I inherited a 788 in .22-250 which is in BAD need of a new
barrel, but can find nothing out there. I have heard that a
700 barrel can be used, but tenon diameter needs to be cut
down and the remaining threads recut to a bit different
pitch.

Anyone know what can be done?

Why not just have it rebored to a large caliber?

You heard sort of right. 788 threads are one inch OD, 700s are 1 1/16th. Best to cut the tenon off and start over but you could turn it down and cut new threads. . Different pitch too, 20 vs 16 for the 700.
But yes it can be done.

Is not a big deal to fit a new barrel to a 788.

The dimensions are here:

http://forums.accuratereloadin...043/m/8671075902/p/1

Thank-you ever so much, Rod!!

One big problem with that receiver.

It has the .473 bolt face BUT is still a 222 length receiver. SO NOT many calibers will fit if you change caliber.

Years ago we used to turn them in to 250 Sav, but had to lengthen the front of the magazine in order to do it well, not much fun in that job, but a nice gun when all done.

With the newer short cartidges on the .473 bolt face I would see first if they would feed thru the magazine before rebarreling.

JW

They were made in 308. 243, 7-08, 6mm; those are some pretty good calibers. All were not 222 length.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
They were made in 308. 243, 7-08, 6mm; those are some pretty good calibers. All were not 222 length.

Also in 30-30 and 44 Mag.

I have a left handed 788 chambered in 308 Win that I purchased in 1975 still in the safe. It has no rifling in the first half an inch of barrel and it still shoot under an inch. I should get it re-barreled one of these days but it doesn't get shot much anymore.

I am certainly no gunsmith but I know a re-barrel can be accomplished. I have a friend in Houston who once had (sold it now due to age) a 788 he had re-barreled to 44 Mag. He had a McGowen barrel fitted and used the rifle to shoot hamstrings at turkey shoots, and he shot the Lyman 429352 full wadcutter.

He told me that he once cut five strings in a row, and was politely told "We don't often do this, but we are going to have to ask you to leave".

OK, they made several lengths of actions.

Receivers are marked on bottom front between magazine well and front guard screw.

Short, 44 mag, marked 44
Medium, 222, 223, 22-250, marked 222 and 250
Long, 30-30, marked 30-30
Ex-long, 243, 6mm, 308, have seen 243 and 308 mark

The 22-250 is the odd duck as it has the larger bolt face but short receiver and special magazine unit

JW

I owned a 788 for a while. I did not think much of it. Clunky and crude. Birch stock...The pot metal trigger housing a was an especially nice touch. If I had one today I would not spend money re-barreling one. Just opinion, it is worth what you paid for it.

The 788s may outwardly look like a piece of crap. But they are a very strong and stiff little action and even though they are rear locking they generally shoot as well as the 700s. I don't think I have ever seen one shoot poorly when mated up with a good tube. In fact, most I have put together for people have shot exceptionally well. It's just to bad that Remington had tried to make it as an economy grade gun.

I had a 788 in .243 it shot under an inch consistantly if I did my part. but it did look kinda cheep and plain. I liked it till my son took it.

They did not have pot metal trigger housings, (they were stamped steel), and they cost Remington more to make the receiver than it did for a 700. I got my first one, a .223, in the mid 70s. It really pissed off my friend when it regularly out shot his SAKO.
So, do not sell them short; the action is stiffer than any Mauser type, they have the fastest lock time of any production rifle, and they usually shot great. They were designed as a cheaper rifle, but it turned out that just making 700s with birch stocks and no floor plate did the same thing (they were called 78s).
It is definitely worth re-barreling.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
They did not have pot metal trigger housings, (they were stamped steel), and they cost Remington more to make the receiver than it did for a 700. I got my first one, a .223, in the mid 70s. It really pissed off my friend when it regularly out shot his SAKO.
So, do not sell them short; the action is stiffer than any Mauser type, they have the fastest lock time of any production rifle, and they usually shot great. They were designed as a cheaper rifle, but it turned out that just making 700s with birch stocks and no floor plate did the same thing (they were called 78s).
It is definitely worth re-barreling.

I always love reading your posts, Tom (I think your name is Tom, but if I am wrong I hope you will forgive me - I might be having a bit of Alzheimer's in my declining years, but whatever the cause, I just can't seem to remember s**t anymore ).

Nevertheless, you are always generous with your knowledge and, very encouraging to everyone.

There are two big black marks on the 788 and the first was the trigger. It was basically non adjustable and most gunsmiths just honed the sears and altered the angles a bit and while it did reduce the weight a bit, it made the trigger a bit hairy and unsafe for all but experienced operators. The clever fix was to install screws and the toggle pin moved up 1/10th of an inch and forward .050 to turn it into a 1 pound trigger. The modification was expensive and it required a bit of knowledge and experience to pull it off properly. Matt did make a few triggers for them but like most stuff Canjar made they were complicated and expensive. Of course Timney now makes a trigger for it, but back in the day there wasn't a lot you could do that didn't cost money or leave the gun a bit hairy to play with.

The second was the furnace brazed bolt handle. While it generally takes a lot of force to rip off a 700 bolt, the tiny footprint of the weld on the 788 was frighteningly easy to break if you got a bit feisty with it. I personally ripped one off with my bare hands on an over pressured hand load. I'm not a big guy and I'm the first to admit when I've done something stupid (I've done lots of stupid shit). When it wouldn't open I simply pulled with all the might my widdle wings had and I had the bolt handle in my hand and a stupid expression on my face. It was after I had been gun plumbing for 10 years and I was doing warranty for Remington at the time. It was so thoughtful of them to buy a new bolt for me. I believe I put down recoil break on the warranty form. I have been out of the warranty gig for a lot of years now and I'm pretty sure that Remington has no more bolts left for the 788. There was talk of Dave Kiff making a run of 788 bolts but I don't think anything ever came of it.

Ahhh...I don't want to cause any discord here, but all the 788 factory triggers I've dealt with had non-ferrous metal trigger boxes. I've seen quite a few that turned green inside with dissimilar metal contact corrosion. I have two on my Remington parts bin and I'll double check by trying to stick a magnet to them but I'm pretty sure they're not steel.

I've repaired 3 or 4 popped-off bolt handles on them, and found out on the last one that there are at least two different bolt shroud thread sizes.

quote:

Originally posted by Toomany Tools:
Ahhh...I don't want to cause any discord here, but all the 788 factory triggers I've dealt with had non-ferrous metal trigger boxes. I've seen quite a few that turned green inside with dissimilar metal contact corrosion. I have two on my Remington parts bin and I'll double check by trying to stick a magnet to them but I'm pretty sure they're not steel.

I've repaired 3 or 4 popped-off bolt handles on them, and found out on the last one that there are at least two different bolt shroud thread sizes.

Nupe. They are not steel. They are a very poor grade of cast Zimbabwe Death Econolumyum.

TRIGGER GUARDS! Is what my brain read. Who the hell said trigger housings? (I see now)
Do not expect me to read the posts before answering. you know that.

Nnnooo, beggin-yer-pardon-sir, but I think you are wrong dpcd.
The trigger housings were indeed made from Zimbabwe Death Econolumyum. The trigger guard and the magazine well cover were actually made from a pretty good grade of stamped sheet steel. Well, 1018 or something similar good. he he he he he he he

Yes, I have some of the trigger guards here, made from stamped steel. I have no idea what the trigger housings are made from, nor does it matter.
My brian did not comprehend what was being discussed, nor did it care; my fingers just started typing, with no guidance.

Aaww don't worry. I have those blond moments too. Well, mine are more like grey moments. Natural stupidity combined with old age.

I actually had to fight pretty hard to keep from saying something incredibly silly about the spell checker mismatch in your last post, but being the super nice guy that I am, I let it go! It hurt though. It hurt a LOT ! he he he he he

Spell checker? I don't got no spell checker. That thing that controls people is called the brian. If you say it fast, you get the Australian pronunciation.
Except for Canadians and the thing that controls them is called the beer.

MMMMMMMMMMMMMM BBBEEERRRRRRRR !

I have a few 788's, good rifles for the economically minded yet still accuracy inclined. Think I even bought one of them off you Rod, a 22-243 Middlestead. I like them, they won't win many beauty contests, but as mentioned, they like to shoot. I have a Canjar trigger on one of mine, the others I modified with a couple tapped holes and some wee little machine screws. Seems to work ok. - dan

I think that gun actually belonged to Wayland Chan before you got it Dan and it shot itty-bitty-bug-bung-holes. I think my southern associate in crime Grumpy Billy Leeper put that together when he was at Guncraft during the shining times.

Burrr. That was 100 fawking years ago.

Ah, that name strikes some chords in the memory bank. I still have it, though it doesn't get out much these days. Tried a 6-284 on one of these later on, too. - dan