Just got my copy of Safari magazine and was stunned by the David Miller ultimate synthetic rifle the GraGun. I believe it is built with a model 70 action and a Bansner stock and comes with a Leupold 6.5x20 scope. An article about a hunt at The Sanctuary with the gun says its cost is thirty two thousand!!! I always felt Jarrett rifle prices were nuts but this is beyond comprehension! The article about the gun is so bizarre it made me laugh out loud.

Mr. Miller is responding to the market. He wouldn't make them if he couldn't sell them.
I see nothing wrong with that.

22WRF: Are you an Obama czar by any chance? I have an 08 Toyota 4 Runner I'll let go for $500K.
I have Ed Brown rifles that make a ragged hole that cost 1/10 of this gun. How can it be justified? The article tries to make sense of the price but it really stretches the imagination.
I am a big fan of Miller's rifles and would love to have one but even if I could afford it could not justify this.

I think that you miss 22WRF's point here, no offence intended; the issue is that IF Miller can sell rifles he builds to some people at this price, that is good, old American capitalism at work.

I would not buy one and, obviously, you would not, but, why should anyone who chooses to spend HIS money on one be constrained from doing so? If, he wants one and can pay the price, let him give Miller the 32K, get the rifle and, hopefully, be happy!

It's kinda ironic, as I just read a long and acrimonious thread on the Campfire concerning the 14K "Legend" rifles built by D'Arcy Echols and, knowing what I know now at 64 and owning many fine rifles, (far too many!, if I were 15-20 years younger, I would sell off what I have, buy a pair of Echol's in .338WM and put the remainder of the coin realized into further hunting trips or international travel.

It's all relative to what YOU enjoy, what YOU can afford and what the market will bear, IMO.

OK guys I see your point. I'm 68 and was VP of sales and owned my on sales company for 35 years so I understand supply and demand. I wish you would read the article and I think you would reach the same conclusions I have. Twenty five hundred dollars of raw materials and thirty thousand dollars of labor for a synthetic stocked model 70. God bless David Miller if he can pull it off!

It's a combination of 'branding' along with The Doctrine of Conspicuous Consumption.

Many wealthy people are so insecure about their position in society that they feel compelled to spend lavishly and conspicuously, so that the rest of us will realize just how 'special' they really are. We've all seen the type, the ones with the huge gold Rolexes and the latest Jaguars or BMWs, etc., that always make a big production about how exclusive and/or expensive their possessions are. When one gets to this level of wealth and insecurity, it becomes increasingly difficult to impress the troops in the never-ending struggle for one-upmanship. These folks are so obsessed that they equate cost with desirability, and so of course they wouldn't even consider seeking a fairly-priced item.

A fairly-priced item wouldn't give them the type of braggin' rights that they crave.

David Miller has taken advantage of this mindset by a campaign of 'branding' with organizations like SCI and similar. By pricing his products out of the reach of the average person at the same time as he displays them up-close-&-personal to the wealthy, he has ensured that the insecure rich folks will feel adequately exclusive and 'special' when they pay the ridiculous price.

He's not the only one taking advantage of these 'special' people, he's just one of the smartest.
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:
It's a combination of 'branding' along with The Doctrine of Conspicuous Consumption.

Many wealthy people are so insecure about their position in society that they feel compelled to spend lavishly and conspicuously, so that the rest of us will realize just how 'special' they really are. We've all seen the type, the ones with the huge gold Rolexes and the latest Jaguars or BMWs, etc., that always make a big production about how exclusive and/or expensive their possessions are. When one gets to this level of wealth and insecurity, it becomes increasingly difficult to impress the troops in the never-ending struggle for one-upmanship. These folks are so obsessed that they equate cost with desirability, and so of course they wouldn't even consider seeking a fairly-priced item.

A fairly-priced item wouldn't give them the type of braggin' rights that they crave.

David Miller has taken advantage of this mindset by a campaign of 'branding' with organizations like SCI and similar. By pricing his products out of the reach of the average person at the same time as he displays them up-close-&-personal to the wealthy, he has ensured that the insecure rich folks will feel adequately exclusive and 'special' when they pay the ridiculous price.

He's not the only one taking advantage of these 'special' people, he's just one of the smartest.
Regards, Joe

I disagree. I know some very wealthy people, and I find that most are very secure. Yes, they have gold Rolex watches, and drive nice cars, and have nice homes, and go on nice trips, but they don't do it for one upsmanship.
Rather, they do it for the plain and simple reason that they can do it. Most have worked hard for their money, realize that life is very short, and want to enjoy the fruit of their labors.

In dealing with people as I do, I find that the most insecure people are those who are insanely jealous of what others have, but don't want to put in the work or time necessary to obtain the success they so badly desire. Everything is an excuse, whereas most wealthy people who have obtained their wealth by their own accord do not make excuses. Rather, they somehow sum up a level of intenstional fortitude that drives them forward until they achieve their goals.
Granted, they may do so at a high social cost, but how one decides to live their personal life is very subjective.

I seriously doubt that anyone who purchases a David Miller Rifle feels as though they are being taken advantage of.

Maybe he's after a diffrent client, and wants a show room like this...Where a sheikh comes and visits and everyone puts on white gloves to handle tuperware rifles!
http://www.vovapen.com/

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
I seriously doubt that anyone who purchases a David Miller Rifle feels as though they are being taken advantage of.

That's very true. They are normally grateful for the opportunity to display their wealth to their peers.

When I was younger I used to feel compelled to purchase things like the obligatory Rolex Oyster, 'til I found that my rather common old Omega Seamaster was far more reliable for far less money (lot less clunky too). My Ford F-250 4 x 4 will blow the doors off the far more expensive Range Rovers on any sort of terrain or highway, and NOT get stuck in the mud while doing it, and NOT be a ferocious maintenance dog either. I used to own Jaguars until the light dawned while the pocketbook drained.

I have no objection to anyone spending their money in any way they desire. I DO object to them assuming that more expensive possessions make them better people, and that 'more expensive' automatically equates to a better product.

And, IMO, anyone who pays that kind of money for a Winchester 70 in a plastic stock is probably not someone I'd care to have as a wilderness hunting companion. Far more money than sense.

Sorry if this twists your knickers, counselor, I'll bet you're a Bummer---er, a Beemer guy, aren't you? Or at least a Mercedes? My Mercedes autos have all been far superior to any other UK or Euro car I've ever owned, BTW, and if the local Mercedes dealer was honest I'd still be driving one.
Regards, Joe

It has never occured to me to measure the thickness of another person's wallet in order to ascertain whether I would want to hunt with them.

The only "foreign" car I have ever owned was a Volvo 142 I bought used for $2100.00 back in 1976.

I'd just like to see a picture of this rifle.

Chuck

Imagine your Model 70 with a fluted barrel, a muzzle break, a Blackburn style trigger guard, a thick red recoil pad, and miller scope mounts.

I've already imagined that it's a braked Marksmen in a Bansner stock.

What colour is the stock?

Gray. It has a steel grip cap.

Is the stock checkered or just a standard issue Bansner?

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
I seriously doubt that anyone who purchases a David Miller Rifle feels as though they are being taken advantage of.

That's very true. They are normally grateful for the opportunity to display their wealth to their peers.

When I was younger I used to feel compelled to purchase things like the obligatory Rolex Oyster, 'til I found that my rather common old Omega Seamaster was far more reliable for far less money (lot less clunky too). My Ford F-250 4 x 4 will blow the doors off the far more expensive Range Rovers on any sort of terrain or highway, and NOT get stuck in the mud while doing it, and NOT be a ferocious maintenance dog either. I used to own Jaguars until the light dawned while the pocketbook drained.

I have no objection to anyone spending their money in any way they desire. I DO object to them assuming that more expensive possessions make them better people, and that 'more expensive' automatically equates to a better product.

And, IMO, anyone who pays that kind of money for a Winchester 70 in a plastic stock is probably not someone I'd care to have as a wilderness hunting companion. Far more money than sense.

Sorry if this twists your knickers, counselor, I'll bet you're a Bummer---er, a Beemer guy, aren't you? Or at least a Mercedes? My Mercedes autos have all been far superior to any other UK or Euro car I've ever owned, BTW, and if the local Mercedes dealer was honest I'd still be driving one.
Regards, Joe

So, for many years, you did exactly what you now castigate and mock others for doing, bought a Rolex that you did not really need and then another costly wristwatch, the OSM, to also wear? You drove a Benz for years, admit that they are better than all other cars and would still drive one by preference.....Joe, you sound just like those whom you profess to disdain here..........

BTW, the shot at 22WRF, ...BUMMER... was pretty low, uncalled for and childish.

Dewey,

it's called growing up. A guy like you, who dreams of someday moving up to a double wide with tipouts probably has trouble visualizing this sort of thing.

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Dewey,

it's called growing up. A guy like you, who dreams of someday moving up to a double wide with tipouts probably has trouble visualizing this sort of thing.

Rich

Thats lower than the shot Joe took at me, uncalled for, and childish.

Nevertheless, back to the gravaman of this thread, which is the David Miller Rifle.

To answer Chuck's last question, it appears from the photos that the stock is not checkered. It does have two cross bolts however.

The article talks about audioflage being the result of the use of a muzzle break. They claim that when you use a muzzle break the sound doesn't confuse the animal you are shooting at as much and therefore you may have a better chance of getting off a second shot.

Gee, I knew that my Winchester Classic Model 70 .270 with the Boss was going to be back in vogue someday!

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Dewey,

it's called growing up. A guy like you, who dreams of someday moving up to a double wide with tipouts probably has trouble visualizing this sort of thing.

Rich

My point here was not to offend Joe, merely to point out that he and most of us can and do exactly what he is a bit, IMO, too critical about here. I should have thought that you would have seen this, but, I understand that you may be having a bad day and are just a little less perceptive than you usually are.

That said, I will refrain from posting the obvious rejoinder as I see no value here in engaging in a slagging match. BTW, I do own a Rolex, bought an Explorer II for use in 1974 as a wildfire supervisor here in BC, age 28; the bloody thing cost a month's pay and I never wear it now as I am retired, it sits behind a bunch of actions, old optics and knives in my largest gunsafe and has for over 10 years....it is stainless, not gold!

Cheer up, Rich, life could be a lot worse.

These are some Ghettofabulous rifles; or Gangstalicious if you prefer.

quote:

Originally posted by srtrax:
Maybe he's after a diffrent client, and wants a show room like this...Where a sheikh comes and visits and everyone puts on white gloves to handle tuperware rifles!
http://www.vovapen.com/

Saw the article as well.

Figured the cost HAD to be a typo- an extra 0 or something.

I could see myself paying that kind of change for a really nice double...not a synthetic soulless rifle.

It is probably a pretty good gun, but since what I have already shoots way better than I'm capable of, I guess I won't buy it.

Besides, who would want to say they owned a "GraGun"???

quote:

Sorry if this twists your knickers, counselor, I'll bet you're a Bummer---er, a Beemer guy, aren't you? Or at least a Mercedes? My Mercedes autos have all been far superior to any other UK or Euro car I've ever owned, BTW, and if the local Mercedes dealer was honest I'd still be driving one.
Regards, Joe

Im guessing you are not what you claim if the Benz is the best euro auto you have driven compared to a Bristol a benz is a civic

quote:

Originally posted by Express_Rifles:

quote:

Sorry if this twists your knickers, counselor, I'll bet you're a Bummer---er, a Beemer guy, aren't you? Or at least a Mercedes? My Mercedes autos have all been far superior to any other UK or Euro car I've ever owned, BTW, and if the local Mercedes dealer was honest I'd still be driving one.
Regards, Joe

Im guessing you are not what you claim if the Benz is the best euro auto you have driven compared to a Bristol a benz is a civic

Never claimed to be anything other than a Southern boy with some experience and an opinion.

You might wanta go back and re-read my post that you quote above, to see the difference between 'owned' (my word) and 'driven' (your word). Don't you just HATE it when you do that (grin).

Never heard of a Bristol, is it made in Alaska (grin)? I have a friend in the UK with a Daimler, is it similar?

I won the OSM in a poker game, its value at that time was $125. I haven't worn a watch or in fact any other personal jewelry since 1978. But My Bride has a whoppin' big vulgar diamond solitaire wedding/engagement ring, does that count?

The Rolex was, indeed, a purchase prompted by an immature mind. Visions of James Bond and all that, plus the usual 20-yr-old's fixation on displaying everything 'The Rules' said. 'The Rules' at that time and place said that all young studs had to wear a pair of aviator sunglasses, a Rolex Oyster with GMT, a star sapphire ring and an orange-handled switchblade (USAF issue, hard to get at that time). I was no different, but as ISS says, since then I grew up at least a little.

My old company, Bechtel, gives all its 30-year men a Rolex President, they're kinda 'the expected thing' in certain circles and so are not often worn by the top dogs for fear of seeming like a nouveau riche commoner (grin). Imagine!
Regards, Joe

Joe, you are a "good ole boy" and can always be counted on to post a provocative and well-written commentary on anything....it's a wet, gloomy morning here and this last post has given me a hearty chuckle!

On the rifle, I too think anybody paying more for something than it truly costs to have it done is crazy. I can't imagine its better than the legend which is half the cost. And for 30k you could I'm sure get Duane Wiebe to build you one in a wood stock.

You can say what you will about rich people buying things because they want to enjoy their money, I'm not buying it. They love buying things because other people see them with them. You know every guy that dumps money on one of these will be hoping every camp he's in that somebody gives him a reason to talk about it. I'd love to be sitting at the fire when him and the guy with the 4000 custom start talking and the list of refinements and features isn't much different.

Nothing wrong with that, it's their money. I don't think you understood the guy saying he didn't want to be in camp with that guy right. It isn't because the guys wallet is thicker, it's because the guys judgment is questionable. If a guy is worth millions and and pays double for things just because he wants whatever name is attached I can't fault somebody for not wanting to be his buddy based on his judgement.

I have no problem with somebody wearing a rolex, I love watches and will own a nice one some day. For me it is all about how the person handles themselves and the way they do it. Are they wearing the watch or is the watch wearing them so to speak (goes for anything, car, house, clothes). Do they have it just to show it off and let people know what they have?

I know an attorney that loves talking about the 1500 dollar a night ski resort place he likes to go to and driving his convertible jaguar, while I know that many times he's eating at taco bell because those checks aren't rolling fast enough. it's a show.

By the same token, I have a buddy (late 50's), I love his casual attitude. He has a gold rolex (he comes from a family with money, has never really had to work for it). I was helping him move and he needed some cleaning supplies. He's wearing ratty jeans, $3 dollar flip flops, an ugly flannel, and this gold rolex. And we go to the dollar store. then when he goes to pay he pulls out this huge wad of money. He doesn't flaunt it, he pulls it out low behind the counter and finds the bills.

I have another buddy that isn't rich, but he does good, maybe 150k a year. He bought a beautiful corvette a few years ago. I see some guys drive them slow (I pass them all the time on the freeway) and have custom plates, just like to show them off. This guy just loves corvettes and loves going fast. He lets his schnauzers ride in it, all over the leather, and just goes fast. (he does however park it further away from other cars if he can )

I'm just trying to say I like the guys that have money but aren't pretentious asses. And in the end you can't buy cool.

I also wonder if some of the disagreement about these things comes from whether you are predominantly a hunter or a rifle lover. I enjoy hunting, but am more interested in the guns, I love fine rifles and would like them regardless of if I got to hunt or not.

I'm sure there are guys that are the opposite, the gun is simply a tool to them. and to guys like that I think some of these are snap-on while some are craftsman, mac, proto. To that end, I know a mechanic (he's a real asshole) that ONLY uses snapon, must have over 50g in tools. and he makes comments about other guys stuff. My uncle bought a 1200 dollar quincy 5hp compressor, 80gal tank. The guy talks shit on it because it isn't the pressurized lube system his is. It ain't like it's a husky, but he's a major tool snob.

priorities

Red

Chuck,

Here's a couple photos of the Gra Gun that you requested.

TT

quote:

Originally posted by Dago Red:
I don't think you understood the guy saying he didn't want to be in camp with that guy right. It isn't because the guys wallet is thicker, it's because the guys judgment is questionable. If a guy is worth millions and and pays double for things just because he wants whatever name is attached I can't fault somebody for not wanting to be his buddy based on his judgement.
For me it is all about how the person handles themselves and the way they do it. Are they wearing the watch or is the watch wearing them so to speak (goes for anything, car, house, clothes). Do they have it just to show it off and let people know what they have?
I'm just trying to say I like the guys that have money but aren't pretentious asses. And in the end you can't buy cool.
Red

You've got it right, Red, that's what I was trying to say but you said it a lot better.
Regards, Joe

Cool looking mount...the mount alone must be worth about $25k

Inletted studs, grip cap a few cool touches on there for sure....I even kinda dig the orange/green get-up

Red

How about YOU. Would you feel the same about it if all of a sudden YOU came into a bunch of money. Would you be flashy and not trustworthy just because you had money, or because you used it to buy a certain model watch or a certain model car or a house at a certain address, or looked a certain way?

quote:

Originally posted by Tsquare2:
Chuck,

Here's a couple photos of the Gra Gun that you requested.

TT

Thanks Tom! I was actually in the process of emailing you to ask about it.

Of course, the rifle is superbly done.

Of course the rifle is superbly done, however if it just had a red forend tip it would scream pimp me baby!

I count among my friends a wide range of folks, from multi-millionares to people on Welfare. The possession of money does not automatically confer 'better person' status, AAMOF it often allows one's true nature to assert itself in a negative way.

Most of the really likable wealthy folks of my acquaintance are quite modest compared to some others. For instance their roll has the ones on the outside whereas a four-flusher always has his ones hidden on the inside with his big bills on the outside for show. A gracious and cultured person would never dream of posssibly embarrassing a companion by comparing price tags, for instance. Performance yes, price no.

I guess it largely depends upon just what assets a person considers to be his main braggin' points. If someone has acheived few or no personal accomplishments then I guess his wealth is a readily-available bolster for his faltering ego. But it doesn't make him a better person, it only makes him a richer one.

And if he pays $32K for a (late-model mediocre) M70 in a plasic stock, IMO it makes him a foolish one. If not a just-plain-stupid one.
Regards, Joe

quote:

And if he pays $32K for a (late-model mediocre) M70 in a plasic stock, IMO it makes him a foolish one. If not a just-plain-stupid one.
Regards, Joe

Why is metal work always considered free?

I don't know, maybe the people I know who are wealthy are just different. As I said, they have certain models of watches, certain models of cars, live in certain neighborhoods, etc.
But they don't talk about those things, at least to me. They don't brag about them. They don't say I should get them. They just have them.

I just don't see where a person should be labeled as foolish or stupid just because they purchase a David Miller Rifle for $32,000, or pay $12,000 (or more) for a Duane Wiebe Rifle, or $10,000 (or more) for a James Anderson Rifle, or $80,000 (ore more) for a Fabbri or Holland and Holland shotgun.

I am positive that there are quite a few folks that are members of this board who own more than $100,000 in guns. Maybe some that own more than $200,000 in guns. Are they foolish or stupid. No, they are smart for having the intelligence to figure out what they needed to do in life to be able to afford what they wanted.

quote:

I don't know, maybe the people I know who are wealthy are just different.

Of the wealthy folks I know.....you'd never know it by looking in their garage or in their gun rack or on their fingers or by their homes....and you'd certainly never guess it by what they say or by their drawing attention to themselves....

Mostly we can figure it out when we know they are the third generation to farm the same land and if you're going by their place at 55 MPH, it takes you seven minutes to pass their home place.

This thread is entertaining I will tell you that! Just my opinion but the rifle shown for the monies it cost is not worth the cost to me. I have a safe full of SS rifles built by Speedy some with BR actions such as BAT and Kelby or others such as Stiller and even a Weatherby and Remmy or 2. There is nothing that can be done to the Model 70 action, added in terms of components or labor or processes to even get into the realm of the money we a speaking of here.

I do not begrudge anyone who buys one however, knowing what I know about building rifles this one I have a hard time working backwards into the number.

For the comments about watches and cars---jezzzz give it up for crying out loud. Love Rolex, Panerai, Piaget, Cartier, Vacheron, Baume Mercer and my MB AMG but drive my truck most of the time. Many people work their ass off for what they have and enjoy nice toys… It also helps when your wife works for the company that owns most of the watch brands mentioned and you would not believe me if I told you what I paid for some of them in E sales !!! NEVER judge a person by the watch he or she wears because you just never know………

22WRF,

I'd love to find out!!! in seriousness, I'd hope not to be pretentious. Would I spend the money on all kinds of things, sure as hell I would, but would I be a jackass (any more so than now, that's important to say I think ) I sure hope not.

I'd buy all kinds of stuff I like, hotrods, fine cigars, guns, hunting, straight razors, a fine library, leather goods. but I would still be trying to find deals.

of course I don't know what being VERY rich (a couple million does not make a person very rich IMO) for a long period of time does to a person. And in some things there is the investment factor. Could you get a rifle just as good as an H&H for a fraction of the cost, of course, but will it have the resale value?

hard to say without having it, but I'd hope to be the same guy, but unemployed and with lots of toys.

Red

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Nelson:

quote:

And if he pays $32K for a (late-model mediocre) M70 in a plasic stock, IMO it makes him a foolish one. If not a just-plain-stupid one.
Regards, Joe

Why is metal work always considered free?

Who said that metalwork was free? I'd say the metalwork on this rifle is priced around $30K. Would like to see the actual breakdown... After all it's not like he machined the receiver himself, Winchester helped a little. $30K buys a lot of trueing and polishing.

I'm not saying that you hafta be stupid to pay $32K for a rifle. I'm saying that IMO anyone who pays $32K for THAT rifle is stupid, by my definition.

I've owned Rigbys, H&Hs, G&Hs, and other 'best' UK guns as well as a few drillings and even one vierling and one Crown Grade Elsie, so I'm very familiar with upper-end guns and see no problem with owning as many as I can. Wish I could afford more.

But if I had $32K to spend on a rifle, you can bet that it would have a killer-wood stock and some spectacular engraving in addition to using a much better action (better IMO anyway).

You can buy a similar plastic-stocked rifle at Wally World for about 1/50 of the price. You can buy an equal-or-better-performance plastic-stocked rifle from several bean-field rifle makers for about 1/10 the cost, or maybe 1/5 the cost if you use a top-name smith.

You tellin' me that that Miller scope mount is worth $20K?

It's a plastic stock, worth $1K at the most or maybe $2K if you're clueless. It's a Winchester action, worth maybe $1K with its bottom metal. It's a match-grade barrel, worth another $1K or again maybe $2K if you're clueless. It's a scope mount, worth maybe $500. It's a muzzle brake, worth maybe $500. It's lots of hand work and a little furniture, worth maybe another $4-5K or so if you use a top-name smith. That's ~$10-11-12K, so apparently the extra $20K is for the Miller name (!).

I believe that either David Miller is such a good salesman that he could sell iceboxes to Eskimos or else his customers have a lot more money than sense.
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
I just don't see where a person should be labeled as foolish or stupid just because they purchase a David Miller Rifle for $32,000, or pay $12,000 (or more) for a Duane Wiebe Rifle, or $10,000 (or more) for a James Anderson Rifle, or $80,000 (ore more) for a Fabbri or Holland and Holland shotgun.

Frankly, it IS the people who CAN afford it who are the only ones truly qualified to determine any such foolishness.

All others it's just pure petty jealousy. Plain and simple.

I can't afford one. Do I think they're worth it? Every penny. Mr. Miller (& Crum) is a well known long range hunter, you bet your ass that rifle will shoot.