Quality of New Mass Produced Rifles

[Coyote Hunter]

...
While I have no Metallurgical degree, I have enough experience in Specialty Steel Processing to know what makes a good product.  Anybody can come to a conclusion about performance based on holes in a target but that in no way tells the story of materials used in a process.
...

Holes in the target tell me a LOT about a firearm.  The best steel and materials in the world are useless if you can't hit the target.

Dad gave me a Savage 110E in .22-250.  "Ugly" was the word my daughter used to describe it.  Birch stock, plastic trigger guard, button rifled.  Shot like a dream - 5 shots at 100 could be covered by a dime.  Had a lot of fun shooting agains people with much more expensive rigs.

I will admit I finally shot the barrel out of the Savage.  Got a new Ruger M77 VT in .22-250 to replace it - stainless, synthetic stock, metal trigger guard, heavy barrel.  The Ruger has shot a 4-shot group of 0.5” at 200 yards, so no complaints there, and I expect it will last longer than I do.  We paid under $500 for the Ruger.  Then I sold the Savage and took the money and a little extra and picked up a 1989 Ruger M77 in .257 Roberts for $400, which included a Leupold scope.  Shoots under an inch at 200 yards.  It, too, will outlast me.  

Somehow I fail to see how modern rifles are inferior.  Its kind of like cars – the worst car you can buy today is far better than the best car you could buy in the 60’s.

[jhm]

I will say that for every barrel that has been ( SHOT OUT ) that there are hundreds maybe thousands that have been ruined by pore cleaning or just plain neglect, maybe there is a special metal report for the proper cleaning method every one should follow, then half inch or half info. could fall back on, with over 40+ years of dealing with firearms the thing that has changed the most are the mirror finishes on the metal and the hand cut checkering and like stated b-4 you can have both of them if you want to PAY for it, go and price a quality walnut hand finished stock and see why the manufacturers have gone to the synthtic ones, most people wouldnt own as many if they had to pay for all the work that used to go into them ,  I own several of the older rifles win pre 64 model 70 / rem 721 / and of course the savage 1920 but the ones that I use  the most are the newer manu. rifles. I dont loose any sleep wondering who used what kinda of steel if it blue for the most part I think it isnt STAINLESS if its shiny I only wonder if all the blueing has worn off or maybe it is stainless.    JIM

[Questor]

Back to the original post: Dollar for dollar, today's quality is far superior to the debris they built 40 years ago. I have seen and handled a lot of guns of that fortunately bygone era and am ever the more thankful for the better things we have today.

[bajabill]

I (we)have to define quality in my(our) own terms first.  I have to see an end result change or dissatisfaction, to justify my tag of bad quality.  endlessly chasing better, without a quantifiable result is foolish.  Where do you stop, how do you know you are on the right track.  I could care less if the steel is not twice as good as it needs to be if there is no benefit to the use of that material.  But, Im an engineer, I have to make trade offs - and there always is a trade off.  

One of my favorite signs on the wall -  Cost, Timely, Quality - choose 2 and pay with the other.  

But, no, I dont have any specifics regarding any companies specifications they design to.  Perhaps, my possesion or intent to use such would be unethical at the least.

[Aardvark]

I recently bought a new Remington 700 Limited Edition Classic rifle. On reading some specs about the rifle I noticed that they advertise their barrels as being made from carbon steel. This is a pretty general term and not so specific as to read, say, 4140 moly for example, which nails down a specific alloy. This tells me that perhaps Remington has to make choices in buying steel for their barrels.
 I have also read about people filing law suits against Remington for shooting themselves or bystanders and winning giant awards.
 I understand that this hurts a company financially and possibly to the point of asking employees to take unpaid furloughs as was the case a year ago.
 This makes it very hard on the employees of such a company to get by in the fashion that many of us are accustomed to, don't you agree?
 Then consider the fact that a company like Remington may be forced to cut a few corners to deliver to us, the consumer a satisfactory product.
 I, as an American, don't mind and in fact, am glad that I can be in a position to keep a truly age old American tradition alive by shelling out a few bucks to keep that tradition alive, and to keep those dedicated workers with food on their tables.
  In doing so, have we then really sufferd so much?
 I think not.
 I love my new gun and so will my grandson when I pass it down to him.