Shawn2571---Welcome to the forum. Lots of good folk and good information here. I hope you stick around and add to the fun. HOWEVER, of your first four posts you resurrected threads that were 9, 7 and 3 years old. Nothing wrong with this but feel free to start new threads. Good luck.
Ruger American, TC Arms Venture,Scary
- Thread starter Stillhunter
- Start date
That is because customers are demanding low prices instead of quality build. 70 years ago it was pretty much the same, and no one wanted a tube receiver slapped into a cheap stock. Until Remington made the 721. Then all of a sudden, it was cool. And they just kept cheapening the design until it is now a barrel pressed into a pipe-shaped receiver slapped into a piece of molded plastic. Myself, personally, I do not want the cheapest gun anyone can make. I kinda like my face and fingers to remain recognizable (others may disagree).
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Arrgh. Just arrgh. 
Define quality build. Is quality based on function? MOA seems to be a pretty good functional measurement for the vast majority of shooters. Are we interchanging aesthetics with quality? Are we speaking to longevity and if we are what exactly leads one to believe these budget point rifles won't have longevity?
Accuracy counts, sure. But measuring accuracy for 3 shots doesn't tell you how it shoots after 20 rounds down the tube. I build rifles for a living, and a rifle that won't put 20 rounds into a 1" square has a problem and will get fixed before the customer gets it. I see a lot of Savage and Remington rifles that shoot really, really good for the first 10 shots, then start to open up as the barrel copper fouls because it is not perfectly smooth on the inside. So, a quality barrel for one definition of quality. And a stock that isn't a piece of molded plastic with no rigidity. I have nothing against synthetic stocks, but most are just a molded plastic shell that doesn't support the action properly. And yes, aesthetics count. I read a lot of people going on and on about what a great rifle they got because it is cheap. But no matter how you cut it, it looks like cheap plastic and aluminum is what people are accepting these days. I prefer wood, but if you gotta have synthetic, there are many, many synthetic stocks out there that will actually make your rifle perform better. I like Ruger American rifles for what they are, an accurate, cheap rifle.
Absolutely! And those utility rifles serve a purpose, and are a lot of fun! But you will never see a bunch of guys standing around ooohing and aaahing over grey injection molded plastic and matte black finishes.
Everything on earth has "quality". Many are good qualities, some others not. But don't confuse quality and suitability. My old Chevy pick-up lasted many miles, and we went a lot of places. But it was not suitable for the Indy 500. Would I rather use my Winchester Highwall or a Ruger 10/22 on a jack rabbit hunt ? While the Winchester would work just fine, the Ruger is more suitable.
I agree, Mike. I will shut up now.
Last edited: