The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Tactical Rifle & Carbine => Topic started by: ZRow1 on October 11, 2010, 08:59:24 PM
-
"REMINGTON Model 700 UNDER FIRE: A CNBC INVESTIGATION"
One-Hour Documentary Reported by CNBC’s Senior Correspondent Scott Cohn to Premiere on CNBC on Wednesday, October 20th at 9PM ET/PT
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/10/11/cnbc-presents-%E2%80%9Cremington-under-fire-a-cnbc-investigation%E2%80%9D/67474
-
FTA;
"This CNBC Original documentary examines allegations that the Remington Model 700- series hunting rifle is prone to firing without pulling the trigger, and that its manufacturer, Remington, has been aware of this concern for almost 60 years."
WTF ? ?
Slow news week ?
-
FTA;
"This CNBC Original documentary examines allegations that the Remington Model 700- series hunting rifle is prone to firing without pulling the trigger, and that its manufacturer, Remington, has been aware of this concern for almost 60 years."
WTF ? ?
Slow news week ?
The Walker Fire Control Group has cost Remington Arms literally tens of millions of dollars, mostly when they were owned by Du Pont. Companies with deep pockets are always more lucrative come law suit time. The largest settlement was in the Luis case which $17,000,000.00 ($17 MILLION), was awarded.
http://www.mmmpalaw.com/CM/Custom/case7.asp
Monsees Miller Mayer Presley & Amick are a real good ambulance chaser firm who has a good track record in milking large jury settlements for people who drew blood out of their own stupidity with this weapon. If you follow all of the rules of gun safety, not one single injury would have occurred. Never point the gun at anything you do not intend to destroy!, has no bearing in a courtroom when an idiot mother shoots and kills her son with a weapon she never should have laid her hands on in the first place. Trial lawyers get around that by simply asking, "What is a safe direction to have a weapon pointed when it accidentally discharges?" If you read the particulars of many of these cases, a number of these accidents happened with the weapon being unloaded or loaded indoors. In over 40 years of shooting I have NEVER loaded or unloaded a hunting or target weapon inside my home. A self defense weapon is another story, and even then they'll be loaded outside. Even if and when I have to check the chambering of a handload, I always do it outside with the rifle, handgun, or shotgun pointed straight up into the air. There was simply no excuse for any of these accidents other than pure carelessness. I may sound harsh, but I've never advocated awarding people for being stupid and careless regardless of how tragic the outcome.
http://pagunowners.tripod.com/public/gunsafety.html
I have 4 Remington Model 700's in calibers from .22-250 up to and including .458 Winchester Magnum, and a Remington XP-100 Pistol in .35 Remington. Every one of them was purchased between 1972 and 1985. I've fired thousands of handloads, as well as factory loads through them without a single mishap or "accidental discharge". With that said I never use the safety on any rifle I've ever owned. I've always felt that was MY responsibility, not the responsibility of a stamped piece of sheet metal. Regardless of how it was designed. Bill T.
-
Bill
While I don't disagree with you in principle, well.........
I know nothing more than scuttlebutt on the Rem 700. I would still buy one tomorrow. If they were all that fubared, we'd have probably heard about it. Still, as far as never loading a weapon indoors? Please ::). We've all done it, and will continue to do so. Yes, I clean and reload my Glock in the house. Same with my SD shotty. No, I don't load my target and range guns inside. They aren't loaded till I hit the field/range/skeet range. My carry weapon? That's a different animal. I think others will agree.
FQ13
-
Still, as far as never loading a weapon indoors? We've all done it, and will continue to do so.
FQ13
It's a habit I've never gotten into. Besides a Remington 700 would make about the poorest excuse for a self defense gun on the planet. With that said, why would anyone want to load / unload one inside a house? Bill T.
-
In over 40 years of shooting I have NEVER loaded or unloaded a hunting or target weapon inside my home. A self defense weapon is another story, and even then they'll be loaded outside. Even if and when I have to check the chambering of a handload, I always do it outside with the rifle, handgun, or shotgun pointed straight up into the air.
Still, as far as never loading a weapon indoors? Please ::). We've all done it, and will continue to do so. Yes, I clean and reload my Glock in the house. Same with my SD shotty. . . . My carry weapon? That's a different animal. I think others will agree.
FQ13
Bill, no sweat. FQ apparently didn't read your post, simply reacted to it. You clearly distinguished between SD and hunting guns. And it is a good habit - for those who can - to unload and reload a weapon outside. Many of us can't as a neighbor would call the cops. If I have to reload a firearm, I do it in the lower level, with nothing but dirt on the other side of the wall.
And unloading and reloading a Glock in a house? Remind me to stay away from FLA when FQ is "cleaning" his guns. Ain't the Glocks the ones you have to pull the trigger to take down for cleaning?
-
Bill, no sweat. FQ apparently didn't read your post, simply reacted to it. You clearly distinguished between SD and hunting guns. And it is a good habit - for those who can - to unload and reload a weapon outside. Many of us can't as a neighbor would call the cops. If I have to reload a firearm, I do it in the lower level, with nothing but dirt on the other side of the wall.
And unloading and reloading a Glock in a house? Remind me to stay away from FLA when FQ is "cleaning" his guns. Ain't the Glocks the ones you have to pull the trigger to take down for cleaning?
Actually Path, in the spirit of board comaraderie, I will give your cheap (well, inexpensive, or maybe just slightly discounted) shot a pass. ;D Because honestly, Glocks did used to be dangerous in that regard. (As a side note, I have lived in too many apartments to take "outside" cleaning" areas for granted. Now, I have a garage).
On to the danger bit. Back in the day, late '80s to mid '90s, the Glock factory box came with a stud in the bottom. You were supposed to dry fire the pistol, locking the trigger back, and then fit the gun onto the stud, with the deppressed trigger allowing the guard to accomodate the stud. :o Obviously, the inevitable happened. I shared a house with a veteran DC cop. We were cleaning guns, he put his issue G-19 away, and BLAM! an ND. Scared us both to death (no alchohol involved, though lots afterward). Thing is, outside is better. Inside, is where most of us deal with our carry guns. Not trying to start a war here, just saying that how you deal with you deer gun/skeet gun, is different than day to day on a carry piece. We don't all have big back yards. If a twenty year veteran cop who was a gun guy can screw up with an idiot proof weapon, so can we. Lesson learned. Still, we deal with less than ideal circumstances. That's all I'm sayin'.
FQ13
-
I have a 700 BDL from that time frame and I do remember seeing a recall notice by Remington in a number of magazines. My rifle was not one of those recalled.
I did get the joy of standing next to a gentleman who's Model 12 decided to slam fire every time he loaded the shotgun on a trap line. After the third BANG he decided that maybe it was not safe to shoot. The gentleman in question had the weapon pointed in a safe direction so only the grass was damaged. That was the only AD I ever witnessed. I have seen several ND's however.
Bill is correct, you can't save folks from stupidity.
-
I have a 700 BDL from that time frame and I do remember seeing a recall notice by Remington in a number of magazines. My rifle was not one of those recalled.
I did get the joy of standing next to a gentleman who's Model 12 decided to slam fire every time he loaded the shotgun on a trap line. After the third BANG he decided that maybe it was not safe to shoot. The gentleman in question had the weapon pointed in a safe direction so only the grass was damaged. That was the only AD I ever witnessed. I have seen several ND's however.
Bill is correct, you can't save folks from stupidity.
I had a Bernadelli that did that. It was a lovely little 20 gauge 26" Italian over under. Straight stock, 5 1/2 pounds, gorgeous. After the 10th box? It went off when it felt like it. After the third time? Gone! There was just something in the design. It was the Fiat of guns. ;D It looked great, but God help you if you needed to use it. :o
FQ13 who still kind of misses it, but wont own a landmine like that :-\
-
And unloading and reloading a Glock in a house? Remind me to stay away from FLA when FQ is "cleaning" his guns. Ain't the Glocks the ones you have to pull the trigger to take down for cleaning?
Nice try. Since the first step in cleaning a firearm is MAKE SURE IT'S UNLOADED, does it matter if you pull the trigger when disassembling it?
-
I clean all of my guns outside on the back patio. Our backyard is block walled in with a locked gate because of our pool, so being viewed by the neighbors is of no great concern. I'm not saying it is stupid to load / unload a self defense weapon in the confines of a home, it is just as easy for me to do it outside. If their ever were an AD on my part, the bullet would contact nothing but atmosphere until it fell back to Earth.
I had an uncle who tried to chamber a friends reloads in his Springfield Sporter in .30-06. They were in the living room. When he went to close the bolt he expected resistance from the rounds not being properly resized. There was none and the heel of his hand slipped off the bolt handle, and his little finger went through the trigger guard and set it off. It only made a neat, little .308 diameter hole right where the wall met the ceiling. On the outside it blew away part of one of the roof trusses where it hung over the eve, and blew plywood sheathing through the shingles. It cost him around $1,500.00 or so in repairs. He had to eat the $1,000.00 deductible. I think the embarrassment was worse. Bill T.
-
North of DC this "Outside" stuff is not practical 6 months out of the year.
Don't know about other states but here a loaded rifle in a car or Off road vehicle is a big NO NO, "Prima Facie" evidence of illegal hunting, so having your Rem 700, (or other deer rifle ) loaded between home and woods is kind of pointless.
Had a Rem 700 in .308, never had any problems.
-
I clean all of my guns outside on the back patio. Our backyard is block walled in with a locked gate because of our pool, so being viewed by the neighbors is of no great concern. I'm not saying it is stupid to load / unload a self defense weapon in the confines of a home, it is just as easy for me to do it outside. If their ever were an AD on my part, the bullet would contact nothing but atmosphere until it fell back to Earth.
I had an uncle who tried to chamber a friends reloads in his Springfield Sporter in .30-06. They were in the living room. When he went to close the bolt he expected resistance from the rounds not being properly resized. There was none and the heel of his hand slipped off the bolt handle, and his little finger went through the trigger guard and set it off. It only made a neat, little .308 diameter hole right where the wall met the ceiling. On the outside it blew away part of one of the roof trusses where it hung over the eve, and blew plywood sheathing through the shingles. It cost him around $1,500.00 or so in repairs. He had to eat the $1,000.00 deductible. I think the embarrassment was worse. Bill T.
Firing into the air might not be the best idea either.
The bullet will go up until it's velocity is expended then turn around and come back town...theoretically reaching the same speed it started with on it's way up.
Since it won't be spinning, it won't be stabilized so it won't get going as fast, but it won't be floating down either. It will have enough energy to kill or wound when it hits the ground...where ever that might be.
-
Firing into the air might not be the best idea either. The bullet will go up until it's velocity is expended then turn around and come back town...theoretically reaching the same speed it started with on it's way up.
If a bullet is fired straight up it will decelerate until it reaches the apogee of it's flight. (The highest altitude). It will then begin it's fall back to Earth until it reaches Terminal Velocity. For a human jumping out of an aircraft that is around 125 MPH. For a bullet it might be slightly faster because of it's smaller profile, and the fact lead is more dense than a human body. But in any case it will be FAR LESS than the muzzle velocity it was launched at. Even if it were a 850 FPS, .45 ACP round.
A good example of this were the Apollo Moon Missions. When they fired their Service Module Engine to break out of Lunar orbit, they accelerated to around 4,000 MPH. Then the Moon's gravity began tugging back at them until they broke free, and the Earth's gravity became a greater force causing them to begin accelerating once again. This continued in the vacuum of space until they reached the Earth's atmosphere and impacted into it's outer fringes at around 400,000 feet at 25,000 MPH, (What is known as Escape Velocity). For lack of a better description you could accurately say the Apollo astronauts quite literally fell to Earth from the Moon.
The Earth's atmosphere then began to slow them down until they reached around 420 MPH at 25,000 feet where the main parachutes were deployed slowing them to around 25 MPH until they splashed down on the surface of the ocean. Bottom line is if the chutes failed they would have only hit the water at around 200 MPH. Fatal for sure, but no where near the 25,000 MPH they began reentry at.
This was proven with Soviet astronaut Vladimir Komarov on April 24, 1964 when his parachute failed to open properly during reentry causing him to hit the ground at an estimated 200 MPH, killing him instantly. Bill T.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0114.shtml
-
I have seen this happen, usually due some one monkeying with trigger adjustment, can happen on 1911's too. When ever you get a new gun with a manual safety, make sure it is unloaded, engage the safety, point it in safe direction, pull the trigger hard!! Then still in a safe direction, disengage the safety, many 700's will go bang with and improperly adjusted trigger, if it passes that test, operate the bolt and make sure you slam it home hard, see if the trigger and sear stay engaged, final test, once again, safe direction, on a carpeted floor or a piece of rubber, pound the rifle butt on the ground and see if the sear stays engaged. Most 700's should not be adjusted below 2.5 lbs, especially if you shoot in the summer and hunt in the winter and extreme temperature changed, 2.5 may be 100% at 90 degrees, and unsafe at freezing temps. Do the same safety trigger routine with a 1911, and you might get surprised, safety off, bang.
Another 1911 tip, don't release the slide on an empty magazine, or no magazine, whether it has had trigger work or not, that extra velocity of the slide with no resitance is hard on sear relationships, keep the trigger pulled to engage the disconnector, I do it on loaded guns for the extra safety factor and to protect my trigger jobs, If you have a disconnector problem, it will show up in normal shooting. #2 on any full auto or Semi, have complete control when you chamber a round, always assume when you chamber a round, the firearm will fire, and more than once, I have a friend who put 3 .45acp rounds through his left arm, because he detail stripped his gold cup and got the extra sear piece in wrong, gun in right hand, dropped the slide on a full mag, with one hand and relaxed, it went FA on him, you can just imagine, I have had a 1911 go FA on me, rpm is higher than you think. I was in competition and had full control when it happened.
-
If a bullet is fired straight up it will decelerate until it reaches the apogee of it's flight. (The highest altitude). It will then begin it's fall back to Earth until it reaches Terminal Velocity. For a human jumping out of an aircraft that is around 125 MPH. For a bullet it might be slightly faster because of it's smaller profile, and the fact lead is more dense than a human body. But in any case it will be FAR LESS than the muzzle velocity it was launched at. Even if it were a 850 FPS, .45 ACP round.
You are correct that it will not be traveling near it's muzzle velocity but that does not mean it will be traveling slow enough to be harmless.
The best case would be if the bullet is fired perfectly straight up. In this case the terminal velocity would be somewhere hear 300fps for a 30 cal. 150gr bullet.
That would be around 30 foot pounds of energy. Enough to dent a metal door, nick a soft pine board for 1/16 inch or sink 2" in dirt.
About the force of getting whacked with a hammer. Not fatal every time or even most of the time, but nothing you'd sit still for.
And that is if the bullet went straight up....in which case you would be recovering most of the bullets fired that way.
-
??? Anybody have any comments on the show? I too have a 700 but have never had a problem with it. the moral of the story seemed to be always point youyr fire arm in a SAFE direction; KNOW YOUR TARGET AND WHAT IS BEYOND. Comments? ???
-
The moral of the story seemed to be always point your firearm in a SAFE direction; KNOW YOUR TARGET AND WHAT IS BEYOND. Comments? ???
That is all I have ever lived by for the last 40+ years, and it's been working good so far. Bill T.
-
From Remington:
http://www.remington700.tv/#/home
Remington Responds to CNBC's "Documentary"
To: Remington Vendors, Customers and Industry Partners
Date: October 21, 2010
Re: CNBC "Documentary"
In response to last night's inaccurate CNBC program we launched www.Remington700.tv.
CNBC ignored facts and information provided by Remington and instead relied on allegations, misleading anecdotes, and false claims. Over 5 million Model 700s have been safely and reliably used by millions of shooters, military personnel and law enforcement officers for almost fifty years. The Model 700 is the most popular bolt-action rifle in the world.
The United States Army recently awarded a new contract to upgrade the M24 Sniper Weapon System which requires the same Model 700 action and the Walker fire control system disparaged by CNBC. Despite recent media coverage, the Army reaffirmed its trust in the M24, the Model 700, the Walker fire control system, and Remington Arms Company.
Visit www.Remington700.tv today and view our initial response to CNBC's story. New videos and responses will be added daily. Please encourage others to visit the site.
Thank you all for your continued support!
-
I watched the whole show. In a nutshell, the evidence is pretty compelling that Remington knew about the problems with their trigger system and safety in the 700 as far back as 1947 when the original designer warned them about it and came up with a 5-1/2 cent solution for it. Yes, they interviewed the engineer who wasn't afraid to tell the truth, he's been retired for 35 years from Remington.
To correct the tens of thousands of guns that have been reported to them over the last 60 years would be a 100 million dollar fix today so they've (Remington) have decided to bury the information and deny. Or so it was portrayed by NBC.
In closing, they asked the engineer about the child who died because his mom accidentally shot him while loading the gun and he basically said there wasn't any evidence that she DIDN'T press the trigger. Anyone who's ever shot a 700 knows how light and crisp the triggers are.
Believe it or don't......it's your choice
-
Timothy is this your quote or the engineers.
"Anyone who's ever shot a 700 knows how light and crisp the triggers are."
When ever I do a trigger job or adjust a trigger I weigh it before I begin, hopefully in front of the client, so afterward I can weigh it again, and show the improvement, see my post above about testing to make sure it is safe. Most out of the box 700 rifles triggers, have a pull weight of 4.5 to 10 lbs.
-
Sorry for the confusion. That was my comment, not the designers and in retrospect, of the four or five 700 I've shot over the years, I have no way of telling if they'd been worked by a smith or stock.
My future SIL's trigger on his new one is pretty good out of the box.....
-
First time poster and long time owner of the model 700, never had a problem with it.
I saw the show on TV last night and have been interested in finding out as much as I can about this issue.
From what I saw in the program they showed videos of the police and army having misfires with their 700's. I think that's cause for concern. In the army video the 700 fired when the soldier touched the bolt. In another video the gun went off when the safety was moved to fire. I would not have believed it.
Also the inventor of the 700 called Remington "stupid".
Just trying to get to the bottom of this.
Panzer
-
Also Remington has their "10 Commandments of Firearm Safety"
The 3rd commandment is: " Don't rely on your gun's safety."
Its odd that that would be one of the commandments. I would think you should be able to rely on the safety if safety's always worked. If safety's don't always work then you should not rely on the safety.
Panzer
-
Also Remington has their "10 Commandments of Firearm Safety"
The 3rd commandment is: " Don't rely on your gun's safety."
Its odd that that would be one of the commandments. I would think you should be able to rely on the safety if safety's always worked. If safety's don't always work then you should not rely on the safety.
Panzer
Welcome aboard, Panzer.
About the safety.
I doubt you will find any gun manufacture (or responsible gun enthusiast) who will tell you to go ahead and flip the safety on and then you can wave the gun around without concern about who or what you are sweeping with it.
-
The only effective safety is between your ears.
-
Still, I think the central issue here should: be can the 700 fire without a trigger pull? yes or no ...
Panzer
-
Still, I think the central issue here should: be can the 700 fire without a trigger pull? yes or no ...
Panzer
I agree Panzer, and quite frankly the answers the guy from Remington gave sounded weak. Lot of 'we didn't get to test that gun' and 'they can't prove no one touched the trigger' or "It could have been a very dirty gun'. So what if the memos were from the R&D time. Did ya fix the problem?
He never flat out said "The safety works fine".
-
Come on, it's CNBC.
How do you expect to get accurate reporting from people who have no clue what they are talking about.
Two key words, "gun" and "bad", the rest of it is just a rehash of "the narrative". before you judge Remington harshly it would be wise to do something like , say, looking at the rifles the use for props and examples, ask yourself things like, is that actually a Mod 700 in this video, or a Winch. 70.
Reporters frequently make mistakes that to us are that blindingly obvious, things like saying "semi automatic machine gun".
Since the Model 700 has been sold in 100's of thousands over the last 60 years or so I just can't get to worked up about this.
Even I owned one and I'm not a bolt gun guy, though I did have a model 70 at the same time . ;D
-
I didn't see the episode, but the problem is they, (CNBC), are a day late and a dollar short with this whole deal. This was in the news back in the 80's. Everyone in the industry has heard about it at one time or another. And now with the introduction of the X-Mark Pro Trigger, it is finally behind Remington once and for all.
Don't quote me here because I'm not entirely sure. But from a legal perspective I think something was done to protect the new owners of Remington from further legal damage from this when Du Pont sold the company way back when. Otherwise who would want to buy into a company with such legal ramifications brewing from within. You could find yourself on the ropes for millions 2 weeks after you closed the deal.
Remington is the bad guy here only because they never really did much when this whole thing surfaced. Perhaps they couldn't because it would have made them look even more liable if they scrapped the whole Walker Fire Control System at the first sign of legal trouble. Everyone would have come out of the woodwork who had one and was hungry for a buck. That could have bankrupted them in no time. Again, this is just a guesstimation on my part, and I'm no lawyer. Anyway, as I mentioned I own 4 Remington 700's, all bought before the 80's ended. I've never had an issue, but I never use the safety on any of my rifles so it really doesn't matter. This is water that has long gone over the dam, and since evaporated. Bill T.
-
here's the thing that bothers me. I've seen the videos of the 700 misfiring but Remington won't tell me what to do to make my 700 safe.
Panzer
-
here's the thing that bothers me. I've seen the videos of the 700 misfiring but Remington won't tell me what to do to make my 700 safe.
Panzer
That is because there is nothing you can do with Remington parts to make it so. Short of changing out the entire trigger and fire control group with aftermarket parts, which Remington isn't going to suggest, you have to pretty much live with it. It's all in the design. This is much like the Oldsmobile Diesel, and Cadillac "8-6-4", fiasco back in the late 70's and early 80's. They were simply a bad engine design that no amount of tinkering by GM, or anyone else could make better. Bill T.
-
Looks like Remington is fixing to shoot back.
Figures, 2 sides to every story, especially the ones from the MSM.
http://www.shootingwire.com/archived/2010-10-22_sw.html
Battle Lines Drawn
Less than 36 hours after CNBC's hour long investigative report alleging that Remington's "flagship" rifle, the Model 700 had been plagued by decades of accidental discharges that the report alleges the company knew about but ignored for economic reasons, it's safe to say the story is becoming one of the focal points of very lively industry chatter.
I'm betting it will be remembered as one of those memorable instances when a pair of major corporations square off in what is, essentially, a cage fight with few-if any-rules.
As Remington responds via their "single -and official- channel for communications regarding the CNBC charges" - a very slick website (http://remington700.tv) it's apparent they're doing their equivalent of "teasing" their ultimate response.
Remington isn't pulling any punches calling the factual accuracy of CNBC's report into question. What appear to be excerpts from an eventual long-form Remington response on their website not only attack the credibility of CNBC's senior correspondent Scott Cohn (whose discomfort in handling a firearm was painful to watch), but question CNBC's interview techniques (questions they didn't ask), the experts cited in the report, and virtually everything else connected to the story.
Only the tragic accidents cited in the CNBC report appear - at least at this writing - to be off-limits to very pointed questioning. Frequent references to Remintgon's "10 Commandments of Firearms Safety" however, it would seem to imply that most problems associated with the Model 700 can - ultimately- be traced to a variety of human factors.
A section on that website teases an upcoming special report by Joie Chen entitled "Remington Shoots Straight".
You might remember Chen as a former CBS/CNN anchor, but today she's not a mainstream news anchor. She is Executive Vice President for Branded News Worldwide, a company which "creates online platforms for organizations and industries to deliver news and programming models for niche audiences."
Part of mega-agency Ackerman/McQueen, Branded News Worldwide is in the business of professionally packaging and delivering niche-focused content for organizations as diverse as the Cancer Institute of Oklahoma and the National Rifle Association (NRA News).
In other words, Remington's rolling out very heavy artillery to fight back against a report they say was pieced together out of less than whole-cloth.
Crucial in that vigorous defense is the utilization of the very latest online technologies.
There are several benefits. Using a single-point method of communication.
Remington stays on-point and on-message. With no authorized statements being made outside the channel, Remington also has a considerably tighter control over unauthorized sharing of information (that's "leaks" -a mainstay of the news business).
And it's an effective force-multiplier.
Despite some extremely cranky video and the occasional glitches inherent to the internet (especially a micro-site that appears to be getting heavy traffic), it is a very professional method of getting information out to consumers are either intrigued by the story or concerned about the safety of their Model 700.
In the weeks ahead, this is not one of those stories that appears to be a blip on the radar that fades away. The stakes are simply too-high.
As always, we'll work to keep you posted.
--Jim Shepherd
To comment on Bill's next to last post :
Exactly! They had to go all the way back to 1947 for their "story" ?
Must have been a slow news week ::)
-
The best thing Remington has going for it, is the success of the gun in general. This includes the military sniper rifle system, still in use and recently upgraded to .300 Win. Mag. and .338 Lapua. If it was crap it would have disappeared from the market years ago. CNBC is trying to raise dust that has long since settled. They are as desperate for viewers, as the dems are for votes. Slamming one of the best selling firearms in modern history is a pretty convoluted way of doing it. Bill T.
-
How many people do you think watched that and said, "Hey, I got my first, (insert game animal of choice ) with a model 700, these azzholes don't know what they are talking about", thereby alienating a percentage of their remaining viewers ?
-
How many people do you think watched that and said, "Hey, I got my first, (insert game animal of choice ) with a model 700, these azzholes don't know what they are talking about", thereby alienating a percentage of their remaining viewers ?
Also most of the viewers are gun people like us who normally wouldn't be caught dead watching CNBC or MSDNC. They were torpedoed before they left the harbor. Bill T.
-
How many people do you think watched that and said, "Hey, I got my first, (insert game animal of choice ) with a model 700, these azzholes don't know what they are talking about", thereby alienating a percentage of their remaining viewers ?
There are still 2 videos showing the 700 misfireing. One video by the police and one by the army. If not for these videos I would not give any credence to the misfire charges.
Panzer
-
Panzer1, did you read my posts? There is nothing wrong with a properly adjusted 700 trigger, is the 700 trigger the best, no, some decent sear parts and laminated together and then housing is a brad type arangement. If adjusted over 2.5 lbs by someone who knows how, it is completely safe, but should be tested thoroughly to make sure. I like light trigger pulls, and often do install Shilen or Dlask arms triggers on my personal guns, so I can run 8oz to 1.5 lb pull weight.
This is a bunch of hooie, but any firearm has tests that can be done and should be done to make sure they are safe.
Panzer1, I am a gunsmith.
-
have any other bolt actions rifles such as ruger, savage or winchester ever been reported with problems
-
have any other bolt actions rifles such as ruger, savage or winchester ever been reported with problems
Accidental discharges have been plaguing the firearms industry since the invention of gunpowder. When they happen, they are much like any other mistake, in that the first thing is to place blame on something or someone other than who was behind the trigger, or handling the firearm when it happened. Remington was a easy target here because it was fairly easy for trial lawyers to make them, along with their product look bad. They were able to "prove", at least convincingly enough for a jury to buy it, the product they produced, (The Walker Fire Control System), was defective. At least defective enough that a big cash payout would make it easier to accept. It has been argued both ways for years, usually with the same outcome. Some will never own a Remington 700 because of it, while others dismiss it as operator error. Most of the top gun manufacturers like Ruger and Browning have been sued at one time or another because of accidental discharges, but none so profoundly as the Remington 700 trigger case.
Some years back Ruger paid out a large settlement to an individual who was playing "Quick Draw McGraw" in front of a mirror with a Ruger Blackhawk while it was loaded. You can guess what happened. He ended up in a wheel chair which was probably the best place for him at that point. It was no fault of the firearm, or it's design. But Ruger elected to settle out of court because if they had lost the suit it could have brought an avalanche of suits by other idiot's seeking a fast buck. That isn't fair, but it is the way our legal system operates. Sometimes it becomes necessary to award idiot's for being idiot's to prevent expensive legal action by even more idiot's in a world that is overly infested with lawyers. For what it is worth, that settlement was the reason for Ruger to go with the large "WARNING" roll marks on their barrels urging the owner to, "Read the instruction manual avaliable FREE from Sturm Ruger & Co." Idiot's change our world in many ways. Bill T.
-
Idiot's change our world in many ways. Bill T.
The rest of what you said is dead on too, Bill, but that statement is definitely an X-ring hit at a 1000 yds, IMHO.
-
Accidental discharges have been plaguing the firearms industry since the invention of gunpowder. When they happen, they are much like any other mistake, in that the first thing is to place blame on something or someone other than who was behind the trigger, or handling the firearm when it happened. Remington was a easy target here because it was fairly easy for trial lawyers to make them, along with their product look bad. They were able to "prove", at least convincingly enough for a jury to buy it, the product they produced, (The Walker Fire Control System), was defective. At least defective enough that a big cash payout would make it easier to accept. It has been argued both ways for years, usually with the same outcome. Some will never own a Remington 700 because of it, while others dismiss it as operator error. Most of the top gun manufacturers like Ruger and Browning have been sued at one time or another because of accidental discharges, but none so profoundly as the Remington 700 trigger case.
Some years back Ruger paid out a large settlement to an individual who was playing "Quick Draw McGraw" in front of a mirror with a Ruger Blackhawk while it was loaded. You can guess what happened. He ended up in a wheel chair which was probably the best place for him at that point. It was no fault of the firearm, or it's design. But Ruger elected to settle out of court because if they had lost the suit it could have brought an avalanche of suits by other idiot's seeking a fast buck. That isn't fair, but it is the way our legal system operates. Sometimes it becomes necessary to award idiot's for being idiot's to prevent expensive legal action by even more idiot's in a world that is overly infested with lawyers. For what it is worth, that settlement was the reason for Ruger to go with the large "WARNING" roll marks on their barrels urging the owner to, "Read the instruction manual avaliable FREE from Sturm Ruger & Co." Idiot's change our world in many ways. Bill T.
Another thing to bear in mind, this was a Civil, not criminal trial.
This sets a much lower standard of proof that allows even a jerk like John Edwards to win $800 million law suits.
-
Another thing to bear in mind, this was a Civil, not criminal trial.
This sets a much lower standard of proof that allows even a jerk like John Edwards to win $800 million law suits.
The problem is they don't even have to win them in many cases. Often just the threat of losing is enough to award someone with money they in no way deserve. This countries legal system is in dire need of repair. Shakespeare was on to something. Bill T.
-
Like the Jesse Jackson shake down.
It's cheaper in the long run to just pay them to go away than it would cost in bad PR, and legal fee's.
-
have any other bolt actions rifles such as ruger, savage or winchester ever been reported with problems
i am not talking lawsuits i am asking about problems with their bolt actions
-
i am not talking lawsuits i am asking about problems with their bolt actions
Nothing out of the norm. Every manufacturer lets a bad one get out every now and then. Most is just minor stuff. Last year I bought a Savage 10 FP in .308 and I had to take it to a gunsmith and have all of the scope base mounting holes re tapped. Savage doesn't use plug screws and a lot of over spray from whatever they coat the barrel and action with got into the threads. A minor inconvenience, but I have bolt guns from all of the major manufacturers and have never had to send a rifle back. Most manufacturers have a good Q. C. dept, and anything really bad usually gets flagged before they get out the door. Recalls destroy profits faster than Obama. Bill T.
-
First time poster and long time owner of the model 700, never had a problem with it.
I saw the show on TV last night and have been interested in finding out as much as I can about this issue.
From what I saw in the program they showed videos of the police and army having misfires with their 700's. I think that's cause for concern. In the army video the 700 fired when the soldier touched the bolt. In another video the gun went off when the safety was moved to fire. I would not have believed it.
Also the inventor of the 700 called Remington "stupid".
Just trying to get to the bottom of this.
Panzer
First of all WELCOME!
To test your 700, make sure it's unloaded.
When you close the bolt, put the safety on - if you can operated the bolt you don't have the "bolt block" feature on your gun and it is not subject to the "Safety Modification Program" which expires Dec of 2010. You should not have any problems at all with your rifle.
To further test the rifle's safety, do as M25 said, cock it, (close the bolt), put the safety on and pull the trigger hard. Flip the safety off, if no sear release, bump the butt of the gun on some padding FIRMLY. Slam the bolt closed several times. You can do the same test with the safety left on and after bumping the butt, slamming the bolt and pulling the trigger, flip the safety to the off position.
If the sear hasn't released, I would and do feel just fine about using the rifle. None of my 700s has ever had an issue though I do know of one guy that did buy an old one - with the bolt block - and his daughter had the rifle fire when the safety was pushed off. He sent it in and Rem did the fix for $20.
That is the only 700 I have ever heard of personally having an issue.
If you have the cash get a Jewell trigger.
WARNING - my Jewell trigger has ABSOLUTELY SPOILED ME!
Every trigger in comparison feels like crap, even the ones I thought were really, really sweet before. I'll bet the ones from Shilen feel just as good but I don't have any experience with them. My Jewell is set at 1 pound and passes all of the above tests.
Picking a nit - "In the army video the 700 fired when the soldier touched the bolt. CNBC had only vids of guys in cammie jammies from Border Patrol and Portland Maine police - not military.
Not that it really makes any difference.
Portland, Maine per CNBC, said they 'didn't get any satisfaction from Remington'.
Rem states that they never heard about it and never got to examine the rifles. 7th video on the 700tv site. Another 'he said, she said'.
-
With travel I missed this one, and since it will be on again this Thursday evening I will reserve rants until watching it ...
Oh what the hell ... This is oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooold news!!! Just like Ruger and their single actions, Remington has been doing their best to fix this, and the only guns with issues out here belong to owners that didn't do their work.
If you are concerned you might have one of the guns with an issue - Put the unloaded rifle on your kitchen table under a good light, call Remington, and talk to customer service. They won't lead you astray!
Rant off till I see the show.
-
With travel I missed this one, and since it will be on again this Thursday evening I will reserve rants until watching it ...
Rant off till I see the show.
You won't like it and you won't be surprised at the CNBC hatchet job.
The same gunsmith the show has saying that the design isn't safe, Remington has video of him on the stand testifyiing that he was unable to reproduce the malfunction.
Also the lady shot in the head from another room? Remington shows the police report that states she was shot IN THE SAME ROOM while her husband was showing the rifle to a 14 yr old. When the kid handed it back to the husband it fired. ::)
-
What kind of idiot passes around loaded guns in the house ?
The kind that see's a cheaper course than divorce ?
-
What time will it be on Thursday? I can't trust my local TV Guide. It's wrong too many times. I've got the rewound, wasted VCR tape to prove it. Bill T.
-
From the link
CNBC’s “Remington Under Fire: A CNBC Investigation” will re-air on Wednesday, October 20th at 10PM ET/PT, Sunday, October 24th at 10PM ET, Thursday, October 28th at 8PM ET and 12AM ET, and Sunday, October 31st at 1AM ET.
-
Thanks.
-
FYI: I found this article and thought I would pass it on.
Panzer
Maine Police Stops Using Remington Rifle
Published: Friday, 29 Oct 2010 | 12:08 AM ET
Text Size
By: Scott Cohn
Senior Correspondent, CNBC
The police department in Portland, ME, has become the latest law enforcement agency to stop using a popular sniper rifle over concerns the gun can go off without the trigger being pulled.
The rifle, the Remington 700 , is the subject of a CNBC Original documentary, “Remington Under Fire: A CNBC Investigation,” which revealed thousands of customer complaints, including from Portland police in 2009.
But Police Chief James Craig told the Portland Press Herald he was unaware how many other complaints there were until he viewed the CNBC report.
"I don't want to run the risk of having an accidental discharge like this where it puts an officer's or community member's life in danger," Chief Craig told the newspaper. He later confirmed to CNBC that the department's five Remington 700s have been taken out of service.
The CNBC program included video taken by Portland snipers and obtained by the network showing a rifle going off repeatedly when an officer touched the bolt. Chief Craig told the newspaper that the department had contacted Remington about the problem but was told the weapons were no longer under warranty.
Remington insists the popular rifle is safe, and in a statement for the CNBC program the company said that neither its own experts nor experts hired by plaintiffs' lawyers "has ever been able to duplicate such an event on rifles that had been properly maintained or have not been altered after sale."
RELATED LINKS
Current DateTime: 09:06:55 28 Oct 2010
LinksList Documentid: 39903417
* Inside Remington Rifle's Controversial Trigger
* Why Guns Can Only Be Recalled by Manufacturer
* Deaths, Injuries and Lawsuits Raise Questions about Popular Gun's Safety
But Chief Craig told the newspaper the department's rifles were properly maintained and had not been altered or adjusted. He did say that of the department's five rifles, only the one shown in the video had malfunctioned.
The Portland department is not the first agency to stop using the rifles. The police department in Kissimmee, FL, sold its 700s after one inadvertently went off during a drug raid in 2005, according to a department spokeswoman. And the national police force in New Zealand also stopped using the rifles due to safety concerns, officials told CNBC.
Versions of the rifle are also used by the U.S. military, and documents obtained by CNBC under the Freedom of Information Act show that inadvertent discharges of rifles at the Marine sniper training school at Camp Lejeune, NC, became such a concern, they led to meetings between Marine officials and Remington representatives in 2003, and eventually to changes in Marine Corps procedures for handling the rifles.
The Army recently awarded Remington a new contract for as many as 3,600 new sniper rifles, worth up to $28 million.
"For nearly fifty years, the Remington Model 700 rifle has been the preferred choice for millions of hunters, shooting sports enthusiasts and military and law enforcement personnel," Remington said in its earlier statement.
© 2010 CNBC.com
-
Don't put to much weight on this Panzer. Those A holes in Portland are EXTREMELY anti 2A, and have been for at least 30 years.
Look who they send to congress . Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, they put an R after their names, but they consistently vote with the most liberal of Dems.
They want to undo the Kansas / Nebraska act and return to being part of Mass.
-
Don't put to much weight on this Panzer. Those A holes in Portland are EXTREMELY anti 2A, and have been for at least 30 years.
Look who they send to congress . Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, they put an R after their names, but they consistently vote with the most liberal of Dems.
They want to undo the Kansas / Nebraska act and return to being part of Mass.
+1.
I never use information obtained from police departments as a judge of ANY firearm. If you want a perfect example look at this idiot police chief in Florida that ditched tens of thousands of dollars in Glocks simply because they had 2 of them kaboom in 2 separate incidents over a 2 year period. The incident was investigated and faulty ammunition was found to be the culprit. Speer even admitted to the fact. In spite of this Glock got the blame, and all of the false Internet badmouthing that followed.
If the Remington 700 is so bad, ask yourself why the government just gave them a $28,000,000.00, ($28 MILLION), contract for the next generation of sniper rifles? I'm not saying that a few of these guns have not malfunctioned, they proved that with video, and the sheer numbers of customer complaints. They all can't be lying. But what we don't know is what it curtailed up to the point of malfunction. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have a total of 4 Remington 700's and a Remington XP-100 pistol, all purchased from April of 1972 to early 1985. The last one I bought was a heavy barreled Varmint model in .22-250. The first was a BDL sporter in .300 Win. Mag.
When this was first reported back in the late 70's and early 80's I was concerned. I proceeded to try and screw with my guns in an attempt to make them malfunction at the range. I repeatedly engaged the safety, and disengaged it. Lifted the bolt, reengaging and disengaging the safety on all of them with the rifle sitting on a rest on a "hot" firing line with a live round in the chamber. I could never create a malfunction of any kind with any of my rifles. After that I dismissed the entire matter because I never use a safety on any of my firearms to begin with.
In a great many of these cases people were loading and unloading guns inside residences with people sitting in other rooms. (Woman was shot in the head and killed). There was the case of the Texas boar hunter who blew his own foot off. There was another cited in the program where a father almost shot off his sons hand. If you go back to the original accident that involved the mother killing her 9 year old son who she lost track of, every single one of these incidents could have been prevented if all of these people would have had their muzzles pointed straight up into the air instead of not paying attention to them and allowing them to wander.
I see poor gun handling all of the time. It is the main reason I stopped shooting at indoor ranges here in the Summertime. I've been muzzle swept too many times by idiots. I'm beginning to think this kind of thing is on the rise. Proper gun handling isn't stressed as much as it used to be. Just because a person "grew up around guns", or "hunted all of their lives", doesn't necessarily mean they know and practice safe gun handling. These accidents documented with the Remington 700 prove that. All it takes is one single slip, and the results can be tragic and have a profound effect on people for the rest of their lives. When you look at this in that regard, is a recall of these rifles going to change the way people handle their firearms? I'm not trying to use this as a cop out in defense of Remington, but the fact remains if any and all of these people would have paid attention to their muzzle when manipulating the moving parts on a loaded firearm regardless of the situation, none of these accidents would have happened, even if the gun had discharged just the same. Bill T.
-
As a side bar, the guy suing Remington (the father of aforementioned 9 year old boy) is an active long range shooter and hunter and he himself owns a Model 700 and still shoots with it. That was the part that bother me about the production, the man knows his wife phuqed up, regardless of how the gun discharged.
-
As a side bar, the guy suing Remington (the father of aforementioned 9 year old boy) is an active long range shooter and hunter and he himself owns a Model 700 and still shoots with it. That was the part that bother me about the production, the man knows his wife phuqed up, regardless of how the gun discharged.
That got me as well. I've conversed with Jack Belk on several Internet forums about this subject back in early 2000. He personally sent me information on the Luis case in which he personally testified. This whole thing is sounding more and more convoluted. The guy suing Remington appears to be an avid shooter and handloader. If he firmly believes this rifle is such a hazard, I'm not sure of his methodology, or Belks for that matter. At least at this present time. Proper gun handling appears to be placed on the wayside here.
Then there is the introduction of the X-Mark Pro Trigger. Companies change fire control groups frequently. Marlin just did with their T-900 Fire Control Group on their rimfires to improve performance. The fact Remington is still selling their Walker Fire Control Group in addition to the X-Mark Pro tells me they still believe in it, and that it is in demand, or why would they keep producing it when they in fact have what most would call a "better" system considering all that has happened? Too much isn't adding up here. Bill T.
-
That got me as well. I've conversed with Jack Belk on several Internet forums about this subject back in early 2000. He personally sent me information on the Luis case in which he personally testified. This whole thing is sounding more and more convoluted. The guy suing Remington appears to be an avid shooter and handloader. If he firmly believes this rifle is such a hazard, I'm not sure of his methodology, or Belks for that matter. At least at this present time. Proper gun handling appears to be placed on the wayside here.
Then there is the introduction of the X-Mark Pro Trigger. Companies change fire control groups frequently. Marlin just did with their T-900 Fire Control Group on their rimfires to improve performance. The fact Remington is still selling their Walker Fire Control Group in addition to the X-Mark Pro tells me they still believe in it, and that it is in demand, or why would they keep producing it when they in fact have what most would call a "better" system considering all that has happened? Too much isn't adding up here. Bill T.
+ 10
-
The clincher here is the X-Mark Pro, Fire Control Group. Here is finally a chance for Remington to put this whole thing to bed with a system that is supposedly foolproof. At least from an accidental discharge standpoint. This system, (according to Jack Belk), has the exact same design improvement that Mike Walker had designed as an improvement into his original design before the gun went to mass market back in the early 50's.
Yet Tom Milner who is now president and CEO of Cabela's after serving as Remington CEO for 10 years, still sells new 700's with the older Walker system. Most other retailers do much the same. Not every new Remington 700 out of Ilion has the new X-Mark Pro assembly. You have to wonder why not? The demand is still there for the Walker system. I'm not sure at this time, but I don't believe the new Army contract calls for X-Mark Pro Fire Control Groups on their next generation of sniper rifles. Personally I've handled new Remington 700 Stainless 5-R Mil-Spec barreled .308's with Walker assemblies in them. These guns were manufactured in the last 12 months out of Ilion, N.Y. I've never fired an X-Mark Pro equipped rifle, so a cannot vouch for how good of a trigger they are from a shooting standpoint. With that said I've never fired a Walker equipped 700 that had a poor trigger, including the 4 that I currently own. Bill T.
-
One nonpolitical/commercial reminder here.
If any of the four basic safety rules had been applied there would have been embarrassing holes maybe, but no injuries.
Most of us with any experience have screwed up somehow at some point, I'll bet there are a lot of small round holes in things that got there by "I don't know ::) ".
So any excuse is a good reason to remind ourselves that if the weapon is proven to be empty, OPEN THE ACTION AND LOOK, and, NEVER POINTED AT ANYTHING YOU DO NOT WANT TO DESTROY OR KILL, even if it does function with out a finger on the trigger, you only hear a click.
Even if all you do is just NEVER let your muzzle sweep anything but the target, just one of 4 most basic safety rules, you could use a trigger designed by a homicidal maniac and never hurt a soul.
No matter the mechanics the ultimate safety of any thing is between our ears.
-
hi, new to this website/forum. just thot id throw my 2 cents into the fray. having worked in the firearms business off and on for 20+ years now the ONLY times ive seen issues with accidental discharges on the remington 700's is the older style (where you had to take safety off to operate bolt) that had either A. trigger work done to them (to lighten the trigger pull) or B. weren't kept clean (as in actually taking the firearm off the stock and cleaning the trigger assembly as well as safety mechanism). anyway, just wanted to pass along my actual expieriences with the model 700's and accidental discharges. me personally ive owned well over 30 remington 700's in many different calibers and have never had an issue with any of them other than the occassional and rare lack of accuracy, and that was only 2-3 rifles.
-
I have had few rem 700's anmd I never had a one with any mech problems. And hope never do!