Looking for first rifle, have some constraints.

You've got another vote here for the vanguard 2 (get stainless if you have the money) or a savage weather warrior 16. I had a vanguard 1 with Timney trigger and it was an excellent rifle. Only sold it because I needed to fund a .204. Savage also makes guns with excellent value for what you pay. Weatherbys are phenomenal rifles, I would have bought one if they made them in .204.
 
I'm pretty sure I'd like to get a bolt action .308. I want to get a rifle that i can use for fun at the range or doing long distance stuff but also take off hunting into the bush for long treks (deer, elk).
I want a shorter barrel (20") and probably a synthetic stock. I also just finished university so I'm pretty low on funds, and probably in the $600-850 range for the base rifle (before optics/accessories).
Click to expand...

Range fun - almost anything will do
Long distance stuff - better served with a heavier profile barrel
Hunting - lighter rifle optimized for carry

One rifle for both will entail a compromise either way. If this is your first rifle I'd say you're likely going to be using it a lot more at the range for fun and long distance stuff than walking around hunting, so I'd weigh my decisions based off that.

If it were me I'd look at the Rem 5R, good stock & trigger, stainless, heavier profile barrel, and a reputation for excellent accuracy. Has a 24" barrel but you can have that chopped to 20". You can find a very lightly used one on the EE for bewteen $900-1000. Weatherby Vanguards are solid rifles too.

Stay away from the latest cheap crap like the Ruger American, Savage Axis plastic fantastics.
 
Awesome, really appreciate all the responses and input.

As far as the getting used or new debate- can someone explain where they think the tradeoff happens (for them at least)?
What I mean is... when and where does "older" rifles' quality beat out new technology? Is it the craftsmanship? durability? accuracy?
Are the newer ones built with less quality? What am I getting from and older more expensive rifle that I don't get from a newer one like the Vanguard S2 for example?

I know it's hard to generalize, but I'd like to hear some opinions
thanks!
 
New rifles are all pretty much sub MOA out of the box, while older ones might get that on their best days.

In the real world it means squat, though. What older guns typically have is a fit and finish you will not match in a budget gun. New budget guns often feel like an elongated tupperware container (a big old hunk of plastic shaped like a gun). They have, as mentioned, a lot of plastic, something not typically seen on older guns.
 
If you'd consider a 270 as 308's are sold out Cabela's Canada has Savage FCNS with Accutrigger+Accustock for 549.99. If you want a reliable and very accurate rifle for a great price, they are a great deal. Leaves you with extra cash for a quality scope.
 
Don't fall for the "you get more gun buying a nice used quality gun" hype. It all depends what you want it for. If you want a vintage show piece with nice wood that shoots well enough to hit deer within 400 reliably. Then sure, do that. If you want a basically guaranteed moa accurate, affordable from the factory rifle that you can still abuse (if need be) then buy a vanguard, savage, tikka etc. I buy a gun because it shoots and I don't have to baby it. But that's just me, a lot of the guys I've hunted with shoot rifles with fancy wood etc. Every time one gets dropped or knocked or used as a shovel I have to politely request they remove their tampons so that we can continue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom