Thaugts on Remington 700 all models

Hitzy said:
The retail price to reflect the manufacturing cost lol. It looks like a budget offering to my eyes at a premium price, huge mark-up vs manufacturing costs.
Anyway, I do like the "features", I'll just gladly take them made in Sweden out of forged and milled steel (1600) that's been fully finished by skilled craftsmen with pride.
Everyone has sticking points, I really really get ticked at unfinished cast surfaces, it's just laziness, or pure profit inspired. Is it unreasonable to expect a $1500 rifle to be better finished then a $700 rifle? Comparing Vanguards to M77's for instance.
Click to expand...

The Husqvarna would be a lot more $$$ if made today due to manufacturing cost. They are a bargain.

I haven't checked prices lately, but a comparable M77 should be maybe 50% more than a vanguard, not over double. Regardless, it's personal preference (give me the M77 any day.) Ruger's budget line (American) is forged and machined, they couldn't profitably do their investment casting process at that price point. As said earlier, it's not a typical cast and Ruger has a business outside the gun industry doing investment casting for aerospace, nuclear reactors ect.

We have all had this debate before though and I don't think anyone ever changes sides.
 
Hitzy said:
The retail price to reflect the manufacturing cost lol. It looks like a budget offering to my eyes at a premium price, huge mark-up vs manufacturing costs.
Anyway, I do like the "features", I'll just gladly take them made in Sweden out of forged and milled steel (1600) that's been fully finished by skilled craftsmen with pride.
Everyone has sticking points, I really really get ticked at unfinished cast surfaces, it's just laziness, or pure profit inspired. Is it unreasonable to expect a $1500 rifle to be better finished then a $700 rifle? Comparing Vanguards to M77's for instance.
Click to expand...

Vanguard used to be inexpensive, a quick look through one of the site sponsors shows the vanguard s2 stainless at 949, and the Hawkeye stainless at 929. Wonder what a newly manufactured rifle made to the husky 1600 standard would be....3k?
 
Slimbo said:
Vanguard used to be inexpensive, a quick look through one of the site sponsors shows the vanguard s2 stainless at 949, and the Hawkeye stainless at 929. Wonder what a newly manufactured rifle made to the husky 1600 standard would be....3k?
Click to expand...

The Zastava M70 retails for $699 here, but where it's made may have an impact on it's retail price, as I imagine labour is quite a bit cheaper.
US prices have Howas between $350-$450 for the basic setup, we get the hose up here on retail.
 
a Zastava doesn’t compare to a husky in fit and finish at all. Comparing US retail prices doesn’t mean much to any of the Canadians in this discussion.
 
Slimbo said:
a Zastava doesn’t compare to a husky in fit and finish at all. Comparing US retail prices doesn’t mean much to any of the Canadians in this discussion.
Click to expand...

Agreed, moving on...what about CZ vs M77? Both have similar build features, similar priced, I know which one appeals to me more based on build quality vs retail there.
 
Hitzy you’re hung up thinking investment casting means cheap, or Chinese sand cast. Many aircraft landing gear legs are precision investment cast in a controlled environment. Many components on works race cars are as well, essentially anything that needs metallurgic strength but isn’t readily forged due to its shape. Casting in stainless and challenging alloys is Ruger’s other business, they know what they’re doing with it and that is why they use it, casting in inert atosmpheres and under pressure.

Long ago Ruger realized they had the technical expertise to offer a better rifle and action at a bargain price (Slimbo pointed out the Ruger is the same price as the Vanguard, and it’s cheaper than a Tikka- it will outlast both and I greatly prefer its features). I’m a bonified gunophile and admire many aspects of the Ruger 77, like the best safety (actually blocks the cocking piece, and trigger, while having the M70’s three positions), a great and integral scope mounting system with rings/bases included with every rifle (add $175-250 to your competing rifle’s prices), the best floorplate release tucked into the front of the trigger guard seemlessly where it can’t be bumped open, controlled round feed, and a plethora of chamberings and almost all available in stainless too.

Where would we be without Ford / Chevy personal preferences arguments on this forum! :d 1600s are good too but aren’t better than a Ruger, there are a good few features most classy customized ones get that gravitate them closer to the Ruger (bottom metal, safety, trigger improvements, clean scope mounts like Talley / Ruger).
 
Again, not questioning the durability, just the aesthetics of the left as is casting, it doesn't make me want one for that very reason, minimal annoyance, petty, call it what you will. I have the same feelings about "bolted together bolts" like Savages, or dovetailed separate bolt handles like Tikkas and some Brownings. All good functioning guns, but mostly their price reflects these cuts in manufacturing...maybe not so much with the Tikka lol.
Hell even Win M70's have soldered bolt handles and retail for $1400. And yes, soldered handles will break the weld on occasion on 700's and M70's, it's not ideal for sure.
 
Hitzy said:
Agreed, moving on...what about CZ vs M77? Both have similar build features, similar priced, I know which one appeals to me more based on build quality vs retail there.
Click to expand...


Ruger for the win, with cz having club like stocks with poor checkering, plastic floor plates and two position safeties.
 
Hitzy said:
Again, not questioning the durability, just the aesthetics of the left as is casting, it doesn't make me want one for that very reason, minimal annoyance, petty, call it what you will. I have the same feelings about "bolted together bolts" like Savages, or dovetailed separate bolt handles like Tikkas and some Brownings. All good functioning guns, but mostly their price reflects these cuts in manufacturing...maybe not so much with the Tikka lol.
Hell even Win M70's have soldered bolt handles and retail for $1400. And yes, soldered handles will break the weld on occasion on 700's and M70's, it's not ideal for sure.
Click to expand...

Model 70s do not have soldered on handles, you won’t find any solder in them, they’re splined in, a much better system but still inferior to a one piece. Pre-64 Model 70s are a one piece bolt forging.
 
Slimbo said:
Ruger for the win, with cz having club like stocks with poor checkering, plastic floor plates and two position safeties.
Click to expand...

how good was the brno 602? super no even a discussion ... then the cz550 (cheaper version) anyway no more made on generic calibers only the african calibers and for how long?
 
Ardent said:
Model 70s do not have soldered on handles, you won’t find any solder in them, they’re splined in, a much better system but still inferior to a one piece. Pre-64 Model 70s are a one piece bolt forging.
Click to expand...

I thought I read of a "fix" for them coming loose....pinning the collar to the bolt body, I'll see if I can find it.
Couple of Smith's talk about it here
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/2668921/Re_Model_70_bolt_handle_fix
This shop pins them all when they perform work
http://echolsrifles.########.com/2012/05/pinning-model-70-bolt.html?m=1
 
Last edited:
Call me a heathen, but I far prefer my Remington to any of the Rugers I've owned or do own. Rugers are... ok. With the exception of that .416, I've never owned one I really liked. Nor have I owned any others that shot particularly well.
Take the 77/44 that's my current hobbyhorse; it shoots acceptably, but no better than a Marlin 94 or Win 92. It's reciever is FAR longer than it needs to be - for a .44 Mag rifle it's the same length as a Remington seven. That's insane. It's still about the lightest and handiest bush rifle off the shelf, so there's that.

If the 700 was designed to be cheap to manufacture, then what is investment casting? That's the literal definition of cheap manufacturing technique. High set up costs, very very low production costs. If we think that there's any modern mass produced firearm that isn't designed with production cost at the forefront, then we're fooling ourselves.

In regular hunting use for 99.5% of buyers, even the cheapest savage axis will stand a lifetime of use, and deliver better performance than was available from custom rifles even a few decades ago. The arguments about investment casting and soldered bolt handles are purely academic.

I'm in agreement about the Howas. For the price there's nothing nicer around IME, and that includes Ruger. Even for rifles costing 50% more they stack up very very respectably. I've yet to find one that didn't shoot lights out. They're very rapidly becoming my favourite rifles.
 
Last edited:
Ardent said:
Not so academic, a poster here just commented a couple weeks ago about the hunt his 700 bolt handle came off in his hand on. And how does your .44 Mag Remington bolt action shoot in comparison to your Ruger? ;)
Click to expand...

What I'd really be all over is a .44 Mag rifle in a true micro action ala CZ527 or Howa. Perhaps then it would have a decent trigger and be an inch shorter :p Ok, that's not totally fair - the 77/44 trigger juuuuuuust rises to the level of decent enough I'm not going to address it, it's sufficient for a sub 100 yd gun. But it surely has the worst trigger of any rifle that's cost me over 1k, excepting ARs.

I suppose that's the only appeal of Ruger to me - they simply make things that arent offered by anyone else. But they're hardly without flaws and trade offs of their own. There would have to be a very compelling reason for me to pick an equivalent Hawkeye over a 1500 for the same price. Better safety, infinitely better trigger, better accuracy and you're not limited to proprietary scope mounts.
 
Ardent said:
Model 70s do not have soldered on handles, you won’t find any solder in them, they’re splined in, a much better system but still inferior to a one piece. Pre-64 Model 70s are a one piece bolt forging.
Click to expand...

From Darcy Echols blog posted above:
Our solution was to set up every G-series Model 70 bolt in the milling machine, drill and ream a 3/32" hole through both the investment cast bolt handle collar and the bolt body and then solder a 3/32" dowel pin into the new hole. The pin is then filed and polished flush with the major bolt diameter and the same is done in the inside diameter of the bolt body. The bolt handle and the bolt body are now joined mechanically in addition to the original copper induction brazed joint. No fuss, no issues later on.

Also from the link above - a very well known and respected Canadian gunsmith writes:
"I was a Winchester warranty gunsmith for about 14 years and saw enough bolt handles come adrift to know it is certainly not unheard of. In fairness, I would also have to say it was not really common either. I did see at least as many Winchester handle joints fail as Remington 700s (I did Remington warranty during the same period)."

So if bolt handle attachment is a major concern, and you take the number of 700's sold and compared that to the number of m70's sold - I guess the safer bet would be the 700 as far as bolt handles are concerned. :)
 
Would offer the Ruger is actually the safest bet in that case and what’s been debated lately. :d Noted on the Model 70, presume this relates only to the Post-64? I’ve never owned one admittedly, pretend that era didn’t happen. Winchester attempted to compete with Remington and cheapened the Model 70 hugely from its one piece forged bolt the year before, and gave up controlled round feed and its dignity in that era too needless to say.
 
double gun said:
From Darcy Echols blog posted above:
Our solution was to set up every G-series Model 70 bolt in the milling machine, drill and ream a 3/32" hole through both the investment cast bolt handle collar and the bolt body and then solder a 3/32" dowel pin into the new hole. The pin is then filed and polished flush with the major bolt diameter and the same is done in the inside diameter of the bolt body. The bolt handle and the bolt body are now joined mechanically in addition to the original copper induction brazed joint. No fuss, no issues later on.

Also from the link above - a very well known and respected Canadian gunsmith writes:
"I was a Winchester warranty gunsmith for about 14 years and saw enough bolt handles come adrift to know it is certainly not unheard of. In fairness, I would also have to say it was not really common either. I did see at least as many Winchester handle joints fail as Remington 700s (I did Remington warranty during the same period)."

So if bolt handle attachment is a major concern, and you take the number of 700's sold and compared that to the number of m70's sold - I guess the safer bet would be the 700 as far as bolt handles are concerned. :)
Click to expand...

I could be mistaken but were the G series not the 70's-80's push feeds?
My first M70 was a 300 Win Mag XTR with a G serial.
Don't ask me how I remember that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom