View Full Version : Stevens model 200 7mm-08

November 13, 2007, 11:35 AM
I am looking to buy a new, low cost rifle. I have done alot of research on different rifles that are not expensive. The one rifle that sticks out to me is the Stevens model 200 which is made by Savage and has every part in it as the Savage does. The only thing not on the Stevens model is the accutrigger. So what I came up with is that I can buy a Stevens for about $275 at Walmart and buy a Rifle Basix trigger for $85 which includes the shipping. That's $360 which will be less than a Savage and most other least expensive models and then have a better trigger. I don't know if you guys have ever played or shot a rifle that has the Rifle Basix trigger but let me tell you that I have one on my Rem 700 .270 that shoots consitent crisp pulls every time. I am very pleased with my trigger that I installed myself. So anyways, what do you guys think about this option? Before I go and do it I just wanted to see if there is anyone that has a better opinion. Thanks alot!

November 13, 2007, 11:49 AM
when you factor in the new trigger, couldn't you buy a savage with the accutrigger for just a few more bucks that will probably come with a better stock too ?

November 13, 2007, 11:50 AM
Funny, I am doing something very similar come Christmas. I am getting a Stevens in 22-250 for varmints and I am going to replace the trigger with a Timney trigger for about the same price you are looking at. I haven't done it yet, obviously, but we are thinking along the same lines.

November 13, 2007, 12:07 PM
I just wanted to mention that I don't plan on definately buying a trigger nor do I have to. The Stevens stock trigger breaks clean at 4 lbs. Thanks

November 13, 2007, 03:02 PM
What Walmart has rifles in 7mm08? The ones here won't even stock 7mm08 ammo, much less rifles. I've been to every one in the 2 counties.

November 13, 2007, 04:23 PM
I like the plan. May not need a new trigger (and I don't care for the accutrigger).

November 13, 2007, 06:43 PM
I just bought one of these in .243 topped with a Nikon Promaster 3-9x40. It was a great deal and truth be told that is what I was looking for. I need a rifle for small whitetail deer that I won't really care if it gets scratched, stuck in the mud, rained on, bloody or shot a bunch at the range. I did not want to spend a ton for it and wanted the rifle to be accurate, reliable and comfortable. For me this was the rifle. It is reputed to be very accurate and reliable, that is what I wanted. Plus, one of my good friends has been hunting for years with a Savage that is exactly like the Stevens I bought and has bagged more deer and hunted more with it than any other hunter/rifle combo I know of. It has held together very well, so my hopes are high for the durability of the Stevens.

I know that the Savage/Stevens is a bottom basement rifle in looks, but that was what I was looking for.

November 13, 2007, 07:45 PM
Why 7mm-08?
I have one on my Rem 700 .270
I like the cartridge but the 7mm-08 is too close to the .270 for me to consider. If you are wanting a short action then I'd go for the .308 or .243, but even the .308 overlaps with the .270 a little too much for my tastes.

Both the .308 and 7mm-08 will provide the best performance with bullets weighing 140-160 7mm and 150-165 .308. The .270 performs well with bullets from 130-160. The .308 will allow you to use 180 grain bullets at least, but the 7mm-08 IMO is too small to take advantage of 175 grain bullets.

The real step up from your .270 would be the .300 Win Mag in the Stevens. The .300 will allow you to use heavier than 180 grain bullets with authority. Then I like the .243 to get down for those larger varmints (coyotes and such) and makes on hell of a deer rifle as well.

November 13, 2007, 09:13 PM
the stevens 200's are fine guns for the money, i have shot the 23 and 25-06 and the 7mm-08, all 3 guns shot very well and acuracy was awesome

November 13, 2007, 09:18 PM
Why 7mm-08?

I think the 7mm-08 is the ideal deer caliber. Why? Because it shoots a 140 grn bullet with plenty of power to do the job out to 300 yds and beyond. The 7mm bullet has about the best ballistic coefficient of any hunting round, so it is very flat shooting. It has little more kick than a .243 (which everybody agrees is a kid friendly caliber). And, it is notoriously accurate (in fact, it was developed specifically for long-range sillouette shooting).

I can't think of any other cartridge that has this great combination. Others like the .260, 6.5, etc. are close, but fall short in one area or another.

November 13, 2007, 10:47 PM
Like I said I could see stepping up to a 7mm-08 or down to it. Lets be realistic about the .284 and .277 caliber bullets there isn't enough difference in the BC between the to to make a difference at normal hunting ranges. In fact if you look at some of the newer bullets being made the BC of the .277 cal will sometimes be higher than the .284.

I find accuracy has more to do with the person firing the rifle than the cartridge. A person who can shoot a .5" group @ 100 with a .45-70 is just as accurate as a person who shoots .5" group with a .22 PPC at the same range. I find very few people who complain about the accuracy of the .270 in fact it was developed do knock down real animals, not for steel plates shaped like animals.

The .270 with equal weight bullets will shoot flatter and hit harder than the 7mm-08 will. Of course the trade off is more recoil but it isn't that much greater than the 7mm-08. Either one is a great deer cartridge but too close to each other to see a difference, with a properly placed bullet both kill equally well.

November 14, 2007, 12:16 PM
Sounds like a good plan to me - for a budget, do-everything rifle, it'd be hard to beat the 200 in 7-08.

November 14, 2007, 12:22 PM
cant go wrong with them they shoot very well

November 14, 2007, 11:28 PM
I got one in 223, shot great, nice to carry. Thought the trigger was a little heavy, put in a Timney. Thought the barrel was a little light, slapped on a 223 AI varmint. Kept reading the stock was flimsy, even though no animals had refused to die, so I put a Duramaxx stock on it. Really shoots great now, but almost to heavy to carry all day.

November 15, 2007, 08:56 PM
Yes, Walmart has them (7mm-08) and no usually not in stock but you can order one and have it in 7 days. They don't charge more to order if not in stock. Walmart is great!
Thanks for all the responds and opinions. I love this site and think that you guys have definately given me great advice. Again, Thanks alot!
And for the gentleman that sated that stated the .270 is close in recoil to the 7mm-08 that is not correct. The 7mm-08 with a 7.5 lb rifle will shoot 10.6 lbs of recoil where the .270 in the same weight rifle will shoot 16.1 lbs of recoil. That is around 40% more. Also the studies show that the 7mm-08 compared to the .308 does better with energy and flatter shooting. See I am doing my homework!

November 18, 2007, 02:17 PM
And for the gentleman that sated that stated the .270 is close in recoil to the 7mm-08 that is not correct. The 7mm-08 with a 7.5 lb rifle will shoot 10.6 lbs of recoil where the .270 in the same weight rifle will shoot 16.1 lbs of recoil. That is around 40% more.
I guess I'm that gentleman (never been called that before).:D

Actually I wanted to know why the 7mm-08, and now it seems you wanted something with less recoil than your .270 Win. I find recoil more of a perception than actual math, as a lot of factors go into recoil other than weight of the rifle and mass of bullet and size of powder charge. I'll agree that the 7mm-08 will recoil less than the .270, and I've shot some .270 rifles that the recoil wasn't as pleasant as my .270. I haven't found that much difference in recoil between a 7mm-08 I've shot or my .270 either.

If you don't enjoy shooting your .270 or want a lighter recoiling rifle for another member of your family then go with the 7mm-08. I never said it wasn't a good round. When I go looking for a rifle I look at what the caliber will do for me and the animal I'm hunting. For deer the 7mm-08 is just too close in performance to the .270, and it just wasn't making sense to buy it because Wal-Mart had one in stock.