So Winchester is building a Model 70 Featherweight again.

beretta boy said:
Interesting to note ... in the 4 variations of the newly "re-introduced"
Model 70, only one "Remington" chambering is offered, the 7mm-08, and that in just one model, the "Featherweight" . ( Featherweight 325WSM ... Hmmm)

In the various Remington 700 models however, a total of 8 "Winchester" chamberings are currently offered.
Click to expand...

Really when you think about it, Remington has nothing on Winchester when it comes to ammo development. They've put their name on a few like the .22-250, 7mm-08, .223, .280 etc. But they never really came up with a winner on their own. (I know, but I'm generalizing) Where as Winchester has the big names. .243, .270, .300, .338 and .458 Magnums. Not to mention the WSM's. It just seems to be that Remington has always tried to play a game of catch up. The few that they did produce, while still around, are not too overly popular. I'm thinking of the Ultra Magnums. While the others, like the 7mm-08 and .22-250 already existed. They just shined them up a bit and said "Hey ya'll, watch this"

I think the biggest reason for this is marketing. Winchester is nothing. Between Winchester and Browning, those are the 2 biggest names in marketing. I'm serious. Off topic. Who builds Browning bows? PSE. Winchester isn't even Winchester. Olin took the reigns and started sub-contracting. HOw's the Wildcat .22 for example? Or how about their new autoloading rifle? Built in non other than Japan along side the BAR. And that's where Remington lost out.

When the WSM's first came out, how many of you obsesedto see one? And when you did, were you not astounded by how short it was? Who cares how short it is. It's capacity is still the same. But all of a sudden Winchester reinvented short cases that have really been around for decades. The point is, that's all you saw. Open a magazine or catalauge and you most likely never saw an ad for the .270 Winchester. Nope, you were getting force fed new info on these remarkable short and fat cases. And they are still ramming down our throats today. You will see these same ads everywhere possible. But now think about Remington's SAUM. They were new and short. But how often did you see an ad for them? Sure, they had a few in the beginning, but then it stopped. And the SAUM slippped away from the limelight. They will prbably reintroduce them latter with a name change. Remington likes doing that. "Introducing our brand new 7mm Express, I mean .280 Remington, I mean 7mm-06..."

If an ammo maker wants a cartridge to succeed, perhaps they should pay more attention to the fact that people are suckers for shiney things. Winchester has been doing that for a century.
 
RR said:
pharaoh2
If you don't think the 7 rem mag was a winner you don't get out much.

Rich
Click to expand...


But where did the 7mm Rem Mag come from? Remington has had a love affair with the .284 bullet. That's their only real claim to fame.


(Read back to the Mashburn supermagnum)

I pulled this bit from an article for you.
About the same time outfitter and writer Les Bowman started experimenting with a .338 Magnum case necked down to 7mm. He had RCBS’ Fred Huntington build him reloading dies, which were stamped ".280 Remington Magnum." Bowman, according to stories I’ve heard, got Remington interested in the new cartridge. Shortly thereafter Remington introduced a Model 700 rifle chambered for the 7mm Remington Magnum.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
pharaoh2 said:
I thought about it a couple times. I could never lower my standards that far and ended up buying a Stevens 200. :p
Click to expand...

I have one Stevens in 308 at the moment. I have owned 5 different Stevens 200's,over the years and while a good deal for 300 bucks, its in no way comparable to the Tikka or any other rifle out there. Fit and finish are poor on the Stevens, and its reflected in their 300 price. While they shoot OK, they are not comparable to any other rifle out there in quality. This Stevens in 308 will be on the exchange forum shortly.

Most accurate rifle I have owned out of 33 rifles, surprisingly a Winchester 223 WSSM in a supershadow.

Next would be between Vanguard, Tikka, Kimber, Sako and then Remington. The Savages are probably the least accurate of the new rifles I have owned, though they still shoot under 1 1/2" groupins.

Again, I reserve my comments to rifles I have actually owned and used.
 
Last edited:
While they shoot OK, they are not comparable to any other rifle out there in quality
Click to expand...

Why not? Looks aren't everything. I've been here before. Lets compare the T3 to the 200

Sythetic stocks? Yup.
Ugly synthetic stocks? you bet.
Detatchable magazine? 1 for the T3
Magazine release made of plastic that could break or a lost magazine that instantly converted the rifle to a single shot? Oop's, both are back on level ground.
Rubber butt plates? Yes.
High luster bluing? Nope, not on either.
Plastic trigger gaurds? Yes.
Price difference? Two 200's for the price of 1 T3.

So without beating a dead horse, where is the 200 not comparable to any other rifle out there in quality?
 
So without beating a dead horse, where is the 200 not comparable to any other rifle out there in quality?[/QUOTE]

If you really believe the Stevens 200 is comparable to any other rifle out there, because is goes bang and hits the target, you really have a lot to learn.
 
mylesrom said:
So without beating a dead horse, where is the 200 not comparable to any other rifle out there in quality

If you really believe the Stevens 200 is comparable to any other rifle out there, because is goes bang and hits the target, you really have a lot to learn.
Click to expand...


I know a man who has forgotten more about guns and reloading than I will ever learn. I admit that. I also admit that I enjoy learning new stuff every single day. It's what makes life worth living.

Back on topic, you never answered my question. What makes your T3 better than a Stevens rifle?
 
Tikka's Feed way smoother, better quality stock, better fit and finish. Don't have to sand or shave the sharp edges of the stock from the factory. Better fitting of stock to action. My Stevens 200's tend to rock in the stock until the screws are tightened up. I had a feed issue with 2 of my 5 stevens. Had to replace the ejector on one. The 3 tikka's have all been more accurate out of the box than the savages I have have owned.

The triggers, worlds apart. Tikka/Sako triggers are some of the best out of the box triggers going, break like glass, very nice triggers. The Stevens, all five needed work to make them acceptable and still none compared to Tikka's triggers. Yes, I have also had the accu-trigger, still not as nice, and the Stevens does not have that option.

Again, these are all the rifles I have owned, not just seen in a catalog or a gunshop.
 
You asked why I considered the Tikka better quality than the Stevens, and I told you. Will they both kill, of course, so will my 75 dollar 303. We we discussing quality of rifles not whether you can hunt with it.

Whether you think its worth the extra 300 bucks, thats a person decision, I think they are worth the extra bucks after owning both.

I used to flack the Tikka's for years, while I owned and defended the 200 and Remington SPS's. Then I went and bought my first Tikka. Sold all but one 200 and one Remington. I was making judgement on a rifle I never owned, then when I did, it totally changed my opinion.

If you don't like Tikka's thats fine. Then you should really look at a Weatherby Vanguard, excellent rifles starting at 539.00. Have had 5 of those, still own 2. Wish I could keep all the rifles, but space and money are both factors. Extremely accurate, well built rifles. Much better quality than the 200 and worth the extra 230 bucks, again thats my opinion.

So my suggestion to you is to try different rifles, make your own opinions instead of going by rumours, and just because a rifle is cheap and you can own one in each caliber, does not make it the best rifle out there.
 
Last edited:
Your right, and I should have been a little more clear. Unfortunarly I had to step out and was in a rush. Your reasoning is merely superficial cosmetic issues. The overall functionability and build quality is not much different when you think about it. Not for the price difference anyways. If you were to sell a Stevens rifle for $600, you would probably have a very nice stock on a very good barreled action.

Your trigger argument is a matter of personal opinion. I've owned a couple 200's, and have found the triggers to be quite acceptable for a hunting rifle. If your going to talk about sears breaking like a glass sliver, we should be talking more about a 40X or similar bench rifle. The triggers on my rifles were acceptable, from the box. For $300, you could install a very nice aftermarket trigger and stock, if we got right down to it.

For the record, I am allowed to complain about just about every make and model, as I've owned most. Ruger's, Browning's, Winchester's, Weatherby's, etc. They all have their faults and good points, but all have been built very well, especially for the price tag. I will not spend $700 on a rifle with a plastic magazine, I'll state that right off. And Browning's new X-bolt is one of those. If you wan't to sell me on a T3, find me one for sale for $300, then we'll talk. Until then, my judgment lies in that model being an overpriced entry level econo Sako. Both share the same barrel, but they are not the same.

And your right Todd, I really should get out more. Unfortunatly, I'm lazy, and my chair is damn comfortable. :p
 
Well then you should fill your locker with those awesome 200's and pick up a couple of extra can's of Krylon paint, with all the money you saving......
 
Not at all, my tikka is not my favorite.... I just find it funny when people think the Stevens 200 is a quality built rifle... its cheap and its worth the 300 bucks.... but thats about it...
 
Last edited:
This post makes me glad I own a Benelli...I don't have to sit up at night worried about anything Winchester hammers out. :p

But if I had to play at that level I'd Consider the Mossberg 4x4 in synthetic/marine coat, and .270 (as they don't make them in 6.5x55 Swede). :p
26615.jpg


:D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom