New premium rifle or custom

[farmer_john]

Honestly, people have really changed. So many more people back then grew up with iron sight 22s, and had superior bushcraft skills. A much larger proportion of people lived in rural areas, and the overall population was far less.

Those folks used wood stocked levers that absolutely allowed you to torque a barrel, but they took shots under 100 yds. They also missed a lot more than they claimed. Author after Author would write about hunting buddies with Teddy Roosevelt vision that would blast away at herds til they hit something. The past always gets rewritten by faulty memories.

A commercial sheep hunter then would kill more per year, than all now issued tags for an entire year, because populations hadn't yet consumed all habitat.

Now, most of us work in urban areas, and have to depend on marksmanship for the handful of PTO days available for hunting. Synthetic stocks really started showing up in the 80s and 90s. That's already 40 years (how time flys). Ugly as sin, those first plastic stocks, but guys quickly realized for boreal swamps, they held up much better.

On my trapline, I become acutely aware of how disconnected I sometimes get. Takes a month to really start to see and hear it again. Obviously just an opinion, that I can't back up with clear facts, but it's what Ive observed.

I dont think they missed as much as your crediting for. But at the same time there is a different level of whats considered good accuracy.
Alot of service rifles around ww1 with iron sights the standard was 2-3 moa.
Your rifles like your mannlicher 1903 carbine were keeping 1-1.5
Wich is perfectly adequate for hunting. Even at a few hundred esp with period scope.

But that doesnt answer the question how did they keep their nice guns from getting thrashed in the elements and on their adventures vs the argument now that you cant take a nice gun into the woods because the stock will get destroyed.

 

[akrifleman]

I dont think they missed as much as your crediting for. But at the same time there is a different level of whats considered good accuracy.
Alot of service rifles around ww1 with iron sights the standard was 2-3 moa.
Your rifles like your mannlicher 1903 carbine were keeping 1-1.5
Wich is perfectly adequate for hunting. Even at a few hundred esp with period scope.

But that doesnt answer the question how did they keep their nice guns from getting thrashed in the elements and on their adventures vs the argument now that you cant take a nice gun into the woods because the stock will get destroyed.

Wood stocks do get destroyed in alder thickets. They do warp when wet. Moose hunting isn't Elk hunting on solid ground It is in boreal swamps, which tears up absolutely everything. Minute of moose is probably 8" (MOA) at 100 yds. But, lots of stocks and scopes are destroyed by then. Every year I see a busted stock and broken scope (and stranded hunters who underestimated this country) Go to an Alaskan gunshow, and you'll see a great many barrels scratched to hell, tape glue on the barrel tip, and tore up stocks (or restocked). My original Midwest rifle wood stocked M77 looks better now than anything we drag through the bush. Cerakote is also pretty awesome. Save the Bespoke for gentlemen hunts. Bring cheap ugly guns to the bush (and spend three times that on Swaro binos).

 

[Russ16]

I dont think they missed as much as your crediting for. But at the same time there is a different level of whats considered good accuracy.
Alot of service rifles around ww1 with iron sights the standard was 2-3 moa.
Your rifles like your mannlicher 1903 carbine were keeping 1-1.5
Wich is perfectly adequate for hunting. Even at a few hundred esp with period scope.

But that doesnt answer the question how did they keep their nice guns from getting thrashed in the elements and on their adventures vs the argument now that you cant take a nice gun into the woods because the stock will get destroyed.

Most of the nice guns did get destroyed over time. That's why older guns in high condition command such a premium. There are a lot more beaters out there than there are good condition guns.

 

[farmer_john]

Wood stocks do get destroyed in alder thickets. They do warp when wet. Moose hunting isn't Elk hunting on solid ground It is in boreal swamps, which tears up absolutely everything. Minute of moose is probably 8" (MOA) at 100 yds. But, lots of stocks and scopes are destroyed by then. Every year I see a busted stock and broken scope (and stranded hunters who underestimated this country) Go to an Alaskan gunshow, and you'll see a great many barrels scratched to hell, tape glue on the barrel tip, and tore up stocks (or restocked). My original Midwest rifle wood stocked M77 looks better now than anything we drag through the bush. Cerakote is also pretty awesome. Save the Bespoke for gentlemen hunts. Bring cheap ugly guns to the bush (and spend three times that on Swaro binos).

I never denied that they canot be destroyed or that wood does not/cannot warp. Or that people have busted guns or damage the finish. Or that a boreal swamp is not rough on equipment depending how you hunt. This conversation isnt a dick measuring competition about whos hunted in rougher conditions.

Were still dancing around answering my question and ill even expand on it.
How did people 100 years ago protect their guns while out hunting.
And how are people in your boreal swamp, protecting their rifles while out hunting?
Because somehow people with really nice guns back then sucessfully hunted and alot of them with greater frequency than we do. With wood stocks. So what did they do
differently then than people today are now?
Based on your descriptions one would be led to believe that you go into a swamp for 2 weeks do zero weapons maintanence and just leave the rifle in a puddle the whole time. Then are suprised its thrashed.
and im sure thats not accurate.

And I am aware that over time wood stocks will eventually become unservicable given enough rough use. And barrels/finishes are also consumable items.

 

[akrifleman]

I never denied that they canot be destroyed or that wood does not/cannot warp. Or that people have busted guns or damage the finish. Or that a boreal swamp is not rough on equipment depending how you hunt. This conversation isnt a dick measuring competition about whos hunted in rougher conditions.

Were still dancing around answering my question and ill even expand on it.
How did people 100 years ago protect their guns while out hunting.
And how are people in your boreal swamp, protecting their rifles while out hunting?
Because somehow people with really nice guns back then sucessfully hunted and alot of them with greater frequency than we do. With wood stocks. So what did they do
differently then than people today are now?
Based on your descriptions one would be led to believe that you go into a swamp for 2 weeks do zero weapons maintanence and just leave the rifle in a puddle the whole time. Then are suprised its thrashed.
and im sure thats not accurate.

And I am aware that over time wood stocks will eventually become unservicable given enough rough use. And barrels/finishes are also consumable items.

I answered it very directly, and so did Russ16. You just don't like it.

All of Alaska is a giant swamp, even the mountains are soaking wet. Same with most of Yukon Canada. Like Russ said, most rifles up here turn into beaters. It is a romantic fantasy to think most Alaskans back in the day had really nice guns. (55,000 of them 100 yrs ago) Who in the hell could afford that on bush salaries and flown in everything? Most people had cheap surplus guns, that they left OUTSIDE all winter so the condensation from the cabin heat didn't freeze and rust them up. People tried very hard to keep them as serviceable as possible, more than anywhere else, as that was you life. People learned how to heat and stretch leather over stocks, because they simply didn't last, and the leather could keep them together after they cracked. Something the western mountain men also had to frequently do. The ones that were actually kept nice were the exception to the rule. Most of us don't have guide services that haul in all the gear so your boots can be dry at night. And nobody takes a gun safe with a golden rod on a boat, airplane, or even their RV. Nobody ignores cleaning and taking care of their firearm the best you can. It's only been since the 70s that a sizable urban population with money started to exist. Even hunting the only seven highways in the state is a more recent invention, and the rivers and airplanes are still the real highways. Everyone loves the wonderful look of walnut, but the reality is synthetic stocks and cerakoted barrels stand up far better.

 

[Russ16]

I answered it very directly, and so did Russ16. You just don't like it.

All of Alaska is a giant swamp, even the mountains are soaking wet. Same with most of Yukon Canada. Like Russ said, most rifles up here turn into beaters. It is a romantic fantasy to think most Alaskans back in the day had really nice guns. (55,000 of them 100 yrs ago) Who in the hell could afford that on bush salaries and flown in everything? Most people had cheap surplus guns, that they left OUTSIDE all winter so the condensation from the cabin heat didn't freeze and rust them up. People tried very hard to keep them as serviceable as possible, more than anywhere else, as that was you life. People learned how to heat and stretch leather over stocks, because they simply didn't last, and the leather could keep them together after they cracked. Something the western mountain men also had to frequently do. The ones that were actually kept nice were the exception to the rule. Most of us don't have guide services that haul in all the gear so your boots can be dry at night. And nobody takes a gun safe with a golden rod on a boat, airplane, or even their RV. Nobody ignores cleaning and taking care of their firearm the best you can. It's only been since the 70s that a sizable urban population with money started to exist. Even hunting the only seven highways in the state is a more recent invention, and the rivers and airplanes are still the real highways. Everyone loves the wonderful look of walnut, but the reality is synthetic stocks and cerakoted barrels stand up far better.

Not just Alaska. Come to the eastern shore of Maryland and look at the piles of waterfowl guns that have been used. Not man a collector would look twice at.

For the English guns that went to Africa or India. Many of those hunters had staff that cleaned and cared for them daily. It was also quite common ti send them back to the maker for a wood finish refresh and even reblue. Many of the big driven bird shooters did this with their guns annually.

I think a lot of the 80+ year old guns that look really nice didn’t get a lot of use. Maybe someone bought it for their one big safari and then it was shelved.

Some did of course and through a combination of luck and care came out less damaged but a lot didn’t.

 

[farmer_john]

I answered it very directly, and so did Russ16. You just don't like it.

All of Alaska is a giant swamp, even the mountains are soaking wet. Same with most of Yukon Canada. Like Russ said, most rifles up here turn into beaters. It is a romantic fantasy to think most Alaskans back in the day had really nice guns. (55,000 of them 100 yrs ago) Who in the hell could afford that on bush salaries and flown in everything? Most people had cheap surplus guns, that they left OUTSIDE all winter so the condensation from the cabin heat didn't freeze and rust them up. People tried very hard to keep them as serviceable as possible, more than anywhere else, as that was you life. People learned how to heat and stretch leather over stocks, because they simply didn't last, and the leather could keep them together after they cracked. Something the western mountain men also had to frequently do. The ones that were actually kept nice were the exception to the rule. Most of us don't have guide services that haul in all the gear so your boots can be dry at night. And nobody takes a gun safe with a golden rod on a boat, airplane, or even their RV. Nobody ignores cleaning and taking care of their firearm the best you can. It's only been since the 70s that a sizable urban population with money started to exist. Even hunting the only seven highways in the state is a more recent invention, and the rivers and airplanes are still the real highways. Everyone loves the wonderful look of walnut, but the reality is synthetic stocks and cerakoted barrels stand up far better.

Its not that I didnt like it. Just didnt think was a direct address. But I appreciate the insight into the Alaskan experience. Its certiantly different. And i agreed with russ16.

Not just Alaska. Come to the eastern shore of Maryland and look at the piles of waterfowl guns that have been used. Not man a collector would look twice at.

For the English guns that went to Africa or India. Many of those hunters had staff that cleaned and cared for them daily. It was also quite common ti send them back to the maker for a wood finish refresh and even reblue. Many of the big driven bird shooters did this with their guns annually.

I think a lot of the 80+ year old guns that look really nice didn’t get a lot of use. Maybe someone bought it for their one big safari and then it was shelved.

Some did of course and through a combination of luck and care came out less damaged but a lot didn’t.

That makes alot of sense.
Thank you both.

 

[WAB]

I have a number of semi and full custom rifles. My heart says walnut and blued steel in classic lines. However, you want something for long range work as well. Pictured is my 6.5 PRC by Travis at TS customs (in fairness, I bought the barreled action from Travis and bolted it into the MDT HNT26 chassis. That’s a 600 yard target. I recently cleaned a range to 1,000 with this rifle and was making consistent kills well beyond that.

 

[gbflyer]

I live and hunt in Alaska. The wet part. 100” plus rain a year. There is nothing wrong with a properly sealed wood stock. I have a Tikka with a wood stock that gets absolutely soaked. Also, we have plenty of alders. Stainless is nice but it will still rust unless it’s an old Ruger All Weather. Those you can almost leave in the bilge of the saltwater boat. No problems.

I have a pile of customs. I’ve built some myself and had some built. To be honest, I’m done with them. The factory guns are better than ever. Plus they are worth something when you die and your kids sell them. You will be lucky to recover 50% on a custom that isn’t factory built.

 

[WAB]

I live and hunt in Alaska. The wet part. 100” plus rain a year. There is nothing wrong with a properly sealed wood stock. I have a Tikka with a wood stock that gets absolutely soaked. Also, we have plenty of alders. Stainless is nice but it will still rust unless it’s an old Ruger All Weather. Those you can almost leave in the bilge of the saltwater boat. No problems.

I have a pile of customs. I’ve built some myself and had some built. To be honest, I’m done with them. The factory guns are better than ever. Plus they are worth something when you die and your kids sell them. You will be lucky to recover 50% on a custom that isn’t factory built.

I used to run a boat out of Valdez run the coast. I know what you mean about rusty SS. I had my SS rifles Arctic coated to stop the rust!

 

[JeeperCreeper]

Don't walk... But RUN, RUN as fast as you can away from Christensen Arms.

And it appears like Fierce is following after with awful quality as they try to grow.

Of the off the shelf ones, Seekins are superb from most reports. The few that I know that have them, love them.

 

[WAB]

I have a number of semi and full custom rifles. My heart says walnut and blued steel in classic lines. However, you want something for long range work as well. Pictured is my 6.5 PRC by Travis at TS customs (in fairness, I bought the barreled action from Travis and bolted it into the MDT HNT26 chassis. That’s a 600 yard target. I recently cleaned a range to 1,000 with this rifle and was making consistent kills well beyond that.

View attachment 735319

Tscustomsrifles.com

 

[Muskox]

Fierce and Christensen have horrible customer service and I personally don't like either company.

There are bad and good reviews on Springfield.

$5000 is a lot of money for most people.

$2500 isn't the end of the world.

Seekins Precision has really good reviews. To the point that people go out of there way to push them as they have good success with them.

When you start throwing it together it moves up quickly.

Cerakote $200-400
Action $850-2800 Weatherby 700 clone to the best Titanium Defiance or Bat
Barrel Proof of course $950
Install barrel and thread for a muzzle brake $500
Muzzle brake $250
Fiberglass, carbon fiber or other synthetic stock. Bell and Carlson for $400-best McMillan for $1500 with all the options.
Bottom metal $250-4500
Trigger $150-450

How I would build it

Bat Vesper $2100 shipped plus $150 for titanium nitriding
Bix N Andy 2 stage trigger $400
McMillan Mountain Tracker LR $1150 shipped carbon fiber
Unknown Munitions bottom metal $250 shipped
Proof barrel $1000
Install and fit barrel, and thread muzzle device 5/8ths-24 $500
Bed stock $300

I am at $5950 and I think it will be closer to $6500 by the time we are actually done.

Honestly you could buy a new Tikka Ultra light for $1000, it's already threaded in 7mm PRC or 6.5 PRC.

Then put in a Box and Andy Tikka trigger for $350
Bed it yourself into a McMilland Mountain Tracker for $1150

$2500 out the door and you'd have 88% of the custom Bat in quality and the same form function.

 

[Muskox]

Don't walk... But RUN, RUN as fast as you can away from Christensen Arms.

And it appears like Fierce is following after with awful quality as they try to grow.

Of the off the shelf ones, Seekins are superb from most reports. The few that I know that have them, love them.

Can't remember the dudes name that owns Fierce, complete and utter dung bucket. He used to work for Christensen's as a salesman. I don't know how he got Fierce going.

Same goals as a company chase huge sales without customer service or quality.

 

[375Ruger416]

I think you can’t beat the value of some of the nicer options in nicer factory rifles. I have a fierce - bought it when they first started up. It’s a good rifle, but I tried to contact them several times and … crickets.

I like the Seekins, Weatherby Alpine CT 307, Browning Xbolt 2, and the Waypoint 2020. Lack first hand experience sadly, but I’d give the Seekins or Waypoint a try if it was my money. Hopefully, there’s a shop nearby where you can handle one.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

Can't remember the dudes name that owns Fierce, complete and utter dung bucket. He used to work for Christensen's as a salesman. I don't know how he got Fierce going.

Same goals as a company chase huge sales without customer service or quality.

Not surprised they are on the same trajectory then.

Marketing as premium for the wealthy rookies to buy into junk... Tale as old as time

 

[cwpayton]

Own a Christiansen FFT with carbon fiber barrel. Mine is in .280 AI. Super Accurate, light,come with a lot of custom features such as fluted bolt, M16 extractor. Follow break in procedure. Absolutely love it. Took four days to get it from local gun shop. For less than 2500$ you can’t go wrong

just curious what is the barrel life for the carbon fiber barrels. my rem 700 7mm mag steel, if I remember correctly is about 10 seconds. Ive no idea how many rounds that equals.

 

[Lee M]

I think you can’t beat the value of some of the nicer options in nicer factory rifles. I have a fierce - bought it when they first started up. It’s a good rifle, but I tried to contact them several times and … crickets.

I like the Seekins, Weatherby Alpine CT 307, Browning Xbolt 2, and the Waypoint 2020. Lack first hand experience sadly, but I’d give the Seekins or Waypoint a try if it was my money. Hopefully, there’s a shop nearby where you can handle one.

I am going to look at the Seekings, Weatherby alpine ct 307, and the Waypoint 2020. I’ll be in Arizona on a cat hunt in early Jan and there is a Scheels store in Chandler with lots of these type rifles. Thx to all for the info.

 

[Roosterlund]

just curious what is the barrel life for the carbon fiber barrels. my rem 700 7mm mag steel, if I remember correctly is about 10 seconds. Ive no idea how many rounds that equals.

Not sure. I have never shot out a hunting rifle barrel. Work up an accurate load and hunt with. Maybe shoot here and there. Gun is light and shoots tiny groups. Too old to lug a heavy rifle through the mountains. I’m very happy always gonna be haters out there. Don’t buy guns based on custom service. It shoots or it dose not. If not trade and move on. If I’m shooting paper I use a custom gun!!!

 

[Ontario Hunter]

just curious what is the barrel life for the carbon fiber barrels. my rem 700 7mm mag steel, if I remember correctly is about 10 seconds. Ive no idea how many rounds that equals.

I'll give it a shot (pun intended). I will assume the barrel length is 24" = 2 ft. I will also assume the average muzzle velocity for 24" barrel 7mm Rem = 3,200 ft/second. Thus one second's worth of wear down the barrel = 3,200 ft fired through it. The claim is the barrel can last ten seconds of wear = 32,000 ft fired through it. The barrel is two feet long so, presumably, it will last through 32,000 ÷ 2 firings = 16,000. Seems like a lot so my calculation is probably wrong. Not surprising as my PhD is history not math. But it was fun trying.