I'm in the market for my first hunting rifle. I've done some looking around and I've heard some pretty good things about both the 700 CDL 30-06 and 783. The 783 I can get for fairly cheap at about $399. The only 700 CDL that I've come across locally is going for around $800. As this is my first hunting rifle should I go for the 783 as it's cheaper or should I just bite the bullet and spend the extra $400? Also, is there any other 30-06 hunting rifle I should check out that goes for around $800 or less?
Remington 783 vs Remington 700 CDL vs ?
- Thread starter Hoarseman
- Start date
Ridgerunner665
New member
Winchester model 70...
steveNChunter
New member
Ah the old "which rifle for a first hunting rifle" thread. Before all the "Ford vs. Chevy" opinions get started, I'll throw my .02 in and say that for a first hunting rifle, you're better off not buying something really pretty and expensive to hunt with.
You're more than likely going to get this rifle wet, drop it, and get it caught on limbs, briars, etc. A Remington 700 CDL is a great rifle, and a beautiful rifle, but not something that you want to go beating around in the woods with as a beginner.
If it I were just getting into hunting and had it to do all over again, I'd start out with one of the "budget" rifles that is offered in stainless steel. Stainless will require a little less maintainence If you get out in the rain, or if you bring the rifle in from the cold and it gets wet from condensation.
A couple exaples are the Savage Axis stainless or Ruger American all weather. The stocks on both these rifles are flimsy and cheap, but for hunting they're fine. The trigger on the Savage Axis is rather heavy, but I have one that I've managed to get the trigger down to just under 3 lbs. Also there are aftermarket stocks available for the Axis, not so with the Ruger. So to give an official recommendation, if you're willing to buy a $100 stock and do a free trigger job, get an Axis stainless. If you want to use it as-is out of the box, get the RAR All-Weather.
There will be many other suggestions given, as the list of good hunting rifles is much longer than the list of bad ones. These two are just good starters in my opinion based on my hunting and shooting experience.
PS- Anything .243 and larger will reliably take deer at any reasonable range. Don't get a caliber that recoils more than you care for. It's just not necessary. Shot placement is key. As the old saying goes, it's the Indian, not the arrow.
You're more than likely going to get this rifle wet, drop it, and get it caught on limbs, briars, etc. A Remington 700 CDL is a great rifle, and a beautiful rifle, but not something that you want to go beating around in the woods with as a beginner.
If it I were just getting into hunting and had it to do all over again, I'd start out with one of the "budget" rifles that is offered in stainless steel. Stainless will require a little less maintainence If you get out in the rain, or if you bring the rifle in from the cold and it gets wet from condensation.
A couple exaples are the Savage Axis stainless or Ruger American all weather. The stocks on both these rifles are flimsy and cheap, but for hunting they're fine. The trigger on the Savage Axis is rather heavy, but I have one that I've managed to get the trigger down to just under 3 lbs. Also there are aftermarket stocks available for the Axis, not so with the Ruger. So to give an official recommendation, if you're willing to buy a $100 stock and do a free trigger job, get an Axis stainless. If you want to use it as-is out of the box, get the RAR All-Weather.
There will be many other suggestions given, as the list of good hunting rifles is much longer than the list of bad ones. These two are just good starters in my opinion based on my hunting and shooting experience.
PS- Anything .243 and larger will reliably take deer at any reasonable range. Don't get a caliber that recoils more than you care for. It's just not necessary. Shot placement is key. As the old saying goes, it's the Indian, not the arrow.
Last edited:
You'll probably be getting a lot of different opinions on this one.
If you're looking for an entry level priced rifle, then I would consider the ruger american as first choice...hands down. Next perhaps a savage axis. From the reviews I've read, the remington 783 should be OK but the ruger or savage are better choices. Stay away from the remington 770.
If you want to spend just a little bit more, then I would choose a howa, or the weatherby vanguard, which is just a re-badged howa in a nicer stock. I think the howa's are the best value for the money.
You could also spend a little more for the tikka, or a savage 110/111/114 series. The tikka is a nice rifle but it is usually light. If you're recoil sensitive, the pounding from a 6.3 pound .30-06 will be noticeable.
The winchester 70's are classics, but I have "heard" that production has stopped and will be moved to portugal. So what is out there now may be pretty scare. On the other hand, now might be the time to buy the last of the american made win 70's, if this is true.
CZ's are also a great value and a great rifle. However, CZ is transitioning from the 550 to a new model 557 and I'm not sure about the availability of either one at present.
As for the quality of the current remington 700 BDL's and CDL's, there's a thread going on that right now. Personally I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new remington 700, if you like the rifle and that's what you want.
Edit: It looks like I cross posted with "stevenchunter". So I'll say: "what he said", because stevenchunter said it better. I would also agree with his comment about the cartridge. Unless you intend to add elk to your hunt, I would consider a milder recoiling .243 win or a 7mm-08 instead.
If you're looking for an entry level priced rifle, then I would consider the ruger american as first choice...hands down. Next perhaps a savage axis. From the reviews I've read, the remington 783 should be OK but the ruger or savage are better choices. Stay away from the remington 770.
If you want to spend just a little bit more, then I would choose a howa, or the weatherby vanguard, which is just a re-badged howa in a nicer stock. I think the howa's are the best value for the money.
You could also spend a little more for the tikka, or a savage 110/111/114 series. The tikka is a nice rifle but it is usually light. If you're recoil sensitive, the pounding from a 6.3 pound .30-06 will be noticeable.
The winchester 70's are classics, but I have "heard" that production has stopped and will be moved to portugal. So what is out there now may be pretty scare. On the other hand, now might be the time to buy the last of the american made win 70's, if this is true.
CZ's are also a great value and a great rifle. However, CZ is transitioning from the 550 to a new model 557 and I'm not sure about the availability of either one at present.
As for the quality of the current remington 700 BDL's and CDL's, there's a thread going on that right now. Personally I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new remington 700, if you like the rifle and that's what you want.
Edit: It looks like I cross posted with "stevenchunter". So I'll say: "what he said", because stevenchunter said it better. I would also agree with his comment about the cartridge. Unless you intend to add elk to your hunt, I would consider a milder recoiling .243 win or a 7mm-08 instead.
Last edited:
Well, if I go with a less expensive rifle I could always buy two. One in something like a 270 and one in 30-06. 
I did some reading and it seems like a lot of people love 30-06 but others prefer 270 or 243. I figured 30-06 would be fine as I have a lot of experience with 308 and I'm planning on hunting in Africa which will require a slightly larger round.
I did some reading and it seems like a lot of people love 30-06 but others prefer 270 or 243. I figured 30-06 would be fine as I have a lot of experience with 308 and I'm planning on hunting in Africa which will require a slightly larger round.steveNChunter
New member
.270 and .30-06 are too close IMO if you're going to buy two rifles. How about .243 for the deer/coyote/varmint size animals, and .30-06 for everything smaller than grizzly bear or dangerous African game. A .243 and .30-06 would leave very little that you wouldn't be well suited for. And they are both very common and ammo is plentiful.
I guess this goes to show that you should never assume anything on an internet forum.
1. If you're mixing in african game then I'm probably not qualified to give an opinion and the people who are knowledgeable, will likely need to know the type of game animal and location due to game laws and restrictions in different countries. In any case, it probably means different rifles than the ones under discussion and cartridges like .300 win mag, .338 win mag, and 9.3x62mm keep popping into my mind for some of the plains animals.
2. Not to be snarky or un-welcoming, but if I could afford an african hunt, I would not be worrying over the cost of a remington 783 or savage axis. I will envy you. Enjoy the hunt.
1. If you're mixing in african game then I'm probably not qualified to give an opinion and the people who are knowledgeable, will likely need to know the type of game animal and location due to game laws and restrictions in different countries. In any case, it probably means different rifles than the ones under discussion and cartridges like .300 win mag, .338 win mag, and 9.3x62mm keep popping into my mind for some of the plains animals.
2. Not to be snarky or un-welcoming, but if I could afford an african hunt, I would not be worrying over the cost of a remington 783 or savage axis. I will envy you. Enjoy the hunt.
At around $800 buy the Winchester and not even consider either Remington.
In 1925 the 30-06 and 270 were loaded much differently than today and there were distinct differences between the 2. With todays better bullets and loadings the 2 are as close to identical as it is possible to make them. With the best loads a 30-06 will shoot close enough to the same trajectory that no one could take advantage of the difference. Any animal too large to be taken with a 270, is too large to be taken with a 30-06.
Both have traditionally been considered good all around chamberings, but with todays better bullets and improved loadings I wouldn't recommend a new shooter buy either. Both are more than needed for 99% of your shooting, and not enough for the other 1%.
I've been primarily a 30-06 user for 40 years and at this stage am not going to change. But if I were starting today I'd suggest a 243 for deer, and a 308 for everything else in North America except large Alaskan Brown bear. A 308 is a little light, but would work with good bullets. But lets be honest. Extremely few of us will ever hunt those bear. A guided hunt will cost you $30,000 to $40,000. If you can afford the cost of a hunt, another $1,000 on a more suitable rifle than even 30-06 is not that big of a deal.
Most African countries require 375 or larger for the big stuff. A 308, 270, or 30-06 will easily kill everything else. This is what I meant when I said a 30-06 was more than needed for 99% and not enough for the other 1%.
In 1925 the 30-06 and 270 were loaded much differently than today and there were distinct differences between the 2. With todays better bullets and loadings the 2 are as close to identical as it is possible to make them. With the best loads a 30-06 will shoot close enough to the same trajectory that no one could take advantage of the difference. Any animal too large to be taken with a 270, is too large to be taken with a 30-06.
Both have traditionally been considered good all around chamberings, but with todays better bullets and improved loadings I wouldn't recommend a new shooter buy either. Both are more than needed for 99% of your shooting, and not enough for the other 1%.
I've been primarily a 30-06 user for 40 years and at this stage am not going to change. But if I were starting today I'd suggest a 243 for deer, and a 308 for everything else in North America except large Alaskan Brown bear. A 308 is a little light, but would work with good bullets. But lets be honest. Extremely few of us will ever hunt those bear. A guided hunt will cost you $30,000 to $40,000. If you can afford the cost of a hunt, another $1,000 on a more suitable rifle than even 30-06 is not that big of a deal.
Most African countries require 375 or larger for the big stuff. A 308, 270, or 30-06 will easily kill everything else. This is what I meant when I said a 30-06 was more than needed for 99% and not enough for the other 1%.
Last edited:
steveNChunter
New member
+100 to this. When you are going on hunts that may cost 5 digits, your rifle setup should probably cost at least 4 digits.
kilotanker22
New member
At around $800 buy the Winchester and not even consider either Remington.
could not have said it better.
although i like the 700 the win 70 is a far higher quality rifle.
as for caliber well a few come to mind that would be ideal for a beginner
243 Win
25-06
6.5 Creedmoore
260 Rem
270 Win (because its my favorite)
7mm-08 Rem
7x57 Mauser
308 Win
African plains game are no different than other game animals. i would trust all of these calibers for non dangerous game.
for dangerous game i would say 338 win mag minimum and a 338 ultra mag 340 Weatherby or 375 HH ideal among others.
could not have said it better.
although i like the 700 the win 70 is a far higher quality rifle.
as for caliber well a few come to mind that would be ideal for a beginner
243 Win
25-06
6.5 Creedmoore
260 Rem
270 Win (because its my favorite)
7mm-08 Rem
7x57 Mauser
308 Win
African plains game are no different than other game animals. i would trust all of these calibers for non dangerous game.
for dangerous game i would say 338 win mag minimum and a 338 ultra mag 340 Weatherby or 375 HH ideal among others.
Sorry, I should have been more clear up front. Trust me, I'm not rolling in the dough, I'm actually going to Africa anyway and someone invited me on a hunt while I am going to be there. The hunt is not very expensive due to the location; I'm going to a very rural area with 99% locals. If I do enjoy hunting the majority of it will be local, in the states.
Last edited:
Ridgerunner665
New member
Makes no difference whatsoever...mine started out as an Ultimate Shadow, and would have been fine hunting anywhere if I had left it that way (I upgraded the stock to a McMillan)
kilotanker22
New member
If I did go with a Win 70 should I go with the Sporter or the Super Grade?
it depends on the money you want to spend.
the super grade will run you a bit over $1000 and the sporter will be like $750. either rifle is darn good but the super grade has a nicer stock and better bottom metal
it depends on the money you want to spend.
the super grade will run you a bit over $1000 and the sporter will be like $750. either rifle is darn good but the super grade has a nicer stock and better bottom metal
Hoarseman, I am puzzling over the fact that you are buying your first 'hunting rifle' but you also report a lot of experience with the .308. Was that with a target rifle? For what you wish to do, the Rem 783 will be quite appropriate. It will work and be accurate out of the box and it will be impervious to bad weather. Stick with .30-06. The .308 would be OK, but don't muddy the waters with thoughts of .243, etc. The lighter chamberings will not do the job that the .30-06 will do. Others, such as the Ruger American mentioned, would also work for you, but know that opinions and preferences, including mine, are often expressed without much in the way of actual range or hunting results to back them up. The .30-06, however, needs no special advocacy at this point.
For a trip to Africa with some hunting possibilities, it may be best to rent a rifle from the outfitter and avoid the need to ship yours. When you become more experienced and adept at hunting and riflery, you can treat yourself to a really fine hunting rifle, knowing that your prior experience has not cost that much.
For a trip to Africa with some hunting possibilities, it may be best to rent a rifle from the outfitter and avoid the need to ship yours. When you become more experienced and adept at hunting and riflery, you can treat yourself to a really fine hunting rifle, knowing that your prior experience has not cost that much.
Last edited:
steveNChunter
New member
I always have to post a link to this video when I see a comment such as this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
I am not discrediting the .30-06 or any other cartridge, but the .243 has been proven time and again, especially since the era of bonded bullets, to be a very capable big game cartridge.
If the OP does end up going to hunt large dangerous African game, he's not going to be taking a .243 or .30-06, so that would be irrelevant to this discussion.
Anything between .243 and .30-06 is going to be more than sufficient for the vast majority of what the OP will be hunting in the US.
Another thing that should influence your cartridge selection is to remember that most of the "bargain" rifles, 783, RAR, Axis, etc. weigh in around 6 pounds and have stocks that aren't the greatest at managing recoil. So one of these in .30-06 is going to sting a little. The standard model 70 or 700 will be a little heavier, and shouldn't recoil as bad. Personally if I can't shoot a box of 20 through a rifle without getting a sore shoulder, I'm not very interested in it as an all-around hunting rifle. When you're hunting you're just shooting one time(hopefully), but you need to practice with that rifle every once in awhile to keep your fundamentals and skills sharp. If that rifle has more recoil than you care for, you will develop a flinch and it will carry over when you're hunting. I've seen it too many times.
Remember, shooting something smaller than .30-06 doesn't make you any less of a man, it just means you're not trying to compensate for anything
Awesome rifle. Should be every bit as good as the Winchester or Remington you have been considering. All the Weatherbys come with a sub-MOA guarantee. The rifles are made by Howa. The action is a close copy of the older Sako L57 action, which features a flat-bottom reciever and a stronger extractor than what you get with the Remington 700. Strong, accurate design. Only downside I can think of (but it could also be a plus) is they are a little on the heavy side.
Last edited:
Trying to compensate for something by shooting a .30-06? Very unwise and unfriendly comment.