Recently there was a discussion here about a Remington 788 chambered in 7mm-08.
That thread got me thinking about the 788 and I decided it was worth its own thread.
The 788 was Remington's *economy* bolt action, centerfire rifle from the late 1960's well into the mid 1980's.
Like a lot of American made economy rifles, people seem to love them or hate them and there's not a lot of middle ground.
The people that are in the pro- 788 camp tend to speak of the rifle's excellent value, excellent accuracy, strong receiver and general utility.
The people in the con-788 camp tend to cite the weak bolt handle to bolt attachment, expensive and hard to find magazine, bolt body compression (due to the rear locking lugs) and general cheap materials.
Like most things in life, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.
There's more than a little Model 700 snobbery involved with the anti-788 crowd but some of the criticism is founded in reality.
Like the Savage 110 series, the 788 comes in at a lower price point and is a very serviceable rifle. It some ways, it may be a far better utility rifle or "truck" gun than its more expensive siblings.
One thing I could never understand was Remington's decision to go with the 9 lug, rear locking bolt on an economy rifle?
Those multiple lugs and corresponding locking recesses must have been expensive to machine. It always reminds me of a Weatherby 9 lug bolt except the lugs are on the rear of the Remington bolt. Critics claim there's no way all 9 lugs can be seated against the shoulders in the receiver at the moment of firing and I suspect they're right. However, considering the accuracy displayed by most 788's, it must not be an issue. I've always assumed that one row of lugs would solidly seat when the bolt was closed and were strong enough to withstand the forces involved. The remaining 6 lugs are likely redundant and serve as safeties. That's pure speculation on my part.
In any event, the 788 was one of those American firearms that hit a price point and filled a market segment.
What say you?