Remington Model 8 - 35 Rem

[johnm1]

Just picked this up today. Manufactured in 1929. I had one previously in 30 REM that I regretted letting go. I was willing to hand load for the 30 REM but never got around to it. With the old factory stuff I could never get that one to group. But I promised myself if I ever saw one in 35 REM for a decent price ide buy it. Once this one was in my hand I knew it was going home with me. I won't be able to shoot it until next weekend. This one might shoot better for me now that I have glasses and can see the front sight.

 

[Water-Man]

The first centerfire rifle I shot, in the early 1950s, was a Model 8 in 35 Remington. It belonged to my grandfather and was handed down to me in 1979 when he passed.

It took more than its share of deer and bear over the years.

 

[johnm1]

I think I resized my pictures too small. I'll do it again and see if the quality is any better.

(Better now)

 

[johnm1]

A couple more

 

[GarandTd]

Looks good. Do you plan to reload for it. I have 2 rifles in 35 Remington and close to deer season is about the only time anyone ever has any commercial ammo. That is including the LGS.

 

[johnm1]

I was fortunate enough to find 2 boxes of the 200 grain Core-lokt on the shelf yesterday. I will have to get the dies, but I load for all my firearms. Load development will have to wait until I return from my assignment to Colorado ends in July/August.

In the end, this rifle doesn't fit the place I hunt for deer. I hunt desert deer in the far Southeast corner of Arizona. Very little cover and most shots are well over 100 yards. This was one of those 'want vs need' purchases. Now it could be a javelina gun. Although the same terrain, they see so poorly getting within 100 yards is pretty easy. All one needs to do is to be aware of the wind. It's too bad the 200 grain Leverevolution isn't recommended for this rifle. That actually has ballistics more appropriate for the places I hunt.

That being said, I love the firearm. The only reason I see for the low cost is that it appears the but stock has been sanded and there is a small chip in the wrist area. Only paid $329. I'm bringing it back to Colorado and I'll do a detail strip/clean appropriate for this firearm and a final inspection of the insides. I will not be taking the barrel assembly apart. If I can figure a way to soak the barrel/inside the barrel sleeve and flush I'll do that. I really don't want to get into the guts of the recoil management parts of the firearm. And so far see no reason to. It appears to function properly.

I really hope the new glasses help me shoot this one well. The poor performance of the last one in 30 REM was the reason it was traded. Considering how much better I see with the glasses I think it will.

 

[James K]

The only cartridge (AFAIK) still made for the old Remington auto and pump rifles is the .35 Remington. The others are gone, though some can be made from other cartridges. But do NOT, repeat NOT, exceed factory loads and I would recommend going light even then. Those rifles are not strong and there are a lot of parts that can break and cannot be replaced.

As for writers like the one who described the Remington Model 81 as "gas operated" and "the predecessor of the Garand", please ignore such nonsense; that "expert" apparently had never seen either rifle.

Jim

 

[johnm1]

Thanks Jim,

Although I do reload, I suspect I will use the 200 grain core-lokts. They just seem like they were made for the model 8. This won't be a high round count rifle. Reality is, I hunt deer in the desert and this rifle isn't well suited to that type of hunting. Wide open spaces and typically longer shots. And I didn't draw elk this year. I understand the action and that is part of the draw of this rifle.

I brought it back with me to Colorado (temporary assignment) to clean up during the week and shoot this weekend. But there is no cleaning to do. Barrel is bright and shiny and the guts are clean and free of gunk. At least what I can see during normal take down.

I have been trying to figure out why it went for so cheap. The guy I bought it from normally knows what his stuff is worth. Heck he sold my model 8 in 30 REM on GB for nearly $600. But I may have figured out why it went so cheap. When you dry fire it the sound/feel of the hammer release/firing pin travel is 'soft'. Almost like the hammer spring is working at 10% of what it should. Sorry, that is the best word picture I can think of. I'm not convinced it will fire off the primer. We will see this weekend. Though it does not look overly difficult to disassemble and I may do that tonight. There are good videos on line. I don't have the tool to disassemble the barrel and don't plan to at this point. As clean as the rest of the rifle is, I assume the inside of the barrel is as clean. Also, there are no symptoms that would suggest the inside of the barrel needs to be cleaned.

One other thing that may have influenced the price is that the butt stock appears to have been sanded. There is a slight 'lip' at the butt plate.

 

[Mike Irwin]

I picked up an 81 in .300 Savage over 10 years ago and still haven't shot it.

I picked it up to go with my other rifles in .300 Savage, none of which I've shot in years.

The 8/81 is a really fascinating design.

 

[johnm1]

This is my second Model 8. The action is what draws me to these rifles. My previous Model 8 was in 30 REM I just couldn't get that one to shoot a decent group. I now have glasses so I'm expecting this one to shoot better

 

[johnm1]

Odd, half of my last post got truncated. There was a smiley/wink emoji after the shoot better comment.

 

[James K]

Those rifles shot reasonably well for what they were made for, a hunting rifle for the Eastern (US) woods. But the "nature of the beast" (long recoil, moving barrel, light weight) work against top accuracy, so don't expect a tack driver. The action (except for the magazine) is a lot like the Auto 5 shotgun, another product of that old Mormon guy from Utah. Made some good guns, he did.

As I pointed out, the Remington was sometimes confused with the Garand-designed M1 rifle, and of course the Remington Model 8 came out in 1900, way earlier than the M1 rifle. (The FN-made version was called the Model 1900, but it never became very popular in Europe or other countries.)

The M1 (Garand) and the Model 8/81 are nothing alike in functioning, but it is worth noting that the Army issued some Remingtons when they were contemplating issuing a semi-auto military rifle, to try out tactics and combat use. Those tests did much to confirm the desirability of a semi-auto for combat, though of course, the Model 8/81 itself was never even considered for adoption.

Jim

 

[shuvelrider]

http://thegreatmodel8.remingtonsociety.com

Here is a website you might be able to use, to learn more about these rifles. Yours would be a plain model. Start hoarding brass for it, getting hard to find.

Here is mine, I traded a bubbafied 03A3 for it.

 

[johnm1]

From looking at diagrams and watching videos, it looks like the mainspring provides the force for the hammer. And it also looks like the mainspring (and carrier spring) are anchored with a screw on the bottom of the lower tang. I wonder if that screw somehow was loosened and released the mainspring sometime in the past.

Now until I can find a decent vice, or have a second set of hands to hold the receiver to put the rifle back together again, I'm not going to disassemble the rifle. Is it even possible for a single person to return the recoil spring (the one in the buttstock)?

 

[johnm1]

This is the issue I'm trying to avoid doing by myself

 

[johnm1]

I had assumed that only the model 81 had the recoil spring tube based on the videos I watched. But now I'm not sure.

Does the model 8 have a recoil spring tube?

I saw two videos. One of a model 81 being disassembled and it had the recoil spring tube and one of a model 8 being disassembled and it did not. But that could have been just that one rifle. And so far the only parts diagrams I can find are for the model 81. I'm still looking though.

 

[johnm1]

Here are two clips from the two videos showing the difference between the model 8 and 81. The 1 has the full length recoil tube (action tube I think it is called). The second video has only a partial tube. The best parts diagram I found for the model 8 is a cut away and seems to show the shorter tube.

 

[johnm1]

Well, no rush to remove the butt stock. I took the Model 8 to the range this morning and there is no issue firing a round. Maybe all Model 8's hammer drops sound 'soft'. The trigger will take some getting used to. A lot of creep. Function was almost flawless. I did have two stove pipes and the ejection is best described as anemic. I fire 20 rounds single fire and a couple didn't have enough momentum and dropped back into the receiver. I have the bolt soaking in CLP and will blow it out this evening in case it is just gunk in the bolt. The ejector seem to have enough 'spring power'(?) to eject. But what the heck do I know.

Most of my shots were fired with my elbows rested on the table but the rest of the rifle unsupported. Groups at 25 and 50 yards were decent shooting this way. The wild ones were, I'm sure, my fault. Now firing the 35 REM from a full rested position was approaching brutal. And I Am not the least bit recoil shy. Enough recoil that the 50 yard groups from the full rested position were slightly larger than elbows only.

Top is 25 yards, bottom is 50 yards. Elbows only on the table.

 

[James K]

The only real difference between the Model 8 and the newer Model 81 is that the latter has a "bent" pistol grip and a better looking and feeling fore-end with a few small parts changed to match. There is no difference in the springs, spring tubes or any other major part.

Jim

 

[johnm1]

Thanks James,

So the one video I saw of a Model 8 being taken apart must have had the spring tube broken. When he took the buttstock off in that video the action spring popped out.

I had a a couple of issues yesterday while trying to adjust the windage. Not the least of which was the wind kept blowing my cheap Wal-Mart target stand around. It wasn't a good day for sighting a rifle anyhow due to the wind but I ended up giving up on that endeavor.

On two occasions the first round failed to feed. The point of the bullet rose too sharply or the case head didn't rise quickly enough. Not sure which. I don't have a good grip on that yet as it was only twice. I suppose I could have loaded the magazine sloppily. I'll have to noodle that one out next time.

After clearing the first round that jammed in the magazine and feeding the second round I found I could not pull the bolt handle back and remove the remaining 4 unfired cartridges by hand. I had to fire the rifle to remove them. I can't feel a burr in the chamber but that is what it felt like. I need to do some more testing with empties.

Here are 3 photographs from yesterday's outing. First picture is three rounds. Left and center both have primers that are slightly un-seated (easier to see on the case to the left but the center case is similar. The case on the right fed and fired fine but the neck is substantially 'dirtier' and there is a spot that is battered to almost splitting. The second photo show a scratch at the base (middle case in the first photo). This could have been the result of the jamb I had in the magazine). And the last shows the case that is 'dirtier' and is just short of splitting (case on right in first photo). Although most of the empties are battered to a degree, none are this dirty at the neck. It is almost as if combustion gas passed by the neck on this single round.

None of the above occurred more than once. And I'm somewhat used to a Garand action beating up the cases. But I didn't have any of these issues the first time I fired the weapon. To cure the jamb in the magazine I removed the barrel. I wonder if there might not be a relationship between barrel tightness and my issues.

I don't expect an answer from some non-descript photos and marginal descriptions. But maybe someone has some insight and the right questions to ask.