Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Why Remingtom Actions?!?!?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
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
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kevin Thomas" data-source="post: 618731" data-attributes="member: 15748"><p>Captian Stubing,</p><p> </p><p>Not necessarily stronger (the M700 is a very strong action), but stiffer. The M70 action weighs nearly a full pound more than an M700. This was what originally lead to their being used in applications where weight was a limitation; silhouette shooting being one, BR competition being another. You virtually NEVER see M70s used in silhouette competition, while M700s dominate that game. The cartridges used there are generally fairly mild, and don't have a tendency to torque their way out of the bedding when fired. Ditto for the Bench Rest community. Mild cartridges, weight restirctions that limit the total weight of the gun, ready to run. In Highpower and Long Range Prone, we have no such weight restirctions. Back when the magnums were the norm for this type of competition, the M70s were the standard that all others were judged by . . . and you didn't see many others! It has just been within the last decade or so that we've seen the switch away from the 30 cal magnums to milder cartridges like the 6.5x284. There, the flat bottomed receivers of the M70s resisted the torquing problems so common to the M700s. Since the shift to milder rounds, this has become less of a problem, and we're seeing far more Remingtons on the line these days.</p><p> </p><p>For across the course use, the round bottom receiver issue wasn't so much of a problem (most used the 308s, and even lighter cartridges starting about 10-15 years ago). There, it was a question of bolt throw. Frankly, there's not a sweeter throwing bolt than a well used M70 when you're dealing with rapid fire strings. Gotta love 'em for that alone!</p><p> </p><p>The real shift to the Remingtons (IMHO), has more to do with economics. Many folks gloss over the fact that Mike Walker designed the M700 as an extremely inexpensive, easy to make action. The M70 on the other hand, is an expensive action to produce, with a lot of machine operations going into them. Takes time, costs more, and those costs have to be passed on to the customer. Then we have the M700. They are dirt cheap to make, very strong, have very quick lock times and generally do about all a shooter could ask of an action. Properly blueprinted and squared, they can be phenomenally accurate, and yes, everyone in the competitive world makes aftermarket stuff for them to adapt them to almost any conceivable application. How do you not love an action like that?</p><p> </p><p>I'll reserve comment about the 338 Lapua, since I'm very admittedly biased.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kevin Thomas, post: 618731, member: 15748"] Captian Stubing, Not necessarily stronger (the M700 is a very strong action), but stiffer. The M70 action weighs nearly a full pound more than an M700. This was what originally lead to their being used in applications where weight was a limitation; silhouette shooting being one, BR competition being another. You virtually NEVER see M70s used in silhouette competition, while M700s dominate that game. The cartridges used there are generally fairly mild, and don't have a tendency to torque their way out of the bedding when fired. Ditto for the Bench Rest community. Mild cartridges, weight restirctions that limit the total weight of the gun, ready to run. In Highpower and Long Range Prone, we have no such weight restirctions. Back when the magnums were the norm for this type of competition, the M70s were the standard that all others were judged by . . . and you didn't see many others! It has just been within the last decade or so that we've seen the switch away from the 30 cal magnums to milder cartridges like the 6.5x284. There, the flat bottomed receivers of the M70s resisted the torquing problems so common to the M700s. Since the shift to milder rounds, this has become less of a problem, and we're seeing far more Remingtons on the line these days. For across the course use, the round bottom receiver issue wasn't so much of a problem (most used the 308s, and even lighter cartridges starting about 10-15 years ago). There, it was a question of bolt throw. Frankly, there's not a sweeter throwing bolt than a well used M70 when you're dealing with rapid fire strings. Gotta love 'em for that alone! The real shift to the Remingtons (IMHO), has more to do with economics. Many folks gloss over the fact that Mike Walker designed the M700 as an extremely inexpensive, easy to make action. The M70 on the other hand, is an expensive action to produce, with a lot of machine operations going into them. Takes time, costs more, and those costs have to be passed on to the customer. Then we have the M700. They are dirt cheap to make, very strong, have very quick lock times and generally do about all a shooter could ask of an action. Properly blueprinted and squared, they can be phenomenally accurate, and yes, everyone in the competitive world makes aftermarket stuff for them to adapt them to almost any conceivable application. How do you not love an action like that? I'll reserve comment about the 338 Lapua, since I'm very admittedly biased. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Why Remingtom Actions?!?!?
Top