Overpriced outdoor gear

This thread was started by DougFir as a question: Is high priced outdoors gear really that good or do outdoorsmen (and women) buy it simply because it's expensive? In other words, are they paying a lot simply because they want to advertise they have the means to do so? Some on here maintain they are buying top of the line because they're convinced it serves them better. And maybe it does. Maybe they just think it does. Doesn't really matter. A few have been honest and admit they buy fancy gear essentially because they like shopping for high end things. A hobby if you will. That's okay. A few, like myself, eschew shopping and stereotyping. We're more cautious about following the latest fashion, whether it's guns, gear, clothing, whatever. Sometimes it's due to financial constraints (which I can assure you is NOT the case with me ... not now anyway). Sometimes it's simply because we value being individuals and not slaves to marketing. That's okay too. What I'm seeing is most who have responded on the high-spending end of the spectrum are aggressively defensive. They assume folks who explore or adhere to a different philosophy are ridiculing them for being wasteful or pretentious. Because we with low end preference can demonstrate that we have success without excess, we're branded braggards. But those same guys who brand us flaunt photos of themselves and their expensive gear, rare collector guns, exotic dogs, etc. worth tens of thousands of dollars. Yeah, there's some irony at work alright. :unsure:
To be clear, I didn't really mean to start an argument about whether outdoor gear, in general, is a good value. I was just calling attention to the instances that are so ridiculous, as to be almost comical ($20 for a small bag of crushed corn cobs, $4 for windicator, etc. ) I may have been influenced by grumpiness at having to pay $20 for a bag of crushed corn cobs, but I am legitimately interested in the way a specific target market can increase the "value" of a product (I'm guessing in most other markets, crushed corn cobs do not go for roughly the same price per pound as a good steak). In any case, I guess forum threads are like arrows launched at a bugling bull elk; you do your best to aim and release for a certain trajectory, but once they're away, you're at the mercy of every little tree limb you didn't notice...
 
Another aspect of outdoor gear is that certain areas and hunts require different types of gear. For my local deer hunt it’s 100 degrees for most of the season. I have hunted in cheap gear and now have some good hot weather gear. It’s hands down much more enjoyable and I hunt longer now. For me it’s money well spent to be cooler during this season.
 
Supply v demand. If a market is saturated, prices go down.

It's the sweet spot between a buyer and seller market.

Last wooden penny worth of sage input: For the most part, you get what you pay for.
 
Supply v demand. If a market is saturated, prices go down.

It's the sweet spot between a buyer and seller market.

Last wooden penny worth of sage input: For the most part, you get what you pay for.
Well, than clearly my new brass tumbler media is made from magical corn cobs!
 
This thread was started by DougFir as a question: Is high priced outdoors gear really that good or do outdoorsmen (and women) buy it simply because it's expensive? In other words, are they paying a lot simply because they want to advertise they have the means to do so? Some on here maintain they are buying top of the line because they're convinced it serves them better. And maybe it does. Maybe they just think it does. Doesn't really matter. A few have been honest and admit they buy fancy gear essentially because they like shopping for high end things. A hobby if you will. That's okay. A few, like myself, eschew shopping and stereotyping. We're more cautious about following the latest fashion, whether it's guns, gear, clothing, whatever. Sometimes it's due to financial constraints (which I can assure you is NOT the case with me ... not now anyway). Sometimes it's simply because we value being individuals and not slaves to marketing. That's okay too. What I'm seeing is most who have responded on the high-spending end of the spectrum are aggressively defensive. They assume folks who explore or adhere to a different philosophy are ridiculing them for being wasteful or pretentious. Because we with low end preference can demonstrate that we have success without excess, we're branded braggards. But those same guys who brand us flaunt photos of themselves and their expensive gear, rare collector guns, exotic dogs, etc. worth tens of thousands of dollars. Yeah, there's some irony at work alright. :unsure:
To answer Doug FT question yes most times high price gear is better much better ! Why someone buys what they buy is their choice ! I think your making assumptions because of what someone chooses to put on their back or feet or carry in their hand. You are a minimalist , having read your post for many years I can tell you that’s true. It works for you and that’s fine …… more power to you . You are also blinded by the fact you used two quality guns for years , the Remington 870 and the Browning A-5 . Your are only 7 years older than I am and back in the 70’s I could not afford a A-5 they cost about $450 to $500 back then and I used to look at them and say to much for me! My first shotgun was a Remington 870 wing master 12 gauge 2 3/4 chamber and I paid $140 in the spring of 1974. My point here is those guns lasted for decades … did you buy them for prestige of function ?

Most time the average guy makes compromise on what he uses , the more we hunt or fish the more we learn that better stuff last longer, points better , is lighter , warmer, clearer ! I have Leupold scopes and Redfields that are closing in on 50 years old and still function , all have never needed anything however no weavers , tasco’s that lasted . I bought them because that’s what I could afford at time.

Many times the criticism comes from those you don’t understand the value in quality clothes are clothes , guns are guns , boots are boots etc but they are not. Sitka comes to mind their stuff is light, it’s moves with you and is tough and warm , it’s expensive but it designed extremely well. I guess it does cost more ! Too expensive , maybe or maybe it’s priced for the quality it is. Binoculars are another thing that the more you use them the more quality you want , rifle scopes much the same. If I was to offer someone my old Bushnell sportveiw or my old Zeiss conquest for free I guarantee they would choose the Zeiss every time ! Quality speaks for itself.

I find there are greater and lesser persons at everything whether it’s skill, ability or money ! We all must find what works for our own needs and be less narrow minded about others! Many have better stuff than I and use it better more power to them. I don’t need the best all the time but I want solid gear good glass and warm clothes .
 
Being paralyzed and still outdoors and hunting a lot I can honestly say that Sitka has changed the game for me. When you break the spinal cord your body cannot heat itself anymore and I would get extremely cold. I tried the cheap clothing and came home several times in temperatures that were just unsafe. Since getting the Sitka I can hunt longer and better and much safer. It's not to look cool or to show off because I had to save a long time just to get one coat at a time but it's just to help me do what I like more comfortable and not freeze.
 
Just to clarify, I never purchased a new gun in my life. The 870 Wingmaster magnum I bought from HS classmate almost new in 1968. Got a good deal. He needed to buy hay for his horse. It's about used up. I bought the Browning A-5 magnum at a gun show seven years ago. It was VERY used. Made in 1976 with Jap Invector barrel. Receiver since replaced with 1961 Belgian. In fact, I have replaced almost everything on it at one time or another. Fits me like a glove so worth keeping it in operation.. Every year it shoots thousands of rounds and travels at least a thousand miles.

Edit: Correction. I forgot about the Light Twelve A-5. I purchased that gun new at Seoul PX in 1972. The store was unloading its entire shotgun stock after pheasant hunting was closed indefinitely. $150.
 
Last edited:
I've got a great story for this but it's just not hunttalk appropriate.
Never used, never seen one used, and sure ad shit never been tempted to watch a YouTube regarding their use. Heh!

I don't get it, nor do I want to consider it much further...

Butt, your story mixed w/ @JohnCushman 's tales of midgets, brass poles, cocaine, and Taco Bell drive thru's... would sure evolve into one hell of a fire ring, gut busting time to chug, chug, chug, another Coldsmoke!
 
Just to clarify, I never purchased a new gun in my life. The 870 Wingmaster magnum I bought from HS classmate almost new in 1968. Got a good deal. He needed to buy hay for his horse. It's about used up. I bought the Browning A-5 magnum at a gun show seven years ago. It was VERY used. Made in 1976 with Jap Invector barrel. Receiver since replaced with 1961 Belgian. In fact, I have replaced almost everything on it at one time or another. Fits me like a glove so worth keeping it in operation.. Every year it shoots thousands of rounds and travels at least a thousand miles.

Edit: Correction. I forgot about the Light Twelve A-5. I purchased that gun new at Seoul PX in 1972. The store was unloading its entire shotgun stock after pheasant hunting was closed indefinitely. $150.
Good edit I was about to call you out on that A5 … lol nothing wrong with getting a good deal on a quality gun or anything else for that matter. Truth and fact here is you don’t have junk , those two guns were solid choices !
 
Any piece of clothing that's sole purpose is to be a walking advertisement for a company because it is trendy. Granted I have been guilty of this in the past, but now when I see people wearing a simple carharrt hat or a 100% cotton columbia tshirt (either can go for $20-30) I wonder why so many consumers spend money to advertise for another company.

I'd be will to bet that many companies have a significant profit margin in selling cheap products at a marked up price all because their logo is a status symbol.
 
I think the funniest thing is Sitka convincing waterfowlers they need to pay $550 for a jacket they'll wear for two hours in the morning 200 yards from their truck.
Idk in seriously considering there waders. I spend a lot of time in waders every year and at $200 to $300 for the other brands I've never made it more than one season without several leaks.
 
Back
Top