remington question

H

hg shelton

Guest
I just bought a 660 remington rifle for deer hunting can anyone give me any info on this rifle?? it's chambered in .308 my favorite cal. it shoots extremly well for a hunting rifle but kicks like a mule. I know it's a light gun but never had a .308 hurt me like this one
Gary
 
Similar to....

I just bought a 660 remington rifle for deer hunting can anyone give me any info on this rifle?? it's chambered in .308 my favorite cal. it shoots extremly well for a hunting rifle but kicks like a mule. I know it's a light gun but never had a .308 hurt me like this one
Gary

Similar to the "Mohawk", and 600 short action short carbine like rifles, these economical fast handling Remington's were economical, fast handling, and very accurate. But...in some critic's eyes...butt ugly. In .308 chambering's or in a more powerful chambering, they were a hard recoil rifle. This is one reason many ended up in gun shows. Matter of fact I bought one in .308 for $200 with only about 20 rounds shot through it. It turned out to be one of the most accurate rifles I ever owned. Loved that short stiff barrel. The premium caliber and the rarest was in .222. These rifles commanded over $900 in some gun shows. That must have been one sweet shooting rifle.

virg
 
hg shelton .........

My brother and I both used to have Remington Model 600 rifles (in .308 Win.) and you're right - they are good shooters. Take a look at this link. http://www.larrywillis.com/reduce-recoil.html and you'll see how you can reduce the recoil considerably with slight stock modifications.

This page is from the Tech Tips section of our website. It's one of over 120 pages designed to help motivate shooters to support and preserve our sport. Hopefully, it will keep more of them at the range and away from the golf course.

- Innovative
 
You likely don't want to add weight to it, though doing so would reduce the felt recoil, so why not have the biggest, thickest, softest buttplate that you can find fitted to it?
 
I would start with a Limbsaver recoil pad, they are worth their weight in gold when one is beating up on your shoulder.
 
Thanks guys, gonna try the limbsaver tomorrow it claims to to take 70%of recoil i'll beleive that when i feel it!!!!!!!!!!
gary
 
Hey, this is not a 600 yard gun, why not load it a bit lighter. They make
lighter recoiling ammo for younger shooters

Hey, don't think I asked a 600yd question, just a simple question about this partiular model rifle and had some good replies. guess I could load a bit lighter since I just turned 54 years young last week...........
Gary Shelton
 
Gary:

A friend formerly shot a Remington 700 chambered in .300 ultramag.

He swears felt recoil was lighter after getting action tuned, as prior to action tuning only one bolt lug was touching.

I don't know if this was something he convinced himself of - or - if he was numb and at the point of recoiling himself into submission. I do know he shot alot of rounds downrange prior to and after action tuning.

Possibly someone more knowledgeable could expand if action tuning could reduce recoil?

If you are in love with your rifle and feel you are going to keep it, action tuning and bedding might be a consideration for increased accuracy sake.

There are good smiths out there that do a "factory" or "varmint" tuneup for around $250.00.

Any body want to pile on this one?

Old Cob
 
hg shelton ......

The Rem 600 and 660 are great hunting rifles. Their size is very handy in the woods, and they are surprisingly accurate. I modified the stock on mine, using the same concept as shown on my website. With 2 identicle rifles it was easy to compare the recoil and see a huge improvement. It actually helped more than adding the recoil pad.

When your stock recoils away from your face it's a pleasure to shoot. The angle of your comb and butt have a lot to do with how the rifle fits a shooter.


Old Cob ........

Man ..... your friend must be a very sensitive guy?
(I couldn't resist that one.)


- Innovative
 
Gary

Recoil is a product of one thing, "for every action, there is a opposite and equal reaction".

To negate this "opposite and equal" reaction, you either have to cut down on the originol "action", or figure out a way to absorb the "reaction" so your shoulder doesn't notice it so much.

The easiest solution in your case is to have a recoil pad installed, this will cut down on what you feel, even though the Rifle will be coming back just as violently.

The second is to simply go to a lighter bullet load. The recoil of a Rifle is directly related to bullet weight more than anything. You would be surprised at the difference of a 150 grn load and a 180 grn load as far as felt recoil goes. Choose some of the lighterbullet loads in the Loading Manual, I dought a deer at 100 yards would know the difference between a 130 grn bullet at 2650, or a 180.

Years ago, when I first came out of the Army, a friend wanted to go deer hunting. I went to the local Pawn Shop, and they had a Rem Mohawk in 350 Remington Mag. I even bought a box of Remington ammo with it, about a 250 grn load as I remember. Ugly green box.

We went to the range to sight it in, (the old "Ponderosa Rifle Range and Ice House), :D, and decided to sight it in, at night. Well, the first shot darned near knocked me off the bench, and the ball of fire darned near blinded me. We got it sighted in, but I never took it hunting, sold it to someother unsuspecting fool. That thing was atrocious.

Since I am old enough to remember when Remington brought these out, I am also old enough to remember when you could hardly give one away. The puplic fell out of love with the 600-660 series pretty quickly, (ugly was the general consensus) that is, untill an entire new generation came along and re-discovered them. The things now have what can be described as an almost "cult like" following, much like the 788. Through the '70's, you couldn't sell one for $75. Now, they demand as much as $700 at Gun Shows.

They are really nice Rifles, the action is just a shortened 700, (or a early Model-7), but got a bad rap because Remington offered it as a rather cheap alternative to the 700 series. Since they were cheap to buy, and did look cheap, shooters equated this with "quality", when, in reality, it was assembled with the same basic design parts as the most expensive 700BDL.

It surprises shooters when you tell them you could take a barrel out of the most expensive 700 BDL, and screw it right into a 600, and aside from a few manufacturing tolerances, it would shoot just fine...........jackie
 
Hg, you mean when you DON'T feel it, right?:D Those were some of the best woods rifles ever made, and very economical, too. I have to share this, though. I've been an active shooter now for over 50 years and can recall only two guns that were truly unpleasant to shoot. The first one was a S & W Model 29 with 4 inch barrel - I helped a friend get it sighted in. The other was a Remington 660 in 350 Remington Magnum; It was like touching off an artillery peice from your shoulder - Ouch!! And the muzzle blast would come back at you as though it had a brake on it. Fond memories of masochistic experiences.:rolleyes: I think you got a great little deer rifle, though that dogleg blolt handle IS butt ugly. Aren't these sorta collector items these days?
 
Jackie ........

When a gunstock rides straight back along your face, it's easier to take than a stock the recoils directly into your kisser. The angle of the butt can also affect how you "feel" recoil. It's much more comfortable to get punched in your large shoulder muscles, rather than on the upper boney part of your shoulder.

Take a look at this page http://www.larrywillis.com/reduce-recoil.html and you'll see how to reduce "felt" recoil. Adding a good recoil pad is obvious, but getting these stock angles right can make a huge difference - more than many shooters realize.

- Innovative
 
My most unpleasant rifle for recoil is a .45-70 trapdoor Springfield, loaded with max black powder charges and the 405 grain bullet.

I realize, you would not THINK this would be as bad as it is. I mean, it wouldn't SEEM so bad. But it is.

It may have something to do with the curvy steel buttplate, which really nails your shoulder.
 
I too am old enough to remember when the 600' and 660's came out and have owned a slew over the years. There are some subltle differences between them that aren't real noticable at first glance.

The 600's had the plastic rail on top of the barrel and the sharks fin front sight, and an 18" or perhaps it was 18 & 1/2 " barrel. But if you take a loook at the barrel on the 600 it is a fairly thin barrel, diameter wise. The public took one look at that thing and Buck Rogers Ray gun immediately came to mind, the dealers could hardly give them away. It didn't take Remington long to realize that they had a dog on their hands so they did a little redesign work and called the new version a 660. The 660's had a larger diameter barrel, no rail on the barrel and the sharks fin sight was gone. Not only that but they generally had a fairly nice piece of wood with a forearm tip on them. But the best part was that the 660's shot great, I had one in 243 that like a fool I let someone talk me out of, it was the handiest most accurate factory rifle I had owned at that time.

Unfortunately the "ugly" stigma stayed with them and they never sold to Remington's expectations. So the next version was the Mohawk 600 which was the same gun as the 660 but with a bead blast finish, a hardwood stock, and generally not as well finished, but they still shot like a house afire. I have owned a couple of them in 222 and I won so many meat shoot matches with them that using it was almost unfair.

The saddest part of the story is that when Remington finally discontinued the Mohawk version, and they dropped the 788 at about the same time, I was in Scheels sporting goods in Great Falls, Montana and they had racks full of 788's and Mohawk 600's, in virtually every caliber they available in, for the princely sum of $69.99 each. If I remember right I picked up anoter 222 and a 308, I wish I had refinanced the house and bought a truckload of them.

drover
 
With my limited....

Gary:

A friend formerly shot a Remington 700 chambered in .300 ultramag.

He swears felt recoil was lighter after getting action tuned, as prior to action tuning only one bolt lug was touching.

I don't know if this was something he convinced himself of - or - if he was numb and at the point of recoiling himself into submission. I do know he shot alot of rounds downrange prior to and after action tuning.

Possibly someone more knowledgeable could expand if action tuning could reduce recoil?

If you are in love with your rifle and feel you are going to keep it, action tuning and bedding might be a consideration for increased accuracy sake.

There are good smiths out there that do a "factory" or "varmint" tuneup for around $250.00.

Any body want to pile on this one?

Old Cob

With my limited experience as a shooter (only since 11ys old) I highly doubt action tuning plays any part regards recoil. However; this may get some wonderful entertaining answers on a separate thread.

Who knows...we may get a magic answer of how to "ring-in" less recoil.

virg
 
Why not have a muzzle brake installed...if you want to reduce recoil there is "nothing more effective"...
You can buy an effective muzzle brake for as little as $30 and have it installed for about $30-$50....
A very good investment to manage recoil...
 
tryed the recoil pad today, helped a great deal going to try some lighter bullets next. Never had much luck with light bullets, never tried them in a hunting round though.......
Gary
 
tried the 125's today, she's ready to go hunting!!!! and is a pleasure to shoot.Thanks for all the info.
Gary
 
Back
Top