SwampCollie

One of the things I liked the most about Dakota, both times I purchased with them, was the level of involvement that I got to have in the building of my rifle. From engraving, to quarter ribs to sights to finish, I got to hand pick everything. I went to economy route, because this gun is a hunter first and foremost. I don't want to fret over my exhibition grade wood and gold inlays when my rifle gets kicked off the back of the hunting vehical in the middle of the Kalihari Desert. But I could of had any of those if I want to ante up the fee (would have more than doubled the cost to go with wood... no thanks).

Is the rifle any better than a custom shop Remington in 338 RUM... ehh not really I don't suspect. But I really enjoyed the entire experience. Took me almost a year to get each one made. And when they came in, they even told me what bullet to load and what formula to use. They have a real wizzard working there in the ammo shop.

meat_eater

If my life was on the line I would never buy cheep. Some of my friends ask why I use the guns I do as they cost more than there. I say I never want to miss that shot of a life time. Or leave my life to chance.

When quailty cost and you know your gear thats is priceless.

salukipv1

Someone earlier I think was spot on, saying if you're passionate about something.....spend it, well hunting I am, and some people would like to spend their money around, I tend to save and buy really nice things that I really want, but somethings you look at and think they'd cost 1500, and you find out they cost 4000, then youre like ok i guess i have to sepend that, then while youre at it its like on what about that one for 6000, im just sayin for instance, could be a sofa we're talking about here. also when i'm talking about a dakota, I'm talking about a dangerous game rifle/stopper, not the .270 on mule deer, so we're not just talking about missing the shot of a lifetime, well maybe we are! haha, but when somethigns coming at you to kill you, i want the gun to load, fire, and reload and fire again. I know the parts are typically all made of the same material, but i wanted to point out, machining isnt always done to the same precision.

SwampCollie

Thats why I pay a white boy with a funny not-quite-british accent about $4000 a week to stand behind me with something in the neighborhood of 12,000ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle in his hands.

kdvollmer

Guys, I was not saying that those expensive rifles (Accuracy International, Dakota Arms) are the only way to go by any means. I only wanted to use those as examples of in some cases, yes, the extra money does get you more. I fully understand that both of those are way more expensive than most guys are willing to spend, or are able to spend for that matter. I am not one of the guys willing to spend 6000 on a pure hunting rifle, but, if I could save it up, I would spend that much for a rifle that I can use as a Tactical Rifle for competition, and it will double nicely as a hunting rifle. Has the accuracy for sure. Now if I were buying a strictly hunting rifle, I can't see spending over a grand on it. for $1000 a rifle that shoots 3/4 MOA is 99% of the time more than adequate. Keep in mind, i listed the AI and Dakota because they are 2 that I am familiar with and what you will get for your money. ( I am not too familiar with many companies that will GUARUNTEE 1/2 MOA out to 1500 meters. Dakota did on that one rifle. That is part of what you are paying for.) Not saying it was always practical, or the best choice, but if you can afford it, and you want it, then hell yes, buy it. Sure, lots of less expensive guns will shoot small groups at 100, and even some down right cheap ones will too, but I promise you, as the distance increases, most of those less expensive guns will not perform as well. I might be comparing apples to oranges here in a sense as most of my rifles and rifles that I have owned are designed for tactical purpose, and are therefore GENERALLY ( not always ) inherently more accurate. I could only use the 100yd number for that AI rifles as that was the only available range for us to shoot on, the 200 yd deck was being used for the competition, and 100yds was good for taking it for a test drive.
And no, i didn't mean to say that the AI, or Dakota rifles will last longer than ALL of the Brownings, Sako, FHN and other big names, but I will say that I think that they will last longer than SOME, and for sure the really cheap models. I'll be honest, I would love to own any of the rifles made by Browning, and the others for a hunting rifle. But since I can't afford a room full of guns, I have to stick to something that does both, and it has to do the tactical side better than the competitors. Either way, It still goes back to what I said, Dakota firearms are nice, really nice, and well built. They are expensive for sure. If you want one, then get one. It will last and, like others, you can pass it down to your kids / grandkids.

AmateurHunter44857

Why spend $1000 on a benelli when my Mossy shoots just as well? Its as simple as that. Unlike some of you, i don't have money to blow. I saved and scraped to buy my Mossy Combo. I bought a nicer looking Mossy than the original mossy thus it cost a little more. That gun means everything to me. I bought it saving my money. I clean it and treat it like my baby. No one in my family has ever had the luxury to go blow thousands of dollars on something they wanted. We choose paying the bills over luxury items.

Colorado Luckydog

As far as rifles go, I've only owned Remington, Browning, Savage, Marlin, Winchester, and maybe a couple of others that I can't remember right now. They have all outshot better than me. I have never owned, or will I own the super high dollar guns. If any of the other guns let me down, I might think about it, but until then, no way!!! If you can afford them and want to spend your dough on them, more power to you!!!!

kdvollmer

I guess I need to apologize here sort of anyhow. Understand that I look at a rifle first as a tactical tool, for tactical purposes, which changes some of the parameters of what I expect from my toys. If it is accurate enough to do that work, then it will work for hunting too. That's just how I do it.


KDV, I'm not saying more money can't buy you a better, more accurate rifle. What I AM saying is that somewhere around $1,000 bucks I think one reaches the point of diminishing returns. In you're example, a person is paying $6-$8 thousand dollars for a .308 that will shoot a 1/4 inch group at 100 yds when most $1 thousand dollar rifles will shoot a 3/4" group at 100 yds with a good shot and good ammo. Not many people willing to pay an extra $5 thousand bucks just to cut half inch off their groups. That's what I call paying a LOT of money for damn little in return. I doubt there is an animal in this hemisphere that would appreciate the investment...and even fewer wives.


pavomesa,
In most cases you are right, the extra money just to shave 1/2 inch at one hundred isn't worth it, however, if you are ever going to shoot out over 5-600 yds, that is 1/2 inch for every 100 yds at a minimum, assuming that you do everything perfect as far as shooting fundamentals. That, at least for one of the uses for my rifles, can be the difference in winning or losing, or shooting an innocent person.....etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdvollmer

Somebody has said that more money does not get a better, or more accurate rifle, and in this case you are wrong. Check them out, I think that they start around 6,000-8000 for a .308 and go up from there. It is the only rifle that I have ever shot an honest 1/4 group at 100yds with. Factory demo rifle at a sniper competition, with a Nightforce scope. This is one that you really do get your moneys worth.


Do you think this is the only rifle that will do this? I know of plenty that will do this that cost much less money. I know of rimfires that will hold quarter inch groups at 100 yards. My stock $200 savage 17HMR with a mid priced 20 power scope could come very close to it. And that kind of accuracy out of a center fire has a lot less to do with how much money you spent on the gun. Don't think your going to drop 8 grand on a gun, slap an expensive scope on it and run to walmart and grab what ever rounds are on sale and shoot those kind of groups. I am quite sure there are plenty of custom guns out there that shoot just as well that have much less money invested in them.




quote:


If you want the dakota. BUY IT. KEEP IT. AND HAND IT DOWN TO YOUR KIDS OR GRANDKIDS. It will last. ( that is the other reason to buy nice firearms. THEY LAST LONGER. long enough to give your kids.


Are you saying that gun will last longer than a browning, remington, ruger, winchester, howa, sako, savage or similar? Or that any of these guns won't last long enough to pass down to your children? They are all made from the same materials for the most part. I don't see where the one for twice the money will last considerably longer than any of the others as long as they are well taken care of. I know of some of those brands that have been around for generations.

Paul

_____________________________




Paul,
Not trying to start a war here. I understand that your 17 will shoot small ragged hole at 100 yds, but will it shoot that 1/2 moa, or 3/4 moa out to say 800 yds. I used that example because that was the smallest group I had shot with a Large Bore, center fire rifle. I buy rifles for dual use since I cannot afford to have a safe full of both hunting rifles and tactical rifles that I would take to a Sniper shoot. I can afford though to spend more for one rifle that will work competitvly, as well as work as a hunting rifle.
I have to say, most of the companies that you listed, IMO Browning, remington, Ruger... are not cheap rifles. Those names to me, represent fairly high end, factory rifles. People buy those rifles as well BECAUSE you can hand them down. But lets face it, not all guns, and especially cheap ones are going to last as long as higher priced guns. Sure material might be generally the same, but some metal is not as hard as other, parts wear out faster, and that is why you spend more, or at least why I do, to avoid that. Just for general Info, I haven't yet spent more than 1500 on a rifle. I will most likely not either unless I hit the lottery. I too can get what I need for less than the 6000-8000 I Listed. Those, we just examples where you do get more for the $$$.

No need to worry about me thinking that I can drop the cash, buy a scope, and the cheap ammo to shoot those kinds of groups either. I am no beginner to the sport of shooting, or to long range shooting either. I am, to be honest a little insulted at that, but so be it.

bugsNbows

I'd much rather have a few high end products than many entry level or cheaper ones. That's true for weapons, optics or most anything else.

Paul L Mohr

KD, sorry if I insulted you that was not the intention. I was just pointing out that there are many people that think they can buy accuracy. I have seen it both with bows and guns. They drop a ton of money on a target model because they think it will make them shoot better, when in most cases it won't. Long range shooting has more to do with skill and homework than it does ultra expensive equipment in my opinion. I was reading up on F class long range shooting and most of the stuff I read said that a gun that could group MOA at 100 yards was sufficient to compete with.

I see it a lot in archery though. Someone goes out and plunks down over a grand on a bow, then almost that on sights rests a fancy release and other stuff. Then they are mad because it doesn't shoot any better. When the truth is they just don't shoot that well to begin with. You give a professional target shooter an old beat up out of date poorly tune bow and they will shoot it great, you give someone that sucks a really expensive target bow and unfortunately they will still suck.

Like I said in my original post though, I am basically talking about the average guy that will walk into a gun store, pick one and go home with it, not a custom made gun. I actually thought about getting a browning and had several people tell me not to, the savage was actually better for almost half the money. I still wouldn't mind having one though.

Out of curiosity what are average groups for long range target shooting, like 600 and 1000 yards? Can you really verify that a gun will hold half in groups at 5 or 6 hundred yards? I find that mind boggling if you can. There are so many things that can effect the shot at that distance.

Paul