You use rifles for hunting, range shooting, plinking and/or competition.<BR>You appreciate and enjoy nice rifles especially custom rifles.<BR>But you also use your rifles in the field and you expect them to show a little character after 5 years.What price do you consider the maximum that you would spend for any rifle that you would give significant use (not investment or speculation or pride of owner ship) in the field.$1000$1500$2000$3000$5000$8000$10000 and above

I voted in at $5000
Unfortunately, too often we have to place a rifle's value as an investment ahead of its value as a hunting instrument.
Having said that, my tastes are gravitating to totally original, well used and cared for examples which won't suffer from any normal hunting or handling.
Let's face it, every custom hunting rifle dreams of looking like this:


And every hunter dreams of the hunts that brought this rifle to its present state!

Huvius
I agree with you about the older rifles.
The best way for them to be worth the price is to wear them out. They have infinitely more value for the experiences and memories than as investments.

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

Let's face it, every custom hunting rifle dreams of looking like this:


And every hunter dreams of the hunts that brought this rifle to its present state!

I could not agree more. I love the picture of that rifle and have often said that I hope my rifle looks like that the day I die.

I have used (and to some extent abused) guns in every one of those price ranges. I buy them to hunt with them, and honestly, if I brought something as an investment, it would never come in to my house, as I would be tempted to take it out anyhow.

I think the price point is meaningful only to the user. While I have no issue with using a $10K hunting rifle, some of my friends who live on $50K/year could not conceive of using such an animal. They would sell it and pay some bills and then go and sink some of the remainder in a hunt somewhere. I am sure that there are some rich guys in Saudi Arabia that take multiple H&H Royals out as the money is pocket change to them.

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:
I voted in at $5000
Unfortunately, too often we have to place a rifle's value as an investment ahead of its value as a hunting instrument.
Having said that, my tastes are gravitating to totally original, well used and cared for examples which won't suffer from any normal hunting or handling.
Let's face it, every custom hunting rifle dreams of looking like this:


And every hunter dreams of the hunts that brought this rifle to its present state!

Huvius
I would like to know more about that rifle, in my opinion in that state of use it is priceless.
When I was a kid my grand dad gave us kids a few rifles and with each one came a story of where it was bought and a lot of the hunts they had been on and the animals it had taken.
Strong medicine for a kids imagination hearing of Moose and Mountain Goats, Caribou and Black and Grizzly Bears, fun stuff and priceless memories.

By the way I didn't vote on the poll, if I paid 150$ or 20,000$ for a rifle it would get used. Thats why I buy guns is to shoot them and ultimately hunt with them.

Unfortunately, not mine...
It was posted on the Selby Rigby thread and it is so cool, I had to use it!
Beautiful, isn't it?

I voted $3k. If I did spent $5k or more on a rifle, I'd always have the idea floating in my head that I could have spent less on the rifle and used the rest of the money to do more hunting.

Dean

that is a photo of a very early 416 Rigby that my son Taj took in Zambia. I belongs to Adrian Carr and before that to his father Norman Carr.
Both Norman and Adrian were PH's and the rifle is credited with taking over 1000 BULL elephants !
It is a fine example of a top end, best quality, English rifle that was used for what it was intended.

Today there are plenty of other PH's using "expensive" bolt rifles by top makers like D'Arcy Echols and Lon Paul - and many who pay even more to carry a double.

458Win,Would you happen to have any idea of that barrel length?

With the price of ARs going for over 2000 I might have to raise the level to 5000 or so.

I do not have a rifle I will not hunt with, at any price. One of my favorite deer rifles is over $5000 and the very first things I did while taking it out of the case for its first hunt was to accidentally drop the bolt on the english walnut stock and put a nice dent in it. Heck, I just call it character.

The exact price point at which the transformation takes place: $1 over the price of a NIB FN Win M70.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
458Win,Would you happen to have any idea of that barrel length?

Using 3.3" as the action opening I scaled the barrel at approx. 26.4"

Just a guess....

No miracles, top quality does have a cost.
My 2 most used hunting rifles are :

Drive hunting : FN CCS25 O/U in 9,3x74R + Swaro 1,24x24 in claw mounts. Approx. value : 17000 € (22500 USD).


Stalking : Sauer 202 in .30-06 + Swaro 1,5-6x42 in EAW swingout mount. Approx. value : 5000 € (6700 USD).

I voted $10K plus. Now given the OPs stating that these are not safe queens and usable rifles, I will add that I expect sub MOA accuracy in any non dangerous game custom rifle. Not "groups" in a hunter, rather "POI groups" if you will.

I am of the belief there is no excuse for any non DGR $3K plus custom rifle to shoot over an inch, absolutely none- and I'll even tosss a bone and say with handloads.

A "hunting" non dgr should be expected to shoot around 1/2" or so in std cartridges and 1" or so in magnums. There is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for a modern, custom rifle to not do so. None. Kleinguenther guaranteed this in his rifles in the 70s with factory Voere actions and cold forged barrels.

Anything (non DGR) larger than that, without exception is lumped into the POS category.


(Damnit I was editing while you posted- 3 double espressos)

Well you are correct BUT any big game rifle that will hold 1.5 MOA and put the first shot in the same place as the 5th is far better than the bughole shooter that cannot be counted on to do that.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:


that is a photo of a very early 416 Rigby that my son Taj took in Zambia. I belongs to Adrian Carr and before that to his father Norman Carr.
Both Norman and Adrian were PH's and the rifle is credited with taking over 1000 BULL elephants !

Is this then the rifle made infamous in Hannes Wessels' "Strange Tales From The African Bush"? There is a chapter in the book called something like "Falling On His Sword" that may explain the discolouration seen on the barrel just back of the muzzle and behind the sight.

Dean

quote:

No miracles, top quality does have a cost.

Quality or just expensive?

I never met high (top) quality that wasn't costly. In the examples I showed, I doubt if one would challenge the quality of the brands.
OTOH, you are right if you mean that high price doesn't mean quality per se as it can derive from other more trivial factors, like fashion, snobbery, ego, etc.

Then, if you add beauty to quality, what's costly may become dowright expansive, intrinsic quality remaining the same, though.

Here are 2 identical FN-Browning B25 shotguns, rigourously identical in terms of quality of materials, building skills and "shootability".


The bottom one is the standard grade 12 ga "Special Chasse", not exactly a "cheapie" to start with. The one on the top is the very same gun in presentation grade (walnut root, engraved with gold inserts). This one is really expansive and costs several times the price of its plainer twin. I've known them intimately for years and if asked to shoot them blindfolded, I honestly couldn't tell one from the other, be it by weight or feel. Their only difference lies in their looks...

How does a well made rifle ever lose its utility? Price has no bearing on utility.

Find this question interesting... I've hunted with an individual who shows up in his $60k plus Suburban that he may keep for 4yrs or drive into the ground in 7yrs and he question my sanity for hunting with a English shotgun in our thick alder coverts. My shotgun built in 1895 has been in my hands for 20+ years.
I tried once to look at my guns as tools some may be closer then others, most of mine though I consider as animate in-animate objects, fit and function for the task at hand.
Life is to short to own ugly guns

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
How does a well made rifle ever lose its utility? Price has no bearing on utility.

I think the OP is asking what is the dollar figure that distinguishes a safe queen from a working rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
How does a well made rifle ever lose its utility? Price has no bearing on utility.

Maybe this will explain.
This is one of Goering's Kreighoff Lugers. It has never had any utility as a firearm. I suppose you could wear it in a holster while driving a tractor and use it to shoot rats but so far that does not seemed to have happened.

quote:

Originally posted by maki:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:


that is a photo of a very early 416 Rigby that my son Taj took in Zambia. I belongs to Adrian Carr and before that to his father Norman Carr.
Both Norman and Adrian were PH's and the rifle is credited with taking over 1000 BULL elephants !

Is this then the rifle made infamous in Hannes Wessels' "Strange Tales From The African Bush"? There is a chapter in the book called something like "Falling On His Sword" that may explain the discolouration seen on the barrel just back of the muzzle and behind the sight.

Dean

Yes, that is the same infamous rifle

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

quote:

Originally posted by maki:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:


that is a photo of a very early 416 Rigby that my son Taj took in Zambia. I belongs to Adrian Carr and before that to his father Norman Carr.
Both Norman and Adrian were PH's and the rifle is credited with taking over 1000 BULL elephants !

Is this then the rifle made infamous in Hannes Wessels' "Strange Tales From The African Bush"? There is a chapter in the book called something like "Falling On His Sword" that may explain the discolouration seen on the barrel just back of the muzzle and behind the sight.

Dean

Yes, that is the same infamous rifle

The question now is how true is the story? I once horrified a friend of Adrian Carr's by asking if it was indeed true.

Dean

I have to differentiate between a rifle that I have commissioned and had built to my specifications and one I buy off the rack, custom built for someone else. The most I have ever spent for the latter, I believe, is $4000, whereas I have spent in excess of $10,000 for the former.

Someone said "quality has it's cost"

True, but utility is priceless!

I voted at 3K. While I have pricier rifles, they just won't do on a 11 day backpack sheep hunt! And besides, who the hell would want to do that to a fine chunk of wood anyway?

It's apparent my roll is smaller than your roll! haha

I'm glad we all have a different opinion of what to do with a rifle!

Best,
Zeke

quote:

Originally posted by maki:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

quote:

Originally posted by maki:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:


that is a photo of a very early 416 Rigby that my son Taj took in Zambia. I belongs to Adrian Carr and before that to his father Norman Carr.
Both Norman and Adrian were PH's and the rifle is credited with taking over 1000 BULL elephants !

Is this then the rifle made infamous in Hannes Wessels' "Strange Tales From The African Bush"? There is a chapter in the book called something like "Falling On His Sword" that may explain the discolouration seen on the barrel just back of the muzzle and behind the sight.

Dean

Yes, that is the same infamous rifle

The question now is how true is the story? I once horrified a friend of Adrian Carr's by asking if it was indeed true.

Dean

You will just have to ask Adrian the story

But from the photo it looks like the bluing in front of the sight is not as worn

The vast majority of my rifles land under the $2000 mark (optics included). The few rifles more expensive than that will be hunted with one day, just haven't had the opportunity yet. Hoping to bloody my double on a whitetail this year as marriage/a house have really postphoned my Africa dreams for a while.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
How does a well made rifle ever lose its utility? Price has no bearing on utility.

So true--

Anyone hunting with even a mid-range DR will push the cap above $15K or so. Hey, rifles can be refinished, and it's not too expensive either with the right stock guy.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
How does a well made rifle ever lose its utility? Price has no bearing on utility.

And I will add that increasing the price does not necessarily increase its utility. Engraving, precious metal inlays or finishes, more expensive wood, etc. do not in general increase utility at all, but they don't diminish it either. Using a rifle with all of these cosmetic embellishments may not be logical, in the sense that using the rifle may cause decay or degradation of the costly embellishments, but the utility remains the same. Only the market value of the rifle may diminish. I suppose what I am trying to say is that hard use of a rifle will diminish its market value, but not its utility, as long as all functional aspects remain in good shape. At what price point does a well made automobile lose its utility? A whole lot of people are willing to spend, over the course of their lives, a tremendous amount of money on automobiles and I assume they want to actually drive them. A good guide might be: if you don't want to use the rifle, don't buy it.

FMC opined that the question really being asked is what is the dollar figure above which a rifle becomes a safe queen rather than a working rifle. I say there ain't no such thing. What there is however is people who worry about the dollar value of their rifle diminishing because of use. Lots of collectors don't hunt, or only hunt with low cost rifles, for the single reason of not wanting to lower the value of their rifle.

Perhaps the poll question should have been "at what dollar value of a rifle would you no longer take it into the field?" The poll would then be about people's choices, not the utility of a well made firearm. As for the gold plated Luger, if it shoots straight and you don't care about the value of the pistol, then you might well carry it while riding your tractor. Why not?

Gold Luger or solid gold-platimum Rolex dive watch,...neither have lost any of the orig. utility of the plain jane base versions.

I dont see the price of a rifle in the $10k + bracket, as being something to be overly concerned about taking into the field,
..but that may depend on ones level of disposable income.
People pay several thousand dollars just for the mandatory service intervals on their Ferrari every few thousand miles,
not taking into account other wear & tear repairs/other general maintenance....compounded by massive depreciation on the vehicle itself.

If one can comfortably afford such lifestyle, you could have an Echols Classic without offering it any special pampered treatment,
.. and not sweat the rifles monetary depreciation.

But there are those with bucketloads of money who;
- try not to drive their Ferrari,
- try not to use their high end custom rifles,
- and are also scared to get their high quality dive-watch wet!

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
... what is the dollar figure above which a rifle becomes a safe queen rather than a working rifle. I say there ain't no such thing.

+1

At some point they become investments and that's where I lose interest.

I voted for $2000 but really it depends on what job I bought the gun to do.
Sometimes you have to spend a lot more money to get tough jobs done.

Cheers, John

To put things in perspective let's look at automobiles the same way people look at guns.

The price of the Camaro varies according to the "Trim" package you order. Starting price is $24,245 for the 1LS and goes all the way up to $56,550 for the ZL1. There are several other levels of "Trim" between these, $26,160 (1LT), $29,585 (2LT), $33,035 (1SS), and $36,535 (2SS). Differences between the levels of "trim" include bigger engines, different transmissions, wheels, etc.

Yet, all of the Camaros, regardless of price, are used for the same things. They will all be used to travel the same roads to the same destinations at the same speeds. None are race cars. None are off-road vehicles with four-wheel drive. None are amphibious. None are designed to haul loads.

So, let's ask the question, "At what price does a Camaro loose its utility?" One man will opt for the most basic model under the belief that all of the upgrades are superfluous. For him the price of utility for the Camaro ends at $24,245. He is not willing to spend any more just for looks. He thinks it is wasteful to have a car that can travel 50mph over the speed limit when he always follows the posted speed. He doesn't need a fancy stereo.

Then there is the man who drives the ZL1. He will tell you that his $56,550 is well spent. He values the engineering of the upgrades, enjoys a little more comfort, and likes the flashier look. He can't imagine listening to the stereo without the best surround sound. He enjoys his sunroof and was glad he opted for it. He likes having a "cool ride". Most importantly, he is not afraid to drive his car to work every day or to take it on long outings. After all, that's what he bought it for.

Is one philosophy better than the other? Is one point of view right and the other wrong? Is one driver smart and the other stupid? No, no, no. It is just a matter of preferences and differing tastes.

Regarding "safe queens". Imagine the man who drives his basic Camaro to work every day but keeps his ZL1 in the garage next to the rest of his muscle car collection.

Now there are those who will maintain that a man who drives a ZL1 is only showing off and is flaunting his snobbish opulence. I say rubbish to them. After all, the man driving the ZL1 knows he may be waiting at any stoplight only to have a Corvette ZR1 ($112,600) pull up beside him. That doesn't bother him because he didn't buy his car because of what others think of it. He bought it for what he thinks of it. Neither does he look down on the man who drives the basic 1LS. Instead, he is happy to share the road with a fellow Camaro enthusiast.

Water is muddy.........

Would you ever take your $14K turkish stocked stalker to Alaska and use it to brace yourself as you climb a snow covered hill in the glorious Alaska sleet? All it takes is one week and your blue is covered in this wonderful red-orange "character" patina......

Or would you prefer your similar priced Legend, which is built for that....................

quote:

Originally posted by FMC:
Water is muddy.........

Would you ever take your $14K turkish stocked stalker to Alaska and use it to brace yourself as you climb a snow covered hill in the glorious Alaska sleet? All it takes is one week and your blue is covered in this wonderful red-orange "character" patina......

Or would you prefer your similar priced Legend, which is built for that....................

Oh, ye of little faith.

I took my Holland & Holland 375H&H bolt rifle to Alaska on a drop camp hunt. We spent eight days in rain, fog, ice, and snow. Each moring and each evening I would wipe the rifle down with a semi-dry cloth. Then I would wipe all the metal with a Remwipe. But the rifle was wet or moist the whole trip. Even the inside of our tent and everything in it was wet.

I was amazed that the rifle didn't rust, though there was some rust on the aftermarket scope bases. I had someone apply more oil to the French walnut stock and asked them to remove the scope bases and to clean up any rust there. It was later reported to me that no rust had been found around or under the bases. I am sure that after enough exposure any rifle would rust. But for that eight days the H&H's British black had done its job.

Other posters on AR have taken better guns to tougher places and exposed them to harder use.

I do not hesitate to use my rifles and guns. It is what they are built for.