Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Accuracy potential: Remington vs Mauser

I have a lot of Mausers and few Remingtons. CRF? Why do you need it unless you miss, but I haven't had a Remington fail to feed. Same with the extractor, if it happens to fail and I've never had a Remington fail me, I haven't been trampled by an animal yet. Same deal, you don't need it unless you miss.
A real $hit Stirring thread.

I think everyone has pretty well covered the pro's and con's of said topic. I have a MRC99 action with a 26" Douglas ~#4 and a McMillan Sako pattern stock in 220 Swift. This rifle is the only rifle I have ever owned that could do a 1/2 group ALL DAY LONG;) However I own a Remington 700 with a #2 24" Tube chambered in 25-06, with a take off older Rem KS stock, that on a good day shoots 7/8" groups. Now by definition the Swift is the more accurate rifle. In all other ways the Rem takes the cake: balance pointability, offhand snap shots all go to the Rem. Both put that same Chit eatin' Grinn on my face.

Fraser: I have a number of custom barreled Remington 700 "Hunting" and Varmint Rifles - I have chosen the Remington every time intentionally over any Mauser action I have come across.
I have as yet to be disappointed in either their accuracy or dependability!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I have a number of custom barreled 700"s as well. Knock on wood I have never had one fail to feed or extract. They are just an easier platform to customize. Kinda like the chevy 350, everybody makes aftermarket and accuracy enhancing parts for them. By the way I just put a trigger tech trigger in my last build and I freak-in love it!

IMHO the majority of accuracy gains in the past 3-4 decades have been from barrel quality and the care gunsmiths use to chamber those barrels. I haven't found it any more difficult to work up loads in a mauser 98 than a Remington 700 and I've done so in multiple configurations of both actions.

If my goal was 10 shot groups of 1/2" at 100 yds, I certainly wouldn't choose a 98 mauser as a basis in fact I'd skip the 700 and go with a custom action builder. If I was content with three shots in a 1/2" and maybe some change, I'd not hesitate to choose a mauser, and have a good gunsmith fit a top match grade barrel.

The reason I stopped using Mauser 98 actions is they are heavy and clunky and starting with a military action and converting it to scope use with a good trigger costs as much as buying a complete new factory rifle that is lighter and likely good to go out of the box.

Few know that if a Rem 700 bolt is timed correctly, the extractor will yank the rim off the case before it fails to extract.

I am a Remington freek and own a few customs.

I have also had a bunch of custom Parker Hales which are mauser actions with lock time like Cadillac Door closing. Everyone of the Parker Hale customs shot in the very low 2's, without fail. Now, the gunsmith knew how to indicate a barrel in, and all barrels were Shilen Match grade Stainless steel with good reamers used. I shot benchrest for years, know how to reload and use wind flags.

I have a period 1950's Springfield with a 30" straight taper barrel about 1.125" in dia. The gun was built by a very, very good gunsmith of unknown origin, 22/250. This rifle will shoot with a lot of custom rigs, and has out shot a panda and batt on several occasions....nut behind the bolt.

The gunsmith that uses a quality barrel,takes his time indicating the barrel in, will produce a very, very accurate rifle....period.

Okie nailed it!!

They are both skinny siderail actions and will have similar accuracy potential when bedded correctly which is critical to their performance.
It is much easier to get good accuracy from a stiffer action.

Back in the 1990s there were two great forces on the internet:
Bart Bobbitt [The NRA icon for accuracy is painting of him] who advocated Winchester model 70s [many things in common with a 98 Mauser]
Gale McMillan [whose sons are still in the gun biz] who advocated the Rem700.
Bart is more of a High power competitor, and Gale was more of benchrest competitor.

At this time I have rebarreled ~ a dozen Mausers, ~ a dozen Rem700s and only two Winchester M70s.

I have made a chart of advantages the Mauser has, but have come to the conclusion that there is very little reliability and sturdiness required of a rifle to shoot a deer once a year.

We carry rifles in foam lined hard cases, like we are moving around an expensive microscope. Rem 700s are good enough in that environment.

I have been gunsmithing for forty years and started because of my interest in benchrest shooting and rifle accuracy in general. When I started shooting BR, there were still a few unlimited class rifle in use which were based on FN single shots. Every now and then, one of these rifle would shoot a pretty good group. None of them were legitimate 1/4 minute rifles. I have never been shy about trying different, unconventioal, actions for an accuracy built and, on occasion, one shot pretty well, but the only standard, commercial action which was regularly capable of being built into a competitive BR rifle was the Remington 722 or it's derivitives (700, 600, xp100).
I have always said, if you want an accurate varmint rifle, use a Remington. If you want a stone-reliable hunting rifle, use a Mauser, if you want a classy, hunting.target rifle, use a Model 70. GD

The Mauser brothers didn't ramble on about CRF like todays hunting crowd do,
but they did stress the value of the M98 feature of reliable extraction.

So historically, where and when did the CRF holy grail talk thing start?

CRF didn't seem worth much mention by Mauser in a weapon designed to take on
multiple targets that would be shooting back at M98 user(s)...but for some silly
reason it is typically seen right at top of discussion when it comes to shooting at a
dumb primitively equiped animal.

Considering the amount of 'knowledgeable types ' in the M98 crowd, who erroneously
call the patented gas port feature in the left wall a ' thumb slot' I do kind of understand
how CRF hype can perpetuate.

John Rigby & Co. who even had the exclusive contract with Mauser, made no specific
mention of CRF in adverts:
> http://www.cornellpubs.com/Images4/rigby-c1899.jpg

The magnum Mauser action came about because Rigby requested Mauser build them,
yet in their dangerous game .416 advert they make no mention of CRF.
> http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/classics/rigby/Rigby_catalog1.jpg

In the Rigby proprietary cartridge advert, they make mention of them being magazine rifles
(as done in numerous other UK brand adverts), but no mention of CRF.
> http://c8.alamy.com/comp/D3EJA8/ori...om-english-country-gentlemans-D3EJA8.jpg

Westley Richards mauser magazine rifle advert makes no mention of CRF.

> https://i.pinimg.com/736x/8d/d9/f5/8dd9f57ca09503cb37e4f09f764145ec--rifles-shotgun.jpg
> https://www.theexplora.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/webley-2.jp>

Jeffery .404 and .333 mauser adverts, no mention of CRF.

> https://www.theexplora.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/404Jeffery.jpg
> https://i.pinimg.com/736x/fe/dc/e9/fedce9330d1f9534ecf624e729348b8c--catalogue-vintage.jpg

Manton & Co. mauser .350 magnum advert, no mention of CRF.
> http://rigby08.businesscatalyst.com/images/1924_manton_advertsmall.jpg

Holland & Holland mauser magazine rifle, no mention of CRF.
> https://i.pinimg.com/originals/61/c5/11/61c51120fca1f37fde8fb81706035fbf.jpg

Pre64 M70 adverts, no mention of CRF.
> https://i.pinimg.com/736x/78/f9/1c/78f91c3beb95f09e49b8d205377bc4c6--hunting-rifles-hunting-gear.jpg
> https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d9/cc/bc/d9ccbc0b93c46a36eada592a5dcfac07--rmc-advertising.jpg
> https://i.pinimg.com/736x/89/78/9e/89789e180de17950d0c23c8c0840f777--print-ads-winchester.jpg

Grinning, what a rant!

Hey some things are so obvious...most women have two breasts, but the fact of the numerical count seldom gets as much press as the displacement...:)

I believe warm weather was a contributing factor....

And somewhere, sometime I imagine there was someone who found that the thumbslot was as useful as I have for thumbing down cartridges or setting a clip. Works slick for loading, holding rifle in left hand and give great custom wood-smiths a place to add a flourish or two. It is my favorite feature and to date have found no accuracy issues due it--for killing stuff.

LOL...so obvious that people today feel compelled to repeatedly pump 'CRF' into folks minds
despite the fact it wasn't done in the decades spanning Mauser production and the golden era
of safaris and great white hunters.




Follow the manufacturing changes of pre-war Oberndorf magnum Mausers, one will find that feature was deleted
by Mauser in favor of a solid left wall. Various current manufacturers of the M98 design also opt for a solid left wall.
Since 1925, M54/M70 users have got by fine without such feature. If its really so useful, I wonder why we don't commonly
see commercial M98 and M70 owners and manufacturers opting for a 'thumb slot'.

CRF, thumb slots, fit in well with other hype nonsense like the imaginary '.275 Rigby' that folk like to crap on about.

Ruger-Hornady realised that todays crowd are so dumb and gullible, that they could collude to create a fake nostalgia
'.275 Rigby' that even John Rigby & Co. didn't have, and charge them a premium for it.

Proper re-creation of cartridge nostalgia would be to just get some ordinary boxes of 7mm Mauser and stick labels on them
saying '.275 bore' and mark '.275 bore' in the rifle metal,.... because thats all that Rigby did.

Done that...bedding will be the issue. Get yourself a GOOD composit stock with the bedding system in place...H.S. has one I believe. Then if the guy assembling it knows what their doing, it will shoot with the best of them......tho not quite as good as a 700 IME.

A couple of things I like about the Mauser over the Remington are the safety and the CRF. The safety is dead safe, when it is on the rifle will not fire. I like the fact I can push the round down from the bolt face and back into the magazine with a Mauser, with the Remington I have to jack the round out and then put it back in the magazine. I have owned a bunch of Mausers, all but one had aftermarket barrels, Timney triggers, and stocks. Once tuned I would put any of them up against your basic M700. However if you do the same to a M700 you will end up with a very accurate rifle also. If I were to build a specific match rifle of the two I would use a custom match action instead. Presently I have no M700 rifles but I still have 4 Mauser's and 2 Springfield's. They are all better than MOA shooters. Will I ever put any money into a 700 again, no.

I would do neither.. get a Tikka T3 in your preferred caliber.

Tikka T3 Lite Stainless
308 Win
McMillan Sako Hunter stock
155 Scenar
Lapua brass
Bushnell 3-12x44
Sportsmatch mounts

No animal is safe at 500 yards and that barrel will last 8-10.000 rounds.



I would not bother with a Rem 700 at all.