model 742

[milboltnut]

I had a long talk with two smiths on this model and the first one asked if I considered a 7400. He mentioned a guy who brought one to him for repair. The guy said he didn't care what it costs or how long it took to fix it. The smith didn't mention if the fellow had a operable rifle to begin with. The receiver lugs were mangled and the bolt face had to be redone due to the extractor was damaged due to a dirty chamber. He mention he had a guy mig weld the receiver and bolt face and it had to be machined. He said that the 742's just aren't built as durable as the 7400, which is true as the second smith said .

The second smith said the 742's are fine if you back off on the modern ammuniton used, due to the fact that they were designed around then manufactured ammo. The port pressure was too high and beating the internal parts to death.

I know a gun shop who has quite a few of these 742's. Wondering what experiences you all had or have with them.

[umcpumpgun]

When I was just a young hunter I went through the 742 phase mainly because everybody in my area used one.(southeast) After several different 742"s and many different varying problems I finally gave up on them. Most of the one's I had were new or nearly new. The thing I learned from all of this was basically is if you get one that will feed and eject properly I may work for you for a while,but if it doesn't work get rid of it as it will be a problem forever. Accuracy was never a problem. Take the bolt apart on one and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure friction fit pins in the bolt that takes a lot of slamming at every shot isn't a good thing. I finally decided that reliability is worth a heck of a lot more than a fast follow up shot on game,thus my long road over the years with the pump rifle and have never had a failure and never regretted it. I have been around since the 740 to the present and there is a reason there have been several models of the auto. How many versions of the 870 shotgun have there been??? Don't get me wrong I am a huge Rem. fan with many in the safe so I am definitely bashing Rem. as a whole. If a new hunter asked me about them I would steer him towards a pump or a good bolt gun that seemed to fit him the best. I have 3 occasions that the auto's saved some of biggest whitetails I have seen. Nothing much worse than setting for days and weeks to watch them slip away because of you equipment.

[milboltnut]

the bolt that takes a lot of slamming at every shot isn't a good thing...

I hear that... so you say you've been around since the 740..... so when you bought a 742 was it years later after the 7400 or when they first came out?

What weight bullet ammo did you use?

[umcpumpgun]

The era that I used these guns were from 1972-1980 when they were in current production. The guns I had ranged from out of the box to ex. shape. The chambers were meticously cleaned with bronse brushes. I also hunted with a lot of people that had them at the same time that I refered to. My father bought me a N.I.B. for X-mas in 1972. On the 4th shot the bolt came apart due to broken pin in bolt. My son had one a few years ago he bought from an old timer that never hunted with his and got a box of period ammo with 11 rds. missing from box. A little over half box had been fired and the gun showed zero use, before a box was fired he had bolt problems. A lot of these guns were notorious for stovepiping the empties while ejecting. Also if the chamber wasn't kept very clean a lot of times they would pull the rim of the ctg. leaving you with remainder of brass in the chamber rendering it helpless till it could be extracted with proper tools. I have seen some that worked somewhat better than the ones mentioned but they are far and few in between, and sooner or later would jam or fail to eject which was the major problem with them. I think the gas system was not engineered properly as well as the bolt. Look on the internet and you will find tons of parts and parts guns. There is a reason for that. Also Rem changed the bolt style when they changed models. There was obviously a reason for that also. When you pull the bolt back and look inside the receiver, look on the left inside of the receiver look at the little narrow track on the sidewall that runs lengthwise of the receiver and note all of the peening on the track. Run your fingernail down it and note all of the burrs and gouge marks. This is the best way to tell how much one has been fired,because every time it is fired it chews on this track. One that has been fired as little as one bx. of shells will begin to show a small amt. of peening in this area. One that has been fired a lot is very chewed up and rough. I think this speaks volumes about this setup. I have seen a few that had been fired a lot that the track was so badly chewed up that the bolt wouldn't stay in place well enough to function. As far as ammo goes I only fired factory loads of 150 165, but mostly 180's and found no difference in function. I have never shot one that wasn't plenty accurate. I have heard of them that the barrel moved and flexed in the receiver. The one my son had that broke would put 5 shot consistently in 1" at 100 yds as long as you didn't see how many rounds you could shoot quickly. On the subject of semi auto rifles the only centerfires I have shot that you could have 100% reliability with every shot was the Ruger mini's and M-1 garand which are the exact same engineering. Hopes this helps you.

[milboltnut]

Quote:
The era that I used these guns were from 1972-1980


Quote:
My son had one a few years ago he bought from an old timer that never hunted with his and got a box of period ammo with 11 rds. missing from box

Wikipedia

Quote:
The Remington Model 740 was a semi-automatic rifle manufactured by Remington Arms between 1955 and 1960

Quote:
The Remington Model 742, also known as the Woodsmaster is a semi-automatic rifle that was produced by Remington Arms from 1960 until 1980


The second smith noted that the 740/742 were developed in the 40's and put out on the market in the 50's. So it seems to me that you made the mistake of shooting "period" ammo, which was 20 or so years later. I have reloading manuals that list powder charges alot hotter than current load listings.


Quote:
Also if the chamber wasn't kept very clean a lot of times they would pull the rim of the ctg. leaving you with remainder of brass in the chamber rendering it helpless till it could be extracted with proper tools.


Also one must remember that ammunition components have come a long way since then. Current Remington brass casings are heavier than military brass casings and bullets have come along way too.


Quote:
As far as ammo goes I only fired factory loads of 150 165, but mostly 180's and found no difference in function


Function is one thing, but chamber pressure and port pressure are two different things. These rifles weren't designed to operate like a military semi auto... geting as many bullets downrange as possible. They were designed for a follow up shot or two.

From what I see the operator was at fault here.