You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Remington 700 or the Howa 1500 for accuracy?
- Thread starter wdallis
- Start date
I have a 700 in .243, it is the most accurate rifle I own and my brother has a Howa in 30-06. I believe the Howa is a close Japanese copy of the Remington 700...they are known to make quality firearms...
If it was me and I KNEW some of my shots were going to be at 300 yds I would choose a 308 or 7mm08 if I wanted a short action rifle ....or a 30-06 or 270 in a long action.
IMO, the 243s light bullets lose momentum at distance. It certainly has and is killing deer at that distance but I would prefer a heavier bullet. Heavier bullets if chosen correctly, will still expand, penetrate better, and give a better chance of a decent blood trail....
If it was me and I KNEW some of my shots were going to be at 300 yds I would choose a 308 or 7mm08 if I wanted a short action rifle ....or a 30-06 or 270 in a long action.
IMO, the 243s light bullets lose momentum at distance. It certainly has and is killing deer at that distance but I would prefer a heavier bullet. Heavier bullets if chosen correctly, will still expand, penetrate better, and give a better chance of a decent blood trail....
precision_shooter
New member
Neither...I know it's not what you asked, but there are better rifles out there than the 2 you mentioned. Buy a Tikka or Savage. Then you won't have to change a thing, not even the trigger.
Edit: The howa is a Weatherby. Howa made or maybe still makes barreled actions for Weatherby.
Edit: The howa is a Weatherby. Howa made or maybe still makes barreled actions for Weatherby.
ndking1126
New member
I've shot one Howa. It was a little more accurate than my one Remington 700. I liked the Howa, that's for sure. I like my Remington, too.
I think realistically both can be expected to be accurate enough for what you want to do. It will just come down to the individual rifle you walk away from the counter with. You may get lucky and get a really accurate one, or it may only be normally accurate regardless of which model you get.
I think realistically both can be expected to be accurate enough for what you want to do. It will just come down to the individual rifle you walk away from the counter with. You may get lucky and get a really accurate one, or it may only be normally accurate regardless of which model you get.
603Country
New member
If I was limited to the OP's two listed rifles, I'd go for the Remington. That's because I could easily find all the replacement parts to make it into the rifle I'd really want. But...The Tikka would be my choice if I could get what I really wanted, or a Sako if I had a bigger budget.
The Howa/Vanguard looks very similar to the 700, but it isn't a copy. Both of those can be accurate, but in 2015 I'd pick something else for out of the box accuracy and reliability.
If you never plan on hunting anything larger than deer a 243 is about perfect. Bullet choice is important though because many 243 bullets are designed for varmint hunting. Choose a heavier 95-105 gr bullet designed for big game and it will do just fine at 300 yards and much farther.
I like to show this clip of a gal dropping an elk in its tracks at almost 700 yards with a 243 when people doubt the 243's capability. Personally I'd not take that shot, but if it worked on elk at almost 700, I'd have no doubts about it working on deer at 1/2 that distance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
If you never plan on hunting anything larger than deer a 243 is about perfect. Bullet choice is important though because many 243 bullets are designed for varmint hunting. Choose a heavier 95-105 gr bullet designed for big game and it will do just fine at 300 yards and much farther.
I like to show this clip of a gal dropping an elk in its tracks at almost 700 yards with a 243 when people doubt the 243's capability. Personally I'd not take that shot, but if it worked on elk at almost 700, I'd have no doubts about it working on deer at 1/2 that distance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
"...The Howa is a Weatherby..." Other way 'round. Howa makes the Vanguard for Weatherby. A 1500 is a Vanguard.
The Howa's trigger is factory set and is not user adjustable. The Rem M700's trigger is user adjustable.
In any case, choosing between the two would be the price and nothing else.
"...many 243 bullets are designed for varmint hunting..." Yep. Pretty much any bullet under 80 is a varmint bullet and is not suitable for deer sized game.
"...at almost 700 yards..." At 700, any .243 is at its extreme distance for energy. Realistically, the .243 is a 300-400 yard cartridge. A 100 grain bullet drops like a brick between 3 and 400 too.
The Howa's trigger is factory set and is not user adjustable. The Rem M700's trigger is user adjustable.
In any case, choosing between the two would be the price and nothing else.
"...many 243 bullets are designed for varmint hunting..." Yep. Pretty much any bullet under 80 is a varmint bullet and is not suitable for deer sized game.
"...at almost 700 yards..." At 700, any .243 is at its extreme distance for energy. Realistically, the .243 is a 300-400 yard cartridge. A 100 grain bullet drops like a brick between 3 and 400 too.
stillquietvoice
New member
take a look at savage 11 lady hunter. nice walnut stock. proportinally designed for women. c
I am a gunsmith and have been for 46 years.
Given only the choice you posted, I'd go Howa before Remington every time.
That statement is based on the number of repairs I have done on them both since the early 70s, on the Remington M721, 722, and 700s and the far fewer number of repairs I have done on the Howa M1500 (also sold by Weatherby and Smith & Wesson)
On Remingtons I have replace about 35 bolt handles that have come off, many broken extractors and a lot of triggers.
On the Howas the triggers used to be "poor but reliable". By that I mean they were creepy and somewhat heavy. But I never saw one break. The new onjes are very decent.
I can't say that for Remintons at all. In fact just in the last 6 months I have replaced nine Remington M7 and M700 triggers.
Howa bolt handles never come loose.
Howa Extractors never break, but if you don't lube them they can rust and stick.
Remington extractors can also rust and they break fairly often. If you look at a Brownells catalog you will see replacement remington extractors sold. That's because there is a large demand for them. You don't see aftermarket extractors sold for many other bolt actions except for some old Mausers and that's because so many are messed up trying to grind them to fit belted magnums and done wrong.
Some of the new MIM castings used by Mossberg and Savage can also break, but at least you can replace them with nothing but the tip of a knife, in the field if need be.
If price is a big factor you really should also look at the Ruger American.
So far I have had zero calls to repair them. None. Zip.
So time will tell, but I am of the opinion that for an inexpensive rifle and value for the buck, the new Ruger may have everyone beat. We'll see.
Given only the choice you posted, I'd go Howa before Remington every time.
That statement is based on the number of repairs I have done on them both since the early 70s, on the Remington M721, 722, and 700s and the far fewer number of repairs I have done on the Howa M1500 (also sold by Weatherby and Smith & Wesson)
On Remingtons I have replace about 35 bolt handles that have come off, many broken extractors and a lot of triggers.
On the Howas the triggers used to be "poor but reliable". By that I mean they were creepy and somewhat heavy. But I never saw one break. The new onjes are very decent.
I can't say that for Remintons at all. In fact just in the last 6 months I have replaced nine Remington M7 and M700 triggers.
Howa bolt handles never come loose.
Howa Extractors never break, but if you don't lube them they can rust and stick.
Remington extractors can also rust and they break fairly often. If you look at a Brownells catalog you will see replacement remington extractors sold. That's because there is a large demand for them. You don't see aftermarket extractors sold for many other bolt actions except for some old Mausers and that's because so many are messed up trying to grind them to fit belted magnums and done wrong.
Some of the new MIM castings used by Mossberg and Savage can also break, but at least you can replace them with nothing but the tip of a knife, in the field if need be.
If price is a big factor you really should also look at the Ruger American.
So far I have had zero calls to repair them. None. Zip.
So time will tell, but I am of the opinion that for an inexpensive rifle and value for the buck, the new Ruger may have everyone beat. We'll see.
Stillhunter
New member
+1 on the Savage Lady Hunter.
But if it were me buying for a woman and at 300yds, you definitely need to consider a 7mm-08.
My wife picked up mine a the range one day and now see calls it her rifle.
It recoils more than the 243,but is still pretty tame.
A lot of women and youth use the7mm-08.
But if you are dead set on a 243,95 or heavier bullets should be a must at 300yds.
My experience with heavy bullets in the 243,they are much more accurate with a 9-1 rate of twist,than the common 10-1.
Ruger American is a 9-1,Lady Hunter 9.25-1, in 243.
But if it were me buying for a woman and at 300yds, you definitely need to consider a 7mm-08.
My wife picked up mine a the range one day and now see calls it her rifle.
It recoils more than the 243,but is still pretty tame.
A lot of women and youth use the7mm-08.
But if you are dead set on a 243,95 or heavier bullets should be a must at 300yds.
My experience with heavy bullets in the 243,they are much more accurate with a 9-1 rate of twist,than the common 10-1.
Ruger American is a 9-1,Lady Hunter 9.25-1, in 243.
Wyosmith, I need some education here...the USMC and US Army adopted the M40/M24 as sniper weapons. The 40X is basically a 700 action.
Obviously have the advantage of armorers for maintenance BUT not while in the bush.
Again, I'm trying to get educated...Why wouldn't the military choose a Howa or some other if the 700 platform was so inferior?
Obviously have the advantage of armorers for maintenance BUT not while in the bush.
Again, I'm trying to get educated...Why wouldn't the military choose a Howa or some other if the 700 platform was so inferior?
JJ45, because of the simplicity of the m700 action. And I wouldn't think that the government would import an action for their sniper builds.
For me, the Howa is heavier than the m700, that may not factor in if she's hunting from a blind, but if she's humping across the land I'd opt for a lighter rifle than either of those two.
Savage has produced a new Light weight Hunter, for around 750.00 I'd take her to a gun shop that has all three and let her pick the one that felt the best, and then I'd also move her up to .270 win.
For me, the Howa is heavier than the m700, that may not factor in if she's hunting from a blind, but if she's humping across the land I'd opt for a lighter rifle than either of those two.
Savage has produced a new Light weight Hunter, for around 750.00 I'd take her to a gun shop that has all three and let her pick the one that felt the best, and then I'd also move her up to .270 win.
Basing a choice of rifle based on repairs is like me choosing a Yugo over a Chevy cuz the local mechanic has never had to repair a yugo but repairs Chevys all the time. Not necessarily good reason. There is many more chevys to break than yugos. And Possible that there aremore Remington's than Howa's around to break. Just my .02 worth
precision_shooter
New member
JJ45, because Remington was the main name in the game back when they adopted a "sniper" platform and because they could supply the numbers required under the contract and at the cheapest price, not because they are the best...
precision shooter Thanks
Gunny Hathcock used a Winchester M70 30-06 and an M40 NATO as well as experimented with others like the M14 and even M2 as sniper weapons.....
At the time the M70 had the big mauser type claw extractor. This had to be more reliable than the tiny extractor on the M40. Of course there is more to reliability than just the extractor. I think I heard/read something supporting your answer that Winchester wouldn't deal on the price.
That's always a consideration but I find it hard to believe that Marine and Army R&D would accept an inferior weapon based on cost alone, there has to be something more to their decision.
In any case my favorite bolt gun is an old Ruger 77, Tang safety, 30-06. Everything I want in a bolt action. It has been going bang for over 20 years without a problem of any kind, the bolt strips easily, it will hold MOA for 3 shots and gets smoother the more I shoot it.
Gunny Hathcock used a Winchester M70 30-06 and an M40 NATO as well as experimented with others like the M14 and even M2 as sniper weapons.....
At the time the M70 had the big mauser type claw extractor. This had to be more reliable than the tiny extractor on the M40. Of course there is more to reliability than just the extractor. I think I heard/read something supporting your answer that Winchester wouldn't deal on the price.
That's always a consideration but I find it hard to believe that Marine and Army R&D would accept an inferior weapon based on cost alone, there has to be something more to their decision.
In any case my favorite bolt gun is an old Ruger 77, Tang safety, 30-06. Everything I want in a bolt action. It has been going bang for over 20 years without a problem of any kind, the bolt strips easily, it will hold MOA for 3 shots and gets smoother the more I shoot it.
JJ45, that is an excellent question and there is a very good answer.
The USMC used the Winchester M70 (Pre-64) until -----------you guessed it, 1964. In 64 Winchester dropped the old action and made the "new push feed M70" and called it the M70, but NO parts on the new rifle will interchange with the real M70. In my opinion the rifle made from 64 until the new controlled feed M-70 came out many years later should never have been called an M-70. It’s not bad at all, but it’s not an M-70 in design. Only in name.
But----the barrels that Winchester were making for the new rifle were not generally as good as what Remington was making, so the M700 was more accurate.
Savage was also very good, but for reasons of production and quite a bit of politics too, Savage was not considered (I wish they had been)
So that left only Remington to provide rifles for the Marines and this all happened in 64-65. What else was happening in 64?
The Vietnam War.
So the USMC needed something and they needed it NOW.
Remington was the only option that they were offered. The DOD and the Navy held the purse strings and made the decisions, not the USMC itself. So the M40 (my old issue rifle) was issued.
But if you look at the current M40-A5 you will see that it is HIGHLY modified.
The boys at Quantico Virginia had to address the extractors; the bolt handles the scope bases, the stocks, the triggers, the bottom metal and even the barrels. In fact the current Marine Corps M-40A5 had ONLY a receiver and bolt body from Remington. Everything else on the rifle is after market.
But when a new weapon is integrated into military systems the weapon is the smallest part of the purchase. The support systems and structures all have to be adapted. So even though Ruger and Savage and the new Winchesters are all WAY better rifles as they come from the factories, the USMC cannot simply just change.
The Marines have the smallest budget of any of the US Armed Forces. The entire support infrastructure has to change if you go to a new weapon and the Marines can't afford that. The Remington 700 has been in the system since 65 and they have to stay with it until there is sufficient money to change. The Armorers at Quantico have integrated improvements in almost every aspect of the weapon in the last 50 years, but the very fact that such improvements were found to be necessary should speak volumes to us all.
All these improvements have addressed failures and weaknesses in the M700 as it comes from Remington. And Remington has not even been gracious enough to sell the USMC actions, but make the Marines buy the whole rifle and then the boys at Quantico strip them and re-build them to USMC current specs.
So when someone says "The Marines use them" as a justification to their belief that the Rem-700 is "the best' it is because they have no knowledge of the facts. We used them then, and my comrades still use them, because we had no other choice. Not because they were "the best". I am not saying they are total failures. But they are absolutely not "the best".
Savage, Winchester and Ruger are all better. So is Howa, CZ, Mossberg, Mauser, Sako. Steyr,and Browning (I do have some reservations about Tikka) As civilians we get what we buy. As a Marine we got what they gave us.
Before Savage went to MIM castings for the extractors you seldom saw one break. In the 60s and 70s they used milled extractors. They are just as accurate as Remington and perhaps a bit better. Their bolt head is floating and they use a collar around the bolt body which is the bolt handle. They NEVER break. Their old trigger was as good as Remingtons and less likely to break or malfunction.
Ruger makes it's bolts with integral handles. They also never break, and in all my years of gunsmithing I have NEVER seen a Ruger bolt fail. The issue triggers are not good enough for use as they come, but that is a small problem to fix. They are as accurate as Remingtons as a rule also.
The "New Pre-64" Winchester is the best today in my opinion. As issued the design need no improvement at all. Put a "Marine proof stock" on it and you have the best "snipers rifle" you can get today in a bolt action. If Winchester were to be asked I'd bet they would even make bottom metal to take 10 round and 20 round detachable mags.
But until the Marines get "wealthier" it's not going to happen.
The USMC used the Winchester M70 (Pre-64) until -----------you guessed it, 1964. In 64 Winchester dropped the old action and made the "new push feed M70" and called it the M70, but NO parts on the new rifle will interchange with the real M70. In my opinion the rifle made from 64 until the new controlled feed M-70 came out many years later should never have been called an M-70. It’s not bad at all, but it’s not an M-70 in design. Only in name.
But----the barrels that Winchester were making for the new rifle were not generally as good as what Remington was making, so the M700 was more accurate.
Savage was also very good, but for reasons of production and quite a bit of politics too, Savage was not considered (I wish they had been)
So that left only Remington to provide rifles for the Marines and this all happened in 64-65. What else was happening in 64?
The Vietnam War.
So the USMC needed something and they needed it NOW.
Remington was the only option that they were offered. The DOD and the Navy held the purse strings and made the decisions, not the USMC itself. So the M40 (my old issue rifle) was issued.
But if you look at the current M40-A5 you will see that it is HIGHLY modified.
The boys at Quantico Virginia had to address the extractors; the bolt handles the scope bases, the stocks, the triggers, the bottom metal and even the barrels. In fact the current Marine Corps M-40A5 had ONLY a receiver and bolt body from Remington. Everything else on the rifle is after market.
But when a new weapon is integrated into military systems the weapon is the smallest part of the purchase. The support systems and structures all have to be adapted. So even though Ruger and Savage and the new Winchesters are all WAY better rifles as they come from the factories, the USMC cannot simply just change.
The Marines have the smallest budget of any of the US Armed Forces. The entire support infrastructure has to change if you go to a new weapon and the Marines can't afford that. The Remington 700 has been in the system since 65 and they have to stay with it until there is sufficient money to change. The Armorers at Quantico have integrated improvements in almost every aspect of the weapon in the last 50 years, but the very fact that such improvements were found to be necessary should speak volumes to us all.
All these improvements have addressed failures and weaknesses in the M700 as it comes from Remington. And Remington has not even been gracious enough to sell the USMC actions, but make the Marines buy the whole rifle and then the boys at Quantico strip them and re-build them to USMC current specs.
So when someone says "The Marines use them" as a justification to their belief that the Rem-700 is "the best' it is because they have no knowledge of the facts. We used them then, and my comrades still use them, because we had no other choice. Not because they were "the best". I am not saying they are total failures. But they are absolutely not "the best".
Savage, Winchester and Ruger are all better. So is Howa, CZ, Mossberg, Mauser, Sako. Steyr,and Browning (I do have some reservations about Tikka) As civilians we get what we buy. As a Marine we got what they gave us.
Before Savage went to MIM castings for the extractors you seldom saw one break. In the 60s and 70s they used milled extractors. They are just as accurate as Remington and perhaps a bit better. Their bolt head is floating and they use a collar around the bolt body which is the bolt handle. They NEVER break. Their old trigger was as good as Remingtons and less likely to break or malfunction.
Ruger makes it's bolts with integral handles. They also never break, and in all my years of gunsmithing I have NEVER seen a Ruger bolt fail. The issue triggers are not good enough for use as they come, but that is a small problem to fix. They are as accurate as Remingtons as a rule also.
The "New Pre-64" Winchester is the best today in my opinion. As issued the design need no improvement at all. Put a "Marine proof stock" on it and you have the best "snipers rifle" you can get today in a bolt action. If Winchester were to be asked I'd bet they would even make bottom metal to take 10 round and 20 round detachable mags.
But until the Marines get "wealthier" it's not going to happen.
Last edited: