I have researched on the site but was trying to get a gunsmiths view on the topic. I found this same thread in the bolt action section but it was just guys saying buy custom or save money and true rem action.
I plan to put together a custom 260 as my long range hunting and range gun. I priced out custom actions and they only come out to about $500 (give or take) more then a R700 thats been purchased, trued, given side bolt release, and new bolt knob. My real question here is the custom worth the extra money in your opinions. The reason im asking is that if its not going to be a better shooting gun(including smoother cycling, reliable, and ruged) i would rather save that $500 for better optics, bullets, and range time.
Thanks Tommy
Tommy,
You asked for a Gunsmith's perspective, so I'll offer one.
Your faced with a couple options here. When you pony up to buy an aftermarket action its often made on the assumption that the parts are manufactured from better materials and to a higher level of standard. Your correct in doing so, the stuff coming from folks is pretty darn nice. You can rest easy that your money is being well spent and the additional features/widgits incorporated into these actions certainly make them attractive. The volume of sales these companies enjoy demonstrates this every day.
Buy with confidence.
Onto the Remington:
A factory Remington Model 700 is a good piece when treated for what it is. A mass produced part where cost is an ever looming concern. Competition is fierce in the firearms industry and there is little margin for error as the end result is a court room and Chapters from the Bankruptcy book of death. It's a sad truth that we see all too often.
Improving upon it is relatively simple and the actions respond to it well when the work performed is well thought out and executed.
One has to look at the receiver as a whole to get a comprehensive understanding of what is really going on. Messing with features like locking lugs and lug abutments has a cascading effect on a number of other important features/operating systems within the action as a whole. You can bury your head in the sand and ignore them, but it doesn't mean they are any less important.
It starts with the fundamental process of aligning/orienting all those critical features in the receiver ring. Work holding is a part of machining that I used to preach to anyone that would listen. IMHO the majority of those doing this kind of work have room for substantial improvement.
What I'm about to say will almost certainly ignite a brush fire. It's not my intent to piss people off or suggest your doing it wrong. It's only an observation and opinion after exhausting every resource I've had available to me over the years to do the best job that I can.
Latching onto the entire receiver with a handful of hardware store cap screws is an invitation for disaster for a number of reasons. One is that we have minimal contact with the receiver/work holding device. This violates a fundamental rule in machining; grab as much of the part as you can without distorting it. Surfaces finishes are better, tolerances are easier to hold, and positioning is much simpler because its less likely to slip/move on you as you whittle on it.
There's an important hint in this statement that I'd like to expand upon.
We see countless commentaries about how custom actions are more rigid and therefore capable of greater accuracy because the receiver is more tolerant to being distorted from a heavy contoured barrel hanging off the face of it. SO, if a Remington is truly wimpy wouldn't it stand to reason NOT to latch onto it by the front/back because it runs the risk of distorting as its contorted into alignment? Wouldn't it be better to radially latch onto the ring and allow the back half to hang in space with no influence/distortion? Does added peripheral contact between part/fixture increase the surface area contact and distribute the clamping loads more evenly so as to minimize any deflection/distortion?
I personally think it does and its why we latch onto parts the way we do. A number of other smiths are starting to subscribe to this idea and the collet method is becoming more and more accepted/embraced.
My intent here is not to turn this into an LRI commercial. It's to emphasize that ultimately your decision to buy a reworked factory receiver lies in your confidence that your chosen smith will do a good job for you. Well fitted, there is NOTHING wrong with a Remington Model 700 action. There's just too many out there pounding the snot out of X rings to argue this. Just understand that there's also a lot of receivers fitted up by gorillas that barely go bang at best and can potentially injure/kill the person shooting it at worst. The folks suggesting otherwise have a jaded opinion. It could be the cool factor or the confidence inspired by the notion that their piece costs more and therefore is automatically better. Regardless, its conjecture and based on little fact.
Properly fitted up, the action is more than capable of running right next to the boutique customs. It just takes some additional work to get there. So dollars and cents now come into play. If its a rifle you've had kicking around the safe for awhile chances are you've gotten your money's worth from the date of purchase. If your starting from scratch it may not be a bad idea to consider an aftermarket action. Ultimately its your choice so run with it and see where your aspirations truly stand.
A custom will likely bring more return if your a guy who changes rifles often. If you plan to hang onto it, then there's less of a concern I suppose. There's also something to be said for just having a nice custom piece on the firing line that buddies will envy. That being said there's also something about having a "sleeper" that doesn't look like much when parked next to a whole firing line full of aftermarket receivers, yet makes them look like a can of smashed assholes at the end of the day.
Decisions decisions. . .
Regardless of what you decide, good luck with your project.
C.
