Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles remington vs. savage?

Just get a Savage if you want it to shoot & shoot right out of the box w/out having to repair it in the 1st place. Find an older remmy 70s-80s 700 and you will be ok also.

OK...just to muddy the waters a bit...I DO have one customized Savage. It's a 7mm Mag stainless, restocked, glass-bedded, etc. It has a Bushnell 3200 mounted in DNZ rings. Not bad...my "foul weather" rifle. That's a 5-shot group, with factory 154 grainers.
Bob

Those American classic stocks are very nice, I've been thinking about snagging one of them and an old $200 savage beater for a future project...I'm thinking 8mm...either 8x57 or 8mm Gibbs(I already load for one 8mm Gibbs so I have the dies and a few good loads worked up....)

Don't tell my wife, she panics at the though of me planning to spend money...

You can quit hoping L because you can rest assured that I won't spend a penny on a RH bolt gun for my own use.
That's just not how I roll brother.

I have had both and much prefer the Remington.

I like Savage for what they are erector sets that shoot well, that allow me to try unique and uncommon cartridges. If money and gunsmithing fees weren't an option I'd probably run a M700 clone since there are more and better options for stocks. For strictly off the shelf hunting rifles I'd rather have a Winchester or commercial Mauser.

I will agree that is a beautiful stock, but I think it was a nice piece of wood wasted on the rest of the rifle with the Accutrigger, barrel nut and horrid looking bolt shroud(bolt handle with a bolt through it) but hey it might be like a Tikka T3 and shoot like a house afire!! that would be a big plus................Hb

I've owned good and bad examples of both Savage and Remington. To me the Remington is a more refined rifle.

If I'm going to buy either a Remington or a Savage 110 new it's going to be to shoot it, not to drool over it. Savage every time, don't have to dink with anything to make it shoot. And if I do want it to look nice, the model 14's are perfectly nice.

Have a couple of the stevens 200's and like both of them a lot. Have had other 110 rifles in the past and always had good service from them, but if I was to sell em all off but one, I would keep my older 700 mtn rifle w/o a doubt. My 700's have always been solid performers and I must have had 10 or 15 over the years. As a matter of fact I am sort of thinking about doing just that. At my age I am having a hard time coming up with scenarios that I would be much interested in that my 700 in .270 and a 22 rimfire wouldn't handle. Besides even if I do try and sell some off I'm sure I'd keep a few more just because they are worth more to me than they'll bring.

One factor being ignored is the date of manufacture. I found a Remington 700 in 270 win made in the 80s. Great gun gives groups under 1" with all ammo I have tried. Looked at some of the new stuff from Remy and quality on low end rifles is not close to the 80s or 90s workmanship. Now if you go to the higher priced line with Remington, I must say it looks like very good quality work.
My lower end Savages will out shoot most current production Remingtons in the lower price ranges. I do not get the "pride of ownership" in NEW lower end Remingtons. The 80s Remington 700 surpasses the Savage 110 in handling and accuracy. Comparing new vs new I would take Savage. Older vs older my choice would be Remington. One thing to consider is that you can be sure of what you get with Savage-accuracy and dependabilty. When comparing guns I think the period of manufacture is important.

haters gonna hate ...

I have savages and remmys. the savages outnumber the remingtons. I do love the remingtons, but I think the reason I've got too many savages is that they make them in unique calibers/configurations. where else are you going to get a .250-3000 sav, or a .22 hornet, or a 6.5 CM or 6mmBR in a factory rifle?

as far as accuracy is concerned, both the Rems and the Savs shoot for me. I will say that I'll take the accu-trigger any day over the "x-mark pro".

Something no one has mentioned:

Should you buy choose one or the other, should it have a problem: Support from the manufacturer.

I have 3 Rem 700's. .280,30-06,7mm mag. All good shooters, and I will nerver get rid of the 280.......But on Thursday, I am picking up the Savage 10 Predator Hunter in 6.5Creedmoor. I will let you know my opinion at a later date. Years ago, I did have a Savage 17 hvy barrel, it was a tack driver but the action was very crappy. My dad passed away and he had a Ruger 77/17 so for sentimental purposes I kept that one, I can't get that thing to shoot a good group.

Yep, that's what interests me about Savage rifles.

I have a 700 ADL .270 bought new in 2002 that is a tack driver. I have a Savage .243 with Accustock and Accutrigger bought new a year ago and it is a tack driver. If buying new today I would buy a Savage. If buying old I would buy a Remington.

I have both rifles and like different qualitys about both...The Remingtons are pretty much bomb proof and very accurate right out of the box, but heavy. The Savages ok shooters,like the triggers and very light weight. Considering the Savage 7.08 if I ever draw my Bighorn tag.

I really blew it, not buying an older Rem 700 in 30-06 a couple months ago. Savage does not seem to be the bargain any more, unless you go for the Stevens or Axis/Edge models. The standard Savage bolt gun probably goes for as much as the Rem 700 SPS. I have a Savage slug gun as well as an old 99 in .300 Savage. Really, I am a little disappointed that Savage never carried through on the plan to bring back the 99, even though that was probably just a pipe dream. I just like the design of the 700 over the Savage and know that 700s are good rifles.

I am a little concerned about the quality of the newer 700s. This includes the barrels on the recent guns. It's not really a problem, though, because there's so many good, used 700s out there (even lefties) from the 70's and early 80's to buy. My older 700s with factory barrels shoot superbly.
Bob

I have a Rem 700 BDL .280 made in the early 90's, and then a Rem 700 ADL/SPS .300 WM I bought last year. The .280 is a lot smoother than the newer ADL (yes, I know ADB vs. BDL), and I have had feeding problems with the ADL/SPS. I also have older Savage 116 .30-06, I have dealt with customer service of both, and Remington was easier to work with, but for a new rifle today, I would opt for a Savage over the Remington. Overall would be a Tikka though.