For 50 grand a piece they better be able to shoot one hole 5 shot groups at 100 all day every day or they aren't worth schmick.
"Considered by some to be the best rifle maker in the world".... meh....
NAA.
$100,000 worth of rifles.
- Thread starter chuck nelson
- Start date
For 50 grand a piece they better be able to shoot one hole 5 shot groups at 100 all day every day or they aren't worth schmick.
"Considered by some to be the best rifle maker in the world".... meh....
NAA.
I'd find a competent gunsmith and ask him to do the 82 separate steps and save myself a year waiting and $10 000
Oh, I would love an Echols Legend in 338 Win Mag. But I would rather have Leeper make me one, spend less and have the same thing though too.
He isn't trying to compete with the rifle makers who (historically) are considered "by many" to be the best rifle builders in the world but he's considered the best rifle builder in the world?
canadian hunter312
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brant County
im not really into people paying ridiculous amounts of money for collectors items, but if they have the cash who cares how they spend it.
those guns dont impress me anymore than a $500 gun.
those guns dont impress me anymore than a $500 gun.
So what you are saying is that you won't be spending your " Wal-Mart sour milk settlement" cash on this?
I don't know a lot about art, but do know that if I was going to spend 50Gs on it those rifles would be right up there on the list. Makes more sense than a painting.
Theres a lot of guys that have more than 50 Grand tied up in multiple rifle/scope combos that all do about the same thing. How much sense does that make? Besides, the guys that bought Miller's rifles a few years ago are holding onto something that held or increased its value. For the most part mine lose money. Seems to me that that makes the Miller cheaper. Maybe even a bargain. I wonder if I can convince the wife that not buying one of these showpieces is practically throwing money away.
Theres a lot of guys that have more than 50 Grand tied up in multiple rifle/scope combos that all do about the same thing. How much sense does that make? Besides, the guys that bought Miller's rifles a few years ago are holding onto something that held or increased its value. For the most part mine lose money. Seems to me that that makes the Miller cheaper. Maybe even a bargain. I wonder if I can convince the wife that not buying one of these showpieces is practically throwing money away.
Mike Oxbig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Scarborough Ontario
How dare they force him to drink sour milk!So what you are saying is that you won't be spending your " Wal-Mart sour milk settlement" cash on this?
I don't know a lot about art, but do know that if I was going to spend 50Gs on it those rifles would be right up there on the list. Makes more sense than a painting.
Theres a lot of guys that have more than 50 Grand tied up in multiple rifle/scope combos that all do about the same thing. How much sense does that make? Besides, the guys that bought Miller's rifles a few years ago are holding onto something that held or increased its value. For the most part mine lose money. Seems to me that that makes the Miller cheaper. Maybe even a bargain. I wonder if I can convince the wife that not buying one of these showpieces is practically throwing money away.
Well may I suggest this then:
Available for a mere $5995, and that includes a Schmidt & Bender scope. You can send me a blank cheque for my bird-dogging fee.
http://www.champlinarms.com/Default.aspx?tabid=30&mid=345&ctl=GunsDetails&StyleID=2&GunID=1681
The wood itself is probably worth a helluva lot. Look at it. Probably some kind of enormous burl on some extremely rare kind of tree. And its about image.
You silly gun snops don't get it. Half of you are like "I wanna go hunting, it should be able to get scratched" the other half are like "it should be black and ominous looking cause I have a milsim fetish!" or something. Rich people want ridiculous crap that isn't worth it except it carries a name and an image that says they can afford frivolous stuff.
Its incredibly custom, its very short ordered so that always drives up the price when there are only a handful made. BUt really its a brand thing. A rich person's only club. Just like blue jeans, the jeans aren't whats expensive. Most places in asia that make that crap basically have one run of jeans and they just change out which bucket of labels they're using on Tuesday or Wednesday for their different brands. Same jeans, different label, literally. You can go from one store to another and its the label thats different, same stitching, same wash, different brand, $50 difference on price.
So maybe its the same old Winchester 70 action, maybe only hits slightly smaller groups than a Savage 10 but it has that thing about it that says "I'm richer than you". Why own a Lotus or a Ferrari when those vehicles reach a top speed that none of the drivers will ever have the opportunity to even come close to? Image, statement, the ability to own something and show everyone else it doesn't matter.
Its like rare guns in display cases. Some people think if you don't fire it, wear it, drive it, use it then its a waste. Others only care that they can say they have it.
Welcome to the consumer culture. At the extreme end its a pretty silly freaking world. But you know someone is going to buy it. A product is only as valuable as what someone will pay for it and SOMEONE will pay 50k for a gun.
At the end of the day I think the price tag is a rich person's version of some guy that wants his black rifle decked out in SOPMOD crap on every rail.
You silly gun snops don't get it. Half of you are like "I wanna go hunting, it should be able to get scratched" the other half are like "it should be black and ominous looking cause I have a milsim fetish!" or something. Rich people want ridiculous crap that isn't worth it except it carries a name and an image that says they can afford frivolous stuff.
Its incredibly custom, its very short ordered so that always drives up the price when there are only a handful made. BUt really its a brand thing. A rich person's only club. Just like blue jeans, the jeans aren't whats expensive. Most places in asia that make that crap basically have one run of jeans and they just change out which bucket of labels they're using on Tuesday or Wednesday for their different brands. Same jeans, different label, literally. You can go from one store to another and its the label thats different, same stitching, same wash, different brand, $50 difference on price.
So maybe its the same old Winchester 70 action, maybe only hits slightly smaller groups than a Savage 10 but it has that thing about it that says "I'm richer than you". Why own a Lotus or a Ferrari when those vehicles reach a top speed that none of the drivers will ever have the opportunity to even come close to? Image, statement, the ability to own something and show everyone else it doesn't matter.
Its like rare guns in display cases. Some people think if you don't fire it, wear it, drive it, use it then its a waste. Others only care that they can say they have it.
Welcome to the consumer culture. At the extreme end its a pretty silly freaking world. But you know someone is going to buy it. A product is only as valuable as what someone will pay for it and SOMEONE will pay 50k for a gun.
At the end of the day I think the price tag is a rich person's version of some guy that wants his black rifle decked out in SOPMOD crap on every rail.
If Shelby is the best there is then the US auto industry is in much worse shape than I thought...and I thought it was very bad indeed.
Neat thread though. You can tell hunting season is pretty much over.
Yep. I don't think Shelby is by any means, but people still pay stupid money for that name, eh.
It is easy for us to sit and say "even if I had that kind of cash, I would NEVER".
Well, I think the reason is, we were brought up to know what money is, and live within those means. Most of us will never see 100 grand in a year, let alone spend that on a pair of rifles.
I truly believe that if you were brought up with a gold spoon in your yap, these fine pieces of wood and steel, may be on the LOW end of your collection.
I know that if I had money to burn, and I truly like Mr. Millers work, those rifles would be farther down my list. But-it does not matter how much they cost-firearms were BUILT to SHOT, not just admired. And I would sure as hell enjoy shooting them!
To each their own!
ETA....took so long to type I just seen 1899's post. Soon as I seen the action/trigger guard you had to know it was a Champlin! Too bad it wasn't in 338/378KT
I take my $3000 Shiloh hunting-I bet there are many that think that kind of money is crazy as well. Twenty five years ago I just dreamed of owning ANY Sharps!
I never actually thought I would ever own one.
Well, I think the reason is, we were brought up to know what money is, and live within those means. Most of us will never see 100 grand in a year, let alone spend that on a pair of rifles.
I truly believe that if you were brought up with a gold spoon in your yap, these fine pieces of wood and steel, may be on the LOW end of your collection.
I know that if I had money to burn, and I truly like Mr. Millers work, those rifles would be farther down my list. But-it does not matter how much they cost-firearms were BUILT to SHOT, not just admired. And I would sure as hell enjoy shooting them!
To each their own!
ETA....took so long to type I just seen 1899's post. Soon as I seen the action/trigger guard you had to know it was a Champlin! Too bad it wasn't in 338/378KT
I take my $3000 Shiloh hunting-I bet there are many that think that kind of money is crazy as well. Twenty five years ago I just dreamed of owning ANY Sharps!
I never actually thought I would ever own one.
Last edited:
So what you are saying is that you won't be spending your " Wal-Mart sour milk settlement" cash on this?
Ahahahahahahahahahaha!
They look amazing, and I am sure they are amazing Rifles.
But those who compared them to a Ferrari or a Lambo?
Not a chance, these are Sunfires, with fancy wheels and a body kit. Its a M70 with a fancy piece of wood on it.
If I was a millionarie, like thousands of people are, I would maybe consider one, it would look sweet in my Man cave, next to the Ducatti, Ferrari, and stripper pole.
But those who compared them to a Ferrari or a Lambo?
Not a chance, these are Sunfires, with fancy wheels and a body kit. Its a M70 with a fancy piece of wood on it.
If I was a millionarie, like thousands of people are, I would maybe consider one, it would look sweet in my Man cave, next to the Ducatti, Ferrari, and stripper pole.
Well may I suggest this then:
Available for a mere $5995, and that includes a Schmidt & Bender scope. You can send me a blank cheque for my bird-dogging fee.
http://www.champlinarms.com/Default.aspx?tabid=30&mid=345&ctl=GunsDetails&StyleID=2&GunID=1681
That's a strange combination to my eye.
The features in the wood, actually seem to detract from, rather than add to, the overall image, to my eye.
The lines of the stock look pretty good, though not quite right to me, but the pale feathered wood seems to hide the lines of the stock, rather than making it look better.
I think that stock would look better with a wee bit plainer, much darker wood.
It's a beautiful piece of wood. Between the wood grain, the lines of the cheek piece, and the checkering, it might just as well have a camo paint job on it.
From a car analogy, ever seen the paisley paint job on the Rolls Royce?
That wood would be best on a straight grip shotgun stock, where the wood grain would be all that was obvious, even if the stock was "perfect".
That's what I see.
Oh, and I see that the price of a used one has not rose to match the new ones, so that kind of stuffs the idea that it would be much of an "investment".
I can sorta see spending $6K on a really nice, made to fit, custom like this. $50K, not so much.
Cheers
Trev
The original rifles pictured , if built five-ten years ago, are worth more today in reasonable condition than what they were originally purchased for.
I've known both Echols and Miller to buy their own rifles back and not because they needed something to hunt with.
