New Remington 700 Receiver scope base screws

[bearhunter]

Today I dug out a Rem 700 SA receiver that I picked up in a trade at the Kamloops show this spring. It was one of those gunsmith specials from Canada Ammo.

After truing it up, which was a breeze, compared with some I've done, I pulled out a 1-8 twist, 243 barrel and profiled it, then threaded and chambered it for 6mm Remington.

Went through the usual install of a TriggerTeck trigger, put it into a HS Precision stock and went to mount the scope.

This was a new receiver, never had a barrel or scope mounted on it.

Pulled a Leupold, single piece base out of the bin and lo and behold the receiver is drilled and tapped for larger than usual screws. I had to open up the holes in the base and shorten up some screws I had on hand to mount the base. It's on and thank goodness the holes were aligned properly.

I guess Remington changed the size of their receiver, scope base holes and I didn't notice??

I haven't done any work on receivers made in the last year or so.

 

[gstprecision]

Are the screws 8-40? It might be a 700 police receiver.

 

[double gun]

Yes some models are offered with #8-40 screws like the AAC

 

[bearhunter]

Yes, they are 8-40.

I didn't know that option was available for any models. Not a big deal.

As mentioned, this receiver/bolt looks to be one of those that used to be offered by Canada Ammo. Nice action and made very close to true to its axis.

Thanks for the information. That clears that up.

Now, a fellow brought me a Rem 700 ADL from his grandfather's estate. Looks as new. It's marked with a tag saying it's for Euro export. Looks like an average 700ADL to me. He let it go cheap but it has all four scope base holes filled with the stubs of screws that were set with Loc Tite or some other epoxy. Oh well, it wouldn't have been cheap if it weren't bubbaed.

 

[Duramax6.6]

Anyone else agree that the 8-40 screw craze is just an upsell? I guess for real hardcore military operators that actually may jump from a plane of repell from a helicopter where the very real chance of their rifles impacting a hard surface with force is possible, I can see it. But in almost 4 decades of hunting I've never encountered a situation where a properly installed scope got busted off. Yes I've dropped a nice rifle down a shale embankment on an elk hunt and had a sling swivel pull out during another hunt sending another rifle skipping along. Both scopes stayed attached.

Opinions?

 

[bearhunter]

Quite honestly, the milspec screws are there for a reason beyond what most of us actually need.

The thing is, the rifle I picked up today is going to be drilled and tapped for 8-40 because whatever the screw stubs were glued in place with just don't want to break loose, even with heat. Going to another screw size up is not only easier but copies a factory example.

I can see why the military wanted bigger/stronger screws, especially with some the heavy sighting equipment that gets mounted and stressed by the recoil of some cartridges, which might just be more stressful than dropping a rifle. That being said, I do remember a Marlin 30-30 that fell out of a bike scabbard and the scope was never found again.

 

[kamlooky]

If it just saves one threaded hole from being stripped...………………….aye?
Not sure why the angst of some with the bigger screws used?
Can't see the goll dang thangs once the optic is mounted anyways.

 

[bearhunter]

If it just saves one threaded hole from being stripped...………………….aye?
Not sure why the angst of some with the bigger screws used?
Can't see the goll dang thangs once the optic is mounted anyways.

Well, they're 8x40 now. I have no idea what was used to cement the original screws into those holes but it was impervious to heat and very hard. It's the first time I haven't been able to remove screws from a receiver.

This isn't the first time I've used larger base mount screws. On a particularly vicious Boys AT rifle, converted to the 50BMG, it needed heavier screws for the base. We finally setttled on 1/4 X 28 screws with counter sink tapered heads. That kept things in place.

I can see people being uncomfortable with base screws being a different size. Especially if they don't have the resources or knowledge to deal with it. For many folks here it's not a biggie but some just want their firearms to go bang and hold together, with no other fuss than the odd cleaning session. Sort of like us old farts being computer challenged.

Another place I've used larger screws with less threads per inch is on scope rings. I've saved a lot of scope rings that would otherwise have been thrown out for stripped threads in this manner.

Last fall at the Sannich Fairgrounds show, I picked up a bag of scope ring parts for $5. Most of the scope rings were Burris and Leupold and in different sizes from 1 inch to over 30mm.

Every set in there had at least one hole with stripped threads.

I ended up with six matching X2 sets with another 3 rings that don't match anything. Still, a couple of hours on the drill press to clean up the holes for tapping to another size or in a few cases less TPI and I had several otherwise expensive complete sets of rings, with matching heights/diameters for $5 and a few hours of my time. No, the clamp screws for the caps aren't industry standard but they work every bit as well and the screws are available at the local hardware store for 10% of the price.

 

[guntech]

8 x 40 is overkill but a popular money maker for some smiths...

I have seen about 6 pounds of rail and accessories on a 308 held on with the 4 original 6 x 48 screws... and no problems at all.

 

[bearhunter]

8 x 40 is overkill but a popular money maker for some smiths...

I have seen about 6 pounds of rail and accessories on a 308 held on with the 4 original 6 x 48 screws... and no problems at all.

Not disagreeing with you at all, under normal civilian conditions.

Have you seen all that equipment being used under stressful conditions, such as parachute drops? I saw a C1 with all four screws sheered off from such a drop. IMHO it was a one in a thousand thing but someone decided it could have been prevented. Or so it seems with the folks at Remington. More likely, as you say, it's a popular way to make money.

My only reason for D&T the screw holes in the last receiver was because of the nasty epoxy used to set the base screws in the holes. Very hard and I put in a lot of hours trying to clean them up. No go, so 8x40 was a legitimate way to go.

 

[cody c]

Anyone else agree that the 8-40 screw craze is just an upsell? I guess for real hardcore military operators that actually may jump from a plane of repell from a helicopter where the very real chance of their rifles impacting a hard surface with force is possible, I can see it. But in almost 4 decades of hunting I've never encountered a situation where a properly installed scope got busted off. Yes I've dropped a nice rifle down a shale embankment on an elk hunt and had a sling swivel pull out during another hunt sending another rifle skipping along. Both scopes stayed attached.

Opinions?

An upsell, sure. When dumping thousands of dollars into a scope and rifle, whats 50 cents or $50 on upgraded/larger screws that are the smallest piece of structure between the optic and action tethering them together.

I have a 788 that's been a slow going project, turns out Remington tapped them 8-40 from the factory (larger than the 700), but only three holes. I ordered a 20 MOA EGW rail and tapped a fourth hole probably just to avoid a sense of inferiority (haha), some of the aftermarket 700 style actions are going to 5 screw.

Diminishing returns, sure, peace of mind though also.

I should mention, two sets of taps and drill bits were around $30-35, and extra screws from EGW aren't too expensive if you order with the rail ($15-20 for a bunch shipped separately). Drilling and tapping was fairly easy, and I hope to recoup some cost in selling the second NIB tap with bit and screws, so not bad compared to the cost and time of using a gunsmith for the task.