Rem. 700sps tac. vs. Savage 10fp


July 20, 2007, 12:15 AM
Being similar price, same caliber, who gets the nod? The Savage has the better trigger, and the Remington has the better (factory) stock. Barring any changes, which would you buy? I only ask because I'm trying to decide. Help please...Tim

If you enjoyed reading about "Rem. 700sps tac. vs. Savage 10fp" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
July 20, 2007, 12:43 AM
I don't understand the thinking behind Savage's trigger being better. I've shot a couple of accutriggers and they bugged the heck out of me.

July 20, 2007, 12:56 AM
The savage is far easier to work on yourself. Barrel changes are a 5 minute affair which require only a vise and a wrench.

There's a ton of aftermarket products out there as well.

I've been impressed with savages that I've owned and shot......doubt I'll ever buy Remington again.

July 20, 2007, 12:57 AM
I would buy for three reasons here; which is more accurate/reputation? which one has more upgrades, swivel studs, built in sites, etc.? which one has more ability to be worked on? I'd say , the remmy has the more of situation 2 and 3, while savage has more of the first.
one more thing, if you shoot a lot, you can replace savage bbls, yourself.

Don't Tread On Me
July 20, 2007, 02:28 AM
The Hogue stock the SPS comes with isn't that great.

Don't get me wrong. I really like the Hogue stock. It is comfortable. Ergonomic. Feels good. Nice stock. Just not for a precision rifle.

It is way too flexible. The plastic frame underneath the rubber over molding just isn't rigid enough. Buying a rifle like this, you should get the most out of it. These stocks just don't get the most out of the rifle due to the flex and inconsistency. If you rest it up forward or use a bipod, the stock will touch the barrel and you will get a nasty flyer that will make what should be a .75" group into 2.5"

Now, I'm assuming you're comparing this to a 10FP. The stock on that is actually worse. That thing is a flimsy piece of garbage. It is awful. Thin in the forearm and more flex. If you buy a standard 10FP, all you're buying is a barreled action, 'cause that stock is worth about $2 to make.

I haven't checked, but if my memory serves me right, it is cheaper to buy a Savage with a decent stock (Choate or HS) than it is to get that same Remington in a higher quality stock. Not a lot cheaper, but it is.

Suck it up, save a little more coin and get a rifle with a stiff, quality stock. It will make a difference.

You have to wonder why these "tactical" and "law enforcement" rifles are cheaper than other tactical/LE rifles that run $800-$1000. It's because you're not buying a real stock with it. Those other rifles have basically the same action and barrel, but come with good stocks which ups the price.

Sorry if I am sounding so negative or I am insulting someone's cherished rifle. I just hate having to sit there and worry how I'm resting the gun each shot to get a decent group (I have a rifle like that right now) and it is just annoying. Better to fork out the dough and never think about barrel contact or pressure on the stock again.

July 20, 2007, 02:49 AM
I've heard a lot about the Savages and I've heard quite a few deer snipers swear their lives by them.

However, when perusing Gander Mtn, even my girlfriend (who plugged her ears when I was showing her how an airsoft gun works...) picked Remington as better in a blind test of the action.

Remington's pull is simply...more smooth.

Taurus 617 CCW
July 20, 2007, 03:17 AM
From a gunsmithing perspective the Remington 700 rifles are much easier to repair. The Savage rifles are mostly made of cheap castings (less barrel and receiver). The Remington 700 rifles have more parts readily available and most gunsmiths are more familiar with the Remington rifles. I can't say which is more accurate out of the box but I can say that the Remington rifles have more accuracy potential when modified. Also the Remingtons have much smoother functioning actions. Just my .02 from a repair perspective.

Tully M. Pick
July 20, 2007, 11:50 AM
I'd recommend the Savage, but replace the stock with this:

Add a decent piece of glass and you'll have a nice rig that'll shoot better than 99% of shooters are able to.

July 20, 2007, 12:00 PM
Personally I don't care for the look and feel of a Savage. The accu-trigger is OK but why don't they put a good trigger and stock on the gun in the first place?

My recommendation would be the Remington 700VS. It comes out of the box with an excellent stock-HS Precision with aluminum bedding block, and a quality adjustable trigger. I have one in .223 and it's a tackdriver. All I have done is adjust the trigger.

July 20, 2007, 12:10 PM
No comparison. Rem is the way to go.

Way easier to work on, find parts for, find information for etc. And the stock that comes with it will do for a while.

Honestly the Savage DOES NOT have the better trigger imo.

Essex County
July 20, 2007, 01:56 PM
Years ago the 700 was a fine, fine rifle. Today I'd opt for the Savage without a second thought. Even considering a stock upgrade is often called for I consider it the superior rifle. This is my absolute, unbiased opinion. Essex

July 20, 2007, 05:13 PM
Recently I was deciding between a Savage 111 and Remington 700 SPS. The Remington was only $30 more. So I bought it... mainly due to a most of the positive reasons stated so far. The biggest drawback (for me) so far, is the stock. Excessive flex. Get worse if you don't let your barrel cool down after excessively shooting.

I plan on upgrading the stock in the near future, but overall I have no regrets with my 700 SPS in 30-06.

July 20, 2007, 06:44 PM
Having taken down a Savage to the smallest part, I have absolutely no clue what people are saying when they say the Remington is easier to work on. The Savage trigger was real easy to work on/replace on mine, as was the barrel, floor plate, etc. What cheap cast part does anyone mean? The bolt handle? Other than that, I cannot think of a cast part on the rifle. The follower isn't, neither is the mag housing, the trigger guard, the fire control group housing, sear, none of them are cast.

And since the user really can change out a Savage barrel with a shop vice, two blocks of wood, and a wrench (you also need a go-gage). That can't be done on a Remington. Ergo, the Remington might be just as easy on minor parts, but the Savage is almost infinitely easier to rebarrel and thus, easier to work on than the Remington.


July 20, 2007, 08:13 PM
I would go with the SPS Tactical.

Main reason for my choice is that I have a spare HS Precision stock that I would drop the SPS barreled action into as soon as I got it home.

Plus I have a Rem 700 LTR in .223 which is a 20" fluted barrel and HS stock and it is the most accurate rifle I have ever owned , even outshooting my Savage 12BVSS which is still capable of outstanding accuracy.

Out of the box I thought the Accu-trigger was far and away better than the triggers of any of the 700s I have owned - out of the box. Yeah , it has this weird center blade which may be distracting to some but at a very crisp 2.25lbs it was better than any other rifle I had owned before with the exception of a Beeman air rifle.

Still , my 700 has a Jewell trigger and the Savage now has a Sharp Shooter Supply trigger.

July 20, 2007, 08:16 PM
I went with the Remington 700 and would recommend it to others.

If you enjoyed reading about "Rem. 700sps tac. vs. Savage 10fp" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!