Entry level Remington

I

idigg

New member
First post here.... I've been hunting with a Remington 788 .243 for the past 20 years, but recently wanted more power... Both for knockdown and bigger game. I've been pretty set on a rem 783 for that... I can get one for 220 no scope after rebate... But just recently I found a 700 adl for 375 with a low end Bushnell 3-9x40. I'm guessing he will take a little less. It still has the tags on it. I've heard mixed reviews on the 783.. Most of the hate seems to be from elitist or uninformed. I don't plan on sniping with it... Id like to have the ability to kill deer at 3-400 yards... 200 being the likely real world max... I've also heard some bad stuff about the new 700s coming off the line... Just trying to get some input from u guys..

I like the idea of a removable mag and that neat trigger on the 783. I also like the price. For 375 I could get the gun and have room to put a decent scope on it.

I like the idea that on the 700 I can essential turn it into what I want. Id really like to switch to a wood stock down the road, so in that process I suppose I could get a removable clip kit... With a bdl take off stock... But at the same time, I don't want to have to start replacing the entire gun.

Thanks everyone! After I make the decision, I've gotta figure out some reloading stuff. I'm fortunate in that my dad has all the reloading gear for his Remington 7600 30-06!
 
I'm a Winchester guy, but do have a couple M-700s. My son also bought a 783 in 270 Win.

I mounted a scope (Redfield) and we took it too the range and sighted it in at 100. Then, using the same 270 Data I have for my M-70 270 Win and same ammo, we found the 783 was a darn accurate rifle.

I found no fault with it even though I was pushing him toward the Model 70.

I found the trigger on the 783 to be better then any factor 700 trigger I've seen.

Throwing out the fact that I'm a Winchester guy, If I had to make a choice of the M700 and M783 using the prices you gave, I'd go the 783 route.

Long a go I had a 788, and it was extremely accurate for a budget rifle. I found the 783 to be in the same category except the 783 is a better looking rifle and has a much better trigger.
 
By all accounts the 783, as well as all of the budget rifles shoot well. At least when new. My concern is long term durability and value. Less is known about the 783, but the 770 and 710 which preceded it had some issues at times. It doesn't exactly exude confidence in the 783.

The other concern is long term value. A $300 budget gun today might be worthless 20 years from now, they are often referred to as disposable guns. Most likely never worth more than the original cost. A better quality $500-$600 rifle may well sell used for $1,000 twenty years from now. Long term they end up costing less. My 700 purchased new years ago will sell used today for almost 3X what I paid for it new. That said, nothing made by Remington would be at the top of my list at this time.

I have no qualms with someone buying one of the budget guns as long as they understand what they are doing. I own a mix of some nicer rifles as well as a couple of budget Ruger American rifles. They all have their place.
 
I picked up a 783 last yr. I didnt really need it but with the rebate Ive got like $250 in it and figured would make a good loaner/truck gun.
Shoots well. Im pleased. There are already aftermarket barrels out, and Boyds sells wood stocks for them for $99.
Most of the people who knock them have never laid hands on one of them.
The 783 is not even close to the old 710/770 ....its a totally redesigned gun.
 
The 783 is a good rifle. If you plan on buying one and then putting after market stock etc. on it, then you will end up having more in it than you could buy a 700 for.
 
Yeah you can add a stock and double the cost of the 783, you can add a McMillan and triple the cost.

But why, I've found nothing wrong with the factory 783 stock, son and I had it out again yesterday and it shot fine.

Not all of us can afford a $3000-5000 custom hunting rifle. Not all of us can afford a $1000 off the shelf commercial rifle.

Should we stop hunting because in today's economy money's are needed elsewhere to support a family.

Does hunting and shooting sports have to be a rich man's game. Apparently Remington, Ruger, and others don't believe so.

So the created modest priced rifles so just about everyone can enjoy hunting.

And these companies took their knowledge of building accurate rifles and incorporated them into their modest price rifle.

Its like people say it was the Colt SSA or the Win. 73 that won the west. Not quite true. Most of the settlers, cowboys, miners, of the period couldn't afford these guns. If you would investigate you'd see the real gun that won the west was the single shot rifle, more then likely a muzzle loader. The could word off prowling bands of Indians with cast bullets, our hunt critters, and they could load shot for small game and birds.

Chances are they didn't worry about the collector value of those guns, they worried about using them to feed their families.

When I moved to Alaska in '72, the first two years I built and lived in a cabin just north of McKinley park. I had several guns, but in the winter when I was unemployed it was a cheap used Model 24D 22/410 that fed my wife and two small kids.

That gun isn't worth much, but it worth a heck of a lot to me.

Another worthless gun I have is a single shot 16 gage that my grandfather fed his family with during the depression. Its the only gun he had for his part time job working for the sheriffs office transporting prisinors from Perry Co. AR to Little Rock. (also the same gun I killed my first deer with after walking the highway picking up enough pop bottles to get the $.25 I need to buy 3 shells so I could go hunting)

Yes, I believe these modest priced or cheap guns if you want to call them that have their place. Always have and always will.

The Rem 783 is one of these and a very good one for the price.

In the recent past, Alaska Natives on the Bering Sea pretty used guns that they could get ammo from the National Guard, went from (in my time) '06 to 308 and 223s. I my self as Company commander of one of those units would order extra ammo for that purpose. Things have changed since the early 90s, tighter control on military ammo. So you see Mosin's and cheep Mosin ammo showing up in the villages now.

Mosin's also have allowed those of modest means to compete in rifle matches (CMP games) that they wouldn't otherwise be able to compete.

Don't be a shame of sproting a budget rifle. Don't condemn those who use them
 
IMO the biggest criticism of the 783 is the horrible plastic sling studs. When (not if) they break, there is no good way to make a repair short of replacing the stock.

In terms of the function of the rifle itself, I can't imagine noticing a difference between a 783 vs. a 700 from field positions.
 
For me, it would be a no-brainer. Both are new...dollars are (or will be) about the same.
700 hands down. Aftermarket support in terms of triggers, stocks, mounts, etc. will be far greater than the 783. You'll have the ability to accurize and customize to any level if that ever ends up in the cards.

The 700 will hold it's value over time better than the 783.

Both will clearly serve your intended use now. It's what may (or may not) happen down the road. And since it doesn't cost any more to leave that door open, my choice would be the 700 ADL.
 
There's the "accuracy" discussion again.

A finely tuned Remington or Winchester is "accurate" where the muzzle is pointed by distance. (The bullet does not rise out of the muzzle, but straight...The sighting has to account for gravitational pull and speed of the bullet. Your sighting, trigger squeeze, breathing rules apply, given the distance and windage issues.

Then, there's the ammo issue. Just any ammo from the shelf will perform a little differently with the weather...i.e. Dry air and humid air moving. Get the rifle to the range a 100 yards. Find a cluster and adjust TO it on your scope (including adjustment on your aperture (peep) sight. (go dominant eye, straight sight). Left eye dominant should consider left-hand trigger hold -right hand fore-stock.

The accuracy in range and hunting is determined by the first paragraph. Rules are rules.
 
Im a mid end rifle kinda guy...all my rifles are sako, tikka, browning....and 1 remy 700 that i would not trade not even for a Cooper. Its a 700 vls 223...im sure they make it in 308 i think and this think is a surgeon......thats the only remington i can comebt on bc its the only one i own...
 
thanks for all the replies guys. seems to all go along with my instincts... both guns would be perfectly fine for me... but i think the 700 is the right choice for me. i prefer "classic" guns, and at least with that one id be able to get a walnut stock for it and pretend im carrying around an old gun.

now if the guy who is selling the 700 for 375 would just commit to a time to meet....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top