My nephew's Remmy 788 won't group well, no matter who is shooting it .... looked at the rifling, and it seems faint, in that the grooves are very small, and indistinct, when compared to every other rifle I have on hand .... going to give it a good cleaning, including copper remover, and give it another shot at some sort of consistency .... did Remington do something different on this model?
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 788 Rifling
- Thread starter jimbob86
- Start date
Early 1990s I had a 788 in .223 Rem that was an absolute tack driver.
The 788 was supposed to be a low-tier rifle but people told me Remington discontinued it because it shot as well as their mainstream offerings, for a lower price. That's hearsay, not fact.
I bet cleaning, especially copper removal, will enhance its performance.
The 788 was supposed to be a low-tier rifle but people told me Remington discontinued it because it shot as well as their mainstream offerings, for a lower price. That's hearsay, not fact.
I bet cleaning, especially copper removal, will enhance its performance.
Consider tapping a wood golf tee into muzzle and fill the barrel with fresh [new] bore cleaner, let sit overnight, drain and brush with fresh brush and repeat as needed till patches are just a gray color.
Did that for a 1917 Enfield and took five night and have a great bore.
Also mark a bullet with a magic marker and push lightly into muzzle, and note the number of the muzzle rifling, maybe cleaning from the muzzle, instead of breach.
Did that for a 1917 Enfield and took five night and have a great bore.
Also mark a bullet with a magic marker and push lightly into muzzle, and note the number of the muzzle rifling, maybe cleaning from the muzzle, instead of breach.
Last edited:
If the bullet holes on target are perfectly round, the rifling is good.
Near as I can tell ... they were not exactly wadcutters ... WWB on pulp paper is not a recipe for "circles" ....
Umm ..... WTAF??!"!!? Are you suggesting the barrel has unscrewed itself? In which case, you are screwin' with me and have lost all the credibility I had for you in the past ..... explain yourself, and I hope there has been a misunderstanding .....Is the barrel a tight fit in the receiver?
Pathfinder45
New member
I think Bart was just trying to be helpful......2020 is over, I hope we can lighten up soon...
Jim Watson
New member
What caliber is it?
My .223 is good, my .30-30 is decent, a friend's .222 is excellent.
I know of two very good .22-250s in town.
My .223 is good, my .30-30 is decent, a friend's .222 is excellent.
I know of two very good .22-250s in town.
bamaranger
New member
788's
The 788's have a good reputation as accurate rifles, especially in .223 and .308 in my circles. Seeing as that rifle is something like 40 yrs old, I'd say there is a very good chance it is severely fouled, especially if in a hi-vel caliber like .223 or .243. BTW, in what caliber is this devaint 788 chambered?
I think the Rem 788 was introduced to compete/kill the Mossberg 800, which was undercutting the Rem 700 sales. When Mossberg ceased production of the 800, the 788 didn't last much longer. Savage had the 110, but it was well established and wasn't going anywhere ( and still thrives). Mossberg was new to the centerfire market, ( w/ the 800). Remington creating a competitor (the 788) to Mossberg's affordable rifle (the 800) was marketing tactics to nix a rival.
Once the Moss 800 was gone, I have no doubt that a lot of folks bought 788 because they were shooters, and more affordable than the flagship 700. At that point, Remington likely nixed the 788. Too, the Model 7 surfaced at about that time, another short action rifle, more svelte than the utilitarian 788.
The 788's have a good reputation as accurate rifles, especially in .223 and .308 in my circles. Seeing as that rifle is something like 40 yrs old, I'd say there is a very good chance it is severely fouled, especially if in a hi-vel caliber like .223 or .243. BTW, in what caliber is this devaint 788 chambered?
I think the Rem 788 was introduced to compete/kill the Mossberg 800, which was undercutting the Rem 700 sales. When Mossberg ceased production of the 800, the 788 didn't last much longer. Savage had the 110, but it was well established and wasn't going anywhere ( and still thrives). Mossberg was new to the centerfire market, ( w/ the 800). Remington creating a competitor (the 788) to Mossberg's affordable rifle (the 800) was marketing tactics to nix a rival.
Once the Moss 800 was gone, I have no doubt that a lot of folks bought 788 because they were shooters, and more affordable than the flagship 700. At that point, Remington likely nixed the 788. Too, the Model 7 surfaced at about that time, another short action rifle, more svelte than the utilitarian 788.
I've seen 3 centerfire and 2 rimfire match rifles with loose barrelsNear as I can tell ... they were not exactly wadcutters ... WWB on pulp paper is not a recipe for "circles" .... Umm ..... WTAF??!"!!? Are you suggesting the barrel has unscrewed itself? In which case, you are screwin' with me and have lost all the credibility I had for you in the past ..... explain yourself, and I hope there has been a misunderstanding .....
Jim Watson
New member
I have seen a Mauser sporter with barrel only hand tight and a Rolling Block with loose barrel, but the latter was a Numrich .45-70 in a .43 Spanish action.
I gave my youngest son a 788 in 223 (9" twist) I still have a 308 that I bought new in 1970. I found a RAMLINE stock in the 80s and have my Smith bed it. Shot 3/4" with 150 Sierra handloads. Two years ago, I bought a Timney Trigger for it and it shot 165 Grand Slams into 1/2" with a 2500fs load of H-4895. It's back at the Smith right now to have a 260 Rem barrel installed. After I turned 65, the recoil from this 6.5# rifle became more than my repaired neck and back could tolerate. Both of these rifles have "shallow" rifling, so don't worry about it. Clean it up and it'll do right.