Talked to my local Gun dealer,My cost for one in 25-06 is $1650,dealer cost $1579 Wow.They also couldn't beleive the huge jump!

I can't believe they saddled the standard chamberings with a 24" tube...

I would think you could do better for $1,650 if'n you don't mind a 4 or 5 month wait while you piece one together.

Going to be a while before they are avalible any how.Wish there was a good smith near by........

I've been told by 3 different dealers to expect a 10% price increase across the board for Remington Rifles for 2007.

GB

For a 25-06 I like the 24" tube, for the rest I agree completely.

Considering that Remington factory crowns leave a lot to be desired, I view it as a huge plus that they allow for some extra barrel length. That way I can have the barrel crowned at whatever length I choose.

IMO, 23" is about perfect in a sporter weight, standard chambering barrel. Lop a little bit off the end, and we are right there with a custom crown to boot. $50 very well spent in most every scenario.

It's a fluted barrel and personally I don't like a barrel finished with the flutes running off the end... personal preference as it obviously won't affect anything.

Was anybody griping about the old style Ti, other than wishing it was less expensive? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

First the J-lock and now..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" /> Back to the classifieds..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Gotcha.

Doesn't bug me much though, since I am not of the short-barrelled fraternity.

Good thing for all of us that not all rifles are vanilla flavored.

Looks like you'll get about an inch before the flutes will be exposed.

CAS, agreed!

Hey all, what's the current market value of an NIB 7-08 Ti (no j-lock)?

Helluva markup for the retailer, there, eh?

Did I read that right ... 5%?

I wonder what manufacturing costs are.

Rick

Was thinking along the same lines. Sure glad I am not trying to make a living selling those.

I saw one last week for $1199 in a local store.

I doubt it was the Alaskan Ti model.

I can have a pretty darned nice custom with a barrel a heck of a lot better than remington's put together for that kind of money....

No question firearms retail sales is no money tree. But THAT is some skinny pickins!

Rick

I wanted the Alaskan Ti at first, but not at that price.

1700+ for that rifle........Good luck.

Local dealer quoted me same $1650 for 25/06. I like everthing about it, but........... I have a hard time paying that much $$$ for something w/ a B&C stock.

Wait a minute, I guess I don't like everything about it. I wish they woudl have left it an ADL...................

Not much more for a good build.Thats would be my route.

Let's see...the Ti went from 5.25 lbs to 6 pounds. They went BDL, with heavier barrel and useless flutes...and then made it more expensive...WTF ?

Get a Kimber Montana for less and never look back.

YUP!

If it ain't broken, fix it 'til it is..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

I bought the former Model Ti in Dec 06 for $1057 (new) and it came with the new style trigger to boot. Talk about good timing!

I would never buy the Alaskan Ti for what Rem is asking. Me thinks sales will slump, then Big Green will end the Ti model altogether after a couple yrs.

The sucks loonies will then be back to their regular scheduled programs. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

MtnHtr

IF Big Green would just start producing the Mtn Guide special as a regular offering, they'd be miles ahead....

as an aside to all this, it just hit me that there's no "known" remington employees that are members here ... would be VERY interesting if there were ...

I mentioned on a previous thread on the Ti that the price incerase has to be attributed to an increase in machining costs of that titanium action. No other component in the rifle can cause a price increase like the one we're facing with the new Alaskan Ti.
I worked many years in a production facility, am in tune with manufacturing costs. I went straight to the action as being the culprut for the price increase. I think that Remington had the cost bogie for the action get away from them, and had to discontinue the earlier Ti, and go with the Alaskan, to bury the cost increase of the action.
No other part of a rifle can increase the price by that much, including fluting the barrel, which I see as a masquerade by Remington.

Don

I've been told Remmy out-sources its Ti receiver mfging to S&W...

I want one in 300WSM but I'll never pay for what they're asking.

Did this out-soucing just happen recently?

Don

+1 Looks like a kimber in my future.

DMB, I was told S&W has always made them for Rem... would make sense with S&W's familiarity with Ti.

Looks like the LVSF in 7-08 in a McMillan stock will be the magic toy for me......possibly have the bolt fluted and it would be even cooler...

I had heard that Rem did not make the Ti action in house, but didn't know who did.
The problem with cost growth (higher mfgr costs) can exist no matter whether Rem makes it or S&W. What happens in these cases it that S&W will come screaming to Rem saying they can't make the actiuon for the original, initial, cost. So, Rem has a choice, either stop selling Ti actioned rifles, or, pay S&W more for it.
I'm just looking at what part of the rifle could drive the price up. And, it's all spectulation on my part, but a learned on from having worked in a vehicle production plant. I don't know for sure. All other parts of the rifle should have not gone up enough to drive the price to the crazy level it is now. The barrel fluting will cost more than a straight barrel, but it doesn't add that much to warrent the final selling price. The new trigger should actually cost less than the older Mike Walker trigger.
I'm just looking at the huge price growth and trying to figure out what caused it. To me, it could only be the action machining costs. Since I don't work for Rem, I'll never know for sure. I'm just looking at the rifle as a whole, and analyzing component parts costs. The stock is from Bell and Carlson, so that should not have added much, if anything, to price growth. The only thing left is the barrel. Assembly costs should not have changed much from the original Ti to the new Alaska Ti model, nor should the chambering and barrel fitting have changed.


Don

I would bet attorney fees are a higher cost of doing business.

I was told by my FFL that the WSM Alaskan TI has a wholesale price that is much higher than the standard calibers. Making
his wholesale cost about $1725 for the WSMs.

Not too sure any prorated attorney costs would have a large impact on the Ti. They may be higher, but when prorated over all of the products that Rem makes, any attorney cost increase would be low comapred to what the Ti has gone up.
You point may be vaild however, I don't know.
Another thing just came up. That is, let's suppose Rem is in trouble financially. They could very well be loading the price to "get well".. Don't know, just a thought.

Don

Don

Remington had the best factory rifle they ever built with the Ti.I cant beleive what they have done to it,all they had to do is add a couple more calibers like 223 with 1&8 twist and they would of had a dream machine.I really dont know what there thinking.Just my 2 cents

1

Does anyone know what the weight difference is between a titanium short action and a standard ss short action (with fluted bolt and milled out bolt handle as well, to make it "same same") ???

My point is, while I know the Ti action is less weight, is it really enough weight difference to make the price worth it? Remington increased the weight of the Alaskan Ti, so obviously they're not trying that hard to make it an 'ultralight' ... I figure they could have simply told S&W (or whoever is doing the machining of the Ti action) to pound sand, and just kept making the Ti exactly how they did before, except for replacing the Ti action with a SS action ...

I guess what I'm really trying to say is that while the new Ti is a very sweet package, and is probably worth it to quite a few people to pay the asking price ... they could/should have just done away with the Ti action and kept making the older Ti with perhaps the new and improved stock ... and they could have offered it in blind mag or hinged floor plate configs ...

It would most definitely been cheaper to make, thus cheaper to sell, and seems like that would have sold better than this new one ...

Like we figured a while back. Remington made them 12 ounces heavier and increased the cost $500. I don't think the market will be too kind to this model.

Thought for food:
In my line of work I've seen construction costs rise 70% over the last 3 years due to increases in gas and steel. namely, manufacturers have told us that 72% of the stainless steel being produced in the USA is being shipped to China due to their 4 trillion dollar infrastructure improvements.
Any reasoning that this could cause some of the price increases we're seeing?

It's 4 oz.

In doing some looking at the increased costs of finished Titanium, versus regular steel, I ran across something interesting.
I was looking at the Taurus Tracker model 627H4C which is made of Titanium, and compared it to the same exact model made in Stainless Steel, Model 627SS4. Both are identical, same 4" barrel length, same grips; both are revolvers.
The Titanium is priced at about $800 MSRP while the Stainless Steel Model is priced at about $550. That $250 delta is all Titanium, which includes the delta for Titanium steel over regular Stainless Steel, which used in the 627SS4. I don't know what the raw steel costs of Titanium over Stainless Steel is, but it isn't $250 per gun. Somewhere in that $250 is increased machining costs, over the Stainless model.
To me, that's what Remington is faced with for their 700 Ti, and increase in machining costs by S&W, the 700 action vendor.
I can't explain the huge increase in the new Alaskan TI any other way than that it's in the receiver, plus some delta for fluting the barrel. Everything else is about equal to the earlier 700Ti, stock, chambering and fitting, and basic barrel costs.
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.....<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

P.S. The Titanium Tracker weighs 24 oz vs the Stainless model which weighs 28 oz.

Don

Don ...

thanks for the info ... and thanks for emphasizing my point, regardless of your intention. If the new Ti were a true ultralight, it might make it worth the asking price ... However, when it sports the weight it does, I can't imagine finding many who can justify the extra expense for the 4oz weight savings ...

for a $1600 6lb rifle, I'm building from scratch, thanks ...

as an aside, I think my LVSF 7mm-08 in a Ti SAUM stock is right at 6lbs for the bare bones rifle ... and it didn't even start to approach the $1600 price tag ... more like 1/2 that price, in most cases ...

+1

Good points..
No way I'd pay that much money for the new Ti either.

Don

If they made that Mountain Guide as a regular production rifle, and priced it so it could sell about $700, they would sell a ton of them. I say screw the titanium and build the short action Mountain Guide at 5.75 lbs, and the 06 version right at 6 lbs. If you flute the bolt bore the handle and polymer the trigger guard, couple more ounces can come off. Pretty soon you have a decent reasonably priced rifle.

Exactly...
I know the Titanium action is about as good as it gets.. BUT, all that money, for 4 oz??? I don't think so; not for me anyway.
There are other, more economical ways to save 4 oz.
The loonesy of all of this is, the new Alaskan Ti weighs more than the original one. The great selling point for the original one was the rifle's overall light weight.

Don

I think Remington is relying on the word "titanium" to sell it. Since that has been the whole craze of the gun industry the last few years. Most guys that wander into gunshops are not informed people like the guys in this forum. Most ignorant buyers are easily sold if you just tell them "this is the greatest" or "this is the most powerful" . What's even more ridiculous is the damn carbon fiber on guns now gimme a break!! Remington defintely screwed up the new titanium .....now....if they left the price the same and the weight the same with the improved trigger and stock it's a WINNER and they nearly put Kimber out of the rifle business with all the negative energy surrounding the Kimbers. The Kimber Montana will put the Rem TI 6 feet under very shortly. WHY ON EARTH would they add more weight to it and expect to get more money for it? When the only reason we would buy it is to shed weight. They also raised the weight on the Mod 7. I love Remmy but they aren't very bright.

In the 7mm Rem mag and 300 win mag I would not want the rifle any
lighter.

I second that thought. And to add insult to injury, they stick a yuppified hinged floorplate on it......geeeeez.

Casey

I like the 24" barrel for the 25-06.A couple oz. don't matter to me,but a few hundred more than last years model does!

It seems that around here "4oz" is stuck in everyone's head as the difference between the Ti action and the steel actions, but all the measurements I've done, have read about others having done, and caluclated myself, indicate about 8oz as the actual difference, which is an appreciable amount when talking lightweight rifles. For example, assuming that 2/3 of the 36 oz given as the weight for a steel 700 action + bolt is the action itself (sans bolt), and the fact that Ti is about 2/3 as dense as steel, here's how the math comes out: The steel action (without bolt) should be about 24 oz and the Ti 16 oz. In order for the differnce to only be 4 oz, the steel action, without bolt, would have to weigh 12 oz, which, I'm pretty sure, it doesn't. Add to this the bit of weight lost with the fluted/skeletonized bolt, and it's afully hard to rationalize the difference to be 4oz.

As far at the AK Ti goes, I only hope that Remington will see fit to bring back the 700Ti when sales flop with the AK Ti, which I suspect they will(?). I wonder if Remington went in this direction becasue of the lower price point Kimber seems to be able to maintain with the 84M Montana?

Except that average joe shmoe is not the type of guy to fork over 1600 + for a new rifle (more like $500-800, where the majority of models are listed). So for either gun loonies or joe shmoes, I bet Remington misses the boat on this one.

I heard the same thing. I'm glad I got my 7-08 LSS Mnt rifle when I did. It was "used" for this past two week PA deer season, and sold back to the store for Christmas money. I got it for $600.00 out the door, with the new trigger, no J-lock, and the R3 pad. They are going to be over $800.00 with tax very soon, if not now.