CNBC to claim Remington has been selling defective weapons for many many years
- Thread starter ZeroJunk
- Start date
- Status
Double Naught Spy
New member
Funny how the notion of wanting Remington to fix a long standing problem in a gun package for which they have profited greatly and bringing it to the attention of the general public and gun community is seen as an attack on Remington...as if pointing out a problem makes the messenger a bad guy.
Frank Ettin
Administrator
Concerns about the Remington 700 have been around for a long time. In December of 1994, Jeff Cooper wrote:
"It has been reported to us, ...that a certain prominent gunsmith has told prospective customers that the Remington bolt−action simply cannot fire when the safety is taken off − and that this has never happened since the introduction of the weapon. This man knows what he says is not the case, because he knows me, and like most of my friends, he has heard my tale of the time that I killed an impala simply by easing the safety off when I had a good sight picture. I do not wish to disparage products, but uncontrolled safety action is a matter of life and death."(Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 2, No. 16, pg 83)
And in 1995, Jeff Cooper wrote:
"Just this week we received yet another report of the dropping of the striker in the Remington action when the safety was eased off. Not that we were in any doubt about this, having experienced these failures ourselves, but we are much annoyed when salesmen and gunsmiths inform the ignorant that this failure simply cannot happen."(Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 3, No. 1, pg 3)
"It has been reported to us, ...that a certain prominent gunsmith has told prospective customers that the Remington bolt−action simply cannot fire when the safety is taken off − and that this has never happened since the introduction of the weapon. This man knows what he says is not the case, because he knows me, and like most of my friends, he has heard my tale of the time that I killed an impala simply by easing the safety off when I had a good sight picture. I do not wish to disparage products, but uncontrolled safety action is a matter of life and death."(Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 2, No. 16, pg 83)
And in 1995, Jeff Cooper wrote:
"Just this week we received yet another report of the dropping of the striker in the Remington action when the safety was eased off. Not that we were in any doubt about this, having experienced these failures ourselves, but we are much annoyed when salesmen and gunsmiths inform the ignorant that this failure simply cannot happen."(Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 3, No. 1, pg 3)
Actually there is. Think of the millions of man hours the S&W DA revolvers have been carried (and unwittingly pointed at people) by cops since the final design change of 1905. Not ONE gun-caused discharge. Every shot has been the result of a purposeful trigger pull. The same could be said of the three Colt's DA designs, too. There is no legal or practical excuse for a gun that goes off without the shooter telling it to.
Of course all sorts of things break, get mal-adjusted, dirty, rusted, or abused, but the failure should result in the failure of the gun to fire. NOT fire on it's own.
The definition of 'firearm' is the same, no matter how long it is or how it works.
Bolt action rifles have never been held to DA handgun standards and that's not the purpose of the law suits, but they are held to the same standards as their competition.
Gary L. Griffiths
New member
Can anybody say, "Glock Perfection?"
Uncle Buck
New member
Oldfalguy Wrote:
Have you thought about selling a Vaquero? I want one at a nice cheap price.
Have you thought about selling a Vaquero? I want one at a nice cheap price.
CPTMurdoc30
New member
Jbelk how many message boards are you going to run to and start ******* matches then when someone challenges you just run off to the next one. Your a dang troll if you ask me.
Show me the figures where Remingtons 700 rifles cause the discharge.
For a gun to fire there has to be an outside influence upon that gun. It doesn't matter if it is the safety being flipped, dropped, or pulling the trigger.
I am just waiting for everyone to start dumping their 700's cause I need a 280 rem and a 243 varmint rifle wouldn't mind a 25-06 and a 260 as well. So everyone that is skeered about the 700 start selling them so the price drops thank you.
I will fix the problem on them with the cost of $80 for a new timney trigger.
Oh and you can call revolvers perfect all you want. I had a friend drop one and it discharged. Funny how he didn't pull the trigger yet it went off. Older smiths with the firing pin on the hammer will go off if dropped seen it happen.
CPTM-- I'm answering questions where they're asked. It does seem to be expanding to more and more sites.
The description of exactly how the trigger operates and fails is posted here http://www.flinthillsdiesel.com/Remington-Walker.pdf
I've been told by those that took the challenge that the document is clear, concise, comprehensible, complete and correct. If you can point out a flaw, I'd be more than happy to address it.
I doubt seriously M700 will become any less expensive because of this. It IS a very simple matter to repair them. The question is 'why didn't Remington do it a long time ago?'
As a gunsmith, first and foremost, I listen to the complaints of the customer and then figure out how the mechanical facts and the best witness' experience and description match up. It's the same process as other firearms problems and failures.
I've read several thousands of the complaints written to Remington and can not believe that SO many people, from SO many different places had an experience that is SO alike in SO many ways...and then took the time to write and mail a letter of warning so others would know about it.
I figured out what was happening inside the trigger in 1969 and devised a way to repair it (and told Remington). I invite you to look inside a unique trigger too. It is enlightening and I'm sure you'll agree the guns should be repaired so gun owners don't get yet another bad rap for a defect that's not their fault.
Gun safety is every one's responsibility, not just the shooter's. I take that responsibility very seriously because guns are my life.
The description of exactly how the trigger operates and fails is posted here http://www.flinthillsdiesel.com/Remington-Walker.pdf
I've been told by those that took the challenge that the document is clear, concise, comprehensible, complete and correct. If you can point out a flaw, I'd be more than happy to address it.
I doubt seriously M700 will become any less expensive because of this. It IS a very simple matter to repair them. The question is 'why didn't Remington do it a long time ago?'
As a gunsmith, first and foremost, I listen to the complaints of the customer and then figure out how the mechanical facts and the best witness' experience and description match up. It's the same process as other firearms problems and failures.
I've read several thousands of the complaints written to Remington and can not believe that SO many people, from SO many different places had an experience that is SO alike in SO many ways...and then took the time to write and mail a letter of warning so others would know about it.
I figured out what was happening inside the trigger in 1969 and devised a way to repair it (and told Remington). I invite you to look inside a unique trigger too. It is enlightening and I'm sure you'll agree the guns should be repaired so gun owners don't get yet another bad rap for a defect that's not their fault.
Gun safety is every one's responsibility, not just the shooter's. I take that responsibility very seriously because guns are my life.
CPTMurdoc30 said:
I have a different view on that argument. For me it does not matter if there is a provable discharge due to the 700 trigger design. From a mechanical standpoint there is a design flaw in the disconnecter that should be corrected. And on top of that it is an easy correction to fix the problem, only business politics keep Remington from making the correction.
CPTMurdoc30 said:
From memory, I think Colt was the first with a hammer block on a DA revolver. It was called a police positive. The "positive" meant positive safety. I think that came out in the late 20's or early 30's. Smith followed suit very soon and also have a hammer block on their DA revolvers. That happened during the years when they both had firing pins on the hammer.
Added: Make that since 1908 for the Colt Police Positive
Last edited:
Actually it was the Iver Johnson 'Hammer the hammer' patent of 1898 that got S&W, Colts and others on the bandwagon.
The S&W has two different passive safeties internally. It CAN NOT fire unless the trigger is pulled and held back long enough for the hammer to clear the rebound slide safety lug. The safety bar is redundant.
You can have a firing from a drop, but those two parameters HAVE to be met before it will. There has never been a verified, genuine, AD with a S&W revolver. There is solid steel that has to be removed by grinding for it to occur.
The S&W has two different passive safeties internally. It CAN NOT fire unless the trigger is pulled and held back long enough for the hammer to clear the rebound slide safety lug. The safety bar is redundant.
You can have a firing from a drop, but those two parameters HAVE to be met before it will. There has never been a verified, genuine, AD with a S&W revolver. There is solid steel that has to be removed by grinding for it to occur.
CPTMurdoc30
New member
How can a gun cause a discharge?
If you leave a horriable deadly remmy 700 on the table it is not going to just cause itself to go off.
Is the trigger a poor design maybe. I am not an engineer so I can't say 100% either way. All I know is I have owned and shot plenty of Remmy 700s and never seen this so called problem.
How many problems have people had with remington products and how many people have had problems with GM products. Run them figures I tell me who has a better safety record. Heck GM didn't even think to send me a letter about the fact that the fuel pump in my car may short out causing the gas tank to explode. Sorry That is serious and should have been sent to every owner of all the models that had that problem. yet they leave it up to you to figure it out.
Ok so the trigger is flawed every thing man creates is flawed because man is flawed. No mechanical object is perfect no matter what you say.
if there is a mechanical object it has and will fail pure and simple. To expect every single mechanical object to be perfect then we wouldn't have gunsmith nor would he have auto mechanics or handy men. You wouldn't need Autozone or home depot you wouldn't need any HVAC repair tech, computer repair techs. Because everything in your world is mechanically perfect.
If you leave a horriable deadly remmy 700 on the table it is not going to just cause itself to go off.
Is the trigger a poor design maybe. I am not an engineer so I can't say 100% either way. All I know is I have owned and shot plenty of Remmy 700s and never seen this so called problem.
How many problems have people had with remington products and how many people have had problems with GM products. Run them figures I tell me who has a better safety record. Heck GM didn't even think to send me a letter about the fact that the fuel pump in my car may short out causing the gas tank to explode. Sorry That is serious and should have been sent to every owner of all the models that had that problem. yet they leave it up to you to figure it out.
Ok so the trigger is flawed every thing man creates is flawed because man is flawed. No mechanical object is perfect no matter what you say.
if there is a mechanical object it has and will fail pure and simple. To expect every single mechanical object to be perfect then we wouldn't have gunsmith nor would he have auto mechanics or handy men. You wouldn't need Autozone or home depot you wouldn't need any HVAC repair tech, computer repair techs. Because everything in your world is mechanically perfect.
Last edited by a moderator:
Remington Trigger
To JBelk and others, as I have said before I will be replacing the Triggers on my Remingtons on my own dime. I have two questions for all of you.
1. What is the best replacement trigger in your opinions, Timney, Jewell, etc.?
2. What is the safest bolt action trigger group and safety in your opinions, Mauser, Sako, Winchester, Weatherby, etc?
Maybe I will scratch an old itch and just buy a Double Rifle! God Bless Colonel Jim Corbett and his great book, "Maneaters of Kumaon"!
To JBelk and others, as I have said before I will be replacing the Triggers on my Remingtons on my own dime. I have two questions for all of you.
1. What is the best replacement trigger in your opinions, Timney, Jewell, etc.?
2. What is the safest bolt action trigger group and safety in your opinions, Mauser, Sako, Winchester, Weatherby, etc?
Maybe I will scratch an old itch and just buy a Double Rifle! God Bless Colonel Jim Corbett and his great book, "Maneaters of Kumaon"!
Last edited:
Remington defense logic.
1. Mine has never done it so there isn't a problem with any of them.
2. It's ok for a rifle to go off every now and then without pulling the trigger, just don't point it at anything you don't want to shoot or keep it unloaded until the crosshairs are on the target.
3. Somebody made some defective cars.
4. Another manufacturer made some guns that would do it so it's OK if Remingtons do.
5. Shoot the messenger.
1. Mine has never done it so there isn't a problem with any of them.
2. It's ok for a rifle to go off every now and then without pulling the trigger, just don't point it at anything you don't want to shoot or keep it unloaded until the crosshairs are on the target.
3. Somebody made some defective cars.
4. Another manufacturer made some guns that would do it so it's OK if Remingtons do.
5. Shoot the messenger.
You don't have to be an engineer to understand two levers and two springs! I'm not! If you would just read the document (as many others already have), download the patent so you can follow along (as most do), unless you're just incapable of understanding the principal behind a teeter-totter, you WILL understand what I'm saying.
I have NOTHING against Remington and don't have any dog in the fight. I'm telling you what is reality. It's unhandy sometimes, but its sure DURABLE. We, as shooters, HAVE to deal with the reality of the situation. You can't un-ring a bell and when people's lives are at stake and are being affected by a device that told a lie to get a patent and has proven to be dangerous, and the manufacturer fails to fix it or warn others of the defect, there WILL be repercussions.
I hung myself and my document as a penata to be flailed at by the ignorant in the hope I could soften the blow to shooters that have been fed a line of crap for more than half a century. If you'd rather not listen, please ignore me, but I will NOT ignore my duty to the shooting community.
PH/CIB-- "Best" trigger has to depend on the use to which it's put. Simple, solid, and steel, is my recommendation. Right now, for the money and for all round hunting use, I think the Remington XMarkPro is as good as it gets. A Shilen, Jewel, Canjar, Kenyon and a few other triggers DO have greater precision, some have extra levers to reduce pull, but for a hunting 3 1/2 to 4 pound pull, the XMarkPro can deliver it. Just like a M-70, they will probably take some wear to give the best performance.
ZeroJunk-- Precisely and well put. When I was asked in 1993 if I could explain a Remington M700 firing on safety release, under oath, I said 'yes'. Things sure changed in a hurry.
I have NOTHING against Remington and don't have any dog in the fight. I'm telling you what is reality. It's unhandy sometimes, but its sure DURABLE. We, as shooters, HAVE to deal with the reality of the situation. You can't un-ring a bell and when people's lives are at stake and are being affected by a device that told a lie to get a patent and has proven to be dangerous, and the manufacturer fails to fix it or warn others of the defect, there WILL be repercussions.
I hung myself and my document as a penata to be flailed at by the ignorant in the hope I could soften the blow to shooters that have been fed a line of crap for more than half a century. If you'd rather not listen, please ignore me, but I will NOT ignore my duty to the shooting community.
PH/CIB-- "Best" trigger has to depend on the use to which it's put. Simple, solid, and steel, is my recommendation. Right now, for the money and for all round hunting use, I think the Remington XMarkPro is as good as it gets. A Shilen, Jewel, Canjar, Kenyon and a few other triggers DO have greater precision, some have extra levers to reduce pull, but for a hunting 3 1/2 to 4 pound pull, the XMarkPro can deliver it. Just like a M-70, they will probably take some wear to give the best performance.
ZeroJunk-- Precisely and well put. When I was asked in 1993 if I could explain a Remington M700 firing on safety release, under oath, I said 'yes'. Things sure changed in a hurry.
CPTMurdoc30 said:
Answer, by moving the safety to the off position.
CPTMurdoc30 said:
Doesn't matter whether you have owned 700's with no issue, this is about a mechanical design flaw that allows the gun to discharge when the safety is removed. If you focus on the actual design then the discussion is fairly easy to discuss.
I don't think pointing out a design flaw equates to bad mouthing Remington. It's a flaw with an easy soultion.....even the inventor recommended an easy fix. I see nothing wrong in making comments on the particulars of how a certain design works or doesn't work.
Last edited:
engineermike
Moderator
If I would take someones advice and work on the trigger assembly would that not render my warranty null and void? Once I have worked on the trigger and the gun were to fire again without me pulling the trigger then (I am only guessing here) who would Remington blame then?
I have to buy a gun then buy a new trigger and then pay someone (Qualified) to change it out. Now I have a new gun and no warranty, so why would I want to buy this gun. As for GM didn't they go bankrupt?
Mike
I have to buy a gun then buy a new trigger and then pay someone (Qualified) to change it out. Now I have a new gun and no warranty, so why would I want to buy this gun. As for GM didn't they go bankrupt?
Mike
CPTMurdoc30 said:
Ok, I am a retired mechanical engineer (not firearms industry), so I will address this...best I can.
Yes, I have said myself that given time any firearm can fail, but I am usually talking about failure to fire or function. And yes it's hard to say anything is 100% without failure. Having said that, when it comes to designing a trigger system that will be close to 100% reliable for discharge when operated, then I think this can (and is) accomplished by many brands of firearm designs. Some things are hard to accomplish with mechanical design, and others are easier. Most gun makers in the modern age have come up with solid safety designs that work about 99.99% of the time. The original mechanical designer has control on what happens when the safety is removed on a trigger system. He controls by design how the lever releases and what happens thereafter. Walker's concern was a crisp trigger, and he accomplished that, but later realized the disconnecter was not a positive system and proposed changes.
So, despite what people thank, it is possible to have certain mechanical systems that are close to perfect for operation. I did not say all systems, but when the fix is easy then criticism is deserved. There are several trigger designs that have been around for many years with hammer block or (and) firing pin blocks, and they work....it can be done.
Engineermike--- As stated on page 8, when the sealer is removed, the trigger is 'un-sealed' and Remington has an argument for not being responsible.
The cynic in me says that's why the terrible trigger pulls beginning about 1980. It nearly assured the gun HAD to be altered to be usable. There are undoubtedly thousands of rifles with adjusted triggers in them.
A trigger with less than factory set sear engagement is, by definition, more likely to suffer a failure. (Less overlap, more fragile.)
The factory set sear engagement has been increased twice over the decades, which assures many guns are now considered 'out of spec' even though they are well within the specifications of other manufacturers.
In reality, the amount of engagement is not as important as the quality of that engagement, but heat-treat and geometry of the trigger 'prop' also plays a major role. "Less engagement- less security" is an engineering tenant that I qualify with, "all other factors being the same.".
The flexible nature of the connector 'attachment' means no-one actually knows for sure of what quality or quantity the sear overlap because it can change from shot to shot.
The inability to obtain a repeated failure has been criticized considerably: A workable analogy is a nail laying in the highway. That nail is capable of causing a flat tire. That many nails eventually get worn to dust without causing a flat is NOT in any way proof that nails are faultless in causing flats. It could have caused a flat in the first ten minutes it was dropped. The nail is 'flexibly' mounted to the roadway. If it lands flat, which it nearly always does after being kicked up by a tire, you don't get a flat, but if it tips up just right, it lets the air out.
The question posited in my explanation of the trigger, ask simply, "Why keep the nail laying in the road? Pick it up!"
The cynic in me says that's why the terrible trigger pulls beginning about 1980. It nearly assured the gun HAD to be altered to be usable. There are undoubtedly thousands of rifles with adjusted triggers in them.
A trigger with less than factory set sear engagement is, by definition, more likely to suffer a failure. (Less overlap, more fragile.)
The factory set sear engagement has been increased twice over the decades, which assures many guns are now considered 'out of spec' even though they are well within the specifications of other manufacturers.
In reality, the amount of engagement is not as important as the quality of that engagement, but heat-treat and geometry of the trigger 'prop' also plays a major role. "Less engagement- less security" is an engineering tenant that I qualify with, "all other factors being the same.".
The flexible nature of the connector 'attachment' means no-one actually knows for sure of what quality or quantity the sear overlap because it can change from shot to shot.
The inability to obtain a repeated failure has been criticized considerably: A workable analogy is a nail laying in the highway. That nail is capable of causing a flat tire. That many nails eventually get worn to dust without causing a flat is NOT in any way proof that nails are faultless in causing flats. It could have caused a flat in the first ten minutes it was dropped. The nail is 'flexibly' mounted to the roadway. If it lands flat, which it nearly always does after being kicked up by a tire, you don't get a flat, but if it tips up just right, it lets the air out.
The question posited in my explanation of the trigger, ask simply, "Why keep the nail laying in the road? Pick it up!"
- Status