Remington 700 Classic in 17 Remington - Accuracy

Skids

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2014
Messages
9
I am new to LRH and back to shooting and reloading after a long hiatus. I recently bought a Remington 700 Classic in 17 Remington that I hope to take varmint shooting but for now am punching paper. I am wondering about its accuracy potential. I read that the Rem 700 barrel is not fully floated, but has a small part of the forend touching the barrel. Mine seems to be this way as I can get paper in- between all but a small portion of the barrel near the tip of the forend.

My best load so far was 25 gr IMR 8208 XBR, 20 gr Hornaday VMAX, CCI SR primer in a Nosler case, neck sized. My best 100 yard group was .25. Of course this load was too HOT, as I blew out a couple of primers. So I guess I need to back it down and see if I get the same accuracy.

My second best was 24 gr IMR 4064, 25 gr Berger FB Varmint, same case and primer. My best 100 yard group was .50. No pressure problems with this load.

So I am wondering if this is the best accuracy I can expect to get from this rifle, which is stock with the addition of a Nikon Monarch 4-16 with BDC reticle? Would fully floating the barrel help? I don't want to ruin a good thing.

Thanks for any advice.

image.jpg
 
Last edited:
Floating the barrel may help with accuracy; it usually won't hurt. The caveat is your accuracy loads may change so I'd do it and possibly bed the action/recoil lug before you do any more load work ups if you are thinking you may want to. Remington rifles usually have the bedding pad near the for end of the stock unless they are a heavy barreled rifle. I've got three bone stock rems bedded the way you describe and one (my 7stw) with pillars, a bedded recoil lug, and a skim bedded barrel channel (it was acting up floated so I skim bedded it- pencil thin barrel). Many of my past rems have shot much better free floated though.
 
Lefty,

Thanks for the quick reply. Good to know about your 700's. I'll have to consider bedding as I've not done that before. Again, thanks.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top