I would tend to agree with most of the people on this post... I would never buy a Remington 710. They were designed as a cheap alternative to the higher end 700's. With this in mind my thinking would tell me that they used lower tolerances, cheaper methods, and lower quality craftmanship to manufacture this rifle. Dont get me wrong I own a Remington 700 and will never get rid of it! It is the best rifle I have ever owned! I just wish that Remington could offer the quality of a 700 series at a cheaper price... Then again you get what you pay for!

Personally the 710 I had was finished as well if not better than most savages out there for comparison. I only use them for comparisonbecause alot of people buy them and they are not that glamorous of a rifle.If you dont get the stainless or the top of the line model the finish on them is not to be desired. Looks like they were investmentcast then never finished. Rough edges everywhere, and the barrel nutis frightening.Even the stainlesshas a rough appearance.I know of one Savage rifle that cracked behind the recoil lug on the synthetic stock and the pin that holds the bolthead assembly on broke into.The stock on the 710 doesnt look cheap as the synthetic on the savage i saw.One guy at the range couldnt figure out why his rifle wouldnt go forward and lock up tofire and it was because the nut on the back of the bolt had backed off and the bushing in front of it was out of alignment. Why does savage have to have so many parts on their bolts anyhow. Its just one more part they can sell for replaement I guess.You know when rifle companies put out something that is cheaper in price they have to cut corners. All the manufacturers have to. The nicest rifle Savage has put out in awhile is the new Classic line, but look at the price also. I know they are accurate but so it the 710. I havent had bad luck with it. I know there are some savage owners out there with problems also. All rifle companies have problems every once in awhile. I was just saying in my original post the newer remington is not that bad, but really it looked even better than the first one I had. Where else can you get a rifle with a detatchable magazine, crowned muzzle, in magnum calibers,a short bolt throw due to abolt with three lugs not two that locks up with the button rifledbarrel, scope and mounts,and if im not mistaken it does have the R3 recoil pad. The .300 win mag was just 329.99 I saw. Its not a bad deal.I can only imagine what the Stevens rifles look like if they are theeconomical line for Savage. I know the resale value on the 710 is low, but the resale value on just aboutany of the newerusedSavage bolt rifles is terrible and I see alot for sale out there for next to nothing. If you dont like the 710 the that is your choice. Ifyou have never usedoneyou are only basing an opinion from others that have and thentheymay havebeen that one in a thousand for gettinga riflewith problems.

AmericanPioneer, I have shot both the remington 710, and the savage 110. Althought the savage is the rifle i bought, we still need to compare guns to the money we spend on them. The 710 is a great rifle for the money. All guns may have thier flaws but ones that we pay over 500 dollars on, should never be compared to a 710. Once again the 710 is good for the money....and competes well with its own price range.

P.S so far the Savage has shot great for me. And although many people say it looks ugly...I seem to think its beautiful. I got the savage GXP3 package.

I know there are going to be alot of opinions out there and that is why there are forums for just that. I justfind it humerous intheskepticism of those who probably have never used or even handled a firearm they trash so heavily. Its likethat commercial where the people find outthata person in control of a situation aresupposedly welleducatedat a profession like a helicopter pilot saving them,only to find out they juststayed in a Holiday Inn last night.

When i was buying mylatest rifle, i looked at the 710 just for the price. It was $329 with scope. I then picked up a winchester M70 with scope that was $359. So for $30 more, the 710 wasn't even in the same zip code. I found it cheap, ugly and poorly build IMO. I pulled back the bolt and it stuck at full draw. It wasn't smooth. The M70 was like butterand of much better quality. I thought to myself, how can Remmy put out such a rifle. If anything, it turned me off to remmington in a big way. I recently purchased another rifle (Savage) as a backup. the 110 with scope cost $350 and once again, the 710 wasn't even close in initial quality. It may shoot well, but the 710 should be $99 and no more. I am no rifle expert, but i have learned alot over the last few years and i would never buy a 710. As i said, i think it's way over priced as it is when you can get a savage or Winny M70for the same or slightly more.

I'm sorry to be so ignorant, but could someone explain how "ugly" affects the performance of the 710 - or any other rifle? Does a non-ugly firearm shoot better or just give you some form of arousal to fondle a bunch of fine wood and shiny metal that causes you to be more accurate?

Do some require this same form of arousal when handling a screwdriver or shovel? Are your lawn tools made of engraved metal and fine walnut handles?

Vanity has a price....and a lot of people willing to pay for it. This explains the morons driving around with a set of chrome wheels with pretty little spinning hubcaps that are worth more than the car.

(oops....sorry for the sarcasm....well, not really)

ugly is always in the eye of the beholder, however, if i am going to spend hundreds on a rifle i will look for something that is worth that kind of money from end to end. If there were NO alternatives to the 710, then i wouldn't have any other option. I just feel the overall package needs to be worth something. And the grey plastic just screams "I am a cheap rifle".

I'm no gun snob. If I was I wouldn't own and shoot the milsurps I have. I alsowouldn't like the Savages either. The problem I have with the 710 isthat its the Bic Lighter of the gun world. Shoot them for a few years till they start falling apart and then chuck it and get a new one. Problem is, $329.00 is a lot for a throw-away. Especialy when you can buy a Savagefor the same or less. I could go for one at about $150, but you'll never see them priced that low. They shoot well enough but they're defintely not built to last. They're also clunky and cumbersome. Whatever floats your boat.

Have you ever owned one of the older orNEW Remington 710 rifles or are youjust basing your opinion on what others put in print. And if youhave ownedone, was itlong enough to see it break down and wear out to a point of having to dispose of it like a bic lighter. The bic lighter is one of the more popular lighters out there also. You'll find thousands being sold everywhere which is a testament of a cheaper made product being as reliable as another but at a savings to the consumer. It gets the job done without making the customer suffer in their wallets. If thats the case then it served its purpose.

If you've got a gun and you like it, why does it matter what somebody else on an internet forum thinks?