Remington 722

[ColColt]

Anyone have any thoughts on the Remington 722 as for durability and accuracy? I've read it was one of Remington's best and came in a variety of flavors with their stocks.

[richhodg66]

I haven't worked with a lot of either, but I like the 722 better than the current 700 in general.

We had a family friend when I was growing up who had bought one as a young man and it was his only hunting rifle (a .222). He was a good, steady shot and killed many deer each year with it along with a lot of other things.

[Bodydoc447]

My father and grandfather had them in 257 Robert. Bought them many, many years ago. I used one of them to get a nice doe last week. Seems to work just fine after 50+ years.

Doc

[ColColt]

One of the reasons I asked is because the .222 is my top favorite paper punching caliber and I found a 722 (AC grade) in .222 that looks in superb condition but wanted opinions since I've only seen them, never shot one.

[MattOrgan]

The Remington 721/722 rifles are probably the finest rifles Remington ever built. They are all extremely accurate durable rifles. I've got a 722 in .222 that is accurate with anything I've ever shot in it, though none of it has been cast. I also have a 721 in .300 H&H Magnum that is also superbly accurate. Both have seen steady use for 50+ years. Everything Remington did with the 700 was basically a cosmetic change or something to reduce the cost of production.

[ColColt]

I don't think Ive read anything bad about this rifle and have seen nothing but high accolades. It must have been Remington's best.

[Mk42gunner]

The 722 was basically the precursor to the short action Model 700.

The only thing I have ever seen that I didn't like on the 721/722 was that some of the stocks had a lot more drop than is currently in fashion. In a rifle chambered for the .222, I cannot see how that would be a problem.

Robert

[ColColt]

The drop at heel and toe is a bit more than the 700 models were but as you mentioned, with a .222 it doesn't matter as to felt recoil. The .222 doesn't recoil much more than a BB gun. I wouldn't want that drop with a 375 H&H, however. This is the one I'm looking at.

[cabezaverde]

I don't think Ive read anything bad about this rifle and have seen nothing but high accolades. It must have been Remington's best.

No wonder they stopped making them.

[ColColt]

No wonder they stopped making them.

Chrysler stopped making the 440 'Cuda also but that doesn't mean they're still not available and as good as they were.

[376Steyr]

Only down side of the 722/721 is their extractors are not interchangeable with the current Model 700. Replacements are not readily available. If you get one with a bad extractor, expect to pay some serious money to get it running again. I once got a great deal on a Model 725, and found this out the hard way.

When I buy a 721/722, the first thing I do is pull off the stock and flush out all the solidified 3-in-1 oil that always encrusts the trigger and sear package. This tends to made a crappy trigger pull into a decent one without touching the screw adjustments.

[ColColt]

One plus is the rifle shown comes with a spare original extractor...hard to beat that. I don't think you'd have to be replacing them more than once every 20 years and by that time, it won't matter to me.

[MattOrgan]

Don't worry about the extractors either of the Remington 722/700 series unless you expand a rim into the bolt face to the point it can't be removed with any thing but a lathe or you decide you need to remove it. Those cheesy looking little pieces of spring steel are incredibly efficient and tough. Hard for a died in the wool M70 guy to admit, but the Mike Walker designed rifles are brilliant.

[cabezaverde]

Chrysler stopped making the 440 'Cuda also but that doesn't mean they're still not available and as good as they were.

I was being sarcastic.

[Hardcast416taylor]

I have standard grade 721 and 722 rifles in .30-06 and .300 Sav. respectively. Both are very accurate. Have had the 722 since the early `60`s for deer. The 721 came into my life about a year back. Only problem I have with the 722 is not the extraction of the fired case, but the premature ejection of the case. The case mouth during extraction hits the rear of the front ring of the action and then drops the case onto the rounds in the magazine well making a follow up shot dicey at best. Have had 2 different gunsmiths look at this problem and both claim they fixed it, still does it though. If it wasn`t for it being so accurate with "J" bullets weighing from 130 gr. up thru 180 gr. I probably would do a rebarrel job on it. I solved the stock dimensions problem with a Boyd`s stock in walnut that I fit to the rifle.Robert

[376Steyr]

I have standard grade 721 and 722 rifles in .30-06 and .300 Sav. respectively. Both are very accurate. Have had the 722 since the early `60`s for deer. The 721 came into my life about a year back. Only problem I have with the 722 is not the extraction of the fired case, but the premature ejection of the case. The case mouth during extraction hits the rear of the front ring of the action and then drops the case onto the rounds in the magazine well making a follow up shot dicey at best. Have had 2 different gunsmiths look at this problem and both claim they fixed it, still does it though. If it wasn`t for it being so accurate with "J" bullets weighing from 130 gr. up thru 180 gr. I probably would do a rebarrel job on it. I solved the stock dimensions problem with a Boyd`s stock in walnut that I fit to the rifle.Robert

I had a similar problem with a 725. See my post above. The ejector would push fired cases off the "weak" extractor early, leaving the fired case in the action. Solved it with a SAKO-style extractor, which cost me an annoying amount of time and money to get installed. With the new extractor, the cases would then vigorishly smack into the bottom of the one-piece scope mount, and then fall back into the action. Solved that with a new two-piece mount.

[fouronesix]

Many will do it if the extractor is weak or getting worn or has been replaced with a makeshift one or the replacement wasn't right. The rim has to be held tight in exactly the right spot until the case mouth or shoulder clears the receiver ring and flips out. If the extractor holds the rim weakly or in the wrong place it will release early or at the wrong angle. The release at the wrong angle problem is exacerbated with a scope as even with a correct release angle the case might "clip" the scope and flop out at a less than crisp pace.

Since the Rem clip extractors (new or installed at factory specs), no matter the model, hold the rim at the best place and usually flip cases out cleanly and the cases usually clear most scopes unless the scope is large, low or has big knobs. If a Sako or M-16 extractor is added to a Rem bolt, the extractor by design is not at the best place for the best ejection angle and cases are usually flipped at too high an angle and will "clip" most scopes. All the more reason to guard a spare Rem 721/722 extractor with your life. Sooner or later the day may come when the extractor gives out and you'll be paying with a couple of pounds of flesh for a NOS extractor.

There are more than a few 721/722s out there where the owners quite piddling with fighting the extractor problem or couldn't find an extractor and replaced the 721/722 bolt with a 700 bolt (700 extractors are common and easily replaced).

[atr]

I have a Remington 722 in 257 Roberts.....wonderful rifle.....very accurate....the trigger is adjustable...never had a problem with the extractor.
I am still kicking myself because I just missed a 722 in 308 with price tag of $350.00,,,,

[ColColt]

I am still kicking myself because I just missed a 722 in 308 with price tag of $350.00,,,,

You missed a real deal for sure. I'm not one to talk about lost deals. I've procrastinated on more than one and ended up deciding too late. I haven't seen a decent 722 close to that.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

I owned a very clean one in 300 H&H for several years. Only sold it to finance an Old Model 70 in the same caliber.

Good guns...