# Rinehart vs McKenzie just the facts, once and for all



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

I'm seeing a lot of discussion on the good/ bad of 3D targets.

Well I pulled out my catalogs this morning and compared the prices of one versus the other. 
These prices are msrp and official clubs can get a much better price. Just to be fair, The prices I have listed are each companies full MSRP.

Both companies offer shipping with orders over or around $1500.

Here's some comparisons:

___________Rinehart-------------- Mckenzie XT's
Alert Deer Rinehart, $499 Mck, $441
Mt. Goat, Rinehart = $800 Mck= $514
Alligator, Rinehart =$ 531 Mck= $450.
Fallow Deer, Rinehart = $406 Mck = $461
Antelope, Rinehart = $469 Mck = $439
Mule Deer, Rinehart $588 Mck = $484
Standing Bear 60" Rinehart= $700 Mck (60") = $531
Javelina, Rinehart = $250 Mck = $315
Coyote Rinehart = $275 Mck = $389
Wolf, Rinehart = $494 Mck = $457
Leopard, Rinehart = $538 Mck = $454

obviously the targets are not exactly the same and for this example I tried to match the most similar targets from each companies catalog. 

Average price of new Rinehart inserts (cores) are $99 from $79 to $113
Average price for XT McKenzie inserts (cores) are $69.99 from $50 to $87


Here are the FACTS on some of the popular targets, No McKenzie is not the cheapest on all of their targets but they are cheapest on MOST of their targets. The inserts are cheaper as well.

Some say that the Rineharts hold up better and I agree they do hold up pretty well, However the NEW McKenzies (within the last 4 years) hold up extremely well, since they changed their formula. And the cost of replacement cores will save clubs money down the road.

Thank you for your time,
Marcy


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

Nice!


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

You forgot something. McKenzies still have the standard foam for the main body, so target life is still limited. I do not disagree with your numbers. However, when Sec/Trea of our club I worked with real numbers as in replacement cost per shot arrow. Our figures show something just over 2 cents per shot over a 40 target course. Rinehart advertises 3 cents per shot arrow over a 30 target course. So far no other company has shown cost per shot arrow.

As in my reply in IBO changing targets, we have a 30 Pt Rinehart Buck 12 years old and still going. I understand our oldest Rinehart Target, the 13 year old dino, is going up 4 Sale. Show me a 12 year old HD McKenzie buck still being used and shot as much as our 30 Pt Buck. Show me a 13 year McKenzie target shot as much as our dino and usable to the point it can still be sold.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the target that makes and saves the club money. I gave proof of what Rinehart did for our club, 12 years and no change in shooting fees and membership dues. Evidently, target and other things, our club is doing something right as our club is recognized as one of the top drawing club in mid center Illinois, averaging 144 shooters per event.


----------



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

Sonny, 
I would love to have that many shooters at our clubs. That number is awesome and I commend you.

I will agree that the 13 year old mckenzies have a lot to be desired and were really bad in the day. 
But they have greatly improved. 

We also did a cost calculation and found that the mckenzies were very close on cost per shot to the Rineharts, however the cost of replacement was actually much better with the McKenzies. 

I know we may never agree on this but i also felt that people needed the facts about the Mckenzies, those who are looking to purchase new targets will find that the mcKenzies are not more expensive than the Rineharts. As so many on here proclaim!!

Around here we have found that given a preference most shooters would rather shoot the Mckenzies, which will produce more revenue for the clubs in as, more shooters attending. So if attendance is up then, the clubs are making more money. 

A couple years ago I ordered new mids for some really old Mckenzies (15+) , boy did they look funny, The old bodies were still in useable shape but the new mids made them look really bad.

I would love to pick your brain on what your club does right, with the exception of the targets  I'm getting a new club started and would love to hear what you guys are doing, if you would like to share.


----------



## jg-xring (Aug 26, 2006)

Xforce Girl, I would have thought you have been a member of AT long enough to know that no one here will except facts........Lmao. but really thanks for posting some real info.


----------



## J Whittington (Nov 13, 2009)

Accept not except


----------



## bustn'nocks (May 11, 2010)

XForce Girl said:


> I'm seeing a lot of discussion on the good/ bad of 3D targets.
> 
> Well I pulled out my catalogs this morning and compared the prices of one versus the other.
> These prices are msrp and official clubs can get a much better price. Just to be fair, The prices I have listed are each companies full MSRP.
> ...


Where was this when our club dropped $2,200 on 5 Rineharts that no one want's to shoot. Good work!


----------



## bhtr3d (Feb 13, 2004)

SonnyThomas said:


> You forgot something. McKenzies still have the standard foam for the main body, so target life is still limited. I do not disagree with your numbers. However, when Sec/Trea of our club I worked with real numbers as in replacement cost per shot arrow. Our figures show something just over 2 cents per shot over a 40 target course. Rinehart advertises 3 cents per shot arrow over a 30 target course. So far no other company has shown cost per shot arrow.
> 
> As in my reply in IBO changing targets, we have a 30 Pt Rinehart Buck 12 years old and still going. I understand our oldest Rinehart Target, the 13 year old dino, is going up 4 Sale. Show me a 12 year old HD McKenzie buck still being used and shot as much as our 30 Pt Buck. Show me a 13 year McKenzie target shot as much as our dino and usable to the point it can still be sold.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the target that makes and saves the club money. I gave proof of what Rinehart did for our club, 12 years and no change in shooting fees and membership dues. Evidently, target and other things, our club is doing something right as our club is recognized as one of the top drawing club in mid center Illinois, averaging 144 shooters per event.




They have a completely different foam this year.


----------



## bustn'nocks (May 11, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> You forgot something. McKenzies still have the standard foam for the main body, so target life is still limited. I do not disagree with your numbers. However, when Sec/Trea of our club I worked with real numbers as in replacement cost per shot arrow. Our figures show something just over 2 cents per shot over a 40 target course. Rinehart advertises 3 cents per shot arrow over a 30 target course. So far no other company has shown cost per shot arrow.
> 
> As in my reply in IBO changing targets, we have a 30 Pt Rinehart Buck 12 years old and still going. I understand our oldest Rinehart Target, the 13 year old dino, is going up 4 Sale. Show me a 12 year old HD McKenzie buck still being used and shot as much as our 30 Pt Buck. Show me a 13 year McKenzie target shot as much as our dino and usable to the point it can still be sold.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the target that makes and saves the club money. I gave proof of what Rinehart did for our club, 12 years and no change in shooting fees and membership dues. Evidently, target and other things, our club is doing something right as our club is recognized as one of the top drawing club in mid center Illinois, averaging 144 shooters per event.


Overall, the Rineharts may hold up, but we have a leopard on the rock that has been through two tournaments this year (120 shots) and already has a hole that I can stick my finger 3 inches into the animal. On the other hand, there is an HD Large Deer that is on one of our practice lanes that has at least that many arrows in it from me alone and it's in better shape (Shooting Full Bores). As for the cost per arrow shot, I don't buy that number one bit. With as many arrow, point, weight, bow, speed combinations as there are available today to say that you can have a difinitive number like that is a bit far fetched. Just my two pennies.


----------



## rock77 (Apr 7, 2007)

I would like to see the IBO (just because they are the shoots that I shoot) put out a couple of rineharts on the defense course. Those targets take a beating beyond anything any club could through at them and see which one holds up the best I would bet they would be pretty close in comparison.


----------



## Spotshooter2 (Oct 23, 2003)

Our club will stick with Rineharts. We bought a new Mckenzie large deer last year with the new foam. It isn't anywhere even close to the Rinehart foam and arrows don't pull as easy and the holes when you pull your arrow out of the Mckenzie don't heal as fast as the Rineharts.


----------



## athomPT (Dec 14, 2008)

Even more importantly ASA and IBO don't shoot rhineharts so while I don't mind local shoots with 1 or 2 but it irritates me if 6 or 7 out of 20 targets are rhinehart. Give me mckenzie every day of the week for 3d targets.

Now for backyard block style...it's rhinehart all the way!


----------



## schmel_me (Dec 17, 2003)

personaly i like the rienharts but i just like shooting foam dont care either way.


----------



## rsw (May 22, 2002)

Personally, I don't care about the cost although I understand why a club must consider this. I agree that Rineharts will not draw as many shooters as a McK range will because the McK is just plain more realistic and doesn't have that goofy "comic book" look that I feel with Rineharts. Since IBO and ASA shoot the McK, I will always fill my personal range with them and I frankly won't go to a range that doesn't shoot McK. Several of my friends feel the same way and none of them attend shoots at Rinehart ranges.


----------



## EROS (Feb 15, 2004)

The Rinehart target is the better target but no one really wants to shoot them. They by far held up better then the Mck. On a twenty five target range I would put two or three out on he range and shooters never said anything. But when I put all Mck out I by far got more positive feed back on the lay out. The bottom line nobody really wants to shoot the Rineharts. 

But with that said with the new core inserts in the Mck has improved target life and cost.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

bustn'nocks said:


> As for the cost per arrow shot, I don't buy that number one bit. With as many arrow, point, weight, bow, speed combinations as there are available today to say that you can have a difinitive number like that is a bit far fetched. Just my two pennies.


I did my cost run twice over a 3 year period. Both times it came out below 3 cents per shot per 40 target course - last was a bit more, but still below 3 cents. I don't have last year's attendance records as I am no longer Sec/Trea, but I do have attendance for 2010. 1,280 shooters and this not a record. Our best record attendance was 1,548 shooters and another with 1,380 shooters. 
Right along with this, for the time period we set targets for competition, not bow hunters who wanted to be on top the target.

Still with the above, we have a sheet for targets that gives minimum distances to use. Whether the new target captains use it or not is up to them, but if I see Elk or Caribou set to 25 yards I'll be the first to scream bloody murder at the monthly meeting held right at the club during the event.


----------



## ohiobullseye (Feb 6, 2011)

I must say that I will shoot either one but when I am practiceing before an IBO shoot I would rather shoot the targets they use wheather it be Mckenzie or Rinehart.


----------



## maineyotekiller (Oct 1, 2005)

*Quote*
*Some say that the Rineharts hold up better and I agree they do hold up pretty well, However the NEW McKenzies (within the last 4 years) hold up extremely well, since they changed their formula. And the cost of replacement cores will save clubs money down the road.*

I prefer McKenzies over Rinehart..The Rinehart targets look like caricatures of the animal to me but, this portion of your "Facts" is completely inaccurate....The McKenzies do not hold up worth a crap especially since they went to the insert targets...Check out an IBO defense course at 4pm on the first day of shooting. They targets can't withstand a single day...


----------



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

maineyotekiller said:


> *Quote*
> *Some say that the Rineharts hold up better and I agree they do hold up pretty well, However the NEW McKenzies (within the last 4 years) hold up extremely well, since they changed their formula. And the cost of replacement cores will save clubs money down the road.*
> 
> I prefer McKenzies over Rinehart..The Rinehart targets look like caricatures of the animal to me but, this portion of your "Facts" is completely inaccurate....The McKenzies do not hold up worth a crap especially since they went to the insert targets...Check out an IBO defense course at 4pm on the first day of shooting. They targets can't withstand a single day...


Thank you for dissecting my statement and pointing that out mr. Athens prostaff. Just couldn't help yourself could you? had to try to prove that a "portion" of my statement was un true. Feel better now? 
I was talking about local shoots and local clubs, most of my clubs are going on their 4th year without replacing inserts.
You are talking about a national tournament with 1000's of really good shooters, not really a fair comparison is it?
To do a fair comparison you would have to set the same course with Rineharts and see how well they held up under the same circumstances. Until this happens, how can you say that what I said was Untrue?


----------



## Wesley (Apr 11, 2004)

I know at our club we can't get a full year out of some of the mckenzie cores some we can, however everyone wants to shoot them so you have to have them to draw shooters, I think the real problem with target wear is the popularity of large diameter arrows once a target gets a hole started in it it just chunks a big hole out in it. One thing that helps is to turn target every other shoot


----------



## maineyotekiller (Oct 1, 2005)

X Force Girl I'm sorry for having a different opinion of the McKenzie targets. I did not mean to offend you by having a difference in opinion.I did not think that a difference in opinion with you would elicit name calling and what seems like a personal attack on your part. I've had different experiences with the targets than you have apparently had and my experiences are skewed most certainly flawed as they don't align with yours. I wasn't aware of all the stipulations on your facts and for this I am sorry.


----------



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

maineyotekiller said:


> X Force Girl I'm sorry for having a different opinion of the McKenzie targets. I did not mean to offend you by having a difference in opinion.I did not think that a difference in opinion with you would elicit name calling and what seems like a personal attack on your part. I've had different experiences with the targets than you have apparently had and my experiences are skewed most certainly flawed as they don't align with yours. I wasn't aware of all the stipulations on your facts and for this I am sorry.


Never once did I said rineharts were not good targets. I was only making price comparisons and stating that the new McKenzie's hold up to better than the older ones many clubs still have.
For you to come on here and say I am totally wrong based on your findings at an IBO shoot is not a fair comparison.
I did not start this thread to start fights only to inform people.
Not everyone agrees with me and that is fine. Some just choose to disagree in a nicer manner.
I don't make personal attacks just call it as it is. I never called you any names except Mr Athens prostaff because that is what your signature says.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

XForce Girl, stick with your guns.

Quote maineyotekiller; "The Rinehart targets look like caricatures of the animal to me///

Example of what other people might see or think;
McKenzie targets; When have you seen 3D bulging muscle lines on a animal? When have you seen points zone lines on a live deer? When have you seen a live deer shine like McKenzies do?

Can any target be improved by a company? Yes, but people have to speak up right to the company. Yes, I'd like to see more matching color of the real animal on Rineharts. In some cases, yes, the target lines could be improved. But that we shoot Rineharts as is I haven't spoke up.
No matter what, any target on a course has to be shot by the everyone and all have the same degree of scoring.


----------



## bow-legged (Nov 26, 2002)

Fact McKenzie has raised prices for the last few years a deer that cost me $250. club price 2 years ago and now is $309. McKenzie targets where cheaper than rinehart but McKenzie is catching them quick. Our shoots draw from 160's to 240's and I can tell you some cores will only make it two shoots. My targets are all xt series and we are going into our third year. I have midsections shot up becuase there is only two inches of target under the cores so the mid sections dont last. After two years of shooting I need 8 midsection already. Cores have been replaced many times over. I spent almost $2000. on cores last year alone and Im starting this year off with buying 8 for the first shoot. The cores have gone up $20.00 dollars on some and shipping is $17.00 dollars a core thats a core so a javelina core is 50.00 plus 17.00 for shipping so you are talking $70.00 for a core that I have a hard time making last 2 shoots and if I put it out on the 3 shoot i will have pass throughs. Ask people who shot my course at the sign up building its nothing for me to have 20 cores that have been replaced laying around. If I could do it again I would buy NL targets and patch them. If you patch the 10 ring on an xt that only leaves a little material above and below the patch and you will have pass throughs there even thought the patch is good. 

These are the problem targets, I think its because they are not thick targets and they have something good to aim at. Im lucky to get 3 shoots out of them. 
Javelina
black buck
pronghorn 
impala
coyote

These targets you will have to replace the mid sections with after 2 seasons.
coyote
russian boar
pronghorn.

These are my facts and what Im dealing with.


----------



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

Wow that's a lot of shooters for sure. 
I find that if targets are getting shot up too quick. They may be set too close. Also setting shooting stakes at different angles makes them tear up much faster.
I was advised to not buy certain targets because of the reasons you mentioned. One was the black buck.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Bigjim67 (Jan 23, 2006)

> Fact McKenzie has raised prices for the last few years a deer that cost me $250. club price 2 years ago and now is $309. McKenzie targets where cheaper than rinehart but McKenzie is catching them quick. Our shoots draw from 160's to 240's and I can tell you some cores will only make it two shoots. My targets are all xt series and we are going into our third year. I have midsections shot up becuase there is only two inches of target under the cores so the mid sections dont last. After two years of shooting I need 8 midsection already. Cores have been replaced many times over. I spent almost $2000. on cores last year alone and Im starting this year off with buying 8 for the first shoot. The cores have gone up $20.00 dollars on some and shipping is $17.00 dollars a core thats a core so a javelina core is 50.00 plus 17.00 for shipping so you are talking $70.00 for a core that I have a hard time making last 2 shoots and if I put it out on the 3 shoot i will have pass throughs. Ask people who shot my course at the sign up building its nothing for me to have 20 cores that have been replaced laying around. If I could do it again I would buy NL targets and patch them. If you patch the 10 ring on an xt that only leaves a little material above and below the patch and you will have pass throughs there even thought the patch is good.
> 
> These are the problem targets, I think its because they are not thick targets and they have something good to aim at. Im lucky to get 3 shoots out of them.
> Javelina
> ...


Man you guys have a ton of shooters, how many shoots a year? we barely get 50, a Michigan is a 3d state.


----------



## Bowtech n ROSS (Aug 30, 2007)

He draws that many because of his targets and having the most national like shoot around. He draws that many every shoot for 2 shoots month. Set a good course and people will come.


----------



## XForce Girl (Feb 14, 2008)

That would be an awesome goal for our club.
I want to tell everyone that I appreciate all the feedback. I am learning a lot from all of you.
I don't care if we agree or not. I'm not too stubborn that I can't learn better ways to operate a club. High attendance numbers speak for themselves. But with that comes higher target costs too
Keep the thoughts coming.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk


----------



## gryfox00 (Jun 11, 2007)

We currently have mostly Rineharts, they have held up well. But shooter numbers have been dropping and apparently its due to everybody that shoots often wants to shoot McKenzies. I have been trying to get our club to consider changing due to shooter numbers


----------



## Archerywarrior (Apr 17, 2005)

When i was in charge of a 3-d club(its been 4 years since i left setting up the 3-d's) we went to reinharts cause of the plugs and durability and we tested this by putting a rinehart up and a new mckenzie up beside each other . As for people who attended the hunter class did not care what they shot as long as vitals good and had realistic shots. the comp shooters at first did not care but as we got more rineharts on course they started complaining. there reason is they need to see mckenzies to help practice judge the yardage,which i agree with. My main concern was that we would get anywhere from 80 to 100 hunter class shooters and only 20 comp shooters,so whos paying the bills. Also the younger shooters loved seeing all the different variety of animals rinehart has to put on the course.Now that mckenzie has plugs i would half to say it would be in the hands of the clubs and what they put out. There is a club around home here that uses neither mckenzie nor rinehart but we go because it is a good shoot and challenges you as a shooter. So guess instead of arguing its all comes down to what each indivdual likes to shoot,and comes down to it you go to a club to shoot and practice so you go to were you feel challenged.Hope i didnt ramble on.


----------

