Is it worth it?

[Bljc34]

I don’t reload and may only take a trip out West every couple of years. Is a sub $1500 rifle really worth that much more than a sub $750 rifle? If you never plan to shoot over 450 - 500 yards? At this point, I only shoot factory ammo and I’m not sure that I will ever have time to start reloading.

I see awesome rifles that are expensive but for a general hunting rifle, is it worth the extra expensive?

 

[Geewhiz]

No, not if your looking for practical use at the distances you stated. Just my opinion.

I have expensive rifles because I like them and I think they are cool. Do I need them? No, but I like them. And I think they are cool.

 

[EmperorMA]

I have hunted eight Western states for 45 years. My longest shot on game has been 435 yards on the largest bull elk I have ever taken. I happened to make that shot with a very expensive custom rifle in 6.5x284 and a very thoughtfully and carefully hand-loaded 125gr Nosler Partition.

The second-longest shot was 400 yards on my biggest trophy Pronghorn buck, same rifle using an equally-well hand loaded 120 Nosler Ballistic Tip.

Truth is, I could have easily made the same shots with my $300 (after rebates and sale price) Winchester XPR in 6.5 Creedmoor with its favorite 142gr Nosler ABLR Winchester Expedition Long Range factory load.

Either would have been equally rewarding.

 

[mt100gr.]

You could get it done in any state, every year with a sub $500 rifle. No question.

Occasionally factory ammo could give you fits before you find a load that's accurate. But I promise I have given myself equal to, or greater fits handloading for expensive rifles. I have a few rifles that shoot factory ammo pretty well and that's what I use in them.

Nothing wrong with a utilitarian working rifle. Afterall, it is a tool.

 

[Forest]

Honestly no. I'm more of a mid tier guy just because it gets me a little better fit and finish over the cheaper ones. But accuracy is only marginally better till you spend a lot more and sometimes not even then. My tikka is definitely my favorite for the money. But there are many good brands nowdays, tikka, bergara, savage etc all offer excellent guns in the $6-800 range.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

 

[WCB]

No it is not. I 5 or 6 guns that retail $600-$800 dollars. If you do the work of trying different factory loads and finding what your gun likes well under MOA groups are not hard (if YOU can shoot that good). All of mine shoot .5-.6MOA all day long group after group. I've shot a few animals out to 700ish with them.

 

[OXN939]

I don’t reload and may only take a trip out West every couple of years. Is a sub $1500 rifle really worth that much more than a sub $750 rifle? If you never plan to shoot over 450 - 500 yards?

To agree with everyone above, no. Think that's covered.

The other point I would emphasize is how far 450-500 yards is. This isn't meant to disparage anyone's abilities at all, but you should really spend a few days shooting at 6 or 8 inch targets at that distance and see how it goes before setting it as a max effective range for your trip. There is a lot more going on at that distance than most people think. I'm from the east coast as well, and like a lot of people here, had never shot that distance more than a time or two before attending some precision shooting schools in the military. Holding under 1.5 MOA systemic accuracy (that being the accuracy of the entire system, from ammo to optic to rifle to shooter) from a field expedient position at 500 yards is, to put it lightly, challenging. If you're shooting an average production rifle with factory ammo, smart money is that more like 300 yards is a better max effective range to feel good about.

Just a few cents, worth what ya paid for it.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

You do not need to spend a lot of money just to get a capable hunting rifle.

I have a couple of rifles that cost under $500. They shoot commercial ammo very well. I have one rifle that cost over $1000 and it shoots commercial ammo very well and handloads exceptionally well. The rest cost around $700-800 and shoot extremely well; mix of commercial and handloads.

I do have a few rifles that will either straight out beat friends' custom rifles or give them a run for their money when it comes to accuracy. While my rifles may win a particular "event", their's will win the "all around" every single time.

You can use the money saved to buy an even better optic for the rifle. You can also use the money saved to take a shooting course tailored to your current skill level. If your fundamentals are sound, shooting at various ranges is easier and more repeatable (especially when you know your ballistics).

 

[Rob5589]

Yes. Hell, it ain't my money so...

 

[Bljc34]

I appreciate the info. I wouldn’t personally shoot that far. I think 400 would probably be my absolute max and I would spend plenty of time practicing before I would even attempt that. I’m just saying that a rifle that can comfortably handle those ranges versus 600-1000 yards. As that is a distance that most (not all) people probably shouldn’t attempt on an animal anyways.

 

[EmperorMA]

You do not need to spend a lot of money just to get a capable hunting rifle.

You can use the money saved to buy an even better optic for the rifle.

^^^^^ This. ^^^^^

So many people fail to take this into consideration, when, as long as you have a rifle capable of good accuracy, the glass is far more important to your success.

I have always said, if your total budget is $1,500.00, then you should be looking at a $500.00 rifle and a $1,000.00 scope. Something like a Swaro Z3 or Zeiss V4 on top of an accurate $500 rifle of your choice is gong to do everything you need and let you see the game for the longest amount of time and make a good shot.

 

[Bljc34]

Why is that? Is there 3x the difference between a $300 optic and a $1000 optic?
I’m curious about that as well. What are the major differences that make it worth it?

 

[WCB]

Why is that? Is there 3x the difference between a $300 optic and a $1000 optic?
I’m curious about that as well. What are the major differences that make it worth it?

The whole double what you spend on a rifle pricing for a scope is B.S. in my opinion depending on what you are doing with it. Out to 400 yards lets say you do not need a $1000 scope. a $500 and up scope will perform just fine and can have some really decent glass in it.

Quality of build and components, testing, etc are the differences....There is a bigger difference IMO between a $200 and $600 scope than a $600 to $1,000. Start adding reliable dialable turrets or different reticles and cost can start to creep up.

I used to work in optics and specifically with rifle scopes...If people knew what actual build cost of the scopes compared to MSRP or sales price you can start to see where the good for or great for the money niches are.

 

[wind gypsy]

Agree with the consensus. Avoid the expensive rifle and reloading rabbit hole! It’s never ending and will steal your $ and time.

 

[Ross]

Noooooo I used a $225 pawn shop rifle until 2003, but the newer lighter stuff is much nicer to pack around

 

[OXN939]

I used to work in optics and specifically with rifle scopes...If people knew what actual build cost of the scopes compared to MSRP or sales price you can start to see where the good for or great for the money niches are.

Care to share any recommendations?

 

[EmperorMA]

Why is that? Is there 3x the difference between a $300 optic and a $1000 optic?
I’m curious about that as well. What are the major differences that make it worth it?

I do agree with what WCB said to some extent but I definitely see a big difference in a $1,000 Zeiss or Swaro scope over a $500 Leupold, Vortex, SWFA or similar. The picture is much clearer, it is clear all the way to the outer edges, it gathers more light (VERY important at first/last light and in timber) and lets you pick out detail much better, like making you confident that what you're seeing between those two trees and one bush is the crease of an elk's shoulder, rather than just a patch of tan-colored fur. And perhaps the most important thing, the clarity remains when you turn the scope up all the way to maximum power. Cheaper scopes just don't do that.

My line of thinking has always been:

$1,000 Budget: $500 each for rifle and scope. You can do very well with both at this price point! (Winchester XPR and cheaper Leupold, Burris, Nikon, Athlon, SWFA, Sightron)
$1,500 Budget: Same $500 rifle with a $1,000 scope. You will love the improved glass! (Winchester XPR and Zeiss V4 or Swarovski Z3)
$2,000 Budget: $1,000 each for rifle and scope. (Browning X-Bolt, Weatherby Vanguard, Winchester Model 70, Bergara, not for me but Tikka and Zeiss V4 or Swaro Z3)
$2,500 Budget: $1,000 rifle and $1,500 scope (Zeiss, Swaro, NF, Kahles)
$3,000 Budget: This gets tricky. You start to get into some very nice factory rifles at around $1,500 - $2,000 (Christensen Arms Mesa or Mesa Titanium, for example) and I do see some benefit to these lighter, well thought-out rifles. I might drop back to a very solid $1,000 scope for a rifle like that.

These are just some things that I like. Others have their favorites and nobody is clearly right or wrong. We all like what we like.

After slogging up and down mountains for 45 years dragging along too many rifles and scopes to count and hand loading my own stuff, I have now settled into great comfort knowing that the absolute best factory rifles, ammo and optics are being produced right now. I would quite happily finish out my days with a new Winchester Model 70 Featherweight Stainless or EW, Browning X-Bolt Hells Canyon or Western Hunter, Weatherby Vanguard Backcountry/High Country/Weatherguard /Wilderness topped with a Zeiss V6 or Swaro Z5 and shooting whatever factory ammo the rifle liked best.

ADDED: I am a big-time Winchester and Zeiss fanboy, so take that for what it is worth!