I am wrong and I need your opinion

Despite the popularity of the rem 700 it is fundamentally inferior to Savage for a couple important reasons. First is the stiffness of the action. When you examine a Rem 700 repeater action out of the stock you will notice that the portion of steel between the front and rear ring is very slim. when you compare that to a Savage (depending on the model now) you can see the ejection port is only out to the side and the top of the receiver is steel from front to back. what this does for you is provide more stiffness in the action to prevent the barrel weight from deflecting the receiver. This is a desirable trait that contributes to better accuracy from the Savage.

Second is a safety concern. If you examine the bolt on a rem 700 and think about a ruptured case for a minute, the gas will leak around the lugs and travel out the back of the receiver and blasting the shooter in the face. I've seen this happen. Now compare a Savage and you will find they have addressed this two ways. One is the back of the bolt is capped in such a way as to deflect any gasses from the shooters face. Second is there is a lugway blocking device on the bolt just behind the lugs. What this little trick does for you is remain in the lugway after the bolt is closed and this prevents gas from travelling down the lug way toward the shooter.

Now in terms of accuracy, sure there's lots of guys who'll say they are pleased with remmy accuracy and that's ok. I've just seen the Savages out of the box win in match competition and that says something, cause I've never seen an out of the box Remmy do it. Now maybe a hunter doesn't need to hit match heads, but between these two, generally speaking, you are more likely to get it from a Savage.

As for safety, maybe it's not a concern if you buy nice new factory ammo, but for some guys its just nice to know Savage has made the effort.
 
Pull those tread out, the only Rem i like in the last 5 year was a 7615P 223, i dont buy REM, i think your are mistaken or i am really getting Alzeimer... JP.

He didn't say that you said it, he was making a generalization. It is true that over the years the Remington fanboys would come out in droves to berate the Savage owners. And they do seem to have diminished in their vociferous support of Big Green.

So no, you don't have Alzheimer's at least not at this point. You're not forgetful, you're just French.
 
He didn't say that you said it, he was making a generalization. It is true that over the years the Remington fanboys would come out in droves to berate the Savage owners. And they do seem to have diminished in their vociferous support of Big Green.

So no, you don't have Alzheimer's at least not at this point. You're not forgetful, you're just French.

Being french is an asset especially with the English ladys... JP.
 
See what I mean? Right away the Savage fanboys tout the single element that Savage has, accuracy, and proclaim it as the be-all-end-all of firearms.
Quality isn't solely accuracy, in fact it's far from it. Tell me about the fit/finish/bluing? How about the stock? Trigger?(yes, many think the Accutrigger sucks, myself included) How about the action itself?

IMO, the Savage isn't a steal or a great deal, neither is the Remington. They're worth exactly what you pay for them. There's nothing wrong with that, I just don't get why Savage owners always feel the need to inflate them to a status they're not worthy of.

Quality, eh? Well, my Savage came out of the box with a McMillan stock...they're pretty good. And it shot sub 1/2 MOA with the third handload I tried so the barrel must be half decent. The finish is even and everything seems to open, close and feed pretty well. But in the end the purpose of a rifle is to land successive bullets in as close to the same spot as possible and to do that over and over again. I'm not sure how a rifle that was poorly fitted to the stock or had loose tolerances but I am open to having it explained to me.
 
Despite the popularity of the rem 700 it is fundamentally inferior to Savage for a couple important reasons. First is the stiffness of the action. When you examine a Rem 700 repeater action out of the stock you will notice that the portion of steel between the front and rear ring is very slim. when you compare that to a Savage (depending on the model now) you can see the ejection port is only out to the side and the top of the receiver is steel from front to back. what this does for you is provide more stiffness in the action to prevent the barrel weight from deflecting the receiver. This is a desirable trait that contributes to better accuracy from the Savage.

Second is a safety concern. If you examine the bolt on a rem 700 and think about a ruptured case for a minute, the gas will leak around the lugs and travel out the back of the receiver and blasting the shooter in the face. I've seen this happen. Now compare a Savage and you will find they have addressed this two ways. One is the back of the bolt is capped in such a way as to deflect any gasses from the shooters face. Second is there is a lugway blocking device on the bolt just behind the lugs. What this little trick does for you is remain in the lugway after the bolt is closed and this prevents gas from travelling down the lug way toward the shooter.

Now in terms of accuracy, sure there's lots of guys who'll say they are pleased with remmy accuracy and that's ok. I've just seen the Savages out of the box win in match competition and that says something, cause I've never seen an out of the box Remmy do it. Now maybe a hunter doesn't need to hit match heads, but between these two, generally speaking, you are more likely to get it from a Savage.

As for safety, maybe it's not a concern if you buy nice new factory ammo, but for some guys its just nice to know Savage has made the effort.

Savage's are awesome.:rolleyes: Just look at how perfectly safe there gas system is, but they do shoot.:D
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/762330-In-response-to-post-made-in-another-thread
 
Last edited:
Quality, eh? Well, my Savage came out of the box with a McMillan stock...they're pretty good. And it shot sub 1/2 MOA with the third handload I tried so the barrel must be half decent. The finish is even and everything seems to open, close and feed pretty well. But in the end the purpose of a rifle is to land successive bullets in as close to the same spot as possible and to do that over and over again. I'm not sure how a rifle that was poorly fitted to the stock or had loose tolerances but I am open to having it explained to me.

3445473-good-for-you-.jpeg
 
Back
Top Bottom