Remington Model Seven CDL

warbirdlover · June 25, 2012, 07:07 PM

Can someone tell me why this rifle costs $998? It's as much as the equivalent Model 700 CDL. And try to find a Model Seven listed at Cabela's or Gander's websites. They make a couple other versions with synthetic stocks but if I buy any new rifles they're going to have wood. After replacing my paddle stock on my Ruger all-weather with a laminated wood stock I'm going back to the "old days" of "pretty" guns that still kill animals. They are so much nicer to look at.

Maybe I should look at the Browning X-Bolt micro "whatever" with the wood stock.

jmr40 · June 25, 2012, 09:30 PM

If both the 700 and 7 are the top end CDL versions, why would their prices not be the same?

warbirdlover · June 25, 2012, 09:50 PM

I would think the smaller Model 7 would be slightly cheaper. The mini Browning is $50 cheaper then the full size one.

Doyle · June 26, 2012, 07:45 AM

Model 7's have always fetched a premium price.

oneoldsap · June 26, 2012, 12:48 PM

Plus model 7s don't have any plastic parts , like the Browning . I just cant get by that plastic magazine . They might be fine in warm climates , but from my experience plastics and cold don't mix ! Back when the Savage Axis was called the Edge , that plastic latch would snap right off the mag when you slapped it into the gun if it was cold . I saw this happen twice , with my own eyes !

jmr40 · June 26, 2012, 01:31 PM

Remington makes basically 3 action lengths. A long action and short action 700. The 7 is basically the same gun with an even shorter action, but with the ejection port opened up. To do this they had to shorten the rear receiver bridge. Early 7's required a 1 piece base since they only drilled 1 hole on the rear receiver bridge. Newer guns have 2 holes, placed very close together. Just as there is no reason to charge different prices for a long action and short action, there is no reason to charge more or less for the 7. Assuming they are the same level of finish.

warbirdlover · June 26, 2012, 10:10 PM

Well, it gets mighty cold up here some winters. I've "experienced" -40º F and if you've ever driven a car that's sat out in that all night you'll never forget it. Tires have flat spots and appear "square". Shocks, springs and "SEAT" springs don't move. It's like sitting on a cement block.

If we have a winter like that all the Axis, Americans etc are going to have lot's of broken plastic parts LOL!!

BigJerm79 · June 27, 2012, 11:39 AM

I've been looking at the Model 7's too, but was concerned about the barrel length. I know with the advances in cartridges, it shouldn't be a big deal. Are losses in velocity, if any, enough to matter for shots out to 250 yds?

J

jmr40 · June 27, 2012, 01:56 PM

The early 7's all came with 18.5" barrels and were great for close range brush hunting where a little velocity loss did not matter. All the new guns have 20"-22" barrels depending on caliber. 20" is a better compromise length in my mind and with most of those chamberings it is not enough to really matter. If you really want that 50 extra fps from a 2" longer barrrel one of the short action 700's may be a better choice.

Doyle · June 27, 2012, 02:41 PM

BigJerm, some calibers are more sensitive to barrel loss than others. Fortunately for the Model 7, the .308 based calibers tend to handl that loss pretty well. Both 7mm-08 and .260 do quite well with 18.5 to 20 inch barrels. My 18.5" .260 is easily a 300 yd+ gun.

BigJerm79 · July 3, 2012, 10:44 AM

Thanks for the info guys! This is GREAT news since the 7mm-08 was what I was looking at in this gun. My top two are the Model 7 or 700 Mountain Rifle in .280 Rem (stainless/laminated model). I thought either would be great for long hikes in the Sierras or some other forest here in Cali. Either round will take anything in this state, so I'm good!

J

Doyle · July 3, 2012, 01:24 PM

Unless you are a hand loader I'd advise skipping the .280. You really don't gain that much from the longer cartridge even in a long-barreled gun (about 140fps at the muzzle). In a short-barreled gun you'll find that the velocity is about even because the .280 doesn't handle barrel loss as well as the short-action calibers.

The biggest downfall of the .280 is ammo availabilty. 7mm-08 is pretty common in any decent sized sporting goods store whereas .280 is probably going to require mail-order.

oneoldsap · July 4, 2012, 12:14 PM

That laminated MTN will be about a pound heavier than a model 7 !

Legionnaire · July 4, 2012, 12:25 PM

Watch the forums. This one just sold over at 24HourCampfire. If I didn't already have a Model 7 in .243, I'd have been all over it.

Guybo · July 4, 2012, 08:42 PM

I have the 700 CDL 25.06 and my daughter has the Model 7 CDL .260 and cosmetically her model 7 looks identical to my 700 only shorter. There is a difference in the price of those two guns around here. I paid $725 plus tax for her model 7 about 2yrs ago and around $900 plus tax for my 700 last year. I don't know why the price difference unless it was for the extra 4 inches of barrel, long action vs short action or the fact that remington no longer chambers the 700 cdl in 25.06. Both are nice rifles.

BigJerm79 · July 5, 2012, 03:28 AM

Roger that on the ammo availability of the 280 and weight difference in the Mountain Rifle, but I've been pining over that specific model/caliber for quite some time. I've counted on having to stock up on web-ordered factory ammo, 'cause I don't reload. I'd probably do the same for the 7mm-08 as well. That's not so easy to find in the local shops either. I really dig both rifles so, it's a toss-up!

Jack O'Conner · July 5, 2012, 07:23 AM

You can buy a TIKKA and have the barrel professionally shortened to 20 inches.

Jack

Lloyd Smale · July 6, 2012, 04:46 AM

Im sure rem sells fewer 7s then 700s so if anything it has less of a profit margin and should cost more.

June 25, 2012, 07:07 PM	#1
warbirdlover Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2009 Location: central Wisconsin Posts: 2,324	Remington Model Seven CDL Can someone tell me why this rifle costs $998? It's as much as the equivalent Model 700 CDL. And try to find a Model Seven listed at Cabela's or Gander's websites. They make a couple other versions with synthetic stocks but if I buy any new rifles they're going to have wood. After replacing my paddle stock on my Ruger all-weather with a laminated wood stock I'm going back to the "old days" of "pretty" guns that still kill animals. They are so much nicer to look at. Maybe I should look at the Browning X-Bolt micro "whatever" with the wood stock. Last edited by warbirdlover; June 25, 2012 at 07:15 PM.

July 4, 2012, 12:25 PM	#14
Legionnaire Senior Member Join Date: July 25, 2000 Location: Central TX Posts: 1,503	Watch the forums. This one just sold over at 24HourCampfire. If I didn't already have a Model 7 in .243, I'd have been all over it. __________________ Cogito, ergo armatus sum.

July 4, 2012, 08:42 PM	#15
Guybo Member Join Date: November 30, 2008 Location: NC Posts: 58	I have the 700 CDL 25.06 and my daughter has the Model 7 CDL .260 and cosmetically her model 7 looks identical to my 700 only shorter. There is a difference in the price of those two guns around here. I paid $725 plus tax for her model 7 about 2yrs ago and around $900 plus tax for my 700 last year. I don't know why the price difference unless it was for the extra 4 inches of barrel, long action vs short action or the fact that remington no longer chambers the 700 cdl in 25.06. Both are nice rifles. __________________ Life's Tough......God's Good......Pray Hard!

July 5, 2012, 07:23 AM	#17
Jack O'Conner Senior Member Join Date: July 11, 2005 Location: Manatee County, Florida Posts: 1,976	You can buy a TIKKA and have the barrel professionally shortened to 20 inches. Jack __________________ Fire up the grill! Deer hunting IS NOT catch and release.

June 25, 2012, 09:30 PM	#2
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	If both the 700 and 7 are the top end CDL versions, why would their prices not be the same?

June 25, 2012, 09:50 PM	#3
warbirdlover Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2009 Location: central Wisconsin Posts: 2,324	I would think the smaller Model 7 would be slightly cheaper. The mini Browning is $50 cheaper then the full size one.

June 26, 2012, 07:45 AM	#4
Doyle Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2007 Location: Rainbow City, Alabama Posts: 7,167	Model 7's have always fetched a premium price.

June 26, 2012, 12:48 PM	#5
oneoldsap Senior Member Join Date: September 16, 2009 Location: I live in the foot of the Green Mountains of Vermont Posts: 1,602	Plus model 7s don't have any plastic parts , like the Browning . I just cant get by that plastic magazine . They might be fine in warm climates , but from my experience plastics and cold don't mix ! Back when the Savage Axis was called the Edge , that plastic latch would snap right off the mag when you slapped it into the gun if it was cold . I saw this happen twice , with my own eyes !

June 26, 2012, 01:31 PM	#6
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	Remington makes basically 3 action lengths. A long action and short action 700. The 7 is basically the same gun with an even shorter action, but with the ejection port opened up. To do this they had to shorten the rear receiver bridge. Early 7's required a 1 piece base since they only drilled 1 hole on the rear receiver bridge. Newer guns have 2 holes, placed very close together. Just as there is no reason to charge different prices for a long action and short action, there is no reason to charge more or less for the 7. Assuming they are the same level of finish.

June 26, 2012, 10:10 PM	#7
warbirdlover Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2009 Location: central Wisconsin Posts: 2,324	Well, it gets mighty cold up here some winters. I've "experienced" -40º F and if you've ever driven a car that's sat out in that all night you'll never forget it. Tires have flat spots and appear "square". Shocks, springs and "SEAT" springs don't move. It's like sitting on a cement block. If we have a winter like that all the Axis, Americans etc are going to have lot's of broken plastic parts LOL!!

June 27, 2012, 11:39 AM	#8
BigJerm79 Member Join Date: September 30, 2010 Location: Bay Area Posts: 53	I've been looking at the Model 7's too, but was concerned about the barrel length. I know with the advances in cartridges, it shouldn't be a big deal. Are losses in velocity, if any, enough to matter for shots out to 250 yds? J

June 27, 2012, 01:56 PM	#9
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	The early 7's all came with 18.5" barrels and were great for close range brush hunting where a little velocity loss did not matter. All the new guns have 20"-22" barrels depending on caliber. 20" is a better compromise length in my mind and with most of those chamberings it is not enough to really matter. If you really want that 50 extra fps from a 2" longer barrrel one of the short action 700's may be a better choice.

June 27, 2012, 02:41 PM	#10
Doyle Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2007 Location: Rainbow City, Alabama Posts: 7,167	BigJerm, some calibers are more sensitive to barrel loss than others. Fortunately for the Model 7, the .308 based calibers tend to handl that loss pretty well. Both 7mm-08 and .260 do quite well with 18.5 to 20 inch barrels. My 18.5" .260 is easily a 300 yd+ gun.

July 3, 2012, 10:44 AM	#11
BigJerm79 Member Join Date: September 30, 2010 Location: Bay Area Posts: 53	Thanks for the info guys! This is GREAT news since the 7mm-08 was what I was looking at in this gun. My top two are the Model 7 or 700 Mountain Rifle in .280 Rem (stainless/laminated model). I thought either would be great for long hikes in the Sierras or some other forest here in Cali. Either round will take anything in this state, so I'm good! J

July 3, 2012, 01:24 PM	#12
Doyle Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2007 Location: Rainbow City, Alabama Posts: 7,167	Unless you are a hand loader I'd advise skipping the .280. You really don't gain that much from the longer cartridge even in a long-barreled gun (about 140fps at the muzzle). In a short-barreled gun you'll find that the velocity is about even because the .280 doesn't handle barrel loss as well as the short-action calibers. The biggest downfall of the .280 is ammo availabilty. 7mm-08 is pretty common in any decent sized sporting goods store whereas .280 is probably going to require mail-order.

July 4, 2012, 12:14 PM	#13
oneoldsap Senior Member Join Date: September 16, 2009 Location: I live in the foot of the Green Mountains of Vermont Posts: 1,602	That laminated MTN will be about a pound heavier than a model 7 !

July 5, 2012, 03:28 AM	#16
BigJerm79 Member Join Date: September 30, 2010 Location: Bay Area Posts: 53	Roger that on the ammo availability of the 280 and weight difference in the Mountain Rifle, but I've been pining over that specific model/caliber for quite some time. I've counted on having to stock up on web-ordered factory ammo, 'cause I don't reload. I'd probably do the same for the 7mm-08 as well. That's not so easy to find in the local shops either. I really dig both rifles so, it's a toss-up!

July 6, 2012, 04:46 AM	#18
Lloyd Smale Junior member Join Date: February 11, 2005 Posts: 822	Im sure rem sells fewer 7s then 700s so if anything it has less of a profit margin and should cost more.