Range Comparo: Remington 700 VSF Left Handed vs. Savage 10FP-HS Precision

[The Annoyed Man]

My son and I went to the range yesterday. I brought my Remington 700 VSF Left-Handed, and my son shot his 10FP HS Precision for the first time, so this was the first chance we had to shoot both rifles back to back. Both rifles are chambered in .308 Winchester.

Cost and Appearances:
Both rifles cost within $32 of one another in price at time of purchase (about a month apart with the Remington going for $831.00, and the Savage for $799.00), so I would not consider price a factor in deciding which rifle to buy. The Remington lends the impression of being a more refined rifle than the Savage, but the Savage still gives the appearance of being well made. I'm not expert enough to know if this should make a difference or not, but either the Savage bolt body is smaller around than the Remington's, or the inside dimensions of the action are larger than the Remington's; because when the Remington is loaded, the bolt body fills the ID of the action, and the rounds in the magazine below the bolt are not visible. On the Savage, on the other hand, there is a lot of room between the OD of the bolt body and the ID of the action, and the rounds in the magazine below are clearly visible through a rather large gap.

Functioning:
A trigger function comparison is a little bit of apples to oranges. My Remington has the original trigger, but I've had my gunsmith lighten it to 3.5 lbs, so it is not OEM. Add about $50.00 to the price of the rifle. Given that, it is a great trigger and I wouldn't change a thing about it from its current configuration. The Savage comes equipped with the AccuTrigger system. The Savage trigger has not been altered from the factory setting, and it took me a little bit of getting used to because of the amount of takeup on the AccuRelease on the front face of the trigger. Once it has been taken up, my seat of the pants estimate of trigger weight is 3-4 lbs. Both triggers break cleanly, with the very slightest edge to the Remington's.

As far as bolt function goes, I found the Savage bolt to be finicky and it did not operate as smoothly as the Remington's - including a disconcerting habit of freezing the trigger if the bolt was locked into battery quickly and firmly. When that happened, and it happened 2 or 3 times in quick succession, no amount of pressure on the trigger would fire the rifle, and I had to cycle the bolt again and close it much more gently to allow the trigger to fire the gun. In contrast, the Remington bolt was smooth and quick and positive feeling. By that time, each rifle had sent about 60 rounds down range, so maybe the Savage bolt was just dirty. But my Remington bolt was dirty too (including the previous 60 rounds it had fired as I had not cleaned it after the last trip to the range), and it never stopped functioning perfectly. The Remington action also appears to eject the cases further and faster than the Savage's, although that might be a liability on the part of the Remington for a sniper's application.

In all fairness to the Savage, we cleaned both rifles thoroughly when we got home, and I then function fired the rifle repeatedly, using snap caps, to try and duplicate the malfunction. At that time, the bolt cycled cleanly and smoothly, and I was not able to cause the trigger to freeze up again; so perhaps it was simply a case of needing breaking in and a good cleaning. Before yesterday's range session, I had already fired 100 rounds of Hornady 168 Grain TAP ammo through the Remington in two separate range sessions, and it was well run in.

Range Conditions and Ammunition:
Since my barrel has a 1:12 twist, I shot the Federal Gold Matchking 168 Grain HPBTs. My son's barrel has a 1:10 twist, so he shot the Federal Gold Matchking 175 Grain HPBTs. Range conditions were hot and humid at 95º at 50% respectively, with no wind to speak of. All shots were made from the bench, and I measured all group sizes from center to center of the two furthest most holes in each group. (I don't know if that's how it is supposed to be done, but that is how I did it.)

Results:
Both of us had to tinker with our scopes a bit before getting started "for points." I had to adjust my zero, and my son had to set his from scratch. Also, both of us had to make some ergonomic adjustments in the form of an added cheek rest to raise the comb on the Remington for me, and to get the hang of the new ergonomics on an all new rifle for my son. But, but once he got it dialed in, he started getting pretty good results on his Savage. He shot 6 sub MOA groups of 3 shots each. His group sizes were (I measured all groups center to center):

• 1/2"
• 1/2"
• 1/2"
• 3/8"
• 1" (2 groups of three shots each into the same piece of target, so it is hard to tell which are the first group and which are the 2nd, but it is safe to say that both groups were about 1/2" each.)

Shooting my Remington 700 VSF, I shot 4 shot strings instead of 3 shot strings. After re-zeroing my scope (I had loosened the rings to move the scope back about 1/2"), my group sizes were:

• 7/8"
• 3/4"
• 3/4"
• 1"
• 3/4"
• 3/4"
• 7/8"
• 7/8" (8 rounds, probably .5" for each 4 shots)

Not to make excuses, but there are some factors that might possibly account for the Remington's slightly larger group sizes:

• I have 54 year old eyes and require glasses just to see the cross hairs clearly. My son, "Ol' Eagle Eye," is 17.
• I have a lower magnification scope - my son's maxes out at 24X and mine at 14X, although I have the advantage in quality of optics. My scope is a Leupold VX-III. My son's is a Bushnell Elite 4200. We both maxed out our scopes on magnification, consequently, he had a "closer up" view of the targets than I did.
• My son was shooting at 100 yards with a 100 yard zero. My scope was set to a 200 yard zero, so I had to estimate a 2" low hold for everything I aimed at.
• Each of my 4 shot groups included a "flyer." My son only shot 3 round groups with no flyers, so his barrel did not get as hot as mine. Had he shot 4 round groups, his group sizes might have gotten larger. I had several groups that, had I discounted the flyer, would have come in at 3/8".

Needless to say, both rifles have proven to be legitimate sub-MOA rifles, limited more by my son's and my shooting abilities and/or handicaps than any inherent accuracy problems within the rifles themselves, and either rifle would make a fine platform for someone as either an entry level long distance shooting rifle, or as a starting point for building a custom tack driver.

Although I have been shooting rifles for a number of years, my experience is limited mostly to one rifle, and old Ruger M77 MkII, in one caliber - .308 Winchester - so, I am by no means an expert. This is the first time I've ever tried to write a gun comparison review, and I've tried to be as thorough as possible, but I hope I wasn't too long-winded. I most especially hope that this review will be useful to anybody considering between purchasing either of these two very capable rifles.

 

[taliv]

your "results" reads just like a real-life version of this http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=279218


nice comparison though, thanks for posting it

 

[The Annoyed Man]

your "results" reads just like a real-life version of this http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=279218


nice comparison though, thanks for posting it

You're welcome.

I should mention that all groups were deliberately aimed at different points on the paper. We were were not using "bullseye" targets. Instead, we were using "sighting in" targets (I don't know what else you call them) - the ones with a large central set of three nested diamonds, and smaller sets of 3 nested diamonds at each of the 4 corners, all set against a background grid of 1" squares, printed in bright red ink (sort of like these ones, but bright red ink on a white background, with no black ink). I added four 1-1/2" orange pasties to mine to give me some additional aiming points. So, although I understand your point about "results," I'm not sure that it applies here. If I had included all of the groups I shot while zeroing the scope and before I got serious, and then overlaid all the groups together, all 60 rounds would have fit well within 2", which is reasonably respectable for 60 rounds fired over a period of about 2-1/2 hours. Perhaps I am wrong.

In my list of "excuses," I put the word "flyers" in quote marks, because I don't consider them to really be flyers. I do consider them to be what that rifle would do with that cartridge on that day, with me behind the rifle; and I included them in the group sizes I listed. In fact, I also pointed out that my son's groups averaged smaller size because he shot few rounds. Again, I'm not an expert shooter - never claimed to be - and someone more experienced than I am might certainly do better than I did. My "excuses" aren't really excuses, because the paper doesn't lie, and the paper doesn't really permit excuses. They were more an attempt to offer possible explanations for why my group sizes were larger than my son's, but I freely confess that perhaps this comparison might be more valid if only one or the other of us had shot both rifles, using both cartridges in each rifle, and shooting 4 round strings in both rifles.

All the same, I hope it gives some useful information to those who are interested.

 

[taliv]

i didn't mean anything by "results". it was what you titled the section of your review i was comparing to the arfcom article. i.e. not "functioning" or "cost..." etc.

I'm not knocking your shooting or gun either. I think if you spend 2 hrs shooting into a 2" circle, that's pretty dang good by any standard. i just thought there was an uncanny similarity in the two.

good luck with the rifles

 

[The Annoyed Man]

A follow-up...

I've been giving some thought as to why the Savage trigger would not function when I test fired the rifle. By the time I fired it, my son had already put 60 rounds through it. We gave both rifles a thorough cleaning when we got back, and then I tried, without success, to replicate the problem. So I am sure that the trigger lockup was at least partially due to fouling from having had 60 rounds shot through it. However, fouling from only 60 rounds should not lock up the trigger on a modern firearm, so here's what I THINK happened...

I believe that the Savage incorporates a system in which the trigger is locked out if the bolt is not 100% into battery. I was closing the bolt down with a rapid and firm motion, and it felt like it was completely locked into battery. However, upon cleaning, we actually discovered a small fragment of loose paper located near the lug recesses just outside the chamber. We don't know where it came from, but it must have been from the box in which the rifle was originally delivered. We had removed the bolt from the rifle several times before it was actually fired, and I had looked down the barrel with a bore light, but neither of us actually spotted this little fragment of paper that was just sitting there. Also, we had dry fired the rifle, using snap caps, several times before actually going to the range, and the problem had never come up.

I suspect that, under certain circumstances (like a buildup of fouling), one of the bolt lugs was capturing this little piece of paper and wedging it into the lug recess as it went into battery. I think that the parts were not completely worn in yet, and this aided in the build up of fouling. The bolt felt like it was in battery, but it was actually kept out of battery by a minuscule amount by the wedging in of that paper fragment. Consequently, the trigger was locked out and could not be actuated.

After thoroughly cleaning the rifle and finding that tiny piece of paper and removing it, I tried mightily to recreate the problem and was unable to do so.

However, after showing my son's rifle to a friend of mine who is an avid hunter and pointing out that weird gap between the bolt body and the receiver which allows one to actually see the top of the magazine and it's ammunition when the bolt is locked into battery, he proclaimed that this was not satisfactory in a hunting rifle which is actually expected to be used in the field. It permits rather large foreign bodies to be introduced into the ammunition delivery system, which in turn can make their way into the action, inducing the kind of difficulty we were having. I am not a hunter myself, but what he said makes some kind of sense to me, and I suspect that this is how that paper fragment made its way into the action.

Perhaps it is the case that the Savage 10FP-HS Precision was designed primarily as a law enforcement tactical rifle, and as such, is most likely to be used in an urban/suburban situation where it is not as likely to be compromised by dirt and debris. Again, I can only speculate, since I don't have any previous experience with Savage rifles, and I don't know if their hunting rifles display that same design "flaw."

In comparison, the Remington 700 action on the VSF was first designed as a hunting system, and under a closed bolt, there is very little room for debris to be introduced into the system thereby fouling up the functioning of the action. In my estimation, that makes the Remington the more desirable rifle if it is to be used outside of the urban/suburban environment, and my guess is that this probably has played a part in the military's continuing use of sniper rifle systems based on the Remington action rather than the Savage action, even though the Savage action is otherwise strong as hell, and would probably a little cheaper to acquire under contract.

I would certainly appreciate anyone's thoughts about this.

 

[rockstar.esq]

I have personally experienced the same problem with my Savage 10FP and have concluded that it has nothing to do with bolt lockup. The accutrigger will decock the bolt if you have it set too low. Crank up the trigger pull weight and that problem goes away. You claim you pull is 3.5lbs and your son's is slightly higher. The pull range on the LE accutrigger is 1.5 - 6lbs as memory serves. That would put him over halfway up the pull weight! I've got mine set at 2lbs 11oz and it won't decock from reasonable handling. If I run the bolt as quickly as I can, it decocks most of the time. I bought mine with the plain jane Savage stock and there was no gaps anywhere. I've since replaced it with a Choate varminter, again no gaps anywhere. It sounds to me as though this is a fit and finish issue with the HS precision stocks exclusively.

 

[The Annoyed Man]

rockstar.esq, we haven't adjusted my son's trigger pull. It is whatever it comes set at from the factory. My seat of the pants estimation was 3-4 lbs, by which I meant that it felt fairly similar in pull weight to my Remington's 3.5 lb. trigger. But I stress that this was just me seat of the pants impression. Yesterday, I had the opportunity to fire a friend's AR-15 with a 2 stage trigger set to break at 1.5 lbs., and the Savage trigger was definitely not as light as that.

Come to think of it, the folks at the store where we bought the Savage showed us a single shot bolt action Savage varminter in .223. They showed me how - and I tried it for myself, so I know it's true - if you cycle the bolt on this rifle too vigorously, it will discharge without pulling the trigger. Slamming the bolt home causes the rifle to fire - which seems to me to be patently unsafe, but they still had it on the shelf for sale as is; and it was a new from the factory, unmodified, rifle.

Here is a picture of the closed bolt in the Remington (top half) compared to the closed bolt in the Savage (bottom half). You'll notice a gap below the bolt body on the Savage, through which a red dummy round is clearly visible:

(...that mung you see all over both rifles is a dirty lens, not dirty rifles...)

As you can see, it's not a problem with stock fit. It is rather a problem (if it really IS a problem) of the way the metal parts were machined and fit together.