750 woodmaster .35 whelen carbine

blargon

blargon

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
271   0   0
Location
ON
Getting past the fact that it's a semi;) , what is your view on the 750 woodmaster that remington is offering, in the .35 whelen carbine. Is an 18.5 inch barrel appropriate for this calibre?? Would accuracy be greatly affected compared to the 22 inch barrel??
 
Last edited:
Accuracy shouldn't be an issue, but muzzle velocity and energy will be slightly less than out of a longer bbl.
The Klingon Forehead is just ugly enough that it might be cool to own. :p
Other than that, a 35 Whelen in a semi-auto... WHY?
 
Monty said:
Accuracy shouldn't be an issue, but muzzle velocity and energy will be slightly less than out of a longer bbl.
The Klingon Forehead is just ugly enough that it might be cool to own. :p
Other than that, a 35 Whelen in a semi-auto... WHY?
Click to expand...

Because theyre not offering it in the pump version :rolleyes: I've wanted a carbine for the bush, and they're offering it in .308, .3006, and the .35 whelen. I already have a .308, so I thought why not the .35? I'm not a HUGE fan of semi's, but I like the clips.
 
You should be able to get you hands on a pump. I've been told that they are available from Remington. Getting a barrel shortened is easy and relatively inexpensive. I had mine done for $40.00, cut and crowned. It would likely be a little more if you want the barrel drilled and tapped to put the front sight back on though. And you could shorten it to 20" instead of 18 1/2" or what ever you want.

I've been thinking the same thing you have. A pump .35 gives you great firepower in a light, handi rifle.

Best regards,

Slooshark1
 
To the guys that claim this rifle is ugly.... I suggest you go and have a look at a real one in the gunstore. They are actually very nice looking and the fit finish and wood is outstanding.
I am definitely not a Remington fan and I have no love for the sometimematics that they have made in the past. But I took a hard look at the Klingon Forehead and I am confident it will function well. (new gas valves):)
 
Hi I'm new to this forum.

Wondering if an updated pump version isn't in future plans. I used to own an 7600 in 30.06; I am sorry that I sold it now. It regularly shot 1 to 1.5 inch - 3 shot groups at 100 yds. It did not seem to be fussy.

I thought the forend on the rifle as a bit smallish; who knows Remington could come out with a revised pump. Don't understand why they don't do the carbine in .308.


Gunsmoke
 
So far the pumps are the same... too bad... they are impossible for me to get my head low enough on the comb to align the iron sights. The wood on the pumps is still the same old econo-grade afghani-elm.... even the checkering is nicer on the Klingon. The R-3 recoil pad is a nice touch and they have swivels.
 
Gunsmoke said:
Hi I'm new to this forum.

Wondering if an updated pump version isn't in future plans. I used to own an 7600 in 30.06; I am sorry that I sold it now. It regularly shot 1 to 1.5 inch - 3 shot groups at 100 yds. It did not seem to be fussy.

I thought the forend on the rifle as a bit smallish; who knows Remington could come out with a revised pump. Don't understand why they don't do the carbine in .308.


Gunsmoke
Click to expand...

Welcome to CGN! :)

Jeff/1911.
 
BIGREDD said:
So far the pumps are the same... too bad... they are impossible for me to get my head low enough on the comb to align the iron sights. The wood on the pumps is still the same old econo-grade afghani-elm.... even the checkering is nicer on the Klingon. The R-3 recoil pad is a nice touch and they have swivels.
Click to expand...


REDD, in the early 80's the 7600 had the good quality wood like my 1981 .308, before they started with the monte carlo style buttstock. The iron sights are lined right up perfect.
I recently saw an after-market synthetic stock set that looks like this version and would make the sights usable, if you like the pumps.
 
Last edited:
blargon said:
REDD, in the early 80's the 7600 had the good quality wood like my 1981 .308, before they started with the monte carlo style buttstock. The iron sights are lined right up perfect.
I recently saw an after-market synthetic stock set that looks like this version and would make the sights usable, if you like the pumps.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the history lesson.... but it doesn't change the fact that they have left the CURRENT PRODUCTION pump guns with a stock that is too high for most users to effectively use the iron sights.
And the chances of getting nice wood on a new pump are nil.
 
A competant stockmaker can adjust a 7600 stock quite easily and inexpensively to give you whatever drop & cast you might require to line up open sights.

First thing I do on all my guns is have the pitch and cast altered and a recoil pad installed. ( More to stop the butt from slipping than from any real or perceived recoil reduction ... yes, even on my .410 Model 42 ! )

I find the average" 7600 stock (even the newer ones, the older Rem. pumps and autos were even worse) to be still too low for me for open sights, and way too low for even the lowest scope mount. There is still the ocassional piece of decent walnut that sneaks out, but what does one really expect, a $ 1,500 "AA" piece of burl or fiddleback on a $ 700 gun ?

Just goes to show you that the factory can't please everybody.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom