if i want to buy a remington 700 bdl blued/wood, is it better to buy a brand new one or one manufactured circa 1980, as far quality goes?

The quality of the Model 700 was at it's best between 1962 and about 1985. I've owned a great many Model 700s over the years (I bought my first one in 1972) and there simply isn't any comparison between the earlier ones and the current versions.

As a rule of thumb, I only buy Model 700s that were produced under DuPont ownership, and only those rifles that came with the old-style safety that locks the bolt-handle down when the safety is engaged.

As a bonus, 100% factory-original, mint-condition older Model 700s can be had for less than the current ones are listed for, and there are tens of thousands of them to go around as well. There's no shortage! All you have to do is put in the time and look for them.........

I recently bought a 1971-vintage Model 700 'C' custom (from Remington's custom shop) in 7mm Rem. Mag. that was in dead-mint, unfired condition, and had never so much as had a scope installed on it. I bought it for way, way less than a current custom shop M700 would bring, and for not much more than the retail price of a current BDL or CDL. And in terms of quality, there just isn't any comparison.

I've found the barrels, chambers and receivers, as well as the stockwork and finish, is much better on the older rifles, and I've never had one that wouldn't shoot extremely well...........

AD

I'd go CDL for ergo's.

I've 700's of all vintages and couldn't say with a straight face,that a certain year was better then another.

Could say however,that my Ti is as good as they get and it weren't a child of the 80's......................

I can say it with a straight face, and I'll stand by what I said. You can mike the receivers, analyze the barrels, crowns and chambers from a Model 700 that was built in the 70s or 80s compared to one built in the 90s to present, and it's pretty easy to tell how well these rifles were put together.

As I understand it, Smith and Wesson is producing the the Ti receivers for Remington, which is probably a mark in its favor......

AD

I'm talking off the shelf accuracy expectations.

Same/same...pick your year.

Can add my LTR 308 and S/S Seven Shamu to the fray and I've 700's going back to 721/2.

Couldn't discount the LVSF's either,wicked accurate bastards on the average.

Nice not having to guess,try it sometime..................

Now that we is talking broad brushstrokes,lemme add that in my sampling,S/S tubes have a superior interior finish and routinely outshoot their CM brethren of like guise.

Foul less/shoot and more better,is a good thing IMHO....................

allenday
+ a big 1.
Its the difference between a machinest running a machine preforming a machining a operation and giving a chit about what hes doing.
Or the flip side of a unskilled operator loading a length of bar stock into a robot for a lightsout operation.
The difference in the quality of the machining from the old to the new, is easy to see.
Im not saying the new stuff wont shoot.But to my eye it just looks like crap.Then theres J locks, 8 pound triggers.Rear bridge heights out in outer space. .01 clearence between bolt and hole.Sometimes you have to wonder how it does manage to shoot well at all.
I for one will be usuing the "old" stuff.
dave <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Still laughing at the J-lock nonsense myself.

Someone was smoking rope.

"CNC Machining" ain't a dirty word to me...................

Musing also,my penchant for glass bedding,as opposed to the Gregorian Monk approach,to achieve Divine Inletting via clam shell and untold manhours squandered.

Point being,I'm a fan of results.

New Remmie's flat assed shoot and that is a tangible result,though old Remmie's did likewise and that's my point.....................

The accuracy of most Rems will be decent. The older ADLs and BDLs were built with a high level of quality. The current crop of SPS seems to be spotty. I bought a 270 WSM SS SPS that cratered primers and had an enormous chamber. I sent it to Rem to get fixed and they made it worse. It would have shot okay, the barrel cleaned up easy enough and resisted throat erosion well.

If I had a weak moment and decided to buy a new Rem, I would follow Stick's advice and look at a Ti or CDL, though I think I'd rather have a Kimber.

For a custom rig, I'd get one of the older chrome-moly actions, have it coated, and build off of that. The older CM actions seem to me to be smoother than the newer actions.

Am thinking the most accurate Factory Rifle I've ever owned,was a 308 VSSF,dumped into a McMillan handle.

Barrel was a screamer,despite a polevault to the lands.

Had a 24" S/S BDL 223 Sporter that was also stupid in the accuracy department. Punched it 223AI and made a lotta brass with it and then gave the tube to a pard.

It's the action on my 1-8" 3-groove PacNor 223AI..................

As an aside, I bought my first centerfire (my dad's funding) rifle around 1973 or 1974. It was a 700 BDL .30-06. I still have the receipt, AND the rifle. Paid $135.00 for it. It also came with a thin leather sling. I still use the sling on a late 60's Sako mannlicher .308.

I never shoot the rifle anymore, but plan on using it for a donor one day.

BS,
CNC machining is my stock and trade.In every case,its the man on the handle or these days, the man on the button.
That makes the quality difference.Not to many people crank a handle anymore.
Now a days we use PTG tap-mandrill tool to open up the receiver threads and then ream the bore hole over size.And
ALWAYS square the face of the action.You can get away not opening things up but I have seen 700s that needed it.Then just replace the bolt with a PTG .7025.
Thats still alot of dicking around and the driving force behind guys like Jerret Borden Stiller Lawton to build a better mouse trap.And they are.
You know the sad part of this is that Remington could own this market.If you could just remove the lawyers and bean counters heads, from the manfactureing guys butts.Remington would be king of the custom action market.
Never gonna happen.
So you think they were smoking dope on the J lock thing huh?Musta been on something alittle stronger for the 710 and that eletronic thing they dreamed up awhile ago.
dave <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

George has an action now,then there's Preston's and lotsa good choices available.

Back to over the counter agg's,I can't see a trend which indicates one vintage over,as undisputed king ala Remmie lineage.

Pop a new chamber in a Factory take-off and the dazzle is often upon full display,especially via S/S tubes.....................

Tell you what I absolutely prefer the older model with locking bolt.It gets to be a pain when you have your rifle slung up and the bolt flops often while hiking..

I await the first incident.

Patiently........................

I have owned both and there is no doubt about it the older 700's are vastly superior.
I bought my first 700 BDL in 1975 for the out the door price of 185.00.
It never needed trigger work like my year 2000 700 did and it actually shot a better group than the circa 2000 rifle did.
There are plenty of older 700's out there for sale cause i see them all the time on GB and Auction Arms.
My brother's ex wife bought him a BDL 700 in 1985 and it shoots like a dream.
It did however require a trigger job.
And i do believe Remington eliminated the bolt lock mechanism around 1982.

I too notice a significant difference in quality in the various vintage 700's.....with the winner being the older models by a large margin. The walnut used in the older models is often of a much higher grade also (not always, but newer 700 almost NEVER have anything except very plain grain). I never did like the impressed checkering on the older 700's though, so that point goes to the newer ones. I personally never had much use for the bolt-lock feature......not opposed to it, just not nessisary. However, after slicking up the bolt on a few rifles so less effort was needed to operate the action, I did have the bolt come open while carrying the gun in brushy areas.......so I would now prefer the bolt-lock be present (another point for the older 700's). The very existance of that stupid locking "safety" devise on the new 700 bolts is reason enough to reject them.......I won't use it but just knowing it's here, pisses me off. Finally, the triggers on the older 700's are much better than any current model.......even if the newer ones can be adjusted or replaced to correct this flaw, the fact that I have to do so.....pisses me off.

Older 700's win.......and you can always have the stock checkered. Will admit that ALL 700's, no matter what age are extreemly accurate, but that is a toss-up and give no advantage to either model.

Older ones are/were more nicely finished overall. New ones seem to have sharper corners that the older ones would have had the sharp edge broken just a tad.

Had one new one about 4-5 years ago with the ejection port edge actually beveled over and no finish to speak of on the action area hidden by the stock. I sent that one back and they sent me a different rifle. Have had some new triggers that won't adjust as finely as all the old ones I've had - have two that adjusted great, one that I never could get all the creep out at any safe poundage and one whose pull weight varies depending on whether you put the safety on and take it off - do that and the pull weight drops about a pound. Can't recall anything but terrific, consistent triggers on the older M700's bought in the 70's and 80's.

As far as accuracy, though, I don't really see any difference between the old and the new ones. Of the five or six Model 700's I've bought in the last 6 years, every one of them was accurate out of the box. One .270 was stupid accurate, like 3" groups at 300 yards. So naturally I fixed that one with a new stock, new bedding and such until I broke it so it wouldn't shade 5-6" at that range.

Another .270, a .30-06, a .308 and a .243 have all been pleasing sub-moa shooters with any decent load with nothing more done than a twist of the trigger weight screw.

I DO respect your opinion, Allen. Are you saying the demensions of the older M700 are more consistent? Reciever more square? Bolt lugs more square/aligned. Closer to the blueprints?

I've got M721's/722's and M700's starting in 1963 to 2003--two or three from each decade--including a pristine first-year-production 7mmRM and first-year-production BDL in 30-06. Those two are my worst shooters. My best are a 1994, 270W, 700ADL SS Syn Stock (Plastic stock) Mountain Rifle with a lightweight barrel contour (looks just like a Ti, but sans the fluted bolt--best version of the 700 ever made-- manufactured for two years, 1994-95, MSRP less than $450). And a 2003, 243W, 700ADL "Wal-Mart special" Syn Stock (Plastic stock is even worse). With Ballistic Tips, both will do 3/4 inch groups--5 shots.

The 1994 ADL Mountain Rifle has a better fit than the 2003, even the sling studs and trigger guard are SS. The 2003 Wal-Mart special's matte blueing is terrible (I'm gonna have to seriously consider Cerro-Kote)

Otherwise, like Big Stick, I can't find much difference on the target. The stock to metal fit has steadily declined over the past 20 years. Triggers are the same--some good, some not so good, most started out heavy, but I fixed 'em.

Maybe I'm not discerning enough, but I have never had indications of scope mount holes being out of square enough to warrant much worry on any of them. A little judicious filing or polishing has always slicked up the action on any that may have needed it.

The blueing on the older ones are obviously better.

Casey

I still have am old BDL [#7756X] in 30-06 that I bought used in Security Equipment in Hawaii for 125.00 in 1972. Added a Weaver Marksman scope and, with factory ammo , it shot about an inch or less if I did my part. Started loading when I started working on Molokai and shooting the Axis deer about every other weekend. This rifle [til today] will shoot ANYTHING and still keep its groups under an inch. I even tried this: Five different brands of cases [Mil /NM Mil/ Rem/Fed/Win] and loaded all with 48.5/4895 and 165 Gr. Sierra Gamekings. Even with different cases it still shot! This was with powder charges straight out of the RCBS powder measure and not scaled. [This load was NOT max in my rifle but it MIGHT be in yours so go fore-warned.] Can`t ask much more from an off-the-shelf rifle, used at that. Only difference now is that it has a 1-4 Leupold scope. NEVER touched the stock. Why mess with success?

Aloha, Mark

Without a doubt the quality has went down along with attention to detail. The bluing isn't as nice on the current ones.. The mag followers in some of the new ones are really crude compared to past ones. I've seen a couple of the sps s/s that were crudely tapped and noticebly out of line.

Accuracy hasn't seemed to suffer and this is contributable,to the design of the rifle. It was designed to be made cheap and accurate,as a result of post war manufacturing. That and CNC has helped.

I've owned alot of older ones and current production ones. The older ones are alot nicer in construction and fit. That becomes a moot point when all you do is tear them down and add fiberglass stocks and after market barrels.