Thanks Dave. Looking at the site a few weeks ago, I swear that they weren't there. Guess I must have caught them in the update the site cycle or had a senior moment. I've owned several Remys over the years and still own three. A BDL LH re-barreled to 338-06 and two 788s. I took a 400grit paper to the stock to matte finish cause it looked too gaudy. The 788s in 308 and 223 shoot better than most I've owned. Even at $105 in 1972, the 308 shoots great. That old birch stock gave way to a RamLine 10 years ago.
? for people down on Remington
- Thread starter crimsondave
- Start date
788
GEAUXTIDE,
I was a Remington dealer for a long time. If you wanted to shoot rifles Remington or otherwise and maybe get into some friendly competition with a Remington Rep, most would pick up a 788 and shoot against anything you brought. I personally have made some extremely good shooting 788 rifles with the 7mm08 and Brown Precision stocks. Have had lots of other 788 that shot extremely well too btw but making deer hunting rifles, my favorite was always the 7mm08.
Take care, Murray
GEAUXTIDE,
I was a Remington dealer for a long time. If you wanted to shoot rifles Remington or otherwise and maybe get into some friendly competition with a Remington Rep, most would pick up a 788 and shoot against anything you brought. I personally have made some extremely good shooting 788 rifles with the 7mm08 and Brown Precision stocks. Have had lots of other 788 that shot extremely well too btw but making deer hunting rifles, my favorite was always the 7mm08.
Take care, Murray
crimsondave
New member
They have so many friggin different models now they would be easy to overlook.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
I have seen some new production Remingtons with pretty sloppy fit and finish at gun stores. I have seen guys at the range with absolutely amaxing looking old ones.
Maybe it is just that I am comparing relatively cheap rifles to expensive ones, but at the price of the cheap ones you can get a nice rifle from another company, especially if you aren't after a looker.
Seems to be no innovation at all from Remington.
Remington is not far behind colt IMO. Fading fast and unwilling to admit it.
Maybe it is just that I am comparing relatively cheap rifles to expensive ones, but at the price of the cheap ones you can get a nice rifle from another company, especially if you aren't after a looker.
Seems to be no innovation at all from Remington.
Remington is not far behind colt IMO. Fading fast and unwilling to admit it.
Flatbush Harry
New member
I have a 2008 vintage Rem 700 SPS Stainless in .308 Win that is a <1MOA rifle, out of the box standard using Federal GMM 168gr. While I suspect I could improve things with a new stock with a full Al bedding block, I don't need any more accuracy. Both my Savage 116 FSHAK in .30-06 and my Rem 700 shoot to <1MOA. In watching many shooters out at my local range sight in rifles, I note almost none use a good rest (I use a Caldwell Leadsled with 50# of chilled shot), good technique or even various ammo to find the best performer. I have a high discount rate for most qvetching about Remington.
I'm undecided between a Rem Sendero and a Savage 111 LR Hunter for my next rifle.
FH
I'm undecided between a Rem Sendero and a Savage 111 LR Hunter for my next rifle.
FH
bigrebnc1861
New member
OK any suggestions?
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
Harry,
You made an argument almost entirely based on accuracy, which is not what most have indicated is the problem. Almost any major rifle manufacturer makes a rifle accurate enough for my taste in hunting. Ruger probably has the worst reputation for accuracy, but is the company I would look at first for a hunting rifle. For competitive bench shooting I don't think most would accept <MOA or stock rifles. Savage a possible exception. I think a really competitive shooter is going to want to do some work on a Savage.
The fact of the matter is, the problem isn't accuracy. This site is a microcosm of the shooting community where a large portion of shooters can actually shoot <MOA groups. MOST gun owners in the US just want to hit a pie plate.
You made an argument almost entirely based on accuracy, which is not what most have indicated is the problem. Almost any major rifle manufacturer makes a rifle accurate enough for my taste in hunting. Ruger probably has the worst reputation for accuracy, but is the company I would look at first for a hunting rifle. For competitive bench shooting I don't think most would accept <MOA or stock rifles. Savage a possible exception. I think a really competitive shooter is going to want to do some work on a Savage.
The fact of the matter is, the problem isn't accuracy. This site is a microcosm of the shooting community where a large portion of shooters can actually shoot <MOA groups. MOST gun owners in the US just want to hit a pie plate.
I am very fond of the Ruger 77 MkII for a field rifle, and mine have all been hunting-accurate (1.5MOA) and very pleasing to operate. If you want a longer barrel and push-feed, the Weatherby Vanguard/Howa 1500 is a superb action that is very well finished and sells for a price point far less than Remington can ever dream of hitting. For the same cost as a Rem 700, you can get a Tikka T3 that will display far better finish and shoot circles around the Remington.
sc928porsche
New member
Ive never been that much of a fan of Remington. Their bolts just "feel" sloppy for and expensive rifle. For the price, you can get Winchester, Sako, Weatherby, and Ruger. They feel more solid.
crimsondave
New member
I'd have to see that to believe it. To "shoot circles around the Remington" it would have to shoot .5 MOA groups at least.
About the sloppiest feeling expensive rifle I've seen lately is a Browning. Of course, with the BOSS, it is also about the tightest shooting. Go figure.
I have never had a factory ADL, BDL, CDL, or SPS shoot sub-MOA out of the box, with any factory loads. I have never had a Tikka T3 fail to shoot MOA or better out of the box, with no load tuning. That's my definition of 'shooting circles around the Remington'. YMMV.
I have never had a factory ADL, BDL, CDL, or SPS shoot any better than a Vanguard, when the Vanguard cost $400 NIB and the Remingtons sold for $600+.
It's just that plain. The Remington may be a nice rifle, but it's not a good value when you can get more accurate rifles for the same money or equally accurate rifle for less money. Add in the fact that I prefer a rifle that locks the bolt down when the safety is engaged, and you have my personal reasons for preferring other offerings.
Last edited:
crimsondave
New member
The bolt action Rems I still own are an old 721, a 700, and a 700 mountain rifle. The only one that doesn't shoot MOA is the mountain rifle with the tiny barrel. It's about 1.5 MOA. The 700 has never had factory ammo shot out of it, so I don't know what it would do with it. It's MOA all day with my loads, though. The 721 will shoot factory green box MOA all day. Only one newer than 1990 is the mountain rifle. The brand new one I just sighted in with factory Hornady 150's was MOA with 3 shots.
Who tried to sell you an ADL or SPS for $600?
Most Remingtons can be great shooters, but will sometimes need a little tweaking to get there. If I were having a custom rifle built I would probably start with a Remington. A little more trouble, but you will get a good gun.
Out of the box the Tikka's are amazing. Especially for the money.
I think the new Hawkeyes are the best classic hunting rifle offered for the money at this time. They are using all steel and walnut. No shortcuts and the wood and checkering on the ones I have seen have been above average. The new Winchesters are also a contender. Reports of excellent accuracy have my interest up, but the wood and checkering on the ones I've handled was average at best. Plus they are a bit more expensive than the Rugers and do not come with scope mounts like Ruger.
While I appreciate a good blue walnut gun I always reach for the stainless synthetics. Ruger is the least expensive option out ther and a darn good choice. A stainless Savage will cost you more than a stainless Ruger.
I am most impressed with the new Kimbers right now. At around $1,100 they are not cheap, but you get a lot for your money.
Remingtons are probably as good as ever. My only concern is that they have been sitting on their butts while many of the other companies have been moving forward with better designs.
Out of the box the Tikka's are amazing. Especially for the money.
I think the new Hawkeyes are the best classic hunting rifle offered for the money at this time. They are using all steel and walnut. No shortcuts and the wood and checkering on the ones I have seen have been above average. The new Winchesters are also a contender. Reports of excellent accuracy have my interest up, but the wood and checkering on the ones I've handled was average at best. Plus they are a bit more expensive than the Rugers and do not come with scope mounts like Ruger.
While I appreciate a good blue walnut gun I always reach for the stainless synthetics. Ruger is the least expensive option out ther and a darn good choice. A stainless Savage will cost you more than a stainless Ruger.
I am most impressed with the new Kimbers right now. At around $1,100 they are not cheap, but you get a lot for your money.
Remingtons are probably as good as ever. My only concern is that they have been sitting on their butts while many of the other companies have been moving forward with better designs.
thekyrifleman
New member
All very interesting posts....Sounds very much like a GMC, CHEVY, FORD, DODGE, and maybe until recently TOYOTA:barf: discussion. No one will convince the other and each is convinced he/she is right!!
Cool!!! Oh, by the way.....Remington rules!!!!
Cool!!! Oh, by the way.....Remington rules!!!!ndking1126
New member
To the OP, as a long time Remington fan, I have been very interested in your exact question. I personally don't have experiences with the new Remingtons, but the comments that I've seen about ACTUAL problems (ie, not "I wish it was a different color/finish" or the generic "oh yeah, their quality has gone down the tube!") has mostly been from the cheaper models.
You will almost never hear about BDLs, CDLs or Sendero's having problems. At worst maybe a "not as accurate as I expected", which I'm reluctant to blindly except as a QC problem because probably the owner is comparing them to claims other people post on the internet about group size... just like that big bass grows each time the story is told, you know group sizes shrink each time the groups are posted about!
You will almost never hear about BDLs, CDLs or Sendero's having problems. At worst maybe a "not as accurate as I expected", which I'm reluctant to blindly except as a QC problem because probably the owner is comparing them to claims other people post on the internet about group size... just like that big bass grows each time the story is told, you know group sizes shrink each time the groups are posted about!
Remington still makes great guns. I think some people's perceptions of poor quality are twofold. First, their QC has arguably slipped. Second, they have started to produce some lower end guns, 710:barf: and 870 express to name 2. some people expect them to be top tier guns when they were never meant to be and their price reflects that. With all lower priced guns you are going to see a higher incidence of mechanical problems. Nature of the beast, lower price, lower quality. Their M 700's and 870 Wingmasters and SP's are as good as they've always been.
Those were/are local prices out-the-door in the DFW area. Online, the average price for an SPS seems to be $550; factor in shipping and transfer and you're not much cheaper.
Academy is selling Vanguards for $399 plus tax, meaning that the out-the-door price is less than $450.