I went i to a gun shop out in Tennessee today to order a Remington 700 and the guy told me not to because they aren't what they use to be and i would be better off getting a ruger m77. I have never heard of issues with Remington but i wanted to know what you guys thought. His reasoning was when the remington kids got back from college they switched the metal and other components to save money. He did say that the old ones weregood if i could find one. Also his personal hunting rifle was a rugger m77 so i didnt know if their was a bias their or what.

I agree with the gun shop, just personnal opinion of course

Let me guess......he had the Ruger in stock?

I'd ignore that advice.

Only ding I've heard Remington quality was with the 870 Express, and in the rifles the 770; 770 is a 710 re-invented.

I believe the 700s are still solid rifles, but depending on model will determine how rough they are.

I'd call a few more shops and see what they think.

Why would you call the shops? They are going to tell you to buy whatever they want to sell, including Rems. I'd ask the guys that are buying em and shooting how good or bad they are.

No he had a few guns in stock but they were all shotguns. It was through his catalog. Really nice guy, he was going to charge me $30 + what ever it cost of the gun was.

Shot a .5" group with a (new) Rem 700 223 on Sunday... They (mine, at least) still shoot.

Rem 700 > Ruger rifle any day.

I like a lot of different guns and have owned a lot of different guns, I especially like Rugers. But I would put my paycheck on every Remington I have bought in the last 5 years outshooting every Ruger I have ever bought in my life, every day of the week. The newest one I shot last week put three holes touching each other with less than 7 rounds down the tube. It'd be hard to convince me that their quality has gone downhill. Like was said above, they have catered to cheap folks by building these sub $400 plastic pieces of chit (710,770 or whatever), but the 700's shoot!

I have both, they for the most part all shoot better than my abilities.

That said, I like my 700's. A LOT.

Remington 700 bdl is as good now as it ever was IMHO. More customs built on that action than any other. Remington has gotten a bad rap in the press due to being unsafe while in the safe position (no such thing right?). Well every firearm is unsafe if you are uneducated in the proper handling of such. Check gunbroker and/or BudsGunshop. He has a lot of listings for remmy's just stick with the model 700 and any built on that action.

jdk1985 he didnt say they werent accurate he said they werent quality and they dont last as long as the old ones because they are using lower quality steel

There isn't a more accurate and reliable rifle in my collection than my 700 ADL .270. In fact, I call it my "utility rifle", the one I take to the woods when I'm expecting the weather to be rough and unfavorable on a more "fancy" rifle. It has an economical and yet very effective Nikon Prostaff scope mounted atop it. Its latest victims include a doe and two boars.

Ruger has always over done it with their steel, doesnt matter if your talking about their rifles or their double and single action revolvers. If you said which rifle is tougher I would say the Ruger hands down. But if there has ever been a rifle that I bought knowing good and well I would have to mess with it to get it to shoot well, its been Rugers and trust me a few have been a major pain in the azz.

Quality.....hmmm

Only truly phucked gun I have ever bought new was a Ruger M77 270WSM. Bought it, cleaned it, took it to range and shot first round. Couldn't pull bolt back, beat on it and beat on it finally got it open. Shot 2nd round same same. Took it down the road to a Gunsmith who did a lot of work for me and asked him to take a quick look at it, he got a bore scope and light out and within a couple seconds he said guns no good, it needs to go back to Ruger. The chamber had a Burr in the machining that was grabbing on to the case after firing and the case expanded or something of that nature. Ruger fixed it but that was the only rifle out of dozens I have bought that was screwed from the git go

Not bashing Rugers because I am fond of em but I have to laugh when folks make false claims. Heres another recent example of a Ruger quality for this gun shop fella...

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads...ous#Post7286073

Forgot to mention I am a huge Ruger fan. Grew up on them.

X2

I have seen a few of the 700's malfunction right out of the box, including one memorable instance when a ranch hands brand new .300win Rem 700 blew a hole in the roof of the gunshop where he bought it; when the store owner for some reason called B.S. on it malfuntioning.

I have a couple of remingtons, my 30 year old 243 in 700 is still doing its job my 15 year old ruger is still doing its job also. Now my 6 month old 700 SPSS in 7mm08 is back at Remington for the second time for accuracy issues. none of the above have had any malfunctions or metal quality issues.However my next gun will be a Winchester Mod 70 ultimate Shadow SS in 300WSM.

Don't walk away from that shop, Run!!!!

Sold my Ruger 25-06 cause it didn't shoot as well as my new 243 700. I will buy a 25-06 700 now,which is my favorite round to shoot

And I've been around the 721's 722's and the 700's for over 50 years and shot competition with all models and never seen one. Go figure!

I like them both (and have them both) but the last Rem that I bought had an extractor that lasted less than 1 box of bullets. That said, it is a sub 1 inch rifle. That is the only problem that I have ever had with a 700.

I'm calling BS on that story. Who loaded the rifle while it was in the shop?

Anyone got any of them old junky 700's laying around the want me to come over and haul off, i need a few more of them. Just got another one, 6mm heavy barrel and i am still drouling on it.