Remington 700 quality

[Sauer]

Bought a new in box LH 700 VSF 308 few years ago and to make a long and frustrating story short i ended up spending over twice the starting price to get the rifle to shoot decently.
As i live in Europe the rifle ended up costing about the same as the price for a new Blaser but still not as accurate even if my blaser is a light short hunting rifle...

I might have got a lemon but im never going to buy another one!

 

[SALTINE WARRIOR]

My Remington 700BDL was bought second hand in 1978. I'd buy another A serialed version tomorrow if I was in need of one. I'm pretty happy with the way this one shoots. Here's the first handload I ever ran through it.

 

[Mike 338]

Bought a new in box LH 700 VSF 308 few years ago and to make a long and frustrating story short i ended up spending over twice the starting price to get the rifle to shoot decently.
As i live in Europe the rifle ended up costing about the same as the price for a new Blaser but still not as accurate even if my blaser is a light short hunting rifle...

I might have got a lemon but im never going to buy another one!

Yikes...

I'll bet the outside of the rifle was shiny though!

Keep in mind, Remington doesn't sell it's product to you and me. They sell them to Dealers. If you love your Remington, tell your Dealer. If you don't, take it back and make a scene if you have to. Firearm sales are final but a good Dealer will stand behind it's product. It's not to much to ask that they stock products that work to expectations and to do something about it if they don't. If Dealers spent 3 or 4 times the man hours handling a typical transaction because of poor quality or performance, then they'll take their case to the Manufacturer. If the Dealer rolls his eyes every time he sees you walk into his store, that means he understands how hard you had to work for the money you spend in his establishment.

The idea that delivering a new rifle to the gunsmith to make it function how you thought it would is ridiculous. You wouldn't do that with a washing machine would you? A tight/straight action, a good tube and a fair trigger. Without that, we shouldn't even be thinking about fit and finish.

 

[Mike 338]

My Remington 700BDL was bought second hand in 1978. I'd buy another A serialed version tomorrow if I was in need of one. I'm pretty happy with the way this one shoots. Here's the first handload I ever ran through it.

If your happy, that's all that counts.

That's some seriously legible printing! Just curious... was shot No. 1 from a cold, clean barrel or cold, fouled barrel or neither or can't remember cause it was a while ago? Most of my Rem's threw the first shot 3-4".

 

[Sauer]

Yikes...

I'll bet the outside of the rifle was shiny though!

Keep in mind, Remington doesn't sell it's product to you and me. They sell them to Dealers. If you love your Remington, tell your Dealer. If you don't, take it back and make a scene if you have to. Firearm sales are final but a good Dealer will stand behind it's product. It's not to much to ask that they stock products that work to expectations and to do something about it if they don't. If Dealers spent 3 or 4 times the man hours handling a typical transaction because of poor quality or performance, then they'll take their case to the Manufacturer. If the Dealer rolls his eyes every time he sees you walk into his store, that means he understands how hard you had to work for the money you spend in his establishment.

The idea that delivering a new rifle to the gunsmith to make it function how you thought it would is ridiculous. You wouldn't do that with a washing machine would you? A tight/straight action, a good tube and a fair trigger. Without that, we shouldn't even be thinking about fit and finish.

The biggest issue was that factory warranty does not say much for US guns in my country these days, sending a rifle to the US becuse of issues in simply impossible due to incredibly high cost of import/export fees to the US

Ofcorse thats not Remington´s fault in any way but given how the M700 rifles are today(imo) compared to similar priced rifles ill give them a pass!

Thankfully there are often older M700´s on the used market and they are top notch rifles so atleast i have that option

Also my old M722 in 222rem and old battered 1100 12 gauge simply refuse to stop working gun)

 

[SALTINE WARRIOR]

If your happy, that's all that counts.

That's some seriously legible printing! Just curious... was shot No. 1 from a cold, clean barrel or cold, fouled barrel or neither or can't remember cause it was a while ago? Most of my Rem's threw the first shot 3-4".

I used to get paid well for that printing in the pre-CAD days. The first two shots were walking it in to the point of aim.

 

[Bart B]

I've recently heard from folks well entrenched in military sniper rifle accuracy and they say the recent Rem 700 based sniper rifles don't shoot all that great compared to the early ones.

 

[Mike 338]

I've recently heard from folks well entrenched in military sniper rifle accuracy and they say the recent Rem 700 based sniper rifles don't shoot all that great compared to the early ones.

You'd think those guys would get the best without regard to expense or other factors.

 

[Bart B]

You'd think those guys would get the best without regard to expense or other factors.

No, I wouldn't think that . . . after reading about what happened not too long ago. The .338 Lapua Mag was out performed at long range by the .300 Win. Mag. in tests qualifing rifles for military sniper rifles. But the Army had a "fixation" about the .338 and ignored the .300 Win. Mag that shot more accurate.

And the US military powers chose the Rem. 700 action over the far superior Win. 70 action for the new sniper rifle back in the late 1960's.

 

[Trickymissfit]

No, I wouldn't think that . . . after reading about what happened not too long ago. The .338 Lapua Mag was out performed at long range by the .300 Win. Mag. in tests qualifing rifles for military sniper rifles. But the Army had a "fixation" about the .338 and ignored the .300 Win. Mag that shot more accurate.

And the US military powers chose the Rem. 700 action over the far superior Win. 70 action for the new sniper rifle back in the late 1960's.

a little more to it than your post. They tried the Win. Md. 70 in Vietnam, and moved over to the 700. Now noone has really said why all that much, but the end user prefered the Remington based rifle. Kind of a moote point anyway when looking at distances involved with 85% of the shots taken. Considering the time frame and most rifles were chambered in 30-06; the Winchester might have had a slight advantage (I'm not seeing it) in action length. But those real long bullets didn't exist at the time. But when we made the move to the 7.62x51 the ball game changed. The Winchester short action was slightly longer. But the one real advantage I see with the Winchester is in the saftey lever. You don't have to move your hand as much to move it. Yet by far the most kills in a sniper's rifle was with a N.M. M14 (thus a moote point). The very long distance stuff was (or has) been taken over by the big bore stuff. Yet the four hundred yard shot was the norm. Unless you live in some super remote place in North America (Alaska?), most of us don't know what silence is really like. You can hear an Ak47 or an RPD in use four hundred yards away. The Winchester is probably slightly quieter in use. I'll have to have a beer with a certain scout sniper in my VFW post to get his view point on the subject. I do know that's the SOG teams didn't like the bolt guns at all for covert use, as they were considered to be too noisey in operation.

All still kinda of a dull point anyway. Considering that 90% of all KIA's are under 100 yards, and 85% of them are under 75 yards. On the battlefield 85% of all KIA's come from arty, and another 10% come from air strikes. That leaves the other guys doing 5%. Nothing new, as it's been a known fact for 70 years or more. There will always be snipers in one form or another, but for most of them their days are numbered.
gary

 

[Bart B]

a little more to it than your post. They tried the Win. Md. 70 in Vietnam, and moved over to the 700. Now noone has really said why all that much, but the end user prefered the Remington based rifle.

The "end users" I talked with in the late '60's and early '70's preferred the Win. 70 action. GySgt Hathcock told me that himself at the 1971 Interservice Rifle Matches. None of the long range competitors in the services like the Rem. actions and a lot of them were also snipers.

 

[Trickymissfit]

The "end users" I talked with in the late '60's and early '70's preferred the Win. 70 action. GySgt Hathcock told me that himself at the 1971 Interservice Rifle Matches. None of the long range competitors in the services like the Rem. actions and a lot of them were also snipers.

Nevr heard anybody say why, but a good hint is that the U.S. Palma teams prefered Winchesters. Even though they did try Remingtons and even Rugers. Funny thing is that with 95% of the yardages used in Vietnam; a good M1D would have been plenty good enough! S.F. A-teams prefered the M14 N.M. over bolt guns due to their much faster second shot factor. Those guys could had anything they wanted to use. As a sniper's rifle, I've long felt that the bolt gun was over rated.
gary

 

[Bart B]

Nevr heard anybody say why, but a good hint is that the U.S. Palma teams prefered Winchesters. Even though they did try Remingtons and even Rugers.

As a former Palma and US Goodwill International Team member, here's some info you should consider.

Yes, (most of) the US Palma Team members did prefer the Winchester action, but only through the 1992 world match. The reason was any bullet could be used in Palma matches fired in the USA under USA NRA rules. I wrote the first NRA High Power Rule Book regulation for the Palma rifle, it has subsequently been modified. Some folks used 200, 220 and even 250-gr. bullets in the .308 Win case. With bullets heavier than 160 grains from the .308 case, round receivers didn't hold epoxy bedding very long before their accuracy dropped off. Barreled action touque was the problem. But the rectangular Winchester receiver held bedding good enough to wear out a couple of barrels before it needed touched up. This problem was worse with belted magnums used under NRA Any Rifle rules for long range. One or two of the US military teams tried 2-inch long recoil lugs on Remington receivers but that didn't work. Only after gluing a Remington reciever in a flat side/bottom aluminum sleeve did they do well. Several folks sleeved Remington receivers for the .308 Win. round. Benchresters have been sleeving Remingtons for decades since the 1970's or earlier for their 22 and 24 caliber one-holers with 50 to 70 grain bullets for the same reason.

Outside the USA where only arsenal 7.62 NATO ammo's allowed in long range matches and everyone has to use the same ammo lot, those new cases shot more accurate from 3- or 4-lug actions. The ammo's slightly out of square case heads's the problem. A 2-lug action usually doesn't shoot that ammo well unless it just happens to have very square case heads. Fortunately, the ammo used in the 1992 International Palma Matches in the USA had Winchester cases that were probably the best ones ever made in this country. Winchester had to retool their production line 2 or 3 times to make those 92 PALMA headstamped cases. Nowadays, a Stolle Panda 3-lug or a Paramount/RPG 4-lug action's the favorite in the USA for international competition. Not surprising as in 1971, George Swenson in England made a 4-lug action the British Commonwealth fullbore shooters used for arsenal ammo that was far superior to their SMLE rifles chambered for the 7.62 NATO round. Some folks in the USA used that "Swing" action for their Palma rifles. The Barnard 4-lug action from Australia was also a favorite. I have a Paramount action for my Palma rifle. But a Winchester or Remington will shoot reloaded cases with 155-gr. Palma bullets very well.

The Remington 700/40X rifles were never issued to the US Palma Team. In the early 1990's, Remington offered to build 20 rifles on their 40X action for the US Palma Team. The Team Captain declined. Their problems with extractors, inconsistant triggers, and barrels that plagued them since their Model 7XX and 40X inception were still an issue. And Remington wanted to use a 1:10 twist barrel instead of a 1:13 that was best for 30 caliber bullets in the 147 to 155 grain weights. Ruger offered some rifles on a modified single shot Model 77 action. Their factory rifle folks didn't know what a Palma rifle was nor what it had to do so the just slapped some together. They were checked out by team members in late 1991. I got to handle a couple and was not impressed with them at all; their expoy bedding wasn't done right as it had a long pad under the breech end of the barrel. Worst rifle for accuracy the Team members had ever fired. To say nothing of the poor stock design and bad triggers. Ruger's best engineers decided to use barrels from a company (Green Mountain) that made black powder rifle barrels instead of one of the top aftermarket barrel companies that had a reputation for making good ones. Half had 4-groove barrels and half had 6 grooves; those with 6 grooves shot the worst. Only one was able to hold the 1000-yard 10 ring for accuracy, and then just barely. I wonder what all this says about Ruger's opinions on their factory .308 Win. barrels they used on their 77's.

 

[Aldon]

Bart, Gary,

I am enjoying reading this history stuff. ALOT.

It may get lost in this thread however.

I will continue to watch for posts from you two as I do some of the other very knowledgeable members of the forum.

Thanks for taking the time to write this stuff!