Which decade did remington build the best 700's?

[Boogershooter]

I know some of you are laughing already at this silly question but seriously it gets better. I went to the lgs this morning and they were bringing some guns out of hock. I guess that's correct terminology? Anyway one of them was a older remington 700 adl with the walnut stock and checkered stock. I immediately asked to fondle it. So then the discussion began with all the patrons about how rare this model was and how many and when remington made these. This was the customers not the owners. At $300 I was gona buy the rifle regardless but after hearing the discussion going on I would have paid $300 just to have recorded it. It was intriguing enough I figured I would ask it here also. Oh yea just for the curios ones it is a 25-06. I called remington and Googled the code. It was built in March of 73.

[Sure Shot Mc Gee]

Which decade did remington build the best 700's?

You know I've never thought about the best manufacturing dated 700 rifles. I know its been marketed since 1962. Seems to me the 700s earlier triggers were problematic and due to that defect there trigger works have been re-designed. In some circumstances been replace on Remingtons dime. Other than there earlier trigger problem. I'm not aware of one date of rifle being better made than all others. If anything Remington 700 models have improved over the years due to improvements in material & metals currently used. I've always considered the 700 being the working mans rifle. Nothing fancy just reliable.

[Boogershooter]

The local guys here sure had some different opinions. Some even claimed to know who was in charge of quality control for different periods of time and which models had everything from different style rifling and twist rates. It was very entertaining and I'm not if any of them truely knew if what they were saying was true or not. The majority of them seemed to agree the rifles produced in the 70's were the best but almost all had different reasons why.

[joed]

I've owned 700's from all periods, never had a bad one. If you like wood you want the earlier ones though. Problem with wood is it needs bedding work. At least all I've owned did.

My latest 700 is an SPS VS Stainless from 2010. After replacing stock and trigger it is a good rifle.

I do think the steel is better on the later production.

[SSA]

I looked this up a while back. Pick any decade you want, I found somebody who said that was the best, and somebody else who said it was the worst.

[Scorch]

My opinion, the later 1980s 700s were the best. They stocks were still glossy and chunky, but they got machine-cut checkering that actually looked like checkering (instead of the stamped reverse checkering or the basket weave atrocities), the Imron "bowling ball" finish was better than the fragile sprayed varnish of earlier rifles, and they started putting recoil pads on the magnum rifles instead of plastic buttplates. And the fit and finish were better than 1970s glossy or 1990s satin/rough finish on the steel.

[Picher]

I agree that the 80's 700s were excellent. I still have a 700 ADL that was a .22-250, but now sports a stainless .243 after-market, match barrel with original factory contours. It's pillar-bedded, free floated and a real tack-driver! It still has the original trigger, which is excellent.

Subsequent 700s I own have been nice, but they all have Timney triggers and two have after-market stocks.

[jmr40]

Seems to me the 700s earlier triggers were problematic and due to that defect there trigger works have been re-designed.

Remington used the same trigger design on all bolt rifles except the 788 made from 1946-2006. Any of those could possibly fail. In 1982 as the result of multiple lawsuits the safety was redesigned to allow users to unload the chamber with the safety in the "SAFE" position. It didn't address the real problem, but did reduce the number of incidents. It is possible for the sear to disengage with no trigger pull on any of these rifles as they are carried and handled. When the safety is moved to the "FIRE" position to unload the chamber the gun will discharge if the sear failed. Allowing the gun to be unloaded while still in the "SAFE" position prevents this.

After more lawsuits the trigger was redesigned and guns made after October 2006 have the new trigger. Unfortunately some of these guns were found to have adhesive that dripped into the trigger during assembly. They were recalled. Most of the older guns were never recalled. Some of the 600's were but Remington deals with the others on a case by case basis.

I've owned many over the years made from the 1960's up to the early 2000's. I've never had an inaccurate one. I do have a 1974 made rifle that has had the trigger fail on several occasions before it was replaced.

I'd strongly advise replacing the trigger on any of them and since I like to be able to lock the bolt handle down when the rifle is on "SAFE" I like the pre-1982 versions best.

[roklok]

I like the '74 (when cut checkering started) to mid 80's 700s. I agree with jmr40, in that I like the bolt to lock close with the safety which stopped in 1982. However, through the 80s, even though the safety was changed, the required cut was still present in the receiver and the bolt. So all one has to do to have a bolt locking safety on those 700s (83 to the 90s) is to swap in the older safety lever. Starting sometime in the 90s, those cuts were no longer present. I have a 700 purchased in '97 that still had the bolt locking safety cut in receiver, but not on bolt. I carefully cut the locking slot on the bolt with a dremel, turned out great. The metal polish dropped in quality in the 90's as well. BDLs in the 90s had more of a matte look to the barrel and action, as the fine machining marks were not polished out. While the overall quality remained high through the end of the 80's, I have three C prefix 700's made in 1989, all three had crowns that were not cut properly from the factory. I do not really care for the current production 700s (from about 2000 on). No cuts for the bolt locking safety, poor finish quality, HUGE unsightly recoil pads, x mark trigger, etc.

[Dufus]

JMO, but I never liked any of them. Period.

[Roughedge]

Before the Freedom Group got a hold of them.

[Rifletom]

I was with my friend Dennis when he bought his 700 new in 1978. It's the only rifle he owns! I helped him put a Redfield "Tracker 3x9 scope on it and he had a local 'smith put a good recoil pad on. He hasn't done any more to it, other than shoot a good number of deer with it. Why, it's almost as accurate as my Sako!

[603Country]

Somewhere in a pile of gun magazines I have an article on Kenny Jarrett's bean field rifles. He has an accuracy guarantee and for years used Remington 700 actions as the basis for his builds. The article states that he had to build his own actions due to Remington quality declines. He'll still build a rifle for you using a Remington 700 action, but only if you have an action from specific years. He said that he can't meet his accuracy guarantee using the 700 actions after a certain date.

I took the info in that article as fact that Remington quality had declined. It probably wouldn't be noticed by most of us, but apparently matters if you need extreme accuracy.

[Mobuck]

My 700's are from the mid 70's - mid 80's decade. They were the benchmark at that time and all of the ones I've tried have shown excellent accuracy.

[lewwetzel]

One could possibly make the argument that the years the late Mike Walker worked at Remington were the "golden years". But, the controversy regarding his 700 trigger failures may have rightly or wrongly marred his reputation. The first half of my 50 years working were spent in manufacturing, most in technical positions. I caught the tail end of America's great leadership in that area, and had the pleasure of working with the old "slide rule" engineers such as Walker; I saw first-hand how good, reliable and proven designs were later ruined by bean-counters and management the made quality subordinate to production, and the younger engineers who were all too eager to suck up to that type of management just to keep their jobs or get ahead.
That's why I can side with Walker's explanation regarding bump fires from his triggers. He did, indeed admit - at around 100 years of age - that his initial design may have been flawed. But, he claimed to have corrected it very early on before few if any guns made it into production, and in recent years Remington, in order to save a little money on each rifle, cut corners in production including changing/cheapening his improved design.
By any standards, though, Walker was one of the great ones at Remington, and it's a tragedy that his type is no longer found in American manufacturing - let alone any type of business.

[Paul B.]

"He did, indeed admit - at around 100 years of age - that his initial design may have been flawed. But, he claimed to have corrected it very early on before few if any guns made it into production, and in recent years Remington, in order to save a little money on each rifle, cut corners in production including changing/cheapening his improved design."

Correct me if I'm wrong but I recall reading something quite a few years back now where Walker had redesigned the trigger to be safe. The bean counters decided the extra five cents a unit it would cost to make was not acceptable and so went with the faulty unit. Seems to me the onus should be on the bean counters. The few Remington 700s I have were all from the early to later mid 1980's and so far have been trouble free.
Too cheap to spend a nickel. Wonder just how much in lawyer fees and settlements they would have saved if they just spent that nickel. :roll eyes:
Paul B.

[elmbow]

Not sure how this turned into another (yawn) Remington trigger thread. I've owned two dozen of the darned things, never had a trigger problem.

I am partial to my 1984 BDL, 30.06, pillar and glass bedded, Decelerator pad, hand rubbed oil finish, trigger tuned, will put rounds on top one another all day with good ammo.

[Paul B.]

Elmbow. I did not like that glossy finish on my BDL so I rubbed it out with 0000 steel wool. Looks just like a robbed oil finish. give it a light wipe with furniture polish every 6 months of so and it looks fine. Gonna give it a try on the Classics as while the guns are great, I don't care for the sloppy orange peel finish they came with. A little sanding with mineral spirits and rub out with the 0000 wool and they should look a heck of a lot better.
Paul B.

[elmbow]

Paul, I am in the same camp, it's the worst thing about Browning guns is that 1/2" thick impenetrable plastic finish on them. I will take these types of finishes completely down to wood, and then re-finish with boiled linseed oil followed by Tru-oil or Linspeed. It takes a little time, but it will last forever with a little care and is so much nicer.