Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Remington 788

I'm looking for an affordable, yet accurate and reliable rifle to build a 300 blackout on. Would the Rem 788 lend itself to a rebarrel without much fuss? Can I find a barrel that is pre threaded, or is my gunsmith going to have to do this? For those of you that have experience with these rifles, what are your thoughts? It looks a lot like my first gun, a Remington 580.

Thanks for your time and input.

Jeff

I sent mine to Mickey Coleman for a rebarrel, & he did a bang-up job! I'd say it would certainly be worth calling him.

Good Luck,

FC

Too bad you live in Texas. I have one the needs a new barrel... and a new home.

Your 'smith will likely have to measure the threads. Some 788s seem to have different ones. They don't match the M700, either.

I had one re-barreled and my 'smith had no problems at all.

not a writer, but my thoughts anyway;

the rem 788 is a very accurate rifle. as you might recall, it was remington's budget model that would at times "outshoot" the rem 700 in the accuracy department. theories abound on why they were discontinued:


it would outshoot the 700 and so subsequently it cut into rem 700 sales;
it was built on screw machines, and ultimately cost too much to build--more than a rem 700;
it suffered from bolt thrust in the .308 sized bolt face, etc., etc...

in my opinion they are:

very accurate,
have a nice thick recoil lug,
have heavier mounting screw holes in the receiver,
have very stiff receivers and barrels,
have very fast lock time,
have cheap birch stocks that were sometimes inletted rather poorly,
have rather low magazine capacity,
have a rattle prone magazine,
have a rather marginal trigger, etc., etc...

after market stocks are few--maybe only ramline offering(?)
decent mounts are harder to find, but i think ken farrel makes a one-piece base for it.

i really like rem 788's, they are a good "first rifle", a good "knock around gun", etc., and success can be had both in shooting them, and building a special project rig out of them--but here's my thought on that--buy a rem 788 to shoot it as it is--and build on another platform. why?

sometimes decent or unabused 788's are rather expensive, and as i mentioned already, after market stocks and mounts are a harder proposition to procure--so why not order a howa 1500 barreled action from legacy, and base your build on that--you have a better set of locking lugs, a better extractor, a better safety, much easier to find stocks and mounts, and very important (to me personally)--you can get the howa 1500 in stainless steel...always a plus...(and i'm not leaving out the rem 700--it would be great too--i just know howa offers a decent barreled action for the price--especially when you can get it in stainless steel.)

The 3 788's I have owned, a .223, a .243 and a .308 all would fail to throw the fired case clear of the ejection port often enough to be annoying. The .223 was by far the worst offender. I would be slightly leery of a 788 for a .300 Blackout until I could be sure it would feed and eject properly. The detachable magazine would be more difficult to tweak than a fixed box would be, I think.

788's are usually quite accurate. Many parts are becoming hard to find.

AS Hivel states above, an original 788 is becoming a collectable. It will be worth less after you spend money modifying it than it would be if left original. Unless you can get a really good deal on one, you might be better off with something else.

The annoying tendency to fail to eject properly is magnified 10 times over if you put a scope on it. That was my unhappy experience with a .308 788.

You would be miles ahead with something else for modifying. Of course, YMMV!!

That's interesting about the failure to eject. Has anybody else had this experience? If so, do you know of a cause and/or a way to remedy the problem?

My goal is to have a functional and accurate rifle on a budget. Don't care about the looks. If I could, I would try to keep the original stock and simply have it bedded, so finding an aftermarket stock would hopefully be a non-issue.

Thanks

Jeff

I always thought the ejection port simply wasn't large enough. Of course, the reason 788's were accurate rifles was largely due to the stiffness of the receiver, and a larger port would reduce that.

If you're on a budget, you might be just as well or better off to find a Savage 340 in .222 or .223 and use that as your donor. I have one in .222 and it shoots very well. I did have to replace the ejector spring but it now ejects fine. There would still be the issue of the detachable magazine, though it probably would feed OK.

I dont post much here but this thread has me intrigued.

Im rebuilding a 788 6mm as we speak... trying to find a thumbhole laminate that is 100% that isnt 300 bucks... They are out there but they are expensive... Its a great rifle, just harder and harder to find parts for.... If your looking to fund a new project by selling it, PM me Im interested... But I wouldnt build on it.

Im also in the market for a 300 BLK rifle thats not on an AR platform. Rem 700 has factory ones ready to go out of the box for 500-700 bucks. Another Option is the TC Encore platform. If you allready have an accurate Encore you can get a barrel for $450...

Just throwing some options out there.

What? You mean to tell me the 788's were more accurate than the 700's....

They do??? Which model? That would make things much easier, as long as it has a fast enough twist to stable the heavier bullets.

Found this:

http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/remington-700-in-300-blackout/

This raises a question I've been meaning to ask. I have two 788s. My first one was a .222 that I bought sight-unseen. When I took possession I found that someone had whacked 6" off the barrel, supposedly to make it lighter for a youth hunter. It doesn't look good, but it shoots very well. It's the most accurate rifle I own.

Now, about the stock. It was the cheap birch stock. I bought a Ramline stock for it, thinking it would be lighter, but it weighed exactly what the wood stock weighed. So I returned the Ramline, took a little wood off the birch stock, painted it black, and it's ugly. But it shoots.

Then I bought a 788 in .22-250 AI. It has a walnut stock! I figured it was a replacement stock, but it appears to be original. Then I met a guy hunting in the woods with a 788 (.22-250) and his was also walnut (but pretty beat up.) The other day I was at the house of a friend who recently passed away. I was helping his widow figure out the value of his guns. He has a 788 (in .222) that also has a walnut stock.

Question: I've read a hundred times about the cheap birch stocks on 788s, but I've seen three now that have walnut stocks. How is it that walnut sometimes shows up on these guns?

Steve.

Usually I resist any compulsion to criticize a concept, but t this concept eludes me. The .300 Blackout was designed for the AR-15. Why make a 788, an action able to handle the .308, into a Blackout?

Plus, despite the high regard the 788 action has among certain rifle loonies, it ain't perfect. Getting a Blackout to feed from the magazine (which aren't common) might be a PITA.

I've owned 788's and haven't been crazy about them. Timney makes a nice trigger, but the actions vary so much in dimensions that getting the trigger to work consistently can take some doing. Reloading the action from the top is difficult (if not impossible in the smaller rounds) and stocks are scarce.

Apparently, however, difficulty and impracticality in a build is a real attraction for some people.

I've owned three 788s, two in .223 and a .308. They were superb rifles, and with the right load, one of the .223s would shoot in the twos. (Sold the other one before I shot it much).

They're rattley, have a cheap box magazine, lock at the rear, and have a cult following. If I had to chose between a 700 and a 788, I'd go the 788 every time. Now, both of them have bad triggers from out of the box.

I wouldn't build on one. Too good of a rifle.

Early 788's had walnut stocks. I had an early walnut stocked .222 that was very accurate. It had the distinction of being the only rifle I ever owned that was rendered inoperational by an errant grain of sand in the trigger mechanism. They were cheap, ugly, overweight rifles with lousy triggers and not worth the price asked for them today.

Well, Mr. Mule Deer, truth be told I don't care for the AR platform. I have enough experience with them to know that they are an inherently dirty firearm, unless you want to pay a lot more money for a gas piston set up, which I don't. I am a reloader on a budget. I enjoy my shooting a lot more when I don't have to chase expensive brass all over the place. Also, I am a collge student and won't need thirty rounds of sub sonic capability to take down any jihadist here in the near future. So, in this situation I see the 788 being more practical than an AR, which simply doesn't suit my needs, nor my pocket book. If you can point me in the direction of an affordable ( I think with a little effort I can score a good donor 788 for a couple hundred bucks) bolt action to build my rifle on, that will fit my needs, I would be very grateful.

As far as my interest in the 788, like I said, I am on a budget. Low and behold, I also have a thing for older firearms. I am also not a gun writer and don't claim to have any experience with the 788. This is why I came here, to ask those more knowlegdgeable than me to get the low down. As far as the rifle being heavy enough to handle a large round... I think that mentality is kind of silly considering the plethora of rifles that can be had in smaller rounds capable of handlng larger rounds, ie. A Rem 788 chambered in 223 Rem that could also be chambered in 308...

I'm not trying to build a masterpiece here. I'm talking original stock with glass bedding, original trigger, and so on. If they are accurate enough to begin with, as many have eluded to, and with the low report/low recoil round like the 300 blk, trigger control should be a non-issue even to the most inexperienced of shooters. As long as it shoots accurately and functions as advertised, I wiil be happy.

The verdict is still out. I will continue to take these replies for what they are worth and go from there. But, if I can get my hands on a 700 already chambered in the round I am looking for, that has the twist needed to stabilize a heavy bullet, at a price that I think is reasonable, I will probably go that route.



Thank you for your responses everyone. I truly appreciate it.

as blackheart mentioned, the early 788's had walnut stocks. and if i recall correctly these early rigs (some, or perhaps all ?) also had a lighter weight barrel contour than they had later on towards the mid 1970's. of course the earlier walnut ones are the more desirable to collect these days. to be sure the birch stocked .223 can get pricey, if you can find one. my old shooting bud glen grey used them alot, and was one of the best rifle marksmen i've ever known...his rigs were sure enough cobbled together affairs, but he could make them waltz...

around about 1980-1983 some were made in carbine length barrels (243, 7mm08, 308). at that time the stock was changed so that the "floorplate" was inletted flush, the forearm was "fuller", and the monte carlo was removed. as to metal, the bolt body was changed to in the white, and the bolt handle was swept back some--no longer just straight--and the rear sight was "improved" to a newer design...

i have quite a few of these rifles--i prefer many of my other rigs over the 788's, especially the rem 700's and sako's--but the 788's almost always shoot exceptionally well--despite poor inletting in some specimens. as far as the ejection problem, this was covered by pete brown back in the 1960's when they first came out--he mounted his weaver scope with the elevation turret to the left--which would not be my cup of tea but it solved his issue--the problem is caused by a small port, which helps stiffen the receiver, which is already "about as thick-walled as a section of 6 inch diameter black pipe".

a casual pic of my carbine 243 and ramline stock--a gun so ugly you gotta close one eye to look at it. with factory 100 grain fodder (which is all I use in it--and i'm not a factory ammo fan), it will do right at a 1/2 inch at 100, is reasonably easy to make hits with out to 600 on 2 and 3 moa size targets, and can at times deliver the mail out to about 800--though i consider it a 300 to 400 yard rig--pretty ok for a budget gun...

they shoot fairly well, but they are definitely budget guns to be sure--that are a true "anomaly"...

The 788 actions for different cartridges varied in the size of the ejection port and magazine cutout. So, a 223 action won't handle a 308. A 22-250 action won't either.
The ejection problems arose from the ejection angle being too high. If a scope was mounted low, the empty would often hit the turret and fall back into the port. The easiest cure was to rotate the scope 90 degrees counterclockwise.
788 bolt handles came loose much more often than any other action I ever worked on. The lack of camming power with the multiple lug bolt made the problem worse.
I devised a system for adding weight, sear engagement, and over travel adjustments to the 788 trigger and so modified a couple of dozen. I also made up a three lever trigger for one but wasn't really happy with it.
The 700 or any of it's spin offs (model 7, 600, 660, Sportsman 78 etc.) are a better platform for most any purpose than is the 788.
The 788 that intrigues me most is the 30/30 and, if I ever see a cheap one, I'll buy it. I probably won't see a cheap one so my money should be safe. GD