This might be a neat coyote rifle....

[17VLD]

I always liked the model seven variants,heres another.
TTFN
Matthttp://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/model_seven/model_seven_CDL_specs.asp

[17VLD]

Although only 20" of barrel might be a little short for a .204.
I just think it would make a handy close cover gun.The satin finish appeals to me also.
TTFN
Matt

[GLWenzl]

A friend has a 17 Rem in a Model 7 with a compact scope... What a sweetie!!!!

[Alan in GA]

even saw one in .35 Whelen,,what a beautiful rifle! It had a matt blued 24" barrel and was/is limited production for a distributor. Should kick like a bunch of small calibers fired all at once!
Would be great in a small caliber!
Alan in Ga

[foxhunter]

set the barrel back 3/8 of an inch and do a zero lead 20 vartag, the lil rascal would burn the right powders in the 19 5/8 barrel that is left, doubt it would give up anything to a 22" barrel.
we already know a 32 gr vmax at 3800 fps will knock an old coyotes baby maker in the dirt.
that would be simply to sweet, love the looks of the redesign.

[Oleman]

I've had those short barrels before. They have more muzzle flash and muzzle blast. I really think that's a super looking little rifle but I'd opt for a barrel the same contour and 4 inches longer.

[montdoug]

Thanks for the link Matt and your right it is indeed a nice looking piece. Before CZ's came into my life I was a stone cold Remington fan.
I was reading down the posts developing a thought (kinda tough for a guy like me) when Foxhunter said it for me.
In .204 the waste of powder, the above mentioned excessive muzzle flash and the noise make no sense to me with a 20 inch tube. Turn it into a .20 VarTarg or even a .221 Fire Ball and now we're talkin!

[17VLD]

Now thats tough for me to say.
But you guys are right,just imagine a 20VT with no leade in such a neat little package.WOW
TTFN
Matt

[DittoHead]

The lack of a .221 Fireball is a glaring omission, especially since it’s a Remington invention. I’d also like to see it chambered for the .222 Remington.

A little out in left field for this forum, but I can’t believe they gave the .350 Remington Magnum only 20 inches of barrel. I’ve got the model 673 Guide Rifle chambered for that cartridge with a 22-inch barrel and it’s nice. Some day I’m gonna kill something with that gun…

[foxhunter]

then go shoot a p-dog with it, it looks like kicking a football for a field goal.

[Daryl]

The lack of a .221 Fireball is a glaring omission, especially since it’s a Remington invention. I’d also like to see it chambered for the .222 Remington.

A little out in left field for this forum, but I can’t believe they gave the .350 Remington Magnum only 20 inches of barrel. I’ve got the model 673 Guide Rifle chambered for that cartridge with a 22-inch barrel and it’s nice. Some day I’m gonna kill something with that gun…

What was worse, was the 20" in 6.5RemMag. That one is the reason for my loss of hearing today. The new .350 is just fine at 22", but it has a butt-ugly front sight. What were they thinking? Great ctg. but not for gophers. I did run some 150gr. Remington .358's out of my .358 Norma Mag at 3,400fps - I guess they'd qualify for rodents.

[DittoHead]

then go shoot a p-dog with it, it looks like kicking a football for a field goal.
The Speer #13 manual has .350 Remington Magnum data for the 158gr. JHP revolver bullet for varmints. I’ve been thinking about using that on a groundhog.:D

The new .350 is just fine at 22", but it has a butt-ugly front sight. What were they thinking?
I like the rib and shark-fin sight, but I’m sure it’s a love-it or hate-it thing, just like it was on the Model 600.

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/model_673_specs.asp

[Alan in GA]

if the inner curve were sharpened,,it'd make a fine gut hook. Or at least make a zipper cut down a deer or elk belly!
Alan in GA

[montdoug]

The lack of a .221 Fireball is a glaring omission, especially since it’s a Remington invention. I’d also like to see it chambered for the .222 Remington.

A little out in left field for this forum, but I can’t believe they gave the .350 Remington Magnum only 20 inches of barrel. I’ve got the model 673 Guide Rifle chambered for that cartridge with a 22-inch barrel and it’s nice. Some day I’m gonna kill something with that gun…

You mean besides your shoulder?
I had one in the Rem Classic they made in 1984 (22 inch barrel). I replaced the magazine box and had the feed ramp worked and picked up a full 3 tenths of an inch in seating depth and powder capacity. I shot 250 grain Hornadys just over 2,700fps. Thumped elk like Gods own hammer. Kicked like a Spanish mule.
I turned it into a .17 MachIV, best move I ever made. It sure was accurate though.

[TCAS]

[QUOTE=DittoHead;1004]The lack of a .221 Fireball is a glaring omission, especially since it’s a Remington invention. I’d also like to see it chambered for the .222 Remington.

Ditto that 221. I had a model seven and the gun was assembled poorly especially the stock fit, it was pushing the barrel in numberous directions, accuracy was poor. My old 1970 versions Remington are much better weapons. Go the Lilja barrel site and click on the Remington bore scope link. no big surprise...IMHO

Tcas

[DittoHead]

You mean besides your shoulder? ... Thumped elk like Gods own hammer. Kicked like a Spanish mule.
My Model 673 weighs about 8 ½ lbs. with a Leupold 2-7x VX-2. The recoil is a bit abrupt, but not punishing. I handled one of the old Model 600 rifles at a gun show last summer; very, very light.

I bought my rifle used, but it looks like new. $480.