SmallCaliberCentral

Hello there guys,

Does anyone have any experience with the Remington 700 SPS Varmint, in .204 Ruger? I like the fact that it has a 26”(I like this part because long means faster ) heavy barrel, with a synthetic stock that won’t get all scarred up; I particularly like the comparatively small price tag . I’m just wondering how it is for accuracy and reliability, etc.; I’d particularly like to know how you find the X-Mark trigger. Thanks all.

Davis

Davis, first of all welcome to the forum. As to your question I don't have that rifle but I do have the VLSSTH in .204 and she shoots great. It has the new X-Mark trigger on it and I adjusted it down to 1 1/2 lbs. Sage rats hate it! Gary

p.s. The grin on my mug is from the first three shots out of the pipe being hits!

The Remington 700's a GREAT rifles. I have the varmint in .223 and it shot great groups at a 100 yards out of the box. You couldnt find a better rifle than the 700's. Sorry but i havent shot one in .204 but from the accuracy of the .223 id say that the .204 would only be better. The x mark triggers a not bad unless you plan to shot in competitions. Then i would recommend a aftermarket trigger. All around the Remington 700 sps varmint is a AWSOME rifle to shoot. I couldnt be happier with mine.

Captqc wrote:Davis, first of all welcome to the forum. As to your question I don't have that rifle but I do have the VLSSTH in .204 and she shoots great. It has the new X-Mark trigger on it and I adjusted it down to 1 1/2 lbs. Sage rats hate it! Gary

p.s. The grin on my mug is from the first three shots out of the pipe being hits!

Captqc,

Just curious, what scope do you have on your VLSSTH and how tall are the rings? I have one that looks just like that although I don't know if I have the same trigger. Mine's crisp but its a tad heavy. After bedding and releaving the pressure/contact on the fore-end of the stock she shoots very well.

Jim

Jim: Rick here for Gary. His scope is a Leupold 6.5-20X 50mm LR in Leupold medium height rings. His rifle is not bedded, but factory floated and shoots quite well for a factory rig. He's right, Skippy hates it.

For Lupy's with 40mm objectives, low rings will work with most varmint weight barrels on most rifles and medium rings for 50mm objectives. Look at the below photo of my Cooper M21 in .223 with a 3.5-10X 40mm M1 LR mounted in low rings......slammed nice 'n low, the way it should be for a great cheek weld.

Thanks Rick.

Apparently the reticle in my Nikon isn’t responding (linear) when I turn the elevation knob and besides I’ve wanted to replace it anyway. Now I have an excuse . This is primarily a bench gun unless, something goes south on my CZ-527.

I’ve taken a real liking to Burris Signature Scope Rings with the plastic inserts and in fact when I put the Leupold VX3 8.5-25x50 on my 40-X several months back I had to use extra high scope mounts for the objective to clear the barrel. Fortunately, that rifle has an adjustable cheek piece. Regarding ring height, I’ve noticed on both of my thumbhole stocks (Remington 700 & Savage 17 HMR) the built in cheek piece is pretty high.

I’m torn between the following scopes;
a. Zeiss 6.5-20x50 (1” tube) with the Rapid Z Varmint Reticle.
b. Leupold 6.5-20x50 (30mm tube) with the Varmint Hunters Reticle.
b. Leupold 8.5-25x50 (30mm tube) with the Varmint Hunters Reticle.

The way I see it thus far;
- Price. Scopes (a) and (c) are pretty much a wash, so no real advantage there. Scope (b) is about $100.00 cheaper. Advantage Leupold.
- Internal Adjustment. I like the option to turn knobs instead of using the hold over method. Advantage Leupold.
- Clarity. It’s tough for me to see the difference and besides, this is being used in broad daylight. In addition to the Leupold mentioned above, I have a Zeiss 4.5-14x50 and when I set both scopes on 10 power and look into dark shaded areas late in the day (barely legal light limits) it seems the Zeiss has better color (looks more natural) but I’m not sure its any clearer. The best way I can describe it is; think of driving down the highway on a bright sunny day and compare the differences between brown (Leupold) lens to gray (Zeiss) sunglasses. No advantage.
- Customer Service. Ive only used Leupold (as well as Burris) for small items and I’ve never had a problem. Leupold will change reticles, Zeiss does but they are very limited. I’d have to give Leupold the nod here.
- Reticle. This is the unknown part and with everything else being so close it’s probably going to be the deciding factor. The Zeiss reticle looks to be thicker in comparison to the Leupold. I’m wondering if there is anyone who has used either, or both of these reticles if they could comment. I like the thinness of the Leupold, but I don’t want it too thin where it would be hard to see. The Zeiss has a built in range finder whereas the Leupold doesn’t. Since both reticles are etched I’m presuming the contrast is pretty much the same. Regarding the Zeiss Z-Plex reticle, it’s really “black” and it shows up well in dark hard to see areas.

This leaves the last question; is it worth the extra $$$ for the Leupold 8.5-25 scope over the 6.5-20? In the target shooting world, the extra magnification “can” be an advantage. Also, I can always crank the 25 power scope down to 16 power on those days where the mirage is as thick as the BS in both Salem and Olympia during the legislation sessions. Like wise, I’m also wondering if the eye relief at 16 power on the two Leupold scopes would be the same? By the way, in terms of eye relief, the new VX3 line has it over the Zeiss Conquest scopes.

Jim

Sounds like you already know what to get. The 8.5X25! I use a 6.5X20 for my target shooting and sometimes wish I had that 25X. I seldom use 20X in the field, so my varmint shooters are 4.5X14. You will love the VH reticle. Rick advised me some time ago to choose the VH, and now I have several. The cross hairs are not too fine.

Hotshot,

Right after posting the above I decided to ride over to the Leupold factory and check one out. Sure enough, out comes someone with a VX-L 6.5-20x56, matt black with red bowling ball look with the varmint reticle.

Sure enough, it was thin but very easily seen even when I placed it against the darkest objects I could find and, it wasn't a very busy reticle to boot. I'm going to stop by Cabelas tomorrow on the way home if I get a chance and see if they happen to have a Leupold and a Zeiss with Rapid Z reticle so I can compare side by side. The last question I'll have to answer is the 8.5-25x50 vs the 6.5-20x50. Decisions, decisions....

In the meantime I'll drop Nikon Customer service a line and see what the damages are (if any) to get the one I have looked at and repaired.

Jim

I have a 700SPS in .22-250! It's an awesome an accurate gun for me! You'll end up replacing the stock on it however. As for the trigger...with a bit of tinkering, it's working great for me!

Still prefer my Savage VLP tho'!

Another vote for the remington's .I also have the VLSS TH same as Gary , and I love mine. My hunting party , 5 out of 6 of us have the rem. vlss th. The only diffenece is i have 8-20 oz. Rifle Basix trigger and a Bushnell Elite 4200 6X24. In my opion they are the most underated scopes out there. My buddy bought the highest end leupold and I really thought my bushnell was just as clear as the leupod no bull. There is some features i liked on the leupold but not $600 more. I know You get wht you pay for but i love my Bushnell and my Remington 700

My 700 VLSS (TH) needed something to bring out the full potential and in all probability it was the crown job that did the trick. I bought mine used on the gun rack at Cabelas and while there wasn't a scratch on it I did observe what appeared a nick/ding/divit (or a whack) on the muzzzle of the barrel on the corner of one of the lands probably caused by a cleaning rod during the initial cleaning. It also would not pass the dollar bill teat at the forend of the stock. So I just pillar bedded and completly free floated the stock and recrowned the muzzle and voila, she shoots great.

HTH,

Jim, what Rick said about my scope plus it's got the varmint hunters reticle which I really like, in fact I just got another scope with the VHR to go on my new Ruger No.1
Gary

Thanks Gary,

After stopping by Leupold on Friday I think it's just right. I'll still try and comapre the two side-by-side but the Leupold VHR reticle made a darn good impression and besides, on a slow day at work, they're only 15 minutes from work and I can just swing by if need be.

Thanks,

Jim

I have been very interested in the 700 SPS Varmint, because it is offered in many cartridges in lefthand. However, as a previous poster noted, "you will end up replacing the stock". I remember a shooting test that came to a similar conclusion. After replacing the original sythetic stock with an HS Precision, the gun shot about 30 percent tighter groups, with nothing else done.

So, my question is, are you really getting much of a deal to buy the SPS at about $550 or $600, and then spending, $300 or more on the HS Precision stock that it should have in the first place?

I originally got my SPS for a little under $500 (on sale at the time) with the intention of replacing the stock right off the bat. I came across an HS Precision stock on a forum that I got for $150. I ended up selling that for $175 and picked up a B&C Stock which is there to stay. So, in the end, I actually saved a bit of money rather than dropping more from the start on a better model.

I can't say that I noticed an improvement in accuracy do to the fact that I didn't fire it with the factory stock on it. Right now it shooting 3/8"-1/2" at 100 and I expect that to tighten up with handloads. Here's a pic...