FSU_Seminole Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 (edited) Hey guys got a few questions.I'm a Remington/Browning man. Most of the rifles I own are from these 2 companies. I've been offered a good deal on a Weatherby Vanguard Sub MOA 270 wsm a deal I feel is pretty good financially. The problem is I've never owned a Weatherby rifle & I really can't find any rifle reviews on the net.So are their any current or former Weatherby owners here?What is the quality of a Weatherby? Are they realiable? What are the pros & cons? Thanks.Here is the gun, I love the stock & look & I think the 270 wsm is an awesome round. Edited August 9, 2009 by FSU_Seminole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m gardner Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 (edited) They are made by Howa and are a rugged reliable rifle. The MOA version I don't think is worth the money. They all come with a target from the factory mine from Walmart looked like this for $350.00. The triggers need work too. They are a heavy rifle compared to the Brownings which I own also. I like the Browning trigger better.Mark Edited August 9, 2009 by m gardner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 The Vanguards are, indeed, good rifles. The only two I have first-hand experience with are Vanguard Compacts in .308. They are my kids' rifles. Being the Compact model........they are not heavy......6 lbs. I can't speak to the full-sized rifles. The pair of .308's my kids have are superbly (extremely) accurate rifles. They are not of the Sub-MOA designation. I have my theories that the Sub-MOA guns are just the regular Vanguards that test fired well and got a different stock and fancy, engraved floorplate installed. Could be wrong. But any rifle that shoots under an inch at 100 yards outta the box is worth some attention. The Sub-MOA's may be a bit spendier than the $399 Vanguards........but the Mark V Weatherbys are considerably more than that and are only guaranteed to shoot 1.5 MOA. Go figger. I'd say if you feel you are getting a good price on the gun, go grab it. I don't believe you'll be disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSU_Seminole Posted August 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Thanks for the info guys. Now I'm a bit confused. I have a couple of dealers in competion for me to buy. I guess because of the economy its a win win for me. Now here is the situation just since I posted last night. I have the chance to get this Vanguard 270 wsm & I have another dealery telling me he has a Kimber 84m 270 wsm & an unfired Sako 85 greywolf new in the box 270 wsm. All of these guns are marked down new in the box & nothing is wrong with them. They just want to sell them. Now I'm really at a cross road because I've heard nothing but great things about Kimber & Sako & all of these rifles are within 150$ of each other with the Kimber being the most expensive. What now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Handle them all first. See which one suits you best. I went to the gun shop one day to buy an 84M. I was convinced that it was (on paper) the rifle for me. I picked one up and handled it extensively. I ended up buying a Weatherby Mark V Ultra-Lightweight. To me, the Kimber was a turd. To you it could be altogether different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m gardner Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 See what you like handling the best. I always go with the best trigger if all else is equal. Make sure the rifles function well. The 270 WSM has had issues feeding in some rifles because it's short and fat. The Howa in the short action and short barrel configuration like the youth rifle is light, but the large action will handle the Weatherby cartridges and has a long stout barrel and is heavy. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adjam5 Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 The Vanguards are, indeed, good rifles. I have my theories that the Sub-MOA guns are just the regular Vanguards that test fired well and got a different stack and fancy, engraved floorplate installed. Could be wrong. But any rifle that shoots under an inch at 100 yards outta the box is worth some attention. The Sub-MOA's may be a bit spendier than the $399 Vanguards........but the Mark V Weatherbys are considerably more than that and are only guaranteed to shoot 1.5 MOA. Go figger. . You are right on Don with that assessment of the MOA Vanguards. They test fire them all, and the ones that are sub MOA go into a special group that they think command more $$$. My Vanguard in 7mm rem mag shoots better than I can. I think I paid $315 at Wally world about 7 years ago or better. You won't be disappointed with the Vanguard. For the dough, it is a steal. Then again...those Sako are great also. Good Luck with whatever you choose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Gotta agree with Don's advice on shouldering and handling all of them if possible. Those Kimbers sure look nice, but the price tag on the last one I saw at Gander mountain was up near a grand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Those Kimbers sure look nice, but the price tag on the last one I saw at Gander mountain was up near a grand. If it stops there. The 84 Montana (which is what I looked at) comes in around $1100. Thing felt like crap in my hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimT Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 I just picked one up at WalMart in 7mmm for $350.00. A great price for a very good rifle.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted August 13, 2009 Report Share Posted August 13, 2009 That's a good deal. I'm not even sure our local Wally World carries the Vanguards anymore. I'd like to snag one on the cheap if it were in an interesting chambering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted August 13, 2009 Report Share Posted August 13, 2009 That's a good deal. I'm not even sure our local Wally World carries the Vanguards anymore. I'd like to snag one on the cheap if it were in an interesting chambering. They have them here for $350 as well with the tan stocks. Same one in the display has been there for quite some time. Thinking it is chambered in .270. Not sure if he has anymore in the back or not, probably does but I will ask next time I am in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimT Posted August 13, 2009 Report Share Posted August 13, 2009 All they had were .270 win, 30-06, 7mmm, and .300wby mag. Thought about the .300 but ammo cost for that it brutal. Mine is the tan stock. I like it actually. Some guys do not seem to though. To each their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted August 13, 2009 Report Share Posted August 13, 2009 Thought about the .300 but ammo cost for that it brutal. Definitely benefits to be a reloader if you plan to shoot Weatherby calibers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimT Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 You guys think a Nikon Buckmasters 3x9x40 scope will be ok on my 7mmm? I already got low Leupold rings. Hopfully they are ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Would think it should be fine Jim. Have heard different opinions on how well nikon scopes hold up to recoil/travelling abuse, but never had any issues with the buckmaster and monarch lines myself. Have had a monarch on my .270 for a while now and no issues with it. The wife has a 3-9x40 buckmaster scope on her .243, she did not want me to change her scope to a monarch a few years ago when I picked up an extra one, my oldest daughters a-bolt ended up with that monarch scope and she really likes it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSU_Seminole Posted August 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Hey guys I went with the Sako 85. I had to because of the price and the ultra slick smooth bolt & because of the reputation & beauty of the gun. I just hope I'm not getting conned. The rifle has been sitting new & unfired in the box since 2007 & the onwer has 4 or 5 of them & he just wants to move them for what he paid for it. I'm not paying anywhere near the 1400 price they go for. I feel like I got a awesome deal. I'll post some pics when I get some glass on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterbobb Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 You guys that don't like the Kimbers must have hands the size of baseball gloves. They are slim classic style rifles. If I could get one for $150.00 more than a Vanguard I wouldn't even be thinking about it. Give me the phone number of that gun store I want to call them. However, I do agree you have to buy what feels best to you. I have a Vanguard in 257 Weatherby Magnum. I kills deer like they were hit by lightning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tecumseh Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 I have two,a vanguard sst 300 WSM and a Mark V 280 Rem,both are tack drivers and well built.I went with the Nikon buckmaster 4.5 - 14 BDC reticle on both rifles and have never had a problem with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 You guys that don't like the Kimbers must have hands the size of baseball gloves. They are slim classic style rifles.... However, I do agree you have to buy what feels best to you. I do have a fair sized mitt. But there's just something about the under side of the forend........it's rounded all wrong, to me. Beyond that, the balance, with a 3-9 Bushnell 3200 on it, was just all out of whack to my feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.