PDA

View Full Version : Remington 783, Good or Bad?



Z_Yanoshewski
03-23-2017, 08:15 PM
I'm looking at buying a Remington 783 chambered in 22-250 just wondering if their are any people out their that could tell me whether they are a good reliable rifle or not? and whether the caliber is good for hunting small game? and if $350 for a brand new one with Synthetic Stock, Blued Barrel and a 3x9 scope is a good price or not? thanks in advance

Swampdonkey
03-23-2017, 08:34 PM
You get what you pay for. Decent for what it is, but it doesn't have any hidden potential.

Take a Remington 700, though, and the action will last you for life. You might eventually upgrade the stock, trigger, barrel, magazine, but it's done at your pace to your taste.

zulu
03-23-2017, 08:54 PM
It's not a bad rifle

kennymo
03-23-2017, 09:31 PM
Good enough maybe?

They're a functional unit, accurate, and way better (and 100% different) than the 710/770 that preceded it. Rumour might have you believe that they're a slightly revamped Marlin XL7 (Remington and Marlin being sister companies now), which was an excellent budget rifle. I was considering buying one for a cheap varmint rifle, but got a good deal on a Savage 11 Trophy Hunter instead (which I'm quite pleased with).

gtr
03-24-2017, 08:26 AM
I'm looking at buying a Remington 783 chambered in 22-250 just wondering if their are any people out their that could tell me whether they are a good reliable rifle or not? and whether the caliber is good for hunting small game? and if $350 for a brand new one with Synthetic Stock, Blued Barrel and a 3x9 scope is a good price or not? thanks in advance

If your looking to stay on the thrifty side, a 22-250 is not that. Unless you reload, a 223 would be more cost effective. The money you save on ammo with a 223 over a 22-250 you could afford to buy a better quality of rifle. A 788 would be a better starting point. Good luck with it.