Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Are classic rifles doomed?

I don’t have any new firearms. All mine are old, wore out things.

At 14, I am now 69, my parents purchased a used Rem 760 30-06 that was my only hunting rifle until 1992 when my sons gave me a Win 70 Stainless Synthetic 270. I sold the Remington later to a friend who needed a cheap rifle for his son, gave it to him on time payments and he never completely paid for the rifle. Oh well.

Anyway thru the 1990's and until today I have been fortunate to have been able to purchase many new rifles and all have been Synthetic stocked with most being stainless. About 5 years ago I purchased my first wood and blue bolt rifle, a JC Higgins 50. Last year I purchased a JCH 51 both are 30-06. I love these guns and for the last few years they have been my primary hunting rifles. In bad weather I still use one of the Synthetic rifles but almost all other conditions I feel good using the wood and blue.

I see more wood stocked Mauser based rifles in my future.

Its true that wood stock rifles need not weigh a ton and some are amazingly svelte and light. Ive got two full stocked bolt actions, one a Steyr Mannlicher and the other is a full stocked Brno 22 small ring mauser. These handle like a wand but these dainty rifles arent all that common to begin with and it seems that its a European thing in that they got the weight and proportions correct in reguards to bolt rifles. To make one of those Brno 21 or 22 model rifles today would require immense amounts of money as no large factory has that level of wood workers and craftsmen on staff. Everyone today is an CNC programmer operator.

But yeah, theres some amazing wood guns from Europe

My last two rifle purchases were a Tikka T3X 6.5CM, a trade. It's OK, shoots OK, but not spectacular. Last one was a Steyr Classic Mannlicher FS in 6.5X55. Guess which one will stay until I can't hunt...

I sure hope none of you lie dying in your bed, wondering where the 'classics' went.

It's all stuff.

I was in a pawn shop yesterday and spotted a nice custom Mauser on the rack, I was hoping to see 7X57MM stamped on the barrel, but it was stamped 458WM. Awesome rifle thats probably going to be sitting for awhile.

Rhetorical question ? Still. I've "packed out" smallshit like deer in the PA mountains (yeah I know "hills" to you Monrana supermen) and hogs/deer out of the swamps and thickets here in the south and frankly, I don't think it would matter. Now if I was packing out for a long haul with everything on my back where every ounce counts, I can obviously see the advantages of lighter weight fire arms, but the Synstheric Weatherbys I've owned were no lighter than my wood stocked ones and my son's McMillan stocked 06 Vanguard I just don't see the issue with a few extra ounces.

Likely because you've never really had to pack stuff. I bet there are few times you weren't within shouting distance of something with wheels or someone to do it for you.

I shot 2 deer 5 seconds apart last monday morning with my lightweight hva 270 but I still walked out to get my game kart and got them out 1 at a time was that against the rules btailhunter? And if I may ask who gave you the right to make the rules? With a bum right knee right now I am glad I'm still able to go. What your rifle weighs is up to the individual carrying it. Magnum Bob

Jorge,

Quite often the pack-out with larger animals can take days and multiple trips, not just an hour or two. Have done such of pack-outs with big mule deer bucks (which can be the size of younger cow elk), caribou, elk and moose. Quite often it's a good idea to take the rifle along on all of the pack-outs due to the possibility of grizzlies.

Or like the guy who had a nightmare.

He dreamed he died and his wife was selling his guns for what he told her he paid for them....



DF

That's true, but I won't be on my death bed wishing I'd have used them more.

I took a nice custom rifle on a moose hunt this year. It was the 1st time I've hunted it since getting it back from the builder. The 1st day out, I got it soaked in the rain.

I think that as the population becomes more and more urban centered there will be fewer and fewer shooting sports enthusiasts, so tens of thousands of classic firearms will hit the market when current owners retire/downsize/pass and their children are more interested in cash than in old guns. Back in the late 1980's I bought a lot of rifles from a dealer in Plastow, NH, who bought most of his inventory from older people from northern MA who were downsizing before heading toward retiriement in one of our southern states.

I like to look at rifles with blued CM metal and walnut stocks, but mostly hunt with rifles that have laminated or synthetic stocks installed.

You must be either psychic, or a woman to guess what I've done or haven't. THat said, Can't argue with that. In PA the farthest I had to pack out a puny 150lb deer was about two miles. Here in Georgia maybe a thousand yards to a road, but the swamp can kick one's ass. Still, we are getting away from the topic at hand, aren't we?

Yessir. I understand.

.[/quote] Can't argue with that. In PA the farthest I had to pack out a puny 150lb deer was about two miles. Here in Georgia maybe a thousand yards to a road, but the swamp can kick one's ass. Still, we are getting away from the topic at hand, aren't we?
[/quote]

When did a Campfire thread 10 pages long ever stick exactly to the script? :-)

I would say that a question about whether classic rifles are doomed is indeed related to the advent of synthetic stocked rifles--and a major reason for their advent was lighter weight.

Can't argue with that. In PA the farthest I had to pack out a puny 150lb deer was about two miles. Here in Georgia maybe a thousand yards to a road, but the swamp can kick one's ass. Still, we are getting away from the topic at hand, aren't we?
[/quote]

When did a Campfire thread 10 pages long ever stick exactly to the script? :-)

I would say that a question about whether classic rifles are doomed is indeed related to the advent of synthetic stocked rifles--and a major reason for their advent was lighter weight.
[/quote]
I'd disagree slightly John. I'd say it was cost..I have a very small sample universe (Weatherbys) but all the synthetic ones I've owned (Accumark or Weathermark) have been just as if not heavier than my wood stocked MKVs

The number of shooters appears to be growing healthily with the population, but an increasing proportion are primarily or solely interested in guns for personal protection.

If I am lucky, many MANY thousands of old school classics will be thought of as useless, and offered to me at very low "junk price" so they can then go out an buy plastic/stainless guns that can "really kill game" ............leaving me to muddle through with the old junk.

You know..............like what I have always used for 1/2 a century...........Those that just don't work in the "modern game fields".


Shhhhhhhhhhhhh............don't tell those animals I have been killing with them, so they never know I can't kill them with wood and blued steel guns, over half of which have only iron sights.
Or they will come alive, get back up and and run off..............................

I've got a bunch of rifles, mainly rimfires, in the past few years, and looking them over, it's been about 8/3 in favor of decent wood and blued steel versus synthetic stocked rifles. Rarely has it been about price, though I got good value on the wood/blued guns, too. The stainless/synthetic guns were often a bit more, yet haven't provided any better performance than the blued "pretty" guns in any way.

I'm getting older and don't want to wait in the rain for a deer anyway, I don't take that kind of weather well nowadays. I might as well carry something I like, instead of just a tool.