Chuck Hawks wrote this in 2010:

Many folks are fervently price-loyal, not brand loyal. Perhaps that is why I receive thousands of e-mails every year asking if "xxx is any good?" Firearms do not come in nice, clean, tidy versions of good and bad, it is a long series of compromises. There is always interest in low cost fodder and I understand that. Yet, if you are a hunter, you will not wear out a good grade of center fire rifle or shotgun in a hunting lifetime with just ordinary care. The cost of the gun is trivial compared to food, travel, lodging, licenses and other fees. Nobody gets a discount on ammo or a hunting license just because they have a cheap firearm. When we buy a cheap gun and decide we want better, of course, it has little value. It was a low value item when new, so its used value is less than low. Too soon we get old, too late we get smart.

We can hardly blame manufacturers for continuing to built what we continually vote for with our purchase dollars. The design parameters of modern firearms are to meet price points, not to be good. Firearms are designed to sell, just like everything else. Firearm companies are hardly immune from business fundamentals.

The weak point of many centerfire rifles is the stock. How can one blame a firearm manufacturer for using a few cents of melted milk jug and ground up garbage can material, instead of selected, cured, and machined walnut, if the customer is too ignorant to understand the difference?

The term "bedding" is used quite loosely. For example, the pillar bedding bragged about in Savage rifles is not bedding at all, nor are there pillars; they are merely tubes. Nor does bedding make great sense when the stock material being bedded to excessively flexible. When a barreled action moves around in a stock, a high level of repeatable, long-term, all-weather accuracy should not be expected.

However, ammunition has improved and barrel quality has improved to the point where, with low-intensity or medium intensity cartridges, MOA accuracy is usually not a problem. The recently reviewed Mossberg Patriot .270 shot into one inch at 100 yards, the cheap (by Browning standards) Browning AB3 put three shots into 1/10th inch and both the Savage 111 AccuStock and Weatherby Vanguard 2 shot inside an inch with several brands of ammunition. All of these rifles are economical and all were reviewed in .270 or .30-06 caliber.

Cheap and economical are relative terms, for the Nosler M48 retails for $1798. Comparatively, the extremely beautiful and beautifully made Winchester Model 70 Super Grade is economical at $1359 MSRP. A Model 70 Featherweight at $939 is a mid-range rifle in the grand scheme of things, as is my personal favorite the Browning X-Bolt Medallion, currently at $1039. The X-Bolt Hunter at $899 is the same rifle, just a bit lesser grade of walnut and bluing. Yet, the AB3 Hunter, Browning's price-point rifle at $669, is apparently at a 2015 retail price level that consumers want. The tested AB3 (synthetic) is at $599 and all of these rifles are significantly discounted from retail.

Prior to the last trip to South Africa, we were motivated to find the best bolt-guns to take based on handling, fit, action smoothness, feeding, ejection and repeatable field accuracy. The finalists were a Weatherby Vanguard Sporter and a Browning X-Bolt Medallion, both chambered in .270 Winchester. The X-Bolt shot inside of one inch at 205 yards with Hornady Superformance 130 grain InterBond ammo and that is the combination I used. Despite the shorter than 24 inch standard barrel of the X-Bolt (22 inches), the velocity did not fall off enough to make it of consequence. It still chronographed at a very peppy 3125 fps instrumental velocity.

For the animals of potential interest, fallow deer, waterbuck, red hartebeest, blue wildebeest and black wildebeest to 325 yards or so, several rifles and cartridges would have been suitable. In fact, a Savage American Classic in 7mm-08 Remington shot so well it was tempting. However, the reduced drop and windage from the ballistically superior .270 Winchester ammunition was too significant to disregard.

The X-Bolt and the Weatherby did not like the same ammunition; no surprise there. Although the Weatherby shot the 140 grain Winchester AccuBonds (140 grain, 2950 fps) into 7/8 inch at 100 yards, it did marginally, but still noticeably, better with a late arrival, the new Federal Trophy Copper P270TC1 load. At 3060 fps with a published static ballistic coefficient of .459, it is a relatively flat shooter, with about 6.3 inches of drop from 200 to 300 yards with a 200 yard zero. That is 0.6 inch less than the slightly heavier and slower Accubond load. One of the tested cartridges that shot well in the Weatherby (but not the Browning) was the 150 grain Winchester Power Max Bonded protected hollow point. Despite its accuracy, the drop from 200 to 300 yards is about eight inches, with increased wind drift.

As the Weatherby has a 24 inch barrel, there is no significant velocity loss from published data. I would not expect the dramatic cavitation from the Trophy Copper bullet that you might get from the InterBond, yet the bullet has an almost identical BC to the Hornady, while the Hornady has a faster launch velocity. It was not a difficult choice, for as much as the X-Bolt loved the Hornady, the Weatherby did not, so the Federal TC won out when paired with the Vanguard. Your results will probably vary.

Neither of the rifles we finally selected were custom rifles, nor were they particularly expensive. Mid-range to slightly upscale price is where they reside. Nevertheless, the practice paid off, for it was five shots and five trophies when the safari was over. Cheap often comes with a heavy price, a price I am not willing to pay.