PDA

View Full Version : 722 vs 700 Remington action?



GlennC
03-04-2008, 09:01 PM
Greetings,

I've mostly been lurking on the Forum, soaking up the collective wisdom. It's a great place to learn.

I saw a rifle recently that I may think about buying that is based on the Remington 722 action. I'm familiar with the 700 action (own one), but don't know anything really about the 722 except that it was the predecessor to the 700.

Can you folks shed any light? The rifle in question has a "custom" barrel (26" heavy stainless) and Palma sights, adjustable buttplate, and a few other enhancements. The pictures look nice (don't they all?).

Any thoughts or experience are appreciated.

Regards,

Glenn

jackie schmidt
03-04-2008, 09:21 PM
The 722, and the long version 721, were first brought out in about 1948. This design has proven to be one of the finest bolt action concepts ever.
I think the 700 was first brought out in 1962. The main difference in the 700 and the originol 721-722 was mostly cosmetic, the tang is shaped a little different, the bolt knob is more of a tear drop. I don't know about the difference in the safety. The triggers might be alittle different, but mount the same.
A number of years ago, Remington placed a bolt guide rail on the right lug of the 700. This makes the bolt feel like it is more stable in the action. Overall, the originol 700's had an overall better cosmetic finish than the 721-722.
The things that count to us, mainly the basic design, is just about the same. If I had a 722 action, I would not hessitate to use it on a custom Rifle.
I would venture a guess that factory originol 721-722's will bring a premium price as compared to a 700. Many shooters relate the 721-722 to the glory years when Mike Walker roamed the halls of Remington. better steel, better workmanship, better barrels, just a better Rifle.
Whether this perception is true or not, it is out there........jackie

T Pohl
03-05-2008, 06:17 AM
I have a 6Br on a 722 action and a 300Win. Mag on a 721. They both shoot great. All jewels triggers that fit 700 actions will fit the 721's and 722's. I was told that they was built a little beefer in those days.

Stryker60
03-06-2008, 10:24 PM
If it matters to you, the 721-722 have bolt handles which are at near 90 degrees, whereas the 700 bolt handles have a backward sweep. This means that the bolt handle notches in the stock prevent interchanging stocks without modifications.

Not really important unless you need/wish to change the stock

Stryker60

Paul Workman
03-21-2008, 09:00 AM
The 722 is reminiscent of Remington's "good ol days". This 722 is in Mike Walker's 222. I've had/have a dozen 700s, but this little guy is my favorite Rem center fire (the little Rem 341 P sits in the "favorite chair" in the rim fire section).

The 722...They don't make 'em like this anymore...sadly.


P.

jimfinn
03-21-2008, 02:01 PM
Can you put a model 700 Jewell or other aftermarket triggers on the 721-722's? If not, are there triggers made for them?
Thanks
Jim

terry byler
03-21-2008, 02:27 PM
If you will scroll down the page to the post about converting a 722 to a BDL ,i address this and what you will need to do when making the trigger swap,and to add a bit,if you retain the 722/721 bottom metal the 700 trigger,and some aftermarket triggers set further back in the trigger guard,and may not clear,i had to cut a bit off the 700 trigger lever to clear on some i did.

VarmintGuy
03-21-2008, 05:07 PM
Paul Workman: Thank you for posting the great pictures of your clean looking Remington 722 Rifle with the Weaver scope (?).
Please, if I may inquire what makes it "your favorite Remington"?
Is it more accurate than the 700's you have or is it a nostalgia thing?
I just purchased a Rifle very similar to your 722 - it is in caliber 222 Remington. And it came with a Lyman Perma-Center 10 power scope. It shoots quite well. Most load development loads made groups (5 shots at 100 yards) in the high 6's and mid 7's.
The load I have tentatively settled on makes groups (5 shots at 100 yards) in the low 6's!
I have two other Remington Rifles of much more recent manufacture that are similar to this Remington 722 - they are Remington 700 Classics in caliber 222 Remington.
These Classics have similar weight barrels (sporter weight) 24" long.
They BOTH shoot REALLY well!
One makes groups (5 shots at 100 yards) consistently in the 4's and 5's! This Classic has a Lyman Perma-Center 10 power scope on it also.
The other Classic 700 Remington in 222 that I own has a Weaver 4x16 power scope on it and it shoots groups (5 shots at 100 yards) in the mid 5's, consistently!
I also have a newer manufactured Remington 700 V in caliber 222 Remington with Redfield 6x18 variable scope, it normally shoots groups (5 shots at 100 yards) in the 3's and 4's.
It has on several occassions made groups (5 shots at 100 yards) in the high 2's.
I am "happy" to say Remington makes them pretty good, any more!
I am not sure from your photos but it appears that there is a replacement or custom barrel on your 722.
Are you comparing a customized Rifle with factory Remingtons?
I have really enjoyed all the 722's I have owned over the years but the Remington's I have bought of recent have shot as well or better than my 722's.
My 722 in 222 Remington still has the 26" factory barrel on it.
Long live Remington.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Paul Workman
03-21-2008, 08:25 PM
The total history of the little rifle is not known to me, as the friend I bought it from got it at a gun show with the intention of making it a project. The barrel is the original 26" 222 barrel which was apparently turned down to remove the "bulge" that was typical for barrels of the day.

The jury is still out on this barrel as far as accuracy goes. I'm currently grooming the little rifle as a walk-about varminter which I hope to find a powder that shoots 1/2 MOA consistantly at about 3500 ish w/ a 40 grain Blitz or the like. So far it shows promise. I've floated the barrel and bedded the action. I'm considering a Jewell trigger too, at some point.

I'll see how it shoots here in the next few weeks, and if it doesn't come around, I'll re-barrel it; prolly in 222 or maybe a 20 TAC or 17 Mach IV (I have the dies). I dunno...Depends on how it shoots. I love the rifle and the era from which it came. They truly do not make them like that anymore.

P.

P.

VarmintGuy
03-21-2008, 08:32 PM
Paul Workman: If its the original barrel then let me recommend this loading that my original barreled 722 in 222 Remington sure likes.
Try Nosler 40 gr. Ballistic Tips with H 322 powder and Federal 205 M (Match primers).
Best of luck with the "new" 722.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Paul Workman
03-22-2008, 10:28 AM
Got it! It is "on the list", and I just happen to have some H322 "hangin' 'round!

Thanks fer the tip!

P.

rhaney2
03-22-2008, 05:33 PM
Greetings,

I've mostly been lurking on the Forum, soaking up the collective wisdom. It's a great place to learn.

I saw a rifle recently that I may think about buying that is based on the Remington 722 action. I'm familiar with the 700 action (own one), but don't know anything really about the 722 except that it was the predecessor to the 700.

Can you folks shed any light? The rifle in question has a "custom" barrel (26" heavy stainless) and Palma sights, adjustable buttplate, and a few other enhancements. The pictures look nice (don't they all?).

Any thoughts or experience are appreciated.

Regards,

Glenn

I have a 722 in .300 savage,and i just started building one on a 722 that was chambered in .244
The difference is the safety,stamped parts, but really the same as a 700.
I like mine,don't care so much for a .300 savage chamber but it;s a good light hunting rifle with very good barrel/accuracy.

dmort
12-31-2015, 06:16 PM
Paul Workman: If its the original barrel then let me recommend this loading that my original barreled 722 in 222 Remington sure likes.
Try Nosler 40 gr. Ballistic Tips with H 322 powder and Federal 205 M (Match primers).
Best of luck with the "new" 722.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

VarmintGuy Glad to see you and some other folks that enjoy shooting these older Remington rifles. I bought mine used at a gun show almost fifty years ago. It looked like new and came with Weaver mounts and a Weaver K10. The Weaver scope was made in Texas and appears to be longer than the Weavers made overseas. I replaced the mounts with a set of Redfields which are really pretty. Twenty years or so back I got a great deal on a used Leopold Vari-X3 4-14 from a friend and that's how it sits today. My eyes aren't what they use to be and the scope change was a good move. Early on I floated the barrel and bedded the action with a Herters glass kit. That modification with 4198 and some 50 or 52 grain Sisk hollow points, I shot my first five shot 1/2 inch group.
The COL on my reloads is way over standard so they have to be loaded one at a time. An after market plate that fits over the top of the magazine really aids feeding.
My current load of choice is BLC-2 with 50 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips. The groups will still run around 1/2 inch and the BCL-2 throws a consistent charge. The accurate loads with both powders on my chronograph produced velocities from 2900 plus to 3000 and change. It isn't real fast but the ground squirrels don't know the difference.

martin zuck
12-31-2015, 07:22 PM
A few more 722 tidbits. Those barrels were button rifled. I believe they started hammer forging in around 1967. Also there were two different weight 26" barrels on the early models. The last of the 722's were referred to as transition models. These had 24" barrels without the boss. I think about that time they brought out the 725 in the long and short version. Then came the 700's. I bought a brand new 725 in .244 back then and wish I'd kept it. Also for the "what it's worth department" extractors are far and few between for these old timers. About the only cure I'm aware of is a sako style conversion.

B.Larson
01-01-2016, 08:48 AM
I would take a 722 or 721 over a 700 any day.....

Joe Salt
01-01-2016, 10:54 AM
I have five 721's they have all been trued and have Sako Extractors! They are the strongest action Remington ever made, I could never find a 722 that was in great shape or I would have bought it, Do your self a favor buy it.

Joe Salt

dmort
01-02-2016, 07:04 PM
A few more 722 tidbits. Those barrels were button rifled. I believe they started hammer forging in around 1967. Also there were two different weight 26" barrels on the early models. The last of the 722's were referred to as transition models. These had 24" barrels without the boss. I think about that time they brought out the 725 in the long and short version. Then came the 700's. I bought a brand new 725 in .244 back then and wish I'd kept it. Also for the "what it's worth department" extractors are far and few between for these old timers. About the only cure I'm aware of is a sako style conversion.
You just cleared up a question I've had for years with regards to the 722 26" barrel. In my old Spear #7 reloading book the rifle used for testing was a 722 with a 26" barrel. Mine is a 24" so I'm thinking what's the deal here? The explanation I got was Remington supplied the long barrel version for testing because they were more accurate than the 24" variety. Anyway I now know my short barrel 722 is a late transition model and wasn't available when that load data was published. Bingo!

jackie schmidt
01-02-2016, 11:25 PM
Just to clear up a few misconceptions, there isn't anything "special" about the 721 or 722 action. When I built my project Rifle on a old 1949 721, I found the action face and the threads to be no more square and truly straight than any typical 700. Also, the material for the action body is the same chrome moly that 700's are manufactured from. Dimensionally, they are the same.

Dusty Stevens
01-04-2016, 01:01 AM
From all ive seen they are way worse than a modern 700 dimensionally. The finish on them may have been better but as far as betting on the straightest and nicest a modern bdl action is way straighter. Of course they can be made just as nice as any if you put in the work.

MilGunsmith
01-04-2016, 06:54 AM
I was told by the Remington Custom shop years ago, that the 722 became the 40X.

Dusty Stevens
01-04-2016, 12:33 PM
The 40x is not a rebranded 721/722. Back in those days as far as rimfires the 40x had a straight bolt handle like the 721/2 and the 40xb had a swept back 700 style handle. The 40x no matter how much they cost from the "custom shop" is no different than a solid bottom 700. They need trued just as much as any remington. They were nothing magical at all and had the same tolerances.

jackie schmidt
01-04-2016, 12:46 PM
I was told by the Remington Custom shop years ago, that the 722 became the 40X.

Not exactly. The 722 evolved into the short action 700 in the late 1960's, which Mike Walker used as the base for the 40X.

James M.
01-04-2016, 01:20 PM
This is what Mike Walker told me at the SS about a decade ago. He told the folks to pick a good specimen of the 722 and not make the cut for the magazine. He made a solid bottom 722 and called it a 40X. He had this particular rifle with him and it had serial number "1". Also, he offered it for sale for $12,000 if memory serves. It did not sell at that SS but I believe that he later sold it. Good shooting...James

dmort
01-04-2016, 06:49 PM
A few more 722 tidbits. Those barrels were button rifled. I believe they started hammer forging in around 1967. Also there were two different weight 26" barrels on the early models. The last of the 722's were referred to as transition models. These had 24" barrels without the boss. I think about that time they brought out the 725 in the long and short version. Then came the 700's. I bought a brand new 725 in .244 back then and wish I'd kept it. Also for the "what it's worth department" extractors are far and few between for these old timers. About the only cure I'm aware of is a sako style conversion.

I didn't know Remington ever made a 725. How is it different from the earlier 721/722 series?

Dusty Stevens
01-04-2016, 11:23 PM
That was probably a typo

RStiefel
01-05-2016, 07:58 AM
"The 40-X receivers use the same barrel threads and dimensions as the standard actions, BUT, the 40-X series are NOT taken from the standard production line and trued. They are final machined to a closer to spec dimension, and made (and serial numbered) in a different facility".

martin zuck
01-05-2016, 08:52 PM
I didn't know Remington ever made a 725. How is it different from the earlier 721/722 series?

725's were a dressed up version of the 721's an 722's. The 725 was actually Wayne Leek's brain storm. They were made to compete with the Win. 70 which of course they never did. They came out in 1958 and there were approx. 16 thousand made.

RJM
02-03-2016, 09:33 AM
725's were a dressed up version of the 721's an 722's. The 725 was actually Wayne Leek's brain storm. They were made to compete with the Win. 70 which of course they never did. They came out in 1958 and there were approx. 16 thousand made.

From the Roy Marcot book, "The Official Authorized History of Remington Arms Company", page 243:

The 725's were dressed up 721/722's to compete with the fancier model 70 winchesters. They look much like the later 700's, but have a safety that looks like the 1917 Enfield-based models 30/30s/720.

The 725's were made in 270, 280, 30-06, 244, 243, & 222. The 725 Kodak was made in 458 & 375 H&H. They were listed in the catalog from 1958-1961, and a few were made as non- catalog items in 1962. Only 16,635 were made.

I've seen a couple of 725's, but they were both 30-06's. I wish I'd bought that one that was new in the box!

Regards,
Ron

jackie schmidt
02-03-2016, 12:36 PM
"The 40-X receivers use the same barrel threads and dimensions as the standard actions, BUT, the 40-X series are NOT taken from the standard production line and trued. They are final machined to a closer to spec dimension, and made (and serial numbered) in a different facility".

That might be the intention, but I have trued several 40x actions through the years, and have found them to be no more, or less, truly straight in the criticle areas than any regular Remington 700.

R.G. Robinett
02-03-2016, 07:28 PM
Can you put a model 700 Jewell or other aftermarket triggers on the 721-722's? If not, are there triggers made for them?
Thanks
Jim

Jim, in my experience - only a pair of 722 - yes, Jewell, and other aftermarket "Rem. 700" triggers have worked very well.
The original 722 triggers had two-part stamped sears . . . and, still, with a little working-over, could be made to work fairly well. :D RG

jackie schmidt
02-03-2016, 08:35 PM
Jim, in my experience - only a pair of 722 - yes, Jewell, and other aftermarket "Rem. 700" triggers have worked very well.
The original 722 triggers had two-part stamped sears . . . and, still, with a little working-over, could be made to work fairly well. :D RG

Randy, on that 1949 vintage 721 that did that project on a few years back, a Jewell Varmint Trigger with the safety went right on with no mods what so ever.

dmort
02-14-2016, 07:36 PM
From the Roy Marcot book, "The Official Authorized History of Remington Arms Company", page 243:

The 725's were dressed up 721/722's to compete with the fancier model 70 winchesters. They look much like the later 700's, but have a safety that looks like the 1917 Enfield-based models 30/30s/720.

The 725's were made in 270, 280, 30-06, 244, 243, & 222. The 725 Kodak was made in 458 & 375 H&H. They were listed in the catalog from 1958-1961, and a few were made as non- catalog items in 1962. Only 16,635 were made.

I've seen a couple of 725's, but they were both 30-06's. I wish I'd bought that one that was new in the box!

Regards,
Ron

I was cleaning out my loading room and thumbing through some old magazines before tossing them in the recycle bin. One of the things I stumbled on was this ad for gunstocks in a 1968 Herter's catalog."These stocks would dress up a moderately priced 721/722 and could be altered to fit the new model 725". What alterations were required wasn't stated ,but since Herter's was never short on verbiage it must have been obvious or fairly simple.
As an aside, between the different grades and types of wood you had fifty choices! Select American Walnut started at $9.75 and they didn't accept credit cards.
Mort

glp
02-28-2016, 12:13 PM
I was cleaning out my loading room and thumbing through some old magazines before tossing them in the recycle bin. One of the things I stumbled on was this ad for gunstocks in a 1968 Herter's catalog."These stocks would dress up a moderately priced 721/722 and could be altered to fit the new model 725". What alterations were required wasn't stated ,but since Herter's was never short on verbiage it must have been obvious or fairly simple.
As an aside, between the different grades and types of wood you had fifty choices! Select American Walnut started at $9.75 and they didn't accept credit cards.
Mort

is the odd ball extractor. They are very hard to find if they break. I know, you can install a Sako but that defeats the safety features of the action. That mod would not be for me. I have 3...two 722s and one 721, but have spare extractors for them all. greg