Ive read thru this forum on threads lokking for the Rem 722 and if it has warts.. Some say unsafe. Some say a piece of junk, some say the extractor will break and another cannot be sourced. Really, what is the truth, isnt it basically an Rem 700?

Personally im not into Remington bolt rifles but i came across an old 722 with an new barrel in 257 Roberts and this rifle has an laid up synthetic stock that looks like a Brown precision. Its pretty light but i was thinking about a rebore job or a rebarrel. If i were to rebarrel id just go 308 win and be simple. As is the thing is all there in fine condition for $325. Im tempted but im reading lots of negitivity about the 722 in general. Tough call. But conditiin is great on this lightweight thing and the trigger action is outstanding and definately not stock. Someone put some effort into this one for sure.

So is the 722 going to kill me? What could that 257 chamber be rebored out to? Or should i run away?

For $325 you shouldn't have to ask.

MD's granny gun is a .257, 722. I doubt wild horses could separate him from it.

I've had two; sold a .300 Savage that I should have kept; a very accurate rifle. I have one in .222 that I bought fifteen or so years ago. It's probably more accurate than my three Sako .222s. I know the 700 was an improvement over the 722, but I can't really see a difference. I'd buy another 722 if it was in good shape at a reasonable price. Nothing wrong with 722s. I also had a 721; same rifle with a long action.

oldpinecricker,

Dunno who is posting that BS, but yes, 722s (and 721s, the long-action version) are basically 700s. Have owned several aside from my grandmother's .257 Roberts, which is still working fine and shooting very accurately after my wife and I have put well over 1000 rounds through it AFTER it got fairly heavy use from others in the family. The others have been in calibers ranging from the .222 Remington to .300 Savage, and never had any problems with them in any way, though they generally shoot more accurately if the barrel is free-floated--just like 700s.

I would not even consider passing on it nor rebarreling it. That is a steal and a fantastic cartridge. Like MD, I have a 722 in .257 Roberts and I like it very much. Hunted with it exclusively for a decade (just deer and pronghorn) and it never let me down.

Buy it, and keep it a .257!
Rex

The price is low enough and im thinking its a decent canvas to work with. Just wondering what could one bore that 257 roberts out to. Is a 358 win or 338 Federal chamber too short, if it can be set back that far?

This^^^^

I also have a M722 257R, with a late 50's or early 60's B&L and Balvar mounts.

I have a 722 in 222 Remington made in 1953. It is the most accurate rifled I’ve ever owned even edging out my 788 in the same caliber.
I’d love to have one in a Roberts.

If you are gonna change it yank the 257 barrel and sell it to one of us. Lol

May well do that.

It's also BS that the extractors break frequently--and that they're not available. The design is very similar to the 700s extractor, though not an exact match. I purchased a couple of 722/721 extractors for cartridges with the .30-06-sized rim maybe 3 years ago, from a gunsmith who advertised them on the Campfire Classifieds--just in case the extractor breaks on my .257 722.

But I have probably fired 100,000 rounds from Remington 700s, along with a few thousand from 722/721s. Have never had an extractor break, perhaps because I tend to keep the bolt-face of those rifles clean. Dunno, but that's what's happened over several decades. Have also never had a 700/722/721 trigger malfunction that I adjusted and maintained.

I believe its mostly not true on the extractors either. Ive got older Rem 700 rifles without issues but ive had 3 new out of box Rem rifles that featured broken extractors after a few outings. I attribute that to bad qyality control at the tail end of Remingtons history most likely bad heat treat control.

That's a good point. I haven't purchased a new 700 since 2010.

But that has nothing to do with 722/721s.

Let me guess: Did one of the people who trashed 722s (and 700s) have the Campfire handle jorgeI?

I have several 722’s B’s in .222 Rem and 222 Mag and without much work they’ve all been less than 1” for five shots. A couple, even as old as they are, are good for 1/2-5/8”. A couple of 721’s in 270 do almost as well with 150 Ballistic Tips and H-4831. All of them cost a good bit more than you’re looking at. Buy it.

No different than a 700, just shorter. Shot one for years in that exact caliber. I have had several Remingtons through my lifetime, including a 721, all have been fine rifles

Have owned or own multiple M700's and M721's/722's from every decade since they were introduced. My chrono notebooks alone have roughly 20k rounds recorded with M700's. I've never had a bolt handle fall off, extractor break, or an AD--as JB mentioned the operative phrase would be "well maintained" trigger.

The M700's from the late 90's until about 2010 are probably the worst as far as fit, finish, and pieces not functioning properly, or falling off. I have a G prefix from 2003 that the bolt handle wasn't precisely clocked and was just barely hitting the receiver when opened. Filed off a thou from the receiver and it's good. Bought a new 2005 BDL/synthetic and while I was looking at it noticed there was no ejector. Pulled the bolt and showed it to the gun shop owner/gunsmith and he says, "I'll be damned". Takes the bolt, disappears into the back of the shop, and 10 minutes later comes out with the ejector/spring/pin installed.

Recent vintage M700's seem to be quite accurate in my experience.

Ok, Remington 700ish action and a decent glass stock for basically lunch money. I vote yes!!!

The only 722 I’ve owned was a 222 and I wish I still had it.
Buy the 257 and leave it unmolested.

I had a model 721 in 3006 for about a decade. It was one of the most reliable rifles I have ever owned. It was not free floated but the walnut was stable and once sighted in it never changed its point of impact in over 10 years. and its was accurate one minute or less. no problems whatsoever. However I listened to the internet BS and sold it. What a mistake. I bought three new 700's ( Yes you read that right sell one buy three) and I had three broken extractors in as little as 200 rounds on each rifle. Since the extractors have been replaced I have had no trouble.

One of my first rifles ever was a 722 in 222. I bought it because it was affordable at the time and I’d read all about the accuracy of the cartridge .

It’s not much to look at but I’ll never sell it.
I was tickled $hitless when I could go buy factory Remington ammo and sit down and easily shoot sub 1” groups with my first center fire.

Now I own a few more 222’s including a Cooper that will do 1/4” on the regular, but that 722 started it all

Buy it and shoot it as is................

You may fall in love.

I would be watching for a lifetime supply of brass if it was left as a .257 Roberts. The .257 (IMO) is a better deer/varmint combo than either the .243 or the 6mm Rem. If varmints are not on the menu, then a 7 X 57 or even a 8 X 57 is worthy of considerarion. If a .308 Winchester (or even a 7-08) is what you want, I'd run several of those cartridges through the action to assure myself of their feeding characteristics as they have a slightly different body taper than the Roberts.

I've owned a Rem 721 for years (the long version of the 721, 722, 725 series) with absolutely no incidence at all.....they are very fine rifles IMO.

At that price, if he hasn’t bought it by now, it’s probably gone.

I would have paid $325 for the rifle you've described without a second thought.

Just an FYI, but if you set the barrel back on a rifle with rear sight boss, you'll need to inlet the stock farther back to account for the setback In a fiberglass stock you could fill the elongated inletting with epoxy, sand it, and paint it if the aesthetics matter to you.

I have a couple of 722s, a 257 Roberts, # 2354xx, that I restocked after I saw MD's 722 installed in a 700 MR stock, and a 257 Roberts that has been set back and rechambered in 25-284, Whoever owned the second rifle, # 1375xx, rechambered it twice, first to 257AI and then to 25-284.

Rather than rebore your 257 Roberts barrel, you could buy a cheap 700 take-off barrel in a common chambering and have that barrel rebored/rechambered. Since 700 barrels never had the rear sight barrel boss, that eliminates one thing to deal with. If you'd be interested, I have a 722 take-off barrel in 22-250, a rechambered 222, that I'd be happy to dig up as an option. I can't remember the specs on the 22-250 barrel, whether it still has open sights in stalled, etc. I bought that rifle for the donor action and still have the barrel and stock somewhere.

This.

My sample of 1 has had me looking for others ever since 300Jimmy sold it to me. I paid considerably more than $325, and it was still a bargain.

FC

Wouldn't the OP be likely to run into COAL issues with the 7x57 or 8x57 in a short action 722?

The 722, 721 & 725 Remington's were about the most accurate rifles available when they came out.

I still have a couple of 722's and a 721. That 721 has been shot a whole lot as has one of the 722's. Both have had several barrels on them. The 721 is an '06 and it has shot dime size groups with hunting loads. The 722 that has been shot a lot and has an after-market 244 barrel (slow twist 6mm) with a throat that is getting worn a bit, but with 75 grain Sierras it still a rifle that shoots under 1/2MOA.

The top one in this picture is a 721 - '06, the next one below is a 722 - 244.




They've been modified a little bit, but they are fine rifles!

I thought the 257 Roberts was the 7x57 necked downed.

Mike

The 7x57 is the parents case for the 257 Roberts, 244 REM, and 6MM REM. It has been my experience that most short actions typically run into COAL issues when you combine case lengths over 51mm and longer/heavier bullets. Even 51mm cases can run into COAL issues with longer/heavier VLD style bullets, illustrated by how much better the 6.5 CM fits into a short action with longer/heavier VLD style bullets than the 260 REM.

You could sell that rifle to me, because those rifles are no good and I'd just be doing it for a favor to you. No thanks needed.

Well, im going to go pick it up today. It had an old 2x or 2.5x scope on it called the Alaskan with a heavy post point and fine horizontal line. Thats coming off and ill update the optic. Ive got a Burris, Sightron, and Minox on hand.

some people loved those Alaskan scopes - back in the day. There may be a market for it.

I have owned several 721/722 Remingtons, always thought they were great! Loved the BDL version , but somewhat scarce.

The dealer who is selling that rifle must either be clue-less or he/she is desperate for money to sell that rifle with a Lyman Alaskan for $325. An Alaskan in decent shape will bring over $150 on eBay and 7/8" rings bring a premium too.

I dont know much of the rings and optics other than its a Leupold Alaskan.

Always thought the "Alaskan" was a Lyman scope.

For a while Leupold made exact copies of the Lyman Alaskan scope.

I I have one mounted on a marlin 336 thirty thirty,

Lefty

Try shooting it, before you ditch that scope. You might surprise yourself at how much game you can collect with that 722 just as it is.

I just inherited a rifle with a 2.5 Alaskan that consistently shoots sub-MOA. Granted, with my eyes, I gotta use a fairly big damned target, but that rifle is as ready to hunt today as it was when Great Grandad carried it.

FC

Yep. Both Lyman and Alaskan had them

Love my 722 in 257. Its going to my grandson when I'm gone.

I've owned Leupold Alaskans and they all had duplex reticles, while the Lyman Alaskans that I've owned were split between crooshair, post & crosshair, and dot & crosshair. The Leupold Alaskans came in 2.5x, 4x, and 6x, while the Lyman Alaskans were all 2.5x. The 7/8" tubes are a nice fit, at least aesthetically speaking, on small/short actions, like the small Sakos and the Winchester 43 and 52 Sporter. I have a 4x Leupold Alaskan on a Miroku-made 52 Sporter for the Aesthetics.

The Leupold Alaskans are fairly modern scopes, made for a couple of years in the early 1990's IIRC. Lyman Alaskan are considerably older technology, made form pre-WW2 until the late 1950's or early 1960's. They were well regarded in their day, but their zenith was probably in the neighborhood of 65 years ago.

A Leupold Alaskan in decent shape will bring close to the $325 that the seller is asking for the entire unit. This deal just keeps getting better and better for you.

Guess i got lucky. Also am going to pick up an beautiful Browning BL-22 leveraction but now the rule is for me to sell off several to make room for a new one becUse the accumulation gets out of hand.

Aside from reticles, there are two big differences between the Lyman Alaskans and the Leupold Alaskans.

The Lymans were NOT sealed against moisture. Instead they were called Alaskans because the adjustment turrets had caps, which earlier Lymans of the same basic design did not. But capped turrets do not make scopes waterproof against atmospheric moisture. That's accomplished by O-rings inside the turrets.

The other difference is the Lyman Alaskans didn't have coated lenses, which made them pretty dim in low light. The Leupold Alaskans did have coated lenses, though as a recall they were only single-coated, as most Leupold lenses were back then. But they were definitely brighter than the Lymans, which I know from owning more than one of both.

I have a couple of Lyman Alaskans installed on old rifles. One is on a Savage 1920 that Larry Koller once owned, installed with a stamped steel Weaver N-Mount. One on a pre-WW2 99EG in 250-3000, installed with a G&H side-mount. One on a post-WW2 99EG in 300 SAV, also installed with a G&H side-mount, both rifle were owned by the same man. One with a Litschert power booster that claims to take it up to 8x on a Marlin 336 SC in 219 Zipper, installed in Redfield turn-in mounts.

I had one of those G&H side mounts on a Savage 99 303 Savage with a big long barrel on it. I dont have a lot of use for old optics and i have a nice Minox and Sightron ready to mount. Someone put some money and work into this thing making it into a light rifle and i think i did good

I was fortunate to be able to purchase Mike Walker's favorite deer rifle. It is a 722 in 257 Roberts. I asked Mike where the beautiful wood came from. He said if you control the wood box you can get some nice pieces. I do not like the scope mounts as they are the type that swing to the left to allow you to use the iron sights.

I have used these actions over the years numerous times. They will shoot as well as others, assuming the action is trued, good barrel , stock, and ammo.
Charlie

When I saw "Alaskan" on an old rifle, I thought Lyman. The technology on old scopes can't compare with today's scopes. But an old Lyman "Alaskan" would be a collector especially if it is in good condition.

If you get that rifle and it turns out to be Lyman and if you don't want the scope. Sell it on E-bay. You'll might get your money back on the purchase.

No warts on this one.

Ive got two 721's 30/06 and 300 H&H. I consider them an outright bargain, and good solid guns. A 722 in 222 may be added if its still available.
Mule Deer, I have a question about free floating the barrels on my 721's.
So they have the large "barrel ring" where rear sight was/is dovetailed into.
Do you free float from that point forward? From recoil lug to that and then beyond that (leaving ring contacting stock)? Or float it all including that "ring"?
They shoot pretty good as is, but I like to tinker and can't leave well enough alone.
Thanks

More years ago than I care to remember, I decided that the .222 Mag was the ideal varmint caliber. Something about the legendary accuracy of a .222 with a bit more range, or something like that. At the time our LGS was going out of business and had everything on sale and had a set of .222 Mag dies and a bunch of brass. I bought it all and then spent the next several years looking for a rifle to go with it. One day I came across two of them at a gun show, a Sako and a 722. I bought the 722 and never looked back. In the last 20 or more years I have had it, it has never given me any reason to second guess myself. It has been completely reliable and consistently shoots sub-moa. Love that gun.

Some really like the 257 cal but im seriously considering reboring or a rebarrel to 308 win. The biggest reason im already set up for 308win to load and have lots of bullets, cases and powder for it and at this time with shortages its a matter of economy and availibility.

You'll be soooooorrrrrryyyyy!
Paul B.

Maybe sell your 257 to someone who really likes the cartridge and get yourself a 308 or trade. You could make someone else happy and save yourself some $'s.

I'm a fan of the Roberts and most other 25 calibers. A Ruger #1 250 Savage was just added to go along with the Remington 700 Classic in that caliber. The Roberts will serve you well in any deer country you choose. Shoot it some you'll like it. If you don't than sell it and buy another rifle in 308. I have one of those also but it hasn't seen the light of day in 20 years. The Roberts or a 25 06 always seem to come first.

I agree with the availability statement but not so much with the economy part. A rebore will probably set you back somewhere around $300 plus some shipping, a rebarrel more like $500 - $600 plus some shipping - a hundred cases and and a few hundred bullets will not even come close to setting you back that much even at current high prices. I will say that you may have to look a bit to find them but I suspect that they will be easier to find than you are thinking because the 257 R and its brass are not high-demand items.

drover

I had an early 40x in 222. It was a 722, very accurate rifle.

Don't rebore or rebarrel it. It is precious as is.
IMO (and this is pretty straight forward Rifle Looney dictum) ALREADY having a .308 is about the worst reason to take a sweet .257 Roberts and make it a .308 too.
Just my opinion (and everybody else on this thread...LOL)

If you want another .308, just sell this rifle at a nice profit (because you WILL get a nice profit), and buy one. You'll get half your money back on the Lyman Alaskan, and It would not surprise me in the least if the rifle (sans scope) brings twice (or more) what you paid for it on Gunbroker.

All the best,
Rex

This^^^!!!!!!!!!

One more pitch,
I just checked eBay and saw at least a half dozen Remington 700 .308 takeoff barrels, most at less than $100 at this point. That's another option you might consider. You can put one of those on, play with it as long as you like, and still retain the option to put it back as it is now. The Lyman Alaskan will more than pay for the M700 .308 barrel. A couple of them are long heavy varmint contours meaning you could turn them down to about whatever contour you want, even to match the current barrel so the stock stays a perfect fit.

Good luck with it. How about posting some pics of it once you get it home?

Rex

Ill take some pics but my phone wont reduce the size enough for this forum. I really got an exceptional deal on this.