Savage 110 / Remington 700 ADL

[Arizonagunrunner]

I am looking for thoughts on which rifle you would prefer.(action, quality, looks) Not the caliber, just the rifle itself. I have a Savage 110 in 30-06. It is wood stocked and made in 1996 I have it scoped with a 2x10. My Remington is a wood ADL model 270 WIN caliber made in 1985. It is scoped with a 3x9. Both are excellent rifles in excellent condition. Both are great shooters. The ADL is heavier of the two though. I never have had issue with either. I prefer the Savage myself. Looks sleeker, feels better to me. And is lighter.

 

[Teachu2]

The only opinion that matters is yours!

 

[C-grunt]

I prefer the Remington. Especially the older ones.

 

[jim243]

I prefer the Savage's, I have 3 of them. No on the Remington's, maybe one made 30 years ago, but not one of today's, A tikka T3 but not a Remington.

But that's just my personal view.
Jim

 

[Bushpilot]

Between the Savage and the Remington, I prefer the Remington. The action is shorter, trimmer and all else being equal usually weighs less. Looks are subjective but I think the Remington action is better looking. The long action Savages often require a rail or extension rings with some scopes, especially for proper eye relief.. This adds even more weight. I don't care for the Savage's barrel locking nut or the shape of the bolt handle. I think the lock time on the Remington is faster also. It's not that the Savage is a bad gun, they usually shoot very well, but I like the Remington better. The Savage 110 was a great "budget" gun but is over priced today. There are better choices for the money than the Savage. Although it's a hard thing for a long time 700 fan to admit but the same thing probably goes for a new Remington as well......

 

[Ash]

I prefer the Savage because it allows me to rebarrel it myself, or even adjust headspace easily for a particular load.

By the way, the Remington was also originally a budget rifle. They are both fundamentally built the same - tubular receiver with a separate recoil lug mated between the barrel and the action. In any case, lock time seems irrelevant as the Savage is equally accurate, sometimes more accurate, than the Remington product.

 

[Bushpilot]

By the way, the Remington was also originally a budget rifle. They are both fundamentally built the same - tubular receiver with a separate locking lug.

The Remington 721/722 was actually the "budget" rifle. Then Remington upgraded it somewhat when they turned it into the 700. Savage on the other hand is basically still selling the same rifle today that they have for decades, a dull finish with a synthetic, "hard wood" or laminate stock. But today, buyer’s tastes have changed and now Savage can market and sell that same rifle as more of a "top shelf" product... Both the 700 and Savage do have receivers made from tube stock but the 700 doesn't have a floating bolt head like a 110. I think that is why the Savage receivers are so long. There maybe some very basic similarities between the two but the Remington is a little more elegant... The Savage design delivers similar performance and lower production cost with some minor compromise in appearance.

 

[adelbridge]

which one groups better?

 

[Bushpilot]

which one groups better?

Similar in my experience... I've shot more Remingtons than Savages but I've shot rifles from both that have ranged from good to extremely good.... I've never had a poor shooter of either type.

 

[Kachok]

I used to use Remingtons only, but in the past decade I have grown to prefer Savages, they are in genral; lighter, more compact, better trigger, more accurate, easier to customize, and absolutely tough as nails. Now Tikka vs Savage is a much closer contest.

 

[jmr40]

Wow, where did you find a 2X scope with a 10mm objective, and where did you find rings for it. Don't get mad, just messin with you. But seriously a variable power optic should be written as 2-8X or 3-9X etc. Fixed power scopes or binoculars are written as 4X, 8X, etc. If you want to include the size of the front objective it comes after the X. For example 2-8X40, or with a fixed power binocular 7X35.

In this case most folks won't have any trouble figuring out what you have, but with some combinations it could be really confusing. For example they make 8-32X variable scopes and 8X32 fixed power binoculars.

I cannot like a Savage, especially a long action. I can tolerate a short action. I've owned and shot several and never found one to be any more accurate than any other rifle. They used to be less expensive, but no longer. If they aren't any cheaper, or accurate, why put up with an ugly rifle.

A big part of that is the extremely long loading/ejection ports Savage uses. Their long actions are about 3/4" longer than anyone elses rifle. Their short actions are only about 1/16" shorter than other brands long actions. This makes it impossible for me to mount my prefered scope with my prefered mounts on a Savage. They simply won't fit. It also messes with the rifles looks and balance. Getting touched on the nose by the bolt while operating the action is not fun either.

Their short actions are tolerable. The Hog Hunter in 308 might just find a place in my safe.

 

[Ash]

The 700 is for all intents and purposes the same as the 721. And, like the 700, not all Savage 110-based actions are the same. There are short action, long actions, deluxe actions and basic actions.

Compare, for instance, a Remington ADL with generic hardwood stock in 30-06 to a Savage 14 with cut-checkered walnut stock in 308. The Savage will be far nicer finished, with a detachable magazine and shorter action/lock time.

Savage 110-based actions can be very nice indeed, as nice as a Remington. They also tend to be more accurate these days than the average 700. Conversely, 700 actions can be bottom-barrel cheap.

In any case, they remain largely the same type of action and these days virtually equal after-market support.

 

[Kachok]

Savage long actions are annoyingly long, but mine wears a Leopold VXII quite comfortably. It does not make Savages excessive long or heavy so it does not bother me one bit, I have owned a few 700s and they were all considerably heavier.
Racking my brain trying to think of anything that does annoy me about Savages.
1. Savages have a ROUGH bore from the factory, I always end up brushing lead flakes out of the bore for the first couple hundred rounds (I shoot alot)
2.Savages are bullet picky, they may or may not like your first choice of bullet, but I never have too much trouble finding something they really like.
3. Savage does not use 24" barrels on high intensity cartridges like the 25-06 which really beg for it.
4. The flexy stock on the lower end Savages feels pretty darn cheap (As does the one on the Remington SPS)

 

[Bushpilot]

There are short action, long actions, deluxe actions and basic actions.

And they are all too long, longer than they need to be..

Savage 110-based actions can be very nice indeed, as nice as a Remington. They also tend to be more accurate these days than the average 700. Conversely, 700 actions can be bottom-barrel cheap.

Sure, the Savage comes in higher grades but the shape and design of the action are limiting factors. Looks are subjective, but the Savage action looks a bit coarse and crude compared to the Remington.. Disagree? Well, how many really high grade, finely checkered, AAA walnut stocked, custom sporters have you ever seen built around a Savage 110 action? Not many.. There are lots built around 700's

The OP didn't ask which were more accurate but I’d like to know how you arrived at this conclusion. Savages are accurate but no more so than lots of other rifles out there..

Compare, for instance, a Remington ADL with generic hardwood stock in 30-06 to a Savage 14 with cut-checkered walnut stock in 308. The Savage will be far nicer finished, with a detachable magazine and shorter action/lock time.

Comparing the highest grade Savage with the lower grade Remington isn’t an accurate comparison. The comparison should be high grade to high grade and low to low. The lock time on the Remington is still faster...and the kicker is... the action length for the Savage in 308 won't be any shorter than the full length Remington 30/06.... Now, turn it around and make the Remington a 308 and the Savage a 30/06 and the Remington will be WAY shorter...

 

[Kachok]

All of my Savages are lower end and they all shoot great, I don't own a 114 or 116 though I would love to.

 

[Ash]

"Comparing the highest grade Savage with the lower grade Remington isn’t an accurate comparison."

I agree, mine was in response to your statement "Savage on the other hand is basically still selling the same rifle today that they have for decades, a dull finish with a synthetic, "hard wood" or laminate stock."

You lumped all Savages into one category, yet I have seen very basic, make that cheap, looking 700's with the same blind magazine and "hardwood" stock.

And the 110 no longer comes labeled as a such in a bottom-end budget design - that is reserved for the Stevens 200 brand of the 110.

And, other than dimensional differences, there is fundamentally little real difference between them.

Even so, I sold my last Savage off a decade ago. I shoot a four-lugged Pedersen 3500.

 

[bluekouki86]

I own both. I have an older Savage 110 in 30-06, and a Rem 700 in .222 rem magnum. They are both fantastic shooters. I prefer the Savage trigger for its adjustability (pre-accutrigger), but the Remingtons action seems smoother than my 110. I really wouldn't hesitate to buy another of either rifle.

 

[Bushpilot]

I agree, mine was in response to your statement "Savage on the other hand is basically still selling the same rifle today that they have for decades, a dull finish with a synthetic, "hard wood" or laminate stock."

I think it's fair to say that rifles with those general characteristics are very typical of the Savage 110 series. Buyers looking for a more upscale rifle in terms of wood, bluing, finish and style usually look to other brands.

You lumped all Savages into one category, yet I have seen very basic, make that cheap, looking 700's with the same blind magazine and "hardwood" stock.

There may be a few out there but they certainly don't typify the average 700. I remember some Remington Sportsman 78's which were in their product line years ago that might fit that description but even the 700 ADL's came with walnut stocks.

other than dimensional differences, there is fundamentally little real difference between them.

We'll just have to disagree on that one...

 

[Arizonagunrunner]

My bad on the scope description!!!!!! Like I said, I prefer the Savage. Both are great rifles. Both have put meat on the table. I think the Savage is a bit better for me. I will never part with them I do know that. I was just wanting to get a group thought from fellow rifleman.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I prefer the Savage over the Remington. That's not just because the fact that Remington took bribes from an anti-2nd amendment government.

 

[Lj1941]

For those who like to knock the Savage action for being long, remember they also make a short action for the shorter calibers.This doesn't help a person who already owns the long action-but I am throwing it out for the"Savage Bashers".evil:

 

[yzguy87]

A poll on this subject would be telling of people's preference. I owned a Savage 10 and I've shot a 700 too but didn't own it. I'd say get what you want. They're both good weapons and no matter who you ask people are always going like this and hate that for what ever reasons fact or fiction.

 

[Ash]

If a large number of people wish to purchase an SE Ford Mustang, does that mean the Mustang is a cheap car? Savage makes multiple levels, and indeed I have seen more high-end Savage rifles - which is to say the typical Savage - than bottom end now that Savage brands the basic models with the Stevens monicker.

In any case, it is irrelevant. I can get a Savage every bit as nice, well-finished, and polished as any Remington 700. Since I can, fit and finish comparisons lose their value.

 

[Bushpilot]

I have seen more high-end Savage rifles - which is to say the typical Savage - than bottom end now that Savage brands the basic models with the Stevens monicker.

We obviously have very different ideas on what is "higher end." Every rifle that is branded Savage instead of Stevens is certainly not "high end." Savage has been branding the ultra low end products as "Stevens" forever... This is hardly anything new...

I can get a Savage every bit as nice, well-finished, and polished as any Remington 700.

Actually no, you can't. Remington has far more “higher end” choices that Savage. That goes double if you include Remington's Custom Shop. Savage has absolutely nothing that even compares...

For those who like to knock the Savage action for being long, remember they also make a short action for the shorter calibers.

Read the previous posts... The shorter Savage actions are as long as the full length actions on other rifles...

 

[Kachok]

Yep Remington does have their custom shop, but Savages are so easy to customize that they have absolutely no need for a custom shop, you can do it all yourself pretty easy, barrel/caliber changes take 10-15 min, stock changes take half that, and why on earth anyone would want to change out the Accutrigger is beyond me but you sure can.
Who's approach is better..... I give that one to Savage, I can customize and dress up a rifle for well under half what a Remington custom shop rifle costs.
As far as Remingtin making nicer rifles then Savages higher end guns I am questioning that a bit, my CDL was not any nicer then the Savage 114s I saw recently, not in terms of fit/finish anyway, but my (FN) Winchester Model 70 Featherweight trumps them both in that department.