Rem 700 CDL SF -or- Win Model 70 Featherweight

[64physhy]

I currently have a Winchester 70 Featherweight in .300 on layaway. I just noticed that the place I have it on layaway at also has a Remington 700 CDL SF (stainless, also .300) for the same price. Store policy is that you can change your mind before the layaway is paid as long as you change your mind for an equal or higher priced item, so switching wouldn't be a problem.

Both are used, the Win is like brand new. Looks like it's had MAYBE 50 rounds through it. I have not seen the Rem yet, but it's supposedly in very good condition, as well. When I get back over there, I'm going to see if they'll let me shoot both at their indoor range to help decide.

Assuming the Rem is in as good of condition as the Win (or close to it), which would you recommend?

[JStor]

I would choose the Winchester Model 70 over a Remington any day, but that's just me. A Featherweight .300 Mag...no thanks. Make mine a .308 Winchester or other standard bolt face cartridge.

The older you get, the more you will appreciate the lack of recoil in certain cartridge/rifle combinations. They are easier on the shoulder and easier on the checkbook when buying ammo...just my 2 cents.

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

I would choose the Winchester Model 70 over a Remington any day, but that's just me. A Featherweight .300 Mag...no thanks. Make mine a .308 Winchester or other standard bolt face cartridge.

The older you get, the more you will appreciate the lack of recoil in certain cartridge/rifle combinations. They are easier on the shoulder and easier on the checkbook when buying ammo...just my 2 cents.

This 100% with one thing to consider. For me if its not a CRF action then I would go with the Rem. 300mag in a feather weight OUCH no thanks!

[64physhy]

Is the recoil in a .300 mag really that much worse than a .308? I'm new to bolt action rifles. Most of what I've shot has been military weapons, and most of them have some kind of buffer.

.300 muzzle velocity is about 300 fps more than a .308, but about 750 more ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle, so I guess that would give it more kick.

I am at an age where I don't want a lot of recoil. I guess the best thing to do would be to fire one and see.

It's got to be better than my Win 1874 .32 Win Spl...That thing hurts.

[High Tower]

Yes, the .300 will have more felt recoil - some might say much more. Unless you use the managed recoil loads. But they pretty much take away any advantage of the .300.

My vote is for the Remington 700, but that is just personal taste.

[okie john]

Is the recoil in a .300 mag really that much worse than a .308? I'm new to bolt action rifles. Most of what I've shot has been military weapons, and most of them have some kind of buffer.

.300 muzzle velocity is about 300 fps more than a .308, but about 750 more ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle, so I guess that would give it more kick.

I am at an age where I don't want a lot of recoil. I guess the best thing to do would be to fire one and see.

It's got to be better than my Win 1874 .32 Win Spl...That thing hurts.

If your 32 Special kicks too hard for your liking, then you're going to hate a lightweight .300 Magnum.

Several things influence felt recoil, including bullet weight, charge weight, bullet velocity, rifle weight, and stock design.

Your .32 Special isn't very powerful, but it kicks hard because it's light and the stock has a lot of drop at the heel, which is a poor design for handling recoil. Either of the rifles you mentioned will have a better stock design, but the .300 Magnum is so powerful that it's going to kick pretty hard in a light rifle.

I'm also averse to recoil, and I find that a seven-pound .308 is about all I want to deal with these days. Unless you routinely take long shots in windy country, I'd skip the 300.


Okie John

[64physhy]

Thanks for the replies. I'm going see if they'll let me fire the one I have on layaway. If it's more recoil than I want to deal with, I'll swap for something in a .308.

What about 7mm?

[AR15barrels]

Is the recoil in a .300 mag really that much worse than a .308?

.300 muzzle velocity is about 300 fps more than a .308, but about 750 more ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle, so I guess that would give it more kick.

Yes, they recoil a lot more.

It's not ONLY the bullet weight that creates recoil.
It's ALSO the powder weight.
So, going from 45gr of powder in a 308 to say 70gr in a 300 mag, that is a big increase...

[JStor]

Another point to consider is that the .300 will reduce mag capacity to 3 rounds instead of 5 for a standard bolt face cartridge...if that matters. The .300 will cost a lot more to shoot and will wear the barrel a lot faster than one of the standard (take your pick) cartridges such as .308, 7-08, .30-06, .270 etc.

The .300 is a great cartridge for long range shooting, but the rifles usually have heavy barrels and stocks, along with high magnification optics.

The .308 shines because of the availability of excellent and accurate factory loads and rifles. Other notable characteristics include its accuracy, its long barrel life and the fact that it has enough power to use for any game in the lower 48. It comes close to the mythical "do it all" type of cartridge.

As for which rifle...a Remy or a Winchester, I favor the Model 70 for its design characteristics...flat bottom, integral recoil lug, field strippable bolt, etc.