Comparing my '87 vintage 995 to my '11 vintage Remlin 795, I came up with a few small differences, beginning with the most obvious:
1. Checkered walnut stock
2. Premium, folding rear sight and covered front sight
3. No LSHO
4. Flat, rectangular bolt face like a mod. 60 vs protruding, round face like 795
5. Action side plates are at least twice the thickness of the 795 (probably changed on the 795 so as to accommodate the LSHO "monkey-motion' within the same overall width)
6. Magazine guide does not have the cast-in boss which fits into the slot on later generation mags. This makes the mag fit a bit looser, an arguably "good news, bad news" situation. The mags will drop more easily when released, but tend to wobble a bit in the guide, making feeding a bit less precise.
7. Better & more comfortable heft and "feel"(at least to me, likely due to the heavier & more rigid walnut stock moving the overall CG of the rifle to the rear a bit)
1. Checkered walnut stock
2. Premium, folding rear sight and covered front sight
3. No LSHO
4. Flat, rectangular bolt face like a mod. 60 vs protruding, round face like 795
5. Action side plates are at least twice the thickness of the 795 (probably changed on the 795 so as to accommodate the LSHO "monkey-motion' within the same overall width)
6. Magazine guide does not have the cast-in boss which fits into the slot on later generation mags. This makes the mag fit a bit looser, an arguably "good news, bad news" situation. The mags will drop more easily when released, but tend to wobble a bit in the guide, making feeding a bit less precise.
7. Better & more comfortable heft and "feel"(at least to me, likely due to the heavier & more rigid walnut stock moving the overall CG of the rifle to the rear a bit)