51 year old Husqvarna Lightweight VS 3 year old Rem 700 Mnt Rifle

[Float Pilot]

1957 vintage Husqvarna 1600 lightweight Rifle
VERSUS
A 2005 vintage Remington M-700 Titanium Mountain rifle.


57 Husky (400 import model) front sight, side peep sight holes ready, Steel and wood. Double set triggers, Redfield one-piece scope base, 5 shot magazine. With the sling and scope mounted = 7.25 pounds

2005 Remington M-700 Titanium Mountain rifle. Scope mount holes only, no front sight, stainless barrel, titanium action, fiber, kevlar, foam stock.
With sling and the exact same scope it weighs 6.75 pounds

(Both rifle weights with the same scope mounted) I moved it over from the Remington.

PHOTOS: Best load with cold barrel and the dreaded rapid fire hot barrel group. The last photo is the M-700 Shooting 165 grain fail Safes. the same ammo that shot a .75 inch group in the Husky shot a 8 inch group.

Husqvarna: $450 about two weeks ago base cost, plus scope, mounts, recoil pad and some bedding work due to an age split.

Remington: $1,150 back in 2005 base cost, plus scope, mounts, bedding work. Plus the stock broke and now I have to buy another...

Sometimes new and expensive is not better.

 

[skinewmexico]

I don't have the slightest bit of trouble believing that.

 

[Float Pilot]

The rifles involved:

Husky has a 520mm Barrel so around 21 inches.

The Remington a 22 inch barrel.

 

[Wheeler44]

What? You mean they don't make 'em like they used to?

 

[jmr40]

Love the Husqvarna, but I have to wonder what it would cost to produce a rifle of that quality today. I would imagine the cost would be closer, possibly more for the Husqvarna in todays money.

 

[Float Pilot]

Odd thing is that you pay less for a Husky now, compared to many other rifles. I bought this one a couple weeks ago for $450...

I have the trigger set for 1.75 pounds in set mode.

 

[absolute0]

I consider your findings to be an anomaly and badly in need of additional trials to be validated.

Please forward the Husqvarna rifle to me for further testing. With luck, I expect to have initial data compiled and ready for review by the summer of 2066.

I (or my progeny) shall report my findings to the group

 

[Grizfire]

I consider your findings to be an anomaly and badly in need of additional trials to be validated.

Please forward the Husqvarna rifle to me for further testing. With luck, I expect to have initial data compiled and ready for review by the summer of 2066.

I (or my progeny) shall report my findings to the group

yes, but we need a minimum of three (3) analysts to do a full statistical validation. Therefore, when you are done, you should send me the rifle for its final analysis.

 

[absolute0]

Therefore, when you are done, you should send me the rifle for its final analysis.

I can live with that

 

[24kshooter]

The husky would cost 5 times more to produce today than the Remington - a rifle is not like a classic car that needs new parts just due to age - if it was well built 60 years ago it is still going to be nice today if it was taken care of. As far as new and expensive not being as good as old - well how do you feel when your wife reminds you that new and expensive ain't always better when she catches you looking at the blonde in the tight dress - you smile and say yes dear.

 

[avan47]

A few observations:
1. Your rem 700 does not like the load with the 165 gr. bullet, or check your scope mounting screws, and your bedding screws.
2. Light weight rifles are more difficult to shoot accurately. I have a rem 700 Ti in 7mm-08. It kicks hard with 140 gr bullets at about 2700 fps. I bet that 06 kicks a lot harder.
3. What caused the stock to break? Did Remington replace it? They are kind of pricy.
4. What kind of scope do you have on the Rem? Mine is a Leupold 2-7x compact. Rifle with scope, sling and 4 rounds of ammo – 6.25 pounds. I like it a lot.

 

[aspade]

Are tighter sub-minute bench groups really a meaningful measure of better in a flyweight hunting rifle?

 

[Float Pilot]

Are tighter sub-minute bench groups really a meaningful measure of better in a flyweight hunting rifle?

When you can get it, yes. As once said by a great rifle Guru. "The only interesting rifles are accurate rifles."

When trying for a shot at a mountain goat's spine at the base of his skull, at 200 yards, it can make a difference.


I was able to get the Remington to be much more accurate for awhile. It soon will be again.

I used the same scope on both rifles. a 3 x 9 Leupold Euro Model with a 30mm tube. With butler creek caps installed and slings on both rifles.

I am not trying to cut on the Remington, I have a few.

Just thought it was interesting that 50 years ago the folks at Husqvarna could make a lightweight rifle with a wood stock and steel parts.

 

[Skoghund]

The sad thing is that here in Sweden an old Huskvarna rifles is worth next to nothing.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Just thought it was interesting that 50 years ago the folks at Husqvarna could make a lightweight rifle with a wood stock and steel parts.

Yup. Imagine that. Quality parts; no plastic stocks. Still very accurate, lightweight, much more duranble and much MUCH prettier than the modern *mountain rifles*.

Goes to show what I've been saying all along. We are getting gyped as consumers with all the cheapening and dumbing down of guns and their components - plastic trigger guards, plastic stocks, plastic floorplates, shrouded revolver barrels, ad nauseum. Demand better folks - vote with your money and buy quality wood and steel. Such as is still offered by the likes of CZ and a few others.

 

[cracked butt]

The sad thing is that here in Sweden an old Huskvarna rifles is worth next to nothing.

Send them over here then! To me they are sort of the Swedish version of the Pre-64 WIn model 70.
-no plastic magazines
-A nice wood stock that's well finished and checkered- not roll press/stamp checkered.
-carefully bedded actions
-very high qaulity metal finish
-No metal on metal galling/grinding feel while working the bolt (hello Savage)
-Actions/bolts/triggers that are made of forged steel, not thin stamped parts or held together with safety-pin shaped springs (Remington).

 

[Tarvis]

the same ammo that shot a .75 inch group in the Husky shot a 8 inch group

If the barrel is the exact same, you have found something. If the twist or length is different, you have just proved that different barrels will behave differently with the same ammo. If you and everyone else on the planet can not get the Rem inside .75 or .5 moa, it's the rifle, but I have a hard time believing it's only the rifle's fault. You were shooting reloads, right?

Also, the cost for a Remington is based on current material prices, advertising costs, R&D inputs, current taxes and other costs of doing business, warranty work, and mostly the supply and demand curve.

 

[gtmerkley]

A Good Test to be sure.

 

[aspade]

Wasn't trying to say new and expensive is better. I have a lot of respect for Huskys and the other age of craftmanship blue and walnut guns for pretty much the same reasons cracked butt and Premium Sauces already listed.

Accuracy isn't one of them. I don't shoot at a golf ball sized base of the skull at 200 yards, I shoot the shoulder or behind the leg. 2 MOA is fine. Still fine at 300 yards for that matter.

 

[Float Pilot]

You were shooting reloads, right?

I shot lots of various factory loads and hand-loads using virgin brass.

I could not get all the photos to load up.

There are a couple loads that the M-700 Titanium just loves. Those, it will shoot at 1 inch or just under. The loads that it does not like result in huge groups. It is very picky about bullet weight. 150 grains work best with selected 165s in second. It is odd how they are not even close.
And it was much better after I free floated the barrel. The original pressure bumps in the barrel channel made any group less than 4 inches impossible.
It has a 1 in 10 twist. It is a stainless barrel with about 500 rounds through it.

*** It may have been a problem with a flawed stock. I am in the process of obtaining a replacement stock from the fine folks at Remington. My cousin at Browning/Winchesetr said they also had problems with a certain runs of stocks which were made by the same vendor.*****

The Husqvarna on the other hand, consistantly shoots almost any factory load or hand-load at 0.75 to 1.1 inches. 150s, 165s and 180s all about the same. It has a 1 in 9.5 twist.
It has a Swedish steel barrel with 51 years of shooting through it.

I will be trying some 190, 200 and 220 grain boat-tails this week end along with some 180 grain round noses.