View Full Version : Remington 700 question.
October 23, 2011, 11:06 PM
A friend is looking at this Model 700
I haven't had a chance to handle the gun yet, it's supposed to be in very good condition.
It has an aluminum butt plate. That's what I'd like to know about. Did Remington ship model 700s with metal but plates or is this after market?
October 23, 2011, 11:16 PM
Yes, but you can put limbsaver butt pads on then
October 23, 2011, 11:52 PM
Barrel seems short..... 20"?
October 24, 2011, 12:04 AM
Blind magazine adl with pressed checkering and pot metal butt plate with sloppy stain and finish overrun on the metal. I'm placing this in early 70s. Yes, I think it's factory. That is the same plate, I think, that was previously used, at one point they went to plastic with white spacer, and recently they've gone with metal, pads, or plastic.
That's a nice enough gun. I'd own it. I'd rather have an ordinary piece of wood like that than have to look at plastic.
I hate plastic.
October 24, 2011, 01:41 AM
Remington used the aluminum buttplates from the 1960s to early/mid 1970s.
October 24, 2011, 02:41 AM
even earlier, i think. I have a 1950s model, appr, that has the aluminum plate. Looks almost identical, completely down to the dripped and scraped varnish.
What's your take on the checkering? Look pressed to you? What was that, very late 60s until the late 70d/80s?
I'm sticking with somewhere between 70 and 74, based on what I see.
October 24, 2011, 10:26 AM
even earlier, i think. I have a 1950s model, appr, that has the aluminum plate.
Not to start a war, but the Rem 700 was introduced in 1963. The 721/722 were the 1950s rifles.
October 24, 2011, 03:17 PM
If it was built in 62-64 the 20" barrel is correct , as is the aluminum buttplate on non magnum 700s ! Oh and the 700 was introduced in 1962 along with the 7 Mag. .
October 24, 2011, 04:07 PM
Thanks for satisfying my curiosity. The only other 700s I've dealt with had plastic plates, or they were covered with pads.
22" barrel and it's in .308. I'll probably get a look Wednesday or so.
October 24, 2011, 09:19 PM
The older guns were drilled and tapped on the side of the receiver for receiver sights. This extra work was discarded with the newer guns. Sorry but I forgot the year Remington did this as a cost savings measure.
October 25, 2011, 09:45 AM
Nothing wrong with 20"-22" barrels. Unless you're a competition, long range benchrest shooter, or long-range hunter, longer barrels just aren't necessary.
I used to think that there was a huge cost to velocity with shorter barrels, but that old-school line of thinking just doesn't seem to hold up to reality.
During the development of the Tango 51, Tac Ops took a standard 26-inch barrel and cut it down to 18 inches in one-inch increments. Between 10 to 20 rounds were fired at each invrement. They found that a 20-inch barrel provides for a complete propellant burn and no velocity loss when using Federal Match 168-grain BTHP, a cartridge that has become something of a law enforcement standard. Going to an 18-inch barrel only resulted in a loss of 32 feet per second (fps).
October 25, 2011, 11:02 AM
in spite of all of the conventional knowledge, in most cases with anything but the slowest possible propellants, every inch of barrel loss from a standard 22-24" barrel is pretty insignificant, as are the gains.
But that's my opinion. Some people here may find a 50-200 FPS velocity loss with a couple inches of lenght reduction to be a real problem.
October 25, 2011, 11:21 AM
Just for information purposes, this is the difference between a 24, 22, and 20 inch barrel for the 308 Rem 180 grn Core lock out of a remington 700.
24 2722 fps
22 2713 fps
20 2677 fps
This is from my granddaughters science project where she cut down a 26 in barrel from 26 to 16, two inches at a time.
In a 308 you don't really need the longer barrel. Where it comes in handy is with the longer sight radius you get when using iron sights.
Another example is the M14. It has a 22 inch barrel and has done very well at Service Rifle 1000 yard matches.
With the M14 and its flash hider, using M118 ammo, there is no detectable muzzle flash when fired at night. (I know, I would have lost money on this if I would have bet the first time I saw it.
If the price is right that would be a good all around rifle. If I bought it, and intended on keeping the iron sights, I would go to a reciever sights, again because of the longer sight radius.
October 25, 2011, 09:38 PM
The .308 was designed to replicate .30-06 performance with a smaller case and out of shorter barrels.
Well I got to handle the rifle and it's in 99% condition. Who ever owned it either treated it very well, didn't shoot it hardly at all, or some combination there of.
It is a 22" barrel as advertised. The gun is light and very handy.
Not sure about the age. The serial# is 273xxx. I didn't see any letters that the inter-tubes tells me should be there to date it.
I told my friend he should expect from $450 to $550. Does that sound about right?
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.