Here's a hypothetical situation that I'd be curious to hear opinions about. If someone wanted an exceptionally accurate custom barreled hunting rifle how much difference in accuracy would be seen between a commercial FN 98 Mauser and a Remington 700? I'm not talking about a varmint or target rifle, just a hunting rifle that is so accurate that you can't wipe the smile off of your face.

For the sake of discussion let's assume it would be a .270 Winchester with a high quality custom barrel in a #2 or #3 contour, a good trigger, well done bedding and good handloads. Maximum scope magnification wouldn't go over 10x. I'm thinking about building a rifle like this. I want something exceptionally accurate which points to a Remington perhaps but I have a bit of a preference for Mauser actions in general. For a target rifle I'd take a Remington over a Mauser every time. But, for a hunting rifle does using a Mauser action give up much of the accuracy potential of the barrel?

haha this should be good....

I have to admit that I cringed a bit when I posted it. I've had nicely accurate factory rifles from Remington as well as Mausers but I don't have the experience to know about these actions when custom barrels are instaĺled.

Well, anecdotally speaking, have several vintage mausers capable of touching 3 at 100 yards. Perhaps that has little statistical value...:)

Am not quite sure that can be as easily duplicated as with a 700...but it can be done!

I appreciate the anecdote. The experience of others is a helpful thing.

One Half-Moon barrel and the rest are Douglas.

I guess a good mauser smith within driving distance would be more of an issue to me than the particular brand of a good barrel

I think it would come down to the skill of whoever puts it together.


Okie John

I'm in Canada where gunsmiths are fewer and farther between. There is a good one about 2 hours away otherwise I will be shipping things.

No.

Yes.

Years ago, when I was just getting into custom barreled guns, I had a very informative conversation with a national quality (now deceased) rifle builder. He said if he did everything right building a rifle on a Rem 700 action, he might expect .5 MOA. Do everything just as well on Win 70, and he would expect .75 MOA. The design makes the difference, and I think a Mauser would be even worse. The action twists more, the recoil is transmitted more back into the action, the lock time is slower.

I appreciate Mauser actions as much as the next guy--my last several builds have been based on them. But if my goal was a gun that was "schit eating grin" accurate, they would be about the last place I would start.

I have an FN 98 commercial action in 6.5x55 swede( x-caliber stainless barrel). With quickly developed hand loads(didn't take time to work with bullet seat depth) it shoots just under an inch at a 100 with 140 gr. Nosler partitions. If the action face has been trued and a good barrel is twisted on and the action is solid in a good stock you're not going to notice any practical difference between the two for hunting purposes. I think there are a number of gunsmiths who say Rem.s are more accurate because they would prefer to work with them, not necessarily because they have proven Mausers to be inferior.

Rem 700

I have had more than a half-dozen rifles built on Mauser actions, and I still two and my daughter has one. My .257 AI is on a Mexican Mauser action, as is my daughter's 7mm-08. Both will shoot 1/2-inch three-shot groups with loads that they like. The .257 AI has a Krieger barrel and the 7mm-08 has a Douglas Premium barrel. The third one is a .404 Jeffrey built on an InterArms Mark X action. It easily shoots one-inch three-shot groups from a good bench rest--with open sights. All three of these rifles were built by the same gunsmith who is literally a wizard when it comes to building on Mauser actions.

I have also had several rifles built on both short and long Remington 700 actions, but I no longer own any and have no plans to acquire any more. YMMV.

Locktime and lack of a good trigger handicaps the pure accuracy of a Mauser. Not a problem for me as I think a true MOA rifle will do all I want it to do as 300yds is my personal limit.

My first "custom" rifle started out with a VZ-24 military action and a Midway 35 whelen barrel. A friend of a friend chambered it as a 35 whelen AI, it struggled to put three shots into 1 1/2" at 100 yds, with groups in the 4+" range typical. Needless to say, I wasn't happy. Through a sequence of events I came into a set of 350 Rigby dies and the loan of a 350 Rigby reamer. I sent the gun off to a real smith to have it re-chambered. I faced the action, re-chambered the barrel and cut a new crown. The gun subsequently struggle to shoot worse than 2" at 100 yds and it's best groups were 1/2". This from a sloppy miliatary action, two stage military trigger and a 2 1/2X scope.

Personally I wouldn't want to the added weight of a mauser action for a .270, but with a good barrel and good gunsmith, I would expect for all intents and purposes a 98 Mauser to be as accurate as a Remington 700 for a hunting rifle.

Nearly all my custom rifles are made on Mauser actions. And all are accurate with some being freakishly accurate.
The FN Mausers made in the 40s, 50s and 60s were excellent rifles but you must remember the barrels were made at that time too. Some were OK, some very good. The barrel making capability of today is WAAAAAY out in front of most commercial manufacturing of the 60s. So asking "Remington VS Mauser" is not really the right question.

The actions don't shoot.
The barrels shoot!

So given the same barrel quality in both guns, they would be equally accurate. If you look at a M700 of say 1990 vintage and compare it to an FN Mauser of say `950 vintage, even money says the Remington will out-shoot the Mauser, because the 1990 barrels are made to tighter tolerances then the 1950 barrels overall. There are exceptions on both sides, but they are just that.........exceptions.

The Remington has a faster lock time, but that feature is a bit over rated. If your squeeze is straight and to the rear and you have good form, lock time is not much of a factor in accuracy. It can be a slight edge for bench rest shooters, but even then we don't see all the records set or broken with guns with "the fastest lock time"

The Mauser is far superior in it's extractor, and in it's bolt handle (one piece instead of being soldered on)

The Remington triggers are a good design, but often made from low grade materials which is why they have had so much legal trouble with them, over and over and over. Mauser military triggers can be re-worked for decent pulls, but it's easier to replace them with a Timney or some such after market trigger for most men. To be fair, if we replace the Mauser trigger with an aftermarket trigger we'd have to give the same trade to the Remington.

The controlled round feed is the gold standard in all bolt action everywhere in the world. Here the Mauser, (and the copies of it's extractor, 1917 Enfield, M70 Winchester, M77 Ruger Mk2 and so on) leave the Remington in the dust.

In fact, as a gunsmith with about 50 years of experience, I can tell you that the Remington M721, M722, M700 and M600/660s all suffer from the weakest extractor ever put in any bolt gun anywhere at any time. That's not to say they are all failures, but just to say everyone eases are stronger. I have replaced more Remington M700 extractors in my 50 years then all other actions of center fire rifles combined.
But these are reliability issues, not accuracy issues.

Comparing a full custom build made on a Mauser to a factory Remington is not a valid comparison. That's because you get to select a high grade barrel one at a time on any custom rifle, where as the production rifle has a production barrel in it. MOST Remington are very accurate. I have had to work on a LOT of Remington for a LOT of reasons, but barrel quality is not often one of those reasons.

I think it was about 15 years ago, a fellow won the 1,000 yard national prone competition, with a .30 cal magnum on a Mauser action... Kind of a blast from the past. But obviously they can shoot well if handled well.

I do like the Remington action a lot, but if you like a Mauser, then use a Mauser. You're not going to shoot poorly on big game because of that choice.

Guy

I Forgot, I had an Interarms Mark X with a stainless Shilen barrel in .270 back in 1987 that also shot under an inch with factory Rem. 130 gr.
Rem. is boring, pick the Mauser, put a quality barrel on it and go forth and kill critters.

A round action (Rem 700 clone) especially with a smaller port is going to be more rigid, more symetrical and EASIER to make shoot great. It will take much more care and skill to get a Mauser to shoot as good and I don't think the end potential is as good. If it was, you would see them in some of the accuracy disciplines. With one exception, I have never seen a Mauser action at a rifle match. I also don't think there is any need for a hunting rifle to shoot much better than 1 MOA. How many of us really shoot far enough that this matters? Sure, it is fun and nice to brag about and to some degree a confidence builder. When I put together a long range hunting rifle I use quality 700 style actions with the accompanying excellent triggers, scope rails and stocks that abound in this configuration. I also quit load testing once I hit .5 MOA as I feel practice is more important that chasing the holy grail of accuracy. I only get about 600-800 rounds out of my 6.5-284 barrels. I hate burning them up looking for 1/4 inch groups when 1/2 inch groups are more than good enough.

You said exactly what I was about to say.

Also, the only extractor I ever had fail was in a Rem 700 Classic 35 Whelen.

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.