I think that I can deal with the stock. The mechanical aspects of the bolt and trigger are more my concern. Any outstanding problems.
Thanks cudatruck.
ear
It would seem more prudent to resolve concerns over mechanical aspects of the 770 before buying one, rather than after doing so.
For your $331.00, you got the inexpensive but adequate rifle intended for casual end users that you paid for. That's not meant to be a judgemental or offensive statement. Casual users can certainly be every bit as passionate and enthusiastic over what little shooting they do as the exponentially higher-volume shooter is. Passion and enthusasim aren't the relevant issue here. Shooting volume is.
If you are a member of the demographic that Remington sought to target with the 770, then you will likely find it to be an accurate, light-weight, ergonimic, dynamic handling rifle that is farily easily to hit with in the field. You will probably not have any issues with function, reliability, or durability. You may even find that you received full value for your $331.00.
If you aren't in that demographic, but instead are a member of the significantly smaller one that shoots their main hunting rifle enough during the off-season to consider its barrel a wear and maintenance item with a finite lifespan, and fully expects to have that barrel replaced once or twice over the life of the rifle, then you might not be so enthused with your choice and might wish you'd made a different one.
The biggest problem that I see with the 770 is that it's barrel is interference press-fitted in to it's non-stressed "receiver." Essentially, when the barrel is toast on a 770, the whole rifle is relegated to the scrap heap and not just the barrel. This is the main reason why I would never own one. I shoot too much in the off season to find value in a rifle that I can't get the barrel replaced on.
My other personal gripe has to do with the 770's overly flexable stock, but that has a lot to do with my penchant for using the Butler Creek Mountain Sling carry straps I favor as accuracy enhancing devices when shooting from field positions... I basically use that strap as a kind of hasty sling in the field, putting a crap-ton of sideways pressure on the fore-end of the rifle in the process. So I want a stock that is stiff enough to resist that pressure without being pulled in to contact with the barrel. I wouldn't have a 770 to begin with because of it's non-replacable barrel but absent of that deal-breaker, the stock it comes with would be it's own deal-breaker to me and I couldn't live with it. Replacing it with something from Boyd's would make an inexpensive gun not so much anymore.
A lot of my dislike for the 770 is manifested in the fact that I'm not the sort of guy that Remington designed it for. If I was, I would fully expect to get a lifetime of trouble-free service out of one.
There are some things I actually like about the 770 and one of them is that almost every single one of them I've shot has been capable of shooting three-shot groups well under an 1", center to center. Another thing I like is the feathery light weight. The stock I find butt-ugly to look at and too flexy is actually pretty comfortable to me and very ergonomic. The shortish bolt lift and fairly minimal bolt stroke makes it a pretty rapid-fire platform for a bolt action, too. The detachable magazine is a potentially useful feature. I actually think the stainless and cammo stock versions look kind of cool, too.
So it's not all hate with me as far as the 770 is concerned. It's just not something that would meet my own personal needs and wants very well.
If you're more of the typical hunter who doesn't shoot enough to make wearing out a barrel a real potential issue, then I'd expect you'll find a lot to like with your new buck-slayer and I seriously doubt you'll have any reliability problems or functionality issues with it.
