Remington 700 not a good choice for big bore.

Since when is ATRS the standard when it comes to safety?

I'm almost positive that Remingon has a larger bankroll when it comes to R&D, safety issues, etc.

Of course they do. After all, look at all the issues Big Green has had over the last few years. Rick knows enough about building extremely accurate rifles that I trust his appraisal of the situation. Have you ever looked at how much material is left once you open up a M700 bolt to fit the 338 Lapua case head? I'll stick with something made for the job, not adapted to save money.
 
I know an extremely experienced, skilled armourer who has successfully done a number of M700 conversions to .338LM.
I have also examined a factory 700 .338LM.
Sure isn't much of the boltface counterbore rim left, and of course the famous Remington three rings of steel breeching is compromised. This breeching is effective.
It is obvious, though, that the 700 .338LM works. I've never heard of a failure.

For most any other cartridge, there is no reason to hesitate.
 
Of course they do. After all, look at all the issues Big Green has had over the last few years. Rick knows enough about building extremely accurate rifles that I trust his appraisal of the situation. Have you ever looked at how much material is left once you open up a M700 bolt to fit the 338 Lapua case head? I'll stick with something made for the job, not adapted to save money.

Yup. I own a 700 MLR in 338 Lapua that was rebarreled to AI it.
 
Of course they do. After all, look at all the issues Big Green has had over the last few years. Rick knows enough about building extremely accurate rifles that I trust his appraisal of the situation. Have you ever looked at how much material is left once you open up a M700 bolt to fit the 338 Lapua case head? I'll stick with something made for the job, not adapted to save money.

But the .223 have plenty of material.

 
I asked a question about a Remington 700 in 375 H&H in another forum and I have receive this reply "The 700 action is basically a steel pipe. The recoil lug is just a big washer. In a big bore rifle, that's not a good design to handle the torque generated by heavy bullets" Anything wrong with the 700 and big bore caliber?

Some Retarded Idiot said that ! JMO RJ

Rem M700 XCR 11 375 H&H
 
I'm not sure what the thickness or in this case thinness of the rim material of the bolt head has to do with anything, there is plenty of steel there to deflect gasses from a pierced primer which is about the worst it would see as it only holds the rim of the cartridge. So what's the big deal?
 
That means they all suck. Buy a Toyota!

So whats the rifle equivalent to the toyota? Howa's? or maybe Miroku Winchesters? Perhaps it's a Zastava?

Let's see, drivetrain that just won't quit and paint that wasn't properly engineered for our salty roads...
 
But the .223 have plenty of material.


Plenty of material but nothing sealing the extractor from blowing out in the chance of a catastrophic case failure.

These are three examples of how to screw up a 700. The original 700 extractor fully contained within the '3 rings of steel' is so much stronger and safer than these alterations... Remington screwed up when thy decided to build a Lapua on the 700, they had an excellent chance to build a larger 700 action just for the Lapua but instead choose to alter the design and produce what they did. There are far better actions for the Lapua case than a 700.
 
I should point out that the .338 Lapua is not a big bore - as per OP's question. As folks have mentioned you can easily do a .458 Lott or even a .470 Capstick. There is nothing on earth that would walk off a good hit with the .458 Lott.

Also, if you are into the long range game and the Lapua interests you, then why not consider the .338 Edge?

Lastly, I respect Guntech's experience and knowledge.
 
I'm not sure what the thickness or in this case thinness of the rim material of the bolt head has to do with anything, there is plenty of steel there to deflect gasses from a pierced primer which is about the worst it would see as it only holds the rim of the cartridge. So what's the big deal?

The issue is not gas escape from a pierced primer; it is what happens when there is a casehead failure. The ring surrounding the casehead becomes critical if this happens. In the original Remington 721/722/700 design, with internal extractor, the casehead is completely enclosed. The boltnose rim is surrounded by the barrel counterbore. With a really big case, like the Lapua, the remaining rim is slender indeed, and even worse, the external extractor cuts through it. In the event of a failure, there is going to be a serious loss of containment, and the extractor is going to become a projectile, exiting through the right hand lugway.
Of course, catastrophic casehead failures are rare. But if one happens, design makes a real difference.
 
I should point out that the .338 Lapua is not a big bore - as per OP's question. As folks have mentioned you can easily do a .458 Lott or even a .470 Capstick. There is nothing on earth that would walk off a good hit with the .458 Lott.

Also, if you are into the long range game and the Lapua interests you, then why not consider the .338 Edge?

Lastly, I respect Guntech's experience and knowledge.

The issue with the Lapua is not the bore size; it is the diameter of the casehead, compared with the diameter of the boltnose.
 
The issue with the Lapua is not the bore size; it is the diameter of the casehead, compared with the diameter of the boltnose.

That is my point. The OP asked about big bore cartridges in the Remington 700, but the thread has been sidetracked and is now dealing with cartridges that have a larger diameter head than .532"
 
Back
Top Bottom