Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Cheap Rifles and expensive scopes

You sure hit the nail on the head there MD.

I've owned a bunch of cheap rifles old and new. Have had 4 savage 340's, 4 Winchester 94's, 6 Marlin 336's and a Remington 788. Currently own two 94's, a 336, a stevens 200 and a Ruger American and have shot a couple recent synthetic 700 ADL's and a Savage axis. Love my 94's and 336. Still use them frquently and have killed a big pile of deer and other game with them over the years. Like my stevens 200 pretty good now but not so much as it was issued. It's now glass/pillar bedded into a Boyd's laminate stock, has a rifle basix trigger and shoots extremely well. Haven't shot my new RAR yet. Not at all impressed intitially as the barrel was not even close to free floated out of the box. Full contact along the right side and a big gap on the left. Due, as best I can tell, to an internal bedding block casting that's a bit cockeyed and forces the action over to the right when the action screws are tightened. Because the forend of the stock is so thin along the top edge, you can't really remove much plastic along the sides without it being really noticeable and ugly so will need to solicit Ruger for a new stock or at least a new bedding block.. Beyond that, the action is rough as a cob and sounds like you're dragging a file along a cast iron fence when operated. The trigger has some annoying creep and breaks at 4 lbs. Not terribly impressed with it so far and it is in no way even remotely comparable to a Tikka in quality/precision of manufacture, despite the comparisons I've seen to that effect. The Savage axis is a pitiful excuse for a rifle as issued. Can shoot decent groups so long as you are aware of the stock flex and take it into account AND can manage to overcome the rediculous stock ergonomics that were obviously intended to work well if you're an orangutang. Try not to look at the damned thing though or you may go blind from the ugly. I almost always end up doing some performance enhancing and/or cosmetic work on damned near every rifle I've ever owned. These new economy wonder rifles are no exception and in the end, after the work is done, they don't perform any better than my old rifles. They're just uglier. In fact, that old Remington 788 .222 I had was still one of the most accurate rifles I ever owned. More accurate than any of the new economy rifles I've owned or shot/test fired. I'm still kicking myself for selling it.

You obviously haven't tried many Ruger American Rifles. There were problems initially with the stocks, though in several examples I didn't encounter any that couldn't bee free-floated with a couple minute's work with a round rasp. But maybe a couple of years ago they stiffened the stocks and pretty much solved the problem. I have three here right now that had the barrels centered in the forend and properly floated right out of the box. The actions can be very smooth, though some are smoother than others.

The triggers can be adjusted down to 2.5 to 3 pounds with the instructions (depending on the trigger) but it only takes a few more minutes to easily remove the mainspring and either replace or modify it for a lighter pull. How much creep depends on the individual trigger, but I'd say most are relatively creep-free. I know all this because I didn't judge every RAR on the basic of ONE rifle, but on several examples.

The only Savage Axis .22-250 here right now had a similar properly bedded, stiff stock right out of the box. Dunno how recently you tried one, but this one's at least three years old. It shoots most handloads well under an inch, and some around 1/2", holding it normally over bags off the bench. The barrel did foul some at first so I installed Dyna Bore-Coat, which solved the problem. All I've done to it is lighten the main trigger spring, as with the RAR's. Now it breaks cleanly at around 2.5 pounds. If you want to argue stock esthetics, then there are a bunch of "classic" rifles that had walnut stocks that also sucked.

Have also had very good results from more than one T/C Venture, which some would rate as a step up from the lowest priced "affordable" rifles. They run about $100 more than an RAR but less than a Tikka.

Dad won a 7mm Remington the next year in the same raffle I won the 300 Winchester.

He carries it around with him all the time. It is an econo rifle, 780 something I think.

Thats not a bad rifle. It serves a fine purpose for him. Keeps him from having to pack around the second year Model 70 that I had restored for him.

Win Win!

Not a bleeding thing wrong with an econo rifle, or liking them.

Also not a bleeding thing wrong with disliking them.

I have a 300 dollar bass guitar, and a 1400 dollar bass guitar. Sure, they are basically the same thing, but there is a mile of difference.

I once had a fellow in college tell me that I was "closed minded" for not liking Rap music. Sorry, I just dont like it.

That is interesting. I was just thinking about the TC and if they were still available.

I suppose it does not matter much. I am not the target demographic.

That demographic being people with disposable income.

Funny thing is, this is the second RAR I've had that had the barrel contacting the forearm along the right side. Both in the past two weeks. I sent the first one back because of it. The second one is the same way, so I decided to keep it and correct the problems. I've never been terribly impressed with Rugers quality control period. Have sent many back for various manufacturing defects back when I worked in the gun shop. Have corrected many more on my own guns and those of customers when I was doing general gunsmithing. As I said, I haven't even shot this RAR nor have I monkeyed with it much yet. I will correct the bedding issues and the trigger and smooth things up and see how she shoots. Sure ain't no fuggin wonder rifle yet or it woudn't need all this shyt done to it before I shoot it. I have a 16 year old Tikka that I still haven't done anything to except mount a scope and shoot. The friggin thing is smooth as oil on an ice cube, the trigger breaks like a glass rod right at 3 lbs and it averages in the .4's and .5's with loads it likes and under an inch with ones it don't.

Yeah, my experience with Tikkas is they're normally GTG right out of the box, even the trigger pull. But they cost close to twice as much as an RAR, and my last four RAR's have been good out of the box, except for one trigger that needed some adjusting.

Both Tikkas and Rugers have very nicely-done hammer-forged barrels, but the heavy barrels on Tikkas (and Sakos) are also lapped to very close tolerances, one reason the varmint/target models shoot so well.

These are the reasons I DONT put Tikka's in the 'dumpster' category with the . rar

You guys can be glad that I'm NO competition for rar. AFAIC they don't rate upper case classification.


Jerry

One Addition to my previous post.

That post is NOT an indictment of other Ruger rifles/handguns. I've had yrs. of dependable service from 77s, Super Blackhawks, & Super Redhawks.

My first Ruger 77 was a 243 W that I bought in Baton Rouge, La. in 1978. My long time friend STILL has it and hunts it.


Jerry

I see it every weekend, Some guy will walk by a mint Remington 700 for 300 bucks and pay 380 to 400 for a cheap a$$ junk Ruger American!!!!!Why?????

Having owned a few dozen Model 700’s but only two Ruger Americans, I’ll try to give a serious answer.

If the Model 700 is mint, it means they will most likely need to be bedded to achieve their full potential accuracy. They may or may not need the forend floated. If it was an older M700 the trigger could be made quite nice but it still had the FOSR possibility. And you still had to be careful when adjusting the old trigger, it needed a bounce test to make sure it wouldn’t fire when the bolt was closed. Never worked with a new X-Mark trigger so can’t say how well they can be adjusted. Now it could shoot great out of the box, I’ve had probably three that needed no tinkering whatsoever – except adjusting the trigger - to shoot great. One of those was a heavy barrel .223 varmint rifle which one should expect to shoot great out of the box. But if a M700 needs bedding and someone is not a good DIYer, that’s more money on top of the base price. If the customer needs customer service from Remington, his experience can be iffy at best. He might get to someone who knows what’s going on or might experience the equivalent of offshore computer support.

Both RAR’s I’ve owned (.243 and .22-250) shot as well as the best Model 700’s right out of the box. That means .7’s and .8’s easily and sub-half inch with their better loads. Both of them shot better than all the other Model 700’s until those M700’s had more dollars put into them – bedding, floating, whatever. Their triggers will go down to about 2 3/4 to 3 pounds with a twist of an allen key and are safe. For a few years now Ruger customer service hasn’t been what it used to be but it’s still pretty darn good. The .22-250 developed a feeding problem but a quick call to Ruger customer support produced a free magazine in the mail three days later, feeding problem resolved 100%.

I’ve had two Model 700 bolt handles just fall off – it does happen, half a dozen failures to eject due to brass shavings jamming the ejector, a bolt that came out due to a weak bolt stop spring, one would pop rounds out of the magazine and produce smokestack feeding jams, numerous little problems like that. To be fair, the RAR’s haven’t been around long enough to develop a real test to see where their weak points are. Apparently feeding problems are their biggest consumer complaint but also apparently that is easily solved by a new magazine as it was in my case.

Now despite saying all this, I like Model 700’s. Most of my big game hunting has been with a Model 700 and it worked fine. But I was giving my answer to the question of why walk past a Model 700 to pick up a RAR. Remember that a few decades ago someone would ask the question of why walk past a perfectly good Winchester to pick up a cheap ass Remington.

Remingtons used to have the reputation of the best “out of the box” accuracy in the business and the best factory barrels in the business, but they lost that 20-25 years ago. The RAR does take advantage of more economical manufacturing techniques, exactly like the Model 700 and 720 series rifles when they were born. And as has already been noted in the thread, back then the contemporary writers noted how the 720 series were “cheap”. But those same techniques also lend themselves to a functional, very accurate rifle that can compete in the market place.

The Model 700 is a decent rifle as is and makes a great donor – i.e. more bucks, the RAR is a great “pay once, take it out and shoot it as is” rifle.


But to be honest, after recent experiences I’d walk right by both of them and get a Tikka.

I like 700's too. All of this talk has reminded me of when I bought my Hill Country Rifles 7mmRM Harvester. They use a Rem 700 SPS action and barrel, then go to work with their truing, squaring, etc, etc, etc. I once called them asking why it was taking so much longer than anticipated. Their reply was that they had to go through 10 combinations of factory actions/barrels to come up with one they could work with that would wind up spec'ing the way they wanted, and promised.

It did shoot lights out though, but I chalk that up to HCR's expertise, not necessarily Remington.

Hands on tweaking trumps CNC machining? Who'd a thunk it?

No surprise though.

Like anything else, there's CNC machining and then there's CNC machining.

Sako/Tikka must have it figured out pretty well.

Looks like it.

I see RAR's now come in .300 Win Mag. It has me thinking..................

Just remember that if you get one, you'll need to put a Nightforce scope on it...

No, Schmidt & Bender, or maybe a Swarovski Z8....

I'm waiting for the .404 Jeff