In the past 10 years, the ACCURACY attainable with a $400 rifle has risen phenomenally.
However- the QUALITY and the DURABILITY also enter into the picture.
I am, coincidentally, working with two Remingtons that overlapped.
A semi-custom 700SPS build, and a stock 783.
Both 16.5 factory heavy barrels, free floated.
Both synthetic stocks.
Both shooting exact same five loads with varying bullet weights, same state range, concrete shooting tables, black bulls, 100 yards, same rest system.
700SPS build uses a McMillan fiberglass stock, pillar & glass bedded, three steel sling points, Pachmayer pad.
783 uses an injection molded stock, pillar bedded, molded trigger guard & sling points, SuperCell pad.
700SPS fitted with 3-pound Timney trigger.
783 uses factory trigger, adjustable, very clean, 4.5 pounds as shipped.
700SPS internal mag, hinged floorplate.
783 flush-fit detach steel mag.
No sights either rifle.
700SPS uses their standard pushfeed action, with standard extractor. Not all that strong extraction.
783 uses different pushfeed action, M-16 style extractor. Stronger extraction.
Both same safety, two position.
700SPS bolt release inside triggerguard.
783 bolt release up on leftside receiver, opposite safety.
700SPS fit with Warne steel Maxima QD rings on steel two-piece bases.
783 fit with a one-piece alloy Pic rail at the factory.
700SPS mounted with Trijicon 3-9x40 AccuPoint fiber-optic/tritium illuminated reticle.
783 mounted with Primary Arms 4-16x44 electrically-illuminated reticle.
700SPS standard checkered bolt handle.
783 big smooth bulb bolt handle.
Both gun fired with scopes on lowest settings.
700SPS build roughly $2000.
783 out of box, roughly $400, add $150 for the glass.
Range results?
700 outshot the 783 in four out of five loads, for best 3-shot groups.
Difference in best-group 100-yard spreads, in my hands, was maybe half an inch on average, between the two guns.
Was the cheaper package THAT inferior?
Was the more expensive package THAT much better?
Will the plastic 783 stock be as strong in banging around as the McMillan fiberglass stock used by the Marine Corps on their M40 sniper rifles?
Does it need to be?
Will the 783's trigger hold up like the Timney trigger will?
Does it have to?
Are the steel sling studs stronger on the McMillan stock?
Is the alloy triggerguard stronger on the 700SPS than the plastic triggerguard on the 783?
Are the Warne steel mounts on the 700SPS stronger than the alloy rings and alloy rail on the 783?
Which mounting system will hold up better if the rifle gets dropped down a mountainside?
Does it matter?
Both scopes may do fine at 100 yards, but will the $150 Primary Arms glass show the same picture quality at 400 yards as the $800 Trijicon glass?
Does it need to?
Are there any electronics to die suddenly in the Trijicon scope?
Are there any in the Primary Arms?
Does it matter?
These are some of the differences between two examples I happen to have here.
The 700SPS was built to my specs & preferences, with me selecting specific components of the build and working through it with my gunsmith to get exactly what I wanted.
The 783 came as it came.
Could I live with it?
Sure.
Would I prefer the 700SPS?
You betcha. That's MY gun.
It was put together specifically for me.
I used components I KNOW will hold up over the long run, because the gun was not built to a price point.
It wasn't built to be cheap, it was built to be GOOD!
Not that the 783 isn't necessarily good.....
You have to decide whether the expense of a custom project is worth it.
Nobody can make that decision for you.
Denis