$500 For A Remington 721 In 300 H&H. Too Much?

[pietro]

.

IMO @ $500, it's a MUCH better buy today than it was in the past - if I wanted a .300H&H, I'd jump on it in a New York Minute.


.

[super6]

Theres a brand new set of 300 H&H hollywood dies over at flea bay (New old stock)

[oconeedan]

Unless I missed it, no one has mentioned that the 721 / 722 rifles had forged barrels. I used to have a 722 in 300 Savage, I sold it during hard times. It was a shooter, and I wish I had it back. I can't speak for the 300 H & H caliber.
But the rifles, were "budget" rifles that had a potential to really shoot.

[Texas by God]

Food for thought; people give $500 for Remington’s m788 daily.
I too have never heard of a chamber end crack on a Remington anything but anything’s possible.

[Lloyd Smale]

500 bucks is a steal for that gun. Even the scope isn't bad. Its not as good as some more modern scopes but the scopechieff 2.5x8 was probably my favorite scope back in the 70s and 80s. I owned quite a few and still have two going strong on guns in the safe. Ive got a 721 and a 700 classic in 300 H&H and both of them have seen hundreds of rounds and ive know of quite a few more and this is the first time ive ever heard of splits in chambers of them. About as likely as that trigger pulling itself and killing someone.

[glaciers]

As far as I'm concerned the 300 H&H is the only 300 I'd buy. I have no use for 300 WM or some ultra or WSM or some other nonsense. After the 30-06 the 300 H&H is just a perfect cartridge, long neck, a little extra go power, after that the 338 magnum would get the nod. I'm not shooting 500 to 1000 yards, about 400 yards is as long as I've ever shot on game, and I will not do it again. The little extra you gain from the magnums over the 30-06 is minimal, and maybe 35 yards in point blank range. I do have an occasional opinion, and the 30 caliber is definitely one. Up here I have been looking for a reasonable priced 300 H&H for years and have not come across one yet. But I've been tripping over 300 WM and WSM's and the like while looking. I'd buy a decent early Remington 300 H&H for $500 in a heart beat.
BUT, YMMV.

[RustyReel]

Unless I missed it, no one has mentioned that the 721 / 722 rifles had forged barrels. I used to have a 722 in 300 Savage, I sold it during hard times. It was a shooter, and I wish I had it back. I can't speak for the 300 H & H caliber.
But the rifles, were "budget" rifles that had a potential to really shoot.

Don't think these were considered "budget" rifles at the time....think it was Rem's only bolt action centerfire offering at the time. I don't think they are quite as cool as the somewhat rare 725, but I like them better than the 700's that replace them.

[skeettx]

Yes, I have a 725 in 243 Win

[arlon]

721 in 300H&H in VG condition is a good deal. Kind of scarce chambering. I would rather have a 721-722 series rifle than a 700. The only weak point is extractor/ejector in this series. The 300H&H was the long range match winner for years. The Win 300mg put it out of business because it could be chambered in standard length action.
300H&H is 375H&H necked down without a sharp shoulder and requires full length magnum action. The 300Win is a little hotter cartridge too, in factory ammo.

I've had many rifles in this series and still have a 722 in 222 that my uncle bought new in 50s. This rifle has had thousands of rounds through it and has never been repaired. It's VG shape and is still a accurate rifle. I also had a 30/06 for years that had big round count. I had it set up with reciever sight for target and shot loads of GI ball and no problems.

I've always been a pre 64 M70 Win guy but would buy a nice 721 in about any caliber at $500. A 300H&H in a pre 64 Win in VG shape would be $1K plus. Anymore 300H&H is expensive ammo, so it's a hand loaders gun for practical purposes.

I think If I found one in 300 H&H and it was in good shape, it would most likely go home with me. I have a 722 in 222 and a 721 in 06, fond of them both. I have the 06 set up with receiver sight.

[Drm50]

I don't belive I would hesitate to buy any 721-722 at the right price and good condition. I've owned several and handled many more. Never saw a split chamber on any. If that was a weak point it would have been much talked about. Never herd tell of it. Make it a point to check it out before you buy it. If there are two 300s with cracked chambers that should take care of the law of averages and you're safe.

[Petrol & Powder]

Unless I missed it, no one has mentioned that the 721 / 722 rifles had forged barrels. I used to have a 722 in 300 Savage, I sold it during hard times. It was a shooter, and I wish I had it back. I can't speak for the 300 H & H caliber.
But the rifles, were "budget" rifles that had a potential to really shoot.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say the 721 / 722 had "forged" barrels.
The barrel blanks could have started as life as a forging but it's more likely the blanks were produced in a steel mill by drawing & rolling. A forged blank would be both hard to drill and rather expensive.
If you're referring to the hammer forging process to rifle the barrels, I think that technology appeared later.

[EDG]

Unless it is something that you have been wanting and searching for a long time why bother?

$500 will buy many other guns of better quality.
My local dealer has a lot of nice over and under shotguns for that price. Twenty years ago those shotguns might have brought more but now they are passed over because they have fixed chokes.
You can buy Sears and Monkey Wards rifles built on FN Mausers for $500.

My experience is that you have many competitors (other buyers) for guns in the $300 to $500 price range. All those potential buyers help keep the prices of the lower tier rifles inflated. It is all about supply vs demand.
When the price goes above the $700 to $800 limit there are a lot fewer buyers and you get a lot more gun for your money.
A guy that I know cheaped out on his rifle. He bought a like new circa 1972 M70 Win push feed rifle that was a ordinary as a corn cob. It was a clean and totally functional rifle. He put a new recoil pad on it and a nice scope. He took it to Africa and shot a lot of antelope and a wart hog.
He passed up another .338 at the same dealer. It was a semi-custom M70 with a stainless barrel and a high dollar kevlar stock. The price was $800. Yes it was double the cost of his wood stocked rifle but compared to the cost of his trip to Africa it was nothing.
Today his $300 rifle is still worth about $300. The kevlar .338 will always be a high dollar all weather rifle.

[Lloyd Smale]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say the 721 / 722 had "forged" barrels.
The barrel blanks could have started as life as a forging but it's more likely the blanks were produced in a steel mill by drawing & rolling. A forged blank would be both hard to drill and rather expensive.
If you're referring to the hammer forging process to rifle the barrels, I think that technology appeared later.

im sure that its the hammer forged rifling that he got a bit mixed up on .

[Petrol & Powder]

Yeah, and I'm not sure when they started hammer forging the rifling.

[oconeedan]

Sorry Gents. Yes, I meant hammer forged. I may be mistaking, but when I was reading up on mine, I came across several references that said the barrels were hammer forged. Maybe they were not. But mine was a shooter, and they have a good reputation.
Also, when I said "budget" rifle, that meant the basic model came with plain walnut stock and stamped trigger guard, which I guess you can call standard at that time.
Thanks, Dan

[Petrol & Powder]

Remington has a long history of making excellent barrels. Even their budget rifles had good steel used in the barrel and good workmanship to make the barrels.

I don't know when they started hammer forging the rifling but I think they were still cutting the rifling or using button rifling in the 50's, maybe someone can fill us in.
The machinery needed to rifle barrels by the hammer forging method is insanely expensive but once set up, it's an economical method to rifle barrels quickly and inexpensively. On a large scale it makes good sense.

[Drm50]

As far as I know 722/721 barrels had cut riflings. Series weren't budget rifles they were just less expensive than Winchesters. Remington was a cut below Win in price until 64 when Win lost the market. Win lost because of labor cost and old school production. Rem was a step up on stamping from WW2 contracts. The post 64 Win were junk and Rem was better. End of story for awhile.

[Geezer in NH]

Buy it! If you don't do it now to bad when it is gone. It is worth as far as I can see 50-100% more than that.

Scope price is no matter unless it is a high end one worth more than the rifle. As a retired dealer scopes don't count to smart buyers even if the dealer thinks it is a bargaining point. Tell him to keep the scope.

[eric123]

A 300H&H Rem 721 just sold here in the last day or two for $499. It sold fast...

[Texas by God]

I am pretty sure all the post-war Remington rifles have button rifled barrels.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk