xcaribooer
Regular
- Location
- The fishing highway
I have heard from a few people now that the older (70's 80's) remington 700's were better than the newer ones. Why would this be.?
Quality Control, tighter tolerances, more attention to detail, less cost cutting, to name a few. Back then most companies actually gave a s**t, and it wasn't all about the bottom line $$...
It ain't just Rem either...![]()
Look at the first Sako 75's compared to the last ones. They were still good, but the first thing that comes to mind is the thinner barrel on the later ones. I wouldn't classify that as a quality issue though? Maybe guys complained on the weight? I for one liked the better balance of the slightly heaver barrel. The finish on the Finnlights marked real easy and looked old quickly. Companies try to keep costs down and cut corners. Quality has really slumped because of this! My $.02I have a 1965 700 in 22-250 that shoots as good as any rifle Ive ever shot. As far as accuracy I have never had a Rem 700 that left me wanting more accuracy out of it, once I had time to play with a few bullets and powders (which is the fun part), and I have owned probably 18 or so in the past few years.



























