Remington 300 Savage BDL vs Classic

dennis53

August 24, 2004 15:31

Hello;
I would like to buy a Remington 700 in 300 Savage.I am looking at the 1992 BDL or the 2002 Classic. Can anyone give an opinion as to which is the better shooter? I shoot around 100 rounds per week during the summer, at the range, at paper, (four or five different positions )and the gun might be a back-up white-tail gun,too. Any comments as far as accuracy, stocks, triggers, sights, actions, etc would be appreciated. Thanks,

Dennis53

0

• 

  vegasblj

  August 24, 2004 17:12

  the guns should shoot the same. I would go with the classic, they only made them 1 year, I like the looks of the stock better, the classics will have a clean barrel (no sights, not drilled for sights). the 2002 classic will have the J-lock however, not a big deal but some dont want that.

  0
• 

  gskyhawk

  August 24, 2004 18:49

  we had a classic in 280 rem , gun was fine but for one thing and that was the blueing , wasn't worth a crap , I would go with the bdl

  0
• 

  D.S.COLE

  August 25, 2004 11:25

  The two rifles came off the same assembly line.One might perform better than the other ,out of the box ,but that is true with any brand or model.The stocks are different ,one has sights one doesnt.You will have to choose which one appeals most to you.
  In all my years of dealing with 700"s Ive only seen one or two that couldnt be made to perform adequately with a little work. proper fitting of the action and barrel to the stock ,glas-bedding usually,and adjusting the trigger is generally all it takes.You may have to find a load it prefers, buy the one you like the best no one can say one is better than the other.

  0
• 

  dennis53

  August 27, 2004 06:57

  Thanks for the input, guys. I'm always glad to see when people take the time to answer.
  
  Dennis53

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.