Remington 798

[Casull]

Exactly the same department store firearms.  Made for folks who can't afford the best rifle you can buy.....The Remington Model 700.

LOL, except for the fact that your average out of the box Savage will shoot smaller groups than your average out of the box Remington.

[Swampman]

The average Savage is a POS.

[MGMorden]

The average Savage is a POS.

In what way?  They typically work like clockwork and as said, will typically shoot smaller groups than a Remington.  The Accutrigger is a better trigger than Remington's stock trigger, and the barrel-nut system allows easier and more precise barrel swaps if you want to go that route.

By what criteria are you grading guns these days?  Number of letter 'n's in the manufacturer's name?  Number of 7's in the model number?

[Swampman]

Accuracy first and foremost.  The Savage isn't even close.  I hate the Accutriger.  Why would I change barrels.....I only use a .30-06.

[Mr. Joe]

I dont think many people honestly consider a savage better than a remington 700. 

[Swampman]

Me either....I would put the new Model 70 in the same class as the Remington 700 and everything else a far distant second, third, etc......

[Oldshooter]

I bought one cause it was cheap and I wanted a mauser action for my arsenal.

It shoots well and is a looker,

[Swampman]

Pretty!

[Casull]

I dont think many people honestly consider a savage better than a remington 700. 

Try taking a poll.   I think you might be surprised.   

[Casull]

The average Savage is a POS.

You don't know s--t about Savage.  BTW, the last Remington I bought was a POS.  And I mean the last.

[Swampman]

If you had problems it wasn't the gun.  Folks might say the think the Savage is as good but in their hearts they know it's about as good as a Ruger or a Mossberg.

[Mr. Joe]

I dont think many people honestly consider a savage better than a remington 700.  

Try taking a poll.   I think you might be surprised.  

I dont need to take a poll...i can just look at sales figures and resale value.  Im not trying to come off as a jerk here...but hear me out.  Savage does build an accurate rifle.  I do not deny this.  Is it more accurate than a remington?  No way...but in the same league to be sure.   I however prefer to have an accurate rifle that is NICE.  Savage rifles are far and away the ugliest most cheaply constructed rifles commonly sold today.  A 7 year old girl could look at one and see that.  If my goal was just to have an accurate rifle...i could buy a nef handi rifle.  I however appreciate quality of design and materials and aesthetics.  I would have no problem recommending a savage...i recently did in fact.  One of my inlaws wanted to buy a bolt action .30-06.  I showed him a remington and he choked at the $540 price tag of their entry level sps.  As soon as he saw a new savage for $365...he bought it.  Why?  Because he is cheep...and because it was the cheapest reliable bolt action money could buy...and i assured him that it would shoot well and hold up.  Am i saying all savage owners are cheep...of course not, that would be like a cooper owner calling a remington owner cheep.  I have no problem with someone wanting to save some dough in these hard times believe me...but to claim that a bargain brand gun is better than a nice mid range item such as a 700...that goes too far.  They may shoot as well...but they are NOT in the same class as rifles such as the 700, winchester 70, sako, or browning.  Not even close.  Just as the aforementioned guns are not in the same class as a noslers, coopers, or high end kimbers...though they shoot just as well if not better.  I may like a remington better than a cooper and i may spend my money on the remington...but that doesn't make the remington better or nicer.  Catch my drift?

[MGMorden]

Savage does build an accurate rifle.  I do not deny this.  Is it more accurate than a remington?  No way...but in the same league to be sure.

While most of the testing is anecdotal from the shooter's community rather than scientific (very few people are scientifically testing gun accuracy), the clear consensus has always been that Savages are the most accurate rifles out of the box. 

As far as "design" goes, I'd far and away give that to the Savage, based mostly on the things I noted earlier.  The Accutrigger design is far better than the stock Remington trigger.  The barrel-nut assembly allows for more quick and precise headspacing.  The Savage safety system also hasn't seen nearly as many failures as the Remington safety has.

Aesthetics?  In the eye of the beholder to be sure, but I don't see any difference in appeal of the "lines" of either gun.  If you're talking strictly finish options, you can easily step up to the "Classic" models from Savage and get snappier finish and stock layout.  I'm actually considering a Savage 14 American Classic in .243 for a future purchase: http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/14AMERICANCLASSIC

Overall, I personally don't see a whole lot wrong with the Remington, but the Savage is a better rifle.

PS You asked to "look" at the sales figures without providing a cite.  Unless we have hard numbers then you really don't know which is outselling which.  That aside though, pointing to sales figures to determine which option is "best" is an exercise in futility.  Britney Spears outsells Johnny Cash.  McDonalds outsells most good local burger joints, and cheap Chinese-made junk at Wal-mart outsells quality items.  Which sells more is based on far more factors than which is higher quality.

[Dixie Dude]

Don't put Ruger in the same class with Mossburg.  I have a Ruger 77 Mk II .308 that will cloverleaf Remington 150 gr Coreloks at 100 yards.  Very accurate rifle and it is a control round feed. 

[Mr. Joe]

I stand by my post.

FWIW the savage barrel nut is used to cheapen production.  Both triggers are junk in the big scheme of things by the way.  Savage rifles good looking?  Seriously?  

Blonds vs. Brunettes...i get it...but savage is the 250 pound sweat hog yelling in the front yard of a trailer park.

Also the save model 10 action was designed in 1956
The remington 700 in 1962.

What is the number one selling bolt action of all time?  The Remington 700.  The savage is much less expensive to boot.  What does that say?




I am done with this post now...have to get some work done before the boss gets wise!

[Mr. Joe]

Hope i dont come across as a jerk...its hard to talk shop on the internet...i would much prefer to have this conversation over a couple of ice cold beers with some steaks on the grill...   All in good fun

[Dixie Dude]

Mr. Joe your post is good, just that Swampman is married to Remington. 

[Coyote Hunter]

You should love the last 2 they are exactly like yours and made in the same factory.  The others are the best in their class but none are the equal of the 700.  None are....

The last two (798 and 799) are not even close to the quality of my Interarms Mark X action.   Yes, they are made by the same company but its like comparing a green peach to a ripe one.

Exactly the same department store firearms.  Made for folks who can't afford the best rifle you can buy.....The Remington Model 700.

Hardly so.  The Interarms were considered one of the better commercial Mausers.  The 798 and 799 fall far short and were an embarrassment to Remington – kind of like the 710 and 770 but not nearly as bad as they were.

[Coyote Hunter]

…
FWIW the savage barrel nut is used to cheapen production.  Both triggers are junk in the big scheme of things by the way.  Savage rifles good looking?  Seriously? 

Blonds vs. Brunettes...i get it...but savage is the 250 pound sweat hog yelling in the front yard of a trailer park.

Also the save model 10 action was designed in 1956
The remington 700 in 1962.

What is the number one selling bolt action of all time?  The Remington 700.  The savage is much less expensive to boot.  What does that say?

…

The Savage barrel nut not only reduces manufacturing costs, it allows owners to easily swap barrels and set headspace by themselves – no gunsmith needed.  Nice feature.  The nut also provides some theoretical advantages in the accuracy department.

Savage didn’t pay much attention to cosmetics for a long time, but some of their rifles are now very nice looking – better than some of the less expensive Remingtons, which are just fugly.

My experience with Savage has been consistently good in the accuracy department.  My older Remington M700 .308 Win shoots great, my newer M700 (2005) not so well.  That matches the experience I’ve had with a couple other M700’s.

In the end, it comes down to what you want.  A lot of match rifles are being built on Savage actions these days.  For a hunting rifle they are a great value, for cosmetics spend more and get a CDL.

By the way, the best selling product is not always the best product. 

[MGMorden]

Just figured I'd post two photos for comparison between the Remington 700 CDL and the Savage 14 American Classic.  These have similar MSRP's (the Savage costs a little less, but they're close).

Now, I'm not going to say that the Savage is "clearly" the winner in the looks department.  I'm not even going to say that some people won't prefer the Remington.  Cosmetically I think they're close enough to let other factors determine which I'd want (and with those the Savage gets my nod).

HOWEVER, I don't see how anybody could look at this and say the Savage is "ugly". 

[Mr. Joe]

Lol...the savage has a decent stock...but the rest of it looks like a pellet gun!

[Mr. Joe]

   how did this turn into a 700 vs. savage debate

  i blame myself

[Casull]

If you had problems it wasn't the gun.  Folks might say the think the Savage is as good but in their hearts they know it's about as good as a Ruger or a Mossberg.

Yep, Swampman, it must have been the way I placed the rounds in the magazine that caused it to be a jamomatic.  Oh, me and damn near every other buyer.  In your heart you know that the 597 is a piece of crap, and the SPS is as ugly as Remington guys claim the Savage to be.

[Casull]

Lol...the savage has a decent stock...but the rest of it looks like a pellet gun!

An opinion about asthetics.  Useful as one man's opinion about the least valuable criteria.  I like 'pretty' guns also, but only if they can shoot.  I'll take performance over looks.

[the jigger]

Since I started this thread over THREE YEARS AGO I guess I ought to jump in here. I passed on the 798! I've owned(past tense) Remingtons and have shot several others. All were acceptable and some a bit better. I have chosen Savage/Stevens six times,primarily because of their accuracy,versatility,and flexibility. I have built Savage/Stevens in 250/3000,220 Swift,and 257 Roberts. The only one that required a gunsmith was the Roberts,which was a re-chamber. I also drive a Jeep which is not particularly "pretty". I'm really glad that all you Remington guys love your rifles. I'm sure we could start another contentious thread about Leupold, Nikon et.al. and accomplish about the same as this one.
GOOD LUCK and GOOD SHOOTING!!!
P.S. I believe team Savage just won and set a new record for 1000yd. competition!!

[351 power]

swampman-always a kind word and an open mind. i thought looks were superficial but function/reliability were the most important factors.

[Coyote Hunter]

Since I started this thread over THREE YEARS AGO I guess I ought to jump in here. I passed on the 798! I've owned(past tense) Remingtons and have shot several others. All were acceptable and some a bit better. I have chosen Savage/Stevens six times,primarily because of their accuracy,versatility,and flexibility. I have built Savage/Stevens in 250/3000,220 Swift,and 257 Roberts. The only one that required a gunsmith was the Roberts,which was a re-chamber. I also drive a Jeep which is not particularly "pretty". I'm really glad that all you Remington guys love your rifles. I'm sure we could start another contentious thread about Leupold, Nikon et.al. and accomplish about the same as this one.
GOOD LUCK and GOOD SHOOTING!!!
P.S. I believe team Savage just won and set a new record for 1000yd. competition!!

Well Mr. Joe, there you have it... Some people DO prefer Savage...

Congrats, Jigger, on your choices of the Roberts.  My Ruger .257 Bob is easily my favorite rifle.

Here's my two latest Rugers.  The top one is a MKII .30-06 that came in the laminate stock on the bottom.  Those Ruger “boat paddle” stocks are pretty plain but they work great and are lighter than walnut.  (I have three of them now.)  The bottom on is a Ruger MKII with a magnum bolt face that is awaiting a barrel – either a .375 Ruger or a .338-375 Ruger.



Had both my Ruger .30-06s at the range last weekend and both were shooting .5” groups at 100.  My Remington M700 .30-06 was almost there…A

[Dixie Dude]

I have the same boat paddle stock on my stainless .308 Ruger Mk II, and it is my go to deer rifle because it is lightweight, weatherproof and accurate.  I think Ruger's accuracy is improved by the intergral scope mounts they make.  I can easily put a large paper clip in the little hole on the backside bottom of the bolt and unscrew the bolt, and thoroughly clean the fireing pin and spring.  Can't do that on a Remington.  The claw also is removable if you ever have to replace it.  All without special tools.  That is another reason to like Mauser actions. 

[Swampman]

Rugers are pretty much like Mossbergs & Savages.  Just a bunch of uattractive also rans.

If you want an accurate & attractive rifle get a Remington 700.

[Coyote Hunter]

Rugers are pretty much like Mossbergs & Savages.  Just a bunch of uattractive also rans.

If you want an accurate & attractive rifle get a Remington 700.

My old Remington M700 shoots circles around the newer one. As to looks, I much prefer the Rugers.