Figured I'd ask the guys who knows. Well sounds like a fine piece. And fancy. Can you all tell me about this rifle? There's one for sale in my area. Assuming it's a model 7000 in 3006, 26 inch tube. Only made em for several years. He knows he gots something special and im thinking of offering him a wad of $. I don't know much just from google.

If you have access to Stuart Otteson’s excellent book, The Bolt Action, Vol. II (Wolfe Publishing Co., 1985), you’ll find a thorough and detailed analysis of the Nikko Golden Eagle Model 7000 in Chapter 16 of that book.

This rifle had a short run in the mid-1970s. Although it was an attractive rifle, with a sculptured receiver and nice walnut stock, it was not a particularly effective action. First, it was very heavy, with a total action weight of 52.4 oz., almost a full pound heavier than the Remington M700 action at 38 oz., as just one example. The end result is a very heavy rifle—probably close to 8.5 lbs. bare, and 9.5 to 10 lbs. when scope and mounts are added. In my opinion, this is too heavy for a 30-06.

Second, it is a rear-locking action, something that is far from ideal if one reloads. The effect of rear-locking is brass-stretching (from bolt compression) on firing and occurs with all rear-lockers like the Schultz & Larsen, Colt-Sauer, Steyr-Mannlicher, and Remington M788 rifles. This means that, with neck-only resizing, chambering becomes very difficult after a couple of firings, and, with full-length resizing, a total of maybe 3-4 reloads before case head separation occurs.

Here is Otteson’s summary of the Golden Eagle M7000:

“…as a useful firearm, it was less outstanding. It seems better suited to a display case, where short bolt lift, weak cams, rear-lug stretch, and small bolt stop latches are not serious drawbacks, than to a rifle range or in the field under adverse conditions, providing reliable and certain performance over many years and many thousands of rounds.”

quote:

“…as a useful firearm, it was less outstanding. It seems better suited to a display case, where short bolt lift, weak cams, rear-lug stretch, and small bolt stop latches are not serious drawbacks, than to a rifle range or in the field under adverse conditions, providing reliable and certain performance over many years and many thousands of rounds.”

Just because something is old doesn't mean that it is good.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

“…as a useful firearm, it was less outstanding. It seems better suited to a display case, where short bolt lift, weak cams, rear-lug stretch, and small bolt stop latches are not serious drawbacks, than to a rifle range or in the field under adverse conditions, providing reliable and certain performance over many years and many thousands of rounds.”

Just because something is old doesn't mean that it is good.

... and sometimes things only get old because they aren't all that good. The owners throw a sheet over them and get something else that works better.

Had one:

Heavy
Pretty
shot ok but I never reloaded for it.

The Nikko Golden Eagle has something of a following. It is a very pretty gun, assuming you like gloss (which I do). As mentioned, it is VERY heavy for a sporter, particularly if in a standard caliber. As a modern design with tight tolerances, I doubt that the rear locking feature results in any measurable case stretching, and it does allow easier access to the chamber for things like single-loading.

But I wouldn't be interested due to its weight unless in a very heavy caliber.

Stuart Otteson's books, The Bolt Action: A Design Analysis (Vols. I and II), are marvelously detailed and a must read for anyone interested in bolt action rifles.

I only wish he had written more about more actions, but the work involved was incredibly time-consuming and sadly did not repay the effort.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
The Nikko Golden Eagle has something of a following. It is a very pretty gun, assuming you like gloss (which I do). As mentioned, it is VERY heavy for a sporter, particularly if in a standard caliber. As a modern design with tight tolerances, I doubt that the rear locking feature results in any measurable case stretching,, and it does allow easier access to the chamber for things like single-loading.

But I wouldn't be interested due to its weight unless in a very heavy caliber.

The rear locking design will definitely result in measurable case stretching. Regardless of build quality, this is endemic to all rear-locking actions. I’ve never owned a Golden Eagle M7000, but have owned a number of the rear-locking Schultz & Larsen and Colt-Sauer rifles all of which I reloaded for. For precise fitting, finishing, and tight tolerances, I doubt that any rifle exceeds the Schultz & Larsen, but case stretching did occur—particularly with stouter loads--and the chambering and case-head separation phenomena I detailed in my earlier post occurred. If anything, I’d expect these to occur to perhaps a greater extent with the M7000 as, based on Stuart Otteson's analysis, it's highly unlikely that it was built to the same standards as the Schultz & Larsen.

In connection with this, here again is Otteson on this topic:

“…a simple test was run on my sample rifle [Golden Eagle Model 7000] comparing it with a front-locked Ruger Model 77 chambered for the same cartridge (.270 Winchester). The following tabulates results when a single cartridge in each rifle was repeatedly fired, then reloaded by neck sizing only. The results more or less speak for themselves. While the 7000 closed easily enough on an empty chamber, it didn’t do as well when even a fresh factory cartridge was introduced. Once that cartridge was fired and reloaded a couple of times, things really started to go downhill. In contrast, there was little practical change with the front-locking action, regardless of how many times a cartridge was reloaded and fired.



Just to finish, here are Otteson's comments in this regard in connection with the Schultz & Larsen M68DL (of which I've owned several):

"The Schultz & Larsen Model 68DL is clearly one of the strongest and best finished bolt actions ever produced. ...Everything is precision-machined steel. ...Being a rear-locked action, however, it stretches during firing, allowing the brass of the cartridge case to 'work' more than would be otherwise necessary, and thus making it, for handloaders at least, a far less than ideal rifle."

Kennedy, you shouldn't need to fork over a pile of cash....they don't resale very high. Unless perhaps for a 458 or 375 caliber, most sell in the $700-$1,000 range.

I have a Golden Eagle in 458 win mag
It is on the heavy side , but that’s a plus for this caliber . I’ve only shot it a few times to sight it in . My intention was to possibly take it moose hunting one time .

I’ll shoot factory rounds only and a limited amount at that . I personally like the nice wood with that gloss finish and the nice high polished blueing

I don’t recall what I paid for mine , but probably in the $1,200 - $ 1,500 range used

I always enjoyed that weatherby style flare
But each too his own

Good luck with your purchase

Same rifle as the Winchester Model 777, which was made by Nikko under contract for Winchester International sales. About 1000 Win. M777s were made in 1979-80 for the European and Australian markets. Pics I've seen of them show a slightly fancier rifle than the GE7000 with some engraving on the receiver.

Kennedy, if you decide to purchase this rifle and are a handloader, let us know. I can share some tips with you about mitigating to some extent the reloading issues connected with rear-locking actions.

I have nothing against a heavier weight rifle, within reason.

But the rear locking bolt is just silly.

If the rear-locking bolt is reliable and shorter than usual, Michael, it could save someone from suffering African short stroke - perhaps another reason to use one in 458WM.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
If the rear-locking bolt is reliable and shorter than usual, Michael, it could save someone from suffering African short stroke - perhaps another reason to use one in 458WM.

Is that right, whateveryournameis?

Short stroke is a disease of the preternaturally infirm using a non-CRF rifle.

It is readily cured by other means than a rear-locking bolt.

There is no excuse for a rear-locking bolt.

Thanks fellas, I have made a decision ya the prettiness sure did attracted me. Also heard that they mite have made few Weatherby mark V. Also got my interest. But not any more. What made that decision is i reload and it doesn't sound very reloada.ble

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
If the rear-locking bolt is reliable and shorter than usual, Michael, it could save someone from suffering African short stroke - perhaps another reason to use one in 458WM.

Is that right, whateveryournameis?

Short stroke is a disease of the preternaturally infirm using a non-CRF rifle.

It is readily cured by other means than a rear-locking bolt.

There is no excuse for a rear-locking bolt.

That’s putting it far too strongly. The effects of rear-locking are completely irrelevant (i.e., pose absolutely no disadvantages) to shooters who use factory ammunition, and, since fewer than 10% (probably fewer than 5%; estimates vary) of rifle owners reload, the one disadvantage of rear-locking is really minimal in the larger scheme of things.

And they do provide some advantages. I can’t speak about all rear-lockers, but my Schultz & Larsen rifles have been the smoothest operating bolt actions of the many brands I’ve owned over the years (not to mention that they have been the finest factory rifles I’ve owned with respect to precision of manufacture, fit and finish, etc.). With no cutaways in the receiver needed to handle the locking lugs being retracted, the bolt slides with almost nonexistent side-to-side play or wobble (like a piston in a closely-fitting cylinder). I imagine that the many thousands of owners of Schultz & Larsen, Colt-Sauer, Steyr-Mannlicher, and Rem. M788 rifles are very happy with their rear-lockers.

It's an inferior design.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
If the rear-locking bolt is reliable and shorter than usual, Michael, it could save someone from suffering African short stroke - perhaps another reason to use one in 458WM.

Is that right, whateveryournameis?

Short stroke is a disease of the preternaturally infirm using a non-CRF rifle.

It is readily cured by other means than a rear-locking bolt.

There is no excuse for a rear-locking bolt.

Thanks Michael, but I'm afraid you've posed more questions than you answered.

You did point to why some governments want to ban children from social media, however.

Yours (forum-typically)
- Anon

Whatever you say, whateveryournameis.