Price doesn't always mean quality!!!

I got into the ML business to hunt deer!!! I do have a lot of other ML guns now, but in my experience the ML is pretty much looked down on by people in the gun business. All ML's I see sold second hand do a drastic drop in price on the sale table! I will agree there are some ML's that have a price tag I would never entertain!!!

But then again, I'm not a ML nut. I love all guns really. :happy0001:

Items purchased at low price, will not have the highest quality available parts, or they would cost more.

Certainly a $300 rifle scope will never have the quality parts of a $2,300 or $3,500 rifle scope.

That said, to many, a lower priced product has enough quality to meet their current need.
For others, they would rather be assured of the highest quality, which always costs more.

It seems like a couple folks out in web-world are a bit butt-hurt that a new off the shelf $300 CVA can out-shoot their $1000+ rifle and clean up twice as fast. ;)


Yeah, CVA put out a couple garbage models in the late 90's that had some serious design/engineering flaws, and sadly folks on muzzie forums still like to cling to those past issues like a newborn kitten to a little kid's pant-leg.

Sadly for you the wins at Friendships Inline match say just the opposite. Some of the best scores of all time have been set by Knights and CVA hasn't even made it into the top 10.

If one is talking competition, CVA can't compete with any of the other rifles, which the score sheets for the last four years clearly indicate.

Actually since 2015, there's only been one individual CVA rifle shot in the matches. In the year 2015, the highest one scored was 25th of IIRC 33 shooters.

lol. I wasn't refering to match shooting, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out CVA's business model isn't the ultra-small percentage market of match shooting, it's obviously the hunting market where they are the market leader. Probably a reason for that: Affordable guns that reliably shoot tight groups at 100 yards that are also easy to clean and maintain.
The hunting market also happens to be the basis of the forum you're posting in. ;)

That's a pretty bold statement some might challenge.


Match shooting is one of the best tests for the repeatability and accuracy of a rifle. It also tests the ability of the shooter. Lots of practice and confidence are learned when one shoots in a match, which only makes them a better hunting shooter.

Everybody has a "tack driver", no matter the brand. Just ask them.
Yes, they are affordable and a decent first muzzleloader. To make them affordable, the highest quality parts are not used, or they couldn't sell them for $300.

100yd shooting today with any modern inline muzzleloader is a chip shot. High quality rifles start to excel at distance.

Agree. My initial comment was largely tongue-in-cheek.

I certainly get a chuckle out of the non-stop CVA bashing based on issues from 20 years ago.

Personally I'm concerned about shooting deer out to 200 yards in which a CVA happens to excel.

For a hunting rifle under $500, it can't be beat for out of the box accuracy with the Bergara made barrels.,

I think "bashing" has different meanings to some, but that's ok too.

As I mentioned earlier, I personally don't care for anything about the CVA rifles........ BUT...... I've setup a couple of friends Accura V2 rifles which shot decent and their owners were happy, and that's what counts. Its a good rifle for the "extended season hunter."

For those who want extreme accuracy and long range tight groups, there are much better rifles available. However, to get extreme accuracy and especially tight long range groups, a higher quality rifle is required. Break open rifles of any brand, just won't compare to any of the bolt rifles for extreme accuracy, especially at long range.

There are a couple of guys on here that will bash CVA any chance they get... yes BASH! It's the exact definition given by JW. I happen to love the CVA Accura and Power Belt Bullets... they just plain work for me where it counts, in the field.

I have also said a thousand times,,, If you don't like CVA or Power Belts,,, if you don't like Knight or TC,,, keep it to yourself. You shoot what you like, I'll shoot what I like. There are too many "experts" on here that want to force their thoughts on others... If a person comes on here and says " I like to use TC muzzleloaders and Hornady bullets" do not tell that person that their set up is crap and they should be using what you say because you are a bullet expert.

Bottom line is there are a couple or three bullies on here that need to be checked.

I Thought this thread was finished
I thought that brand bashing had been explained to me.
Evidently I did not correctly understand the definition.
Sounds to me that some people, without reason, are still bashing CVA a brand, even after they also read the rules I read. Without any intervention.
Maybe it is just me, but is it possible to have double standards related to brand bashing? Maybe even people?
I don't think I will have to waste much time thinking on this one.

Good, then stop doing it!

Yeah, sounds like you maybe trying to stir a pot of old dish water!!! Like he said drop it.

I don't know about you but it doesn't sound like anyone dropping anything! I haven't stirred anything yet just observing.

Wow 6 pages on a thread to get a definition! Sounds to me like there's more than that going on here and it seems instead of a definition there are opinions flying AGAIN!

This was looking for an answer from a moderator, it does not look like I am going to get one.

The answer to half of your question is available on the CVA webpage. All CVA barrels are now made from the same high-grade 416 stainless stock, all made in the same Bergara factory, on the same Bergara machinery.

If Bergara barrels are what some consider to be "inferior steels", then I guess I'm ok with inferior. :rolleyes:

As I pointed out before, some folks are clinging on to the CVA barrel issues from 20 years ago before BPI bought Bergara.

BPI never bought Bergara. Dikar S Coop owns Bergara, BPI, CVA and others.

http://www.dikar.es/en/#nuestras_marcas

BPI is the American entity of Dikar. They are one in the same. BPI/Dikar did in fact buy/create Bergara. They took an existing barrel maker and retooled it to modern standards under the guidance of Ed Shilen of Shilen Rifles, who engineered the current manufacturing methods of Bergara.

http://www.bpioutdoors.com/

http://www.bpioutdoors.com/BPI-History.php


Bottom line is the bad CVA barrels of years ago were manufactured by the extruded steel method. Current model CVA/Bergara barrels are now drilled and button rifled from solid stock. Previous junk vs. current high quality.


.

I just showed you the brands OWNED by Dikar S Coop.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...-rifle-market/
Bergara is owned by Dikar S. Coop
BPI is owned by Dikar S. Coop
CVA is owned by Dikar S. Coop

Im not sure how much clearer i can make it for you.

Founded in 1980 and with headquarters based in Bergara (Spain), Dikar S. Coop. is a member of MONDRAGON Corporation within the Equipment Division.
The group also includes the affiliates BPI/BPF and the QUAKE in Lawrenceville (Georgia, USA).

Clearer that I already made it? No, you can't. You're attemping to argue a point that was already made and is common internet knowege. Dikar is the Spanish entity. BPI is the U.S. entity. It's a partnership. They both claim ownership of the CVA and Bergara brands. You act like you have some revolutionary info here.

Look at Dikar's website:
http://www.dikar.es/en/#nuestras_marcas
BPI is not listed as a company Dikar owns, is it? No, it's listed as their contact for the U.S. Get it yet?

It has nothing to do with the point of my original post. The barrels today are nothing similar to those that had issues in the late 90's. Period. Any comment on that subject?

Its ok to be wrong. You will get over it in time

Call it Dikar or call it BPI it doesn't really matter. As I stated moments ago, do you have any comment on my original point of current barrel quality or are you just trying to muddy the water with your silly 'parent company' rant? I'll assume the latter.

As I stated earlier, my problem with CVA stems mainly from theft. Plain and simple. Every single design they have was stolen. CVA hasn't had an original concept since their beginnings. This is a completely provable fact that cannot be denied. I have a problem with foreign companies stealing concepts from American companies then producing cheaply made knockoffs flooding the market. I have an even bigger problem when Americans stand behind them and shill for them. And by the way, do a little research before you jump and you will find the reason Dikar/BPI purchased Bergara. The lawsuits were starting to put a hurt on their bottom line so they had to start putting out better barrels. And they still aren't inspected and proofed to anywhere near US standards.

Your "buy American" cause is noble, but impractical. Keep in mind corporations like BPI employ plenty of folks here in the U.S. as well.

Consider every front-wheel drive American car being made today is based on a design "stolen" from Japanese manufacturers back in the 80's. Are you only going to drive a Toyota or Honda? The road you're walking is a two-way street.

The list of "stolen" designs applies to virtually every product made today, and those ideas aren't actually stolen once the patent on them runs out. Binoculars, bows, tree stands, bullets, hunting boots, range finders? Any of these fall under your clause?

How about we check your house out? Cell phones, TV's, computers, tools, light bulbs, lawnmowers, tires, beer, chewing gum...etc. etc.. Are you only going to purchase and use the original design/brand?

Welcome to the 21st century.

IAhunter, was John Walter Christie, the inventor of the first successful front wheel drive automobile, Japanese? I think not. Was Oldsmobile, the producer of the front wheel drive 1966 Toronato a Japanese company? I think not. Before you type, learn. 90% of Asian tech comes from the US. It's manufactured there cheaper. It's a well known fact that anyone with fingers can look up on the internet and one that has been known to us well before the wide spread use of the internet. That's the problem with kids today, you think you know all and most don't know a damn thing.

Good points....

Kid? I'm 50. Take some of your own advice and read before you post:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front-wheel_drive

Your Toronado example is a completely different drive-train set up from the Japanese design to which I was referring which rules the market today which is the transverse engine front wheel drive. That's the design the American makers copied/borrowed/stole from the imports, likely because of the impractical design of the full size Toronado/Eldorado which couldn't be used in the compact market.

Apples and oranges.

You and GM54 should hook up. You both like side-skirting whatever point is being made on this forum and go off on some tangent. And an often incorrect tangent as well. A swing and a miss.


.

1929 Cord L-29 Phaeton first FWD to be offered to the public in the USA.

...and right on cue! lol

Once again, and read carefully: ^^^ that's a longitudinal engine front wheel drive, not the transverse mounted engine design used today that was borrowed from the imports to which I was referring and making a point.

My quote once again:
You guys are trying so hard to be "right", that you are completely missing whatever point is being made. High-larious stuff here. :happy0157:

I never said i was right about the car. I just thought it was a cool car. Austin Mini had some too.

In 1959 Austin Mini was launched by the British Motor Corporation, designed by Alec Issigonis as a response to the first 'oil crisis', the 1956 Suez Crisis, and the boom in bubble cars that followed. It was the first production front-wheel-drive car with a watercooled inline four-cylinder engine mounted transversely.

So much for CVA............. :wave:

That’s the biggest bunch of nonsense I ever heard. Talking about a crock ......
You keep plugging your crappy CVA. You might convince newbies or the pennywise pound foolish but those with one eye and half a brain know better ....:)

Well they may not be the best nor the most accurate but I'm happy with Accura V2. Every animal I've shot at with it has either dropped on the spot or only went a short distance. It has done everything I've asked of it. But then I don't shoot at game beyond 200 yards with my muzzleloader.

So what was that about the Japanese being the inventors of the first production transverse engine front wheel drive? Wrong again there Mr. CVA shill? For one you never mentioned transverse engines. BMC was the first to produce those on a sales scale. Now, if you wish to read a little history, take a look at the Japanese auto industry and you will see that all of Japans car models were based off of a few of other countries models. The US built their car industry. Ford and GM had major plants over there. Like most everything else technological that comes from Japan, US engineers thought it up first. Same with China. Same with pretty much all Asia.

Here's a little fact for you to swallow, if your CVA products are so good, why can't you buy them in the country they are produced in? That's a question none of the CVA shills seem to be able to answer honestly. Even with the better quality Bergara barrels, they still aren't safety inspected to Spain's standards which, by the way, aren't even as strict as ours here in the US.

Yeah, that's why CVA is the market leader, because they're crappy.:rolleye0011:

Yes, I will keep plugging my crappy CVA,...with bullets. And I'll be enjoying it as it keeps punching the x-ring at 100 yards. Crappy good times.

You might not have noticed but CVA has gotten much better while other brands have fallen off in recent years.
Any idea why the easiest way to get a TC to shoot better is to throw a Begara barrel on it?

More nonsense : but you keep telling yourself that . You sound like a poster child for marketing brain washing
Tell a lie loud enough and long enough and people will believe it
Worked for Hitler , works for CVA

I don’t think I am reading this wrong, there are still people bashing CVA, in a thread called “What is Brand Bashing”.
One thing I have not heard of is where all this hate comes from. It does not seem normal. The biggest thing I have heard is “it is a proven fact!” when nothing has been proven at all, just general statements. Whenever it comes to discussing some point of why CVA is better or not, there is always a change of the subject being discussed at the time.
So, I would really like to hear from you CVA haters, “What is your personal experience for hating CVA”. Was it a purchase that went wrong? Maybe a model of gun you felt cheated with. Or a Warranty that was not honored or Bad service!
Waiting paitiently.