.


Connoisseurs of fine wines and classic cars and planes talk about the Best Years for certain makes and other years to avoid.

Collectors of Smith & Wessons seem to like certain years of production and avoid others.



Not for collector status but for straight performance, reliability, and smoothness...

What are the Best Years for Remington 700 rifles and which years should one avoid ?

Similar question for Weatherby Mark V's ?


.

Alot of guys consider the early 1980s as the time frame
when Remington 700s started to lose their quality.

Best year for the M700 was 1964, when the new Model 70s came out.

Seriously, my take is that M700s made in the last 10 years have suffered significantly in quality. I was seriously disappointed with a M700 APR, supposedly produced at the custom shop, that was ordinary- in fit/finish and performance (the firing pin assembly was fitted terribly, had to replace it with an after market Callahan that worked well; guess I'll sell that, as the rifle didn't stay).

I bought Model 700's and Mark V's throughout the 90's and they have all been really good rifles...in every respect.

I have had Remingtons from all periods and consider the quality about the same, although my most accurate Remington was a new sps I bought about five years ago.

I own multiple examples of M700's from every decade they have been made.

Several shooters/gunsmiths whom I respect say the last 2-3 years of production for the heavy barrel M700's have been shooting lights out.

I've yet to find a chamber from a 2001 or newer M700 a sporter or mtn barrel where the chamber wasn't significantly eccentric to the bore.

I picked up a pristine M722 in 257R a long time ago that shoots very well with every bullet I've tried. But when you stand a fired case on a flat surface, it looks like the Leaning Tower of Pizza......

The blueing on all my 70's vintage M700's is the best of the lot.

My 60's M700 all cycle very smooth--even a 1963 BDL that was virtually NIB when I bought it--nor does it have the anti bind slot.

The matte/synthetic ADL's--especially post 2000--have the worst metal work/finish I've seen.

The first 5-6 years of regular production SS M700's (1991 thru 95 or 96) have had the best chambers, smooth actions, and all three of mine shoot very well. The barrels clean as easily as my custom barrels.

I've killed more elk with 70's vintage M700's than any other decade--so I guess I could say that era has really good elk karma.....

Gee, where is Swampy when you need him....

I have only had 3 700's.

One was a 1990 Classic, 25-06, didnt shoot good at all, it currently is a 280AI.

Had a 223, 26" heavy barrel with the synthetic stock, bought new in 2001, outstanding shooter.

Just got rid of a 2005 22-250 SPS, was a great shooter as well.

I've got a bunch of 'em; a couple from the first 1000 built and my last was a CDL Stainless fluted bought about a year and a half ago. The only ones that I wasn't pleased with were in the "J-lock" era. I replaced the firing pin ass'y with a Callahan speed lock ass'y. Problem solved. All of those I've bought in the last six or seven years seem to have very smooth bores and clean very easily and get down to "bare metal" with one application of Wipeout.
__________
NRA Life,Endowment,Patron or Benefactor since '72.

I'd say the best year for the 700 were before Cerberus bought the company.

I do think the quality declined after the Cerberus buyout, but has improved lately........

Exactly.

Offhand, does anyone know the serial# range for the 700s that reportedly had the trigger/sear slippage problems? That is, firing pin falling/striking without intentional trigger action. Thanks for any info.

There was just an article in Rifle magazine profiling Jarrett rifles where he stated that he would only work with 700's that had a A, B, C or D serial number. I don't know what years they correspond to, but maybe someone could look that up on Remington's website.

I though that the only good ones were those that were produced on Thursdays?

Ive alwasy liked the 700s back in the 80's I was alwasy jelous of my cousins 700 BDL in .243 compared to my old 1947 mfg Winchester modle 94(I think diffrently about that now). My uncle had a Classic in .257bob and that is a beautiful gun, I get to see it every November. My .300wsm is built on a 2001 LH short action. In its orignal configureation it shot VERY well and worked very smoothly. I like it just as well after the rework. I will say that Im not at all impressed with the fit and finish of the current ones. I handled an SPS model this past weekend and noticed that the bolt is parkerized and seems very sticky as the action is worked. It actually remined me of a model 710 POS I picked up as a back up gun. It shot good for a hunting rifle but UGLY and clunky to manupulate.

You know he'd say "ALL OF EM"

That's why I clicked on this thread

Current production is outstanding....

All of them are fantastic. I don't care for the j-locs as much but both of my j-locs shoot sub-MOA.

This was the best bolt aciton rifle remington had it's name on. Doesn't matter what the year was



They say a picture is worth a thousands words and heres the proof

I have been buying and shooting 700's, both new and used, since 1973. Would have to add it up, but between owning at least at least a couple dozen and shooting a bunch more, there have been quite a few.

The early ones were typically very good, if you accepted stamped checkering and some rebedding to get them to shoot.

I have had excellent luck with the synthetic/matte metal ADL's as far as accuracy is concerned. In fact every one I've shot has been extremely accurate as-is, including a couple I've regretted selling.

There can be problems with ANY factory rifle. I have had a couple of 700's that only had one locking lug contacting its seat. One was in the late 80's and one in the early 90's. Have seen very few bad barrels, but a lot of great ones.

Personally, I don't care nearly as much about fit and finish as function.

The most consistent problems I've heard about came right after the move to North Carolina--which would be normal for a transition like that.

Right now I have one 722 and five 700's, in calibers from .17 to 7mm, all of which shoot really well.

I have 4 700's and all shoot very well.

One was my grandfather's, a 243 ADL he bought used in the early 70's. He used it in New York to kill woodchucks. When I got the rifle, it was covered in 3 decades of his use. Grandpa's rifle still shoots Sierra varminters like one would want.

I have another 243Win. ADL, this one a synthetic, post 2000. It shoots great. I have used it to kill deer. It shot every bullet I loaded sub-moa. A no-frills shooter.

My first bolt-action, a 700 ADL, wood stock 270 Win. I bought it new in 1997. I put an aftermarket pad on this one, the original one was that hard plastic and the rifle had a sharp punch. With the 6X Weaver scope, the rifle weight is perfect for me. I just shoot 130 gr Sierra SPB's out of it.

Finally, a 700P in 300 Win Mag. This rifle is more accurate than me. Shooting clover leafs at 100 yds is routine, and 3oo yard groups under 2.5" are not a problem. I wish I had a range near me to shoot this thing as far as it could shoot. Sadly, there is nothing near College Station that I have found yet.

Anyway, I never had a problem with a 700. I have never sold one, but that is just a few of millions...

Told ya!

Yep.....when you aren't pulling the trigger......

I've owned over 200 of them, from 4-digit SNs to "T" prefix SNs, and have yet to own a "bad" Remington 700. Or, for that matter, a "bad" 7, 40x, 78, 600, 660, 721, 722, 725, or 788. I've never owned a 673, but think that they'd be nice rifles for donor actions, I just can't get over those butt-ugly barrels, with their ventilated ribs and sharkfin front sights.

Without digging up the rifle logs, I know that I've easily fired over 10K rounds through my Remington bolt guns and have yet to have a single round fire when the safety was released.

JEff

same as you in the numbers owned, the shots fired and the safety issue (with the exception of an after market canjer set trigger that was over zealously adjusted )260 guy, but my favorites are the 60's-early 70's..

My new 700ML came in last night. I think the trigger is under 2#. I'm going to have to increase it a bit. I like the fit and finish of some of my earlier 700s but they all shoot great. I've been shooting them since the mid-1960s.

Cool 720 military model BSA!!!!, made in '42 only and given away as trophies
IIRC it was the only "sporting" rifle made during the war.

And here I thought it was a Remington model 30.

Based on my recently acquired 700 Classic .35 Whelen, 1988 was certainly a good year. My 700 Classic .30-06 is a shooter from the 80's as well.

My M788 and the 2 M600 Mohawks(one now gone)indicate that the 70's were good years.

I recently bought a M700 SS SPS DM in .308 that is still too new to judge. So far, it does not match my Stevens 200 or my Tikka T3 Lite,which are also fairly new.

I have 8 Remingtons from the sixty,s through the last year, and have one on order. I perfer the 60,s to mid 70,s. I have never had one that would not shoot an 1" MOA. My favorite is a 60,s 243 BDL sporterized model I use for ground hogs. I took it to a the range with a friend recently and he could not get over the way the gun looked. The only problem it has ever had was the scope went bad(cloudy up)last year.

Agreed, the 1960's up to mid 70's.

I've owned over 20 Remingtons from each decade. Every one shot under MOA with only a trigger job.

They are just as good and better than ever.

Though the Sako A7 now has my attention.

When did Cerberus buy and ultimately sell Remington? Didn't the sale take place after the Sandy Hook shootings?

Not sure when they bought Remington. Anyone else have thoughts on the Cerberus era???

a good friend of mine ,father worked in the custom shop for years and had sadly noted how things were done and picked out versus the years before his retirement ,shame on ANY company who tries to live on their credentials without following through on current production

Other thougts on the Cerberus years regarding quality of production and accuracy.

I ask because I am looking at one produced in 2009.

Thanks,

Any of them made 1946-2006 when the trigger was redesigned.

Guns made after 1982? with the modified safety that allows the bolt to be opened while in the fire position are far less likely to do this, but the trigger is still the same.

I had a 700 mountain rifle that neither I or my brother could get to shoot consistently under 2 inches. I tried all my tricks and then sent it to my brother who redid most all my work and then some. Sold the rifle to an individual who insisted he would be able to get it to shoot, never heard back.

I believe the early model short action Titaniums are the best rifles they ever built as far as function goes.

June of 1988 is considered the absolute high water mark of quality for Remington Model 700 rifles. And since the left handed rifles were assigned to be produced by the top employees at Remington, they are considered the creme de la creme of the breed. D'Arcy Echols and David Miller have noted ruefully that they wished they could build rifles as fine as the left hand Model 700's produced by Remington in June of 1988.



By sheer coincidence, I happen to have a LH Model 700 FS produced in June of 1988 listed in the classifieds here...

The best 700's are the pre-62's.

I've owned em from every decade they were made in. Very rare is a Remington 700 that won't or can't be made to shoot extremely well.

Really?? WHAT makes them the "best" functioning Model 700s ever built?

Please, feel free to expound on this...

I have had various 700's over the years and my current go to is a BDL in 7 SAUM. Even after being beat up by a water buffalo which cracked the stock it still shoots better then I can for the most part. (with a new stock of course). Never been bedded and I think once I get a trigger job done it will be even better.
I have never had a bad one and would buy another tomorrow if the price was right.

Mark

Had a few over the years. All were M.O.A. or sub M.O.A. Currently have 3, .270 and 30-06 mountain rifle and a fairly new CDL in 7-08. They all make me look good. If I think for a minute, there are a couple I wouldn't mind having back.

Well I didn't read all the opinions, because I have my own. The late model receivers are machined much better than the earlier ones. Have had several in my receiver truing jig.

I own one, a synthetic stock ADL .270 with iron sights I bought new in 2002. It and my CZ 6.5x55 are easily the most accurate rifles I own. I paid $25.00 to have the trigger adjusted to 3 lbs and put a Pachmayr recoil pad on it.

My only issue is that the bolt handle and knob started rusting soon after I purchased it. I cold blued it and have not had a problem since.

Me too. Bought an SPS 308 Winchester in 2008. It shoots very accurately.

Butch,

A couple other gunsmiths I know say the same thing: The newer 700 receivers take less work, on average, to true up.

I've been buying and using 700's since the early 1970's, but some were used rifles made in the previous decade. I haven't noticed much difference in 700 barrel accuracy in that period, in fact just replaced the shot-out barrel on my 700 .204 Ruger with a brand-new take-off purchased here on the CLassifieds, and it shoots the same load as the old barrel into the same size groups. I also can't see much difference in the quality of 700 barrels with my bore-scope.

John,
I can't give an opinion as the barrels were either not on the receiver or were replaced. I do know that Shilen makes a lot of 17 cal. and 20 cal. barrels for their factory rifles.

I can`t say I ever had a bad one.I did have a 700 Ti that I did not care for as the bolt & action & trigger had a gritty feel to it when you worked the bolt or pulled the trigger.It shot good but I sent it down the road.

Well, that's VERY interesting. Aside from the .204, I have a 700 in .17 Fireball that's VERY accurate.

Before I shot out my first Remington .204 barrel it would put 10 rounds of its favorite load in 3/4" at 100, shot as fast as I could aim well. I decided to replace it when 10-shot groups with the same load opened up to 1-1/4", and this new Remington barrel (purchased from a gunsmith who pulled it off, since a customer wanted a "custom" barrel) shoots just about as well.

The old barrel, by the way, lasted over 1500 rounds, mostly shot on warm summer days at prairie dogs. I did let the rifle cool off occasionally, but mostly it was shot hot. It would still hit most prairie dogs, but the bore-scope showed visible erosion for about 7-8" in front of the chamber, so it wasn't going to hit dogs much longer. The replacement cost $60 o5 $75, I can't remember which.

I have owned a few of the newer SPS Remingtons and I have to agree that generally out of the box accuracy (after some trigger work) has been right around 3/4 of an inch for 5 shot groups. Not bad for Tupperware stocks and not even doing bedding work.

I am not fond of the SPS finish although my latest one (about 3 months ago) has a softer matte on it that does not look like it was bead blasted with gravel.

drover

Late getting back to this:

Where else could one purchase a 5 1/4 pound rifle that would shoot MOA for $900? Purchased a new 7mm/08 and had it rechambered to .284 Win, the smith said the action was as true as anything he had seen. This rifle was the best available for hunting Idaho's steep mountains. I'll agree wooden stock rifles look better but when moving through steep terrain I'm not aware of a better choice in that price range. Used it up to 17,000 feet and really appreciated the light weight there. Looked at a ULA but decided to keep the Ti and bought a second for $950 - I'm WAY ahead.

It would have been clearer in my OP if I had said best function for my type of hunting.

I have 4 M700 currently. A 1982 700 Classic in .257 Rbts, a 1988 Classic in .35 Whelen, a (approx.) 2002 VSS in .22-250 and a 2008 SPS in .270 Win. All of them have been great shooters, better than me in most cases, after a mild trigger job. I agree that the action on the SPS seems a bit "rougher" than the others and the 2 Classics have fairly nice wood/bluing. The 2 Classics "seem" to be a bit more accurate but the VSS has consistently placed 40 gr. Winchester white box ammo into a inch or less since it was new.

Everyone has an opinion. I prefer C series and older. Double bonus for 6 digits!

Had My Fair shair Of Them All. I Also Prefer The C series As Well.

260Remguy: My experiences and observations closely match yours.
I have been shooting Remington 700 Rifles since the 1960's and I also have NEVER had a need for warranty work or factory repair type work on any 700.
And after firing many tens of thousands of rounds through my 700's I have as yet to incur a "missfire" or "accidental discharge"!
I currently own 34 (thirty four) Remington 700's from 17 caliber on up through 30 caliber.
I also own Remington 700's from all decades of production - I am not worthy to comment on the machining tolerances maintaining or diminishing over those decades BUT I am qualified to assess/review the accuracy and dependability of the newer 700's versus the older 700's.
The dependability is the same - superb in all generations!
The accuracy (in my extensive experience!) has NOT diminished at all, over the decades!
In fact I think it has improved on average from very good to excellent!
Let me give an example - earlier this year I bought a Remington 700 SPS Varmint (on sale and had a rebate!) in caliber 223 Remington. I precision mounted a Weaver V-16 (4 to 16 power variable) scope on it, did a quick trigger job on it and headed for the range with some new brass handloads (a known and trusted loading for this caliber).
THE first group (five shots at 100 yards!) after barrel break in and sight in measured .307"!
Let me add that this "original" group was fired with new brass handloads, factory stock and cheap Rifle, with a 16 power scope and was made with Varmint appropriate (non-BR type) bullets!
I also own MANY other Remington centerfire bolt action Rifle Models including 721's, 722's, 788's, 40X's, 7's and XR-100's.
Dittoes on the top notch reliability, safety and GOOD to EXCELLENT accuracy I get with all of these Rifles.
I am a BIG "Big Green" proponent/advocate, and have been for right at half a century now.
I do have reservations about some of Remingtons policies and production decisions and of recent their pricing policiy has me seeking out used 700's more and more often.
I see you are a 260 Remington "kind of guy" - I have an extremely consistent 700 VLS Rifle in caliber 260 Remington and it consistently shoots groups (5 shots at 100 yards) in the 4's on no wind days at my range!
In full disclosure this Rifle does have a Leupold 6.5x20 power variable scope on it to aid in the great accuracy - again my groups are all shot with Hunting type bullets in a factory stock Rifle.
I have recommended Remington 700 Rifles for 40 years now - to new Varmint and Big Game Hunters (who ask of me for recommendations) and many of those folks have bought 700's, I have as yet NOT heard a complaint from any of them.
I say the "best years for Remington 700's" are ANY years!
Any year Model 700 you find a "good deal" on I am sure you
will be happy with the money you invest - and I call it an investment because Remington 700's are VERY easy to resell should the need arise and value of Remington 700's (if cared for PROPERLY!) has virtually always appreciated for me.
Again I have NOT gone for as many full "retail" purchases in the last couple of years as I used to.
Remingtons asking prices of recent have really gone up!
Long live Big Green and the Model 700!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I have 3 700's, all in 300 Winmag. Two of them are from the mid 60's with the stainless/blued barrel. Wanting a true weather proof gun, for the rigors of Alaska, I bought a 700 XCR II a few years ago. Got it home and was adjusting the trigger with the set screw. About the third time I racked the bolt to cycle the action, the bolt handle fell on the floor. To say the least I was pissed. Took it to a local authorized repair shop, who said they would look into rebrazing the handle back on..... I insisted they send it back to Remington, which they did. Have used it on the Alaska trip and a Utah hunt successfully but really have a bad attitude towards Remingtons now. In fact I am leaning towards older guns right now. I really dislike the cross bolt safeties in lever guns...OK, that'e enough....

Bought my son his first centerfire, a new M700 Classic .30-06 made in or near 1980.

Fortunately, I got it at a good sale price.

The bolt had steel chips inside and the firing pin was bent. There wasn't even minimal polishing of the action under the stock line.

The stock wasn't symmetrical where it should be in a classic, i.e. the flutes were off center. Finish looked like pigskin, like the stock had been sprayed and rolled in sawdust.

My son kept the action, but replaced the barrel and stock over the years.

Older isn't always better. I've been a consumer for about 70 years, since I first handed my coins over a counter. There has been no shortage of crap made in the good old USofA, including by big name companies. Certain vehicles come to mind.

Caveat emptor is always good advice.

Paul

From a purely nostalgic point, the best years of the 7XX series of rifles ended with the 725; man, that was a quality rifle - maybe not as accurate as the 700, but bank-vault solid quality.

Naw, the "good" Remingtons ended with the Rolling Block. The Model 30 was a cheap, modernized POS.

Now John! I only have half a million in my soon to be finished one.

Ain't that the truth. Wish all my "cheap" rifles cost that little....

JB, you may be right. I have a military Remington Rolling Block (7mm) that I bought from Golden State Firearms in 1955 or '56 (age 14 with just a money order for $7.95 plus shipping; no ID, no FFL, just a signed statement that I was over 18 [OK, I lied]). The rifle was in good shape on the surface (except for the deep exterior barrel pittng under the fore-end and hand guard). I started reloading for it but have never been able to get less than 5" groups at 100 yards on a good day. BUT....., it is hoot to shoot!

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't that a Remington 725? Wasn't the model 30 made with U.S. M1917 actions complete with the dogleg bolt handle?

I have two 700s, both from the late 60s-early 70s vintage, on long action one short action. The long action never had a factory barrel on it in the 25+ years I have owned it. But after being trued up and having close to 10,000 rounds through it, It is smoother then the new model 700s can never imagine. The only part of the gun original is the action ,bolt and firing pin mechanism(spring etc.) The new 700s seem to be assembled by people who just don't care and their chamber specs. seem a little hit or miss.

Any Pre J-Lock Rem will make a great donner.

Remington 30?





James Anderson will get it back from the engraver next week. Needs rust blue and a buffing on the wood.

Currently have two M700s. A late 70s vintage ADL in 25-06 and a 90s era synthetic ADL in 223. Both shoot very well, but the 25-06 has been especially accurate since the day I brought it home (used) in 1978.

Floated the barrel, lightened the trigger a bit when I got it and the rifle hasn't been fussed with since. Even still has the original Bushnell 4x12x40 on it, that I installed all those years ago. Figured to eventually replace it with a better scope. Never got around to it because that piece of junk still works fine.

A huntin' bud turned me onto the M700 back then. His first was a BDL in 25-06 he bought new in the early 70s. Over the years he added a pair of M700 varminters (6mm and 22-250); A 40XB in 7mm Rem mag and an 8mm Rem mag M700 the year that was introduced. All of which I used from time to time over the years. He also had two M7s in 7mm08: One original for his other son and a 20" SS/synthetic for himself.

He eventually replaced the OEM barrels on both varminters with 26" SS Douglass tubes, after about 15 years and thousands of rounds. Some launched at paper, but mostly woodchucks. There was a long period of time when we killed several hundreds per year between us.

When the ADL synthetics came out, he bought one of 'em in 30-06 for his oldest son, followed by another one in 223 and then one in 6mm Rem (Grice's special run) and another in a chambering I have forgotten. All were superbly accurate.

When the 300 UM was introduced, he wanted one in a Sendero fluted, but finally settled on a 300 Weatherby because no shop in these parts could find him one in 300 UM. That Sendero consistantly put five into an inch @ 300 yards. 150gr Btips over IMR 7828, as I recall?

Bottom line, never any accuracy/functionality issues with any of our M700s over a thirty year period, whether they were BDLs, walnut ADLs, Senderos, or ADL synthetics.

I've never actually known anyone that ever had a "problem" M700, that wasn't attributable to something they'd done.

To me, the Model 700's are pretty much equal in quality from the start (1962) to present. I will admit the whole J-Lock idea was pretty damn stupid and counter-productive......but the "rifles" themselves were still of good quality. The Model 700 is a very good, but not elegant design. The desirability is tied to the main competition.....the Winchester Model 70.

In 1962 the "new" Model 700 was introduced just as the Model 70 was reaching it's lowest point. Not that the Post-64 Model 70's were a "bad" design, just not up to the quality and reputation of the rifles that preceded it (I still say that Winchester screwed up by calling it a Model 70 instead of giving it a new designation).

Thus the 1960 and early 1970 Model 700 seem much better, by comparison, than their main competitor....the Model 70. By the 1980's Winchester began to improve their offering and Remington reached their own low point (J-Lock series)......so by comparison, the Model 700's seem weaker. In truth, the Model 700 was as good as ever, just not head-and-shoulders better than the Winchester of this time period.

In truth, there is no "best" Model 700.....they have maintained their quality through-out the production life of the rifle. The Model 700 is a very good, but not an elegant design that just "works". The "best" of the Model 70's are outstanding.....while the "best" of the Model 700's are great, but not "outstanding". The "average" Model 700 is probably a bit more accurate than the "typical" Model 70, but just doesn't have the "style" of the best Winchester offerings. It is what it is.....a very good, working man's rifle that is more accurate than it's competition. Maybe not a "great" design, but more than any would ever need for most uses.

I heard complaints about the J-lock from the time it appeared. One well-know custom gunsmith told me they couldn't shoot as well as the non-lock 700's, since the firing pin spring was over-compressed, affecting consistency of primer strike.

It just so happened that I'd purchased a J-lock 700 not too long before that, a heavy-barrel, laminated stock .223. After a few small modifications, including epoxy-bedding the action and floating the barrel, it would put 5 shots of its favorite load into an average of 1/4" at 100 yards, so I decided to see if it would shoot better without the J-lock. I had another short-action 700, so substituted its bolt innards and shroud for the J-lock's, and found the accuracy was unchanged.

Yeah, the J-lock doesn't look so hot, but I've never seen that it made one bit of difference in the way the rifles performed.

I keep hearing the same thing JB from obvious M700 haters. Only have 1 J- lock gun, a Ltd Classic in 8x57 and it sure shoots nice.The other 700's I have shoot as well or better. Magnum Man

I agree Mule Deer.....I've never had a problem with the J-Lock personally. I just don't see the point in introducing a pointless and potentially damaging feature to a rifle that has no problem. It's more of an esthetics thing with me than a real problem.....there was and is no reason for the J-Lock to exist.

I have 5 700's and 2 have the jlock. I consider all to be very accurate and of acceptable quality verses what I payed for them.

My opinion, the J lock dingus was just an unnecessary "nod" to the prevailing winds of the day, those being aimed at manufacturers to make firearms somehow "safer"?

When that crap got up momentum and most firearms entities were trying to make an effort to appease those concerned, a group I'm part of must've doled out thousands of the little yellow cable gun locks supplied by USSF.

I've often wondered how many were ever actually used as intended, or are still merely taking up space somewheres?

I once briefly had a J lock M700 (used) and never did get the key. But as it was a superfluous feature and I wouldn't have used it, never needed it.

Unless it had come to me sans key and "locked", natcherly. In which case I wouldn't have bought it to begin with. ;O)

The first thing I've done with all the J-lock 700's I've owned was make sure it wasn't locked, then thrown away the key.

Of course we all now hope that Mrs. B didn't keep one key secreted away and that you never, ever manage to rile her up to the point of her having to actually use it.

A 700 is hard to beat for the price.