How do you inspect/check a brand new rifle in the shop?

I can't really understand, a dealer that lets you test fire a new rifle??? then he takes it back as a used/second hand rifle??
Would you buy a "new" rifle that Tom, Dick and Harry had a go off already...and gave it back?

edi

I can't really understand how you extrapolate that scenario from try before you buy. I think the idea is that the dealer puts himself in the position of making sure you get a good gun. If the gun is not up to snuff/has a fault why would he put it back on the shelf and try to sell it to someone else rather than send it back to the maker to be sorted?

I thought both of their business approaches civilised and exemplary, very easy to understand. Which is why they stuck in my memory and I was able to suggest them. Generating word of mouth recommendation must indicate good business sense on their behalf. But maybe I am just naive.

I think in Paul Hill's case because of the marmite/novelty of the Blaser system he offers you to try the type of gun (i.e. one of his own in wood or plastic etc.) and he then offers a session at the range to help set up and zero your new gun when it arrives. I think his attitude is that it is a joint enterprise.

I should add that:-

I have now reread the OP and realise that I although I must have seen the word NEW (twice!) I still comprehended
"Straight barrel, Stock alignment, The crown, The trigger feel, Cycling ...... (with what? in the shop??)
What can I check to see if I 'As a good'un' before taking possession and it becomes mine?
in terms of damage/faults with a second hand rifle and while not invalidating it my post was in response to that.

The rifle I bought from Paul was second hand.

Alan
 
At a recent visit to Birmingham Proof House, the staff there told us some countries proofs were acceptable and barrels did not need re-proofing in the UK.e.g German.. other countries proofs are not acceptable.

Certainly all weapons from the US must be proofed here in the UK...because there is no standard national proofing in the USA and the manufacturers proofs are not acceptable in the UK.

Countries whos proof is "acceptable" have been fired for proof so as I said if a gun has been proofed then if it's done properly it's been fired. After firing is a whole part of the proofing process so they HAVE to be fired.
 
Remington, if I'm not mistaken make some pretty cheap badly finished and none too accurate rifles but do have the killer advantage that, in the states at least, you can buy a million of anything for them so are often platform of choice for some shooters. I think most of the European stuff is better value, esp for us in Europe and much less so in the US. Sooooo when you get US reviews comparing US and Euro rifles (Yes I know the Howa is from Japan) they factor in a price differential that is almost reversed this side of the pond ... that and the 'made in USA' mantra distort the comparisons.

Well judging by your posts I'd say you're "mistaken".
First, rather than cheap you should use the word budget. Many manufacturers produce budget rifles for a good reason, to allow those on a budget to buy a gun in the first place, so good on the manufacturers. Not every mans pocket is lined in gold.
And "non too accurate", you obviously have no real experience of Remington's and just listen to some of the armchair crap on here! I've shot dozens of Remington's and have owned a few and their accuracy is always impressive, must be something to do with the barrels?!. Even if you change the trigger group and spend £105 for a custom one (big deal) and also put a custom stock on it you end up with a rifle that will out-shoot many, probably most, rifles double or four times the price! I have.
I'm only interested in accurate rifles for my job and Remington do it better than most for a lot less. . . and then if you must there are all the readily available spares/upgrades still for a lot less.
Oh, and one last thing, the Remington 700 is probably one of the most copied actions in the world. I wonder why . . . must be because it's so rubbish!
 
Well judging by your posts I'd say you're "mistaken".
First, rather than cheap you should use the word budget. Many manufacturers produce budget rifles for a good reason, to allow those on a budget to buy a gun in the first place, so good on the manufacturers. Not every mans pocket is lined in gold.
And "non too accurate", you obviously have no real experience of Remington's and just listen to some of the armchair crap on here! I've shot dozens of Remington's and have owned a few and their accuracy is always impressive, must be something to do with the barrels?!. Even if you change the trigger group and spend £105 for a custom one (big deal) and also put a custom stock on it you end up with a rifle that will out-shoot many, probably most, rifles double or four times the price! I have.
I'm only interested in accurate rifles for my job and Remington do it better than most for a lot less. . . and then if you must there are all the readily available spares/upgrades still for a lot less.
Oh, and one last thing, the Remington 700 is probably one of the most copied actions in the world. I wonder why . . . must be because it's so rubbish!

:thumb:
 
Well judging by your posts I'd say you're "mistaken".
First, rather than cheap you should use the word budget. Many manufacturers produce budget rifles for a good reason, to allow those on a budget to buy a gun in the first place, so good on the manufacturers. Not every mans pocket is lined in gold.
And "non too accurate", you obviously have no real experience of Remington's and just listen to some of the armchair crap on here! I've shot dozens of Remington's and have owned a few and their accuracy is always impressive, must be something to do with the barrels?!. Even if you change the trigger group and spend £105 for a custom one (big deal) and also put a custom stock on it you end up with a rifle that will out-shoot many, probably most, rifles double or four times the price! I have.
I'm only interested in accurate rifles for my job and Remington do it better than most for a lot less. . . and then if you must there are all the readily available spares/upgrades still for a lot less.
Oh, and one last thing, the Remington 700 is probably one of the most copied actions in the world. I wonder why . . . must be because it's so rubbish!

Fair enough, and no I have very little to no experience with Remington’s (seen a few and fired one in the States). As I pointed out I understand their excellent position as a platform but had 'heard' (my post was meant to be clearthat this was not firm knowledge on my part but simply what I had gathered) they were not that good out of the box. This I'm getting from a US friend of mine, rather than this forum, that has a gun room larger than most cold rooms. Everyone has their preferred platforms and it's good to see Remington has passionate and loyal defenders.
Thanks for 'correcting me' :)

[Really - I want to learn and my shooting knowlege is like a buckshot pattern ... broad but full of
large holes ;) ]
 
Last edited:
Ahh the chicken and the egg comes to mind.............................

The Remington 700 was produced in large numbers but was lacking so people and companies started to produce improvements and upgrades and then there was this large volume of stuff to improve 700's so when people started making custom actions they copied the 700 not because it was good but because the supply of after market bits was in place and already large.

Now if the Remington 700 had been so well designed and made in teh first place there would not have been the need for the after market improvements and upgrades ................................................................ surely.

The question is which really came first?????
 
What should I check on a NEW rifle.
Straight barrel, Stock alignment, The crown, The trigger feel, Cycling ...... (with what? in the shop??)
What can I check to see if I 'As a good'un' before taking possession and it becomes mine?

[Rather than grabbing it like a kid with candy at christmas running out the door and shooting it.]

Well you go to the gun shop and handle, fondle, drool over your new rifle of choice. You then take it home, more of the handling, fondling and drooling. You then take it out and shoot the rifle remembering to get used to it quirks so you are sure that if it do's not shoot well that its not pilot error.
If you find something seriously wrong with the rifle you take it back to the shop where you bought it from and fire a few phucks into them till they put right or give you another rifle or your money back. Simple see. All part of lifes rich learning curve.
 
Ahh the chicken and the egg comes to mind.............................

The Remington 700 was produced in large numbers but was lacking so people and companies started to produce improvements and upgrades and then there was this large volume of stuff to improve 700's so when people started making custom actions they copied the 700 not because it was good but because the supply of after market bits was in place and already large.

Now if the Remington 700 had been so well designed and made in teh first place there would not have been the need for the after market improvements and upgrades ................................................................ surely.

The question is which really came first?????

So your saying if there are aftermarket parts available for rifles, they are badly designed. That must cover 70% of the rifles available on today's market. Maybe if your beloved English rifle makers had built poorly designed rifles they would still be in production today:D

Al
 
Countries whos proof is "acceptable" have been fired for proof so as I said if a gun has been proofed then if it's done properly it's been fired. After firing is a whole part of the proofing process so they HAVE to be fired.

OK Bh - I give in. ATB
 
So your saying if there are aftermarket parts available for rifles, they are badly designed. That must cover 70% of the rifles available on today's market. Maybe if your beloved English rifle makers had built poorly designed rifles they would still be in production today:D

Al

Nice one! And they weren't such snobs they had catered for the ordinary man as well.

It's interesting that a small country like Finland can produce a name like Sako and the UK cannot. With any good manufacturing product you need entry level models to draw in your clientele to that marque who will always then aspire to the marques top model. Unfortunately many of our UK 'CEO fraternity' aren't that interested in long term sustainable business models any more!
 
I can't really understand how you extrapolate that scenario from try before you buy. I think the idea is that the dealer puts himself in the position of making sure you get a good gun. If the gun is not up to snuff/has a fault why would he put it back on the shelf and try to sell it to someone else rather than send it back to the maker to be sorted?


Alan

What I meant is that a gun shop owner will hardly let you shoot a brand new rifle as he'd get it back as a used rifle, regardless of the reason, this has nothing to do with a fault or not. The gun shop would have to declare the rifle as used and drop the price. This means one will hardly have a chance to test fire a new rifle before purchase. Just like buying a car. I wouldn't want to buy a brand new car that a was used as a test vehicle for Tom, Dick and Harry...as it is then a used car.
This has nothing to do with proof firing which is the same as a factory test drive of a new vehicle, which is part of manufacturing.
Of course one sometimes is offered to test a used rifle or test rifle ....which later will not be sold as new.

I once sold a brand new moderator to someone who actually tested my test mod on a rifle prior. He later returned the newly bought and then used moderator to us asking for his money back. That mod could only be sold as used, that customer cost me money and we will never serve him again.....

edi
 
What I meant is that a gun shop owner will hardly let you shoot a brand new rifle as he'd get it back as a used rifle, regardless of the reason, this has nothing to do with a fault or not. The gun shop would have to declare the rifle as used and drop the price. This means one will hardly have a chance to test fire a new rifle before purchase.
edi

Yes I did understand which is why I expanded on the offer that Paul Hill makes, to make sure I did not mislead anyone, or create any unreal expectation. The fact that he offers a range session to put on and zero the scope when the new gun is collected demonstrates his confidence in the products and really I am surprised how few gun dealers offer that.

I don't know of the fine details of Ivythorn Sportings offer, but it is on the front page of their website...twice in fact

Alan
 
Back
Top