I don't know many people that call a modern savage a beautiful rifle, but I think they are a quality rifle especially for their price point. I have never had any issues with mine.
Firearms with undeserved reputations
14,571 Views |
124 Replies |
Last: 28 days ago by agsalaska
A lot of people hate on them, but I've had my .270 for 20+ years and it shoots lights out.
Don't know about the newer stuff though.
Don't know about the newer stuff though.
underrated - wood stock deer rifles
So far as under rated goes I will have to say many (definitely not all) new Turkish guns. I bought a Winchester SXP and a Tisas 1911 recently and both look and perform well above their price point.
EFR said:
I don't know many people that call a modern savage a beautiful rifle, but I think they are a quality rifle especially for their price point. I have never had any issues with mine.
Agreed. Savage has consistenly made a fine product. Not always the prettiest girl at that dance, but she gets the job done.
ought1ag said:
underrated - wood stock deer rifles
lol. Half this board can't stop talking about how amazing they are compared to everything else in the world. The rest of us own one even if we don't rant and rave about them. Underrated? That's a stretch.
I actually came back to this thread to post an updated picture of my M9A4 but saw the comment above and couldn't resist.
I call it the Orlando Special (Italian take on the Roland Special build that was all the rage about a decade ago)
M9A4, Beretta 2 port comp, extended metal guide rod, 10lbs recoil spring, match hammer, 13 lbs hammer spring, Beretta mag well, Beretta +2 mag extensions, TLR-1VIR
I call it the Orlando Special (Italian take on the Roland Special build that was all the rage about a decade ago)
M9A4, Beretta 2 port comp, extended metal guide rod, 10lbs recoil spring, match hammer, 13 lbs hammer spring, Beretta mag well, Beretta +2 mag extensions, TLR-1VIR
BenderRodriguez said:ought1ag said:
underrated - wood stock deer rifles
lol. Half this board can't stop talking about how amazing they are compared to everything else in the world. The rest of us own one even if we don't rant and rave about them. Underrated? That's a stretch.
poor wording on my part....should have said under advertised. cant remember the last time I saw a magazine that featured a wood stock hunting rifle on the cover.
schmellba99 said:
Not really specific to a gun brand but more of an overarching group:
Underrated - basic white girl 1911's that aren't Wilson Combat or some other ultra high end super uber duper custom. I'm talking your RIA's, American Classic, etc. and the idea that they don't run. Yeah, fit and finish on them isn't as good as a Dan Wesson or Wilson, etc. but the low end ones I have and have experience with have all ran just fine and so far I havne't found any ammo my cheapo ACII won't eat up.
Specific brand:
Overrated - Glock. Not that it isn't a good gun, reliable, etc. it's the glock dork fanboys that will have you believe it is indestructible and incapable of any type of failure and that even though the ergos suck on it, you should just run your hand through a meat grinder so you can learn to love it just because. Fun fact - last pistol class I took (granted, it's been a minute) there was only 1 gun that jammed. It was a glock. My buddy's glock at that. With factory ammo. They are like any other mechanical device - they have malfunctions, things can and will break and they are not made of adamantium.
I think most of the Glock jamming issues were in Gens prior to 4. I could be mistaken, but I haven't heard much about that -- or seen it for sure -- since those models (4/5 and on) became popular. However, I did see a range incident once -- outdoor range in Central Texas -- where a guy's new Glock jammed and it took 3 of us to dislodge it! I think it was a combo of the handgun, the ammo, and his shooting style as he was older and had mostly shot revolvers.
I've limp wristed older 17s and got them to jam fairly easily, but haven't had one -- regardless of age -- jam when I was shooting it "normally" no matter the ammo (mostly WWB). My issue with Glocks, and this isn't limited to them, is that I believe like all models that require a trigger pull to field strip, it is inherently unsafe. But I own 2 now, have owned several others in the past, and am looking to get a third one this month. I'm hardly a fanboy, however.
I got a Glock 17. Hard to learn to shoot. Once you do it does a decent job. I would not shoot an Apple off someone's head though.
S&W 586 .357 is the most accurate pistol I have shot for making your first shot count. I could hit a coke can repeatedly at 40 yards.
For repeated shooting the .40 cal Browning 1911 puts a tight group together every time at 15 yards.
S&W 586 .357 is the most accurate pistol I have shot for making your first shot count. I could hit a coke can repeatedly at 40 yards.
For repeated shooting the .40 cal Browning 1911 puts a tight group together every time at 15 yards.
one night toward the end of a shift I went into convenience store to get coffee…. the guy behind the counter said I cant believe so many of you guys carry those crappy plastic glocks…. just wanting my coffee without a full blown convo about glock construction I just replied ,well its not like we throw them at people!! He just kinda looked at me goofy and said huh, never thought about it like that!
Underrated: any properly configured Scout Rifle. Does absolutely anything the vast majority of us need a rifle to do with authority and a quickness most people don't even have the skills to fully utilize.
Overrated: nearly anything in new specialty chamberings. 6 ARC, 7mm Backcountry, 8.6 Blackout... All almost entirely superfluous. There isn't a thing you can do with them that some other, longer standing, better vetted, more heavily supported chambering can't also do. Very few people will ever actually realize the bonus 5% of velocity, energy or trajectory a 7mm PRC or a 6.5 Creedmor actually provide.
Overrated: nearly anything in new specialty chamberings. 6 ARC, 7mm Backcountry, 8.6 Blackout... All almost entirely superfluous. There isn't a thing you can do with them that some other, longer standing, better vetted, more heavily supported chambering can't also do. Very few people will ever actually realize the bonus 5% of velocity, energy or trajectory a 7mm PRC or a 6.5 Creedmor actually provide.
BenderRodriguez said:ought1ag said:
underrated - wood stock deer rifles
lol. Half this board can't stop talking about how amazing they are compared to everything else in the world. The rest of us own one even if we don't rant and rave about them. Underrated? That's a stretch.
I read that as more of a rant against the idea that a wood stock is antiquated and that any and all bolt guns must be polymer stocked, or better yet, must be in a chassis system with every attachment possible to stabilize, extra super duper free float, uber tacticalized, etc. if you want even approaching marginal accuraccy and reliability.
You can just about say that about all caliber development though. (Not disagreeing with you).
Right now about the only advancement in firearm development is going to come in the form of better, more efficient or new chamberings. Metallurgy, technology, etc are all pretty well maxed out so niche developlemts will be what we see until there is a quantum leap in the weapon system itself.
Right now about the only advancement in firearm development is going to come in the form of better, more efficient or new chamberings. Metallurgy, technology, etc are all pretty well maxed out so niche developlemts will be what we see until there is a quantum leap in the weapon system itself.
Old pump shotguns which live under backseats. This one is about 50 years old and has never misfired. They are kept in a cheap gun sock to keep out dust and lab hair. Stored nearby are plenty of 00 buckshot and 4 lead shot.
Still occasionally used for unplanned duck and dove hunts and has even been used as a makeshift boat paddle several times.
schmellba99 said:
You can just about say that about all caliber development though. (Not disagreeing with you).
Right now about the only advancement in firearm development is going to come in the form of better, more efficient or new chamberings. Metallurgy, technology, etc are all pretty well maxed out so niche developlemts will be what we see until there is a quantum leap in the weapon system itself.
Not an inaccurate assessment.
AR15's ......They are the Pitbulls of the gun breed......they kill for no reason at all and were built to kill....,
DiskoTroop said:
Overrated: nearly anything in new specialty chamberings......Very few people will ever actually realize the bonus 5% of velocity, energy or trajectory a 7mm PRC or a 6.5 Creedmor actually provide.
So a couple months ago I took at class from Joe Dawson of Veles Industries. It was an AR focused scoped carbine class, but he also teaches precision rifle classes so we talked a lot about long range shooting, cartridge and gun selection, etc.
As background, Joe spent 14+ years with the SEAL Teams, doing everything from assaulter to sniper, and finished his career in the Navy running the NSW Sniper schoolhouse. He also loves PRS competition, hunting, USPSA, etc and is a huge gun nerd for equipment in general, which is way less common than we'd assume for people in that line of work.
He's a big proponent of finding your "why" when it comes to gear, shooting, whatever.
All that to say that he (and I) would strongly disagree with you here on things like 6.5 CM....IF your "why" is learning how to shoot long range. The reason being (as he likes to say) is that when you shoot long range, 3 people get a vote on how it goes. You (you pick the rifle, the ammo, the shooting skill/technique). God (temperature, humidity, altitude, general environmentals) and Satan (wind). If you want to learn how to shoot at distance, limiting the influence Satan has on the outcome is a really great thing, which is what high BC bullets in chamberings like 6.5 CM can help you with in contrast to .308.
Referring back to the WHY again, if your local range goes to 100/200 max and your deer stand is 75 yards from the feeder, I agree with you completely that there is zero reason to use a modern whizbang cartridge over a .308.
Just depends on your why.
The intention of my comment is not that the cartridge is useless, it is more to the effect that the minor increases in efficiency in trajectory, velocity, and the resulting ballistic coefficient is only a single digit fraction beyond that of more mainstream cartridges. For instance if a 7PRC gets you 100fps more than 7 rem mag, what does that really mean for the user? It means the user might get another 50-100 yards of effective range at the extreme edges of the rounds useful range. So the user of a 7PRC might be effective to 800yd as opposed to the 7RM user being limited to 700yd.
Of course, all of that is dependent on if the shooter can actually realistically maximize that effective range. Then, of course, we are faced with a question of when is that functionality actually useful? The answer to that is in less than 5% of hunting scenarios.
So when you ask "whats your 'why' in the scenario," the only way you actually legitimize one of these new cartridges is if your 'why' is "in order to extend my effective range 5% in order to go after some game that is at a distance I probably shouldn't attempt shooting at because I probably haven't practiced enough."
And in the case that this is actually something that you want to attempt or feel like you can attempt… You are likely in the top 5% of shooters. additionally, think about that if you can do it with a 7 mm PRC, you can do it with a 7 mm REM Mag if you have practiced appropriately. So if that is the case, what did we really gain by moving to a newer cartridge? The answer is a minor increase in effectiveness at very high cost.
Of course, all of that is dependent on if the shooter can actually realistically maximize that effective range. Then, of course, we are faced with a question of when is that functionality actually useful? The answer to that is in less than 5% of hunting scenarios.
So when you ask "whats your 'why' in the scenario," the only way you actually legitimize one of these new cartridges is if your 'why' is "in order to extend my effective range 5% in order to go after some game that is at a distance I probably shouldn't attempt shooting at because I probably haven't practiced enough."
And in the case that this is actually something that you want to attempt or feel like you can attempt… You are likely in the top 5% of shooters. additionally, think about that if you can do it with a 7 mm PRC, you can do it with a 7 mm REM Mag if you have practiced appropriately. So if that is the case, what did we really gain by moving to a newer cartridge? The answer is a minor increase in effectiveness at very high cost.
I don't think Hi-Point gets enough good publicity…
You can beat a mother ****er to death with it with a couple half decent swings!
Jokes aside, I carry a Beretta Nano for on my walks and it's great for concealed and not being uncomfortable while sweating.
You can beat a mother ****er to death with it with a couple half decent swings!
Jokes aside, I carry a Beretta Nano for on my walks and it's great for concealed and not being uncomfortable while sweating.
I WILL admit if your goal is punching paper or ringing steel, then perhaps it's a reasonable choice.
I tend to see things through a practicality veil.
I also am aware my opinion may not be shared by others and I respect Bender's opinion as well.
I tend to see things through a practicality veil.
I also am aware my opinion may not be shared by others and I respect Bender's opinion as well.
Long range shooting is different. Even at 500 yards a 300 prc is looking at like half the wind drift and like 18+" less drop. That's a big deal. Huge deal even on a quick shot where you're using Kentucky wind age and not dialing.
A 7mm mag is closer to a 7 prc anyway. I know I sure would like that less wind drift while hunting elk in Colorado when I am lining up a 350+ yard shot. I e killed an elk with a 308 and a 270, but I've passed on shots that I didn't feel comfortable with in a crosswind at distance. And I practice plenty at distance.
A 7mm mag is closer to a 7 prc anyway. I know I sure would like that less wind drift while hunting elk in Colorado when I am lining up a 350+ yard shot. I e killed an elk with a 308 and a 270, but I've passed on shots that I didn't feel comfortable with in a crosswind at distance. And I practice plenty at distance.
Underrated - CZ over/under shotguns. They're cheap, they're made in turkey, and they shoot great and last a long time. I picked up a Teal Target to be my buddy gun for clay shooting, and I end up shooting it myself sometimes. It's got many thousands of rounds through it - the finish is good, the wood is nice, and the action is as smooth as many higher quality guns. It even has ejectors! The best sub 1k O/U on the market by a long shot.
DiskoTroop said:
So when you ask "whats your 'why' in the scenario," the only way you actually legitimize one of these new cartridges is if your 'why' is "in order to extend my effective range 5% in order to go after some game that is at a distance I probably shouldn't attempt shooting at because I probably haven't practiced enough."
This is exactly why I said "find YOUR why" is such a great question to ask, and also why a lot of gun discourse online is full of people talking past each other who can't imagine a different why than their own.
Like I said in my initial reply to you, I fully agreed that if hunting is your why, most people (especially if they hunt in Texas and not out West) aren't going to see much to any benefit of something like 6.5 CM over 308.
Buck Compton said:
Quote:
Long range shooting is different. Even at 500 yards a 300 prc is looking at like half the wind drift and like 18+" less drop. That's a big deal. Huge deal even on a quick shot where you're using Kentucky wind age and not dialing.
Buck, agree completely. I don't have a ton of long range experience. Reducing the influence wind has on my impacts is something I am greatly interested in as I continue to learn and shoot past 600 yards, which is why even though I own a .308 bolt gun, my next one will likely be in 6.5 CM or another cartridge shooting a high BC bullet. I need all the help I can get at distance.
cryption said:
Underrated - CZ over/under shotguns. They're cheap, they're made in turkey, and they shoot great and last a long time. I picked up a Teal Target to be my buddy gun for clay shooting, and I end up shooting it myself sometimes. It's got many thousands of rounds through it - the finish is good, the wood is nice, and the action is as smooth as many higher quality guns. It even has ejectors! The best sub 1k O/U on the market by a long shot.
I have a 20g CZ Drake, but don't have enough rounds through it to speak to its longevity. I like mine as well though.
This is exactly what my question in the OP was about: guns that have a reputation online that YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE with differs from the general talking points.
That's why I mentioned my M9A4. I didn't expect much from it based on its reputation, but really enjoy it as a shooter.
Some of y'all seem to think anything you like or use is underrated and anything you don't personally like or use is overrated. You're missing the point worse than a .308 shooter at 800 yards in a 20mph cross wind.
Serious clay shooters turn their nose up at anything made in Turkey, but my two highest round count guns are Turkish. A Weatherby SA-08 (over 10k) and my CZ Teal O/U (nearing 6k).
I may shoot "B" guns now (Benelli and Beretta) but those Turkish guns have a special place in my heart. They're not as crap as everyone seems to think. That Weatherby SA-08 was the gun I learned to shoot clays on, and it's still a great gun for the blind. It runs like a sewing machine to this day.
Turkish shotguns have come a long way and aren't crap anymore!
I may shoot "B" guns now (Benelli and Beretta) but those Turkish guns have a special place in my heart. They're not as crap as everyone seems to think. That Weatherby SA-08 was the gun I learned to shoot clays on, and it's still a great gun for the blind. It runs like a sewing machine to this day.
Turkish shotguns have come a long way and aren't crap anymore!
cryption said:
Underrated - CZ over/under shotguns. They're cheap, they're made in turkey, and they shoot great and last a long time. I picked up a Teal Target to be my buddy gun for clay shooting, and I end up shooting it myself sometimes. It's got many thousands of rounds through it - the finish is good, the wood is nice, and the action is as smooth as many higher quality guns. It even has ejectors! The best sub 1k O/U on the market by a long shot.
In that same vein, and I have no dog in this fight - but is there really a noticeable difference in performance between this price-point and the higher end models for thousands more? Is it really just aesthetics? You can go hard in the paint of high-end O/U's from what I've seen.
BenderRodriguez said:
Referring back to the WHY again, if your local range goes to 100/200 max and your deer stand is 75 yards from the feeder, I agree with you completely that there is zero reason to use a modern whizbang cartridge over a .308.
Just depends on your why.
*Raises hand slowly....
BlueSmoke said:
In that same vein, and I have no dog in this fight - but is there really a noticeable difference in performance between this price-point and the higher end models for thousands more? Is it really just aesthetics? You can go hard in the paint of high-end O/U's from what I've seen.
So I like my Turk made CZ Drake, but its a lightweight field gun and while I have shot sporting clays with it, its not super fun.
I use a Beretta A400 for clays now and love that gun. I've shot some really nice O/Us (including ones owned by AggieGunslinger and Cledus, I think) and there absolutely a difference in weight, swing, trigger, recoil, fit, etc.
I'm sure some of the $$ differences at the top of the pile are about flex more than usefulness like in any other type of gun, but you could absolutely tell the difference between an cheaper Turk O/U and a really nice O/U just by how it swings before you even shoot it.
To hammer on the why thing again, I shoot clays 3-4 times a year so my A400 is more than enough gun for that. I bet the SA-08 also works great for that. If I was shooting a clays tournament every other weekend, I'd spend the $$$ and upgrade.
This is nail on the head.
You hit a point of dimishing returns. Will a $3500 686 shoot better than a $900 CZ? For sure, but that's not to say the CZ is a bad gun. Will a $26k Kolar out shoot the 686? Maybe, dude ... but not 20k more
Also the A400 has won a LOT of NSCA tournaments. The A400 Xcel is all over the clays course. It's a hell of a gun, and one of the best Semis on the market!
You hit a point of dimishing returns. Will a $3500 686 shoot better than a $900 CZ? For sure, but that's not to say the CZ is a bad gun. Will a $26k Kolar out shoot the 686? Maybe, dude ... but not 20k more
Also the A400 has won a LOT of NSCA tournaments. The A400 Xcel is all over the clays course. It's a hell of a gun, and one of the best Semis on the market!
BlueSmoke said:BenderRodriguez said:
Referring back to the WHY again, if your local range goes to 100/200 max and your deer stand is 75 yards from the feeder, I agree with you completely that there is zero reason to use a modern whizbang cartridge over a .308.
Just depends on your why.
*Raises hand slowly....
I agree with both posters really. I think new cartridge development, barrel development, etc is totally badass. It's really cool what some of these guns can do and do consistently. I spend a lot of time listening to podcasts and reading about them. It's awesome. Accurately shooting 130gr. Ullets past 1000 yards consistently is definitely not overrated.
But for the vast majority of hunters, especially in Texas, the gains all of this new tech provides from a hunting application is non existent. So in that sense it's a bit overrated. There are plenty of good reasons to buy a new rifle with a new modern cartridge to hunt with. But killing better than your current rifle isn't one of them unless you are in the very tiny minority that shoots very long distances.
I don’t say this in a braggedocious way. But it’s true. I’ve been right about everything.
-Donald J Trump
-9/22/2025
-Donald J Trump
-9/22/2025
BenderRodriguez said:DiskoTroop said:
So when you ask "whats your 'why' in the scenario," the only way you actually legitimize one of these new cartridges is if your 'why' is "in order to extend my effective range 5% in order to go after some game that is at a distance I probably shouldn't attempt shooting at because I probably haven't practiced enough."
This is exactly why I said "find YOUR why" is such a great question to ask, and also why a lot of gun discourse online is full of people talking past each other who can't imagine a different why than their own.
Like I said in my initial reply to you, I fully agreed that if hunting is your why, most people (especially if they hunt in Texas and not out West) aren't going to see much to any benefit of something like 6.5 CM over 308.
Buck Compton said:Quote:
Long range shooting is different. Even at 500 yards a 300 prc is looking at like half the wind drift and like 18+" less drop. That's a big deal. Huge deal even on a quick shot where you're using Kentucky wind age and not dialing.
Buck, agree completely. I don't have a ton of long range experience. Reducing the influence wind has on my impacts is something I am greatly interested in as I continue to learn and shoot past 600 yards, which is why even though I own a .308 bolt gun, my next one will likely be in 6.5 CM or another cartridge shooting a high BC bullet. I need all the help I can get at distance.
100%. I don't disagree with any of this. But to the original question RE over/under rated… These are the reasons I feel the chamberings are over rated.
Your average Academy or Bass Pro gun shopper should not be being shown a 6.5 Creed or 8.6 Blackout as the most likely to satisfy their need for a deer rifle for that 75 yard pot shot to put meat in the freezer. Yet there they are, being sold to them with a regularity.
They're over rated.
Damn, guess we should have quit any development at the .30-30 then, huh?
Getting back to the OP, I have a couple.
Taurus revolvers, Taurus had a terrible (and probably deserved) reputation at one point but I have a couple of newer revolvers and they are top notch. Definitely underrated to me.
Walther Ppk…I love my walthers but this is probably my least favorite. Heavy gun, heavy double action trigger pull. Not really great as a carry gun, but it does look cool and it is fun to play with at the range once in a while. Overrated in my opinion.
Taurus revolvers, Taurus had a terrible (and probably deserved) reputation at one point but I have a couple of newer revolvers and they are top notch. Definitely underrated to me.
Walther Ppk…I love my walthers but this is probably my least favorite. Heavy gun, heavy double action trigger pull. Not really great as a carry gun, but it does look cool and it is fun to play with at the range once in a while. Overrated in my opinion.
cryption said:
This is nail on the head.
You hit a point of dimishing returns. Will a $3500 686 shoot better than a $900 CZ? For sure, but that's not to say the CZ is a bad gun. Will a $26k Kolar out shoot the 686? Maybe, dude ... but not 20k more
Also the A400 has won a LOT of NSCA tournaments. The A400 Xcel is all over the clays course. It's a hell of a gun, and one of the best Semis on the market!
Ehh, it's like pretty much everything else in our world though - a whole lot of it is "because I want to" and little more than that. Cars, houses, electronics, the list goes on when it comes to that.
Also, that $26k Kolar is getting fitted to you whereas the off the shelf 686 isn't. Does that make it $20k more? No, but it does make a difference in how you swing and how you shoot. And that Kolar is hand fitted and the stock likely costs more than the entire 686 gun does. It's purely a luxury, and there is nothing wrong with that.
It isn't going to make you a world class shooter simply because you spent the money on it. But it will make you look way better as a crappy to mediocre shooter, and there is something to be said for that.
Featured Stories
See All
Post-SECMD26 questions to answer as camp nears
by Billy Liucci
4:44
1d ago
4.6k
Elko's hardware quip highlights A&M's hard truth
by Olin Buchanan
5:49
1d ago
3.6k
The Voice winner Aiden Ross '28 joins TexAgs Live
by David Nuño
Three Things: Fall camp is coming, 2027 class & more
by Jason Howell
Orlando Ayala Cant Read
Kaden Henderson With a Short But Epic Social Media Comment
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
54