Gun Review: Remington 700 American Wilderness Rifle in .30-06

I feel for Remington. In many ways, Big Green is a victim of its own success. The Remington 700BDL in .30-06 is an absolute American classic. Perhaps the American classic. Many argue whether the ADL or BDL (I prefer the ADL) is the best configuration, but either way, Remington sold millions of these rifles over the decades.

It’s the biggest selling bolt action rifle of all time. And for good reason. They represented a good rifle and a great value. For a long time you could recommend a 700 in .30-06 to anyone and know that they could reliably hunt anything in North America with it. Generations have done just that.

Those are big shoes to fill. With the new Remington 700 American Wilderness Rifle in .30-06, Big Green has attempted to top America’s “go-to” rifle. And they did. Almost. But not quite.

The rifle I reviewed should have never left the factory floor. The bore is so off square to the action that it’s obvious to the eye, even an untrained eye. Holding the rifle upright, I was able to ask anyone “what’s wrong with this rifle?”, and they would point out that the barrel wasn’t laid out evenly inside the stock. I got one “is it supposed to be that way?” No. No it is not.

Looking down the barrel toward the receiver, you can clearly see that there is much more space on the left side of the barrel than the right. A little bit of difference is ok, but this is grossly off. That means the stock is bent, the action is laid out wrong in the stock, or the action threads aren’t square to the bore.

Taking the action out of the stock, I had a pretty good idea that the composite stock wasn’t bent. After measuring the stock six ways to Sunday, laying it out on graph paper, and laying graph paper inside the stock, I put to bed the notion that the stock itself was off, or that the action was laid out crooked in the stock.

I emailed John Stewart of Kiote Corp and sent him photos of the stock and action to double check my conclusions. He verified them, but he pointed out that the actual barrel tenon could be off square as well. Mr. Stewart said he sees the same thing that I and others have seen from Remington over the last decade. Ninety percent of the time, when there’s a problem, it’s not due to poor barrel to stock fit, it’s a bore that isn’t true to the action.

That’s particularly troubling because there is just no cheep fix for this. It’s going to have to go a competent gunsmith. Mr. Stewart, who is a big 700 fan, told me that most of the time, when a customer asks for a blueprinted action, he counsels them to go with a Stiller Predator action instead. In total cost, that’s about a $100 more to the customer, but actually less money to the gunsmith. That’s an honest smith, but as one of the many Americans who loved the 700, it’s sad for me to hear.

To make matters worse, the actual barrel to stock fit isn’t very good either. Not only is there a big gap on the left side of the barrel channel, there is a huge gap underneath it. This isn’t just a cosmetic concern for a “wilderness rifle.” As I found out when using a tree as a shooting rest, a small branch from the juniper tree got wedged in between the stock and the barrel.

After a few shots, the small branch disappeared under the barrel, but was enough to push the barrel into the stock, since there was so little space there on the right side. The difference was a whopping 4-inch point of impact at 100 yards. At 300 yards, that’s likely a missed shot, or worse, a gut shot.

Now some of that 4 MOA has to be eaten up in shooter error and the error inherent with any rifle, but the effect was repeatable and predictable. If you were in the field and were lucky enough to notice you had the problem before you took that once in a lifetime shot on a 160” 8-point buck, the only way to fix it would be to remove the action from the stock. Unacceptable.

I’m actually impressed with the stock itself. The length of pull is a tad short for me, but most are (I’m 6’1”). The comb height is great for use with optics, a necessity on this rifle as it comes without sights. It is very rigid. Supported only by it’s ends, I could stand on the bare stock without much movement at all. That’s impressive for a stock at this price point.

The entire stock is coated in a brown and black splash pattern resin that, although not particularly attractive, provides a solid and sure grip surface in any weather. It has a generous palm swell that I often see on higher end rifles and a Pachmayr Decelerator butt pad. Swivel studs are standard. I was a little surprised that, when I pulled the action from the stock, I saw bright metal hiding underneath the coating around the action screws.

The stock is pillar bedded. My curiosity piqued, I went on the Remington website and found that this is actually an aftermarket Grayboe stock. I’ve heard nothing but good things about Greyboe, and if this is any indication of the quality of their product I will certainly be on the lookout for them in the future. This is, however, the wrong barrel profile for the stock, as I have already lamented above.

The American Wilderness Rifle ships with the Remington X-Pro trigger. A small screw on the outside of the trigger face allows for the user to adjust the trigger pull weight. According to my Lyman trigger scale, the rifle came out of the box with a 5 lb trigger pull. I consider that too heavy for any bolt action rifle, and far too heavy for precision work. I’d like to see it closer to 2 or 2.5lbs.

Unfortunately, regardless of how far out I adjusted the trigger pull force adjustment screw, I couldn’t get the pull any lower than just under 4 lbs. Although I consider that too heavy, the feel of the wide, curved trigger is excellent. In fact, it’s as good as many aftermarket triggers I’ve felt. There is no creep at all, and the break is so short and crisp that the trigger feels far lighter than it actually is.

Also well done on this particular rifle: the action. After a quick spray of Rogue American Apparels’ gun oil, the action glided on the rails with minimal wobble or movement from the bolt. Locking home the bolt was easy, as was extraction almost entirely throughout the review process.

I say almost, because after about about 300 rounds through the gun, the bolt got a little sticky on the stout 180 grain loads. About half of these were my own reloads. Included in that were about 100 rounds that I shot for accuracy. So I noted the results, and then fully stripped and cleaned the rifle.

This is a departure from my usual practice of never cleaning a review gun. That’s because the 700 American Wilderness Rifle sports Remington’s “5-R” cut barrel, similar to the one found on the US Army’s M24. In this cut, there are five lands, and they’ve been formed to a specific shape that is said to reduce the need for cleaning.

If that is the case, it must be after many more rounds than I had through the rifle. There was no measurable difference in the average group size between the fouled bore and the clean bore, although there was a slight change in point of impact.

Set on a rest with bags, the 700 AWR scored groups that were hunt-ready out of the box. But just. Mounting an Atibal Nomad 3X12 scope and shooting groups off a rest, the best performing commercial round was the Hornady Superformance 150gr SST, at a 1.4” average 5-round group.

Oddly enough, the Federal Premium Edge TLR didn’t score quite as well. In this 175 grain weight, the 700 AWR printed 1.8-inch five-round groups. I say oddly enough, as this same round has shown to print extremely tight groups with other rifles.

Some of my own reloads shot better than any of the commercial rounds for this rifle, and I suspect that a pet load in the 150 grain weight could produce sub MOA groups with minimal effort. Around 1.5 MOA isn’t bad for an off-the-shelf rifle at the top end of this price range, but I was expecting better.

As for reliability, there were no feeding issue of any kind, with any round or any manufacturer.

The gun’s capacity is 4+1. I could actually get five rounds into the magazine, but the top round would always bind up when I pushed the bolt forward when I did this. The only recourse was to drop the floor plate, dump the rounds, and start over. As long as you’re loading no more than four rounds in a four-round internal magazine, the rifle runs great.

All of the external facing metal, save the trigger shoe itself, is coated in a black Cerakote finish. When I look at the flat black Cerakoted metal and the web splashed stock, I see a finish that’s often requested by customers of custom Cerakote shops.

Remington followed what they were already seeing customers doing on their own guns for a few years now. And why not? It’s a work gun with a work gun look, but look also happens to make for a very durable and a affordable finish. It looks like a rifle ready for the wildernesses, and with this coating and finish, it is.

Despite all of my complaining about this gun, I would actually recommend it. Well, not THIS particular one, but one of the models like it. I would just make sure that I could physically inspect it first. It has all the basics for a good all-around rifle with a great stock, good trigger, and a proven action. I’d just make sure I was doing my own QC on this one, because Remington’s didn’t make the cut.

Specifications: Remington 700 AWR

Caliber: .30-06 Sprg
Magazine Capacity: 4 rounds
Barrel Length: 24 inches
Barrel Twist: 1:10 5R
Overall Length: 44.5 inches
Length of Pull: 13.375 inches
Drop Comb: 1.125 inches
Drop Heel: 1.375 inches
Barrel Material: 416 Stainless Steel
Barrel Finish: Black Cerakote
Stock Material: Grayboe fiberglass & epoxy
Stock Finish: Brown with black webbing
Average Wt: 7.35 lbs
MSRP: $1,150

Ratings (out of five stars):

Fit and Finish * * 
If the barrel was lined up straight with the action and all the way through the stock, the combination of the black Cerakoted metal and the black splash web patterned Greyboe stock would be a great one. If.

Accuracy * * * 
1.4-inch groups with commercial hunting ammo is good enough for any game you’re likely to want to take. Still, I’d like to see better and I know the barrel is capable of it.

Reliability * * * * *
If your hand can work the bolt, the gun runs.

Customization * * * *
There are no bolt guns with the aftermarket support that the Remington 700 has. You can change anything, for a price.

Overall * * 
This would have been a four star gun if the barrel was lined up straight and there wasn’t a gaping hole beneath the bore. Remington was close to a new American standard. Close, but not quite there.

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    Yeah… historically, the 700 has been a whole pile of disappointment. I’ve got more or less the same gun that I replaced more or less everything besides the barrel and the action. Still won’t hold better than 2 MOA.

    1. avatar Evan says:

      Indeed. Remington has been a victim of their own success; and it has been run like a bean-counter-led operation for some time now.
      Half baked execution in handguns and rifles has become the norm, meanwhile buying up other companies along the way, seemingly more interested in licensing their name for every other product in the gun aisle, than what’s in the gun case.

    2. “historically, the 700 has been a whole pile of disappointment.”

      Yes, this rifle had its problems. But it’s hard to make a case that the 700 — the world’s biggest selling hunting rifle — has historically been a disappointment.

      And stay tuned for a review we have in progress of the 700 5-R Stainless Gen 2, a gun that shows Remington still knows how to make a great rifle.

      1. avatar Burley says:

        The f150 is the world’s best selling automobile, but no one thinks it’s the world’s best automobile.

        1. No argument here. But neither is it a “pile of disappointment.”

        2. avatar Milwaukee says:

          Half the 700 owners I know bought them solely on the recommendation of the gun shop salesman. Profit margins are larger on the 700 then say a good gun like a Browning. So the data is skewed.

    3. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Well, seeing as how the barrel and the action are the two components that most impact how well a rifle groups, I think I see your problem…

    4. avatar Charles says:

      I don’t agree. Recently Remington quality has suffered… a lot. However, I have a late 80s 700 in 243 that will shoot ragged holes at 200 yards with handloads. And it has the standard profile barrel. I have a 700V from the mid 90s that shoots amazingly well also. Prairie dogs at 300 yards? Yep, done that. You can’t compare anything Remington makes today with what was made when they were run by management that actually cared about their product and reputation.

  2. avatar USMC Sgt. says:

    I guess I’m lucky I got my 700BDL 30-06 in 1964!

    1. avatar Kenneth says:

      Mine is a 1979 model. No problems since I got it in about ’86. But Remington has been a very different story since it was taken over by George Soros’ Cerberus Asset Management group under the so-called ‘freedom group’ moniker.
      Should one expect any less than an A$$ f**#king from such a dedicated anti?

  3. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

    Weatherby Accumark for less money. Taking chances on this kind of quality makes no sense.

  4. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    Once production line quality starts to slip, it’s very hard to rectify. What’s happened is that company “organizational culture” has internalized some practices that, although dysfunctional, have become so routine that they are commonly overlooked. When you see stuff like this happening it’s reasonable to wonder if anybody there is really in charge. While it’s commonplace to talk about “getting things right again, getting things back on track”, etc., the practical reality is that it is enormously difficult to change an organizational culture that’s become dysfunctional. Achieving the kinds of changes needed to correct things can easily turn into a manager’s career-killer. That’s one reason why modern managers usually don’t stick around very long. It’s a lot easier to paper over the problem and then leave before things really go south.

  5. avatar Accur81 says:

    Where the heck are you guys getting the Federal Edge TLR ammo? I can’t find it anywhere. I could use .308, .30-06, or .300 Win Mag.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      I get mine in the mail or delivered by TTAG. It just shows up sometimes. It’s a great system, highly recommend it.

    2. avatar I don't get follow-up emails so what's the point says:

      $2/round, but here ya go.
      http://www.cabelas.com/product/FEDERAL-EDGE-TLR-RIFLE-AMMO/2543558.uts

      Edit: J Dub’s system is much better.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        Thank you! Edge TLR doesn’t show up on Ammoseek yet. I may wait. I’m mostly wanting the .300 Win Mag or .30-06. The Eagle Eye 2.0 is my go to .308 hunting ammo.

  6. avatar JTPhilly says:

    If you wanted a rifle that was ready to hunt right out of the box, why would you pick Remington with their known QC issues over a Ruger, or Savage, or Weatherby, or Mossberg even? Seems like with the exception of the Greyboe stock, all the other guys are giving you more for less.

  7. avatar strych9 says:

    I guess I just got lucky with my 700 SPS in .243. Damn accurate out to pretty long ranges with 0 problems encountered so far.

    Took a while to dial her in at ranges past 300m but she’s more than acceptable out to 550m (551 being the farthest I’ve shot her). Any problems with accuracy related to that rifle rest squarely with me.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    Remington illustrates what happens when a bunch of accountants take control of a firearms company. You get products that reflect the ethics and abilities of the company’s management.

  9. avatar Swarf says:

    Wow. You’re giving Remington about as much slack as they gave the rifle they sent you.

    Screw those guys.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      You thought a 2 star review was slack?

      1. avatar Jbourneidentity says:

        Yes, he still recommended it. That’s slack if ever there was slack.

  10. avatar Ironhead says:

    Took my savage model 10 out to get her ready…. my friend brought his 700adl. Both are chambered in .308, and both have 24in. barrels, and vortex 3.5-10×50 diamondback scopes. After sighting them in, we tried for grouping.
    The savage was more accurate, but the 700 is lighter and the action was faster to operate.
    Older 700s and 870s are the cats ass, the newer ones, not so much.
    I dont know why remington let the quality slide, but i would be very leary about buying another one.
    I hace a 700 in .270 from the early nineties, and my friends is a hand me down from his father. Both are great examples of what remington quality used to be.

  11. avatar TommyJay says:

    I was beginning to wonder if most of the firearms tested here were factory hand-selected wonders. I’ve bought 4 handguns and 1 rifle over the last two years and only 2 or those were excellent out of the box. I suspect that the general level of QA in what was a hot market just isn’t that good.

    The above story sounds a bit like my Walther P22. This semi-auto .22 has a frame mounted barrel with a barrel sleeve and barrel nut holding the two together. In the CA version the nut is bonded in place and not removable. When I first zeroed the adjustable rear sight I noticed that the sight was near the extreme limit of its travel. Removing the slide, I could see that the barrel was visibly out of alignment. Walther fixed this for me after an expensive shipping charge.

  12. avatar Swilson says:

    I’ll stick with my Savage 10…

  13. avatar Tile floor says:

    A grand for a sloppily built rifle that can’t hit 1MOA? no thanks.

  14. avatar Rumblestrip says:

    TL;DR Go buy a Tikka T3X

    1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      Another good example. Exact same MSRP and a far, far, superior rifle.

    2. avatar Kaban says:

      I second that; however, US shooters does have a reason to use 700 platform, with that huge selection of parts and smiths.

  15. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    I’ve said for years here at TTAG that if you want to blueprint & rectify the issues in a Rem700 rifle, you’re better off buying a high-quality custom action (Surgeon, Stiller, Defiance, Big Horn, Kelby – or go to PT&G and buy a pre-blueprinted 700 action), putting on a better quality barrel, and then buying the stock/chassis system of your choice.

    Here are all the ways that someone can screw up the alignment of a barrel to a Remington 700 action:

    1. The barrel tenon is cut incorrectly, or the tenon threads were cut incorrectly, or have been damaged.

    2. The threads are damaged in the receiver.

    3. The recoil lug (aka “the out-of-round washer that Remington has pressed into service as a recoil lug”) between the barrel and action isn’t flat. Think about this for a moment – if that washer/recoil lug isn’t flat, with parallel sides, it doesn’t matter that the tenon is cut correctly, or that the threads are correct, or that the receiver face is correct and the receiver threads are correct. The barrel will cease being co-axial with the receiver as a result of the lack of flatness/parallelism of the sides of the washer as you torque the barrel into the receiver. It doesn’t take a big variance in the flatness/parallelism of the washer – only a thousandth of an inch or two, and you’ve got a problem. For those wondering “how much is that?” consider that a piece of 20# copying paper is about 0.004″ thick.

    4. The face of the receiver isn’t normal to the axis of the receiver – or there might be too much paint (Cerakote – that’s ‘paint’ to a gunsmith. It’s not a high-quality finish, it’s paint, and quit trying to peddle it as something more than paint) on one side of the receiver (or washer) than the other.

    Remington designed the 700 to cheapen the cost to manufacture a bolt action rifle. They did this by eliminating safety features from the Mauser action, and eliminating other things like integral recoil lugs (which is why they use a washer), forged bolts (which is why their bolts are soldered together from three pieces), a safety on the bolt (which was partly responsible for the Rem700 trigger issues in the past), a real extractor (which is why there is a market for M16 or Sako style extractors for the 700 bolts), etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

    As that mentality of “make it cheaper, cheaper, cheaper” takes hold in a company, you end up with what you see above: a rifle that has been slathered in paint, plopped into a plastic stock, and the machining appears incorrect.

  16. avatar Stinkeye says:

    Remington is not a “victim of their own success”, they’re a victim of incompetent management. Plenty of successful gun companies out there who aren’t shipping embarrassing QC rejects to customers.

  17. avatar michael says:

    For the money, buy 2 Savages that have better triggers and accuracy…..

    I have a late 1980s 700 in 243 winchester….it shoots great but the recent versions I see at the range are good for minute of deer to 200 yards at best.

  18. avatar Southern Cross says:

    This example is not a QC reject. It is an export model typical of what we’ve seen from Big Green in the last 20 or so years in non-US markets.

    Bad barrels. Non concentric chambers. Mis-aligned stocks and or receivers. Barrels more mashed in than screwed in. And we pay about $2000 for the privilege of owning a Remington (before optics). The holder of the import license has openly stated to the magazines any negative comments will result in no advertising revenue.

    Only newly minted FUDDS buy Remingtons. Any else buys a second hand example and goes nuts with a Brownells catalog. Remington 700s are like Harley-Davidsons. It is the after market scene where the action is.

  19. avatar Jonathan Kidd says:

    What about the whole gun fired even when trigger was not pulled thing?

    1. avatar fteter says:

      https://www.remington.com/support/safety-center/remington-model-700-and-model-seven-notice

      Spot on. That’s all I needed to know about the recent state of Remington firearms.

  20. avatar WadeJ says:

    After reading your article, I pulled out a new Remington Model 700 Mountain Rifle SS in 308 Win that I recently ordered and was planning on giving my son in a couple of months when he gets his Eagle Scout award. Somewhat of a family tradition since my father gave me a Model 700 BDL when I received my Eagle Scout award in 1981. I mounted a scope but haven’t fired it yet. I found that the rifle, which comes with a Bell & Carlson stock, looks very similar to yours. The barrel isn’t even close to being centered in the stock. A dollar bill just squeezes by on the left side and a penny easily slides into the gap on the right (about 1.5 mm). The Mountain rifle has a lighter profile barrel so the gap isn’t as big or as noticeable but the offset is proportional to yours. Since I haven’t fired it, I don’t know what the accuracy is. Did you contact Remington to see at what point fit & finish or accuracy problems become a warranty claim? I’m not going to turn a gift into a problem and a bad memory, so if the accuracy is poor and I can’t easily fix the problem; I’ll find another rifle. I was considering the Savage 16/116 Lightweight Hunter but went with the Remington instead.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      I’d see how it shoots first. A 1.5mm difference is much less than this rifle was.

    2. avatar WadeJ says:

      So I’m starting the process to get more information from Remington in order to decide to file a claim for an unacceptable bore to receiver misalignment.

      I’ve learned on the Remington website that they have a “New limited lifetime warranty on all Remington firearms.” “Remington Arms Company, LLC (“Remington”) warrants to the original purchaser (“Purchaser”) of a new firearm from Remington that such firearm shall be free from defects in material and workmanship for the duration of time that the Purchaser originally owns that firearm.” Seems like a misaligned bore should be a defect in material or workmanship.

      After much more inclusions and exclusions, a significant statement of eligibility or ineligibility:
      The Purchaser, in order to achieve eligibility under this warranty, must complete and submit the product registration card included with the firearm (or register the firearm online at http://www.remington.com/pages/support/online-product-registration.aspx) within thirty (30) days of purchase. The Purchaser, upon discovering a defect in material or workmanship in the firearm, shall contact Remington at:

      Remington Arms Company, LLC
      870 Remington Drive
      Madison, North Carolina 27025
      Telephone: 800-243-9700
      Fax: 336-548-7801

      I tend to avoid registering any of my firearms with anyone that I don’t have to. If there is a recall, I will find out about in right here on TTAG. In this case, I read the article, thought maybe I better register in case I need to file a claim and registered on 5 Sep. Found that I ordered the rifle on 3 Aug, it shipped 8 Aug, and arrived/transferred at a local gun store on 11 Aug. So, I will call tomorrow to where I stand and what Remington wants to do with it. Meanwhile, which other manufacturers require registration to be eligible for the warranty and who registers their firearms with the manufacturer?

  21. avatar Just Someguy says:

    Greyboe stocks can be had for about $300, so I could slap one on a Ruger American or a Savage, and have a better rifle for a lot less money. I hope Remington goes under and changes hands, best thing for them at this point.

  22. avatar Matty 9 says:

    JOHN WAYNE TAYLOR:
    What would it cost to true the action, and would that fix the issue?? Would that most likely turn this pig into a sub MOA killer? Or is there more than that???

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Careful reloads would turn this rifle into an MOA rifle. But the better bet would be to inspect the rifle closely prior to purchase. It has the basics there to be a very good model, but this particular rifle is not. I’ll be posting a review of the R5 Gen 2 soon that made me just question how it was possible that both of these guns came from the same company.
      As far as cost, check out Dyspeptic Gunsmith’s post above for all of the things that can go wrong. You are spending five hundred dollars at the absolute bare minimum.

  23. avatar Matty 9 says:

    Or would it be better to just get a new barrel of the right contour, THEN blueprint the action??? Again…cost????

  24. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    To blueprint an action completely, which includes the following:

    – true face of receiver
    – surface grind the recoil lug (or buy a ground recoil lug)
    – true the threads in the receiver
    – lap bolt lugs
    – bush firing pin
    – check/true barrel tenon (shoulder, threads, etc)
    – adjust headspace after all of above

    You’re probably looking at about $600 in gunsmith shop time.

    1. avatar WadeJ says:

      As detailed above, I have a Remington 700 Mountain with a similar problem but maybe not as bad since there is only about a third of the overall gap between stock and barrel (but maybe worse since it wouldn’t take a large vibration for the barrel to touch the stock.) I can send a picture if it would help. If I can’t get this corrected under warranty and decide not to do a complete blueprint up front, where is the biggest bang for the buck for a gunsmith to perform 1-2 procedures at a time? In other words, which steps will result in the greatest improvement in accuracy without a lot of cost and likely result in a rifle accurate to 300 yard?. Or would gunsmith intake and setup time and cost of multiple visits make it much more expensive for an incremental approach than just to bite the bullet and do it all at once? Thanks!

  25. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    And no, the Rem700 is not the American classic bolt rifle.

    That distinction belongs to the pre-64 Winchester Model 70.

    The quality of American bolt action rifles started heading downhill when American gun rag writers started fawning over the Remington 700 – a veritable steaming pile of shortcuts and half-measures.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      The numbers don’t lie. The 700 is America’s rifle. That doesn’t make it a better rifle, just the one American consumers have chosen.
      It would be difficult to argue that the 700 is a better design over the improved Mauser action of the model 70. I certainly won’t make that argument. I’d put the Savage 110 over the 700 in design quality as well.
      But quality of design, or product, isn’t what most Americans are buying. Not for a long time.

      1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        If the Rem700 were all it is cracked up to be, there wouldn’t be so many Rem700 compatible actions made in the aftermarket, and they wouldn’t be making a profit. The reason why all those action makers, from Surgeon and Stiller to Defiance, and everyone in between, are able to make any money is because when you pay a guy like yours truly to clean up a Rem700 action, there was so much wrong with the Rem700, you might as well have purchased an action that was competently executed in the first place. Or, you might as well have purchased an old Springfield or Mauser action, and paid me to sporterize/blueprint that action.

        Of course, you’re going to be paying more than $1000 for your rifle, sans optics. This is seen as heresy by the gun buying public, who seem to labor under the notion that their dollar has the same buying power for guns (and only guns) as it did in the early 1960’s. They’ll take out a loan to pay $35K (and up, up, up) for a F-150 that used to cost about $3500, but they squawk like ruptured ducks when someone tells them that a competently executed firearm will now cost them over $1,000.

        OK, so don’t believe me. Let’s see what Remington charges for what would be the above rifle, but… done correctly from the get-go:

        https://www.remington.com/custom-shop/classic-series-rifles/model-700/model-700-north-american-custom

        Oh, about $2K. That’s funny. And not as in funny “ha ha.”

  26. avatar Kaban says:

    A bore off from chamber axis? No wonder it shoots “acceptable”; it is surprising it prints sub-2″ groups at 100.

  27. avatar Old Region Fan says:

    Weatherby SUB MOA !!!

  28. avatar Matt in Oklahoma says:

    WOW I have a 710 that we paid like $300 for in 06 that shoots MOA with several round types. There are some round sit doesn’t like but that’s any gun. This is terrible.

  29. avatar kap says:

    bought the kid an 06 (rem 710) a box of Rem Cartridges and off too the range we went for sight in,on the 3rd round bolt was sticky, case didn’t look bad, 4th round bolt froze had to hammer bolt open case remained in chamber, home we went! Removed case out of chamber, case shoulder was bulged and grown in length, this is using standard factory ammo. We took rifle back to dealer and had it sent back to the factory! they said it wasn’t under warranty as we used reloads, I sent empty cases and box too the factory! they sort of fixed it (seems the press fit barrel slid forward and changed the head-space. they fixed the barrel, back to sight in shot #5, #6. #7, #8 scope would not adjust, so back to Gun hop and got scope replaced on my dime, back to range shot #9,#10 and #11 was the proof shot and it was good, next shot #12 was verifying #11 was good, it was good. Son went open bolt and it fell off in his hand! had it fixed got rid of it and haven’t bought another Remington of any model or Caliber since,

  30. avatar jimmy james says:

    I have a least a dozen 700’s from box stock to only kept the action and everything else is custom. The last box stock 700 I even tried to shot was a 22-250V with that hollow plastic stock they ship on those guns now. It would shoot MOA with my handloads. I gave up on factory ammo a long time ago except for Federal Gold Metal Match just for reference. The current 700 trigger is the absolute pits. I had the 22-250 rebarrelled with a Shilen bbl and a Jewell trigger. Action squared up and flat ground recoil lug. Bedded into a Stocky’s brand stock. Shoots better than a 1/2 MOA now. The last box stock 700 I kept that way is a 300Win Mag Hunter. Heavy Varmint bbl in a BC I think stock. Had a brake threaded on it. It shoot sub MOA all day long with hand loads. Yep, $1500 actions are nice. I have one on a 284Win F-Open/Heavy Benchrest gun. I also have a $400 Rem 700 action that I had my smith turn into a 6BR that will shoot the same hole all day long a 100yds. It’s more about the bbl and a good light trigger than it is about the action. I proved that to myself. The rest is up to me on the trigger and at the reloading bench.

  31. avatar J says:

    No thanks. The ruger american is the new king of the economical bolt action hill.

  32. Thanks for the review. Awesome rifle. I really like the new Remington X-Pro trigger.

  33. avatar Rusty Shackleford says:

    Let me preface my following comments with this; given that hypocrisy runs rampant in “reviews” such as these I henceforth choose to willingly participate. Once upon a time in a small western Missouri town I worked at an outdoor retail establishment who also dealt in new and used firearms. Amidst the used bolt rifles sat a Remington 700 ADL .270 Win complete with the bemoaned synthetic “Tupperware” stock. Roughly two years later a soon to be born son prompted me to put in my two weeks notice and head off to a real job. No way in hell was I going to leave that rifle behind. A well seasoned Boresnake cleared the cobwebs, a torch and some choice words lightened up the trigger. Cheap scope mounted and a box of 130 grain Hornady SST’s completed the deal. From the bench at the public range I sat astonished at the rifle laying on my pack. All I ever heard was Remington’s didn’t shoot worth a damn anymore. Not without spending a pretty penny that is. Well every bullet went into the same hole until I farted or otherwise misplaced my aim enough to put a hole outside the big hole. It did that every time. Same hole. That unassuming rifle fed my baby boy and his momma and I many a meal. Dozens of deer died in the ensuing years not knowing that Remington “quality control was (insert word of choice)”. I gave that rifle to my young cousin for his birthday the year he was old enough to hunt. Bullets go where he intends them to go. Fact is I’ve been around a fair amount of 700’s and every single one of them will wallow out a hole in the paper. One misshapen hole. They kill animals real dead. I bought my current rifle, also a .270 ADL, at Academy sports of all places for $379.99 plus tax. Add a Bell & Carlson stock for $271.99 and that equals one hell of a rifle for roughly $660. It’s got a Cabelas branded 30mm 2.5-10×50 on it that was bought real cheap on closeout. Guess what? Shoots one hole. I have my doubts as to whether all you folks who commented above and so eagerly pile on the “Remington quality control” bandwagon have much experience with 700’s or rifles in general. Bold statement maybe, some of you I’m sure can shoot far better than I can. Some also have had their hands on a lemon no doubt. No way do you need to put thousands of your hard earned dollars into a rifle to make it shoot good. Comparing a gun like the Ruger American to a 700 is just plain funny. Go put your hands on both and say that again. Try and flex the stock on a 700. Now try that with the Ruger. It and many of its buddies stocks’ are about as stiff as a spork from KFC. All the corporate dogging on Remington is warranted, but I bet a lot of you guys barking about that probably drive your GM’s proudly. Remember that hypocrisy part? If there is a young or otherwise fiscally conservative man reading this; buy what makes you happy. You can do this as cheap or as pricey as you want. Expensive guns are awesome. All your trying to do is put one where it counts. By the way, don’t take the word of whoever the writer of this “reviewer” as gospel. Anyone can write about guns on the Internet. I don’t feel that people should be misled by “experts” that demonstrate such a misunderstanding of basic rifle anatomy, and hell, even the laws of physics. If you look at any rifle with a “free floated barrel”, the barrel never lines up perfect. Sako’ s with aluminum bed blocks hug one side of the road or the other. Savage rifles in their accustock do the same. They all do. Now if you find one where the “bore isn’t square to the action” and somehow you get a round to chamber in such a way that the firing pin would still impact the primer you need to do two things; buy a lottery ticket and a six pack. Then blow the barrel off the thing. Tiny twigs that wedge themselves under barrels and inside of stocks do not change your point of impact 4 MOA at 100 yards. Big ass hammers do that. Trucks do that. Skidloaders do that. Not knowing how to mount a scope does that. Loose screws do that. It ain’t the rifles fault buddy. Buy a 700, American, Savage, Tikka, etc. Shoot bullets at targets before animals. Make funny shaped holes in paper. Talk smack on Remington if that’s your thing. Sure is easier that way. Make your own facts if you want. Defy physics. Contradict yourself. Or don’t. Hypocrisy? Whats that say at the top of the page? The TRUTH about GUNS? If you say so.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email