Who else prefers the old classics?

Longwalker

Longwalker

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
216   0   2
Location
Saskatchewan
I was reading several threads lately about "hunting guns" that are plastic stocked, stainless, magnum chambered rifles with mildot scopes and bipods, and shotguns with telescoping stocks, breaching chokes and ghost ring sights, and say good for them, go have fun.

But my gun room is full of firearms that have some history and artistry. Small ring mausers, Sako L and A - series bolt actions, with polished & blued steel and figured walnut. A few traditional lever actions and falling blocks for variety, and my shotguns lean towards finely engraved SxS and O/U doubles and a couple of classic pumps. I like German combination guns for their meticulous workmanship and functional versatility.

For chamberings I lean towards rounds that are classic ( old) too. Currently I shoot .22 RF .22 hornet, .222 Rem, .25-06, 7x57 ( 2) 7x57R ( 2) 7x64, .308, 30-06, 8x57IRS, .35 Whelen, .357 mag, and 45-70. In my shotguns I only rarely shoot any 3" shells any more and mostly use my 16 ga. guns for everything.

Antique preferences for sure, but I'm wondering, am I so unusual or are there may others on this site with similar tastes? The more I see of the latest "plastic gun of the week" the less impressed I am. I understand that we need entry level guns for low budget hunters and beginners and cheap durable guns for hard use, and even some of the new chamberings may be needed by someone, but most of the current marketing hype just isn't working on me.

How about you?
 
I'm kinda like you. But then again I wasn't raised on video games with all the first person shooter games available. I still prefer the look of wood to plastic. I do have wood lamimated stocks and love the look of them. And I own a few synthetic stocked shooters too. They have their place.

But breaching chokes and all that stuff is a waste of my time.
 
I am a dinosaur the same as you, I guess. I don't even like Monte Carlo stocks on rifles although I do own a 1950's Husqvarna with one on it. When I go to the local gun emporium I go directly to the used rack and bypass all the new stainless, synthetic SWAT team Rambo wannabe crap. There is no quality there. I think 1900 to the late 1950's were the golden years of gunmaking here and in Europe. To each their own but the new stuff doesn't interest me in the least and I hope I remain in the minority because it keeps the price down on the truly "good" stuff.
 
If you're older like me you've had time to own and shoot classics and therefore know the difference.

Yes I own some old Mausers, Italian 20ga O/O, Remington 700's built in the 80's and older and one 6.5x55 Rem 700 Classic. I'm partial to wooden stocks and prefer to pay the extra for it, polished blued finished and nice checkering.

Plastic maybe functional, but certainly not desirable for me. Unless youngsters have older guns to compare with they will most likely get caught up in the new fangled guns/calibers because the stores stock them at cheaper prices.
 
I prefer the look of a classic over a modern gun, but I can and do appreciate the qualities of a properly thought out and executed modern design.

For instance - and I bring this up frequently so I apologize to those whom I have already bored - I own a Benelli Nova. I pained over wood/blue vs. synthetic/flat and decided to go with the practical tool. Boy, am I glad I did. Hunting wood ducks in the muddy river bottom behind my house with a "classic" would be more about protecting the gun than actually hunting ducks. I hate to look at it though. And fellow Benelli owners, if you would please look away now... I haven't seen a Benelli firearm that I would rate better than "bloody awful" in the looks department.

One day, though, I want a CRF-based, big game rifle with a rich, slow-rust bluing job and bedded into a quilted maple stock with ebony forearm and grip caps.
 
Nope, your not alone.

Nothing beats the quality of yesterday and you don't need a sniper rifle to go hunting (but I would like a long range .308 for the range) plus the price of older guns is usually less.
I love my Marlin guide gun (eventhough it is new). All of my guns have wood stocks except for my Stevens o/u 22-410. I got it from my girlfriends dad and the stock broke the first time I shot it. It must be from the 50's and I'm surprised even back then they used a type of plastic. I love natural wood so much I recently bought a machine to help me duplicate a stock for the 22-410.

I have Winchester '94 in mint condition, couple of 1886's (40-82 and 38-56) and some old SXS with damascus barrels and some others that I will never sell.

I love the old ones for there quality and style.
 
A beautiful figured wooden stock gives a firearm it's individuality. No 2 wooden stocks are identical and really makes the "this is my rifle, there are many like it..." monologue some truth. I've never had a problem making them stable shooters by bedding actions and free floating channels. When I look at a rack of my walnut stocked beauties they each have their own personality, if that's the right word, because of the different wood grains. Another rack has stainless and synthetic clinical looking and cold tools for shooting and hunting. While being stable and reliable rugged tools that get the job done regardless of environment, they are still cold and impersonal. Not having the warmth and feel of a gorgeous piece of mother nature in your hands to enjoy just looking at.
 
I like classic sporter and I also have a soft spot for synthetic stocked "modern" type rifle. I shoot 31/2inch magnum shells out of a Synthetic stocked shotgun but love the handling and appearance of wood stocked pump gun and doubles.I can see both sides of the argument and I will own both "classic" and "modern" type rifles. The only stock design I really hate is the California style.
 
Put me on the list. For me, hunting with a modern, flat-shooting, scoped rifle is just plain boring. I hunt with old rifles. The average age of my old rifles I hunt with is just over a century.
 
I like the synthetic shotguns for hunting. They make perfect sense in that configuration. But everytime I see a pic of the Benelli Vinci I puke a little in my mouth. Fugly!
 
I think my tastes are along similar lines. My preference is for a nice blue and nicely figures wood. I do have a few, but very few, firearms that are stainless, one with a composite stock and one with a laminate stock.

In caliber choices, I tend toward some of the older classics of yesteryear;
Rifles:
.22 LR
219 Donaldson Wasp
7x75R
7x61 S&H
30-06
308 Norma Magnum
303Br.
348 WCF
358 Norma Magnum
44-40
444
45-70
458 Win Mag

Similar tastes in handguns and shotguns.
 
New guns are awesome. They can be spectacularly accurate right out of the box. They can take punishment that would splinter wood and rust chromoly. They can be chambered in some of the fiercest fire breathing super magnums on the market. They can be ultralight mountain rifles, heavyweight long range rigs, and sturdy sporters. Their triggers break like glass rods and their recoil pads absorb massive amounts of recoil before passing the rest on to the shooter.

But let's face it, they're hideous. There's just no accounting for taste. And assembly/finishing robots certainly take no pride in a job well done.

So while I prefer to hunt with a modern gun in the worst possible situations, I would most certainly wish it was a hand-built classic.
 
JasonS said:
I'm kinda like you. But then again I wasn't raised on video games with all the first person shooter games available. I still prefer the look of wood to plastic. I do have wood lamimated stocks and love the look of them. And I own a few synthetic stocked shooters too. They have their place.

But breaching chokes and all that stuff is a waste of my time.
Click to expand...

hehe im 22 and I like wood and blue steel.. its a look that plastic just makes it look like a toy..
 
I've been fascinated by guns of all kinds for as long as I remember. I can't say I have a favourite type of firearm. I seem to have more rifles than shotguns or handguns. I like black guns and single shots but I own more bolt actions than anything else. Have more than my share of antique and modern SxS shotguns, but i'd call myself a rifleman more than a scattergunner. I went through a milsurp phase, and I still like them.

I own more firearms chambered in classic cartridges that the more recent offerings, but I do have a .300 winmag that's my hotrod gun.
 
Last edited:
I don't limit myself.

My idea of a hard core hunting rifle is stainless with a quality synthetic (not injection molded plastic) stock and a good scope. And I use a couple of brand new cartridges, also. (300WSM and 375 Ruger)

When I go out for upland birds, I pack an O/U or SXS, walnut and blued 20 guage.

I've taken out the .45 Colt Mdl 94 Trapper for deer and bear a few times.

I am eagerly anticipating a Ruger #1 chambered in .303 British.

I have seen as many (or more) examples of poor craftsmanship and poor materials with wood and blued rifles as I have with stainless//synthetic. You can't simply classify one style as "good" and the other style as "poor" Both styles have good and bad examples.

As I said, I don't see the need to limit myself to just one style of firearm or cartridge. There are too many great guns out there made of all sorts of materials to want to limit myself.
 
I guess I'll come and stand over there with you fellas....my cabinets are filled with a half dozen each of Husqvarnas, FN Sporters not violated by drills & taps, L series Sakos and assorted Mausers. There is one lonely Remington; if it gets muddy or broken I really don't give a damn - it's disposable. The rest I shoot, but cherish.

I do admit to having a bedded MPI synthetic stock for one of my Sakos - it goes on when the weather gets bad.
 
Blue and wood for me. have never owned either a stainless or one with a plastic stock.
I am not trying to influence anyone, as we are all different and like different things.
My gripe is with the industry that have so pushed the stainless and plastic, that many new hunters think they need this for a hunting rifle. My Husqvarna 30-06 that I purchased in 1949 has weathered at least 25 mountain hunts. Only mountain hunters will know the rain, winds and snows encountered on these trips, but my rifle never lost it's sighting and has not a speck of rust on it.
 
In rifles, a few of my favorite 'older' guns and calibers.

WinchesterHighWall219DW-1.jpg


An old Winchester High Wall in 219 Donaldson Wasp, matching vintage scope

TheNorthernEuropeanConnection.jpg


Two Schultz & Larsens, left to right, 308 NM and 7x61 S&H.
Two Husqvarnas, 358 NM and 30-06.

348WCFElkoutfit1.jpg


Winchester model 71 Deluxe, 348 WCF.
 
All of my rifles have been purchased with the intent to be used for hunting.

Rain, mud, truck kisses, rock tumbles, freezing, etc. are all part of the reality. Ive got some old classics and a few newer lightweight stainless/synthetic/high precision types.

I love none but use them all.
 
Where would you draw the line between classic, and antique? When I was a child, my dad had a .577 Snyder that he actually shot a deer with. When he took it out for an occasional test fire (ammo was scarce), I used to hide under my bed, and cover my ears.
If you're talking about American classics, from the last century, I'm with you, for sure. I own a 4" model 29, a 2" model 10, a 2" colt cobra, and an original delta elite. I hate rubber grips. I like a 30-06, with a wood stock.
The odd thing is, like some others, I prefer SS and synthetic stocks, for every day use. If I had to pick a handgun for bush carry, I'd probably take my glock 20, just because I don't want to scratch my "classic" model 29.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom