Better varmint rifle?for a new varmint rifle for a while now

S

stofferahn

New member
I have been looking for a new varmint rifle for a while now and I am kinda stuck in between two rifles and would like some help deciding. I am stuck between the Remington 700 SPS Varmint and the Savage 12 BTCSS. I am very interested in getting a .204 because I have heard great things about them and I will mainly only use the rifle on Prairie Dogs. I want a rifle that will shoot very accurately at long distances. I chose both of these rifles because they both have a 26" heavy barrel which should help me get a little better accuracy. I know that the Savage probably has a better trigger but for the price difference I can put a better trigger in the Remington. I am a little concerned about the Remington because it has a synthetic stock and I have heard that they can have some flex in them that will reduce accuracy. I also know that the Savage BTCSS is pillar bedded and I am not sure about the Remington. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Well, I can tell you this much. You would most likley be satisfied with both. The new Remingtons come with an adjustable trigger (just in case you didn't know that already). I'd go with what felt best. I'm a Remington fan, but I have had nothing but good results (except for once, witch was a minor action problem) with the savage, especially with accuracy. As far as the synthetic stock goes, I have stacked a many bullet with remington 700's, synthetic and wood. So, like I said, if it were me, I'd go with what felt best. Hope this helps!

-Dave
 
You're comparing a Savage with a nice thumbhole laminate pillar bedded stock with a cheap plastic stock. The SPS stock is pretty much garbage, it's cheap injection molded plastic with no pillars and not free floated. Not to mention one is SS the other matte blue. Really they're two different types of guns. Why not compare apples to apples with similar models?

http://www.snipercentral.com/remspsv.htm
 
I wouldn't look any farther then the Savage. My last 4 rifles have all been Savages. I have a 204 BGTV SS which is the same as what you are looking at only it has a blk/grey stock but no DBM.

It seems you have already made up your mind since you are questioning Rem's stock, trigger and bedding.

Go with the Savage and then once you start putting other barrels on your gun (very easy to do) you will be hooked.

Check out www.savageshooters.com
 
I would pick the Remington, but I would restock it also. The factory tupperware stock is crap. I gave mine to a guy and he was nice enough to bring me a 12-pack of beer for it. I thought it was a great deal. In reality, it will fetch you $40-45 on an interenet sale.

IMO, the stock on the Savage is crap also. Feels like a log, and handles even worse. I do not do laminated stocks of any flavor. They are the worst of both worlds to me. Heavier and less stiff than a good synthetic, uglier than real wood. If you want a nice looking wood stock, get one. Otherwise, synthetic is the way to roll. The only way you could make a laminated stock even worse in my eyes, is to put a thumbhole in it. The Savage weighs 10lbs, unscoped, unloaded, with no bipod. Much too heavy for a carry gun, but fine for shootin' prarie rats all day.

I'll take a nicely tuned 700 trigger over any accutrigger, any day.

The Remington will hold it's value much better than the Savage. Plus, lots more aftermarket parts are available for it if you decide to do a little customizing. It is also easier to sell if you ever choose to.......
 
Just to clarify: barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy (within reason). e.g., the accuracy of a savage 26" barrel is not going to be more accurate than a savage 20" barrel simply because of its length. I hear that wives tale on this site fairly often. I understand why people assume that but it is not the case. A longer barrel "can" give you more muzzle velocity depending on a number of factors, which may make it more advantagious for velocity gains; not for accuracy.
 
I think if you can get the Savage with a nice stock, stainless barrel that's pillar bedded and accutrigger I'd take that over the Remington. I shoot both Remingtons and Savages but I think the Savage has a whole lot more to offer in this case.
 
I own both and while the Remington is a decent carry rifle and shoots ok the Savage's I own are far better shooters. While one poster complained about the Savage laminated stocks having too much flex I can only say that my Savage Model 12 VLP has no noticable flex and shoots much better than the Remington. On a good day with handloads the Remington will average around an inch while the Savage will always average 1/2" or better. I was a diehard Remington fan until I shot my hunting partners Savage so I decided to buy one. I now own 5 Savage rifles. As far as resale goes I don't see the prices dropping on either.
 
I appreciate all the input. I am just trying to find a really nice rifle for long range PD hunting and maybe the possible coyote now and again. I would like to stick to a .204 caliber. If anyone else knows a really good rifle that can compare I would like to hear about it. I know a lot of people will tell me to go to a .223,a 22-250, or even a 220 swift for long range varminting but i think that I like the .204. I saw on youtube where a guy shot a yote with a .204 at 502 yards. I was very impressed. A big thank to everyone who has commented.
 
I have a Ruger Hawkeye Tactical with the 20" barrel and Hogue stock. I absolutely love it! The two stage trigger is amazing and the stock fits like a glove. I have it in .308 but it comes in a few different calibers. It is vcery capable of shooting in the same hole at 100 yds. I clover leave shots alot. Hope this helps
 
Ben Legg,
Really? A Ruger? Is it worked over with a new barrel? Is it a one in a million or is this model performing really well? I'd like more info just because i've never considered Rugers to be exceptionally accurate. they rarely come up in accuracy conversations.
 
Well my friend, you are comparing apples to oranges. The Savage would be my choice hands down. Not long ago, I bought a Savage Model 12 VLP .223 and was strongly considering the Savage BTCSS, but decided the VLP would better meet my needs (and cost less) since I now only shoot paper. I was very pleasantly surprised how far Savage has come since the 70's - 80's and what a truly fine and accurate product they now manufacture. Remington has in the past consistently built really nice weapons, but I've read several people's comments and have been told there has been a drop off in their quality. BUT, make no mistake, if I were going to build my own custom rifle (in 6mm), I wouldn't hesitate in the least to buy a Remington short action. But overall, if I was going to buy another production rifle, it would be a Savage without question. Good Luck and enjoy whichever way you go!
 
has anyone owned the BTCSS or another thumbhole stock from savage? I have heard that they are very comfortable but do not have the chance to try one out. I have a Ruger M77 Mark II in 7mm Mag and have killed a 5x6 elk at 650 yards with it and it is completely stock. My dad won it on 15 dollars worth of raffle tickets. It also came with a Bushnell 3-9x40 scope. He already had 2 7mm Mag's and gave me this one. Just trying to help you out some Ben.
 
Of the two I'd go with the Savage. You may want to consider the Remington VS SF 2 or the VL SS(which is an apples to apples comparison for the Savage).
 
I am curious about the Kimber 84M Pro Varmint. I do not know anyone that has owned a kimber rifle and I know there is vast wisdom on this forum. Does the Savage 12 series compare with the Kimber 84M series?
 
Or how about the Weatherby Vanguard Sub-MOA Varmint? I thought I was sure what rifle I wanted but now I am second guessing it. I just want to hear from others what they think. I just want the most accurate .204 rifle. I prefer not to have a single shot though.
 
ok now I think it is between the Savage BTCSS, The Kimber 84M Pro-Varmint, or the Remington 700 VS SF II. I am now leaning towards the Kimber or the Remington.
 
Originally Posted By: ARDaveWell, I can tell you this much. You would most likley be satisfied with both. The new Remingtons come with an adjustable trigger (just in case you didn't know that already). I'd go with what felt best. I'm a Remington fan, but I have had nothing but good results (except for once, witch was a minor action problem) with the savage, especially with accuracy. As far as the synthetic stock goes, I have stacked a many bullet with remington 700's, synthetic and wood. So, like I said, if it were me, I'd go with what felt best. Hope this helps!

-Dave

I would also go with what feels the best I have a Remington 700 SPS Varmit and I do use it to hunt PD's. Now I agree that the stock on the sps is pretty cheap and at one time I thought about changing it out or trying to bed it. but it shot so well(less than 1/2" at 100) that I decided not to bother. Personally I do not like the Accutrigger because I feel that I don't get a good feel of the trigger breaking but that is just my opinion. I would just go to a shop that has both rifles and dryfire both and see which one you like better (I would not pay much attention to the wieght the trigger is set because both are adjustable). That is just my $.02
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top