The Remington 700 has been the gold standard for bolt action rifles since, well, ever. But there are still cheap bastards like me out there that would rather gamble with a lesser piece of kit than pay the extra couple hundred dollars, which is where the 783 comes in. It’s not quite as expensive as the regular 700, but the el-cheapo version has some improvements . . .

The 783 doesn’t feel too bad, actually. The stock suffers from the same issue I have with almost every other bolt action rifle on the market (that the cheek piece is too low), but that’s unfortunately par for the course. What’s different about the gun is the receiver, specifically the shape of the ejection port.

The original Remmy 700 was designed to be a top loading gun, so there’s no metal going over the top of the bolt. But for the 783, it’s designed to be magazine fed and therefore has a smaller ejection port. This adds a ton of rigidity to the frame, and also would appear to cut down on machining time in the manufacturing process.

MSRP is around $450 for the base model, which puts it lower than the normal 700s but still not quite in spitting distance of the 100 ATR and American Rifle models that are fighting it out for the cheapskate dollar.

The only thing I’m not sold on is the bolt handle. It’s plastic, and while I get that it’s cheaper to make, it just feels, well, cheap to me. I would have much preferred having to shell out a couple extra bucks for a metal bolt handle.

In general, the rifle feels great. It’s solid, seems well built and comes from a great heritage of firearms manufacturing. But we’ll have to test it out to see if it lives up to the hype or if, much like Marlin’s nosedive into the gutter, is the beginning of a Freedom Group-inspired tailspin.

Recommended For You

72 Responses to Hands-On with Remington’s New 783 Rifle

  1. If you have been considering buying one, make sure you buy it before the gun control people declare them to be dangerous “high-powered sniper rifles” and ban them.

    • I was almost hooked until the plastic bolt handle was brought up. That is just stupid of Remington for doing that. I don’t care how tight a group it shoots I just couldn’t stand that.

      • I own two, both of same caliber (30-06). Purchased the second one to secure the deal after shooting hundreds of cheap federal ammo, this thing shoot and shoots, the groups are within an inch at 300 yards on a cold barrel.
        This article clearly misrepresents and the writer is certainly a “distorter of the truth”.
        The bolt handle is made of metal all the way through, not plastic. Buy with confidence, this rifle won’t disappoint ya. Cheers

    • The bolt handles are metal. I have the 7mm Rem Mag and the .308 Win. This reviewer has no clue what he is talking about.

      • This. Plastic or not? A plastic bolt handle would keep me from buying one. My Cabelas points are piling up and I could use a new hunting rifle. This is intriguing, but if it has a plastic bolt handle I’ll buy a Savage.

        • I held one of these rifles yesterday. The first thing I noticed was what I thought was a plastic bolt handle. I LOOKS like plastic but it isn’t. Apparently, the “brazing” process described above gives the metal an odd appearance that looks plastic.

        • I own one in .270 and my bolt handle is 100% metal besides the weather resistant coating on top that can maybe seem like plastic to some as it is kinda a thick coating but i promis theirs no plastic on bolt handle

  2. I would like to see a comparison to a Savage. What I’ve seen so far is that the 783 has an accutrigger and a Savage barrel nut system…

    • The 783 trigger is not an AccuTrigger. While they both have a safety “blade” nested next to the trigger, the triggers and safety are mechanically different. The AcuTrigger blocks the sear, the 783 trigger blocks the trigger. Seems like a few other companies are using the saftey blade deal as well. According to Remington, the 783 trigger is similar to the Marlin X7 trigger.

    • i have a savage axis in .270 that shoots inside an inch at 100yds, inside 2″ at 200 when my son shoots it…using factory winchester 130gr php ammo.. I just purchased a 783, 30.06 yesterday, got the scope on it and heading to the range next week. I had trouble with savage with a hog hunter .308 and two .17wsm. So far one .17wsm and the hog hunter have been repaired and or replaced by savage at no cost. Both the savage and the 783 feel good. I got the 783 to replace a poor shooting 700, 30.06. This base line 700 has never performed well on too many different boxes of ammo to mention. My sons 700 in .270 does perform well. The bottom line, no matter what gun you buy, you don’t know how well it will shoot because of the many variables involved. Gun, ammo, scope, mounts, wind, rings and the person pulling the trigger. Find a gun that feels good and slowly reduce the variables. When it shoots an inch or better at 100…….then you will have a gun worth something. The process ain’t cheap………………

  3. Remington 700, the “gold standard” for bolt action rifles?

    Um…. I don’t think so.

    The Rem 700 is an atrociously cost-reduced shadow of what Herr Mauser designed over 100 years ago. The 700’s receiver (in the magazine-fed versions) is more flexible than a Model 70 or Mauser 98’s, the 700 has no integral recoil lug on the receiver, the bolt is soldered together from three pieces, the extractors have had issues over the years… the common solution to those extractor problems is to cut into the bolt and install a Sako extractor, which compromises the “three rings of steel” marketing Remington has been blathering about for decades…

    Give me a moment or two and I’ll come up with some other complaints.

    Oh, yes… let’s not forget the wonderful issues with the Walker Fire Control Group trigger … or Remington’s handling of same.

    Remington and Remmy fans have created a cult around the 700… which it hardly deserves. If it were “all that,” there wouldn’t be over a dozen clone action manufactures out there, making Remington-like or Rem700-compatible actions, cleaning up all the problems that the 700 has, and selling just these actions (with bolt and bottom metal) for more than Remington sells an entire rifle.

    If I had to pick one bolt gun as a “gold standard” of what a civilian bolt gun should be, it would be the pre-64 Winchester Model 70, and especially those made before WWII.

    • Wow. While the 700s aren’t perfect, your criticism is off the deep end. You seem to be digging for things to complain about.

    • Oh so that’s why the M24 is still used? Because I’m sure the military wants to use low quality rifles right? Nice try but the M24is a solid rifle and thats why the military uses it. Get your head out of your ass moron. The 700 is a solid gun and that’s why the military uses it!

  4. I own a 783 first the bolt handle is Not plastic! This gun goes toe to toe with the 700 no problem it’s smooth accurate and I’m my opinion better the the sps wich I also own.

  5. I held a 783 this week and I’m almost positive the bolt handle is not plastic. It’s a shame that these stories get started without knowing for sure what is or is not. Please don’t assume the bolt handle is plastic, check it out for yourself.

    • Not sure if it is but I was not happy with this gun at all. Did not feel right the bolt was nothing to write home about. there are better choices out there over the 783. Its kind of hard to beat the American or the Axis they are both great priced rifles! The Marlin XL7 is a great buy to! I wish it came with a box mag like the others.

  6. It not plastic I just picked one up last night have not even a chance to fire, it is a 270 and it feel great and if it shoots like a Remington this will be a great buy for use who donot have money to burn.

  7. I just saw this Rifle the other day and boy what a joke. The American is 10x better than this gun. I don’t know what they had in mind with this gun but it feels really cheap and the bolt does not slide well. Honest I would rather buy the 770 Over this rifle. The Axis is a great choice too!!!

    • Hey automatic hater. Ive held both the 783 and the American. American stock felt cheaper, bolts both slid well, and the steel box mag slipped in better than the Americans which catches unless you put it in perfectly level. So tell me in detail, how is the American 10X better than the 783?

  8. I’ve been looking at the 783, axis and American and the 783 def had the best feeling stock atleast for a bigger guy not so small in my hands and seems to have a little more to it not weak feeling. the 783 and American def had smoother bolts too.

  9. I bought one yesterday for $387 and must say that it’s just about everything I thought it would be. At that price I won’t be afraid to scratch or ding it. It’ll be my “workhorse” 30-06 and not some prize that I’m afraid to get dirty. I am a little disappointed that it didn’t come with scope bases and spare magazines aren’t available from Remington yet (I called), but I guess when they say no “frills” one has to expect these things. Once I get a scope mounted I’ll find out if it lives up to its accuracy claims.

  10. Get the 700 scope mounts only the back ones fit very nicely. The weaver brand. Call rem back they have them just tell them you need the two back mounts. yes the 783 is not nice to look at so if you want looks get something else. The rifle surprised me at how accurate it was. I own a lot of different rifles even the American which shoots great also. The 783 did maintain a tighter group then the American did. It was meant to be a low cost accurate rifle. smooth bolt action. good job Remington. I did not like the 770 very much as it would not hold a accurate shot group. of course the 700 is better looking but the 783 gives it a run on accuracy. please lets stop bad mouthing rifles and just give opinions of “if you have shot it not heard or saw it”.

  11. When I got to the part where the author said the 783 had a plastic bolt handle, I knew then he / she never even looked at the 783. Entire write up pure BS, author must work for the “other” guys. Another fine example of ” you can’t believe everything you read on the internet.

  12. MOUNTING A SCOPE: to mount a scope on the 783 you need to use two of the FRONT mounts from a Rem. 700 … the hole spacing for both front and rear mounts on the 783 is 7/8″ center to center. The hole spacing of the rear 700 mount is 5/8 of an inch .. the 700 rear will NOT fit the 783 .. trust me.

  13. +1 on Dyspeptic Gunsmith’s comments. As soon as I read the first sentence, I figured the author is either an idiot, or about 20 yrs old. Gold standard? The Remington is not in the same universe as the original gold standard, THE MAUSER!

    The Remington was/is an el cheapo mass produced by machine for the highest possible profit. The year it was introduced, 1962, you could have purchased ANY other bolt rifle and it would have been superior to the Remington: Winchester (unfortunately would join the Remington the following year), Sako, Weatherby, etc.

    Guess what? The Weatherby and Sako are still wonderful, well-put together rifles 60 years later!

  14. Let’s just say it… what you want….what I see is personal perference and for myself….I do not care what another person wants to shoot. I dig my Glocks but know lots of people that think Glock’s are garbage….I happen to love “The Dark Side” of dumping the 1911’s since Glock’s are such a great pistol and cost far less than the 1911’s and far easier to maintain as well….you know the that’s a fact! And many others have too!

    Now….it is apparent that the tried and true barrel nut system and floating bolt head of the Savage 110 design has proven to be a a marvalous engineering master piece of Nicholas Brewer and another gent which I cannot recall this guys name at the moment…and because of this socalled “Inferior” rifle design, the evolution of the barrel nut system today…is proving to be great for barrel makers and DIYers but ticking off the good ol boy gunsmiths. Let’s face it…the barrel nut system and the floating bolt head works and works fantastic.

    Hey…..I have a whole lot of Savage rifles and frankly (And I have a serious issue with Savage Arms over a warped receiver as I type!) I have bolt together rifles I have upgraded with Boyd’s laminate stocks, better triggers, bedding the actions into the stock with Devcon epoxy, installing decent mounts and rings and “not” using scopes such as BSA type of optics but opting for decent optics as well…I kick out rifles that have and do outshoot the Gunwerk types of socalled custom rifles…fact.

    O.K….these Savage rifles are not stock and I suspect that the Remington 783 will need the above mentioned redo’s as well. But what will be the end result? A rifle that will match or outperform any Mauser action rifle? Custom built rifles? When you can lay down around $1,500.00 total for a rifle rig and smoke a $8,000.00 rig….I say that is a bargin!! But surely upsets the “Good Ol’ Boy” gunsmiths!!

    Oh…for the record…yeah I’ve upset people with rifles that = a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$. It had to be impossible (So they thought!) for a cheap rig to outshoot their high dollar rifle…but oh well!

    I look forward to working with and improving the Remington 783, And besides….I know a whole lot of people that can throw down $1,500.00 but not into the many thousands.

    Ah…one more thought. The extractor system of the Remington 783 and floating bolt head mirrors the Savage system and is superior to the 700 extractor and solid bolt. So….doesn’t this mean that the 783 is so simplistic and reliable that this places the extractor claw and controled round feeding of the Mauser the endangered species area? As a well known gunsmith said to me..”You cannot build a race car using Model T technology”! (Referring to the Mauser actions) Say What????!!!!!!!!!!

  15. Safe bet this writer is making up this review and never even seen this rifle. Lost all cred as I just bought one and the bolt handle is not plastic. It looks plastic in a pic so this writer just goes by pics and not facts. Go home

  16. Safe bet this writer is making up this review and never even seen this rifle. Lost all cred as I just bought one and the bolt handle is not plastic. It looks plastic in a pic so this writer just goes by pics and not facts. so much for “truth about guns”

  17. Yeah this writer has no more credibility with me, I own a 783 30-06 the bolt is metal. For him to make this type of statement is ridiculous and unprofessional.

  18. Bought a new Remington 783in 300 Win Mag for $269 + tax at Whittaker’s in Kentucky.
    Haven’t shot it yet. Bolt a little sloppy but big deal. I don’t compare it to the 700 or other “higher grade” rifles. I considered the Ruger All American, but the price won me over.

  19. I own an axis, a 783 and an American. i like all of them like anything else in life theres positives and negatives to all of them but as for “better” ??? i would say whichever ones laying next to your trophy in a picture on your wall is the better one. i’ve killed deer with all 3. woodchucks, fox, coyote; none of them complained about the stock of my gun or trigger system when i wadded them up at 200+ yards.

  20. I purchased a 783 7mm rem mag. Bought a scope vortex nothing to fancy. Bought 20 rounds to play first day. Best but pad I have felt specially with the recoil. With I 5 shots had this gun zero in at 200 yrds with 2 inch grouping no stand just resting on a log. Went to 300 continued with 2 inch grouping getting used to gun. 400 hundred no problem hitting on target folled up the last ten again ay the 200 yrd target 1.5 in grouping. Payed 400 for this gun canadian. No custom features a scope and a newer shooter. The gun is amazing for the price. Played with a tika t3 7mm rem mag. A little better feel but all in all left 700 dollars in my pocket with the same results. Time to go hunting.

    • Jay, what ammo were you using for your first box. I need to pick sum up for my 7mm also and didn’t want to waste money on ammo that its not going to eat well. thanks

  21. I bought the 783 30-06 earlier this year. Yes the bolt is a little rough, but that is all I can say. Zeroed in less than ten rounds. I am very happy with it even though it is not pretty as has been pointed out previously. And, yes the bolt handle is very much metal.

  22. I just bought the 783 Compact in 308 Winchester. I put a Vortex Crossfire II 2-7×32 scope, Vortex rings, and Weaver base. My local gun shop charged me $348 for the rifle, and with the scope and rings I purchased, I am into it less than $500 total. It shoots one ragged hole at 100 yds; with boresighting upon purchase, it took three shots to zero. No complaints. I am by far not a long range competitor but I was in the military for 29 years and was a small arms instructor. I would not hesitate to recommend this rifle for typical hunting and recreational applications. I will be shooting it at the 500 yard gong tonight at a local gun range to see how it does. I live by the old saying “only accurate guns are interesting” and this one is a keeper.
    I do have other middle to higher end guns such as Rem 700 in 270, Tikka M695 in 30-006, Win M70 in 30-06, and T/C Encore with 22lr, 243 and 270 barrels…this one will hold its own with any of those. And they also have decent Leupold, Pentax, Burris, and Vortex scopes on them.

  23. I also lost interest of what the author had to say after the plastic bolt handle comment. I have shot a 783 that belongs to a friend in 7mm RM. The bolt is a little rough out of the box but break it down, scrub it good, and use a quality lube and repeat for the receiver and it smooths out quite well. I find the trigger to be excellent for a hunting rifle very little take-up and crisp break. Only stretched it out to 200 yards but it managed a 4 shot group of just over 1″ using factory nosler ammo with accubond bullets from a Coldwell rest. I would not hesitate to buy one were I in the market for an inexpensive rifle for hunting. He has since upgraded to a Boyd’s classic stock and now it’s a looker and a shooter!

  24. I purchased a 783 in 270 Win. Put Redfield Revenge on it. Bore sighted an headed to range.
    Was only 2″ to right And 1.5″ low. Made corrections, rifle put up .796 group@ 100- 1.12@200-1.33@300..
    I was shooting 150gr bullets that I load, rifle came through like a champ. This was shooing off rest, not sled.
    I would put it up against any other rifle for accuracy. The eight pointer Tuesday evening want argue that either.
    Great Gun For The Money!! PS The Bolt is Steel. That guy is STUPID

  25. I’ve read through all of the comments and didn’t see anyone mention that this gun is not a Savage knock-off; it’s a knock-off of a Savage knock-off.

    This gun is a reworked Marlin X7. Shares the same trigger group (identical), same bolt head (for the long actions), and barrels are interchangeable (Savage barrels have 0.015″ less case protrusion from chamber) as an X7. The receiver was changed in shape and the barrel nut is different and of course the (seemingly nice) box magazine but they are being made on the same line as the now discontinued Marlin X7.

    It’s a shame Remington didn’t just outright rebrand the X7 and continue making it instead of their own uglier copy. The X7 was my favorite bargain rifle and I built a custom off of it’s action. I would use a 783 for a future build if I could get one under $300.

  26. Just bought one in Georgia for $220 plus tax. 30-06 version.

    Don’t really care what it’s a knock-off of, if it’s accurate and reliable.

    To add to the Savage knock-off comment, it takes Savage 10/110 (round receiver)2 piece scope base from Leupold.

  27. I was picking up some items at Walmart and decided to meander over to the rifles and look at a few. I held and operated the Savage Axis, Ruger American and the Remington 783 last. I got to tell you the Remington 783 felt the best and the Bolt Action was extremely smooth verses the others and the mag was all metal and went in very nice verses the other non metal ones on the other two rifles. When I go back its going to be the Remington 783 that I’ll get. It is over and above the others.

  28. It is dangerous to our wallet for us as consumers to assume that because a rifle, in this case, is less expensive that it is junk. I have looked at this rifle on numerous occasions and have a favorable opinion of what I see. Finish is not great, but then its main competitors are not better in this regard. The stock is ugly, kind of like the Ruger American stock is ugly, but you know what those stocks are fine ergonomically. It is easier to see how ugly they are if they are not camo, so that may be a reason to by a camo version if it is available.

    When the model 722/721 came out, they were the economy grade rifle of the day. But they were very good rifles. The 700 evolved out of them. When Remington brought out the 788, they were and are plain and simple, yet very accurate and serviceable rifles.

    My point is that the 783 has some great design features, some of which they “borrowed” from their competition. Some of those things are actually innovations and make things better for us enthusiasts.

    Now, the bolt handle on this rifle is cast steel. I don’t know why they chose to make it as ugly as it is, but it is metal and not plastic. It seems to me the reviewer who wrote this article never actually picked one of these up and worked the action on it.

    This rifle might just wind up embarrassing the flagship 700 in performance. It definitely deserves a look from folks that can’t afford a $850 production rifle. There is already some pretty neat aftermarket stuff available for it.

  29. bought Remington 783 in 308 and have problems ejecting the empty brass. Tried six different brands of ammo, same problem. Any ideas?

  30. I bought one in 7mm magnum an the bolt shuts an locks fine without a cartridge but when you try to load a cartridge the bolt won’t fully shut or lock. Can anyone tell me why?

  31. @Glenn, don’t try to shoot it. Take it to a gunsmith. Are you using factory cartridges or handloads. If handloads, have they been fired in a different rifle? If it is not the ammo, then the rifle may have a serious problem, or just needs to have the bolt/receiver cleaned and maybe polished. Find out what a gunsmith has to say, and contact Remington,,,,I think their customer service is beginning to be a lot more “accommodating”.

  32. I have the 783 in .243, came with a scope mounted, scope is decent for a freebie, only paid $336 for the rifle with optic, bolt is an odd shape being flat, but is very much a metal bolt. My rifle is bore sighted only to the scope, it shoots about an inch low and to the left, but offers 4 shot groups within 1.25 inch at 100 yards in a standing position with no rest, my sister has the savage axis in 308, not exactly Apple’s to Apple’s but I can tell you, even carrying the last name of savage I will take the Remington 783 in every available caliber before I spend more on the savage axis line, it has issues to say the least, mag falls out with recoil, can’t place a single shot on paper, which in all fairness is probably all scope related, but in my hands and my own opinion I wouI’d say the Remington feels a bit more solid, more comfortable to shoot, and in my area is almost $100 cheaper than the savage, now onto the ruger american, I have not fired one as of yet, but I have manipulated it in the store, all of which were green, cool if you like it i suppose, I would rather the black, aside from that, the American seemed to be a decent feeling rifle, did notice the magazine was finicky, and it was the most expensive out of the three with no optic, savage even had an optic, but the American was about $60 over the savage, so $160 over the remmi, couldn’t justify a solid reason to pick the American with no optic and the ugliest of the bunch to me, have had the personal issues with the axis, so that steered me away, and then there was the 783, I personally find it better looking than the other two, more comfortable in store than the others, and the most affordable, once I fired it, well we have formed a bond, I have added a few things to it as well, purchased about two weeks ago and ran around 100rounds last Sunday alone, hitting golf balls on a bore sight at 100yd, there are a few that have said it, but I’ll say again, but the 783, any caliber, you won’t be sad about it!

  33. I own 2 rem 783s and one in 30-06 sprg the other in 300 win mag both have metal bolts and handles plan on buying one in 223 rem good groups with on range reliable use rem oil once in awhile and your set good for family guys on a budget

  34. A few haters in here, which is ok. Firearms are pretty subjective in some ways. I just picked up a .270 783 for a song. With the sale and the $40 mail-in I’ll only be out $270, scope included! First, it’s not a pretty rifle – it’s not supposed to be! It just has to work, which it does pretty well. I ran 40 rounds through it at the range at 100 and 200 yards and am happy with the results. It will get the job done. Next, the bolt handle is not plastic. Also, yes the bolt did not slide well out of the box, but after a good cleaning/oiling and a few shots into the first box of ammo it started working itself out. The only complaint I have is the “factory bore sighted” claim which was total hogwash. It was WAY off at 50 yards as was a friends .243 we were sighting in at the same time. Mine was way up & left, his was way up & right – 8-10 inches in either direction for mine! Making the proper scope adjustments put us both on target. Easy! Other than that, we’re both pretty happy with the rifle.

    • I now own three rem 783s 30-06 sprg 300 win mag and 308 win also own two rem 700s in 7mm mag and 243 win no problems with 783s dropped a bull moose at 300 yds last year no problems at all better rifle than savage axis by far test one out you workin boys with families to feed you will like them

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *