A simple question, but a few conditions.

No talk of the reasons why you wouldn't buy one. You cannot reload for it. No expensive scope or aftermarket trigger or stock. No barrel treatment.

This isn't a long range rifle. 300 yd max. Most hunters don't take game that far, but we need a max. range.



You walk into Cabelas and say, "I'll take that 30-06 Axis, a 3x9 Bushnell scope and the cheapest box of Remington 165 gr Core Lokts you got."

What is acceptable? 1 or 2 inch groups at 100 yd? For me, because of CNC machining and ammunition improvements, I think 2 inches at 100 yards is just fine.

I wonder if that 30-06 Remington 700 from 1970 and a box of 1970 Remington ammunition would shoot as well as today's rifles and ammunition?

Have we improved?

Thinking about your conditions, I don't know if anyone here would have have any experience

IMHO, Most guns shoot better than the person pulling the trigger.

I think today's rifles and ammo are better.I remember long ago when Weatherby used guarantee their rifles would shoot 1 1/2" groups or better with their factory ammo.It seemed fairly common for the norm was that or greater for most rifles and ammo.If you got better you were really happy.If you handload you could usually get better.I think a good rifle today should shoot and inch or less.

Mine do, ain’t as good as I once was, probably never as good as I thought I was. Wifey says I’m a legend in my own mind!

If you are OK with a 2 in. group at 100yds, then that combo should be ok for your expectations. My nephew bought the same rifle/scope combo in 6.5 Creed for his girlfriend. It shot 1.5 inch groups out of the box with factory ammo. I know its a different cal. but I have not shot one in 30 06.

Every one of my factory inexpensive rifles handloaded will shoot .5 inch. With factory ammo it all depends what the rifle likes so a lot of experimenting. But I noticed that cheap Remington and Federal shoot the best groups.

I was able to get the rifle mentioned above to shoot .75 inches with 140 Berger VLD's. thats all I tried. and thats good enough for now.

Steve your assumption that anybody can shoot a 1 moa group is not valid. That simple....mb

Agree with MB

I did not say that.

Why anyone would waste their time conversing with Steve Redgwell is beyond me.

Not gonna get into whether or not Steve assumes everyone can shoot MOA. Don't care.
I will say that after taking several (lots) of friends and guys I work with shooting over the years , Also working in a gun shop for over two years back in the early 90's , I can say without a doubt most people cannot shoot nearly as good as they think they can.
Most of the guys on here , I'm sure are above average at a minimum.
Back when I use to be a fairly good shot . I was shooting 2-300 rounds of hi power rifle a month. Not a lot by some standards but more than some "rifle shooters" in a decade or more.
Soo back to my original statement of "Most guns shoot better than the person pulling the trigger" .

You ain't kidding. He wrote the book on moron.

I don't think that everyone can shoot MOA. It's a question about what people expect from an inexpensive bolt gun. I agree with your statement about most rifles being more capable than the shooter.

I suppose this is where the question goes off in another direction, but do people expect better accuracy with rifles/ammunition built in the past 10 or 15 years? Some people decry the use of today's plastic stocks, less steel and other manufacturing changes, but to me, off the rack rifles seem to be shooting better than pre CNC builds. I know they aren't as pleasing to the eye, but performance has improved.

Am just happy to hit the target, regardless of what really old curmudgeons opine.

That's the spirit! Kinda' the same approach I take.........

I think if I couldn't shoot MOA or a little more after setting that rig up there's something wrong. As MD said in one of the Gack books accuracy can be pretty inexpensive today.

I don't think it's a waste of time communicating with you.

Good luck and shoot straight y'all

I'm going to give a bit more credit to newer bullets. It seems to me older rifles can be made to shoot better with newer bullets.

I don't know. The Remington 788 I had back in the '80's was a .5 MOA rifle with handloads and under 1 MOA with factory loads of the day. Kind of a homely thing at the time but almost handsome in comparison to todays plastic fantastic junk. Had a couple of Savage 340's and 110's back in the day that were nearly as accurate. Again not handsome rifles but not horrible compared to the likes of the Ruger American or Savage Axis either.

Don't know how all inexpensive rifles shoot with factory ammo, but have yet to shoot an inexpensive 6.5 Creedmoor--whether a Ruger American, Savage Axis or T/C Compass--that wouldn't put three factory loads in an inch at 100, and most did better.

They all seem to shoot pretty well these days. Some of the stocks are crap, some are OK.

Many of the actions are baffling designs that would freeze up in the least bit of moisture and cold, but to many people that doesn't matter.

I would expect better out of a Savage or a Ruger American than 2 MOA with your pick of "cheapest in the store" hunting ammo.

If you get lucky and it really works, then it really works.

Dunno what cheap rifles are supposed to freeze but haven't seen that concern in Canada yet. Have seen some that are just pieces of schidt and don't need cold not to work right, like the Rem 710 and 770. But moisture and cold? Ain't seen or know of trouble yet...hardly an authority though.

Today's cheaper rifles are all about function and not form or aesthetics. Personally I like all these things in a rifle. I'm not a snob or anything, I just like a decent piece of wood and some nice bluing on steel parts.....nothing fancy. I can't knock the performance of the new crop of factory rifles, but I sure wouldn't admire them while wiping them down on a cold snowy evening in January.

I think there are several factors that go into producing a firearm that groups well. I would agree that the appearance of today's plastic stock rifles leaves much to be desired. As a retired armourer, I credit some of the performance improvement to polymer stocks that are less prone to shrinkage and expansion. And better bullets. And having more powders. The burn gaps have been narrowed since the days of yore.

As a general statement, I think it's fair to say that, looks aside, manufacturers are producing a more accurate product.

There seem to be more aftermarket stock manufacturers around these days too. Probably because plastic isn't pleasing to the eye. Laminates are my first pick for an aftermarket stock these days.

Brilliant assessment. We'd have never know that without this valuable thread. Lucky for you though, since Llama Bob showed up you're not the only moron here.

Nothing against Bushnell scopes, and I own a few, but the Bushnells, Weavers, Remington, etc. scopes that come on these "package" deals are pure junk and do make nice novelty targets. The Savage Creedmoors that I have shot, after replacing scopes, always shot great.

Forty years ago when I bought my first ever rifle, a 30-06 Remington. After a half a dozen or so of factory I could off hand at a 100 paces I could shoot a 5" groups with iron sights. I traded brsss for a box of handloads. The group was cut in half. That shows how poor factory was.

1970 was 52 years ago. Rifles, scopes, and factory loads have all improved since then, but most shooters have not.

If I had to buy an inexpensive factory bolt gun today, then it would be a 308. I’d also take the time to mount the scope properly, I'd torque everything evenly, and I might tweak the trigger.

2 MOA will put a lot of meat on the table. I’d accept that in a pinch but my next box of ammo would be something else.


Okie John

1.5 MOA, ten shots.

Well, lets examine the shooting technique

Are you shooting off of a few coats?

Benchrest?

Bi pod?

Roll of paper towels?

Devil is in the details!

If it will put meat on the table or fur on the stretcher at the ranges you expect to shoot, it's good enough.

That made me laugh! I've used all those as rests except for the paper towels, but in the field, I use what we called a a small pack in the military.

Using a stack of toilet paper sounds like good, short story material! Sitting on the privy, sniping from the John!

My expectation is for 1MOA but I'll live with 1.5. Anything more than that is false economy I reckon. This is for a new bolt action. Accuracy expectations of ex-mil firearms and lever actions etc is different but anything more than 4MOA is a shotgun.

2 MOA with a random box of factory ammo would be acceptable to me.

I'm a tinkerer, so much of the fun of owning a firearm for me is finding the faults and then endeavoring to fix them.

That's my Ruger American Predator. Fine CHEAP rifle!

Yep!

With my first 6.5 CM, a Predator, I loaded some 140 Berger VLDs with 41.5 grains of H4350 and took it to the range, on a day where Eileen accompanied me the check the zero on a couple of her big game rifles.

After getting the Predator on paper at 100, I fired a second shot. Eileen was on the spotting scope and said she couldn't find it. I fired another shot, and she said the first hole was a little larger. The 5-shot group ended up measuring .33, center to center.

You walk into Cabelas and say, "I'll take that 30-06 Axis, a 3x9 Bushnell scope and the cheapest box of Remington 165 gr Core Lokts you got."


That’s just Crazy Talk. I would never do that. Most of my rifles have only fired a box or two of factory, and a couple have not tasted a single round.

THAT is the exact same load I use for the 140 in my Predator as well as my Ruger Precision.

OK!

Great minds tend to think alike....

But I thought everybody did this. You point at a rifle and ask the clerk at the counter if he has one in a bigger size!

cheap rifle will do moa

This.

Ain't that the truth, although I am guilty of tweaking his nose a bit.

I expect under an inch out of any rifle. If I did not think it would be capable I would likely not buy it to begin with.

Between bedding and reloading for it, almost every rifle I have owned in the last twenty years would do it. With two or three exceptions, which got traded or sold once I decided I wasn't happy with the results.

Perhaps I should thank you for the attention, Hastings. Or, more to the point, It seems that I have captured yours.

All the best for 2022.

I can remember when most rifles out of the box shot closer to 3" than those today. 1 1/2" is actually very accurate for a hunting rifle. A rifle that "consistently" shoots 2" will kill everything on the mountain, ha. I do think both rifles and factory ammo have come a long way. Unfortunately, most of the bargain rifles are ugly as all get out, ha. Its hard to have any "pride of ownership" with them. But I have some relatives that buy the bargain level Savages every year. Between the rain/mud, four wheeler wrecks, etc, their rifles look like crap! And they like the 7mm Rem Mag, over most chamberings. Most of the deer/hogs they kill are shot about 60yds, average, ha.

Kind of like a bad traffic accident........

Perhaps that's what got people's attention years ago when the Remington 788 was still being sold. 788s grouped a little tighter than the standard rifles of the day, and was a budget rifle to boot! Not the overexaggerated Internets groups, but good for the most part. I know my 222 Remington still shoots well, but a lot of that is because there isn't much recoil.

Remington seemed to have lost its way in the 1980s with their budget rifles. It wasn't long before Savage's board room figured out how to market an inexpensive rifle that would appeal to the public. They certainly caused the other mainstream companies like Ruger and Remington to sit up and take notice. Barrel nuts and better triggers are now the thing. These helped with accuracy for sure in the budget rifle. It's hard to believe that the AccuTrigger has been around since 2000!

I have one.........Bought a Tikka T3x 22-250, I tried every powder, bullet combo and it was a 3"gun unless I used Hornady bullets then it was a 4" gun.
Pillar bedded it and had it re-crowned, still a 3"-4" gun. cant decide on a re barrel or beating it over a big rock at the range !!!!

You are welcome. And you have captured my attention. I find people outside the norm interesting. Thanks

+1

I dont say this haphazardly. I used to like his posts when he was all about shooting, and reloading and even Canadian patriotism, but lately I've steered away from his posts due to his recent politics.

The bottom line: His posts are to be studiously ignored.

Well said, I obviously couldn't agree more.

Clue us in. What hateful politics? And please don't continue to post this in the Ask the Gunwriters section. Post your evidence in the Canada area. I'd like to read it as well.

You have a bee in your bonnet. We cannot all be wrong. But in a perverse way you are entertaining.

I guess my request not to muck up this part of the forum will be ignored.

What do you mean, I have a bee in my bonnet?

My honest answer is I don't Know what size group would be acceptable to me. Almost all of target shooting is done from field positions and very rarely off a bench.my thinking is if I can consistently hit the vital area of the intended species ( deer mostly or woodchucks but occasionally other as well) from say sitting or kneeling at 200 yards then I am good for that shot when it comes up. Off hand is what practice the
Most and for me 125 yards is a long shot tha!t way. I do all my gunfire and air gun practice off hand and hunt the 22 quite a bit. It is how Dad ( a child of the depression) taught me to be efficient. It has worked for ,for 5 decades. I get many do it differently and that is good fo them

Check it out, the internet is your friend. Do you want me to go over to the Canada forum and tell your 2 friends you need help over here. Actually the "bee in the Bonnet" comment understated the disorder.

This is as good a place as any to show what a complete idiot this Redgwell clown is. No sure why he wants to hide over in the Canadian forum where everyone already knows it.

You are being cryptic. I have no problem with you going over to the Canada forum and telling them I need help.

Geez JG, you're kind'a on a call-out roll recently............

I know......I just can't help myself sometimes, and I really can't stand a fraud. People need to be exposed for what they are so you'll know who you are conversing and dealing with, so you know what you've got sort of thing. They say all of these disparaging things on various threads, hold libtard ideals, spew their BS.....I've had enough of these loud mouthed punks.

OK, out of my system.

They used to say if a guy could hit a paper plate offhand at 100 yd, he was good to go. Of course, that was more of an eastern thing I suppose.

Do people still shoot off hand.....that sounds scary.

I always have, it works out for me. I admit if I can get to prone or sitting or use a low branch for rest when hunting I do so. But I truly enjoy offhand target practice. Most of my targets are silloetes of animals to help keep my intrest

I suspect that's surface symptoms. He's displayed....more interesting ... peculiarities before he went off the political cliff....

Off hand is about all I ever practice. The vast majority of that with rimfires and air rifles. Everything else is easy if you can shoot off hand. I shot one deer this fall at 270 yards and did take a rest for that. I think it was the first time in probably 20 years. It was also the first time in 20 years I shot one at over 150 yards. The other five I killed this season were all inside 65 yards which is typical. Fully 95%+ of all the deer I've killed in my life were taken off hand at ranges well inside 100 yards.

I expect 1" or better out of a budget bolt gun

Sensible approach.

Maybe...but the man is correct.

Pretty sure the man thinks you are a fuckwit and you very quickly irritate everyone that attempts to converse with you.

He is not wrong.

Have we chatted before?

I’d still like to know about this bee in my bonnet.

I have better things to do...piss off.

ok.

Steve: A very happy New Year to you. I have a recent experience with this sort of thing.

In September 2020, I started having problems with one of my deer rifles, and sent it to the 'smith. At about the same time, I stumbled onto a $325 TC Compass in 7mm-08. The rifle that was in the shop was a short-range rifle, and I figured the Compass would suffice no matter what at those distances. I mounted a Bushnell Banner 3-9X40 on it and cooked up some loads using 308 brass, and went to the range. The first attempt yielded a 2MOA group. I deemed that sufficient for that season and went hunting with it. I nailed a doe @ 120 yards in late November with this rifle, and I was quite pleased with the performance of the rifle, and the load.

Folks on this august forum said that 2 MOA was ridiculous for the rifle; I should be getting much better. While I agree, I was not figuring on using the rifle for anything but close-in treestand work, and 2MOA is fine for those conditions. I still have not tinkered with the load any. However, I did swap out the stock for a walnut Boyd's with a higher cheek rise in the off-season. I figure that I will keep it a treestand gun until I have time to work on it and fine-tune the load.

I had a roommate in college that was rather eccentric. We all used to dump quarters into the pinball machines in the lobby, trying to get a high score. Pat had a unique take on it. He would insert a quarter and play to some personal limit and then give it up and walk away from the machine, leaving one of us to finish. He said he was satisfied and as long as he got to the score he wanted, he did not want to play anymore. At the time, we all made fun of him. However, the idea stuck in my head. As I've grown older, I see Pat's wisdom.

I meant you are seeming a bit unbalanced, but that is OK, a lot of us are.

Most of the members here come for the camaraderie, information, debate, and have no problems with good natured insults. Notice that deflave is not widely disliked as are you. It is your know it all condescending attitude toward the unwashed among us. Take antelope sniper for instance, he and I believe totally opposite on whether there is a supernatural power governing the universe. Although I wouldn't know him if I met him on the street I value his insight and discussion. Same is true about many here that I don't exactly agree with on a given subject be it military intervention or theology or cartridges, etc.

The problem with you is the contempt you show towards those that differ with you which contempt has been shown by you especially concerning people whose lives and finances have been unnecessarily upended by government reaction to the Corona virus and your blind following of "the science" which has proven a hard horse to catch.

So, it's not "the bee in your bonnet", it is the contempt. As Ben Franklin said "...many can forgive injuries, none ever forgave contempt".

shaman,

Thanks for taking the time to describe your situation. It’s a personal thing. If you are satisfied then all is good.

Hastings,

Your solution is simple. There is an ignore button. Use it and don’t respond to questions I pose.

I find this conversation to be a small conundrum.

Don’t have any new guns. Last new one I purchased was in ‘84. Model 94 it was and my only expectation was minute of dead deer. It did not disappoint. On paper, maybe 4 MOA after I installed a peep sight. Bolt guns currently in inventory shoot 1/2-3/4 MOA with those newfangled jacketed bullets and bore me to death. Have a couple or three that will do the same or close to it with cast more than likely, if I shoot them from a rest. Haven’t been sufficiently anal to pursue that.

One of my favorites is a M1 Carbine that is good for 4-5 MOA, go figure.

Other than .22 RF I haven’t shot any factory ammo in over 20 years, so I can’t give a good answer to the question.

I don’t have much use for pistols.

That’s ok, Dan. You’re happy, so all is good.

1984 was the last new gun? Wow, you have much better self control than I have!

Nope not going to ignore you. Self righteous condescending bullies interest me. I wonder what makes them tick.

I have a very condescending flintlock. It kept telling me, “My way or the highway.” It was a challenge to be sure, this doing it different from my way. In the end I submitted. It will put 5 balls (yes, it has more than me) in about 1.5” @ 50 yds, offhand. It’s totally bizarre that it shoots better than my carbine shoots off a bench rest.

Someone asked earlier about who shoots offhand? I ain’t never killed a critter shootin’ from a bench. Not never.

Shooting sticks? I've killed multitudes of prarie dogs from a bench though.

Never used shooting sticks and the only dogs around here bark and growl. Never figured MOA for a load of buckshot. No sir, I don’t shoot anything but paper from a bench. I have leaned against a tree for a shot on occasion. Even squatted a few times and rested an arm on my knee. You fellas out west got to deal with different affairs than us swamp critters.

Guess I must have been lucky. I don't remember having any bolt action rifles going back as far as the late '70's that shot as bad as 3 MOA. Of course I shot few "out of the box" and would routinely glass bed and adjust triggers even back then.

My old 788 that my Dad bought from me in 1975 for getting good grades (I was 15) is a 1/2" rifle. I killed a bunch of groundhogs with it at all kinds of ranges. It has never had a factory round shot through it though. A couple years ago I saw a T/C Compass package deal at my LGS complete with Vortex 3-9 scope and I took it home with me. It shoots right at an inch at 100 yds with Hornady factory 143 grain ELD-X ammo.

Ron

Which cartridge did you use in the 788?

I expect 1.5" at a 100 yards for 3 shots. All of my rifles but 1 do better. A 30-30 Contender carbine barrel is the one that won't. I have tried a bunch of bullets and powder combinations and 1 approached 1.5. The other carbine barrel I have shoots great.

Seems like everything posted now turns into a pissing contest.For those who don`t like someone use the Ignore feature.Internet call outs are a joke.I think this was a good topic but since I don`t use factory ammo and don`t own a Savage or RA ,have no input to give.

No worries. I think most of us know what you mean.

The only new stock rifle I have is a 308 Ruger American from the first year they were available. When I bought it, I did buy a box of factory Remingtons to try it out, but like most people here, it got reloaded stuff since that initial try out.

Steve;
Good afternoon and Happy New Year to you and yours, I hope the weather is behaving out east better than it has been here so far this winter.

Thanks for the thread and thanks for the replies that made it an interesting read.

Back in the fall of 2020 I did a rough and dirty review of a Remington 700 which a neighbor had won at a game banquet and he decided it was going to go north moose hunting on a cancellation hunt.

Here's a link to that thread for any interested.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...gton-700-bdl-report-sort-of#Post15290275

The Cliff Notes are that after I lightened the trigger and worked on the fore end pressure, it shot Winchester 190gr Accubonds better than I thought it would.

It went on to get him a really decent bull the first night they went up there, though the return trip on a choppy lake, in the dark and in a boat loaded with people and moose was more adventure than he or his wife who was along too were bargaining for.

When I ran some old Winchester White Box 55gr Ball through my Ruger American it shot pretty well now that I think of it, but like most firearms that end up here, they're all apart and on the bench before range day so that's not exactly in keeping with the spirit of the thread. For that matter I did fool with the fore end and trigger on the 700 so that wasn't out of the box either.

Regardless it's been an educational read and I do appreciate all the participants.

All the best to you folks in 2022 Steve.

Dwayne

I have had several Ruger Pred. rifles that shot as good as some custom rifles I have had

Hi Dwayne,

I admit that whenever I have purchased a new, bolt action econo-rifle, I started filling out a modification sheet. I have always enjoyed making over rifles with good bones.

pullit,

I understand what you mean. That's the reason why I never did anything to my American except buy a single shot mag for it. That was primarily for load testing.

I have it in my head that everything should shoot to 1". I would not be happy with a two inch group with anything (which doesnt really match up with reality). a two inch group looks horrible on paper, just my inexperience showing through. I used to sight in and hunt. Never really shot groups, still have not perfected shooting off a bench. I was off hand at rabbits, off the truck hood or tree branch for a long shot, off hand walking for anything inside of 200 yds. It is tough for me to shoot a good group off the bench.

Yep. Same results with my Ruger America Predator in 6.5 CM.
Shot several brands of Factory Ammo under an inch.
I might get around to reloading for it someday. But why bother when it shoots that good with Factory Ammo.

Unless you just couldn’t find any ammo anywhere.

Has anyone had similar experiences of great accuracy with other chamberings such as 6 CM, 7-08, 308, 243... and factory ammo?

Or is this only a phenomena with 6.5 CM factory ammo and entry level bolt action rifles?

Sample of one. But, we have a RAR in 243 Win topped with a Weaver K6 that my boys share. It's no trick to keep 3 under 1.5" at 100yds using Federal Fusion 95gr ammo. More than good enough for their uses and a level of accuracy that I have no problem with. It's take whitetail and pronghorn from 50yds to 267yds. None have gotten away and none have made it more than 70yds from being shot. I'm pleased with it.

For me, I'd expect about any rifle to be able to keep 3 shots inside 2" with some flavor of factory ammo. My 1 sample does this and so do all those of my friends with inexpensive rifles.

With proper trigger control, and even the cheap scope that comes with it, just about any factory gun out of the box is less than 2" and usually close to 1". even 2:" is fine for 100 yard shots on big game.

1.5", but I feel the worst detriment to good accuracy is poor triggers.

The only truly factory cheap rifle that I own, is a Ruger American in .308. I did lighten the trigger a bit and other than that, nothing add-on. It shoots 1/2 moa with 150 Hornady Interlocks, over CFE223. In my opinion, many people worry about how a rifle looks, instead of concentrating on how they shoot. I have some real nice rifles, but have always concentrated more on functionality.

A friend of mine has three Thompson Ventures. They all shoot as good, or better than any of his expensive rifles.

I think that if all you can get is the expensive factory ammo and don't want to do a lot of testing, two-inch groups and under should suffice for the average hunter.

Last Christmas I got a T/C Compass Utility in 308 Win to use as a truck gun and it cost a whopping $241 including sales tax here in Amarillo, TX. Topped it with a 4x Nikon scope I had in the gun case and that is all I did to the rifle. I handload so I tried about 12 different loads and found it likes this load:



That is a 100 yard group. And before anyone gets excited, I know I spelled Barnes wrong. I cannot complain about that accuracy in an out of the box rifle.

Reading through the responses, it seems that today's inexpensive rifles perform quite well. That's no surprise, given that every firearms company wants the lion's share of sales, and ultimately, occupying the top spot. To do this, the rifle has to be accurate.

It seems that Whelen's statement that "only accurate rifles are interesting" is still valid. Appearance is less of a concern. That said, we spend a fair bit of money these days on aftermarket accessories...like stocks.

What a surprise.

That's right, nobody buys guns at Cabelas......

Some of the cheap rifles are accurate. A wise writer once wrote about over-engineered rifles - some of these cheap rifles fall into that category, in my opinion.
These cheap rifles will have an action that is as enclosed as possible reducing flex in the action. They may have cheap magazines made out of plastic and have a trigger that some may not like. They may (may) have a barrel that’s difficult to replace. Their stock may be hollow and sound like a drum.
But they are often accurate. If accuracy was a shooters only criteria that shooter should be able to get a rifle that shoot 1 MOA or under and the shooter could get that rifle with a scope mounted for $300-$500.

My wife's bil walked into a Phoenix Cabelas with the idea of buying his grand daughter a 410. In order to get waited on, they wanted to make him sign his name on an Ipad. He walked out. They have been requiring extra paperwork for a long time, also.

Will accept < 3.0 MOA w/ factory ammo from field positions.

Got a coupla $400 Mossberg Patriot Synthetic - Vortex Scoped Combos a while back, chambered in .270 Win.



W/ PPU 150 gr. they shoot < 2 MOA.




GR

Not to mention, their prices suck.