Remington 750 Woodsmaster .30-06
No. 27061, $831
Reviewed: May 2007
This model, introduced in 2006, is chambered for .243 Win.,. 270 Win., .308 Win., .30-06, and .35 Whelen. An 18.5-inch barrel Carbine is the same price, and a synthetic model introduced this year sells for $732.
The 750 variants replace the 7400 model, which we reviewed in July 1998. The 750 had a four-shot magazine, and on our test gun, a 22-inch round-tapered blued barrel. The gun weighed 7.5 pounds and measured 42.6 inches in overall length. The stock has been restyled, with an American walnut forend and stock with machine-cut checkering under a satin finish. Sights included a gold-bead front sight on a ramp and a step rear sight that’s windage adjustable. The gas-action gun came with an R3 recoil pad, and had a positive cross-bolt safety with a Remington key lock. The receiver was tapped for a scope mount.
In the 750, the gas orifice is drilled at a 45-degree angle, instead of a 90-degree angle like on the 740/742/7400 guns. This eliminates a 90-degree turn at the gas port, and it eliminates shaving-off copper in the bore from the projectile. The gasblock on the 750’s barrel has been moved rearward, which also moves the gas orifice hole rearward. Moving the gas hole back captures gases sooner and under greater pressure, which should increase reliability.
The barrel extension is now made as a cast part instead of a machined part. By casting, Remington says it can better control internal geometries and eliminate machining burrs, which they say translates into better reliability. Also, the bolt head has a slick nickel/Teflon coating, which smoothes out bolt sluggishness. The gun comes with an R3 recoil pad, and the comb drop has been lowered at the comb so that the shooter can use the rifle sights more easily, one of our complaints about the 7400.
All of our testers agreed the R3 recoil pad was comfortable and effective. The R3 buttpad was very soft, though it wasn’t fitted flush with the buttstock. Our sample came with nicely figured walnut on the buttstock and forend, which featured finger grooves more like what we’d expect on a pump gun. The buttstock had a Monte Carlo-style cheekpiece. The gun came to shoulder smoothly and naturally, and gave us a solid cheekweld to view the sights or scope. Three out of five test shooters preferred the Remington’s stock design over the others. It made no difference to one, and the left-handed shooter preferred the other two. Three out of five testers preferred the forend on the Remington.
The push-button safety, located behind the trigger, had a child safety lock built into it, but it in no way interfered with the operation of the safety when it was not activated. The safety was smooth and positive.
To load the 750, the shooter drops a round in the chamber and pushes forward on a button, located on the left side of the box magazine, thus pulling down the follower and allowing the bolt to close. Then you can remove the magazine by pushing forward on a lever just in front of the trigger guard. The older-model 7400 magazines are interchangeable with the 750. Another advantage of the Remington is 10-round box magazines are available for the Remington.
The Remington came with a chamber brush, but we’d prefer a bore-snake that drops into the muzzle and can be pulled through the length of the gun. Cleaning the action spring is also fairly easy. To take the forend off, the shooter loosens the forend screw and removes the forend. Then he brushes the action spring and action tube with gun cleaning solvent, dries it, and applies a thin coat of Rem Oil to prevent rusting.
The trigger assembly pops out easily for cleaning, much like a shotgun trigger group. To remove the trigger assembly, the shooter closes the action, then taps out the front and rear trigger plate pins. Then lift the rear of the trigger plate assembly and remove the assembly from the receiver. At the range, the 750 shot near-MOA with everything we fed it.
Marlin .308 MX, $590
Reviewed: September 2007
Our Marlin came with mighty nicely figured walnut. The buttstock wood matched the wood of the forend, both having prominent contrasting grain and some fiddleback. The wood appeared to have an epoxy-base finish, it being quite hard and scratch-resistant. The checkering was excellent, with decorative touches. It wrapped the forend and was generous at the grip. The butt had a hard-rubber pad that curved to fit the shoulder, though it did little to cut recoil. There were sling studs, too.
The bluing and overall fitting were excellent, though we could have done without all the extra words of warning on the barrel.
The sights consisted of a buckhorn rear with a U notch, and a hooded front having a large, flat, gold-faced bead. We thought a good aperture rear sight would have been the way to go, rather than the dated "cowboy" buckhorn rear. The rear sight had the old-style stepped adjustment for elevation, with windage by drifting.
The action had well-polished flat sides with matte finish on top, and was fitted with a hammer-blocking cross bolt that could be used or ignored at will. The MX had the overall flavor of the old West, which we found pleasant. The fact that its ballistics match the .308 is cause for celebration, we thought.
The easily loaded tubular magazine held five rounds, and one could be added in the chamber for a total of six. The front of the magazine tube was secured to the barrel via a single screw going into a small carrier dovetailed into the barrel. We found the screw had worked loose after only a few shots. We snugged it up and then kept a wary eye on it, and found that it didn’t want to stay perfectly tight during our extended test shooting. It seemed that as this screw came loose, accuracy tended to deteriorate slightly. However, the Marlin had accuracy to spare, even at its worst.
Feeding, firing and ejection were perfect. The lack of suitable padding in the token recoil pad led to our noticing the kick, but it was not substantial. For those shy of recoil, a softer pad might be appropriate.
Our first sight-checking rounds of the iron sights gave us three shots touching at 25 yards, dead center, so it was not necessary to adjust anything. As noted, extraction and ejection were strong and easy, and primers appeared to have flattening commensurate with reasonable pressure.
There was a trace of creep in the trigger, which broke at 5.5 pounds. We felt the future owner of this rifle ought to have that taken care of.
With an empty weight of 7.3 pounds this wasn’t a lightweight, but that’s about the only thing we could complain about, concerning the Marlin. The balance and handling were superb. The lever was easy to work with the rifle at the shoulder. The rifle was easily carried with the hand wrapped around the action, which was the static balance point. However, a suitable scope would make the overall weight of the MX at least eight pounds, and that’s a good reason to consider a good aperture sight instead of a scope, for those whose eyes permit this.
On the range we found the Marlin was simply outstanding. We made one of the smallest lever-rifle groups ever recorded, with three touching at 50 yards from the machine rest. The group measured just 0.4 inch, not bad for crude cowboy sights.
Ejection was clean and easy, and the lever worked easily and smoothly throughout our test sessions. Rapid-fire working of the mechanism was easy, as well.
We liked the looks, the great wood, the feel and handling of the Marlin a lot. We liked its five-year warranty. It’d be great, we thought, if Marlin brought out a takedown rifle, if only for historic reasons. Marlin offers a takedown .22 in the Golden Model 39, but there are no centerfire takedowns available directly from the company as of this writing.
The Marlin combined its excellent accuracy and great looks to make it one of the best lever-action choices we’ve tested.
No. 27061, $831
Reviewed: May 2007
This model, introduced in 2006, is chambered for .243 Win.,. 270 Win., .308 Win., .30-06, and .35 Whelen. An 18.5-inch barrel Carbine is the same price, and a synthetic model introduced this year sells for $732.
The 750 variants replace the 7400 model, which we reviewed in July 1998. The 750 had a four-shot magazine, and on our test gun, a 22-inch round-tapered blued barrel. The gun weighed 7.5 pounds and measured 42.6 inches in overall length. The stock has been restyled, with an American walnut forend and stock with machine-cut checkering under a satin finish. Sights included a gold-bead front sight on a ramp and a step rear sight that’s windage adjustable. The gas-action gun came with an R3 recoil pad, and had a positive cross-bolt safety with a Remington key lock. The receiver was tapped for a scope mount.
In the 750, the gas orifice is drilled at a 45-degree angle, instead of a 90-degree angle like on the 740/742/7400 guns. This eliminates a 90-degree turn at the gas port, and it eliminates shaving-off copper in the bore from the projectile. The gasblock on the 750’s barrel has been moved rearward, which also moves the gas orifice hole rearward. Moving the gas hole back captures gases sooner and under greater pressure, which should increase reliability.
The barrel extension is now made as a cast part instead of a machined part. By casting, Remington says it can better control internal geometries and eliminate machining burrs, which they say translates into better reliability. Also, the bolt head has a slick nickel/Teflon coating, which smoothes out bolt sluggishness. The gun comes with an R3 recoil pad, and the comb drop has been lowered at the comb so that the shooter can use the rifle sights more easily, one of our complaints about the 7400.
All of our testers agreed the R3 recoil pad was comfortable and effective. The R3 buttpad was very soft, though it wasn’t fitted flush with the buttstock. Our sample came with nicely figured walnut on the buttstock and forend, which featured finger grooves more like what we’d expect on a pump gun. The buttstock had a Monte Carlo-style cheekpiece. The gun came to shoulder smoothly and naturally, and gave us a solid cheekweld to view the sights or scope. Three out of five test shooters preferred the Remington’s stock design over the others. It made no difference to one, and the left-handed shooter preferred the other two. Three out of five testers preferred the forend on the Remington.
The push-button safety, located behind the trigger, had a child safety lock built into it, but it in no way interfered with the operation of the safety when it was not activated. The safety was smooth and positive.
To load the 750, the shooter drops a round in the chamber and pushes forward on a button, located on the left side of the box magazine, thus pulling down the follower and allowing the bolt to close. Then you can remove the magazine by pushing forward on a lever just in front of the trigger guard. The older-model 7400 magazines are interchangeable with the 750. Another advantage of the Remington is 10-round box magazines are available for the Remington.
The Remington came with a chamber brush, but we’d prefer a bore-snake that drops into the muzzle and can be pulled through the length of the gun. Cleaning the action spring is also fairly easy. To take the forend off, the shooter loosens the forend screw and removes the forend. Then he brushes the action spring and action tube with gun cleaning solvent, dries it, and applies a thin coat of Rem Oil to prevent rusting.
The trigger assembly pops out easily for cleaning, much like a shotgun trigger group. To remove the trigger assembly, the shooter closes the action, then taps out the front and rear trigger plate pins. Then lift the rear of the trigger plate assembly and remove the assembly from the receiver. At the range, the 750 shot near-MOA with everything we fed it.
Marlin .308 MX, $590
Reviewed: September 2007
Our Marlin came with mighty nicely figured walnut. The buttstock wood matched the wood of the forend, both having prominent contrasting grain and some fiddleback. The wood appeared to have an epoxy-base finish, it being quite hard and scratch-resistant. The checkering was excellent, with decorative touches. It wrapped the forend and was generous at the grip. The butt had a hard-rubber pad that curved to fit the shoulder, though it did little to cut recoil. There were sling studs, too.
The bluing and overall fitting were excellent, though we could have done without all the extra words of warning on the barrel.
The sights consisted of a buckhorn rear with a U notch, and a hooded front having a large, flat, gold-faced bead. We thought a good aperture rear sight would have been the way to go, rather than the dated "cowboy" buckhorn rear. The rear sight had the old-style stepped adjustment for elevation, with windage by drifting.
The action had well-polished flat sides with matte finish on top, and was fitted with a hammer-blocking cross bolt that could be used or ignored at will. The MX had the overall flavor of the old West, which we found pleasant. The fact that its ballistics match the .308 is cause for celebration, we thought.
The easily loaded tubular magazine held five rounds, and one could be added in the chamber for a total of six. The front of the magazine tube was secured to the barrel via a single screw going into a small carrier dovetailed into the barrel. We found the screw had worked loose after only a few shots. We snugged it up and then kept a wary eye on it, and found that it didn’t want to stay perfectly tight during our extended test shooting. It seemed that as this screw came loose, accuracy tended to deteriorate slightly. However, the Marlin had accuracy to spare, even at its worst.
Feeding, firing and ejection were perfect. The lack of suitable padding in the token recoil pad led to our noticing the kick, but it was not substantial. For those shy of recoil, a softer pad might be appropriate.
Our first sight-checking rounds of the iron sights gave us three shots touching at 25 yards, dead center, so it was not necessary to adjust anything. As noted, extraction and ejection were strong and easy, and primers appeared to have flattening commensurate with reasonable pressure.
There was a trace of creep in the trigger, which broke at 5.5 pounds. We felt the future owner of this rifle ought to have that taken care of.
With an empty weight of 7.3 pounds this wasn’t a lightweight, but that’s about the only thing we could complain about, concerning the Marlin. The balance and handling were superb. The lever was easy to work with the rifle at the shoulder. The rifle was easily carried with the hand wrapped around the action, which was the static balance point. However, a suitable scope would make the overall weight of the MX at least eight pounds, and that’s a good reason to consider a good aperture sight instead of a scope, for those whose eyes permit this.
On the range we found the Marlin was simply outstanding. We made one of the smallest lever-rifle groups ever recorded, with three touching at 50 yards from the machine rest. The group measured just 0.4 inch, not bad for crude cowboy sights.
Ejection was clean and easy, and the lever worked easily and smoothly throughout our test sessions. Rapid-fire working of the mechanism was easy, as well.
We liked the looks, the great wood, the feel and handling of the Marlin a lot. We liked its five-year warranty. It’d be great, we thought, if Marlin brought out a takedown rifle, if only for historic reasons. Marlin offers a takedown .22 in the Golden Model 39, but there are no centerfire takedowns available directly from the company as of this writing.
The Marlin combined its excellent accuracy and great looks to make it one of the best lever-action choices we’ve tested.
