Thoughts on the Remington 783?
- Thread starter Halftail
- Start date
Everyone will have their opinion, but I think one would be further ahead getting a used M77 on the EE for a similar price to the 783 with a Boyds.
The 783 is like the other budget rifles. Some will see value some will see crap. I don't think it's worse than the other brands.
The 783 is like the other budget rifles. Some will see value some will see crap. I don't think it's worse than the other brands.
Cam's right. By the time you buy a new rifle and restock it in a new Boyds, you've spent enough to buy a good used rifle like a M77 or 700.
Some of these entry level guns are very good shooters and would be a good value left as is w/o spending extra money on bling for them. The Gun Dealer has some if those new 783s for $300 in the used section. Beat that for a new rifle!
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Why does Remington keep rehashing this thing under different model numbers? Its neither an enthusiast's rifle, nor a rifle that should be expected to stand up to hard use. While I'm not much of a Savage bolt gun fan, next to a 783, the Axis is an exemplary example of the gun maker's art. Neither is the 783 inexpensive when compared to jack handles, tomato stakes, and similar implements which better fill the roles for which its best suited.
Note cam's post above to see which camp I fall into. I just disagree that this thing is like other budget rifles.
Note cam's post above to see which camp I fall into. I just disagree that this thing is like other budget rifles.
Last edited:
Get the 783 its a good gun and not a rehashed anything. The stock is good too much better than the sps but uglier and with moulded sling swivels. Its stiff, pillar bedded and free floated. Magazine system excellent although i cant say the plastic latch will last for generations. Or maybe it will. My bolt didnt smooth out nicely till 500 rounds at least due to the bolt finish which the sps isnt any better. It has a very good adjustable trigger. Mine works well at slightly below 3 pounds if i want a crappy trigger i could buy one of the more expensive american rifles. I dont think it would make sense to buy a new stock for it.
Boomer, I usually (but not always) agree with your posts. Have you looked at or handled the 783? It is a step way above the the 710 or 770. This rifle has a screw in barrel with a barrel and a good trigger. Way better than the accutrigger. It is basically the marlin with a detachable magazine. I am not in the market for a budget rifle but would take it before the Savage axis.
Neil
Neil
Just got a 7MM RM! From Cabellas for $299. Free del and will be sending in a $40 rebate card, looks good and yes the sling swivels look bad but that can be fixed, I read lots of great reports on accuracy and can't wait to try mine next week! I will be bedding mine eventually but by the sound of it they are already very accurate for a hunter and they are quite light! So, less than $300 for a robust accurate hunting rifle, that is dependable! Hard to beat that!
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Okay fair enough, I assumed it was a repatched 710/770. I stand corrected. Its nice to see that the problems associated with the former models were addressed.
when Remington bought marlin they stole most of the features off the XL7 by the looks of it, other than the receiver. I would prefer the marlin product but for a low cost budget gun the Remington is probably as good as any of the others
I know what you mean but it is meant as a hunting rifle and really how many round does the average Hunter shoot each year? 10-20 to sight in,, 10 at game if he is a bad shot and 20 more at pop cans and squirrels! 20 years 1000 rounds! It would take a while and then pop another barrel on and go, the 7MM RM I bought may chew through the barrel after 1200- 2000 rounds tops I guess, then I might change it to a diff caliber if not sooner. Now if you are going to soup it up with new stocks etc. then perhaps it is cheaper to go a couple grades up to one with some goodies on it already.
Bigfoot 870
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Nova Scotia
The 783 is a new design and a good one, at that. Add that Boyd's stock and you'll be a happy shooter 
Doors of Perception
CGN Regular
- Location
- Burlington, Ontario
I have a 783 in 270win and it still wears the original stock. It is spooky accurate with load developed hand loads. The action feeds a little rough - but is perfectly adequate for follow up shots. The safety will make a noise and the solution it to hold your thumb on it and walk it forward. It does feel cheap - BUT it shoots really well. It is the ideal hunting gun - cheap and cheerful and if you scratch it - no big deal. IMHO with modern CNC machining guns don't have to be expensive to shoot well. If you like to shoot and have shots touch this is your rifle, If you like to look at your rifle and think how pretty it is - not so much.
Well you want opinions so I'll give mine.
Many who buy budget rifles of any flavor rave about their accuracy. I don't dispute this. They are accurate in general. Are they more accurate than a $600-$1500 mid grade rifle? In general no because of their flimsy stocks; but, individual rifles vary and they are not far behind. Aside from the odd lemon modern rifles are generally under 1 inch at 100 yards. Here is the kicker though.
0.5 MOA or 1.5 MOA means diddly squat in a hunting rifle.
Yep, the only deseriable trait, aside from cost, the budget rifles have means nothing. Unless you're into long range hunting (and you won't be using a budget rifle for that anyways) a 1.5 MOA rifle will serve equally as well as a 0.5 MOA one.
What does matter in a hunting rifle? Big on my list are: reliability, ruggedness, fit, feel, cartridge and application. Another that really does not affect my effectiveness in the field is pride of ownership.
The budget guns fall short in all these catagories IMO (and remeber you were looking for opinions.)
I would go on but I need to go to sleep and most are set in their ways on both sides of this argument.
Many who buy budget rifles of any flavor rave about their accuracy. I don't dispute this. They are accurate in general. Are they more accurate than a $600-$1500 mid grade rifle? In general no because of their flimsy stocks; but, individual rifles vary and they are not far behind. Aside from the odd lemon modern rifles are generally under 1 inch at 100 yards. Here is the kicker though.
0.5 MOA or 1.5 MOA means diddly squat in a hunting rifle.
Yep, the only deseriable trait, aside from cost, the budget rifles have means nothing. Unless you're into long range hunting (and you won't be using a budget rifle for that anyways) a 1.5 MOA rifle will serve equally as well as a 0.5 MOA one.
What does matter in a hunting rifle? Big on my list are: reliability, ruggedness, fit, feel, cartridge and application. Another that really does not affect my effectiveness in the field is pride of ownership.
The budget guns fall short in all these catagories IMO (and remeber you were looking for opinions.)
I would go on but I need to go to sleep and most are set in their ways on both sides of this argument.
