Remington 700 vs. 783 vs. 7 - what are the differences?

My understanding is the Model 7 is essentially an ultra compact version of the model 700. The action is the same, differences are in barrel length and stock size. Both of these rifles would be competition for Winchester model 70, ruger m77, savage 11 etc. Kind of the mid level price point rifles.

The model 783 is a "budget" rifle, in competition with the savage axis, ruger American, and similar rifles. The action is totally different, and there is no part compatibility to the model 700 line-up, (as far as I know). All in all the 783 is a more budget minded rifle. Not to say that this is a bad thing, its just evident that Remington has slotted the 783 under the 700 and 7 in their model hierarchy.
 
The Model 7 is a descendant of the Model 660/600. The receiver is shorter than that of a short 700. The difference is in the rear of the receiver. The Model 7 is marketed as a ight, compact rifle.
The 700 series was initially introduced post WW2 to undercut the price of traditionally built rifles like the Winchester Model 70 with its forged and machined parts. Innovative manufacturing techniques allowed a quality rifle to be built at lower cost.
There is now market demand for even less expensive rifles and the 783 is aimed at this market. It replaces a couple of earlier Remington attempts that were less than stellar. It uses techniques pioneered by Savage to bring down the cost of production.
 
The Model 7 is a lightweight hunting rifle. All current offerings come in at 6.5 lbs. All have pencil hunting barrels. They even have a 16.5" barrel version that comes in at 6 lbs. You'll be paying an arm and a leg to get a 700 in that weight range. The Model 7 is also short action only.

The 700 doesn't need much of an introduction. It's one of the most versatile rifles around. Aftermarket support is the best in the industry. Some naysayers will say you NEED aftermarket support for the 700. Let them. I'm on the 7th one, all have been flawless and great shooters out of the box. That being said, I've used aftermarket parts on all of them too. Two of those are now custom builds with the only original Remington parts remaining being the action. My only gripe about the 700 is that Remington's implementation of the detachable magazine is abysmal. Cutouts in the side of the stock? Really? Even Savage does that part better. They got it right on the 783 though. Not quite a Sako DBM but they're getting there.

The 783 is the next gen rifle from Remington. It's also their low cost option. Mag fed only, no top loading. Decent DBM setup. Floating bolt head. Barrel nuts for easy barrel changes. Aftermarket support is growing but it's nowhere near what the 700 has to offer. Jerry at Mystic Precision has very good reviews on them.
 
IMG_2064.jpg

The 783 has a small port, closed top ejection port... similar to a variety of rifles like the Tikka T3, Savage Axis, RPR... which makes it difficult to stuff a bullet into the mag from the "top" (you can still toss a round into the action and chamber). These actions are designed from the ground up to use a det mag, not an internal or blind mag. That closed top makes the action very rigid... a good thing for precision work. Also, helps to keep debris and water out of the action.

Despite the entry level pricing, the 783's are actually made to a higher standard then the 700's have been over the last years. As a clean page design, I feel that Rem corporate is trying to get into the CNC produced rifles and drop production costs yet improve performance, and tolerances.

Been mucking with a number of these rifles over the last couple of years, and am blown away by how consistent these actions are. Materials are no different then the Rem 700 but assembly and fitting is so much better - when just grabbing random rifles - definitely shows how CNC production keeps QC and specs at a very high level with very little time needed for manual fitting.

IMG_1393.jpg

Actions I have played with have been true, bolt lugs have very high contact (mine are nearing 95% - will lap in just with useage), barrel threads are consistently machined and true with the bolt face, bolt face is square with the lugs.... if this sounds like a custom action, you would be correct.

Trigger is excellent and can be easily tuned for a light pull and crisp break... if the trigger has a hint of creep, the adjustment is done manually.... not hard to do but must be done properly for safe operation. The upcoming Timney trigger should address this... I very much like the factory triggers. I like that the trigger assembly is bolted to the action and doesn't fly apart when removed... making repairs in the field very easy.

I have reported on some of the quirks which Rem seems be addressing in their newer rifles... standard bolt knob is horrid... firing pin springs can be crap.

IMG_1990.jpg

Accuracy has been superb, easily keeping up with the custom rifles I also own... all with reduced costs and ease of assembly. More aftermarket support is coming.. PT&G offers DBM, and bolt heads (these are very nicely made by the way). Timney will have a new trigger later in the year. Boyds and MDT makes stocks/chassis.

As interest grows (walnut and shorty version seems to be selling well), aftermarket goodies will follow. There are some very forward thinking machining already in the action wrt to using AICS and AW type detachable mags... this machining is not used by the factory det mag so I have to believe, there are a variety of new projects already in the works.

My conversion to an AICS fed precision rifle was straight forward as all the proper dimensions are already built into the receiver.... yes, better then the Rem 700 especially when loading longer then 2.80".

IMG_1967.jpg

With a little TLC, this is one of the smoothest actions you can operate with some very interesting byproducts of the new bolt/firing pin design. See my articles in my dealer forum, facebook and website.

Like the Savage Stevens 200 of a decade ago, the 783 has some "happy accidents" that shooters will start to realise as they use them in the field and in target shooting.

Hopefully, Rem will not water down or screw up the design as Savage has been doing to their SA's....

Jerry
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2064.jpg
    IMG_2064.jpg
    55.1 KB · Views: 227
  • IMG_1967.jpg
    IMG_1967.jpg
    69.1 KB · Views: 225
  • IMG_1393.jpg
    IMG_1393.jpg
    49.8 KB · Views: 226
  • IMG_1990.jpg
    IMG_1990.jpg
    64.7 KB · Views: 227
Last edited:
thanks for that write up MP. can you advise the weight difference between the 783, the 700 and Savage's 10?

I like lightweight rifles, so having a light action is a good start. eh? ;)
 
They are all standard weight receivers so around 30'ish ounces. No lightweights here.

If you want light, Tikka T3 and Ruger American are two of the lightest factory actions you can draw from. I would lean you to the T3.

The M7 is a very nice compact option but it is a compact option so make sure all the other specs you want work properly.

Jerry
 
If you are full meal deal build and have a big budget, then you can add a bunch of CF products and get thing really light.

If you are looking for 6lbs on a sub $1k budget, grab a T3, bed it, load up some ammo and enjoy... if interested in a Tikka in a 7RM, let me know cause I have a local customer looking to sell a nearly new rifle.

Jerry
 
Back
Top Bottom