Remington 700 vs 788

[rangerruck]

... I knew you couldn't resist, Offhand, but I allready had in my mind your answer. As Krochus has said, extra parts and extra machines, needed extra people to run the machines, inspect the parts, and then do more final hands on inspection and usage of all parts, once put together. I still say that is more labor!!!! Tee hee...

 

[R.W.Dale]

I do know that the 788 had little issues such as less than 100% locking lug engagement.

I'm sure you're correct, but with the exclusion of a savage or other floating bolt head rifles this is the NORM amongst other turnbolts and not the exception. My last CZ 527 for example was only running about 10% contact on ONE lug.

 

[wyohome]

788's lugs you will usually see that some lugs show more engagement wear than others in the set

I have owned 3 and that has been the case on each of them. They are pretty damn accurate and can be made to look alright.




Yes, I know I have posted this picture before. Sue me.

 

[sig220mw]

Great looking stock on that rifle. Mine still has the plain jane original stock which I had bedded and the barrel floated. The stock is plain but I wouldn't call it ugly. It was very accurate when I got it used. It got even more accurate with a trigger job. Wish I had one in 22-250.

 

[wyohome]

Wish I had one in 22-250.

I wish I could find one for my wife in .243 or .308. She shot her first deer with this one last fall and has kind of taken ownership.

 

[SwampWolf]

Great looking stock on that rifle. Mine still has the plain jane original stock which I had bedded and the barrel floated. The stock is plain but I wouldn't call it ugly.

With the caveat "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" in mind, your "plain" looking stock is a lot nicer looking than any stock with an ugly "roll-over" cheek piece in my estimation.

Reloaders have always had reservations about bolt-action rifles with rear-locking lugs-from the pricey Schultz and Larsen to the inexpensive Remington Model 788: Rear locking lugs allow cases to stretch inordinately. How much this matters to the individual reloader is a matter of how long the longevity of the brass counts. To me, at least, not so much.

 

[Casefull]

wrong. BTW I own both.

 

[Casefull]

BTW I own both.

 

[Kentucky_Rifleman]

This post is not only stupid it is proof that people on the internet will state the most ignorant, just plain wrong information. It is like high school was. If you can speak your opinions are relevant...wrong. BTW I own both.

Wow. Okay. I've been enjoying this and several other conversations here. I thought I'd been learning quite a lot. Where is the stupid part?

KR

 

[paducahrider]

Howdy!
I'm probably not gonna say anything that some 788 lover hasn't said before, but, The 788 had several innovations that made it not only different than, but, better than, the 700.
1. It had multiple lugs, with a total area which(I suspect) exceeded that of the 700.
2. The rear-locking lugs were arranged in an "interrupted thread" configuration, 120 degrees apart, which allowed the bolt to be completely unlocked with only 68 degrees of rotation, and still clear a scope.
3. The rear lugs allowed more reliable feeding, especially with rimmed ammunition, since the cartridges didn't have to cross a lug recess in the reciever.
4. The rear locking generally minimized the length of the bolt stroke, which speeded cycling
5. It had a very quick locktime of 2.36 milliseconds versus 3 milliseconds for a stock model 700.
The main limitation of the 788 was the length of the ammunition box, which didn't allow longer, but very common, cartridges.
The bolt handle was brazed onto the bolt body, but wasn't the only Remington model which had this feature. However, the Remington engineers did not consider the bolt handle to be part of the safety lug system, on the 788, as in some designs.
When it was introduced, it was part of a family of firearms which included .22 caliber models(580s and 590s), which had only six lugs.
The thought process of this design can't be questioned too much, as it did the job it was intended to do, which was to offer upper level performance from an economy level firearm group.
It is an idea that would work again today, and it wouldn't be the first firearm which has been resurrected, more than once, because of good, basic design.
Thanks for your time.

 

[Jim Watson]

Shaggy Dog 788 Story

I bought my .223 788 at a gun show, years after they were discontinued.
The stock had been refinished to a not unpleasing light shade and pretty well checkered.
The bore was dirty but I figured that was due to a lazy seller, what can go wrong with modern non-corrosive ammo, right?
Wrong.
I cleaned the barrel and found it a bit dark. Hard metal fouling from cheap ammo or corrosion from really cheap ammo, I could not tell.
Accuracy was poor.
I cleaned it very thoroughly and found a bulge near the muzzle. Ouch.
The gun show long over and the vendor long gone, of course.
So I had FLG (Friendly Local Gunsmith) cut and crown behind the bulge.
Accuracy improved to the mediocre to disappointing range.

I called Remington.
A new barrel would be $135.
I sent them the barrelled action only so as to not expose my checkered stock to damage or misplacement.
In the fullness of time, it came back and I dropped it into the stock. Or tried to. The guard screws did not line up by about 1/16". I started checking. The serial numbers did not match. They had not replaced my barrel, they had sent me a whole new barrelled action; at least ten years after the model had been discontinued.

So back to FLG. A slightly ovalized guard screw hole (we'd use a pillar now) and a couple globs of glass bedding mix and the rifle was together. Can't really say back together, could I? That got me assembled and shooting. Accuracy is good but not astounding like a friend's .222 or the locally famous dealer's personal .22-250.

 

[Jim Watson]

New 788A

It is an idea that would work again today, and it wouldn't be the first firearm which has been resurrected, more than once, because of good, basic design.

I am sure the CNCs could be programmed to really crank them out at low manufacturing cost these days. You could get better multi-lug engagement and sounder bolt handle attachment. A plastic stock would be expected, not considered cheap. Maybe they could be set up to load from Remington R15 and R25 magazines. Wouldn't THAT be tactical?

 

[X-Rap]

My 22-250 is the only spray painted gun I have. I was able to get a couple new mags for around $25 each and put an ammo carrier with a pouch on the stock so I don't loose track of the loaded mag I keep with the gun.
It shoots as well as any I have and has become my truck gun, I have a newer 7-08 with the shorter barrel but always thought that Rem made a bad choice cutting the barrel length especially on the better varmint rounds.
Neither gun cost over $300 with decent scopes so I'm happy and will buy any I find for that price.