, how would y'all say the F&F on a new Mesa compares with a new M70 FWT? All three of my FWTs (Portugal models) have been excellent in that department and all shoot MOA or better with factory ammo. (Just starting to tinker with loads for the 280. Have components but not messing with the 708. And haven't messed with loads for the 6.5 at all.)


Fit and finish. I am an odd sort in that I have a problem with the way those words are coupled into something that so many people have a difficult time explaining. It is often used when discussing boats. People will say the fit and finish is bad. When I ask what didn't fit, I rarely get an answer. Or what wasn't finished or finished poorly...

That aside, fit is somewhat less subjective with guns. The fit of the Mesa is good. The barrel is floated, and the channel evenly spaced on both sides of the barrel. The rest of the stock to metal fit is as it should be. The recoil pad fits precisely. The metal to metal fit is as it should be. It is finished as it is finished. Mine is is tungsten with a black stock with gray splatter. It would be hard to compare the finish with a FWT, because they are finished very differently.

I think sometimes "fit and finish" is used to describe what is really a subjective feel of quality. In that respect, they both feel like quality pieces.


Fair point, Paul. When I say F&F I literally mean fit of components to stock, finish quality of metal, finish quality of stock, etc. So the walnut to composite isn't a direct comparison, but those "finishing touches" do add up to overall quality beyond basic functionality. So I think we're fully capable of at least ranking or tiering models based on that definition.

That said, asked a different way, for a rifle that didn't need to suit a specific purpose (rough use, wet climate, etc.) is a Mesa really worth $300-400 more than a brand new FWT?