Rem 722 vs 700

[Harold50]

...and so,

Have been offered a Remington 722 with a sporter barrel in .222.
Are there signifivant differences between the 721/722 and the 700 which would cause one to avoid the 721?
Price is reasonable and rifle appears to be in very good shape.
Thanks for the help,
Harold

[wncchester]

The older rifles are the equal of the 700s except for appearance.  The 721-722 rifles had stamped bottom metal, rather plain stocks with steel butt plates, low poliish finish, simple sights and a plain bolt handle but they are excellant rifles.  The 721-722 rifles, differening only in action length, were intended to sell as inexpensively as possible to new hunters after WWII. 

Fifteen years later, Rem's sales people decided they could afford to market a dressed up version of the old rifles and still have a good market share.  Prettied-up rifles were designed, designated Md. 700's and marketed. The rest is history; Rem 700s are the largest selling sporting rifle series ever produced but they are based on the first rifles.

[dw06]

I'd snap it up in a heartbeat!Just as wncchester says,they are more plain than the 700s but shoot just as well.

[338xcr]

Assuming a fair price,  I would grab it.   The slickest action I have ever worked was a 722 in .222.   Plain, even ugly?  Yes.  But, again, if a good price, and in good to great shape,   I would advise a purchase.