PDA

View Full Version : CNBC Report on the Rem. 700


redrick
January 17, 2011, 06:15 PM
I just watched a CNBC report on the Remington 700 series, that shows it firing without pulling the trigger. The report shows, they new about the problem as early as 1946.

CNBC interviewed Mike Walker, now 98 years old and the inventor of the 700.
He had warned them of the problem and wanted to change the trigger design in 1948, at a cost of 5 cent per gun. They rejected the change.

Remington admitted in papers, that 1% could be tricked too fire, without pulling the trigger.

Laura Waton a CS representative, testified just last year, that this can happen.

It is estimated the cost of a recall will cost 300,000,000 now, more than the company is worth. The recall would have to be voluntary.

Remington has lost and settled several lawsuits, in deaths and injuries regarding this problem.

I just bought a 870P, but my next rifle will not be a Remington 700.

pilpens
January 17, 2011, 06:24 PM
Same here.
I bought a .223 SPS tactical before I saw the show. My rifle shoots very well. I only chamber ammo when shooting. I almost do not use the safety. So, it is not too much of a concern for me.

jmr40
January 17, 2011, 06:39 PM
I'm quite upset at Remington because their repeated lies and coverup. But that said any new Remington made after 2007 should be just fine. And while the problem is very real, although some Remington fanatics seem to want to bury their heads in the sand, the problem is also quite rare.

alfack
January 17, 2011, 07:09 PM
Jeezus. Not this crap again. :barf:

redrick
January 17, 2011, 07:29 PM
After I saw the show it almost made me barf. Company greed makes me sick.

I posted this as a warning, if you have a 700 as so many people do. If it can save the life of your kid, unlike the father who lost his in this report.

Suprising, he isn't a bitter man, but he would like to see Remington recall the 700 and fix them. He gets his peace at the range.

m&p45acp10+1
January 17, 2011, 07:37 PM
I think they should have put a reinforcement of the safty rules on a label stuck on the bolt that a new owner would see before trying to load a rifle.

Next I was taught to keep my rifle pointed in a safe direction if relasing the safty, and/or unloading it. Also to never transport one loaded. I ownd several Remingtons that I inherited from my grampa. I have used the method he taught me when handeling them, and have never had a problem.

Note my Savage has a note that says to not load, or unload without it being pointed in a safe direction.

Also note in every manual of every fire arm I have purchased in the past 16 years since turning 18 they all say never to rely on the safty, and to make sure the weapon is pointed in a safe direction before relasing it.

redrick
January 17, 2011, 08:05 PM
I was taught that also, but that does change the fact that it can fire without touching the trigger or safety.

m&p45acp10+1
January 17, 2011, 08:18 PM
Actualy it does take releasing the safty. Some of the older models the with the safty on if the trigger was pulled, or caught on something. It would release the sear, with the safty blocking the travel of the sear. When the safty was released the sear would still drop. Resulting in the weapon firing without the person touching the trigger. To compound the problem if the safty was engaged the bolt could not be opened. That is why they recalled the older models to upgrade the safty to a 3 position safty that would allow for the safty to remain engaged, and the bolt to be opened and closed for unoading or loading the rifle.

jmr40
January 17, 2011, 08:21 PM
In which direction would you choose to have the rifle fire without pulling the trigger? Fired straight up the bullet will come down somewhere possibly injuring bystanders. Fired down into the ground and bullets ricochet and fragment injuring bystanders.

I've got a better idea. Lets build guns that don't fire until the trigger is pulled and it is aimed at a suitable target.

m&p45acp10+1
January 17, 2011, 08:35 PM
Remington has been producing all of their bolt action rifles with 3 position safetys for many years now. As far as the unloading. Try unloading pointed in the direction you were shooting, or hunting before leaving the stand. Not when you get to the dang truck. So what if you pass up a shot on deer. I place more value of safty than I do on putting a deer head on the wall.

I seem to wonder why it is called common sense. It seems to be less common theese days. Simple Solution for Complicated People.
Rule # 1 Treat all weapons as if they were loaded

Rule #2 Do not point it at anything you do not wish to DESTROY.

Rule # 3 Keep your finger off of the trigger until you are on target

Rule # 4 Know you target, and what is beyond it.

Also note Safety Mechanisms can and do fail. Safety is your responsibility. See Rule # 2

redrick
January 17, 2011, 08:45 PM
And this makes you feel better about your 700?

I would like, first that they at least warn me that there have been reports of it firing without touching the trigger. Second I would like them to fix the problem as the inventor Mike Walker sugessted in 1948.

None of this has been done since they new about it.

They did change the safety in 1982 I believe, but that didn't solve the problem with the trigger.

bhannah
January 17, 2011, 08:48 PM
Ruger said he never intended for "simple civilians" to have 30 round magazines.

Colt?
During a 1998 newspaper interview, CEO Ron Stewart stated that he would favor additional gun control at the federal level.

How long did those "boycotts" last.. is Ruger around still?
How about Colt?

Come on please we are talking about huge company's with huge overhead, not to mention the lawyer fees they have to pay.

Sure lets run another firearm manufacture out of business and save the Feds the trouble..

I am sure it took them a long time to find a 700 that was defective.
People screw around with the trigger based on "the internet Remington 700 trigger job guide" and wonder why it is screwed up.

Go adjust your own valve timing on your car and see if it leads to a recall... good luck...

bhannah
January 17, 2011, 08:53 PM
1% of all the 700's built since 1946?

Please that's a rate that would not even get a car recalled..

GeauxTide
January 17, 2011, 08:53 PM
There have been over 5 million 700s produced over the past 50 years. Look at the report from remington.tv that provides the other side of the coin so you can make an informed decision. In my view, they do a good job answering all of questions brought up in the news report. Let's see, do I believe MSNBC or Remington? The safety design goes back to the 1917 Enfield (I own one). I've owned 700s since 1970 and still own three, with two 788s for good measure. Weatherby also has the same kind of rolling two position safety mechanism. The only accidental discharges that I have personal knowledge in 40 years of shooting were firearms that were modified by unqualified people or mistakes by the person holding it.

redrick
January 17, 2011, 08:55 PM
The safety concerns came right from the inventor back in 1948. He wanted to change the design at 5 cents a gun, but they said no, it would cost to much.

I like guns as much as anyone here, but I don't like company greed over safety.

They are the ones running themselves out of business with pratices like this.

It will now cost them over $300,000,000 to fix the problem.

Ridge_Runner_5
January 17, 2011, 09:04 PM
The issue would have been nothing more than a surprise inconvenience had it not been for NBC dragging all the people by the screen who didn't follow the rules of gun safety, and as a result lost something or someone they love...

bhannah
January 17, 2011, 09:05 PM
reddick

It will cost them that much because of the sheer amount of 700's that would need recalled, this is not an issue with EVERY 700..

So don't buy one..

Go cry on some Lib gun hater board..I am sure you will get the response you are looking for there...
Until then drop it it is OLD news we all knew about this years ago and we didn't care then either...

mpd61
January 17, 2011, 09:10 PM
+1:barf:

kraigwy
January 17, 2011, 09:14 PM
Jeezus. Not this crap again.


Hey come on, these boys need their boogie man.

pmeisel
January 17, 2011, 09:18 PM
Remington is doing just fine.

But they would have done better if they just did what Mike Walker suggested over 50 years ago.

redrick
January 17, 2011, 09:22 PM
When the inventor off a product says he has safety concerns off this design, I take his word on it, not yours.

You can bet that I want buy a 700 or any Remington. If I would have seen this show 2 months ago I would not have bought a 870P either.

m&p45acp10+1
January 17, 2011, 09:23 PM
I just had my girlfriend talk on the phone to my dad. He checked the manual that came with a rifle he bought for me 24 years ago.


Printed plain as day in bold type all caps. Page 3
DO NOT TRANSPORT, OR CARRY WHILE LOADED. MAKE SURE THE RIFLE IS POINTED IN A SAFE DIRECTION WHILE LOADING/UNLOADING, OR RELEASING THE SAFTY. FAILURE TO DO SO CAN RESULT IN SERIOUS INJURY AND/OR DEATH, AS WELL AS DAMAGE TO PROPERTY.

I own several that where inherited. Have hunted, and/or shot all of them. I have never had a problem with any. I Have NEVER TRUSTED THE SAFTY ON ANY FIRE ARM.

redrick
January 17, 2011, 09:30 PM
The point is they new of this and did nothing to fix it only to write a safety step in a manual.

bhannah
January 17, 2011, 09:32 PM
M&P

My point exactly.
A guy screws up and unfortunately his child had to pay the price.
How many BASIC safety rules were broke here?

Just like suing McDonald's because your a fat ass..

Personal responsibility is DEAD, it can't possibly be my fault that a loaded gun was pointed at my child...

Did anyone bother to ask the father what was on his mind?
Remington should sue that guy for not following the instructions on the rifle.

"Do not use this firearm until you have read and understood the manual"

As they say Idiots rule...

redrick
January 17, 2011, 09:40 PM
I would say most people don't expect a firearm to discharge unless the trigger is pulled, but that does not excuse poor safety. I believe it was the mother who shot the kid.

GoOfY-FoOt
January 17, 2011, 09:46 PM
It was my understanding that all of the ones that mis-fired had prior trigger work done to them. Was this not the case?

redrick
January 17, 2011, 09:56 PM
No, this was not the case in what I saw.

bhannah
January 17, 2011, 09:59 PM
Ahhh so you are going to take CNBC'S word for it..

You are showing your hand reddick

m&p45acp10+1
January 17, 2011, 10:03 PM
Not all of them had bubba trigger jobs. It was noted to have happened to a few people. One common denominator in most was 2 issues.
1 While the safty was engaged the trigger was somehow pulled. In the field it can happen. Especialy in tree stands, or moving through heavy brush.
2. Bolt would not open with safty engaged, and the people were attemting to unload the rifle.

They were like "well the safety is on." Then release it to get the boom effect of the sear dropping on a live round.

redrick
January 17, 2011, 10:06 PM
If this hurts your feelings so be it.

I just hope anyone with a 700 series rifle is aware it can go off without the trigger being pulled.

guf
January 17, 2011, 10:08 PM
banana: You are either misinformed, illinformed, uninformed, or all the "above". Please google Rem./Walker trigger and read all the information contained therein and then voice an informed opinion!!!

Art Eatman
January 17, 2011, 10:09 PM
This is new to y'all? It's already been beaten to death, all over the Internet. Give the poor old horse a rest. :)