What are your not-negotiables for a rifle?

[Badboymelvin]

Hi.

Like the title says, what are your not-negotiables when purchasing a new rifle?
Now this is obviously going to be a very personal thing and we are all going to have very different ideas on this.
My perfect rifle may be your worst nightmare!
But it's still interesting to hear other people's opinions a- and you never know, my mind might be changed.

Here a are a few of my not-negotiables...

1. NO detachable magazines. I won't buy a rifle with a detachable magazine. I especially don't trust budget rifles with plastic magazines that can wear, get lost or are unreliable.
Floorplates - or better yet, blind magazines for me.
I'll tell you a story... l hunted with a mate who had a Mossberg .308 with 10 shot magazine and we had to walk a fair way to get to our spot. Once we got there my mate somehow realised that he had somehow released his magazine on the walk and now he had a very awkward to load single-shot.
As a side note on the walk back he somehow found it again (!!!) but he never used that rifle hunting again.

2. NO wooden stocks. Once again a very personal choice and l have to add that l love the look of a nice wooden stock as much as the next person, but l absolutely hate scratching stocks, so fancy wood stocks are a no for me these days...
And unlike most people l actually don't mind the looks of a synthetic stock. I think practical has a certain beauty to it.
Having said that l believe that shotguns and quality air rifles SHOULD have a wood stock.
A nice shotgun with a synthetic stock just doesn't look right to me... so what l should've said is all my centrefire hunting rifles have synthetic stocks.

3. NO muzzle brakes. l have owned several big-bore rifles and l have personally never felt the need for a muzzle brake.
YMMV.
Sure, shooting a .458 off the bench is hard work but take your time, fold up a towel and put it between your shoulder and the rifle and hang on!
Once sighted in the hard work is done and l've never felt recoil in the field - even when l've been kissed by the scope.
Not judging other people for using a muzzle brake, they may have an injury etc... but personally for me, l don't want/need one.

4. Heavy rifles. Just sold my last heavy rifle and won't buy another. My hunting style consists of walking, and walking, and walking... yep, light rifles for me.

5. Classic styling. I prefer my rifles to have plain classic lines.

6. NO attachments. Personally - and for the type of hunting l do, l don't need flashlights, bipods or anything like that on my rifle. It just adds weight and l simply would never use them for my style of hunting.

So that's my personal not negotiables for when l buy a rifle.
l'm sure other people's are different and that's totally fine by me.

So what are your personal not-negotiable's when buying a new rifle?

Russ

 

[KJE81]

Must have wooden stock, blued steel and open sights, no muzzle brake/magnaports for me. Also like nice wood and engraving (if well done).

 

[R eight]

Must function perfectly.

No muzzle breaks/ Magnaporting.

Shoot precise enough for what it will be used for.

 

[odonata]

Must have wooden stock, blued steel and open sights, no muzzle brake/magnaports for me.

I would start my list off favoring the criteria that @KJE81 specified. I currently only have one stainless rifle & none of them have plastic stocks. If I lived in a wetter climate, that might be different.

Because of the moderate distances I shoot at in the southeastern woods of the USA, I don't make excessive demands of my firearms. So I generally eschew the modern, long-distance, technically advanced options in favor of classic chamberings in falling blocks. I have one modern Wilson Combat AR-15 in 300 HAM'R for hog hunting. The other 10 cartridges I shoot have a design that is on average 110 years old (e.g. 303 British, 6.5x55, 375 H&H, 405 Win, etc.).

The #1 criteria I look for is left-handed or ambidextrous capability. I'm a right-hander who prefers shooting left because of a problematic right eye.

I'm a bit nostalgic so emotion & aesthetics will often override practicality. I have a strong dislike for thick butt pads. And my definition of thick is probably a lot thinner than yours. When I see a skeleton butt plate or a thin one of pure metal, I start to get intrigued. The Ruger Guide Gun is especially hideous regardless of how sensible the thick rubber & extra spacers might be. My 458 Win Mag has a half inch / 12mm butt pad which includes the hard plastic spacer. I would never advise anyone to be like me. Visually, I prefer front sling mounts on the barrel (à la a Rigby Highland Stalker) vs on the forearm. My rifles have a lot of barrel bands.

I don't buy safe queens. I totally understand someone enjoying the ownership of something so beautiful they don't want to ever see it damaged. I shoot everything I own. Hopefully, I'll wear it out creating memories.

I prefer low-powered optics since I have no practical need (at the moment) for something really powerful like hunters in the mountains or out on the plains might need. Most of my scopes start at 1, 1.5, 1.7 or 2x magnification.

Unlike @Badboymelvin, I am not completely adverse to a removable magazine. Both my Sako 85 & my Steyr CL II have removable mags that I have a high level of confidence will stay put once they're in place based on the attachment design for those specific rifles.

 

[CBH Australia]

No not negotiables as such.

We can agree on many points, but I would like a nice blued walnut hunting rifle with a traditional look. But if it’s pricey I would be scared to use it in the field.

Agreed with R eight, flawless functioning is a requirement.

I have a few Tikkas, they are detachable mags. But sometimes I carry a spare and that’s more because the plastic doesn’t way much and I could quickly change if I ran out of ammo on a mob of pigs etc.

Can live with Blued or Stainless if it suits my purpose.

I like solid mounts and decent optics. I don’t have high end but I appreciate the glass I have.

I haven’t used a brake or Magna ported rifle. The wife’s 7x64 in blued came with a brake but it shoots great without it.

I have several variations of synthetic and composite stocks. They don’t excite me as far as aesthetics but if they suit my needs or feel and handle right then they are fine with me.

Only my Rem700 .223 and CZ550 in .375H&H have floor plates instead of magazines.

All weather rifles have a place. Probably well suited to the areas where Russ lives and hunts.

 

[Altitude sickness]

I had always been primarily a bow hunter. But also shot 600 yard prone matches. 3 gun competition. Hunt mountains, plains, Alaska swamps, rivers and mountains. Africa etc

So for each and everyone of those have I have different wants and demands. I didn’t use fine walnut for 3 gun or long range shooting. Or Alaska.

So if I had hard and fast rules. I would have eventually broken them after learning there are always better tools for the job than what I may prefer.

So a Quick Look in my safes would show pretty much every example of someone else’s favorite or someone’s most despicable rifle. 50 BMG with a muzzle device down to a suppressed .22

Oh the horror

 

[Tally-Ho HUNTING SAFARIS]

Must feel good
Must look good
Operate flawlessly

I wont use a rifle that in my eyes is ugly or doesnt feel good in my hands

I love all makes of rifles and can adapt to any safety or bolt system easily but if i think its ugly its not gonna see the light of day

 

[ftrovato]

Controlled Round Feed for dangerous game! Other than that I can be talked into just about anything. Even ugly meat sticks have a purpose.

 

[Papa72]

Must have iron sights, period. I grew up in these piney woods hunting nothing but open sights and did not own a scope until my early 20’s, and that rifle was only scoped for a traveling hunt where ranges could actually reach 100 yds.

 

[RyanPalmer]

For hunting, my preference is three position safety, two-stage trigger, and CRF.

 

[Tra3]

I can be more forgiving of an inferior rifle if the glass is very good. So, item number one for me is a very good scope.

I don’t care for muzzle brakes anymore. Noise is worse than recoil!

Wiggly stock parts: if the stock moves in your hand on the barrel, if there is a magazine that isn’t tight fitting, if the bolt rattles or moves. A good rifle is a solid item that shouldn’t make noise.

After those things, I’ll hunt with about anything. In truth, I’m happy to hunt with any type of rifle because I’m always happy to hunt.

I’ve purchased some cheap rifles, because they were cheap and I was just getting discretionary income. I hardly ever used the cheap rifles. I would have been better off waiting for something of quality.

 

[318AE]

Must have wooden stock, blued steel and open sights, no muzzle brake/magnaports for me. Also like nice wood and engraving (if well done).

All these things, plus a trigger with a clean break and a stock that fits me of course, whether that’s for a scope or open sights. Some triggers feel like you’re pulling a stick through gravel - none of those.

 

[wysongdog]

Threaded for suppressors. 22” or shorter barrel for quick handling with suppressor yep this includes my 375 . Gotta have eye appeal

 

[dogcat1]

Must be accurate and have a 14 1/4" LOP.

 

[Northern Shooter]

Depends what kind of rifles we're talking but if considering a dangerous game rifle:

1. Controlled Round Feed
2. Barrel band
3. Express sights
4. 14" + LOP
5. 4 Round capacity minimum
6. Quality wood

 

[Puddle]

- Rockchucks out past 600 yards in 100-degree weather - one kind of rifle combo
- Pronghorn antelope with the rifle laying across the backpack in the gusting winds - a different setup
- Elk at 7000+ feet elevation and waaay below freezing temperatures - yet another combo
- Cape Buffalo at 35 yards and clearly annoyed - a very different rifle set up

 

[BeeMaa]

Reliability, function and accuracy above all. Those are my non-negotiables.

You guys know I'm gonna say the R8 Professional, but at the same time I love a fine timber stocked rifle. I'd say no to muzzle brakes on everything except a home defense AR/AK. Suppressors only for use in certain situations.

 

[RedTag]

For bolt action rifles specifically, my one and only non negotiable for anything going forward is the rifle having a 3-position safety on the bolt. I have tried most if not all of the various designs and have determined that this is the correct configuration for a safety on a bolt action rifle. You may call it personal preference but I think there are valid mechanical principles that support my opinion on this.
I otherwise prefer controlled round feed, but will not turn down a good deal on an accurate push feed M70. I simply accept the limitations of that design.
I also prefer an open trigger design, for reason of durability and reliability. I do not care for the “box” type trigger units so common these days. This is, for me, the only significant drawback to the current production Winchester M70. I had an extreme weather model with the MOA trigger, thought it was okay but didn’t fully trust it in the field, and traded it away after a few years. I think these adjustable box type triggers are a fine choice for shooting from a bench, but we’re talking about a hunting rifle.
I will say that I really like the concept of the hinged floor plate with detachable box magazine. The Browning A-Bolt had this one feature that I thought was great. Marlin borrowed the concept for their MR-7 rifle in the late 90s, and along with the M70 style trigger and safety, M700 type bolt face, conservative styling and value, it was a great design that unfortunately wasn’t kept in production.

 

[roklok]

On a serious hunting rifle, the safety must lock the bolt shut when on safe. That is my one non negotiable. I have a list of preferences, but am somewhat open minded on other items.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Hi.

Like the title says, what are your not-negotiables when purchasing a new rifle?
Now this is obviously going to be a very personal thing and we are all going to have very different ideas on this.
My perfect rifle may be your worst nightmare!
But it's still interesting to hear other people's opinions a- and you never know, my mind might be changed.

Here a are a few of my not-negotiables...

1. NO detachable magazines. I won't buy a rifle with a detachable magazine. I especially don't trust budget rifles with plastic magazines that can wear, get lost or are unreliable.
Floorplates - or better yet, blind magazines for me.
I'll tell you a story... l hunted with a mate who had a Mossberg .308 with 10 shot magazine and we had to walk a fair way to get to our spot. Once we got there my mate somehow realised that he had somehow released his magazine on the walk and now he had a very awkward to load single-shot.
As a side note on the walk back he somehow found it again (!!!) but he never used that rifle hunting again.

2. NO wooden stocks. Once again a very personal choice and l have to add that l love the look of a nice wooden stock as much as the next person, but l absolutely hate scratching stocks, so fancy wood stocks are a no for me these days...
And unlike most people l actually don't mind the looks of a synthetic stock. I think practical has a certain beauty to it.
Having said that l believe that shotguns and quality air rifles SHOULD have a wood stock.
A nice shotgun with a synthetic stock just doesn't look right to me... so what l should've said is all my centrefire hunting rifles have synthetic stocks.

3. NO muzzle brakes. l have owned several big-bore rifles and l have personally never felt the need for a muzzle brake.
YMMV.
Sure, shooting a .458 off the bench is hard work but take your time, fold up a towel and put it between your shoulder and the rifle and hang on!
Once sighted in the hard work is done and l've never felt recoil in the field - even when l've been kissed by the scope.
Not judging other people for using a muzzle brake, they may have an injury etc... but personally for me, l don't want/need one.

4. Heavy rifles. Just sold my last heavy rifle and won't buy another. My hunting style consists of walking, and walking, and walking... yep, light rifles for me.

5. Classic styling. I prefer my rifles to have plain classic lines.

6. NO attachments. Personally - and for the type of hunting l do, l don't need flashlights, bipods or anything like that on my rifle. It just adds weight and l simply would never use them for my style of hunting.

So that's my personal not negotiables for when l buy a rifle.
l'm sure other people's are different and that's totally fine by me.

So what are your personal not-negotiable's when buying a new rifle?

Russ

1) No detachable magazine for the same reason. I had one fall out of my 760 pump and it cost me a bull moose.

2) I prefer wood. Battle scars add character. If it bothers me, I will refinish the stock.

3) Definitely do not like muzzle brakes or suppressors. I shot a couple of animals long range with my PH's suppressed 270 WSM and it was a delight to shoot. Fortunately, he was carrying it not me. If I was a range junky, I might feel differently about suppressors. But for the little time I spend shooting paper it's just not necessary.

4) I prefer rifles and shotguns with some weight to them. Heavier rifle mitigates recoil. Heavier shotgun swings better. To me balance is most important and I have found very few lightweight long guns that balanced well. I carry this heavyweight old Browning humpback all day, day after day, every fall for six weeks hunting uplands. Unless the bag limit is filled, it's in my hands with sling detached. I can take it and I'm no body builder. Works for me. I miss very few birds or clays: my skeet average is 22/25 ... and I'm half blind (literally!). Loaded with three twelve gauge shells, 31" barrel, and dressed in plastic it weighs just a bit over ten pounds.

My 30-06 1903A3 weighs slightly more when fully loaded with six rounds. I can carry it all day no problem. And in rough country.

My 404J is a bruiser at over eleven pounds fully loaded with four rounds. I carried it all day for several days hunting buffalo in 2023. Yes, I notice the weight but my fragile retinas need it for recoil mitigation.

All guns are balanced perfectly at the forward half of floorplate (or just ahead of magazine loading port for A5). Balance is more important than gross weight.

5) Classic styling is not terribly important to me. Because I stalk big game up close and I'm often shooting moving targets, quick acquisition is more important than cosmetics. Monte Carlo cheekpiece is fine for getting me on the crosshairs in a hurry. Low European style comb not so much. Fit is paramount, especially for a quick shooter. My shotgun wears a slip-on recoil pad for extra LOP when shooting in shirt sleeves but it gets pulled off on extra cold days when I'm layered up. Not pretty but it works.

6) I agree about minimizing attachments. Tried a bipod for a while. Didn't work out. Throws off gun's balance and rarely practical. I do have quick detach rings and iron sights on both rifles. Good to have another option for adverse conditions or scope goes south. Again, maybe not the prettiest setup but it works. No lighted reticles. Just something to go wrong. I don't own a range finder or chronograph but contemplating buying the latter. I do reload.

7) I'm not into long range shooting, either at targets or animals. Sub MOA is overkill in my book. MOA is good enough for shooting big game out to 200 yards. Sub MOA for a dangerous game rifle is just silly.

Keep it simple. Don't overthink. Choose what works not what is trendy.