For $230 I hate I missed it.
At the time that rifle was selling for $230, the price of gold was $35.00 an ounce. Now gold is going for $1,200 an ounce, if you could have bought $230 in gold bars in the 50's, the return on the investment would have been much higher than buying a $230 rifle.
Really, my posting of a Weatherby ad was more of a rant against the dishonest advertising practices that we all have to live with. And I am of the opinion that as consumers, we are deluged with dishonest advertising about guns, stopping power, cartridge choices. Gunwriters are shills for the industry and as such, they push products with dishonest and misleading claims. I consider it fundamental that you cannot compensate poor marksmanship skills with gimmicks, be they reloading gimmicks, or over powered cartridges. But, touting marksmanship skills does not sell hardware.
If shooters got out to the range more often and tried to hit that 600, 1000 yard target, first time, every time, they would come to the conclusion that it is a lot harder to do, and consistency is hard. But instead, they read in the literature that all they need to do is buy more junk.
I am primarily a paper puncher, but my friends who hunt tell me their stories, where they aim, and the results. I have a bud who is making "bang flop" shots out to 300 yards with 223 Remington's on the small deer in this area. I have another who hunts with a 308 Win. He claimed he is no longer trying for heart lung shots, not because these shots are not lethal, but because the deer will run off and die in the brush. He says he is having much better luck aiming between the shoulder point and the neck, placing his bullet in solid muscle mass. He says the lung shots, the bullets were not expanding, but that same bullet placed in an area with bone and muscle, it really knocks them down.
So for him, it comes down to shot placement and bullet construction.