THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM GUNSMITHING FORUM


Moderators: jeffeosso
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Remington 700 SPS accuracy?
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
posted
Given a new remington 700 SPS in 243, a decent trigger and some carefuly crafted hand loads, what would your expectations be on accuracy.

Would you expect a bedding job to be necessary to get repeatability?
 
Posts: 2032 | Registered: 05 January 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I would suggest that you take it out and shoot it without any preconceived (and sometimes unrealistic) expectations.

Bedding a rifle, IMO, is never a bad idea.
 
Posts: 4574 | Location: Valencia, California | Registered: 16 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 1894mk2:
Given a new remington 700 SPS in 243, a decent trigger and some carefuly crafted hand loads, what would your expectations be on accuracy.

Would you expect a bedding job to be necessary to get repeatability?


MOA maybe. Repeatability, I don't know, the SPS stock is pretty flimsy and doesn't provide a very stable platform for which I would want to rely on. Change the stock to something more solid, add bedding and a recrown and you will have something more dependable.
 
Posts: 1374 | Registered: 06 November 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Fancy names on rifles do not contribute or equate to better accuracy.

The moniker SPS sounds really cool but about the only difference between these and the regular old BDL’s is the metal finish and the style of the stock.
 
Posts: 4574 | Location: Valencia, California | Registered: 16 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rick 0311:
Fancy names on rifles do not contribute or equate to better accuracy.

The moniker SPS sounds really cool but about the only difference between these and the regular old BDL’s is the metal finish and the style of the stock.


If I were naming these particular models I would use: CPS (cheap plastic stock), or, NACAPSATOCPSM (not as cheap a plastic stock as the other cheap plastic stock model), or the ever favorite EBOACPPSOIADC (every bit of a cheap phuquing plastic stock only in a different color)... Big Grin
 
Posts: 1374 | Registered: 06 November 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I guess these monikers work on most customers, or they wouldn’t keep using them! Smiler

The only practical differences in factory rifles is the caliber...they are all made by the exact same people and machines and with the exact same non-attention to detail and quality control.

That’s true of Remington as well as all the others unless you go through their custom shops...and even then its a crap shoot sometimes.
 
Posts: 4574 | Location: Valencia, California | Registered: 16 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
The 06 I bought for my son last year would shoot MOA every time. One of the very few factory rifles we ever had that would out of the box. I did adjust the trigger and lap in the lugs first. Bullet used were the Barnes XXX 150 grainers.


My biggest fear is when I die my wife will sell my guns for what I told her they cost.
 
Posts: 6660 | Location: Wasilla, Alaska | Registered: 22 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Snowwolfe:
The 06 I bought for my son last year would shoot MOA every time. One of the very few factory rifles we ever had that would out of the box. I did adjust the trigger and lap in the lugs first. Bullet used were the Barnes XXX 150 grainers.


Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that factory rifles are crap. Out of the box most will be more accurate than the people shooting them. I was only pointing out that the differences in all of the various models (within a certain receiver style) are basically aesthetic and will have nothing to do with function or accuracy.
 
Posts: 4574 | Location: Valencia, California | Registered: 16 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I wasnt questioning what anyone said. Was simply stating my experience with the SPS and it's very cheap stock.


My biggest fear is when I die my wife will sell my guns for what I told her they cost.
 
Posts: 6660 | Location: Wasilla, Alaska | Registered: 22 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rick 0311:
I would suggest that you take it out and shoot it without any preconceived (and sometimes unrealistic) expectations.

Bedding a rifle, IMO, is never a bad idea.


Not a lot of help in deciding whether to buy one but then I didn't make that clear I suppose... nor evidently did I make clear that I don't give a stuff about what it's called other than to give an accurate description of the model involved.

For what it's worth I've bought one. I am at my busiest culling and need a platform to mount a sound mod on whilst I get over whatever the hell is causing my tinnitus.

From a good rest I need to be able to hit a 4" target out to 275 or so yards. We'll see.
 
Posts: 2032 | Registered: 05 January 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I think you'll be perfectly fine with the M700. Even if the stock may be a bit floppy, it will not cause the gun to shoot worse than what you need for hunting. After all, you are an experienced hand loader and a good shot to boot. If later you like the gun, but decide a stock upgrade might be worthwhile, a replacement synthetic stock can quickly be acquired.

Best of luck with your new toy, and above all best of luck with your hearing problem.

- mike


*********************
The rifle is a noble weapon... It entices its bearer into primeval forests, into mountains and deserts untenanted by man. - Horace Kephart
 
Posts: 6653 | Location: Switzerland | Registered: 11 March 2002Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia