Help me choose between a Savage or Remington

[Avenger29]

Allright, I have decided to get a bolt-action rifle for Christmas (parents won't let me have an "assault rifle", but are ok with a "hunting rifle")...This ain't going to be a hunting rifle. I don't even hunt. I wish I could afford an uber-tacticool sniper rifle, but it ain't gonna happen. I would like a rifle that I can upgrade into a target rifle later.

Anyway, I want one in .30-06. I have been looking at either a Savage or Rem. 700ADL, and right now, Savage is winning out b/c of the Accutrigger and inherent accuracy that Savages seem to possess. For the record, I have not shot either of these rifles, but I have handled examples from each manufactorer. I feel that they would probably feel the same shooting...

I want a rifle with a floorplate or detachable box magazine, but I don't want to shell out a whole lot of money. I also realise that I can convert the Rem. to a box magazine or hinged floorplate if I so decide. The Savages have been around $420, witht the Rem. 700ADL at $308. I also want iron sights, too. Just a personal preference. Synthetic stocks are fine with me. I don't care for so much as looks, etc, as long as I get a good, accurate, reliable, and strong rifle.

I have researched as much on hear about the two rifles and manufactorers, but I can't reach a clear decision.

Mainly, I want to know which action is stronger. That would help some. If the Rem. action is stronger, I would probably get it without hesitation.

Oh, yeah, don't suggest used rifles. I am weary of a used rifle, and I will look, but I would much prefer new, sub $450 price range.

 

[Sniper4Life]

Go with the savage. Go to savagearms.com and order a catolog free it will come in about a week or two. My savage 12fv for $445 will shoot better than anything I have shot, but it doesnt have the box mag, or floorplate and with a 26'' heavy barrel no iron sights. You did not mention if you wanted wood or synthetic stock. My experience with remingtons has been bad I had one never sold it and bought another. This is what will happen if you get a remmington :banghead: :banghead:

 

[Avenger29]

Stock don't matter. Whichever is cheaper. I think I will get the Savage- I have not had much faith in Remington lately. I am looking at the savage Hunter 111F from Walmart right now...

I don't want this rifle to turn into another Ruger 10/22 for me. I have not been quite satisfied with the one I got- wish I had done some more research.

Please, more opinions! I especially want to hear on the reliability and strengh issues.

 

[Ash]

Oddly enough, I sold one of my Savages because it was TOO accurate. Not really, but I had a Savage 110FP in .308 with bull barrel. My best group measured 13/32's inch at 100 yards, 5 shot group, using PMP ammo and mounting Tasco World Class glass. It was in a standard Savage synthetic stock and was pre-accutrigger (but adjustable trigger all the same). The bull-barrel was very heavy, though, and for hunting my 111 in .270 with Burris FFII, or my older Stevens 110E in .243 with Redfield Widefield, both of which were around MOA accuracy, and they fit the bill just fine while being much lighter. That 110FP cost me $400 at the time. It was the cheaper alternative to the Remington, but I could not imagine the Remington beating it. Indeed, while the 700 is a fine rifle, I can't see a reason for buying the Remington over the Savage when consistently, the Remington is more expensive. You have to have something better than name, and personally, having Remington stamped on my rifle isn't worth $100 alone.

That said, the Remington 700 is most certainly a fine rifle and you would not go wrong buying it. For me, I prefer the Savage safety, the position of the bolt handle, and the ability to rebarrel yourself (My 111C started life as a 30-06, but I rebarrelled it at home to .270, with only a barrel nut wrench and a go-gauge). While not elegant, the barrel nut makes the Savage more user-friendly and is probably the secreat to consistent accuracy (and makes it cheaper to make). Also, the Savage has the same "three rings of steel" that the Remington has, but also has a better system to control gas should the case head fail or primer burst.

There are others, legions of others, who prefer the Remington. In my opinion, the only way you can go wrong with a Remington is to get a 710, which costs the same as the Savage but is the Yugo of the hunting rifle world (the Mossberg 100ATR is better).

Ash

 

[Jackal]

I have personally banned Remington rifles from my home because of a very bad experience with the 710. Any company that will put thier name on such a lump of crap isn't worth giving my hard earned money too.

 

[ECVMatt]

I am going to vote for the Remington

They just seem to hold up better in hard use situations. I have used Remingtons in very hard use situations and have never seen one fail mechanically. If it is only for the range, then I am sure a Savage would be fine. I would also recomend getting a .243 if this is your first rifle. The 06 kicks a bit and while it is not that bad, it is still tough for beginner. The .243 is very accurate, has little recoil, and will easily take most deer and pigs.

Hope this helps.

Matt

 

[Davo]

I shot my first Savage today for the first time. .75 MOA at 100yds with cheapie federal hunting ammo (3 shot group).
Save the money youd spend over the savage and put it into better rings and glass...you will NEVER regret this.
You dont have to worry about a trigger upgrade with the savage, and its actually pretty straight forward to switch barrels in these guns. With a short action you could have a .308 and a .223 in the same gun, or a '06 and a 338 WSM in the same gun.
Im happy with Savage, Remington has done NOTHING to maintain any of the reputation it had at one time.

 

[Avenger29]

The Savage is winning by a wide margin, especially with the same strength as the Rem. 700 and the better gas containment as Ash said. Plus the barrel nut system. I like that, similar to the easy change V-block that the 10/22 uses. It will be easier to put a bull barrel on later.

I agree, the 710 is a worthless POS that should never have been developed. I pitty those that purchased one.

This is not my first rifle. I have a .30-30 that I love very much. I don't mind recoil, and I can always put on a pad. I want a .30-06, so that ain't changing.

 

[erict]

I don't think you could go wrong with either. I have a 700bdl in 30.06 and 2 Savages (a 12 in .270 and 110 Tac. in .223).

I use the bdl for hunting and it's never had any problems at all. It feels much more smooth and refined than the Savages but I like Savage's accu-trigger better.

The Savages have never failed me either and are much nicer for upgrading due to their lower intitial cost and interchangeability. Both are VERY accurate out of the box but I'd give the edge to Savage because of the trigger.

With all of that said; I'd get the Savage and swap the stock, get some decent glass on it, and shoot the snot out of it.

 

[Avenger29]

get the Savage and swap the stock, get some decent glass on it, and shoot the snot out of it.

I think that is what I am going to do. Gonna go research optics now...

 

[YodaVader]

I finally ended up with both! A Rem 700 LTR 20" in .223 tactical style rifle and a Savage 12BVSS varminter also in .223. I have no plans to part with either. The LTR thus far has been the most accurate rifle I have ever owned. The Savage is still no slouch and with more time with the rifle things will only get better.

The triggers on both rifles were replaced but in all fairness to the Savage the stock trigger was pretty good but the Sharp Shooters Supply is even better. But for the majority of shooters the AccuTrigger will be all they will ever need. The 700 has a Jewell unit. The stock 700 trigger can be adjusted but I wanted a benchrest grade trigger.

The Savage is a great value. The bore is not as smooth as the 700's , fouls much sooner. But for a stainless , laminated stock and out of the box 2.25lb trigger I have no complaints. Like mentioned easy barrel changes is a great Savage advantage - I may do this some day.

On the sporter type rifles I am not sure which I would go with.

 

[Eightball]

I have personally banned Remington rifles from my home because of a very bad experience with the 710.

The 710 is one of the worst rifles ever. Period. I hate selling them to people at my job, but if they insist, then the "customer is always right" <cringe>

Other than the 710, the Remington is a better offer. I have not been impressed by Savage's QC or workmanship on any of the rifles I've sold, and I've sold about.....30 or so in the last year. Sold close to 80-ish 700s. The Remington has a better bolt design when it gets into the detail stripping (various reasons, I don't feel like typing them out at 3 AM). You can really turn the Remington into a tack-driving machine, though--you just need to be willing to sink some money into it, but the options are near-endless.

Though, regardless, picking up good optics makes the rifle. If you're planning on keeping this thing, my advice for glass is a Leupold VX-1 (not the Rifleman)--they run about $150 IIRC. Very clear, very nice optics.

Just my .02. Whatever you buy, POST PICS

 

[Sniper4Life]

If you can find a good FFL dealer he could probably get your gun for less. Wal-mart isnt my favorite place to buy guns: the flashing is still on the stock, packing grease is still there most of the time, and general low quality. A good example is wal-mart and my FFL had a 17hmr that I liked for the same price but my FFL got me the gun with a gold trigger for the same price as wal-mart.

 

[KINGMAX]

REMINGTON 700 ADL

My choice is a Remington 700 ADL in a .270. Just one man's opinion.

 

[MCgunner]

I have both. I like both. However, I like my Remingtons better than my Savage. Savages are made to be inexpensive. They use a barrel nut system rather than tread the barrel which keeps costs down, but is butt ugly. They use a multi-piece cheaper to produce bolt, which is neither here nor there because it don't deter from function. The new ones have better triggers, I understand, than my old one. That's an improvement, though I tuned my old one to about 3 crisp lbs which is what I like in a rifle trigger. It matches the tuning of my Remingtons. All three gun's triggers break identical at 3 lbs like glass.

The Savage is a GREAT rifle for the money. If money's a problem, go with a Savage. If you want a more refined rifle, a smoother bolt and beautiful flowing lines and looks, great finish, go with a Remington. It's just a more refined gun.

My 110 Savage in 7mm Remington Magnum is picky, picky, picky about ammo, bullets actually. My best handloads in the gun shoot about 1MOA. I've free floated the barrel to get it more consistent as it was stringing vertically. It now makes nice little 1" round groups at 100 yards. My M7 Remington will shoot 1" groups with all sorts of different loads, more consistently accurate. I think that's partially due to caliber, though. .308 is just a great, consistently accurate little short action caliber. The gun is absolutely eye candy to my eye, though. The Savage sort of hurts me to look at it, LOL. But, beauty is as beauty does and I can't knock the Savage for function. The Remington just does it a little better. My old M722 is a 3/4MOA gun in .257 Roberts. It is a really nice old gun, too.

My absolute favorite rifle (and all I do is hunt with 'em, care absolutely NOTHING for tacticool) is my M7 stainless Remington, though. It's so short, handy in a stand or blind, light to carry, and laser accurate and hits with authority in .308 Winchester caliber. I just love that thing. I topped it with a Weaver 2x10x40 scope which is a really nice scope for the money, better scope than a Leupold VariX 2 IMHO and for less money. I have a Weatherby Supreme 3x9x44 on the Savage which is an awesome scope if a little heavy.

Another thing I don't care for in Savage is their use of one platform for everything, saves money. For their short action calibers, they just shim the bolt so it has a shorter throw, use the same friggin' action, just limited travel of the bolt. The little M7 is a true short action and for short action calibers, Remington uses a different action all together, shorter, than for their .30-06 length actions. That little model 7 is a scaled down rifle, could call it a carbine, and it only weighs a little over 6 lbs sans scope. That M110 is heavy, bulky, long, a PITA in a stand or box blind and heavy to carry all day. For its caliber, 7mm Magnum, that weight is a good thing, but I wouldn't want it in .308. Their .308 is the same rifle with a couple inches lopped off the barrel length.

The one thing I like about the Savage design over the Remington is the extractor design. It uses a spring loaded claw. The Remington uses a round spring thing inside a recessed bolt face and it's a bit of a weak point in the design theoretically, but it works. I don't have problems with my rifles. The only time I've had a problem with extraction was when I case sized some 7x57 Mauser brass to .257 Roberts for my M722. I think the 7mm brass had a thicker case head/rim because it didn't extract these cases 100 percent. With .257 Winchester +P brass it's 100 percent, so it was the case at fault. I think the Savage system would have handled the thicker rim size, though. I've never fired .257 brass in that Remington and had it fail to extract, though, so I can't call that a failure, though it was POing me at the time until I figured out what the problem was. LOL

My M7

 

[Ash]

"Another thing I don't care for in Savage is their use of one platform for everything, saves money. For their short action calibers, they just shim the bolt so it has a shorter throw, use the same friggin' action, just limited travel of the bolt. The little M7 is a true short action and for short action calibers, Remington uses a different action all together, shorter, than for their .30-06 length actions."

That isn't true. Savage 110's traditionally came in long and short actions. Today, they have the 110 long action and the 10 short action. My Savage 110 in .243 (actually a Stevens) has a short action, shorter at any rate than my Savage 111C in .270. The receivers on the Savage and Remington are virtually the same. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though, as I consider my 110C in a skip-line checkered walnut stock a thing of beauty.

Ash

 

[MCgunner]

That isn't true. Savage 110's traditionally came in long and short actions. Today, they have the 110 long action and the 10 short action. My Savage 110 in .243 (actually a Stevens) has a short action, shorter at any rate than my Savage 111C in .270. The receivers on the Savage and Remington are virtually the same. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though, as I consider my 110C in a skip-line checkered walnut stock a thing of beauty.

Then, at least they must have addressed that. When I bought mine, if you got a short action caliber, it was a long action with a shim to shorten bolt travel. Actually, that gas shield behind the locking lugs was bigger/thicker which restricted the travel. I'm glad they've addressed that. Bought my rifle about 15 - 20 years ago. They were just coming out of bankruptcy and couldn't afford frivolities. The gun was an incredible bargain, though. I think I gave about $200 for it dealer, had a FFL at the time. It offered, even then, a lot of accuracy for the dollar and is as effective as any platform once the trigger is pulled. I hope they've gotten a little better in their bluing, too. My 110's bluing is a bit of a joke, very thin and prone to rust if you let it. I don't let it. I got that rifle really cheap and was specifically wanting a belted magnum, so the short action thing didn't matter to my purchase. I'd have paid a little more for stainless, but I got it a few years before Savage offered the 116.

The old triggers weren't bad, just set hard with some creep out of the box and could only be adjusted down to about 3 lbs. They've addressed that weakness, too, with the new triggers. I still think they're ugly, though. I put a Ramline stock on mine, an improvement over the machine checkered stained birch it came with, but it's that gawd awful barrel nut, I think, that really puts me off. But, functionally, the gun shoots just fine so I just ignore the barrel nut.

I dont' know if they actions have gotten any smoother, either. Mine feels like the bolt is riding on sand paper where my Remingtons feel like they're gliding on ball bearings.

 

[SUBMOAS]

Savage

Savage......

 

[Avenger29]

Thats a nice rifle, MCgunner. I just don't really care for stainless, myself though. I am going to look each a bit closer, though. There are not really many dealers in my area, and wal-mart pretty much has the lowest prices. There are 3 dealers in my hometown, and two of them are overpriced. One has a fair prices, but does not have a huge inventory, and I want to see the rifle before I purchase it. I might buy it from him, though. I know that he will probably point me to a Savage because he builds tactical rifles from Savages for the local PD, I think...
Yes, I will post pics of her in all her glory when I bring her home, although I do not know if I am going to hold off until right after deer season to maybe see if I can get one on clearance...

How about some more reports of the production quality of each rifle?

 

[TA_Raider]

I would go with Remington. I have both, Remington 700 ADL in .270 and Savage 110 in 7mm Rem Magnum. You said that you wanted iron sights and the savage did not have them but Remington did. The one thing that I noticed between the two is that the Remington bolt is much smoother than the Savage. Also the bolt is looser in the Savage than the Remington. I went to the range today and the one thing I was looking for between the two of them were accuracy. The Savage came with a Simmons scope and I only had iron sights so it was not too easy to discern because they are not the same sights. but as I was looking I noticed that they both shot around the same, maybe the Remington had tighter groupings, but was very close. As far as the accutrigger, they are nice. Do research on the Remington triggers. They are good triggers, but the only thing is that because of liability issues, they made the trigger pull heavy but can easily be changed to a lighter pull.


The one thing I can tell you is do your research. Both the Savage and Remington have their ups and downs but you wouldn't be sad with either purchase. I couldnt find my camera so here is an older ( week or so) but not detailed picture of my Remington 700 ADL.

 

[rangerruck]

i would think that , if the savage is a closed floor plate, then that is stronger. a detachable box mag type has to have more flex.

 

[Avenger29]

The Savage I am looking at has iron sights and appears to have a blind magazine. Note that I have not gone and actually looked at a Savage in person yet- this is just from internet pictures. The particular model I am looking at is a Savage Hunter 111F at the walmart site.

TA_Raider, your 700ADL is the model I was looking at at the gunstore.

Still doing research on this, I am not in a hurry to purchase because I want to be extremely happy with my choice...

 

[highlander 5]

there's a magazine called "Gun Test" that BUYS various rifles,handguns and shotgun and then side by side and to a fault Savage rifle out shoot there bretheren. I own 2 Remingtons 223 and 308 and both shoot well but if you can get a rifle that shoots just as well for less money go for it use the difference to buy a better scope and /or more ammo.
I also think that Savage rifles are ugly but beauty is in the eye of the beholder

 

[TA_Raider]

Have you checked out Browning A-bolts? If you go the extra mile ( a hundred bucks conservatively ) you would be able to find one at that price. They sell on gunbroker $400 - $600. They are even better than 700 ADLs and Savages.

 

[YodaVader]

Savages are ugly is a commonly heard theme - probably due to the fact the budget models with the flimsy plastic stock are the versions most likely to be encountered. About the only aesthetic feature which bothered me a little on my Savage 12BVSS was the finish on the large bolt handle , looked as if it was cast in someone's garage , but a polishing session with Mother's gave it a real nice finish!

I happen to like the look of my .223 Savage 12BVSS which utilizes the laminated stock. For the price ($599) I could not get any .223 Model 700 with the same features like stainless barreled action , 2.25lb out of the box trigger and 1 in 9" barrel twist.

I also have a Remington 700 LTR in .223 mentioned in my first post. It does have a hinged mag floor plate mentioned above as compared to the Savage's smooth bottom stock with no mag opening. The Savage still has the large cutout on the bottom of the action. I don't really see where flex will be a problem with either rifle or how the Savage has any advantage by not having a mag floor plate except for cost. Regardles , either rifle should be engineered with strength to spare.

My 700 can be fired for more rounds without fouling degrading accuracy as compared to my 12BVSS. The 700 has also given me better accuracy but the 700 has the advantage of a Jewell trigger , a better scope and probably a more solid bedding platform with the HS stock and aluminum bedding block. The Savage with a Jewell , the same scope and a bedding job or HS stock would probably do just as well. In fact ,I am probably going to take the Savage out for tomorrow's range session.