540X chronology of changes

Topics related to Post - 1898 Remington Rifles
Post Reply
jcj54
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:09 pm

540X chronology of changes

Post by jcj54 »

Anyone have a chronological list of changes to the 540X/540XR design?
I have seen 2 different length action screws, the longer one won't work on either my 540X or 540XR. These are different than the 580/581/582 screw, they have a chamfered head.
nambujim
Posts: 597
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 3:16 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: 540X chronology of changes

Post by nambujim »

I'm not sure what you're asking here but with all that has been going on at Remington since your rifles were produced, its unlikely the info you're looking for will be available in your lifetime.

I was working for DuPont when this rifle was introduced, was given one to "play with" if you will. I was a "position" small bore shooter with considerable experience and was asked to give an opinion, not that it would matter much since it was already in the market place. Remington sales people were looking around to find anyone that could say something positive about the rifle and were coming up a bit short.

You need to put the introduction of the 540X into perspective in that while the small bore version of the 40X was accurate, the trigger sucked, and the rifle itself was barrel heavy so it was most suitable for Prone shooting only. Most prone shooters replaced the trigger, made some other modifications but when you went to a "Prone" match you saw mostly 52 Winchesters. Truth of the matter is the Remington 37 was a far better position target rifle than the 40X. Remington did sell a butt load of the 40X to the military who were far less discerning than competitive small bore rifle shooters. The DCM in turn lent them in bulk to Junior Rifle Clubs who quickly determined what most of us already knew.

The 540X essentially was meant to compete with the Model 75 Winchester but Anschutz had already introducted their great Model 64 with a better trigger, sights, and pricing. The 540X was actually a comfortable rifle to shoot, was accurate, and over the years enough modifications/improvements were made so the final product was a pretty nice piece of hardware. It was never meant to be a top of the line smallbore target rifle!

The re-emergence of all these old target rifles took place maybe 15 years ago when "smallbore" bench rest shooting became a "thing". I have very strong feelings about "bench rest" shooting in that center fire bench rest shooting involves securing a 50# rifle to a concrete bench and then fire it by remote control. Yeah-yeah, there's a lot more to it than that but its surely not a test of an individuals shooting abilities but more of a test of his engineering skills. My personal feeling toward small bore bench rest shooting is pretty much the same, love to see these bench rest guys shoot their bloody rifles in the sitting, kneeling, or standing positions! I'd even settle for watching them shoot with "iron sights", oh well that's enough of my editorializing for today.

The 540X in my opinion was better than a Model 75 Winchester but not nearly as good as the Anschutz 64 but give it a better trigger and for bench rest shooting it is probably competitive. Hope this hasn't been too boring but nobody was responding to your inquiry.

Jim Peterson
Charlotte, NC
Jim Peterson
jcj54
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:09 pm

Re: 540X chronology of changes

Post by jcj54 »

Thanks for your insight. I have an Anschutz 1403 and Remington 540XR and agree with your assessment of the two. My 540XR has two action screws, one longer than the other. The long one is too long, is in the rear hole, and if run all the way in protrudes into the bolt pathway, interfering with the bolt.
Was hoping someone might know why the two length screws.
Post Reply