Update: Pricing on Remington’s 2020 TrackingPoint Rifles

Screen Shot 2013-09-27 at 1.17.19 PM

Remington debuted their new 2020 TrackingPoint-enabled rifle line the other day to virtually no fanfare whatsoever. The new guns are a result of Remington’s partnership with TrackingPoint via Jason Schauble, but the pricing wasn’t released when the rifles were announced. Today we can report from a source who was present at a meeting with distributors that the total package will cost somewhere in the $5,000 – $6,000 range retail (scopes alone are rumored to cost $3,000 just to make, not counting retail markup). It looks like TP has recouped its R&D costs on the full-price version and is selling these at much smaller profit margins. Stay tuned.

avatar

About Nick Leghorn

Nick Leghorn is a gun nerd living and working in San Antonio, Texas. In his free time, he's a competition shooter (USPSA, 3-gun and NRA High Power), aspiring pilot, and enjoys mixing statistics and science with firearms. Now on sale: Getting Started with Firearms by yours truly!

26 Responses to Update: Pricing on Remington’s 2020 TrackingPoint Rifles

  1. avatarJAlan says:

    That’s actually not so bad. It’s still over-priced, but until other companies start releasing their own smart scopes, this will do for those that must have it.

    • avatarBDub says:

      Unless you can jailbreak the 500Yrd limit and install and aftermarket electronic trigger, you’re better off spending that money on a good rifle and traditional scope, and some range time.

      Hunting at 500 yrds though….really?

      • avatarT Rex says:

        I used to also believe no one should ever take a 500 yd shot…….until I went on a hunting trip to Nebraska with a buddy and we both discovered our Leupold 3×9 and 4×12′s were woefully inadequate if you intended to bag a big buck in the Sandhills. Luckily the Rancher let us borrow his Sendero 7mag with a Huskemaw 5x20x50. I witnessed my buddy take a nice buck at 515yds with one shot thanks to the Huskemaw system, my buck was a chip shot at 285 yards. If I had not witnessed and actually fired a rifle equipped with dialed in quality ballistic compensating scope like the Huskemaw, I would never have believed a 500 yard shot was practical and would have suspected anyone claiming such consistent long shots to be full of $#it. You should try to find one for yourself to check out because I’m hear to tell you that a 500yd shot is not that difficult if you have the right optic matched to a load and know how to use it.

  2. avatarBigTex says:

    That is a regrettably poor choice of image. That shot angle is anything but ideal, especially at 500 yards where the 30-06 is only carrying ~1200 ft/lbs of energy, and even less so with the .308 at ~1000ft/lbs. Velocity for both calibers is only is in the 1800fps range at the distance, which is low for reliable expansion.

    I guess it would be too much to ask for Remington to advocate responsible shot placement with their newfangled whiz-bang gadget.

    • avatarIng says:

      Image chosen for visual impact, not the realities of hunting, apparently. I’m not a hunter, but I’m guessing if you were really taking that shot, you’d prefer the elk to be either broadside to you or quartered facing away, so’s not to have to try shooting through all that bone and muscle in the chest and shoulders.

      I’m also guessing that attempting a 500 yard shot on any large game animal is borderline irresponsible to begin with. But again, I’m not a hunter. And I won’t ever have the $$ to spend on a something like the Tracking Point dingus, so for me it’s a moot point. (Why bother commenting at all? Just because I can.)

      • avatarBigTex says:

        500 yards is getting into the “because I think I can” category and out of the “hunting” category. But then isn’t that the point of this gizmo?

        • avatarGunGeek says:

          Guys I dont know where you are from, I grew up out west and hunted white tail deer. There are really no large trees in southern AZ, its all cactus and some small shrubbery. The likely hood of coming within 100 yards of a deer where we rifle hunted was slim. My father had us sight in to 300 yards at minimum, and my first deer at the age of 13 was at 350 yards. Now take into consideration that the deer out west are significantly smaller than deer in the south. To put it into perspective I packed out my first deer at 13 for about 2 miles. It might have weighed about 70 lbs after cleaning. Anyway the point I was making is that in some placed 500 yards is not that unheard of.

        • avatarEugene says:

          To you this is a “Maybe” shot. There were several of us that made many kill shots with the Winchester 70 using the 30-06 in 67 – 68 .. at the 800 – 1000 yard ranges. Fact.

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      500 yards is well into the traditional “too far” range – given the equipment from 10-15 years ago. Some .30-06 loads (Buffalo Bore 168 grain TSX, Hornady Superperformance 180 grain SST) carry more than 1500 FPE at 500 yards. A good 7mm or 300 mag load can carry 1500 FPE well past 500 yards, and a .338 Lapua can travel much further beyond that.

      We can debate the ethics of long range hunting all day – my furthest shot at a deer was about 320 yards. Paced. So that’s a very rough estimate. That 8 point buck fell to a 180 grain Hornady Light Magnum .30-06 load. Sure the tracking point may be a but ridiculous as a shooting crutch. Say what you will about technology, it will not move backwards. I won’t give anyone a hard time (well, not too much, anyways) about hunting without a host of gizmos. I think some things people take into the field can be ridiculous – especially if they haven’t trained with them. I’ll occasionally pack a range finder if I think I’ll be taking a shot longer than 100 yards with my .45-70.

      There are parts of me that wished that Tracking Point never was created, but here we are.

    • avatarSouthern Cross says:

      I’ve always had the philosophy in hunting that “long-range shots should be apologized for, not boasted about“. Most game I’ve taken has been at 150 meters maximum. Sometimes so close the bayonet was a useful accessory. With a wounded pig in front of me, options were few.

    • avatarSam S. says:

      For those talking about ethical shot placement, this gee wiz bang device people refer to allows the shooter to place that round into the spot it is supposed to go into in order to harvest game ethically.

      Another aspect of this system, it’s freedom of choice to use or not use a system like this. If you are poo pooing it, I guarantee you haven’t shot it.

      “My grandfather this”…..”when I was in the Army that”……….this is an inevitable technology just like the digital camera, cell phone, blue ray, tablets, hybrid cars, solar, etc.

      Old school shooters, please keep doing that and teach the younger ones. Target shooters, please keep doing that and teach the younger ones. To each their own in the shooting world. Be thankful we live in a nation where this tech is available to the civilian shooter.

      Better face the reality that there is a whole new generation of shooters behind you that love tech and would love to see it integrated into a firearm. If this it what it takes to keep new shooters in the game, then so be it…………that’s the point folks…….getting and KEEPING new shooters in the ranks.

      I wish you all the best.

  3. $3,000 isn’t bad at all for the package, if the package includes a rifle. Depending on the rifle, of course.

  4. avatarI_Like_Pie says:

    That is an incredible waist of money if you are a hunter.

    However that is an incredible way to bilk money from gullible G.I. Jokers who must have every stupid gadget that makes them feel better about themselves.

    • avatarPops says:

      Hey I’m one of those gadget guys lol, this is cool– however I think for hunting, I would feel like I was cheating. At that price I could buy a really nice scope, and a decent rifle, which would probably be a lighter package, and do just as well. And not need batteries.

  5. avatarFred Sherman says:

    When I was in the army we fired a nonscoped garand at 500 yards. thats a 30-06. we also shot a BAR at a thousand. That is also a 30-06.

    You may never know your ability if you let some so called expert tell you your ability. It may take some practice but there a lot of servicemen that wear an expert badge and they can do it.

    • avatarChris Stough says:

      In the Marine Corps – we qualify at 500 meters with a standard M16A2 – irons sites – all day long. Ooh Rah. .308 w/700 bolt – 800 meters…all day long.

  6. avatarStephen M. says:

    My grandfather would laugh at this. That man used to spine shoot running deer at 500 with a .220 Swift. Never once left a wounded animal, though granted some of the old timers tell he poached more deer than I’ll ever shoot. Fancy equipment over practice is just lazy.

    But what do I know, I only hunt with a bow.

  7. avatarjames says:

    @Stephen,
    Your grandfather sure sounds like a good story teller. You on the other hand should be more intelligent to assume ANYONE would believe your statement. My dad used to shoot Bald Eagles at 20,000 ft with his 12 gauge.

    • avatarPops says:

      Bah! Bald Eagles at 20,000 ft, I knock down drones at 30,000 ft with my Mosin Nagant at least once a week

  8. avatardavycrockit1 says:

    I take 300 and 500 yard shots with my 300 win mag with a 4x12x50 Nikon and have never missed . and the 30.06 and the 300 is proven for distance’s of 1000 yrds !

  9. avatarMalcolm says:

    What you are all missing is not the accuracy factor or skill factor IT IS THE TIME OF FLIGHT at these long distances and no ( hunter) shooter has any control over or knowledge of how the animal is going to act, move as you pull the trigger. Two or even one and a half seconds means a wounded animal when it moves and you are 500m to 1000m away for another poor follow up shot.TrackingPoint rifles have no place in hunting.Target shooting for fun sure.South Africa

  10. avatarJay K says:

    I checked one of these out at Cabela’s today, and I have to say its pretty cool. The system fires up quickly, and is easy to adjust for zoom, focus, and wind correction. I’m not sure I would want to lug this thing up the side of a mountain, but after having my hands on it, I’m definitely giving it some thought. As for the long range hunting shot, you should never take any shot unless you are comfortable with the conditions. I hunt with a 300 RUM with a 12X Zeiss, and might feel comfortable on an elk at 500 yards if the wind was light, the FOV was clear, and the animal was stationary, and I might pass on a nervous whitetail at 200 in gusty winds. While the 2020 will help with your trajectory, it will not teach you how to judge the wind, steady the rifle, or squeeze the trigger, and will not replace time spent on the range.

    • avatarjhammon30 says:

      You don’t have to judge the wind. The scope does it for you….just saying. As for everyone commenting as to 500 yd shots being irresponsible it all depends on the shooter, his or her ability and knowledge of their weapon, and the quality of equipment used. Plain and simple.

  11. avatarGeorge T says:

    Some guys, not hunters, don’t shoot game over 100 to 300 yards because they don’t know how to shoot. I have taken trophies home since I was 15. My 7mm is sighted in for 300 and I regularly make 300 to 400 yard shots on whitetail, mulies, elk and moose. I hunt with guys with 7mms that sometimes shoot moose at 800 yards and mule at 700 yards with 308. We have never had a wounded animal.
    Saying that someone shouldn’t try a long shot because they might only wound an animal is like saying don’t try a 300 yard shot because you might wound an animal. The days of sighting in guns at 100 yards have long gone. But yet these guys keep on commenting like they know what they are talking about.
    It just doesn’t make sense. My 7mm is sighted in for 300 yards becuase that is the distance that my animals are at. We know at 700 yards where the bullet is going to go. And so does the TrackingPoint. Use either one, the one you prefer.
    The so-called hunters that don’t believe that over 500 yards are possible probably don’t believe that we walked on the moon. Get with the times.
    We make 700 and 800 yard shots, measure it out, and it is a fact.

  12. avatarWayne says:

    I think most are missing the point. It says it is good up to 500 yards nowhere does it say you have to shoot it at 500 yards. I for one would not want it to work only out to 100 yards if most my shots were at 200

  13. avatarLarry says:

    You dang whippersnappers with yore gadgets. We killed animals humanely with a sharpened stick that we hardened in a fire (later, after we learned how to make fire) at three feet, and usually had to finish the job with our bone knife! First, it was blunderbusses, then ya’ll been shootin’ that powder and ball, then those unethical cartridges for decades. So, now, you got somethin’ to make that long shot even longer and more accurate, and you start whinin’ at each other like little princesses over ethics of this new gadget.
    I do hope I made my point; you are ALL using technology to give you advantage in the field, whether it is an assembled cartridge, rifled barrel, ballistics calculator, or this scope. Quit whining about the technology and realize your confidence in the shot, no matter how good your “kentucky WIndage”, now has a new tool for making sure your shot is true,effective, and humane.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.