Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Swapping bolts in a 30/06 Rem 700

OP,
Clean the bore & chamber as if the Bbl had never been fired.
(Mick made excellent barrels)

Install a higher power scope to shoot groups with.

The 2.5-8X scope is for point & click hunting...not load work/grouping....even w/ 20 year old eyes!

Sorry I missed that post--but it still doesn't tell us a lot.

Some have already commented on how it's just about impossible to analyze inaccurate rifles on the Internet--for various reasons. Per usual, the "answers" you're mostly getting are the usual stuff--often involving stuff that's already been done to the rifle.

However, I will point out a couple of simple things that have eventually come out of threads like this, of course AFTER a bunch of people suggested all sorts of the usual stuff, often expensive.

One was a thread a few months ago, where it turned out the OP was resting his rifle so the rear sling swivel stud hung up on the rear rest during recoil. That one went on for over 10 pages.

A few years ago a guy who lives in a state south of me sent me a PM, saying he had a new .30-06 of a usually accurate brand, and could NOT get it to shoot well with the typically accurate load of a 165-grain bullet and around 58 grains of 4350. (Can't remember if it was H4350 or IMR, but both usually work with that charge and 165's.) I asked about the scope, and he said it was a New Leupold, purchased with the rifle. So I asked if he'd tried a different scope, and he said yes, but the results were the same. He'd already checked at the screws for tighteness, etc. I gave up.

Maybe six months later he decided to try a third scope, because it finally occurred to him that the second scope he'd tried was also a new, unproven scope. He found an old 4x Leupold in his safe that had worked fine on several other rifles, so he mounted it and shot the same load--which then went into around 3/4". (There are two implications from that: Two scopes can be screwy, and no, you don't need a high-X scope to tell if a .30-06 will shoot sub-inch groups, as somebody suggested here.)

In general, I have found simple solutions occur far more often in instances like yours than many rifle loonies are willing to believe.

Keep front stud out of bags too.

I thought Pierre was dead.

Let me know what the gunsmith says. Nothing beats talking to the right guy, rifle in hand.

That's the key with gunsmiths - talking to the right guy.

It would be great if the work done on the rifle came with an iron clad guarantee.

Something to the effect that if the work (agreed upon) done on your rifle does not produce at least 1 MOA with 5 shots at 100 yd consistently by said gunsmith then the work is free of charge. 4 consecutive groups (20 rounds) should be enough of a test. Client pays for ammo (Manufacturer and type agreed upon).

I wonder how many gunsmiths would still be in business if that were the norm??

I don't think you'll find anyone offering that guarantee, but if someone did, their prices would have to be really high! Not that many big game rifles are consistently MOA for 5 shots.

🙂 He will offer to check anything that you want. He will need to know what has been done to the rifle, and usually by whom.

You should tell him everything, but say that you only wish to try the new bolt. He will ask if you want him to fire it with the replacement bolt to see if it makes any difference. That way, knowing what's been done already, and firing it himself, he can give you an informed opinion.

From there, you can decide if you want to proceed with any other work. He will make suggestions, and most importantly, what it will cost.

That sounds like a good idea

You have a PM.

Don't know what happened to my text on my other post.

Was going to say they can guarantee and prove a rifle capable of 1/2" groups, but can't guarantee the customers ability to do same with the same ammo used, let alone with what other reloads and factory ammo the customer runs through it. Seems a constant controversy customers have with their gunsmith.

Absolutely assure yourself of proper head space!

I hunted with a 2MOA 700 .243 for several decades, and killed stuff with it. Can't remember ever not getting what I shot at with it. Maybe why I became a fan of "leaving powder burns".

Didn't like the original stock, with factory pressure point, but did glass-bed it that way, with and without pressure point. No Joy, so I built my own - in fancy wood. No change. But prettier. For a time....

Couple years ago I had nothing better to do, so started playing with the bedding/pressure point again, trial and error. Finally found an exact pressure point pressure that it liked (.75 MOA) with shims, and bedded to that. The PP bedding did not achieve the temp shim accuracy, quite - It now shoots moa. But then I don't use a torque wrench, so a slight difference NAY have caused that, or maybe the rigidity/flexibility/compression differences of the two PP materials. Close enough!

It doesn't kill any better or worse, tho.... . And I still don't particularly like it. Never did.

That exact pressure preference might be something to consider, as well, and make sure your receiver is bedded in flat. There should be no more than 1/2 (1/4 is better) turn in the front and rear screws from coming snug to fully tight. Use index marks or torque wrench to bring those back into perfect alignment if action is removed from stock. If you and/or the gun is that particular.

If you haven't already done these things..., also I've read some stuff on 24 about magazine fit affecting accuracy. And front receiver screws being a tad too long. I have two rifles that are full length bedded- M98 in 06 is superb - the 1985 M70 7x57 is 1.5 t0 1.75 moa. I've some playing with to do on that one this winter. But after full bedding, it shoots better than as it came factory trigger set, crap- bedded and fit, and the safety never factory fit at all. The Tubbs safety and bolt upgrade made no difference from factory. At least in my hands.

These 3 are the only of my rifles that are not free-floated from a couple inches forward of the receiver. Most rifles prefer free-floating, in my experience.

Good luck chasing the phantom of accuracy!

Oh, yes - I once had a RU77V in 25-06 that shot about 5MOA with factory. A Lee Loader (19.95 at the time) and reloading my cases with that, loads worked up, turned it into a sub MOA shooter- no other changes made, tho the trigger pull was a tad harsh.

I have a Rem Mountain Rifle in .30-06 purchased new in 1994 and had a similar problem. The good news is that I was able to fix it.

It was ADL with a synthetic stock and shot sub MOA. After a few years of great success with the rifle, it suddenly just lost it's ability to shoot a decent group, way larger that 2 inches.

I put on an new scope but that didn't help. Finally, I spoke with a guy in the parts department at Remington who had the same rifle. He explained to me that the mountain rifle's pencil barrel is extremely sensitive and NEEDS to be touching the two small fingers at the front of the stock. If the barrel doesn't rest firmly on the fingers, the increased vibration will affect accuracy.

It turns out that the FFL that sold me the rifle had filed the two finger to float the barrel, all with good intentions. So, over time, the fingers continued to erode until the accuracy went out the window.

As a result of the conversation with the Remington guy, I ordered a new mountain rifle synthetic stock (BDL was the only one available) and my rifle went back to sub MOA accuracy. The only other non stock mod on the rifle is a Timney trigger that I put in it a couple of years ago.

I hope that this helps you, it sure fixed my problem.

It's possible that is the problem. After all, every barrel is different, and very thin barrels seem less likely to shoot well free floated. On the other hand, I had a Rem 700 Mountain Rifle in 30-06 made in the 1980s that shot well bedded and free floated. So it depends on the barrel.

I've had Rem 700's that shot much better after I filed the magazine box so it didn't put pressure on the action. And I've had some where I had to shorten the front action screw for the same reason.

So there is a long list of possible accuracy fixes that one can go through trying to get a rifle to shoot well. JB has written about many of them in his books.

It certainly does depend on the barrel.

My Mountain Rifle barreled action shoots great in a stock having an inlet for a varmint contour.

There are even two magazine-box possibilities:

The magazine box is "too tall," so contacts the bottom of the action firmly when the action screws are tightened. This can happen over time as a wooden stock shrinks. (Another problem that can occur if a stock shrinks is the front action screw can contact the lower recoil lug, as the hole for the front action screw in 700's goes into the lower lug recess. Somebody mentioned this earlier.)

The other potential problem is either end of the magazine box can contact the stock. Usually it's the front end, but not always.

Both problems are relatively easy and cheap to fix, but often overlooked--even by supposedly professional gunsmiths.

I take it that the magazine should have a little wiggle and play when one opens the base plate with the follower and sticks a finger in to wiggle it up and down.

I just checked mine and that's how mine is.

Curing a too tall magazine box transformed my buddy's Model 7.

Slap the new bolt in it, tie this abortion strongly to an old tire, get her aimed right and pull the trigger with a string. Just looking at the fired brass will give you some insight. With a small miracle there could be an accuracy increase.

As an update to this saga.

I took the new bolt and rifle to the gunsmith and he checked it with the Go/No Go gauges and it will definitely not close with the Go gauge. The gunsmith said it will likely not even chamber a round.

I will not be using the bolt. It appears that there may be some dimensional differences between older Remington bolt lugs and newer bolts. Interesting to know.