Is Savage poised to take over Remington's

[skinewmexico]

It took me 20 minutes to put my 6.5X47 Lapua barrel on. I've also built a 223AI, a 6.5X55, and a 338-06. I haven't seen a Remington yet where $350 and 20 minutes gets me a match, stainless barrel in whatever caliber I want.

As far at the extreme accuracy market, well, Nesika, Surgeon, and Stolle have pretty much taken that over, I wouldn't call Remington competitive in that game anymore. As far as long distance, stock factory Savages were 3 of the top 5 at the F-Class nationals in F/TR. Not that shooting at 1000 yards is a good test of accuracy or anything.

 

[R.W.Dale]

COME ON! It's not like a synthetic stocked Remington is a stellar example of the finest quality fit and finish envied by riflesmiths worldwide.

 

[aubie515]

Owning quite a few Savages in the past, I can say they build precision rifles. Now their actions on the other hand suck big time. Savage has addressed the "stock issue" and "trigger issue", but the action still sucks. When Savage can offer a smoother action, I might consider buying another one.

I don't have the action complaint on my 5R.

BTW, for those who try to compare prices and using apples to peanuts, should rethink things. I see people trying to compare the Savage 10FP with flimsy factory stock to a 700P, which is silly, IMO. If you compare the Savage McMillan stock to a Remington 700P, that would be a better comparison. The latter would be almost the same price point.

 

[Frog48]

I find it hard to believe that anybody will take over Remington's market share, simply because Remington has a huge brand loyalty following.

With that said, I love my Savage.

 

[jmr40]

When the Remington 700 was introduced Winchester was the king of rifles. Remington found a way to make a very competetive rifle cheaper at about the same time Winchester was changing to their post '64 rifles. Remington knocked them off the top spot. I guess what goes around, comes around.

Maybe I've had bad luck but I've had 3 Savages and the accuracy has been so-so at best. Not ready to give up yet.

 

[dr0]

Winchester really faded. Why? Well price. Over time their rifles became more and more expensive relative to the competitors. Finally they closed the factory.

Now they have reopened a new factory to make Model 70s. They only have about four models and four calibers, so it is a shadow of it's former self. I think Herstal decided the Browning name was just as good for selling guns. It's interesting that the Winchesters are all the "classic" action, three of the four are wood and blued, and are in the basic calibers like .30-06 and .270.

They strike me that they are almost turning the model 70 into the Single Action Army of rifles. Buy it for the heritage. Buy it for the nice wood.

They are about $1000 a piece list price. (And probably won't be discounted a lot for a while.) Strangely many Remingtons are now this price as well, or higher. Maybe history is repeating itself.

 

[Ceemack]

Savage may make inroads into Remington's market share, but I doubt the 700 will be going away any time soon. The 700 still has advantages over the Savage.

First, Savage barrels shoot pretty well but are very prone to copper fouling. I've just learned to live with a certain level of blue-green streaking in my bore; life is just too short to do all the cleaning that thing requires. A lot of shooters who replace the factory tube with an aftermarket barrel don't notice a big increase in accuracy, but have to spend a lot less time cleaning the bore (and believe the change was worth it). 700 barrels, as far as I know, are much smoother.

Sure, I could buy a replacement barrel and all the necessary tools and fix the problem. But that would put my total cost at a little more than the cost of a comparable 700. The other thing to keep in mind is that quite a few shooters don't want to go to the trouble of swapping out a barrel.

Second, my 10FP just doesn't feed all that smoothly. I get too many misfeeds for my taste. It's okay for a take-it-to-the-range rifle, but if I was part of a police or military unit I'd definitely go with a 700. For hunting, I might feel the same way.

The Savage is close, but it's not as good a rifle as the 700--and I'm saying this as a guy who owns a Savage but not a Remington. The Remington was just a little out of my price range when I bought my Savage. If I had it to do over again, and if I had the budget, I'd definitely take the Remington over the Savage.

 

[dr0]

Is the copper fowling you are seeing in a stainless or cromo barrel? It would seem unlikely BOTH variations would have that problem. I guess most accuracy shooters prefer stainless.

 

[eliphalet]

Next few years are gonna be interesting in the rifle arena, to many players or so it seems, it will be interesting to see if everyone is going to make it. Remington has gone downhill since Dupont sold the company and Savage has improved a lot lately. Remington now has new owners maybe things will change for the better, Savage is continuing to do a good job since their big shakeup a few years back.
BTW, Have any of you looked at the new Savage model 25?

 

[PPGMD]

Savage is right fully taking up some of Remington's market share, they have sat on their rear ends for a very long time.

But I highly doubt that Savage will take over they will get some market share, but Remington's have much much more after market support, that keeps it's market supported. You have people that Savagify (barrel nut), AIing (stock and new action), and Sakoing (extractor) their Remmys.

 

[mule157]

i like both and each have there own markets.... by the way price doesnt matter by the time i am finished with my savage project, it will have cost more than my last rem i bought.

 

[cmb3366]

Why put that much trouble into maching on a 700 action what the aftermarket choices are vastly superior in every way/ if that kind of accuracy is your goal neither Savage or Remington is going to serve your needs with a factory action.

BUT other than the bolt head (which is debatable) if you desire you can do away with the barrel nut system and turn a shoulder on the bbl. There's no law saying you have to keep the barrel nut.


Quote:
The Savage Barrel Nut--Advantages
Many gun builders will re-barrel a Savage without the barrel lock nut, by milling a shoulder on the barrel and mounting the barrel Remington-style. The only advantage to this is that it will let you fit a heavy-contour barrel with a diameter that is larger than the nut. The nut has several advantages, however. First the nut makes it much easier for the gun's owner to set headspace and switch barrels. Second, the barrel lock-nut provides a more solid thread joint and controls harmonics in a positive manner. I truly believe the barrel nut can enhance accuracy. In fact, I've made Remingtons shoot better by simply cutting back the shoulder and adding a nut.

read more here!
http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek040.html

So again what does a Remington 700 do better?

______________________________________________________________________________________



With the custom actions available today, it makes more economic sence to buy a BAT or Stiller predator than it does to have a 700 completly gone through, particularly if you dont allready have a doner 700. But the fact remains the 700 CAN be brought up to even BR snuff, and it can win, and set records. The guy that allready owns a 700, and has outgrown it, can throw $600 at the action (bushed bolt, bushed fireing pin, Aluminum striker assembly, rebore raceways, square the face, square the lugs, square lug seats, clean or rethread, surface grind lug, 2oz trigger), a new barrel and some bedding/stock, and get a world class rifle. There is damn good reason NO custom action manufacturer uses a floating bolthead, its a self-limiting design. There's good reason benchresters who utilize switch barrel setups dont rely on barrel nuts. You can only take a Savage 110 so far, the sky's the limit with the 700 (not that it makes much $$$ sence anymore). If you've already got a well done, trued 700, there's no need to go custom, there's nothing to be gained.

 

[Detritus]

One thing I've heard in defense of the Remington is that it is a little sturdier.

I'm sorry I don't recall the place where I saw this discussed, but the point that was made was that the Remington had fewer small parts that were prone to failure. I believe the person saying this had seen a larger number of Savage failures in the course of long multi-day training at someplace like Gunsight or Thunder Ranch. Esentially this is heresay.

Do those of you with both credit this claim at all?

I beleive i know the thread/post you're thinking of. see if this sounds familiar

Group fo LE Sniper types going through a course of somesort to improve their skills. keep haing break downs or otherwise trouble with their LE model Savages.

later in the same thread it is revealed that the Officers in question had recently been forced by Dept. budget decision to switch to using the savages instead of SAKO TRG22s or similar european "uber-rifles" (thread i saw it wasn't rem700s).
the officers want their Uber-guns back and are actively TRYING to break the savages so they can say "see these are junk give us our old toys back!! "
old military saying comes to mind, "given enough time and motivation you can destroy a bowling ball with a feather"

as has been mentioned, in not so many words, mechanically the savage has one remaining glaring fault, the bolt timing is HORRID!! now a Savage centerfire will NEVER be a slick as a remmy in the way of... not sure of the term here, "the front to back movement within the action" the 10/110 series action just isn't designed to allow minimizing the play between bolt and receiver.

what CAN be fixed is the "timing" of the bolt, which effects the stiffness of cocking the action, ie lifting the bolt handle. savage simply puts no more work into this aspect of the gun that it takes to make the action functional. also the interior design of the bolt makes corecting the timing a PITA, and i think the only 'smith currently doing it on a regular basis (or possibly at all) is Fred moreo of Sharpshooter supply.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Very interesting indeed. Thus so far nobody has manage to come up with one thing a Rem700 does better than the Savage 10-110 action. So far the only "advantages" listed have been things that can also be done to the savage action.

 

[mule157]

although i can buy a benchrest stock for my remington off the shelf lol.

 

[R.W.Dale]

although i can buy a benchrest stock for my remington off the shelf lol.

You could for the Savage as well if you hadn't ordered a three screw action!

But you know as well as I do that your LRPV will be way cooler when finished. Especially when you order a 30br barrel for it.


NOW GET TO WORK loser

 

[Detritus]

You could for the Savage as well if you hadn't ordered a three screw action!

doesn't the LRPV and the other three screw single shot types use the same spacing as the three-screw 10ML (muzzle Loader) actions? I know Richard's Microfit will make a laminate stock fo that... in fact there was a savage "three-screw Muzzle Loader" stock listed in the "Bargain list" over at the richard's sight earlier this week.

 

[SpeedAKL]

Savage builds a solid gun for the money. I've been looking for a nice, solid rifle to play with. The Remington 700 is a nice gun, lots of configuration/caliber choices and good build quality. The Savages don't have quite the build quality but undercut the Remmy in price and are apparently just as accurate. I like the adjustable trigger, too. Remington's lower-end guns, the 710 and 770, really didn't impress me, felt really cheap.

Given my expected financial state tho I'll probly just save up over the summer and spring for a 10FP or 700P since I'll mostly be using the gun for target shooting and hopefully trying some longer-distance stuff.

I like what Savage is doing with their products. Quality seems to keep getting better, and they are not afraid to innovate. Furthermore, there's no doubt that they make very accurate guns. All in all, they represent good buys.

 

[dak0ta]

Isn't the Savage Model 14/114 a really good deluxe rifle that rivals the Rem. 700's?

 

[Lazuris]

Now that Remington and Marlin are both owned by Cerberus Capital Management, the same company that bought out Chrysler last year, I have my resverations about the future of the company. Now don't get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Remington as well as private equity. However, the number one reason that companies like Cerberus buy companies is to make money. Now its important that all companies want to make money, but private equity tends to want a quick return on capital in order to satisify its debt covenants. Now that there is a global credit crunch companies like Cerberus are in a tight financial spot where they are having a hard time keeping the cash machine going. That tends to force companies owned by private equity to make decisions not based on what's best for the brand but whats best for the parent company. That said, who gives a s.h.!.t what somebody says about another mans gun. If he likes it and can shoot it well, who gives a damn. Contrary to popular belief, the shooter makes the shot not the gun.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

LRPV in Bencrest Stocks? You can get 'em. Here's mine in long range benchrest style stock.

I have both Remmys and Savages, especially like heavy barrel varminters. I sunk a fortune in an XR-100, and about half into the Savage shown. The Savage shot better initially, and even better now.

The one shown is now 6mm BR Norma (was .223 Rem), on a right-bolt left port LRPV action, in a LRBR stock, floated, pillared, has a rifle-basix trigger (4 Oz), 26" PacNor 3 grove 1-8". Scope is just a Weaver T36.

I'll happily shoot against any Remington that was also 'Bubba-ed' by it's owner in a garage.

My XR100 was a disappointment, and I had almost as much in the scope as I did in this Savage. I'll have to see how it does trued, I have a Shilen barrel to replace original Remmy barrel. The remington is pretty, jeweled bolt, smooth action...but I couldn't find any load the Remington liked that shot much under MOA. It had a mile of freebore in it. Bedded it, not much better. The 40X trigger was 'just OK'...not as good as the Rifle Basix on the Savage...but neither are Jewels. Wearing the original barrel and stock, the Savage outshot the Remington pretty handily.

So, IME, based on Remmy's varminter vs. Savages Varminter...I'd rather have the Savage to shoot. The heavy barrel Savages can shoot. I also have a Savage 114 in .270 that outshoots my BDL.

I can also swap the bolt heads and barrels, headspacing and all, in 20-25 min.

The Remington seems to need a barrel more than the savage...kind of the opposite of the inital thoughts/posts. I'll say this, the XR100 barrel was as smooth as glass and didn't copper foul. The original .223 LRPV barrel copper fouled for may 150-200 rounds, the stopped. The LRPV, in the original barrel (.223 Rem) shot groups about half the size of the XR100 (.22-250), both shooting Bergers and MatchKings.

One note: If I was Remington, I'd worry about CZ. I've a 550, and a 527 (and a 452), that all shoot very well, have great triggers, and have more of that Remington fit and finish than the savages. My experience with Remington was pretty much MOA or larger, nothing impressive. (But I've seen some that shot better.)

 

[skinewmexico]

I think Stockade is making 3 screw benchrest stocks.

 

[YodaVader]

Very interesting indeed. Thus so far nobody has manage to come up with one thing a Rem700 does better than the Savage 10-110 action.

It appears the Savage crowd believes ALL Savages will outshoot ANY and ALL Remington 700s. When comparing complete rifles (action/barrel) between my Savage 12BVSS and 700 LTR I rarely can fire more than two groups with the Savage before accuracy degrades. The bore of my Savage is severely fouled after a few groups fired. To spend more time cleaning than shooting at the range is something I don't have to do with my 700. This is one thing my 700 - as a complete rifle - does much better than my Savage. If it were not for the ease of barrel changes I would have already traded off the 12BVSS.

Now I will say the Accu-Trigger is pretty good for an out of the box rifle. And trigger pull quality is a very significant factor when shooting for precision. All else being equal most shooters will perform better with a lighter trigger when trying to shoot groups. In this regard the trigger on my 12BVSS was better - out of the box - than the 700s I have. When an inexperienced shooter is used to a stock 700 at 5 or 6 pounds a 2lb Accu-Trigger will seem like a revelation!

I still had my Accu-Trigger replaced with a Sharp Shooter Suppply trigger which does not have that center "blade". If a Jewell had been available I would have had one installed as I do with my 700s.

It seems the common belief is that Savages are suppose to be unbeatable against anything short of a full blown custom benchrest rifle. My 700LTR is far more consistent in accuracy than my Savage 12BVSS. It seems those who shoot Savages exclusively find this hard to accept. Seeing that I own a Savage , REPEAT - I OWN A SAVAGE , I prefer the 700. When the Lothar Walther barrel is installed on the 12BVSS that may change.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

It appears the Savage crowd believes ALL Savages will outshoot ANY and ALL Remington 700s.

Don't read my post as meaning that. I've seen trued 700(s) set up that shoot well. I'll say, however, that 'out-of-the-box', and just shot...I've seen more Savages that were good shooters. I've seen some trued Remingtons in .222 and 6 PPC that shot lights out, but they were 'smithed for short range benchrest with Hart's and Kreigers. I've seen a LOT of BVSS, VLP, FP Savages that were 1/2 MOA. The 10/110 12/112 series stuff.

When comparing complete rifles (action/barrel) between my Savage 12BVSS and 700 LTR I rarely can fire more than two groups with the Savage before accuracy degrades. The bore of my Savage is severely fouled after a few groups fired. To spend more time cleaning than shooting at the range is something I don't have to do with my 700. This is one thing my 700 - as a complete rifle - does much better than my Savage.

When I got the LRPV and first shot it, I had exactly the same issue. It took about four boxes of reloads and a lot of soaking in Sweets and BBS to get the copper out. After about four boxes of reloads (say 200-ish rounds), it no longer copper fouled and shot well. I've seen others that had that same issue, and in most of the cases I know it went away. My .270 Win 114 had a sporter weight chrome moly barrel, which didn't seem to copper foul at all, but it seems to be the exception. I'll bet with copper cleaner getting copper off the rough spots and continued shooting, your BVSS barrel will shoot smooth and it will no longer be an issue.

If it were not for the ease of barrel changes I would have already traded off the 12BVSS.

Being able to do this fits right into what the original poster said. I like that a lot.

When I first bought a Savage (the LRPV), I thought it was the ugliest rifle I've ever seen. But I really like the barrel nut setup now. And I really like the right-bolt left-port action.

One thing I didn't say, is that I'm not a huge fan of the Accutrigger. They're fine, especially for a hunting rifle, but it seemed cheap. I'd prefer the CZ single set triggers (and use the set feature) over the accutrigger or the 40X or standard Remington trigger. There is no Savage Jewel trigger, a drawback. But the Rifle Basix trigger and SSS aftermarket triggers are pretty good.

It seems the common belief is that Savages are suppose to be unbeatable against anything short of a full blown custom benchrest rifle. My 700LTR is far more consistent in accuracy than my Savage 12BVSS. It seems those who shoot Savages exclusively find this hard to accept.

Unbeatable, no, surely not. And they're not as asthetically pleasing as a Cooper either (lol!, maybe the accutrigger is better than the stock Cooper trigger tho!).

But I do think that out of the box, Savages usually outshoot Rem(s) dollar for dollar. It probably boils down to the cost of making a solid-bolt action true, and the headspacing.

I don't think most savage shooter think thing they're unbeatable...but I think most are happy with how they shoot. If your LTR shoots good, great!, I really wish my Remingtons shot well, since I wanted a good shooting Reminton since I was a kid. I just don't know if the general percentage of Remingtons that shot well then is the percentage that shoots well now.

Just my $.02...

 

[skinewmexico]

But I do think that out of the box, Savages usually outshoot Rem(s) dollar for dollar.

I agree with that. Probably diminishes as you get to an equal dollar purchase price. But I just have too much fun swapping barrels. My new-to-me $175 Shilen Supermatch 6.5x47 barrel doesn't copper at all. In the future, I'll try not to act like I've been drinking the kool-aid. Don't know if I can expect that from the Remington guys....