Dropped by my cousin's place yesterday and looked at a few of his guns. He brought one out and asked if I had ever heard of a .244 Remington. He showed me a Remington 725 chambered in .244 Remington in about 95% condition. In my opinion the prettiest centerfire rifle Remington ever produced. I looked it up last night and the 725 was only made from 1958 to 1962 when the model 700 came out. Apparently only 880 out of almost 17,000 model 725's were chambered in the .244. The first rifles has 1 in 12 twist rifling for lighter bullets which was problematic with bullets 100 grains and over. But I read on a Remington collector site that in May, 1960 the twist was changed to 1 in 10 in the model 725 .244. I didn't have a chance to check the letter code on the barrel to see when it was produced but even if it was made with a 1 in 12 twist I hope to be able to buy it from him. It is one nice looking gun and light as well. Even with the slower twist a 95 grain Nosler Partition should shoot alright. Anyone have any experience feeding the slower twist .244 Remington? Will post some pics if I am lucky enough to get it.
Remington Model 725
- Thread starter Mike Webb
- Start date
It might or might not stabilize the 95 gr. NP, possibly an 80 gr. bullet may be at the upper limit to stabilize.
Also the important factor is bullet length, sometimes a stubby heavier bullet will stabilize whereas a longer same weight bullet will not.
Also the important factor is bullet length, sometimes a stubby heavier bullet will stabilize whereas a longer same weight bullet will not.
In fact, many of the 1-12" twist Remington 244 rifles will stabilize flat base 100 grain bullets. You have to try it to find out for sure.
I have yet to see one that will not stabilize the 95 grain Partition. It can be driven to over 3200 in a 24" tube, slightly more in a 26.
I had a 722 Remington in 244 Remington with a 12" twist. It shot the 100 grain Cor-Lokt and the 100 grain Hornady IL FB just fine.
It would not quite stabilize the Nosler 100 grain Spitzer. However, Nosler made a 100 grain semi-spitzer Partition for years. Being a tad shorter, it worked just fine.
The 95 grain spitzer Partition shot very well. Sub-moa consistently.
I would grab that 725. It may well surprise you. Regards, Dave.
I have yet to see one that will not stabilize the 95 grain Partition. It can be driven to over 3200 in a 24" tube, slightly more in a 26.
I had a 722 Remington in 244 Remington with a 12" twist. It shot the 100 grain Cor-Lokt and the 100 grain Hornady IL FB just fine.
It would not quite stabilize the Nosler 100 grain Spitzer. However, Nosler made a 100 grain semi-spitzer Partition for years. Being a tad shorter, it worked just fine.
The 95 grain spitzer Partition shot very well. Sub-moa consistently.
I would grab that 725. It may well surprise you. Regards, Dave.
Remington's original factory load in the .244 was a 90 grain bullet so I think anything in the neighbourhood will work. I have read some stuff on line that would suggest Eagleye is correct, you really have to try a few to find out if your .244 will perform. I suspect the 90 to 95 grain copper alloy bullets will not stabilize being much longer than lead core bullets due to the lighter weight of the alloy.
Nice rifle. I have one in 280. - dan
Another calibre with low production numbers in the 725. I think the 725 was supposed to compete directly with the model 70 Winchester which the plain jane 721/722 rifles just didn't do well.
When Remington came out with the 720 series rifles they centered much of their advertising on its great strength. They used to state their rifle had the strongest action of any sporting rifle, with the cartridge head wrapped in three layers of steel. Virtually nothing was said from the company or consumers about the push feed verses controlled feed. The 720 series was a light, strong, accurate rifle with a 22 inch barrel, good trigger, and it went over very well with hunters. I think the only difference with the 725 was the checkering.
By far the greatest asset the Model 70 Winchester of the day had going for it was Jack O' Connor, who called it the Rifleman's rifle. This appealed to the type of hunter who thought they belonged to the elite. But for a great many other hunters, the old 70 was just too long and heavy to lug around in the bush or up a mountain, which made the new Remington's feel like a breath of fresh air.
Then, Remington blew it by putting a 20 inch barrel on their new Model 700 rifles. They went straight against Jack O'Connor on this, because he had the world convinced that no high powered hunting rifle should have a barrel shorter than 22 inches.
All of you present day shooters who were not around in the glory days of shooting and hunting, the twenty years following WW2, may think I have over estimated the power that Jack O'Connor had on the shooting world. There were a dozen or so, big time shooting writers out there, but Jack was the undisputed king of them all, if he said it, it was right.
He was the principal reason that Outdoor Life Magazine, with Jack O'Connor as the hunting and shooting editor, rose to become the leading sportsman's magazine, with a monthly circulation of over four million, at its peak.
You just couldn't over estimate his influence on the shooting world.
By far the greatest asset the Model 70 Winchester of the day had going for it was Jack O' Connor, who called it the Rifleman's rifle. This appealed to the type of hunter who thought they belonged to the elite. But for a great many other hunters, the old 70 was just too long and heavy to lug around in the bush or up a mountain, which made the new Remington's feel like a breath of fresh air.
Then, Remington blew it by putting a 20 inch barrel on their new Model 700 rifles. They went straight against Jack O'Connor on this, because he had the world convinced that no high powered hunting rifle should have a barrel shorter than 22 inches.
All of you present day shooters who were not around in the glory days of shooting and hunting, the twenty years following WW2, may think I have over estimated the power that Jack O'Connor had on the shooting world. There were a dozen or so, big time shooting writers out there, but Jack was the undisputed king of them all, if he said it, it was right.
He was the principal reason that Outdoor Life Magazine, with Jack O'Connor as the hunting and shooting editor, rose to become the leading sportsman's magazine, with a monthly circulation of over four million, at its peak.
You just couldn't over estimate his influence on the shooting world.
Does your .244 have a 1 in 12 twist or a 1 in 10. Supposedly in May 1960 Remington switched twist in the .244 AFTER the cartridge's reputation was already damaged by poor accuracy with heavier bullets. Regardless of the twist it has, does your .244 shoot well?
Jack O'Connor was a leading gun writer in the 50's and 60's and did have a lot of influence at the time. He was a knowledgeable gun guy but had his own narrow viewpoint regarding what was good and what wasn't. Just like Townsend Whelen, Elmer Keith and similar writers. Some of the modern crop of synthetic stocked bolt guns with bead blasted blue or stainless steel metal would have given these guys fits. I remember reading that one of the old crew of American gun scribes called the mauser, "just another damn squarehead gun". A statement which is shockingly ignorant as their favourite 1903 Springfield was a direct ripoff of Paul Mauser's design and from a design standpoint not even as good.
Yes, Jack O'Connor made it very plain that the 03 Springfield was a poor copy of the Mauser 98 and told how the US had to pay royalty to Mauser.
O'Connor had a thing going with Winchester, so he seldom said anything bad about a Winchester product, but I think he had the most balanced views of shooting items, of any of the major writers.
He had nothing but good to say about Mausers, especially the 7x57, and stated that US loading for it was too mild, but Canadian loadings for it were much better. He also stated that no factory ammunition was better than our Canadian CIL, Dominion products and once stated in Outdoor Life that US hunters going on their long safaris in BC and the Yukon, would do well to buy their ammunition after they got into Canada.
Of course, he and Elmer Keith had a great many verbal battles over various things, but I think it was because of his well balanced views on so much, that was responsible for the great influence he had on shooting matters.
I think that the 721,722, 725 were Remington's later sporting rifle iterations. The 720 was the last of the P14/M17/30/30s line. All good rifles and I'm still trying to find a good 720. - dan
No problems. I am starting to have selective amnesia too . �� - dan
Just to clarify, the Rem Model 720, already mentioned in a previous thread, is a completely different rifle than are the M721 and 722. And yes, the 721/722 factory extractors are more prone to breakage than the M700 type. I have several of both models and so far I have been lucky, they are all still intact. A common cause of breakage is to load too hot, where bolt lift is hard and extraction difficult.
Yes the 720 was the final iteration of the wartime P14/M17 Remington/Eddystone /Winchester rifles. - dan
