PDA

View Full Version : what is it with Remingtons?


Rifleman1776
August 19, 2012, 08:38 AM
I know the old problem of Remington bolt action cf rifles going off spontaneously has, supposedly, been fixed.
But, I have read that the 'improved' bolt is still subject to unwanted firings.
It is hard for me to accept that a company like Remington would continue to ship a product like this.
Would appreciate some insight about their current bolt rifles and this safety issue.

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 09:27 AM
Which remingtons went off like this?

ROGER4314
August 19, 2012, 09:40 AM
I've owned a lot of Remington 700's in various flavors and calibers and shot them for years. I have NEVER had a problem like you described. NEVER! I shot matches for years elbow to elbow with other shooters and never saw an unplanned discharge. Sorry, I'm just not buying it. If that was REALLY true, Remington would be out of business pronto.

The triggers are adjustable and it's far more likely that a newbie with a screwdriver readjusted the trigger mechanism, wear occurred on the sear because of poor engagement and a failure occurred. Is that the fault of the rifle?

Flash

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 09:49 AM
I've owned 2 700's, 2 788's and am about to own a 722. I have NEVER had one go off by it's self either. Probably someone adjusted the trigger down to nothing which the factory trigger isn't designed for, or is scapegoating Remington for their own mistake.

kraigwy
August 19, 2012, 09:51 AM
First off I want to point out, any gun can malfunction, they are machines after all.

I've seen the documentary on Remington's. Assuming they were right and did "go off" when they weren't suppose. There were some traget events in that film............................................BUT.........................every friggen one of them (injuries and property damage) could have been avoided if one would follow the 4 basic safety rules.

Lets assume that the trigger did release when no one had their finger on it.

OK, lets take the case where the round went though the camper injuring the child..............what would happen if that rifle was pointed up and down range like it was suppose to be...... no injury, no property damage.

Go back and watch the documentary again and each time, there was property damage or injury, one or more of the four basic rules were violated.

I've screwed up clearing guns I thought were empty and weren't (every time I unload a gun I point it in a safe direction and let the hammer fall). But when I screwed up and let a round off unexpectedly, it was pointed at my pistol target which has a safe background (friggin mountain). In the field I point it at a dirt bank or something similar. It if goes off, nothing is hurt.

Also I've never seen the need for carrying a round in the chamber while hunting. If on the range and not pointing at the target my long guns have a ECI (Empty Chamber indicator) in the chamber. It's impossible to have a round go off if there is one of those puppies in the chamber.

RANT OFF

Now as to Remington 700s, I have a Remington BDL Varmint in 223 that I got to use in LE in 1978, it still shoots today and has never gone off when it wasn't suppose to. It has had some pretty ruff treatment, Bouncing around in the trunk of a police car for over 15 years. I've even taken it to Guard Drills and Jumped with it (I was in an Airborne Unit). To my knowledge that rifle has never been taken out of the stock, I bought it new. I'd trust my life (and have) on that trigger.

I also have a Remington action I used to build my grand son a hunting rifle. It was a piece of junk when I got it. The trigger looked like someone was trying to modify it..............would it malfunction? I don't know, maybe, maybe not. Since it was for my grandson I put a timmley trigger in it just to make me feel better.

Timmly triggers are safe, good, and relatively cheap. If you're worried about it, replace it, if not then use your Remington trigger.

Personally I'm a Model 70 guy, but its not because of the Remington triggers.

I think Remington got a bad rap on the trigger deal.

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 10:00 AM
Amen to that kraigway! Never point a gun where you don't intend to shoot! The only complaint I had was when adjusting my 223 VLS, I was either 3 lbs, or 6 lbs. I couldn't get a happy medium. 3 lbs was just too light for cold weather and cold fingers, but that's the ONLY problem I had with the trigger group.

mete
August 19, 2012, 10:19 AM
The only problem I've seen was an individual who fired as he was unloading his gun.He immediately said "it went of by itself !!" .But I had been watching and told him "you had your finger on the trigger ".
Yes it's a mechanical device and can fail. I've adjusted many of them especially to remove the "lawyer trigger " pull weight. There is one individual a supposed "gunsmith" who is a major charactor in the anti-Remington story. He appears only rarely on anothe r forum and is just ridiculed by the others .His only appearance has been to condemn Remington's trigger.
If you want to adjust the trigger make sure you really know how to do it ,not just changing the springs ! Or find someone who knows how.

Rifleman1776
August 19, 2012, 11:45 AM
I agree with every one of you. But there have been documented instances of the Rem 700 having unplanned discharges. The unsafe handling had nothing to do with the fact the rifles went off without a trigger pull. Remington admitted up to it a number of years ago and changed their design. Now, I recently saw an article that said there were still some of these unplanned discharges happening with the 700.
I also agree it is bad for business. Remington is far from the leader in American bolt action rifle sales.

emcon5
August 19, 2012, 12:22 PM
I am going to wave the big red BS flag on this one.

Remington's rebuttal to the hatchet job:

http://gunblog.com/remingtons-response-to-cnbcs-remington-700-story

tahunua001
August 19, 2012, 12:25 PM
ok some reports may have been taken a bit out of context by someone.
1. there has never been a single reported case of a 700 going off spontaneously, it may have fired if dropped on a hard surface with the safety off but there is no such gun that has ever just gone off of it's own accord(the very definition of spontaneous).

2. all mechanical devices are prone to failures and guns are no exception. the remington 700 is without a doubt the most prolifically used bolt action rifle in the world. of the several million rifles out there, there have been only a handful of cases of accidental firings reported in model 700s made after the late 80s.

3. the lower of a reputation that a gun has, the more people are going to want too go with the flow and report the smallest of malfunctions to aid the consensus that a weapon is bad and the same principle feeds good reputations. for instance there are many more people willing to bash hi point handguns than to laud them but at the same time very few people are willing to bash heckler and kochs and instead try to post positively. since the model 700 got a bad rap for drop fires for years that same stigma carries over today and even the idiots carrying a rifle with a round in the chamber and safety off fight to get their word in edgewise to prove that the 700 is unsafe because they tripped and slammed their rifle against a boulder which caused it to go off.

I grew up with a remington 700 and my older brother taught me from the very beginning that there is no such thing as a safety on a gun. instead I was always taught to carry with the bolt handle up so that the firing pin is completely disengaged. I still carry my bolt guns like this when I hunt no matter the model, and I have never once had a drop fire, spontaneous fire or any other malfunction which resulted in an unintentional discharge.

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 12:32 PM
Documented, and the truth are not the same thing. People and lawyers are willing to fabricate when they are looking for six figure settlements. I carried my Remington loaded and on safety slung over my shoulder with no unintended discharges.

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 12:54 PM
A footnote to my previous post, CNBC was also behind "stringing up" George Zimmerman by blurring the pics of the injuries Zimmerman had on his head, and splicing the 911 tape in attempt to paint the incident into a hate crime. They are anti gun, and are ready to throw anybody to the dogs in order to further their cause.

math teacher
August 19, 2012, 01:37 PM
I once had my Rem 700 discharge when I took off the safety. My fault all the way. I was in the process of shooting an elk and pulled the trigger with the safety on. Furthermore I had lightened the trigger pull, apparently too much. After readjusting the pull upward, I could not get it to repeat, empty of course. Never a problem again. However the rifle now wears a Timney trigger. Don't blame the gun, blame the nut behind the gun.

ronl
August 19, 2012, 03:48 PM
I fixed two Remington triggers that were dangerous. ( not my guns) You can thank WD-40 for both of them. They were gunked up terribly. Some carb cleaner and slight adjustments and the all important safety checks and they were good to go. I had my .222 discharge once when emptying it because my finger slipped off of the trigger guard. (trigger is adjusted very light)It was pointed down in a safe direction as it should have been and there was no harm other than to my ego. Certainly not the rifle's fault. I'd imagine that is how most of the Remingtons "go off by themselves", with a little help, or when someone "adjusts" the trigger without knowing what they're doing.

jmr40
August 19, 2012, 03:53 PM
Remington has documented problems with their trigger going back to 1946 when the engineer (Mike Walker) who designed the trigger went to Remington management and proposed a new design. They decided not to make the change.

In that time there have been somewhere between 5,000-10,000 (depending on whose source you believe) reported incidents of Remingtons firing without the trigger being pulled. Remington managment used to keep records, but they conviently decided they need some extra file space and destroyed all the records about 30 years ago.

there has never been a single reported case of a 700 going off spontaneously, it may have fired if dropped on a hard surface with the safety off but there is no such gun that has ever just gone off of it's own accord.




I've got one that has done it on more than one occasion. The trigger has never been modified since leaving the factory and it was as clean as is possible to keep a trigger mechanism. See the paragraph above. There are lots of others.

I am going to wave the big red BS flag on this one.

Remington's rebuttal to the hatchet job:

http://gunblog.com/remingtons-respon...gton-700-story

Remingtons rebuttal was carefully scripted by company lawyers. Lawyers spend years in school learning how to not tell the truth without crossing the line into a lie. This is a perfect example.

Which remingtons went off like this?

Any Remington bolt action rifle made from 1946-2007 could do it at any time, or may never do it. Remington changed to almost the exact trigger in 2007 that was proposed by Mike Walker in 1946.

I've owned 2 700's, 2 788's and am about to own a 722. I have NEVER had one go off by it's self either. Probably someone adjusted the trigger down to nothing which the factory trigger isn't designed for, or is scapegoating Remington for their own mistake.

Improperly adjusting the trigger, or having a dirty trigger improves the odds of it happening. But there are too many cases of perfectly clean, unmodifed triggers doing this to blame all the problems on the shooters. Just because it never happened to you proves nothing. I've never been struck by lightening, but I know it happens.

OK, lets take the case where the round went though the camper injuring the child..............what would happen if that rifle was pointed up and down range like it was suppose to be...... no injury, no property damage.



Partially correct. If my gun fires, whether I pull the trigger or not I am responsible for where the bullet goes. If the gun fires because of a factory defect, that is on the company who made the rifle. There is no safe direction for an accidential discharge. Even if the gun had been pointed up would it have made the mother feel better if it had come down and hit another hunter 2 miles away. Just an incident happened a few months ago when an Amish girl was killed when a shooter fired his muzzle loader into the air in order to unload his gun. A shot fired into the ground can ricochett or fragment injuring others in the area. In fact the bullet that hit the boy struck the trailer twice changing direction each time before hitting her son. It may well have done the same thing if it had gone off pointing down into the ground in front of her. Even if her son had been standing behind her. There is no way to predict where a bullet will end up when it ricochets.

But, I have read that the 'improved' bolt is still subject to unwanted firings.


I have heard of no problems with the new trigger doing this unless it was perfectly clear that the owner had modifed the trigger. You do sometimes hear of ANYgun doing this if the trigger is improperly modified. Remington is the only design that has a habit of doing it on it's own. And the evidence is overwhelming.

This isn't something new, lots of guys are blaming CNBC of a hatchet job, but anyone who wasn't fully aware of Remingtons problems at least 30 years ago is either just getting into shooting or has been living under a rock for 30 years.

GeauxTide
August 19, 2012, 04:02 PM
I'm with KRAGWY. I've owned a bunch of 700s and 788s dating back to 1972. I still own 2 700s and 2 788s and have never had a misfire of any kind.

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 04:14 PM
jmr40, you are lumping the 788's with the 700's and 722's? It's not the same trigger group.

tahunua001
August 19, 2012, 04:21 PM
so JMR40, you mean to tell me that you had a remington 700 that magically went off on it's own without any outside stimuli?

warbirdlover
August 19, 2012, 04:57 PM
I've got a new SPS with the X-Mark Pro trigger. Mine is crisp and after setting the pull (per their instructions) to 3-1/2 lbs works just fine. I think the tinkerers are at fault with that issue.

ligonierbill
August 19, 2012, 07:02 PM
Personal experience: I have a Remington 700 that has discharged when the safety has been moved to "Fire". It's a fairly early 7 mm Mag that my Dad bought used for an Idaho elk hunt. I had the "recall" modification done by a gunsmith, allowing the bolt to be opened without releasing the safety. But, sometimes, if you pull the trigger with the safety engaged, then release the safety, the firing pin will drop. Why? Well, in this case, the first owner f...ooled with the trigger. The sealant is scraped off, and the tension screw is backed out as far as it will go. It was long ago, as I tried to tighten it and found it frozen. My solution will be to replace the trigger. However, I don't think it is an inherently bad design. But an incompetent (my Dad would say "shoemaker") messing with the trigger is bad juju. My more recent acquisition 700 is flawless.

PawPaw
August 19, 2012, 07:07 PM
what is it with Remingtons?

Nothing, really. They've made millions of them and the vast majority of Remington shooters are very pleased with their rifles. I've got a couple in the locker that have given me nary a problem.

jmr40
August 19, 2012, 08:28 PM
The Remington trigger used prior to 2007 is far different from any other trigger on any other gun design. It is overly complex and prone to failure. Read this. It is one of the better explainations.

http://www.rifflawfirm.com/areas/pdf/remington4.pdf

I'm not a Remington hater. I have several, but I know what can happen with them. The odds of it happening are rare. Most folks can own a rifle for a lifetime and never see a problem. Especially with guns made after 1982. Most of the issues happen with older guns. Mine is a 1974 rifle. Even though I've personally seen it happen, I wouldn't let that stop me from buying a Remington if they were making something I wanted. They are not currently however.

Remington claims, truthfully I believe, that they have never had a gun malfunction unless it had been tampered with or unless it were dirty. There are 2 problems with that. #1, it is impossible to inspect a Remington trigger, let alone clean it. All those tiny, complex parts with close tolerences are fully enclosed.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.quarterbore.com/images/rem700trigger.gif&imgrefurl=http://forum.ih8mud.com/hunting-fishing/425093-rem-700-issues-3.html&h=491&w=317&sz=18&tbnid=w2wVUhQ131gcUM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=59&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dremington%2B700%2Btrigger%2Bdiagram%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=remington+700+trigger+diagram&usg=__IkOszDpbgPPWYtClJaOh_dvEPfo=&docid=2zd4AR7esJ0MdM&sa=X&ei=aJAxULPeBI2I9QStsIHoAw&ved=0CGUQ9QEwCg&dur=234

http://s1129.photobucket.com/albums/m513/jmr40/?action=view&current=003-2.jpg

As opposed to other guns open designs which can be inspected and cleaned.

http://s1129.photobucket.com/albums/m513/jmr40/?action=view&current=006-1.jpg

The other problem is the trigger connector. A good diagram is in the above article. A TINY bit of debris, something no larger than a single grain of unburned powder that gets in between the connector and the actual trigger results in the trigger already being pulled. The guns safety is the only thing holding back the firing pin. When the owner releases the safety the gun could fire instantly, or several seconds later. If you have a round chambered, and the safety off it could fire at any time, even if you are not touching the gun.

This is the reason Remington changed their safety design in 1982. On older guns the safety locked the bolt down. You had to move the safety to the fire position in order to get a chambered round out. On newer guns you can open the bolt and remove a chambered round with the gun on safe. Remington knew very well there was potential for serious problems. This does not address the issue, but does make it far less likely for a gun to discharge.

It is almost impossible to duplicate because as soon as that tiny spec of debris falls out, often from the recoil of the shot, the problem goes away and will often never happen again.

While Remington blames the owners for not keeping their guns clean, they design a complex fully enclosed trigger that is impossible to clean. Something as small as a single grain of powder could make the gun dangerous, while any other gun would still function with a handful of mud in the trigger mechanism. The new 2007 trigger does away with the connector. Just as Mike Walker strongly urged Remongton to do back in the 40's.

geetarman
August 19, 2012, 08:41 PM
I have two M700s and have never had a problem with either.

4runnerman
August 19, 2012, 08:43 PM
I am most definetly not a remmy guy. Savage all the way, But i do know lots of people that are remmy guys. I have never seen one go off by mistake either. Im with the others here,,Im going with a big BS on this one

coyota1
August 19, 2012, 09:01 PM
Well, I am baffled by all the conflicting info. I've been a fan of Remington for there accuracy (varmint calibers), I have owned several, and I am probably going to buy a very nice 722. And I will repeat, I have never had one go off like some of those who claim it did.

allaroundhunter
August 19, 2012, 09:15 PM
When Remington kept getting reports of this happening, they offered to take a look at the guns and tried to mimic the malfunction that caused the supposed AD. Hardly any of the guns that were claimed to have problems were actually sent in, and of those that were, not a single one could be made to discharge without the trigger being pulled. There was video evidence of some of the tests, and you can watch some of them. Some users claimed that closing the bolt too hard caused an AD, but when a rifle with that "defect" was sent in, the bolt was rammed home over and over and nothing happened. While AD's do happen, they are not as widespread as many will have you believe.

I fully believe that JMR40 has problems with his, but if I was him, I would at least call Remington to give them a chance to fix it (on their dime).

That being said, I absolutely love my Remington 700. For a long range target gun, it is hard to beat. Now, don't take me for a fan boy, I also enjoy my Savage, and it is my big game and hog gun.

Sent from my HTC One X

Scott429
August 19, 2012, 09:27 PM
accidents happen, equipment fails, welcome to the real world. I have seen a few oops happen, the men say my bad and dont let it happen again. The rest say it was the guns fault and bash the manufacturer or some other excuse. Yes there have been unintended discharges but they are exteremly rare with the major manufacturers and unmodified firearms. The press seems to feed off of this sort of thing and hypes the crap out of it. I have made a few mistakes in my life but I blame nothing and no one but myself.

guf
August 19, 2012, 09:54 PM
Search Rem. Walker trigger and come to an INFORMED conclusion after seeing/reading all the all that is presented! jmr40 tells it like it is

BIG P
August 20, 2012, 12:23 AM
My 700 has k's & k's of rounds fired,No problems in 35 years.
I'D buy one now if it was a good deal.

old roper
August 20, 2012, 07:24 AM
Here is something from Remington

http://www.drinnonlaw.com/docs/Remington-79-80-Memo.pdf

JimPage
August 20, 2012, 08:28 AM
lognierbill: Pressing the trigger and releasing it then clicking off the safety is dangerous with any gun. That is taught in the Hunter Education classes that are nationally recognized. I doubt that it is peculiar to Remingtons.

emcon5
August 20, 2012, 10:15 AM
Here is something from Remington

http://www.drinnonlaw.com/docs/Remington-79-80-Memo.pdf

Excerpt:

..a gun capable of being "tricked" into firing when the safety lever is released. "Tricked" in this context means, safety lever placed in between "safe" and "fire" positions, trigger is then pulled, and the safety lever is subsequently moved to the "fire" position and the gun discharges.

So let me get this straight: Some people are really bent because Remington didn't recall 2 million rifles so they could find the ~20,000 that may be susceptible to going off when the trigger is pulled after the rifle is not put on safe. "Between "safe" and "fire" positions" is not on safe.

I also recall from the video, they guy who is came up with the dirty trigger theory has never been able to get a Remington 700 to go off in the conditions he describes. You know, the guy who makes half of his income from testifying against gun companies.

http://www.shedracing.net/misc/bsflag.gifhttp://www.shedracing.net/misc/bsflag.gifhttp://www.shedracing.net/misc/bsflag.gifhttp://www.shedracing.net/misc/bsflag.gifhttp://www.shedracing.net/misc/bsflag.gifhttp://www.shedracing.net/misc/bsflag.gif

Big Shrek
August 20, 2012, 11:29 AM
I've got numerous firearms and NONE of them can be set off by placing them on "Safe", pulling the trigger, then moving the safety lever to "FIRE"
That to me would indicate a faulty design.

Remington is the only MFR that I've run across this particular problem with...

That being said, the Marlin X-7 series is less expensive, Sub-MOA from the box, and hasn't got any dangerous issues...
Heck, I'd even go with Savage or a Japanese Weatherby before I grabbed a Remmy 7-series

emcon5
August 20, 2012, 12:08 PM
I've got numerous firearms and NONE of them can be set off by placing them on "Safe", pulling the trigger, then moving the safety lever to "FIRE"
That to me would indicate a faulty design.

What about halfway between "safe" and "fire"? That is apparently the problem here.

Bart B.
August 20, 2012, 12:29 PM
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/10/21/my-take-on-remington-under-fire/

I knew a Remington field rep years ago that quit Remington in the 1970's over the Rem. 700 trigger problems not being properly addressed; he started his own gun shop business. It's also why he used a Win. 70 action to shoot matches.

As usual, when something goes bad with anything, there'll be countless numbers of people using the same "thing" without incident. A 1/10th percent failure rate does not include every "thing" made. It means that 1 in 1,000 "things" will probably go bad. If there's 10,000 "things," 10 of them will go bad. If someones' use of "things" without problems gets them to belive it happened somewhere outside their environment is BS, their reasoning's flawed. Proof of this is they don't know their reasoning's flawed.

The issue at hand is, nobody knows when their "thing" may go bad when others with that "thing" have had it go bad; it might be tomorrow or 93 years from now or in 10 operations from now or maybe 7,654 times from now. So folks get to decide what their own margin of safety is and whether or not they'll accept the consequences.

Friend of mine had mentioned to his daughter and son in law they really should wear seatbelts in their car. Both told my friend the odds were in their favor of surviving. A few days later, they rolled their car; both were ejected. Only his daughter survived but stayed alive hospitalized for about a month before passing.

Big Shrek
August 20, 2012, 12:32 PM
What about halfway between "safe" and "fire"? That is apparently the problem here.

Technically, that shouldn't happen either...it should either be ON or OFF...
shouldn't be any stop at Halfway...it ain't a half-cock like on a lever-action ;)

Also shouldn't fire when you close the bolt...which is another issue Remmy seems to have in several models...

coyota1
August 20, 2012, 12:44 PM
Providing this document is real, and not fabricated to perpetuate the myth, the 788 and the 722 are not mentioned.

emcon5
August 20, 2012, 12:46 PM
Technically, that shouldn't happen either...it should either be ON or OFF...
shouldn't be any stop at Halfway

There isn't a stop, a Rem 700 Safety is 2 position.

Chettt
August 20, 2012, 04:30 PM
I don't like NBC, lawyers or antigun people but I believe Remington built a wonderful rifle that has a safety issue and should have fixed it. Any hunting rifle that is used only two weeks a year will last two, three maybe four hundred years. How many people are going to own this rifle and fully understand how the safety works? As the rifle ages, will there be an increase in these accidental discharges? Are there decades of complaints of Lee Enfields, Mosin's etc. discharging while bumping the bolt or taking off the safety?

emcon5
August 20, 2012, 05:34 PM
I believe Remington built a wonderful rifle that has a safety issue and should have fixed it

Then you need to re-read the "smoking gun" posted by old roper above. The claim seems to be that "if you do something to you rifles it was not designed to do, pull the trigger with the safety positioned somewhere between "safe" and "fire", 1% of them might go off if you put it to fire"

And an ambulance-chaser-paid-expert-witness came up with the theory that if somehow dirt gets inside your trigger in exactly the right place, under the disconnector, it could go off, even though he has never actually got a Rem 700 to go off this way, or found one that conclusively had.

Unless there is more damning evidence that this or what was in he MSNBC piece, I am going to continue to call this BS.

gaseousclay
August 20, 2012, 07:38 PM
i'm curious. a lot of you seem to defend Remington and their faulty triggers like it's not an issue. some of you also state that other gun manufacturers inevitably have the same issue. i've never heard of any other firearm company that has had 'accidental' discharges with their rifles due to trigger design flaws. user error maybe, but not because of a flaw. are there any statistics available that show fatalities caused by gun discharges by companies other than Remington?

coyota1
August 20, 2012, 08:25 PM
i'm curious. a lot of you seem to defend Remington and their faulty triggers like it's not an issue

Because a lot of us own Remington rifles which includes me, and have not had the problems with triggers. I'm not convinced at all that the trigger groups are faulty. I do NOT believe the charges anymore than I believe in the tooth fairy. Not until I hear or see something concrete, empirical, or believable.

tahunua001
August 20, 2012, 08:34 PM
I'm with Coyota1. there has not been a single bit of solid evidence that these malfunctions are not user error rather than faulty design. that is like saying that glocks are notorious for accidental discharge because of their design rather than the fact that the knuckleheads with the ADs were doing something they weren't supposed to at the time.

.300 Weatherby Mag
August 20, 2012, 09:01 PM
I've got a new SPS with the X-Mark Pro trigger. Mine is crisp and after setting the pull (per their instructions) to 3-1/2 lbs works just fine. I think the tinkerers are at fault with that issue.

I have a 700, that I bought new that came with the Walker Trigger.. With a completely unmodified trigger, it would fire when you took the safety off... I've never seen another rifle did it, nor have any of my other Remington 700s done this... Remington replaced the walker trigger with the X-Mark Pro, piece of crap... Remington admitted no fault, but did replace the trigger at no charge... AND NO MY FINGER WASN'T ANYWHERE NEAR THE TRIGGER WHEN I TOOK THE SAFETY OFF!!!

jmr40
August 20, 2012, 09:04 PM
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/_Documentaries_Specials/Remington_Under_Fire/Documents/Rem_Doc_07.pdf

Here is a letter from Remington's repair facility admitting that they were able to reproduce the problem.

More evidence

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/_Documentaries_Specials/Remington_Under_Fire/Documents/Rem_Doc_08.pdf

Of 133 Remington 700's sent in that year Remingtons own people could get 89 of them to fire without pulling the trigger.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/_Documentaries_Specials/Remington_Under_Fire/Documents/Rem_Doc_09.pdf

Mike Walkers 1948 letter urging Remington to change the trigger.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/_Documentaries_Specials/Remington_Under_Fire/Documents/Rem_Doc_03.pdf

A 1947 letter from engineers advising Remington management of a dangerous trigger

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/_Documentaries_Specials/Remington_Under_Fire/Documents/Rem_Doc_02.pdf

Another letter from Mike Walker advising Remington management of a dangerous situation.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/_Documentaries_Specials/Remington_Under_Fire/Documents/Rem_Doc_06.pdf

Various customer complaints

jmr40
August 20, 2012, 09:22 PM
Just to make sure others understand my intentions. I'm not a Remington hater. I am not advocating anyone boycott the company. Current Remington management did not cause this problem. They inherited it from a management group that no longer works there and where most, if not all are dead now.

The guys who are burying their heads in the sand and refuse to see the obvious are going to get someone killed by just not simply addressing the issue. I've known about this issue since the late 70's when Remington was hit with a flurry of lawsuits resulting in them changing the safety so the gun could be unloaded with it in the "safe" position. There were Programs on TV back then just like the CNBC program. The CNBC program broke no new ground and did not report a single fact that had not been common knowledge for 30 years and well known within Remington management for over 60 years.

Even Remington ran full page ads in the shooting and hunting magazines urging Remingon owners to send in their rifles to be retro-fitted with the new safety. Yet some guys seem to think that CNBC is trying to do a hatchet job on your favorite gun company.

If I can just get one knucklehead to understand that a Remington can quite possibly discharge on it's own might save one persons life. And you had better believe it is possible. Clueless people who simply ignore the problem give a false sense of security. I own Remingtons and if they ever make something else I like I'll buy another. But you better believe that they get carried with an extra measure of caution. As long as you understand the problem is extremely rare, but extremely real, and if extra caution is used you'll be fine.

emcon5
August 20, 2012, 10:00 PM
i'm curious. a lot of you seem to defend Remington and their faulty triggers like it's not an issue

What evidence you have that the triggers are faulty?

If there is some actual evidence, I will be happy to change my opinion, but lacking anything at all, the only "fault" I can find is that any moron with a small screwdriver can monkey with them and make them unsafe.

One of mine (early 1980s BDL) was like that when I got it. Way too light, way too little sear engagement. It has since been fixed, and I can beat on the rifle with a rubber mallet with the rifle cocked and safety off without it going off.

Here is a letter from Remington's repair facility admitting that they were able to reproduce the problem.Well, they could reproduce a problem, but they don't specify what the problem they could reproduce was. The listed problem on the both rifles was a binding firing pin head, and the 600 had a binding safety. What exactly was the symptom those rifles were returned for? Binding firing pins were pretty much the opposite of rifles firing uncommanded, aren't they?

Of 133 Remington 700's sent in that year Remingtons own people could get 89 of them to fire without pulling the trigger.No. "Unable to duplicate" means they could not get the rifle to go off. Of the 133 complaints 44 were verified, but there is no info in that document as to what those complaints were. They had ~75 reports of 700s going off by themselves (which I admit seems high) that they could not duplicate, the other unable to duplicate problems were different.

Mike Walkers 1948 letter urging Remington to change the trigger.

I can hardly read that, but OK. I agree, A trigger block on the safety is a good idea. It does not automatically mean that a safety without a trigger block is defective.

That being said, the old 700 safety design that locked the bolt was stupid.

A 1947 letter from engineers advising Remington management of a dangerous trigger Actually, that says some of the parts are "out of design limits", which "can be be very dangerous from a safety and functional point of view" Were there any follow on memos that either the design limits were revised to meet the out-of-spec parts, or were the parts inspected and improved so they meet the specs?

Another letter from Mike Walker advising Remington management of a dangerous situation.Which he fixed: "This change will be incorporated in the drawing as soon as tool procurement is completed". It is also referring to the 721 trigger, which predates the Remington 700.

Various customer complaints

What were the results of those complaints? What did Remington find when they inspected the rifles?

If I can just get one knucklehead to understand that a Remington can quite possibly discharge on it's own might save one persons life.

You should be getting the knuckleheads to understand that any firearm is potentially dangerous, and mechanical safeties do not cancel out the need for basic firearms safety. Any of those tragedies could have been averted by application of Rule # 2: "Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy."

Clark
August 20, 2012, 11:58 PM
I am nobody, so nothing can happen to me from badmouthing Rem700 actions, unlike Jack Belk, "past president of the American Custom Gunmaker's Guild".
You may remember his posting on AR last decade as "J Belk".

My schpeal contains only one complaint about the safety:
One can modify a Rem700 to try to bring it up to Win M70 standards:
1) Glue a shroud to the receiver to get a flat receiver bottom to resist bullet twist torque.
2) Get a Sako extractor modification to replace weak extractor with a bigger extractor.
3) Safety blocks trigger, not firing pin..... Gentry 3 position safety on firing pin
4) Recoil lug not attached... drill lug and receiver and then pin together.
5) Barrel may shake loose, apply glue. Vaughn also has proposed Rem700 design change.
6) Bolt handle soldered on and will break off, TIG weld on handle stronger
7) Not controlled feed... no cure
8) Plunger ejector instead of knife blade ejector... no cure
9) Failed case head shoots shooter in the eye with gas... wear eye protection

What does it all mean?
Rem 700 is the most stripped down nothing of a bolt action available. Of ~ 100 actions with the Rem700 at one end of the spectrum and custom Mausers [M70 parts added] at the other, all of the other actions in between are a trade off between the expensive to manufacture Mauser and the cheap to manufacture Rem700.

What does this mean to you?
The Rem700 action is so cheap to make, they can afford a better barrel.
So for the same price, the Rem700 is more accurate.

No one I know of uses Rem700 for dangerous game, but with eye protection, it may be the best choice for ground squirrels.

nimbleVagrant
August 21, 2012, 01:08 AM
Doesn't the Army and Marine Corps use the 700 action on dangerous game?

mete
August 21, 2012, 01:33 AM
:D Yes they use it as a sniper rifle !! I don't know what trigger is used though.

J.Belk -I couldn't remember the name when I posted before .Not considered credible by most gunsmiths.

Safe on - pull trigger - fires as safety is put OFF. I've seen this in 22 pistols ,the first was my own !! These were not defective design but incorrect dimension parts .It gets your attention !

Bart B.
August 21, 2012, 06:14 AM
Doesn't the Army and Marine Corps use the 700 action on dangerous game? Yes, and so did the USN and USAF snipers back in the late '60's and '70's. But the 700 was not the choice of the best shots and most knowledgeable folks in bolt action rifle action quality and reliability in any of these services; 700's had (and still do, for the most part) too many shortcommings. For example....

* Twists too much in epoxy bedding for 30 caliber rounds; shoot loose and accuracy drops off. Two military rifle teams tried using 1 to 2 inch long recoil lugs to keep it from twisting from barrel torque, but they didn't improve things very much.

* Unreliable extractor, problems feeding from the magazine in rapid fire and inconsistant trigger pulls.

* Not a very stiff action.

Knowledgable shooters in the services preferred the Winchester 70; its action was much better in all these areas besides being about 2.5 times stiffer. But alas, Winchester was in dire straits financially in the 1960's and the military folks holding the purse strings didn't think such a company should make the "new" sniper rifles for the services.

old roper
August 21, 2012, 06:35 AM
Here is good article on the M700 vs M70

http://yarchive.net/gun/rifle/remington700.html

Read all the upper articles then go down to posting from Gale McMillan that actually was building rifles and see what he talking about.

What real interesting that Bart B and the others didn't take him up on his 50K bet.

This is small clip on his bet from Gale McMillan post

"If that doesn't covince you maybe we can arrange a little shoot
off for say $50,000 winner take all"

gaseousclay
August 21, 2012, 07:11 AM
What evidence you have that the triggers are faulty?

If there is some actual evidence, I will be happy to change my opinion, but lacking anything at all, the only "fault" I can find is that any moron with a small screwdriver can monkey with them and make them unsafe.

I don't get it. there's documented video footage of US military test firing these rifles and they went off from just touching the bolt. there also seem to be several people here that have had similar discharges happen with their Remingtons. So are you calling these people liars because you view it as a smear against Remington? If you personally haven't had any problems, good for you, but it sounds like you're trivializing the matter

emcon5
August 21, 2012, 09:09 AM
documented video footage of US military test firing these rifles and they went off from just touching the bolt.

No, there is a video of some unknown dude in generic Camo with a black ball cap and blurred face. I would bet $100 that rifle did not leave the factory like that. What was found when the rifle was inspected by Remington?

And you know what, give me a couple hours with a jewelers screwdriver and I bet I could get my 700 to do the same thing. Monkeying with the easily monkeyed-with 700 trigger does not mean it is defective, and with zero context, that video isn't all that meaningful.

There is also a memo from the Marines telling units not to mess with the trigger adjustments, followed by an order for a bunch more rifles.

allaroundhunter
August 21, 2012, 09:25 AM
I don't get it. there's documented video footage of US military test firing these rifles and they went off from just touching the bolt. there also seem to be several people here that have had similar discharges happen with their Remingtons. So are you calling these people liars because you view it as a smear against Remington? If you personally haven't had any problems, good for you, but it sounds like you're trivializing the matter

These were with triggers that were modified by soldiers in-country. Since this happened, the rifles were returned to Remington and the problem was that the triggers were modified in ways that they were not intended to be. With the proper trigger, the same rifles that had previously had problems could not be made to discharge on accident by any means. Since orders have been not to tinker with the M700 trigger, there have been 0 reports of ADs coming back from overseas.

The whole problem with the trigger is that people who don't know what they are doing try to "make it better" and make it dangerous instead. It is not the fault of the rifle, it is the fault of the operator.

coyota1
August 21, 2012, 10:10 AM
The whole problem with the trigger is that people who don't know what they are doing try to "make it better" and make it dangerous instead. It is not the fault of the rifle, it is the fault of the operator.

This is the core of the problem I believe. Military snipers do not have halos around there heads anymore than civilians. They are "gun nuts" also, (I will include myself in this category) and will go to extremes to get that edge in accuracy. These trigger groups although adjustable, are not designed to be target triggers, but are being used for this purpose. For a little over $100, get a timney, and then set it below 3 lbs.

jmr40
August 21, 2012, 12:33 PM
there has not been a single bit of solid evidence that these malfunctions are not user error rather than faulty design.

It is these type of posts that bother me. Some folks might actually believe them and get into trouble.

I've provided PROOF that Remington engineers found the trigger was faulty as far back as the 1940's.

I've provided PROOF that 152 rifles were returned to Remington in 1980 complaining of guns firing on their own. Remington found that 55 of the total did it for them, they were unable to make the other 97 do it. ( I did misread the chart on my earlier post). Just because Remington could not duplicate the problem, does not mean it didn't happen. But anyway you look at it this is 55 confirmed incidents, verified by Remington technicians, just in 1 year. If that is a typical year that would be at least 3500 such incidents over the life of the trigger design.

Since the 1950's Remington has been sued over 75 times. To the best of my knowledge they have never prevailed. Either losing the suit or settling before.

This is not a witch hunt by a TV network. The problem has been around since TV was in its infancy, long before CNBC existed.

How many times has Winchester, Ruger, Savage, or Weatherby been sued? Why is it that no one ever blames ANY other gun of firing on its own? To believe that there is no faulty trigger, the only other conclusion is that Remington owners are the dumbest gun owners on the planet. I know a lot of Remington gun owners and I don't buy that theory.

ligonierbill
August 21, 2012, 12:39 PM
For JimPage, and others wanting "the rest of the story", I killed my first elk with this 700 on a snowy day the weekend after Thanksgiving in Idaho. Late hunt, cow tag. Long shot, but the cow went down kicking. So, we hike over, rifle slung and a fresh cartridge in the chamber. She's done, so time to unload and get to work. This is the old safety - release to open the chamber. Bang! Hmmm...I wasn't near the trigger. Did have gloves on, though...maybe. Glad I followed my hunter safety and had the muzzle in a safe position. So, I get back to work on Monday and start telling the story, and the guy finishes it for me. Not you, it's the gun, says he. So, that's when I started pressing the trigger with the safety on, then releasing the safety, with, you know, an empty chamber. Repeat, empty chamber. Fast forward to 2010, and my brother is carrying the rifle on a snowy day in Colorado. (Some of you may remember 2nd rifle season that year - harsh.) Warned him to stay away from the trigger, and I think he did. Still, he had to flip off the safety. Bang! Again, muzzle safe, but big brother has to truck on over there to see his elk. No elk. So, folks, it can happen.

I need to emphasize that some fool fooled with the trigger on this one. It's not set super light, but looks to be too light. Note the common element of cold and snowy, however. I'm keeping the rifle, but it's getting a new trigger. If you have an older 700, be real careful about adjusting the trigger pull. There are good instructions on the net.

emcon5
August 21, 2012, 01:31 PM
I've provided PROOF that Remington engineers found the trigger was faulty as far back as the 1940's.No. You provided a memo that some of the parts are "out of design limits". That is not the same thing as a faulty design, no matter how much you claim it is.

I've provided PROOF that 152 rifles were returned to Remington in 1980 complaining of guns firing on their own.No. You provided proof that 152 rifles were returned to Remington for safety problems. The only problems that were specified were the ones that could not be duplicated.

Remington found that 55 of the total did it for them, they were unable to make the other 97 do it. ( I did misread the chart on my earlier post). Just because Remington could not duplicate the problem, does not mean it didn't happen. But anyway you look at it this is 55 confirmed incidents, verified by Remington technicians, just in 1 year. If that is a typical year that would be at least 3500 such incidents over the life of the trigger design.No. You provided a document that stated of 133 rifles returned they could confirm the problems of 44 of them, but there is no information what those 44 reported problems were, nor is there any indication of what the root cause of the problem was. It could be that all 44 failed the "Trick" test, or that all 44 had triggers that were monkeyed with by the end user. I would guess that the details are in the "Attached Letter" mentioned in the document.

If I was a cynic I would guess that letter was not included by the MSNBC because it didn't support their thesis.

Clark
August 21, 2012, 01:39 PM
nimbleVagrant

Doesn't the Army and Marine Corps use the 700 action on dangerous game?

I have read a post by Bart Bobbitt a long time ago, that explained what happened that resulted in Rem700 Rifles going to the military for snipers.

2004 rec.guns

Winchester was going
through dire financial straits in the 1960s. Although the competitive
shooters liked the Winchester and well knew its advantages over the
Remington, the militay brass watching everybody's finances and
business outlook - chose Remington. I talked with one of the Navy
guys who went to the Pentagon to discuss all these things and he said
it was a real dog fight among those hammering out the details of the
choice for the next standard issue sniper rifle for the US armed
forces.

gaseousclay
August 21, 2012, 02:27 PM
How many times has Winchester, Ruger, Savage, or Weatherby been sued? Why is it that no one ever blames ANY other gun of firing on its own? To believe that there is no faulty trigger, the only other conclusion is that Remington owners are the dumbest gun owners on the planet. I know a lot of Remington gun owners and I don't buy that theory.

this was essentially the same question I asked in my ealier post. I have yet to see any reports or statistical data that shows guns discharging on their own from other companies besides Remington. It's strange to me how defensive people seem to be getting when someone criticizes Remington....as if someone just called their mother a whore. there have already been a couple of you that clearly state you've experienced your Remington going off without being anywhere near the trigger, yet, people still see fit to attribute it to 'user error.' I call this head-in-the-sand' syndrome

coyota1
August 21, 2012, 03:20 PM
"It's strange to me how defensive people seem to be getting when someone criticizes Remington....as if someone just called their mother a whore".

It's like calling my favorite rifle a whore. Regarding the triggers that malfunctioned, the trigger groups were either tampered with, or in very bad condition. Any machine will fail if you don't keep up your end.

emcon5
August 21, 2012, 04:29 PM
It has nothing to do with being defensive, and it really has nothing to do with Remington. It has to do with calling BS what it is, BS.

It comes from a complete lack of respect for a network with a history of bias (http://www.nraila.org/138269), who had their conclusion (gun company= BAD! ) before they even bothered to start their so-called "investigative journalism" and only chose to present information that supported their thesis.

To state that Remington rifles must be bad because they have been sued a bunch of times is laughable, as is the claim that other gun companies have not been sued. This is America, where meritless lawsuits are a billion dollar industry.

Companies settle all the time when they are in the right because it is cheaper than fighting, even if they win. It is a business decision.

Clark
August 21, 2012, 05:02 PM
If I can adjust a trigger engagement as small as I want, and there is a trigger safety, I can make the rifle go off when the safety to put on and then is taken off.

Does anyone think I can't?

All I need is a big screw driver to get the stock off and a little screw driver for the trigger and a lawyer to sue.

Art Eatman
August 21, 2012, 09:20 PM
Enough. I have no doubt that this, the umpteenth iteration on this subject, will be repeated before long...