|
The Leverguns.com Community Forum |
) I'll ask here... 
I like the remingtons too! 
) or a Rem 700 of some flavor and I could probably get it locally. Thus the reason I wanted to know the differences in the Remington 700 nomenclatures.
I prefer the Savage bolt actions to the Remingtons OR Winchesters, and (think about it...) YOU should, TOO...!Old Savage wrote:Well Mike it is this way, it is easy to screw a tube into a tube and get accuracy more so than screwing a tube into a machined forging. All my Remingtons, basically 80s 90s, guns are as accurate or better than the best Model 70's (and I love those) that I have shot and have one very accurrate one. The Remington chambers have been consistently tighter.
AJMD429 wrote:I prefer the Savage bolt actions to the Remingtons OR Winchesters, and (think about it...) YOU should, TOO...!Old Savage wrote:Well Mike it is this way, it is easy to screw a tube into a tube and get accuracy more so than screwing a tube into a machined forging. All my Remingtons, basically 80s 90s, guns are as accurate or better than the best Model 70's (and I love those) that I have shot and have one very accurrate one. The Remington chambers have been consistently tighter.
) but something put me off about them. On the 'bolt gun' forums there is often alot of Ruger bashing, and I think in years past there were intermittent bedding or barrel quality issues with some of them. I have a 1976 M77V (heavy barrel) in 6mm Rem that cloverleafs five shots at 100 yards consistently, so there's no way I'd complain about that gun. I have a newer (maybe post-2000?) "Mark-II' M-77 in 308 that I happened to find used at a good price (just after I bought the Savage in .308, of course). That gun and the Savage seem about equal in my hands - both 3/4" with factory .308 milsurp; I think it is either my factory ammo (I handload ALL my 6mm) or that the higher recoil just makes me less accurate with either .308 than with the 6mm. Anyway, I'd not be dissatisfied with the Ruger .308 if it was my only .308 bolt gun, other than the after-market stock options are more numerous for the Savage (the Choate Ultimate Varmint and Ultimate Sniper are pretty nice if you don't need a 'traditional' look).awp101 wrote:I've thought about the Rugers in the past, mainly when looking for a .22 or .22H. I can't put my finger on it (IOW I don't remember why
), in .223, and it will put 5 factory rounds in 3/4" at 100 yards, seems reliable, and a 'worthy' gun. I don't know how the trigger mechanism compares to the 700's, but the 788 does have a crisp trigger, and you CAN really sense the 'fast lock time' when you shoot it. Magazines aren't hard to find for .223, 6mm, and 44 Mag, although like many of the 'box' magazines for guns of that vintage, you have to carefully and purposefully 'seat' them so they don't fall out. Not like an AR-15 or Mini-14! and the MkII I like over the Remington 788 just because on a bolt gun I prefer heavy barrels. (If I'm wanting handiness, I'll go for a lever action 'carbine' and if I'm wanting ultimate accuracy and/or power, I'll go for a full-house bolt gun 'rifle' without regard as to ungainliness.) The 77/22 and the center-fire 77's and MkII 77's all feel very different from one another; even the latter two to me feel different. There are centerfire 77's ranging from short and light-barreled 'mountain' ones to the more 'varmint' weighted ones I have, so they're worth handling.awp101 wrote:Thanks for the additional feedback.
AFA the Ruger, whatever it was that put me off had nothing to do with internet reputation or rumor as I actually held a couple of 77/22s and 77/22Hs in my grubby mitts. I think it was just the way they felt in my hands.
