Rem 700ml conversion

[Denney84]

I have a 700mls in the safe that I've never shot since I bought it used about 10 yrs ago on a whim. I will prob have it converted to smokeless. Who all has dont this? What will it cost? Who can do it? I havent seen much on the 700ml builds in a while, everything that comes up is older builds. Think it would be good fun and better accuracy for my GF shooting my encore as I've always never been impressed by what its capable of.

 

[BuckDoeHunter]

I believe pre-fit barrels for the older Remington 700ML's have dried up. You will most likely need someone to machine a barrel to fit your action.

I'm going off memory so my #'s could be off
Barrel $450 (Brux brand)
Breech plug $90
Recoil lug $30
Bolt nose kit $95
Laminate Boyds stock $150 ish depending on options

I did all the work myself so I have no clue as to what labor would cost. With the right load and right nut behind the butt, these conversions will flat out shoot.

 

[sabotloader]

Contact Jeff at BESTILL Creations. He has the tools and the parts to make it happen.

 

[jsteurrys]

McGowen will machine one of their barrels the last time I checked. The drawback is it will be for the Savage breechplug. Pacnor is a no go after the fire. All of the builders have moved on to using centerfire actions.

 

[derfhunter]

Gary Bush is still doing the 700ml builds

 

[BuckDoeHunter]

I havent seen much on the 700ml builds in a while, everything that comes up is older builds.

After rereading this, Is your muzzleloader the old Remington 700ML or the new Remington Ultimate 700UML?

 

[Denney84]

After rereading this, Is your muzzleloader the old Remington 700ML or the new Remington Ultimate 700UML?

It's an old model 700mls

 

[Leigh Clambakes]

Anyone have contact info for Gary Bush?

 

[derfhunter]

PM sent with his phone number

 

[Huntaholic]

Need some more info on this as well! Ive got one that Luke did for me before he moved on to other things and Im looking to build another one for a buddy of mine.

 

[Patrick McChristy]

Are most builds on the old style 700 using a lrmp bolt nose setup or using 209 primers?

 

[Huntaholic]

Are most builds on the old style 700 using a lrmp bolt nose setup or using 209 primers?

The one I have already is set up for 209 primers just like the 10MLII and that's what I would like to have done to this other one.

 

[Leigh Clambakes]

My 2 were done through Denny's Sporting Goods, in Ohio. They utilize 32 acp brass, and burn BH209 very well.
Unfortunately my last conversion they did was their final kit, so it is no longer an option.

 

[GM54-120]

LRMP in the Rem700ML or MLII still has a similar flash channel length as 209 primer plug. You dont really gain the same things as you do by using a CF action with locking lugs. They wont ignite powder any better than a 209 can. You need locking lugs to handle the high pressures created with a shorter distance between powder and the primer.

What you do gain is less carbon in the flash channel, a larger module to handle and less flash hole erosion than a 209. Virtually no variations in length or OD too like is common with 209s.

 

[HV-Muzzleloaders]

LRMP in the Rem700ML or MLII still has a similar flash channel length as 209 primer plug. You dont really gain the same things as you do by using a CF action with locking lugs. They wont ignite powder any better than a 209 can. You need locking lugs to handle the high pressures created with a shorter distance between powder and the primer.

I have built High Pressure 45 caliber muzzleloaders on both the Remington 700 Single Shot action (has locking lugs), and on the Remington 700ML action (no lugs).

The majority of the pressure is handled by the threads on the breech plug in both cases.
The only advantage for the centerfire rifles is a shorter flame path. Both of the breech plugs use a carbide bushing for the vent. The pressure coming through the small diameter hole in the carbide bushing in both breech plugs is not very different. Therefore, the pressure into the primer modules of both rifles is about the same.

I have not seen a real difference in reliability, or accuracy in either rifle.

I use the same load data in both rifles.

Others may have had a different experience than mine.

However, I do know a 209 primer contains much more priming compound than a Large Rifle Magnum primer. You can check this yourself, by weighing them before firing, and then after firing. If I remember correctly, the 209 had almost five times more weight change. Therefore, you are getting a lot more "bang" from the 209 primer.

.

 

[GM54-120]

The shorter flash channel in the CF plug gets more energy to the powder. Ive seen side by sides using the same loads using a RSI strain gauge. 209 vs LRMP vs DI (Direct Ignition).

The peak pressure increased by quite a bit each time from 209. Speed went up too. As much as 10% increase. So yes a short flame path has a very noticeable gain in performance. Shorter path=less flash channel volume=more pressure reaching the primer. That is exactly why you can see it happen on a MLII plug as the channel fills with carbon. The primer takes more of the pressure and show signs of stress.

You dont want to use a CF LRMP plug in a Rem700ML or MLII for this reason. You want a lugged action. The MLII/RemML type LRMP plugs have a larger volume to keep the pressure to a reasonable level. Luke used to sell both.

 

[bstorric]

The shorter flash channel in the CF plug gets more energy to the powder. Ive seen side by sides using the same loads using a RSI strain gauge. 209 vs LRMP vs DI (Direct Ignition).

The peak pressure increased by quite a bit each time from 209. Speed went up too. As much as 10% increase. So yes a short flame path has a very noticeable gain in performance. Shorter path=less flash channel volume=more pressure reaching the primer. That is exactly why you can see it happen on a MLII plug as the channel fills with carbon. The primer takes more of the pressure and show signs of stress.

You dont want to use a CF LRMP plug in a Rem700ML or MLII for this reason. You want a lugged action. The MLII/RemML type LRMP plugs have a larger volume to keep the pressure to a reasonable level. Luke used to sell both.

How did the direct ignition compare to the LRMP and 209s?

 

[GM54-120]

Most of those traces were deleted when the poster left the forum. Only a few remain. There are some traces of DI vs Hankins LRMP still there. You get upto 10% more fps going from one to the next and the strain gauge shows the increase in peak too.

There is nothing wrong with any of them but they are not the same. Each has its benefits and limitations. You can still get great speed from a RemML or MLII conversion. I can get 2800fps using a 209 and N120 with sabots in my Savage Pacnor with 209s. Pretty easily and safely too. A RemML conversion can use the same OD barrel as a Rem700 CF so it can handle even higher peak than a RemAge or Savage with a barrel nut.

DI really lights up the powder. Its just not as practical it many situations and should only be used in CF grade actions. You might be able to get by using it in something like a CVA Optima/Acurra break action and BH209. Not really sure. BH209 makes far less pressure even with huge loads.

 

[bstorric]

Most of those traces were deleted when the poster left the forum. Only a few remain. There are some traces of DI vs Hankins LRMP still there. You get upto 10% more fps going from one to the next and the strain gauge shows the increase in peak too.

There is nothing wrong with any of them but they are not the same. Each has its benefits and limitations. You can still get great speed from a RemML or MLII conversion. I can get 2800fps using a 209 and N120 with sabots in my Savage Pacnor with 209s. Pretty easily and safely too. A RemML conversion can use the same OD barrel as a Rem700 CF so it can handle even higher peak than a RemAge or Savage with a barrel nut.

DI really lights up the powder. Its just not as practical it many situations and should only be used in CF grade actions. You might be able to get by using it in something like a CVA Optima/Acurra break action and BH209. Not really sure. BH209 makes far less pressure even with huge loads.

Good to know. I just bought the Hankin DI plug and modules for my Accura and wanted to make sure I knew what I was getting myself into (obviously only using BH209 or 777). I am not too concerned with having to screw in and out the module for each shot as most of my shooting will be on the range and even when hunting carrying the extra tool for removing them doesnt matter much to me (I carry alot more stuff when I hunt with my sidelocks for the "just in case" scenarios)

 

[GM54-120]

I would LOVE to see a test of chrono readings with the DI vs 209 in that CVA using BH209. In a break action it is a bit more practical IMO. The DI module is much easier to get in and out than a bolt action. The only thing im not sure about is the firing pin bushing. The slot in them is huge. Its might be a problem but from a strength standpoint it should be fine?????