Remington 700
jerry
-----------------------------------------------------------
Learn about the HERB WOODEND MACHINE GUN RAFFLE at
http://www.direct-action.org/herb.html
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
Clark Magnuson
Mausers].
With the stock on, 700's look good.
Some people get great accuracy with them, I don't.
A number of gunsmiths have told me that Rem 700's are the best place to
start in a quest for accuracy. The cost of a 700 + the cost to improve
add up to the least cost to sure accuracy.
I have also been told that just buying rifles, testing them, and selling
them until an accurate one is found is more time consuming, but cheaper
still.
xlea...@mail.airmail.net
22-250 to .358 Norma. Every one of them is a solid shooter. A couple
of the custom guns approach unreal, but that's with custom stocks,
Douglas barrels and after market trigger groups.
Strong actions, easy to work on, lots of parts, reasonable value. You
probably won't go wrong getting one.
That being said, I still think that Ruger may have the best
off-the-shelf rifles for the money. I've never seen one shoot poorly
out-of-the-box.
Regards.
> ...
Bill Poole
i?
geezz, that's like asking "anyone have a chevy pickup? what do u think
about it?"
Rem 700 is great
Win 70 is great
best thing is buy 'em both! That way you won't have to decide right now
which is better to buy, you can make comparative testing of the two a full
time hobby until next hunting season, you can play with 2 different
calibers, 2 different scopes and you'll be supporting 2 different US gun
manufacturers.
The only reason NOT to buy both is so you can use the money to buy an AR-15
and M1A for high power competition.... That way you won't have to decide
right now which is better to buy, you can make comparative testing of the
two a full time hobby until next hunting season, you can play with 2
different calibers, 2 different sight pictures and you'll be supporting 2
different US gun manufacturers.
Good shooting,
Poole
http://arizona.rifleshooting.com/
John T Haller
I shot it, it shot into 1.2" at 300 yards with a 190gr handload. That's not
bad for a start. It depends on what you want to use it for and so forth.
If you're out to hunt whitetail deer and that's it, then buy whatever is on
sale.
JTH
"jerry" <jer...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b7s1p7$an7$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
> ...
i?
> ...
fred
needs they are perfect
Fred
TJ
What do you think about it?
I absolutely positively love my 700
No problems to report
No complaints either
Should I?
Hell yes!!!!!!
My web page below
http://community.webtv.net/terry0701/AR15AK47twogreat
G. Michael Paine
"jerry" <jer...@comcast.net> wrote:
> ...
I靶e had mine for over 30 years, (30.06) and it is still a wonderful
rifle.
-M.P.
Gunner
#
#That being said, I still think that Ruger may have the best
#off-the-shelf rifles for the money. I've never seen one shoot poorly
#out-of-the-box.
#
Not to start a flame, but Ive never seen a Ruger, out of the box,
shoot "good". My last Ruger, a 77v in .308, will not do better than
..75 no matter what I do, and Ive done everything except rebarreling,
both in mechanical tuning and load development.
Gunner
Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and
strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman
explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound"
Lauren Knapp
famous snipers, l.e. agencies, military forces etc. etc. i'd say they are
pretty good!
<xlea...@mail.airmail.net> wrote in message
news:b7uedm$9p8$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
Usmc bill
free floated it myself and have shot sub 1" groups at 100 yards with factory
Remington ammo. I use 180 PSPCL (30065).
Bill VH
#
#Any one have the remington 700 rifle? What do you think about it? Should i?
#
Do it ! You might like it. I did.
Bill Van Houten (USA Ret)
Thermopylae had it's messenger of defeat, COME AND GET THEM !
The Alamo had none.
Bart B.
centerfire barrels on regular commercial rifles. But everything else,
in my opinion, isn't as good as a Winchester Model 70.
I may have to post the findings of some of the top marksmen in the USA
regarding the differences between these two makes/models.
C. Wilson
wrote:
#Remington 700 barrels are probably the most accurate US made
#centerfire barrels on regular commercial rifles. But everything else,
#in my opinion, isn't as good as a Winchester Model 70.
#
#I may have to post the findings of some of the top marksmen in the USA
#regarding the differences between these two makes/models.
Please do. I for one would be interested in reading that.
Ken Marsh
Bart B. <bar...@aol.com> wrote:
#Remington 700 barrels are probably the most accurate US made
#centerfire barrels on regular commercial rifles. But everything else,
#in my opinion, isn't as good as a Winchester Model 70.
Like what? Lock time? Harmonics and receiver rigidity? Gas containment?
Where does the 700 fall short of the 70? Panache?
#I may have to post the findings of some of the top marksmen in the USA
#regarding the differences between these two makes/models.
Like this?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4rto2m%246g9%40xring.cs.umd.edu&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
"The last mod 70 action I have seen used by serious bench rest
competitors was in 1959 and was shot by L.E. (Sam) Wilson on an
unrestricted rifle. They will not produce the accuracy that it takes to
be competitive. If anyone questions this I would be glad to furnish
equipment lists of matches held by the NBRSA for the last 40 years?
Somehow I doubt your findings will include benchrest.
Ken.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DARE to keep the FBI off of $1.7M | Mail: kmarsh at charm dot net
double agent girlfriends. | WWW: http://www.charm.net/~kmarsh
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bart B.
# But everything else, in my opinion, isn't as good as a Winchester Model 70.
#
# Like what? Lock time? Harmonics and receiver rigidity? Gas containment?
# Where does the 700 fall short of the 70? Panache?
Lock time? Of course the Remington is shorter because factory firing
pin springs are about 30 pounds compared to Winchester's 23 pounds.
Which makes the Winchester easier to operate rapid fire. With a $6 30
pound spring installed in a Winchester, lock time is just as fast but
still easier to open the bolt due to camming angle differences.
Harmonics? Don't understand, but maybe this is related to receiver
rigidity.
Receiver rigidity? Measure both makes of equal length and it's
obvious which one is more rigid. Use one of two dynamic methods
(bending/twisting or resonant frequency) or the static method (4th
order moment of inertia equations) The Winchester is over twice as
rigid. McMillan never understood this nor did he want to.
And about this article:
# http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4rto2m%246g9%40xring.cs.umd.edu&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Those knowledgable of the subtle differences between Remington and
Winchester actions and the best way to blueprint them for best
accuracy know why McMillan's Winchester based match rifles never shot
as good as those worked on by others that shot the best scores. And
some of us know what happened to those Remington magnums after a
couple hundred rounds were fired in them and they had to be rebedded.
Nor does McMillan want to discuss the fact that more Winchesters have
won and set records in highpower matches than Remingtons. Of course
more Remingtons have won benchrest matches. Nobody has ever made a
reliable 2-ounce trigger for a Model 70. And the differences between
the way each shooting discipline holds and fires their rifles is huge.
Lets not compare an engraver's chisel to a back hoe; there's too many
differences that make them unique in their own world.
Clark Magnuson
# Harmonics? Don't understand, but maybe this is related to receiver
# rigidity.
I think what Ken is using the term "harmonics" for here is short for
oscillatory motion and the accompanying harmonics when a barrel / gun
vibrates after firing. If the barrel vibrated and a harmonic with a
node in the middle of the barrel might be called the second harmonic,
and the harmonic with a node 1/3 and another at 2/3 down the barrel
might be called the third harmonic.
It is easier to get a feel for harmonics by plucking an open guitar
string and then touching the string at middle point of the string. The
only vibration left are harmonics with a node in the center i.e. 2 nd
harmonic, 4 Th. harmonic, etc.
I have spent years reducing electromagnetic interference [EMI] emissions
and susceptibility of electronics, mostly trouble from the upper
harmonics of switching power supplies' fundamental switching frequency.
These are most often electrical and magnetic waves, not motion, but
there is some similarity. My solution is often to make tight things
tighter and loose things looser [lower impedances and higher impedances].
Back on rifles, I work hard to get the inner and outer stop rings in a
98 Mauser trued and smooth, and the shoulders on the barrel the same
distance apart to match the trued action. I put grease on the threads
and a couple hundred foot pounds of torque. These things, I hope, will
make the barrel - receiver connection stiffer, resulting is less
movement at the muzzle from oscillatory motion. I also glass bed the
action and part of the barrel to the stock. I want the receiver and
stock to hang on the to barrel so firmly that muzzle moves less, or at
least more consistently.
Jeff Olsen
#Any one have the remington 700 rifle? What do you think about it? Should i?
I have three of them, two of the Mountain Rifle LSS's and a Model 7 LSS.
Those are variations of the 700, BTW.
I wish I could say all three were great but it isn't true. Well,
actually, it IS true now, but it took some effort. One of them, the Model
7, was all screwed up; the stock was crooked and binding the barrel and
action, and the crown was miscut. After floating the barrel, bedding job,
and a recrown, it's a 1.25 MOA shooter. One of the Mountain Rifles, a
30-06, was a good solid rifle that shot everything to 1.5 MOA or
so. After bedding and floating, it shoots about 1 MOA with tuned
handloads. The third, a Mountain Rifle in 7mm-08, was a great shooter
right out of the box; it shoots 1 MOA dead stock, and shoots most ammo
very well. It did have a bad spring in the trigger group when I bought it
though.
So there it is- the good, the bad and the ugly. Buying a factory rifle is
a roll of the dice. I think Remingtons are as good a roll as any.
Probably, on balance, the best choice in American mid-priced factory
rifles.
-jeff
Ken Marsh
Bart B. <bar...@aol.com> wrote:
#Lock time? Of course the Remington is shorter because factory firing
#pin springs are about 30 pounds compared to Winchester's 23 pounds.
#Which makes the Winchester easier to operate rapid fire. With a $6 30
#pound spring installed in a Winchester, lock time is just as fast but
#still easier to open the bolt due to camming angle differences.
So, in ONE aspect, the 700 is superior, out of the box. Put titanium
firing pins in both and the 700 is still superior.
#Harmonics? Don't understand, but maybe this is related to receiver
#rigidity.
I didn't think you would understand. Try reading Stuart Otteson and
Harold Vaughn's books.
Let me ask you, why are the most accurate rifles today barrel block
bedded? (hint: harmonics)
#Receiver rigidity? Measure both makes of equal length and it's
#obvious which one is more rigid. Use one of two dynamic methods
#(bending/twisting or resonant frequency) or the static method (4th
#order moment of inertia equations) The Winchester is over twice as
#rigid. McMillan never understood this nor did he want to.
Nor does Otteson nor Vaughn. Sorry, but you are swimming against the
current on this one. All the leading authorities say the 700 is more
rigid, and have data to back it up. Otteson's books have good
cross-sectional diagrams that demonstrate why.
#And about this article:
#http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4rto2m%246g9%40xring.cs.umd.edu&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
#Those knowledgable of the subtle differences between Remington and
#Winchester actions and the best way to blueprint them for best
#accuracy know why McMillan's Winchester based match rifles never shot
#as good as those worked on by others that shot the best scores. And
#some of us know what happened to those Remington magnums after a
#couple hundred rounds were fired in them and they had to be rebedded.
McMillan's rifles were the beginning of 700 dominance and the end of
M70 dominance in high-power.
#Nor does McMillan want to discuss the fact that more Winchesters have
#won and set records in highpower matches than Remingtons.
It is just a matter of time before more records are set by the 700... it
has a lot of decades to catch up on. :)
# Of course
#more Remingtons have won benchrest matches. Nobody has ever made a
#reliable 2-ounce trigger for a Model 70.
Not just that. There's also lock time... and harmonics... and receiver
rigidity.
# And the differences between
#the way each shooting discipline holds and fires their rifles is huge.
# Lets not compare an engraver's chisel to a back hoe; there's too many
#differences that make them unique in their own world.
Interesting analogy. Which is the back hoe; the benchrest rifle or
the hi-power rifle? I have my opinion, but I want to hear yours.
Ken.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Iraq Democracy will become a minority oppressing Theocracy in less
than two years. Iraq's new government needs to be a Republic!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bart B.
# So, in ONE aspect, the 700 is superior, out of the box. Put titanium
# firing pins in both and the 700 is still superior.
Fine.
# #Harmonics? Don't understand, but maybe this is related to receiver
# #rigidity.
#
# I didn't think you would understand. Try reading Stuart Otteson and
# Harold Vaughn's books.
I don't understand lots of things. Thanks for reminding me
#
# Let me ask you, why are the most accurate rifles today barrel block
# bedded? (hint: harmonics)
Doesn't matter why. They're the most accurate so it doesn't matter.
#
# #Receiver rigidity? Measure both makes of equal length and it's
# #obvious which one is more rigid. Use one of two dynamic methods
# #(bending/twisting or resonant frequency) or the static method (4th
# #order moment of inertia equations) The Winchester is over twice as
# #rigid. McMillan never understood this nor did he want to.
#
# Nor does Otteson nor Vaughn. Sorry, but you are swimming against the
# current on this one. All the leading authorities say the 700 is more
# rigid, and have data to back it up. Otteson's books have good
# cross-sectional diagrams that demonstrate why.
Well, I don't think I'm a leading authority. I just bent several
receivers and measured their deflection. So, whatever amount of
bending I noticed between different makes is meaningless; I've not
written a book. Therefore, I must not know what I'm talking about.
Everybody knows stiff things bend more than flimsy things, except me.
# McMillan's rifles were the beginning of 700 dominance and the end of
# M70 dominance in high-power.
Whatever.
# It is just a matter of time before more records are set by the 700... it
# has a lot of decades to catch up on. :)
Whatever.
# Not just that. There's also lock time... and harmonics... and receiver
# rigidity.
Yup.
# Interesting analogy. Which is the back hoe; the benchrest rifle or
# the hi-power rifle? I have my opinion, but I want to hear yours.
The back hoe is the one you want it to be. It doesn't matter. 'Tis
just another apples and oranges expression but relating to mechanics
instead of food.
Ken Marsh
Bart, if you wrote a book on Hi-power competitiveness, reading the wind,
confidence in your equipment, reloading techniques, etc., I would buy
it in a heartbeat. As for your ideas on WHY rifles are accurate...
Bart B. <bar...@aol.com> wrote:
#Well, I don't think I'm a leading authority. I just bent several
#receivers and measured their deflection.
Rigidity under firing stress is not the same as went bent over an anvil.
Roy Dunlap once said the rear half of a receiver could be made of lead,
for all it mattered! What matters here is not the receiver rail's
strength, but the shape and strength of the receiver ring. The Remington
ring is a strong, simple tube, while the M70 ring is a complicated
geometric puzzle, with definite weaknesses.
Besides strength, the simple Remington tube generates far simpler harmonics
back to the barrel. Harold Vaughn measured this with lab equipment and
then modified it, to show the measurable results on accuracy. I suggest
you read his book (before writing yours.)
What you left out of your write-up on M70's is Roy Dunlap's comments on
M70 receiver ring strength in the case of catastrophic case head
seperation. He has a few pictures in one of his books. The Rem 700 takes
a gas containment approach. The Mauser takes a gas venting approach.
Both work well for receiver integrity. The M70 takes the
blow-the-receiver-ring-top-off approach.
# So, whatever amount of
#bending I noticed between different makes is meaningless; I've not
#written a book. Therefore, I must not know what I'm talking about.
#Everybody knows stiff things bend more than flimsy things, except me.
Stuart Otteson didn't just write a book; he'd done the analysis and
gives the math. Harold Vaughn didn't just write a book; he built the
test equipment, did the experiments, and got the results. His book
is not about M70's or M700's. A lot of it is about harmonics, because
it is such an important subject to those seeking accuracy below
0.5MOA.
Ken.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Iraq Democracy will become a minority oppressing Theocracy in less
than two years. Iraq's new government needs to be a Republic!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bart B.
# Let me ask you, why are the most accurate rifles today barrel block
# bedded? (hint: harmonics)
I've often heard and read that the most accurate shooting machines
have barrels clamped in a block in front of the receiver. But the
NBRSA records (as of 9/28/02) for 5-shot groups at 100, 200 and 300
yards with heavy and light varmint sizes are smaller than the ones at
the same ranges for the unlimited rail guns. In the grand aggs., all
classes are so close together, statistical software would lock up a
computer trying to determine which is best; it's a tie. Some
highpower competitors have put blocks in the fore end for clamping a
barrel; they weren't any more accurate than conventional receiver
bedding.
I've seen the barrels clamped in blocks at Sierra's California plant
shoot 22 and 24 caliber match bullet into groups at 100 yards in the
1's and occasionally in the 0's and 2's. Same with 30 caliber match
bullets which shot in the 2's and 3's; the really good ones shot in
the 1's (or better) and those were set aside for sale to highpower
competitors, 1000 of those greasy unpolished ones per plain brown box.
Those shooting a bit larger groups but still in specs would be
polished and put in 100-bullet green boxes for retail sales. I asked
Sierra's ballistic tech what action they got the best accuracy with in
their block mounted test barrels. He replied they hadn't seen any
difference between Mauser, 1903 Spfld., Rem. 700/40X, Win. 70. as they
hung on the back of the barrel and didn't seem to make any difference.
I think they're using Savage actions in their Missouri plant today.
The unlimited 1000-yd. benchrest records have a 10-shot 5.2-inch group
for an unlimited rifle. The three, 10-shot group agg. of about 7.2
inches and the six, 10-shot group agg. of about 9.1 inches mean some
groups were smaller and larger. 5-shot groups in this discipline are
smaller, but that's expected. They all are right in the middle of
what 13-pound Winchester based prone long range rifles do.
I've shot only four test groups at 1000 yards in my life. I shot in a
conventional prone position, but the fore end was rested on a sandbag
and a smaller one tucked under the stock toe. After slinging up, the
reticule would wobble around the target in an area about 1.5 inches in
diameter. They've all had 15 shots. Max. spread ranged from 6 inches
to 9 inches.
I'm not convinced barrels clamped in blocks are the most accurate
shooting thing around; just the equal of all the other very accurate
shooting stuff there is.
Bart B.
# Bart, if you wrote a book on Hi-power competitiveness, reading the wind,
# confidence in your equipment, reloading techniques, etc., I would buy
# it in a heartbeat.
Don't get your hopes up. It would cost lots of money; payments would
have to go through a Swiss bank.
# . . . . while the M70 ring is a complicated geometric puzzle, with definite
# weaknesses.
Complicated? Depends on ones concepts. Winchester didn't have a
problem with it.
Puzzle? Winchester figured out hot to put the pieces together.
Definite weaknesses? Of course. All receivers have them. Don't
think I've ever said a Winchester receiver was the strongest at the
front ring. Weatherby's is stronger there and so is Remington. I'm
only talking about accuracy. Stainless barrels should give way to
chrome moly; stainless barrels get pretty weak in cold climates as
some Alaskan shooters have learned.
# What you left out of your write-up on M70's . . .
. . .is lots of stuff on inherant strength for containing cartridge
failure. I know that. I didn't mention lots of other strength stuff,
either. I only listed things related to use as a highpower match
rifle. It's not driving a tank to win the Le Mans and be as safe as
possible doing it; regardless of where one finishes the race.
Goodness. . . .
# Stuart Otteson didn't just write a book; he'd done the analysis and
# gives the math. Harold Vaughn didn't just write a book; he built the
# test equipment, did the experiments, and got the results. His book
# is not about M70's or M700's. A lot of it is about harmonics, because
# it is such an important subject to those seeking accuracy below
# 0.5MOA.
You mention harmonics a lot. What fundamental are these harmonics a
multiple of and how many are there that influence accuracy? I don't
recall that important chunk (piece?) of data. Just curious.
But all those folks who learned how to make a Winchester based rifle
perform equal to or better than the others in highpower matches
(1000-yd. benchrest, too) probably never read it. They just did what
works to make groups very tiny.
Has any stool shooter put 40 consecutive shots inside 2 inches at 600
yards? Or 20 shots inside 1.5 inches at 600 yards? A wood-stocked
Winchester with a 2.5-pound trigger and 5-round box magazine did; it
had iron sights on it, too.
Brian Jorgenson JOR Technologies
> ...
Sure, if you fired the gun in a 600 yard tunnel with no wind and had
your 40 pound remchester in a vise grip.
> ...
Bart B.
# Sure, if you fired the gun in a 600 yard tunnel with no wind and had
# your 40 pound remchester in a vise grip.
The 13-pound rifle was clamped in a machine rest at its fore end and
just in front of the adjustable butt plate. Weighing about 50 pounds,
the cradle holding the rifle slid its three steel rods in V-blocks on
a two-way adjustable base which was bolted to the top of a cubic yard
of concrete. That "block" of concrete was outdoors. Most of the
owner's testing was done very early in the morning when ther was no
wind. I may have a picture of this setup and if I can find it, I'll
put on a public viewing site referenced in a post to this group for
all to see.
As far as I know, less than 10 of these machine rests to hold complete
highpower match rifles were ever built. The plans came from Hornady
Bullets in the late 1950s or thereabouts.
Ken Marsh
Bart B. <bar...@aol.com> wrote:
#Has any stool shooter put 40 consecutive shots inside 2 inches at 600
#yards? Or 20 shots inside 1.5 inches at 600 yards? A wood-stocked
Surfing around a bit...
The 2002 Heavy Benchrest Class World Record was 10 (ten) shots into
3.151 inches... at 1,000 yards. IBS Light Gun Class 1,000 yards record
is 5 shots into 1.564" by Richard DeSimone 8/17/2002.
#Winchester with a 2.5-pound trigger and 5-round box magazine did; it
#had iron sights on it, too.
Excellent work. Typical 1,000 BR matches are won with 6"/ten shot groups
on a regular basis. It is the consistancy of match wins, not the
occasional wallet group, which define accuracy within a discipline.
Ken.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Iraq Democracy will become a minority oppressing Theocracy in less
than two years. Iraq's new government needs to be a Republic!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bart B.
# Brian Jorgenson wrote:
# Sure, if you fired the gun in a 600 yard tunnel with no wind and had
# your 40 pound remchester in a vise grip.
You're partially correct. The rifle weighed about 13 pounds and was
clamped in a machine rest bolted to a cubic yard of concrete outside
at about 6AM. Is there a better way to test just a rifle and its
ammo? I don't think so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shoot the best and forget the rest! Click on http://www.direct-action.org
to learn how your donation to Marylanders for the Preservation of Firearms
Ownership might bring you your choice of a premier Fulton Armory rifle.
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------