Model 70 vs Model 700 accuracy...

Status
Not open for further replies.
marksman13 said:
Should put the bare rifle around $2K. A buddy of mine has three rifles built by this guy and all three are capable of .5 MOA five shot groups with proper ammo. I’d expect the same level of accuracy. This will be a range rifle 99% of it’s life and be used to shoot in some friendly competitions
Click to expand...

Ya might be disappointed in the friendly competition game. The funny thing these days is I have seen literally dozens of el-cheapo savages and rugers with crappy optics shoot itty-bitty groups with good handloads. It is boringly easy to find 1/2 to 3/4 moa rifles anymore. The days of seeking out mystics to perfect a rifle have been trumped by better concentric designs and factory machining. That doesn't make them pretty or special of course. Just changes the game of chasing accuracy.
 
marksman13 said:
I said “long range hunting rifle”, but the truth is, I have a ton of hunting rifles. The hunting I’ll do with this rifle would be stuff like nilgai in Texas, maybe an elk, and a ton of pigs at extended distances. I have rifles that will do the job right now, but this is an excuse to buy another fun rifle. I was dear set on buying a Bergara Premier Ridgeback until I found a local smith offering to build a rifle for the same money with an accuracy guarantee.
Click to expand...

An excuse is the only requirement that matters, at least in my accounting of things gun related.
 
illinoisburt said:
Ya might be disappointed in the friendly competition game. The funny thing these days is I have seen literally dozens of el-cheapo savages and rugers with crappy optics shoot itty-bitty groups with good handloads. It is boringly easy to find 1/2 to 3/4 moa rifles anymore. The days of seeking out mystics to perfect a rifle have been trumped by better concentric designs and factory machining. That doesn't make them pretty or special of course. Just changes the game of chasing accuracy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I’ve seen some cheap rifles turn in some impressive groups. I could easily go get a Ruger Precision and do what I’m wanting to do. But with this guy, I’m getting a satisfaction guarantee and a chance to choose my own parts.
 
illinoisburt said:
Ya might be disappointed in the friendly competition game. The funny thing these days is I have seen literally dozens of el-cheapo savages and rugers with crappy optics shoot itty-bitty groups with good handloads. It is boringly easy to find 1/2 to 3/4 moa rifles anymore. The days of seeking out mystics to perfect a rifle have been trumped by better concentric designs and factory machining. That doesn't make them pretty or special of course. Just changes the game of chasing accuracy.
Click to expand...
The two best grouping rifles I have ever owned are Savage rifles. Not low end guns, but not as expensive as the other major manufacturers comparable rifles. Both shot consistantly under an inch.
 
mcb said:
This same level of symmetry and concentricity is not as easily achieved with a Model 70.
Click to expand...

Assuming this is true and everything else being equal, I fail to see how this (when comparing the question of an inherent accuracy potential that might exist between push-feed and CRF actions) translates into an intrinsic accuracy advantage between either of the two actions being considered.
 
SwampWolf said:
Assuming this is true and everything else being equal, I fail to see how this (when comparing the question of an inherent accuracy potential that might exist between push-feed and CRF actions) translates into an intrinsic accuracy advantage between either of the two actions being considered.
Click to expand...

It's all about presenting the bullet to the throat and bore as consistently concentric as possible both when initially loading and during the pressure spike at the beginning of combustion that drives the bullet into the rifled bore. A bullet that is off center to the throat and bore is distorted more as it's driven into the riflings. This can have accuracy implication. If the bullet is off center/canted in a different direction for each shot the accuracy implication get even greater. The neck and shoulder of the chamber controls the front font of the case the back of the case in a model 70 is only held concentric by the chamber, the bolt has minimal constraints on the case head. With the 700 there is the added constraint of the enclosing bolt head wrapped around the case head constrained by the recess in the barrel. This extra constraint really helps make things repeatable, especially as things start to move under the impulse of firing. That is the theory anyway.
 
George P said:
Unless you have it blueprinted; otherwise, a custom action should be the starting point.........
Click to expand...

Even blueprinted, it’s not worth the time or money. The money spent towards getting a Remington up to the standard of a custom action is wasted. It’s still just a Remington. If you sleeve the bolt way or replace the bolt body, bush the firing pin, replace the extractor, replace the bolt with a 1 piece bolt, chase and true the threads, true the bolt face, receiver face, and lug faces, redrill and oversize tap the rail screws, pin an an oversized surface ground lug (properly sized lug).... it’s still a Remington, but you have $800-900 into it. Sure, $150-200 will get threads chased, raceways lapped, and faces trued, but you’re still sitting on the same slack and binding as it had when leaving the factory, and have ~$500-600 into an action, not having the same tolerance control and not yet having pinned lugs and rails, or upsized rail bolts (usually another $100 on top of the chase job).

The days are gone when a guy could blueprint a Rem action and be in it for less than half what a bolt and pin custom action would cost. Sure, a Defiance or Impact, or Panda will cost a lot more than twice, but you’re not just getting a bolted rail and pinned lug in those cases.

When a guy can buy any of a handful of custom actions for $800, there’s not as much sense in pouring money into a factory action.
 
marksman13 said:
I’m about to have a custom rifle built. I’m going with a 300 Win Mag for sure. The idea is to have a very accurate, long range hunting rig. My personal experience has been that factory 700s shoot better than factory 70s, but what about the actions themselves. Can a Model 70 action be made to shoot as well as a Model 700 action? Are there limiting factors to how well a Model 70 action can be made to shoot?

Only reason I ask is that I have a Winchester Model 70 Extreme Weather in 270 that I was thinking about sacrificing the action of to build my long range hunting rig. I just don’t shoot this 270 much, but I love the action. Accuracy is my primary concern with this build though and if a M700 action is inherently more accurate than an M70 action, that’s the route I’ll go.
Click to expand...

I'm 74 and have been hunting since I was 18. I see threads like these and I wonder what the posters are really thinking about. The vitals in an average White Tail Deer can be circumscribed by a 9" pie plate while the vitals of an elk can be circumscribed by an 18+" circle. Now Worrying about the group size from a hunting rifle miss the point on how to hunt and shoot. I have a number of hunting rifles (cals. 6.5x55 to .30-06) that will shoot 0.5"-1-1-1/2" groups at 100 yards. I've practiced shooting from field positions to distances from 250-400 yards...all these rifles will group within 2-3.5 MOA out to 400 yards...enough for anything I intend to hunt...AND EAT. Thus, any of my Ruger, Remmy, or Winny hunting rifles will get the job done out to 350-400 yards, as far as I'll take a hunting shot.

Now I shoot LR precision rifles from time to time and I have made hits out to 1,450 yards with my AI AT rifle in .308 Win so I have confidence I know how to hit game out as far as I want to shoot, using my Kestrel 5700 Elite and my Vortex 1800 RF. Worrying about accuracy in a hunting rifle is probably missing the point...the issue is knowing the game, reading the wind, measuring the range and knowing the ballistics and muzzle velocity of your rifle and cartridge. I don't mean to be a PITA but this discussion is usually sterile one.

Harry, able to hit a barn door from inside it
 
marksman13 said:
I’m about to have a custom rifle built. I’m going with a 300 Win Mag for sure. The idea is to have a very accurate, long range hunting rig. My personal experience has been that factory 700s shoot better than factory 70s, but what about the actions themselves. Can a Model 70 action be made to shoot as well as a Model 700 action? Are there limiting factors to how well a Model 70 action can be made to shoot?

Only reason I ask is that I have a Winchester Model 70 Extreme Weather in 270 that I was thinking about sacrificing the action of to build my long range hunting rig. I just don’t shoot this 270 much, but I love the action. Accuracy is my primary concern with this build though and if a M700 action is inherently more accurate than an M70 action, that’s the route I’ll go.
Click to expand...

It all comes down to the gunsmith. If he works on model 70's all the time you have a better than average chance of having a great build. If you find a gunsmith who works exclusively on Rem 700's and same footprint custom actions, don't send him a Model 70 ------------- see where this is going??????
 
Flatbush Harry said:
I'm 74 and have been hunting since I was 18. I see threads like these and I wonder what the posters are really thinking about. The vitals in an average White Tail Deer can be circumscribed by a 9" pie plate while the vitals of an elk can be circumscribed by an 18+" circle. Now Worrying about the group size from a hunting rifle miss the point on how to hunt and shoot. I have a number of hunting rifles (cals. 6.5x55 to .30-06) that will shoot 0.5"-1-1-1/2" groups at 100 yards. I've practiced shooting from field positions to distances from 250-400 yards...all these rifles will group within 2-3.5 MOA out to 400 yards...enough for anything I intend to hunt...AND EAT. Thus, any of my Ruger, Remmy, or Winny hunting rifles will get the job done out to 350-400 yards, as far as I'll take a hunting shot.

Now I shoot LR precision rifles from time to time and I have made hits out to 1,450 yards with my AI AT rifle in .308 Win so I have confidence I know how to hit game out as far as I want to shoot, using my Kestrel 5700 Elite and my Vortex 1800 RF. Worrying about accuracy in a hunting rifle is probably missing the point...the issue is knowing the game, reading the wind, measuring the range and knowing the ballistics and muzzle velocity of your rifle and cartridge. I don't mean to be a PITA but this discussion is usually sterile one.

Harry, able to hit a barn door from inside it
Click to expand...
Flatbush Harry said:
Congrats on being an accomplished marksman with a healthy stable of rifles. Allow me to shed some additional insight as to what this particular poster is thinking. I have several “hunting rifles” which are more than capable of putting a piece of lead into the vitals of a given species of game out to 400 yards. What I have found through shooting those rifles regularly at distances up to 800 yards is that past 400-500 yards, depending on the individual rifle, they are somewhat lacking in terms of giving me that little bit of margin for error. My M70 in 270 has no issue putting five rounds into a 1-1 1/2” group at 100 yards. Those groups stretch to five or six inches at 500 yards. My M77 in 6.5x55 is running around 6 1/2” at 500 yards. My Falkor Omega is probably the only rifle I currently own that is sub-MOA at 500 yards and it will consistently put five rounds of Hornady Precision Hunter into a 2-2 1/2” group at 500 yards, but it’s a 17 lb pig of a rifle, so I don’t hunt with it. The goal is to put together a rifle and cartridge combination with enough juice to reliably kill pigs at 800+ yards while maintaining a standard of accuracy that gives some margin for error at extended ranges.

In subsequent posts I also explained that this will be a range rifle most of it’s life, but I’d like it to be light enough to carry afield without needing a wheelbarrow. I appreciate your opinion that I am missing the boat on how to shoot and hunt, but hunting is different for everybody and I am bored with traditional hunting. I want a new challenge and this challenge gives me a reason to buy a new rifle. Since I am spending hard earned money on a rifle, I’d prefer to have that rifle be as accurate as humanly possible. Hope this helps you to better understand what I’m after.
Click to expand...
 
tbs said:
It all comes down to the gunsmith. If he works on model 70's all the time you have a better than average chance of having a great build. If you find a gunsmith who works exclusively on Rem 700's and same footprint custom actions, don't send him a Model 70 ------------- see where this is going??????
Click to expand...

This. When looking for a gunsmith to work on my Model 70 I didn’t got to my typical gunsmith who likes Rem700 actions but to a gunsmith who builds on Model 70’s frequently and understands them.
 
mcb said:
A bullet that is off center to the throat and bore is distorted more as it's driven into the riflings. This can have accuracy implication.
Click to expand...

My question only has to do with the intrinsic difference (if any) in accuracy when comparing actions having push-feed vs CRF extraction systems. Does the extraction type (and that factor alone) have anything to do with the inherent accuracy of a rifle; again, everything else being equal.
 
SwampWolf said:
My question only has to do with the intrinsic difference (if any) in accuracy when comparing actions having push-feed vs CRF extraction systems. Does the extraction type (and that factor alone) have anything to do with the inherent accuracy of a rifle; again, everything else being equal.
Click to expand...

I though I answered that in post #58. The completely enclosing bolt-head of the push-feed system has the potential to results in more consistently concentric positioning of the round in the chamber than the CRF system. This more consistent concentric positioning of the round offers better accuracy assuming all else is equal.
 
taliv said:
this is very misleading. Most of the reason custom actions exist is to fix problems with the rem700. for instance, longer tenon, integral lug, integral rail, and a one piece bolt handle instead of a handle that's soldered on. all of those things mean a rifle is more likely to take a beating and still hold zero. i could go on and on about improvements, but what you're thinking is probably a result of a lot of custom chambered barrels that are tight fit, and custom actions for benchrest with very tight clearances. those benchrest features do indeed mean one needs to pay attention to cleaning it and that it will have stoppages if you get dust or mud in it.



fortunately, being left handed, most of my custom rifles don't even have safeties. i don't want them at all. raising the bolt handle is my safety



all but one of my custom actions that were based on a rem700 bolt, had a mini-m16 style extractor. and probably almost everyone shooting PRS. these are vastly superior to the lame ring in a cutout inside the 700. if you're saying that modifying a bolt that has that cutout is dangerous, idk. maybe. but for sure, there's no problems with safety with this style of extractor on a custom action (which probably does not have the cut for the ring)



hey don't blame me! i bought two of them! one was most accurate gun i've ever owned.
Click to expand...

And this adds even more food for thought. I only shoot .308. For bigger calibers or more powerful cartridges the scales of decision may be tipped more one way or the other.

I like .308 because for the distances that I have access to, it presented challenge. For my particular needs, I liked being able to have a different bolt handle put on. I also liked being able to go with a rail that would accommodate the scope I wanted to use, rather than finding a scope that would accommodate an integral rail. I’m a bang for the buck type of guy and the 700 was it for me, although certainly not for everyone.

As always, it’s a matter of what you’re doing. If you’re hunting and are going to clean the rifle after every few rounds, that’s a consideration. If you’re shooting matches where you’re shooting 66 round strings, that too would be a consideration.
 
look, 700 is a great action. they've sold a bazillion of them. for decades, it was clearly the best factory action: accurate, cheap, reliable. but that doesn't mean there's not a ton of room for improvement. i believe 15 years ago, modifying a rem700 was the best bang for the buck. these days, with the number of custom actions on the market, it would be my last choice

the screws holding the rail on have been known to move when the rifle isn't babied in the field. all of the gunsmiths i've used would put a few extra pins in there to try to prevent zero shifts. when your zero is shifting and you start trying to troubleshoot, it could be your scope, your rings, or your base. with an integral base, you pretty much eliminate the base immediately. plus, having a solid piece of steel up there and a small ejection port adds stiffness to the action

not sure if you're familiar with how bolts work, but
1-piece-remington-700-bolt-no-ejector-right.jpg remington-factory-replacement-bolt-assembly.jpg
with a one-piece bolt (first pic), the handle and bolt body are machined from one piece of steel so it's really strong and the end of the handle is threaded so you can spin any aftermarket knob on you want. but with the rem 700 factory bolt (other pic), the handle is attached to the bolt body and the knob is part of the handle so it can't be easily swapped.

it is fairly common to hear of people who get a round stuck in the chamber (usually over pressure handloads) trying to beat the bolt open with a hammer or kick it with their foot, and have the factory bolt handle come off.
 
I believe 2 reasons you see more 700 actions used as platforms for custom builds that don’t have anything to do with inherent accuracy of the design

1. You can buy just the action from multiple vendors compared to a model 70 action that isn’t sold commercially anywhere
2. Every stock and chassis manufacturer supports the 700 geometry but when looking for model 70 options the field narrows to just a handful
 
Nature Boy said:
I believe 2 reasons you see more 700 actions used as platforms for custom builds that don’t have anything to do with inherent accuracy of the design

1. You can buy just the action from multiple vendors compared to a model 70 action that isn’t sold commercially anywhere
2. Every stock and chassis manufacturer supports the 700 geometry but when looking for model 70 options the field narrows to just a handful
Click to expand...

There are, however, reasons we arrived here.

What I haven’t seen satisfactorily answered: Why did the 700 footprint become so popular? Why did it become the overwhelming majority standard for nearly all custom actions?

Both of the points you’re touting are correct today, but weren’t always the case. Not so many decades ago, it was easier to find a Mauser or 70 smith than it was to find someone well versed in the 700. At one time, competition records were held by Mausers and 70’s, but at some point in our history, for some reason(s), we saw the 700 design slingshot past the old claw rifles.

Certainly, the lower cost and easier (lower cost, lower skill) repair and enhancement of 700 actions had a lot to do with that, but I don’t imagine competitive shooters a couple generations ago were any more restrictive with budget than they are today - anything goes to win matches. Today, we’ve seen the “super actions” replace any factory action for most records, but I expect there’s some reason competitors shifted, and records with them, from Mauser and 70 actions to the 700. Especially considering the fact the 700 design incorporates the relatively less favorable round action and separate recoil lug.

It’s not necessarily evidence the design is inherently better or more accurate, but it’s a significant result, enough to make me think there’s something going on which made it easier to win and easier to set records with 700’s.
 
Last edited:
Varminterror said:
There are, however, reasons we arrived here.

What I haven’t seen satisfactorily answered: Why did the 700 footprint become so popular? Why did it become the overwhelming majority standard for nearly all custom actions?

Both of the points you’re touting weren’t always the case. Not so many decades ago, it was easier to find a Mauser or 70 smith than it was to find someone well versed in the 700. At one time, competition records were held by Mausers and 70’s, but at some point in our history, for some reason(s), we saw the 700 design slingshot past the old claw rifles.

Certainly, the lower cost and easier (lower cost, lower skill) repair and enhancement of 700 actions had a lot to do with that, but I don’t imagine competitive shooters a couple generations ago were any more restrictive with budget than they are today - anything goes to win matches. Today, we’ve seen the “super actions” replace any factory action for most records, but I expect there’s some reason competitors shifted, and records with them, from Mauser and 70 actions to the 700. Especially considering the fact the 700 design incorporates the relatively less favorable round action and separate recoil lug.

It’s not necessarily evidence the design is inherently better or more accurate, but it’s a significant result, enough to make me think there’s something going on which made it easier to win and easier to set records with 700’s.
Click to expand...


And there is ! The bolt IS concentrically guided to center as you mentioned . The pesky separate recoil lug turns out to be a better way to go than the odd varying abutment of a Mauser TYPE action . The whole action itself is more easily machined to perfection on the tubular design. Once again , back in the 70s when Lee Six and Chet Brown first codified the use of "glue in " bedding for fiberglass stocks I remember them explaining how much more accurately the Walker designed 700 type action was to bed . Like I said the 40x single shot was the one to beat until mid 80s when the voo doo of blueprinting the 700 type action was well known. Then the first custom (I believe it was the Stolle Panda) 700 type actions were developed for the bench rest crowd. I was into how much metal could be removed from a blueprinted Remington 600 action and still retain great accuracy for a few shots :) in the 80s . I know you really couldn't do too much of that with a Winchester model 70 , none of which were ever "short actions" which give greater stiffness.
 
Got some negative feedback on the builder I was going to use, so I just placed an order for a Bergara Premier Ridgeback in 300 Win Mag. While I was at it, I ordered my wife a Bergara HMR Wilderness in 6.5 Creedmoor. Got a pair of Zeiss V4 Conquest 6-24x50 scopes to throw on top of em. We’ll see how well they shoot soon.
 
the bench rest guys I know shoot single shot, no mag. Much simpler to do this with a M700, rather than mag loading the round every time in a M70. This alone would send me that direction for benchrest rather than a 70.

in a mag gun, in the field, I’d want a 70.
 
Gaiudo said:
the bench rest guys I know shoot single shot, no mag. Much simpler to do this with a M700, rather than mag loading the round every time in a M70. This alone would send me that direction for benchrest rather than a 70.

in a mag gun, in the field, I’d want a 70.
Click to expand...

Mike Walker of Remington did more to promote the 700 with the BR crowd than any inherent design feature of the 700. Not to take away anything from the 700 design, but it it didn’t hurt that Mike was a custom shop dude and founding father of the 222.
When it comes to bedding surface, I’d take the flat bottom of the M70 over a 700 anyway. YMMV.
 
Gordon said:
And there is ! The bolt IS concentrically guided to center as you mentioned . The pesky separate recoil lug turns out to be a better way to go than the odd varying abutment of a Mauser TYPE action . The whole action itself is more easily machined to perfection on the tubular design. Once again , back in the 70s when Lee Six and Chet Brown first codified the use of "glue in " bedding for fiberglass stocks I remember them explaining how much more accurately the Walker designed 700 type action was to bed . Like I said the 40x single shot was the one to beat until mid 80s when the voo doo of blueprinting the 700 type action was well known. Then the first custom (I believe it was the Stolle Panda) 700 type actions were developed for the bench rest crowd. I was into how much metal could be removed from a blueprinted Remington 600 action and still retain great accuracy for a few shots :) in the 80s . I know you really couldn't do too much of that with a Winchester model 70 , none of which were ever "short actions" which give greater stiffness.
Click to expand...


You do know that the Panda actions are flat bottomed, right? Just like a M70. It’s far easier to bed a flat bottomed action than a round action like a 700. And a flat bottom action is stiffer than a round action.
 
In the 80's and 90's more likely than not, an off the shelf 700 would outshoot a model 70. I think it is a wash now or maybe slight edge to the model 70.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

V
  • Locked
new rifle m1999
Replies
1
Views
262
Horsemany
H
Garandimal
  • Locked
Winchester M70 Extreme Weather SS or Remington M700 Mountain SS...?
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
6K
C-grunt
C-grunt
P
  • Locked
1964 Remington 700 versus 1950 Winchester Model 70
Replies
13
Views
4K
SwampWolf
S
R
  • Locked
  • Poll
What caliber for model 70?
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
Slamfire
Slamfire
R
  • Locked
Winchester Model 70
Replies
16
Views
3K
jem375
J
Back
Top