remington 770 so far surprised

[James K]

I keep reading about folks who buy a 770 in .30-'06 and right away want to have it rebarrelled in 5.6 Velo Dog and are unhappy because that is not feasible. Why do people buy a rifle and immediately want to change the caliber? Why not buy the caliber they want in the first place?

As to wearing out a barrel, that is very unlikely with a hunting rifle of any type in any caliber. Most of the hunters I know fire maybe 20 rounds a year, if that, so it is going to take several generations to wear out a barrel.

We are likely to see more of that kind of rifle and that kind of design and less of the "made for the ages" rifles of the past. The gilt-edge rifles will still be available for those who want and can afford them. But if a less expensive rifle and a "scope and all" package deal lets more people shoot and hunt, then it is a good idea.

Jim

 

[jimbob86]

As to wearing out a barrel, that is very unlikely with a hunting rifle of any type in any caliber. Most of the hunters I know fire maybe 20 rounds a year, if that, so it is going to take several generations to wear out a barrel.

We are likely to see more of that kind of rifle and that kind of design and less of the "made for the ages" rifles of the past. The gilt-edge rifles will still be available for those who want and can afford them. But if a less expensive rifle and a "scope and all" package deal lets more people shoot and hunt, then it is a good idea.

Jim

More praises for the Age of the Common Man ..... very sad.

 

[L_Killkenny]

I've actually had reports of OK accuracy claims for the 770 but accuracy is just ONE measure of a gun. In every other category the 770's fall flat compared to similar price point firearms.

Most that have been satisfied with the 770's are the less than a box of ammo a year hunters. If you're one of those than a 770 should very well last you a good long time. But if you're putting many rounds down range do yourself a favor and buy a better gun.

 

[Saltydog235]

I'm going to hurt some feelings here but the 770 is a POS and not worth the money you throw at it. I'm just not a real big fan of any of these "throw away" guns. Not saying to go out and buy a $3000+ rifle but for just a little more than what people put into these junk guns they could start getting into a 700 or higher series Savage and end up with 10X the gun with 1000X the aftermarket upgrades and parts.

 

[globemaster3]

Everyone looking for a sub 1" shot group is a dreamer and not a real hunter who puts meat in the freezer for their family.

Ok, I misinterpreted this statement as the bashing of those who don't believe the same as you. Glad we cleared that up.

Personally, if all you have is just shy of $300, and that's ALL you got, I'd rather see you in a 770 than not shooting at all. At least you're shooting!

However, like Saltydog and Killkenny stated, for just a little more, you can get a whole lot more gun that lends itself infinitely better to after-market support.

 

[jmr40]

The Remington 770/710, the Mossberg, Ruger American, and Savage Axis all do exactly what they are designed to do. I've yet to read a post where any of the above rifles have not performed well. They all shoot well enough and function reliably.

But none are designed for shooting enthusiast who like to shoot a lot. They are all meant for the guy who will zero his rifle and make a box of ammo last several hunting seasons. Used that way any will last a lifetime and put meat on the table.

Incidently, none of the others are a bit better or worse than the Remington which seems to get most of the negative comments. All of these guns are designed much the same, with basically the same quality shortcuts. None have any resale value to speak of which means you cannot justify trading up at a later time for a better gun. None are really worth fixing when parts wear out or break. All are the new generation of disposable rifles. As long as buyers understand that when they purchase one of these guns I have no problem with it.

I cannot recommend any of them however. The cost savings between these rifles and one of much better quality will only buy someone 3-4 boxes of cheap ammo. Only about 2 boxes of premium ammo. You will shoot that savings up in a short time and be stuck with a lower quality rifle with little resale value for a long time. Even if you buy a $1000 rifle, most shooters will spend far more on ammo over a lifetime than they spent on the rifle, so skimping on the quality of the rifle is penny wise and pound foolish in my opinion. Even for someone really strapped for cash, there are multiple used guns of much better quality selling for the same or less.

 

[SkillTopsSteel]

absolutely

I agree. Rather see them shooting anything versus nothing. I think what lends to many an argument over quality of rifle when it comes to shooting is derived from the use at which the shooter is speaking. An avid SHOOTER who isnt game hunting but loves to shoot probably is looking for the best possible grouping as this is obviously the most fun and lends itself to a more challenging/fun experience. A HUNTER while still obviously wanting the best shot possible at crunch time, can still drop game easily with a rifle that shoots a 2-3" grouping.

 

[Tom68]

And one other factor to consider, for those who speak of wearing out a barrel: I would guess that most folks who worry about such things are avid shooters who own considerably more than one rifle. Why? mainly for the same reason most of us are here more or less regularly... because we are enthusiasts.

And of course, for those who don't fit into this category...a one-rifle man who sincerely does think of such things: I'm gonna bet that he's already factored that into the equation and is already planning the next Hart, Shilen, or Kreiger that's going onto that $2000 rig.

Like many of the others, I'm just happy seeing folks exercising their right to shoot and hunt. Maybe that 770'll whet their appetite to become enthusiasts as well, and make our pastime even more popular.

 

[Saltydog235]

Everyone looking for a sub 1" shot group is a dreamer and not a real hunter who puts meat in the freezer for their family.

I expect and demand that my rifles shoot under 1" or I get rid of them unless they are a collector's item in which case I don't do much but look at them. However, every rifle that I actively hunt with will shoot between .75 and .5 MOA. I've put plenty of meat in the freezer at various ranges with the confidence and knowledge that I'll put it exactly in the spot I am aiming at. I don't want to group minute of deer, I want to pick a hair and split it. Striving for anything less is doing not only the game a disservice, it is doing the shooter a disservice as well.