Super cheap but I still couldn't buy one.

[taylorce1]

Sportsmans Warehouse was blowing out the Remington 783 today in .243, .270, .30-06, and 7mm RM for $199 in Colorado Springs. If they have any left the sale lasts the weekend for any interested, they were selling a lot of them today. As cheap as they were I still couldn't bring myself to buy one, to me they just handle and shoulder like a steaming heap of dog do do. That said it might be a good deal for a guy looking for a starter rifle to hunt with. I did however walk out with 2 lbs each of TAC and Mag Pro, and I got Wifey the Ruger LCR .357 mag she has been wanting for an anniversary present.

[FrankenMauser]

I'm with you.

Can't do it.

Doesn't work for me.

If I wanted a Remington, I'd rather buy a 700 that's been run over by a truck and left in a duck boat for 3 years, than deal with the 783.
...And I don't even like the 700.

[Pathfinder45]

To me, the most interesting Remington bolt rifle is the 1903A3. The current trend towards cheapo rifles seems odd.... I like a good deal as much as the next guy but I appreciate higher quality too. I prefer older rifles with real walnut stocks. I can't stand a plastic stocked rifle; I won't tolerate it.

[Art Eatman]

I imagine these el-cheapos are oriented toward today's poor-boy market. Newbies want to hunt, even if they can't afford what a lot of us think of as "real" rifles.

Wouldn't hurt to have one as a "loaner" rifle for Sumdood who messes up his toy while at hunt camp. Stick a good-used 4X on it.

[Brian Pfleuger]

If they're accurate, a $199 rifle is a steal. $92 for a Boyd's stock and it should "handle and shoulder" just fine and you've got a $290 rifle with a really nice stock.

[Ruger480]

If they're accurate, a $199 rifle is a steal. $92 for a Boyd's stock and it should "handle and shoulder" just fine and you've got a $290 rifle with a really nice stock.

This is what I was thinking too.

[FrankenMauser]

If I'm going to be buying a rifle specifically to be a loaner, it'll be something I trust a bit more. ...Most likely a Marlin X7. More money. But, much better design.

[taylorce1]

Brian, I doubt a Boyd's stock would correct the handling problems. These rifles are seriously heavy in the butt. The action is the problem causing the rifle to not be muzzle heavy. I can't imagine a stock that most of the weight is in the butt will help it handle any better.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Yeah? Could be. I've never handled one. They're ugly as hell. Reminds me of the Savage B-Mag.

Only pretty rifles are interesting.

[Pathfinder45]

To me, that would perhaps be a Remington 721, 722, older 700, post '64 Winchester 70 and the like. Even a Remington 788 or dog-leg 600 would be preferable to the plastic stuff being offered today. But if the kids of today would rather trade off Grandpa's heirloom in favor of tacticool plastic, so much the better for those of us that appreciate finding yesteryear's classics at an affordable price on the used gun racks.....as long as Grandpa doesn't live to see it.

[Unlicensed Dremel]

You made the right choice.

Quality > Quantity

[hooligan1]

Awe hell, now I got to get one, do a little hooligan magic and show you fellas why you can't look a gefthorse up his hind end.,,,,,damn and Im plenty busy right now.,..

[Cheapshooter]

For two hunnerd bucks I would adapt!

[chiefr]

Apologies in advance but I will be the first to mention a lack of quality I have seen coming out of Remington as of late to include Rem owned Marlin.

[taylorce1]

Hooligan1, I'm sure they are plenty accurate. However, you and I both know I'm not in any need of a cheap rifle right now. Besides I could walk over to Walmart and pick up a M700 ADL for $297 right now in .243, .270, .30-06, or 7mm RM. No brainer right there for me, just I didn't need one of those right now either. I need to finish my current projects before I go investing in the next.

[hooligan1]

Me too man, I got some irons in the fire right now, sure is fun at the range though...
Im almost ready to uncover my latest project, that I've been developing loads for......stayed tuned.

[bamaranger]

Yeah, that was an apt comment about heirlooms.

Guy in town this week was hauling a Savage 1899 in .30-30 around, trying to raise cash for a jon boat/outboard. I expect it was his grand dad's, maybe great g-dad......or stolen. Mfg 1914.

Saw the same thing this summer in a trip up to PA. Lots of the guns from my youth, racked up in the used guns. Problem was....priced out of sight.

[jeager106]

If I were in want of a rifle at the moment I think I'd buy the Rem. at $199.00, add the wood stock and give it a try.
I have a couple 700's and like them a lot. They fit me out of the box, are plenty accurate, look good with walnut.
I even have a hard to find 788 in 30-30.
I don't know who would want one but they are rare, second only to the 788 in .44 magnum.
I loaded mine one year with spitzer 150 grainers, shot a small deer at 100 yards & D.R.T.
It's accurate, lousy unsafe safety though.

[Colt46]

As a spare it would make some sense. Price sure is attractive.

[Huffmanite]

I've handled the Rem 783 a number of times in a LGS. Have no problem buying an inexpensive entry level rifle. But, have not given much thought to buying a 783. However, for the $199 price, I'd be hard pressed to walk away from it.

[SPEMack618]

Only pretty rifles are interesting

Now Brian, far be it from to publicly correct a staff member, but you know as well as I do, that the quote is actually thus:

"Only accurate, pretty, expensive, rifles used by old white guys at Camp Perry in the 1930s are interesting."

That being said, while for some vague reason that I can't quite pin point, I find the trend toward budget beginning rifles somewhat troubling, I think rifles like the 783, Ruger American, and Mossberg 4x4, are great for the continuation of America as a nation of riflemen hunters.

Would I buy one for me, nope, well, except the 4X4, but that was more to help a friend out.

However, would I buy a .243 Ruger American for the Lady Friend so she can have her own deer rifle? You betcha I would. And did.

She's not going to be winning hi-power matches with it, but she knows where it hits, zeros it to her Power-Point loads, and hunts with it, so there you go, the rifle is serving it's purpose and didn't kill my checking account to buy.

[Art Eatman]

If they are reasonably accurate, what's not to like for those whose billfolds are sorta slim? In today's economy, seems like they're a heckuva good idea for those who can't afford $500 and up. More people are in the "one box of ammo at most" group than there are those of us who do bunches and bunches of shots per week/month/year.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

"Only accurate, pretty, expensive, rifles used by old white guys at Camp Perry in the 1930s are interesting."

If that's the case, there aren't very many interesting rifles left. Art's the only one old enough to have been there.

Personally, I think these uber-cheap rifles have an important place, as you aptly demonstrate. It's a good budget, especially as a first, rifle. My brother bought one of the Savage package deals for the same reason. He's not a "shooter" anyway and only uses it a couple times a year. So long as it kills deer, and it would (even if he can't) it's all he needs. If such deals weren't available, he'd be gunless.

Me, I've had plenty of use for cheap rifles over the years but I still lean towards cheap AND at least a little pretty. I just don't like those ugly guns.

[DT Guy]

In a world inured to the construction and aesthetics of Glocks, 'functional' can trump other considerations for many.

And FWIW, I bought a '67 (I think?) Winchester Model 70 in 30-06 for a deer hunt ten years ago, fired it twenty times at the range, once at the deer (a nice 9 pointer) and never since. Something like the cheapo Remington would likely have done perfectly well for that....


Larry

[hooligan1]

Specmak, who you ccalling old? The thing is are we passin a good opportunity to buy a simply accurate rifle? The 700 is probably a better option, but if you hunt yearly with "that brother in law",then it could be trained to kill...Im sure at one time that was the consensus of opinion with the 700.,,,maybe.