The Remington 700:
1- The action is round.
2- The extractor,safety and bolt stop are sheet metal stampings.
3- The recoil lug is separate from the receiver.
The principle advantages of the above mentioned features are:
1- A round action is easier to machine and cheap to produce.
2- Steel stampings are easy to make and are cheap to produce.
3- A separate recoil lug is easy to make and cheap to produce.
The 700 does have the following strongpoints:
1- It has provided years of good service with the US Army, Navy SEALS, and Marines.
2- It is inexpensive, widely available, and easy to make shoot very accurately
3- The locktime is very fast.
4- The trigger mechanism is excellent.
5- There is a well established base of information, modification techniques and tooling available.
The weak points of the 700 are, among others:
1- The safety is a cheap steel stamping which has been known to cause the rifle to fire unintentionally. There is no provision to lock the bolt.
2- The bolt stop is a cheap steel stamping which is overly complicated and located inside the trigger guard. The clearance cuts for the bolt stop and safety provide a ready path for dirt and other contaminants to enter the trigger mechanism.
3- The trigger guard is aluminum, which is not strong enough to provide proper clamping of the action to the stock. It is prone to breakage under hard use.
4- The extractor is a cheap steel stamping and less than ideal. The extractor does not control the feed of the round into the chamber.
5- The cylindrical nature of the action does not provide multiple indexing points to the stock and bedding. The lack of these index points affects the ability of the weapon to retain zero upon removal and reinstallation of the action from the stock.
6- The plunger ejector is vulnerable malfuntion due to the effects of freezing and fouling.
7- The bolt can not be locked shut by the safety, so it can come open and eject a round while getting snagged on brush or whatever. I know I mentoned this twice, but it IS important.
Some of these deficiencies are readily correctable, some are not.
There can be no doubt that the 700 is a good rifle and has provided good performance to date.
There are however better designs available for use in accurate, reliable, and rugged rifles. Most notably the Dakota 76 action.
The 700 has had it's heyday. We at MD Labs are moving on to something superior.
No one is debating the accuracy potential of the 700. I have owned them myself, and will probably own some again in the future.
No doubt it can be a great weapon, especially when properly fitted out.
I will, however, prefer to use them for things that do not require extreme robustness or absolute reliability under harsh conditions.
The real issues are some that you are probably familiar with, like two piece bolts that sometimes break, and safeties that do not lock the bolt.
Certain improvements in design and manufacturing techniques would no doubt render these issues moot, but Remington hasn't done it since 1961, and most gunsmiths and users are simply not aware that some of these failings exist.
Of course, alterations can be made to the 700 to reduce or eliminate these shortcomings, but they are expensive and time consuming.
This may be blue sky to some out there, but we are striving for a "perfect world" here. We want everything that we lay our hands on to be that best it can be. No compromises, no shortcomings. We take EVERYTHING apart to the component level, and then start looking at ways to improve it. Some things are easier to improve than others, some need little improvement, and others are beyond hope.
Generally speaking, we the Gunsmiths here at MD Labs would prefer to start with a weapon/action that is a little closer than the 700 to what we believe to be ideal.
In our case, the Winchester 70 and better yet, the Dakota 76 action are the top choices.
The CZ/BRNO Mausers are also pretty good, but require a lot more work than the Winchesters.
Being open minded does not necessarily exclude the possibility of refusing to lower ones established criteria of performance.
Regardless of how open my mind is on any given day, my standards remain high.
Period.
1- The action is round.
2- The extractor,safety and bolt stop are sheet metal stampings.
3- The recoil lug is separate from the receiver.
The principle advantages of the above mentioned features are:
1- A round action is easier to machine and cheap to produce.
2- Steel stampings are easy to make and are cheap to produce.
3- A separate recoil lug is easy to make and cheap to produce.
The 700 does have the following strongpoints:
1- It has provided years of good service with the US Army, Navy SEALS, and Marines.
2- It is inexpensive, widely available, and easy to make shoot very accurately
3- The locktime is very fast.
4- The trigger mechanism is excellent.
5- There is a well established base of information, modification techniques and tooling available.
The weak points of the 700 are, among others:
1- The safety is a cheap steel stamping which has been known to cause the rifle to fire unintentionally. There is no provision to lock the bolt.
2- The bolt stop is a cheap steel stamping which is overly complicated and located inside the trigger guard. The clearance cuts for the bolt stop and safety provide a ready path for dirt and other contaminants to enter the trigger mechanism.
3- The trigger guard is aluminum, which is not strong enough to provide proper clamping of the action to the stock. It is prone to breakage under hard use.
4- The extractor is a cheap steel stamping and less than ideal. The extractor does not control the feed of the round into the chamber.
5- The cylindrical nature of the action does not provide multiple indexing points to the stock and bedding. The lack of these index points affects the ability of the weapon to retain zero upon removal and reinstallation of the action from the stock.
6- The plunger ejector is vulnerable malfuntion due to the effects of freezing and fouling.
7- The bolt can not be locked shut by the safety, so it can come open and eject a round while getting snagged on brush or whatever. I know I mentoned this twice, but it IS important.
Some of these deficiencies are readily correctable, some are not.
There can be no doubt that the 700 is a good rifle and has provided good performance to date.
There are however better designs available for use in accurate, reliable, and rugged rifles. Most notably the Dakota 76 action.
The 700 has had it's heyday. We at MD Labs are moving on to something superior.
No one is debating the accuracy potential of the 700. I have owned them myself, and will probably own some again in the future.
No doubt it can be a great weapon, especially when properly fitted out.
I will, however, prefer to use them for things that do not require extreme robustness or absolute reliability under harsh conditions.
The real issues are some that you are probably familiar with, like two piece bolts that sometimes break, and safeties that do not lock the bolt.
Certain improvements in design and manufacturing techniques would no doubt render these issues moot, but Remington hasn't done it since 1961, and most gunsmiths and users are simply not aware that some of these failings exist.
Of course, alterations can be made to the 700 to reduce or eliminate these shortcomings, but they are expensive and time consuming.
This may be blue sky to some out there, but we are striving for a "perfect world" here. We want everything that we lay our hands on to be that best it can be. No compromises, no shortcomings. We take EVERYTHING apart to the component level, and then start looking at ways to improve it. Some things are easier to improve than others, some need little improvement, and others are beyond hope.
Generally speaking, we the Gunsmiths here at MD Labs would prefer to start with a weapon/action that is a little closer than the 700 to what we believe to be ideal.
In our case, the Winchester 70 and better yet, the Dakota 76 action are the top choices.
The CZ/BRNO Mausers are also pretty good, but require a lot more work than the Winchesters.
Being open minded does not necessarily exclude the possibility of refusing to lower ones established criteria of performance.
Regardless of how open my mind is on any given day, my standards remain high.
Period.
, Art