Author Topic: Remington 798 (Read 1949 times)

tanoose · « **on:** June 28, 2006, 04:10:40 PM »

Doe anyone have one of these i was wondering how this rifle would be in 375H&H

azshooter · « **Reply #1 on:** July 01, 2006, 08:50:28 AM »

Hmmmm... I feel new gun fever coming on.

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/model_798.asp

DavOh · « **Reply #2 on:** July 01, 2006, 02:36:24 PM »

It actually kinda bothers me that Rem.'s bringing in import rifles and branding them... just my .02

Rogue Ram · « **Reply #3 on:** July 01, 2006, 06:55:07 PM »

There are virtually no affordable controlled round feed rifles left anymore, except CZ and these Zastava rifles. These are the same rifles made at the same place the Interarms Mark X were, which later were imported as Charles Daly. Many of the Daly rifles were rather rough. It appears Remington scooped Daly and got the contract, and the guns are exhibiting a better fit and finish.

The .375 HH in one of these :eek: NO thanks. The rifle in .375 weighs about 7.5 pounds according to the online catalog! Then again, .375s tend to push, not recoil violently. I'll wait for someone else to tell me how it is. :-)

RR

Slamfire · « **Reply #4 on:** July 03, 2006, 02:28:12 AM »

I guess the Ruger ain't affordable anymore, eh? :wink:

DirtyHarry · « **Reply #5 on:** July 03, 2006, 09:09:35 PM »

Quote from: Slamfire on July 03, 2006, 02:28:12 AM

I guess the Ruger ain't affordable anymore, eh? Â :wink:

Not when you can pick up a CZ or the Rem for LESS than half the price of the ruger.....

dave375hh · « **Reply #6 on:** July 18, 2006, 04:05:13 AM »

I just read a test of the 798 & 799 rifles(long & short actions). I think it was in Shooting Times. The accuracy was 2"+ at 100 yds. with like 5 different loads. I'll not be buying one if that's the best they can do. If I have a rifle that will only shoot 2-3" then it's outa here. I consider it broken, and won't waste my time on it. Nice looking but poor shooting.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #7 on:** July 18, 2006, 05:17:01 AM »

yeah but if i had ditched a couple of my rifles when they shot a 2" group with factory ammo, i would be sorry...those rifles now shoot 3/4" groups because i took the time to find a handload they liked.

those tests don't scare me much...i think those guys spend more time behind their desks then shooting, and that fact and the fact that they use only a couple types of ammo in the tests make me think those guns have more to offer.

-Matt

Rogue Ram · « **Reply #8 on:** July 19, 2006, 03:59:45 AM »

Quote

I guess the Ruger ain't affordable anymore, eh? :wink

:

Last Ruger M77 bolt action I owned had a push fed action with a big Mauser claw extractor. That means its not "controlled round feed". Did Ruger change something recently?

RR

Slamfire · « **Reply #9 on:** July 19, 2006, 07:01:57 PM »

Quote from: Rogue Ram on July 19, 2006, 03:59:45 AM

Quote
I guess the Ruger ain't affordable anymore, eh? :wink
:

Last Ruger M77 bolt action I owned had a push fed action with a big Mauser claw extractor. That means its not "controlled round feed". Did Ruger change something recently?

RR

Recently, no the old tang safety models were as you describe, but the Mark II is strictly CRF.

HuntingGuy · « **Reply #10 on:** July 20, 2006, 07:12:52 AM »

Quote

Hmmmm... I feel new gun fever coming on.

Never totally leaves any of us, just goes on a short vacation

hunt127588 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 20, 2006, 03:56:31 PM »

Quote from: Slamfire on July 19, 2006, 07:01:57 PM

Quote from: Rogue Ram on July 19, 2006, 03:59:45 AM
Quote
I guess the Ruger ain't affordable anymore, eh? :wink
:

Last Ruger M77 bolt action I owned had a push fed action with a big Mauser claw extractor. That means its not "controlled round feed". Did Ruger change something recently?

RR

Recently, no the old tang safety models were as you describe, but the Mark II is strictly CRF.

Slamfire, not true. I own a Mark II from the first year they were produced (circa 1992) and it is not controlled round feed. It was after the first of year of production that the Mark IIs became a true CRF setup. Mine is a MK II all-weather stainless .30-06 with the old style boat paddle stock.

Thebear_78 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 20, 2006, 07:13:15 PM »

I wouldn't over look a 375 just because it is fairly light weight. My current 375 weighs 6lb 4oz naked and just over 7lbs with quick detach rings and scope. It isn't uncontrolably at all. The 375 isn't nearly as bad as people usually think. It doesn't have that really sharp jap that some of the higher velosity magnums have. I'm sure with a good recoil pad that 798 would be a fine rifle, too bad its not stainless though.

If it were me I would probalby just look for a stainless 700 in 375 H&H. Drop it in a good after market stock with good recoil pad, get the extractor changed to a sako, or AR15 style extractor and call it good. The push feeds are very reliable as long as you get the weak remington 700 extractor fixed up.

Gregory · « **Reply #13 on:** July 21, 2006, 01:13:47 PM »

Quote from: hunt127588 on July 20, 2006, 03:56:31 PM

Quote from: Slamfire on July 19, 2006, 07:01:57 PM
Quote from: Rogue Ram on July 19, 2006, 03:59:45 AM
Quote
I guess the Ruger ain't affordable anymore, eh? :wink
:

Last Ruger M77 bolt action I owned had a push fed action with a big Mauser claw extractor. That means its not "controlled round feed". Did Ruger change something recently?

RR

Recently, no the old tang safety models were as you describe, but the Mark II is strictly CRF.

Slamfire, not true. I own a Mark II from the first year they were produced (circa 1992) and it is not controlled round feed. It was after the first of year of production that the Mark IIs became a true CRF setup. Mine is a MK II all-weather stainless .30-06 with the old style boat paddle stock.

Hunt is right, I had a LH 300 Win Mag from the first year's production of MKII's and it was a push feed.

Slamfire · « **Reply #14 on:** July 22, 2006, 05:11:09 PM »

Ok you convinced me, only about 95% of Mark IIs are CRF.

slab12 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 23, 2006, 05:06:41 AM »

I bought one of the Charles Daly models just before Remington took over import. Here is what I can tell you. Mine is a .270 with a Meopta 3 x 12 x 50 RD scope with the german #4 reticle, with factory Hornady SST 130 grain loads it will shoot 3/4 groups off the bench. I had to have some trigger work done and that was it other that useing some JB bore paste to smooth out the barrel. The action is rough compared to higher dollar rifles, but it seems to be smoothing up with use. For my use as a deer rifle 2 weeks out of the year it fits the bill just fine. Is it a Sako "NO" Does it shoot good for the money "you bet" I gave $289.00 for mine NIB and am satisfied.

Mr. Joe · « **Reply #16 on:** July 23, 2006, 06:58:53 AM »

I think these are fairly decent rifles, but unless your talking about a .375 or bigger, they are not a good deal. They are fetching $450 around me. Within that price range, you can pick up a ruger in blued steel wraped in walnut. Its controled round feed, made in the U.S.A, has the best rings in the industry, and since ruger started making their own barrels again, are tack drivers.

I am actualy very mad at Remington for doing this. Basicly i see it as using cheep forign labor to undercut their other american competitors such as ruger, or the now defunct winchester. I can not and will not support this type of buisness practice wich i find hurts the cause of American industry. I know this is common and it cannot be avoided in many products such as cars, but as long i have a choice, i will no longer be giving my money to big green.

I know some of you will chime in and say they are in financial trouble and just trying to stay afloat, but i dont care. They sell a ton of guns, and they still loose money. If a company like kimber can stay in buisness selling a fraction of what remington does, it tells me remington is poorly run. Even larger companys that are well run can compete. Look at ruger, they have NEVER lost money.

Mark my words, we will see more and more of this until an american made gun is a rareity.

GeoW · « **Reply #17 on:** July 26, 2006, 02:22:29 PM »

Mr Joe,
USRA (Winchester), Browning, Weatherby, all have or had guns made in Japan for years. Kimber butchered thousands of Swedesh
Mausers and sold them as Kimber sporters.

As far as I know, Ruger has kept manufacture within our borders but I may be wrong.

Why all the fuss about Remington going overseas. I never liked the Russian made Remington stuff, looked kinda trashy and third world to me but the Mauser actioned M798 is a nice alternative for someone who prefers mauser actions.

GeoW

JBabcock · « **Reply #18 on:** July 26, 2006, 04:05:20 PM »

Remington sure jacked the price up compared to what Charles Daly was selling them for. I wonder if the quality followed the price increase?

Mr. Joe · « **Reply #19 on:** July 27, 2006, 10:50:48 AM »

I never bought any of that stuff either! I dont like the fact that we are loosing all of our manufacturing jobs to low bid overseas companys and i refuse to support it with my money.

Demonical · « **Reply #20 on:** July 27, 2006, 01:49:23 PM »

If you don't like it don't buy it, but don't preach about it.

Nothing wrong with free enterprise and that's all that's going on here. I thought that's what the good ol' US of A was founded on...

BloomGrad · « **Reply #21 on:** August 17, 2006, 05:00:20 AM »

I've owned a .375 before, and if this gun is in the 7.5 lb. range the answer would be..Poor Choice. It would be simillar to getting hit in the shoulder with a baseball bat. Light weight .375's rely on GREAT stock design to distribute the recoil forces. Factory stocks in this price range really lack the good design features like a wide enough butt, the proper dropoff and cheek position along with wrist size. Not to mention Proper bedding of the action to prevent cracking under the recoil lug, cracking around the trigger bridge and cracking at the tang. Years ago Remington made a run of their 700 CLASSIC in .375 using almost the same stock as their other CLASSICs. They had LOTS of cracked wrists on those stocks to replace under warranty.

If you want a .375 in a lower priced CRF rifle, the only one I would consider is the CZ 550. They have the proper weight and action bedding designs. They may lack a little on the outside but they make the error towards sturdy performance giving a utilitarian feel. This CZ rifle has been used in Africa for decades by guys that NEED a .375 H&H. If you look at a CZ 550 there is a gap in the inletting at the tang and I've heard people remark of the "poor inletting quality". HELLO!.. this is to prevent cracking.

If free money is found lying on the street then my next choice is the big the Ruger 77.

If you are looking for something bigger in the Mauser 798 size and 2"-3" factory groups scare you off, then have it rebored or rebarreled to .35 Whelen. My .35 Whelen is nicer to shoot. Factory brass is available for loading. Maybe even the .338-06. I've heard good things aout it but have not had one. They'll drop anything here in North America. To keep the price low you might find a barrel in the GunParts (Numrich) Catalog for cheap and have your local 'smith put it on for you.

Good shooting.

anweis · « **Reply #22 on:** August 18, 2006, 12:13:02 PM »

Quote from: Mr. Joe on July 23, 2006, 06:58:53 AM

using cheep forign labor to undercut their other american competitors wich i find hurts the cause of American industry. I know this is common and it cannot be avoided in many products such as cars,

Yes, it can be avoided, as long as the managers and CEO's are not stupid. I just heard on the radio that Ford is going down the drain. I knew that it eventually will, because of them insisting on manufacturing gas guzzling monsters. Where is the 50 mpg Ford with 5 star frontal and side impact crash ratings, ABS, and 8 airbags? Those who don't see it commin' deserve it. Gasoline is not expensive enough.

anweis · « **Reply #23 on:** August 18, 2006, 12:15:05 PM »

Quote from: Mr. Joe on July 23, 2006, 06:58:53 AM

using cheep forign labor to undercut their other american competitors wich i find hurts the cause of American industry. I know this is common and it cannot be avoided in many products such as cars,

Yes, it can be avoided, as long as the managers and CEO's are not stupid. I just heard on the radio that Ford is going down the drain. I knew that it eventually will, because of them insisting on manufacturing gas guzzling monsters. Where is the 50 mpg Ford with 5 star frontal and side impact crash ratings, ABS, and 8 airbags? Those who don't see it commin' deserve it. Gasoline is not expensive enough.

Brithunter · « **Reply #24 on:** August 18, 2006, 12:30:37 PM »

Ford does have fuel efficient cars but they are made in Europe. Why they don't make some of the same models in the US you would have to ask them. However the Mondeo depending on options will give around the mid 40's to the gallon.

Now gas is not about to run out because if it was normal folks would not be driving about as the remaining fuel would be grabbed and horded by the government for it's use. All those nice Military toys are useless without fuel