Jump to content
Military Firearm Restoration Corner
Sign in to follow this  
rivitir

Remington 700 Safe?

Recommended Posts

I haven't watched the whole thing yet but I thought this was interesting. Apparently CNBC is saying the Remington 700's have a problem with shooting while your closing the bolt. I've shot several 700's and never seen this problem before. What do you guys think about it?

 

Link to story:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39554936/

 

Remington's response:

http://www.remington700.tv/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"Family Tragedy

Tragedy struck the Barber family during a hunting trip outside Bozeman, Montana. Rich and Barbara Barber’s 9-year-old son Gus was fatally shot when the Remington 700 rifle discharged while Barbara was unloading the gun. She says she’s certain her finger was not on the trigger."

 

 

 

Did anyone think to ask this idiot broad just exactly why she was pointing a loaded rifle at her son at the time it went off? :o

 

She should have been charged and held accountable for CHILD ENDANGERMENT, CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE, AND MANSLAUGHTER. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up front, I think Remington makes great firearms. I currently own an 870, and have owned a .22 or two from them too. Walking into a gun store and seeing a Remington on the rack, I'm proud to see the quality of construction and safety of their firearms. I've never owned a M700. I have many friends who do, and they are delighted with the quality and performance. I dislike the brazed, 3-piece bolt (head, body, handle); the bolt handle has a reputation to peel off the body at inopportune times. My preference, and not a safety issue (excluding the charging cape buffalo).

 

Concerning the linked articles:

 

Most interesting are the comments of Mike Walker, the actual designer of the M700 trigger. He's "still kicking" and apparently his input doesn't bode well for Remington. There's a link to a memo from 1946 where he outlines the necessary changes required to improve the trigger's safety. There's also another document from 1947 where a test engineer (M.E. Leek) had concerns about the same issue.

 

A link is also provided to a Consumer Reports review of varmint rifles (really, I kid you not) where they had the same issue.

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39759366/

 

Ruger went through this same issue with the Blackhawk revolvers and the M77. I appreciated Ruger's aggression on keeping a positive, concerned image with the public.

 

The M721/722/725/700 Rifles are well-proven to be accurate and dependable. Remington also seems readily concerned with repairing malfunctioning rifles when consumers and gunsmiths send them in. I think the large majority of the issues are related to cleanliness of the trigger mechanism and "home mechanics" wreaking havoc on the trigger, trying to improve it.

 

It does appear that a small percentage of the rifles may have had trigger issues straight from the factory. Could be two, could be 10,000. Dunno.

 

I'll watch the segment and see what's up. I'll form my own opinion. Show times are posted on the CNBC link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I,ve never heard tell of any recall on the 700's

 

Back in the 70's there was a recall of Rem. 600 and 660 carbines for trigger issues.

 

If the trigger was a little mucked up and you happened to pull the trigger while the safety was on, the rifle could fire when the safety was flipped to off position without again touching trigger.

 

Same thing is true of a military Mausers safety if improperly fitted with relation to sear engagement.

 

Safe and proper firearms handling cannot be over stressed. To use small mechanical parts to compensate for human stupidity is just not the thinking of a reasoning individual.

 

JM2c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WEll my 2 cents...It seems like there might have been some actual mechanical failures and while 100 out of the millions that cnbc themselves reported have been sold tells me it wasn't a major design flaw it is very tragic that even one person died as a result muchless a child BUT you nailed it on the head Pacrat. Where did these people learn gun safety...ALWAYS point a gun in a safe direction...ALWAYS treat every firearm as if it was loaded. Mechanical devices fail period. It might be one time in 10 million but if its mechanical it will fail, thus the reason for gun safety rules.

Hey maybe we can sue God for making people with weak minds...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i may be in the minority on this but after studying the design of the remington trigger i think it was flawed and could do exactly what cncbc said it could.

i think having the trigger & connector as two pieces is a design flaw that should have been corrected much sooner than it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is flawed. The older models, you had to put the gun on fire to open the bolt and eject the shells. My dad has a 25-06, bought it new around its introduction time of 1969 or early 70's. It was common then to drive around on saturday evenings with a loaded gun in your passenger seat, muzzle pointed in the floor, and stop and shoot ground hogs.

 

One evening, he was doing such and came upon a friend that had broke down along the road. Dad offered him a ride to his home but said to wait before he got in so dad could unload his gun. Flippend the safety on fire and started to open the bolt and the gun went off shooting the transmission out of his car. It happens folks, I've heard many owners of early Remingtons say this. We have a few remingtons, and nope, I'm not a big fan of em. Stiff action manipulation, crappy safety, and even worse trigger.

 

Brenden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Interarms Mark Xs all need to be on "fire" to cycle the bolt. Most older bolt actions with two-position trigger safeties worked this way. I'm guessing that it was a "feature" to prevent the bolt from accidentally opening while carrying and handling. If trigger safety can be made to lock the bolt when engaged, it can be made to not lock the bolt as well. Who knows?

 

I would not let anyone bring a chambered weapon into my vehicle. If I found out that the weapon were chambered, the guilty party would exit the vehicle, point in a safe direction, and unload properly.

 

There are 4 rules to weapons safety:

 

1. Treat every weapon as if it were loaded

 

2. Never point a weapon at anything you don't intend to shoot (floorboards and transmissions count)

 

3. Keep your finger straight, and off the trigger until ready to fire

 

4. Keep the weapon on safe until ready to fire

 

If everyone followed the above rules, we would have no inadvertent firearms injuries and deaths. People use a safety as a "crutch" in lieu of good safety practices. Is a weapon WITHOUT a safety inherently unsafe, or is it more safe because it forces people to be aware and manage their firearms better? Without a safety, folks would be forced to carry weapons with an empty chamber. The French never had safeties on their bolt actions; the Lebels, Berthiers, and MASs all were safety-free. They relied on discipline and training for safety.

 

I don't blame Remington for fools mishandling weapons and injuring their fellows; I blame the fools, or the irresponsible parents or mentors who failed in instill the above mentioned safety rules. I blame Remington for not reacting at all, other than a press release.

 

I think the issue with all of this isn't that Remington had a problem with the 700, it's the fact that they went out of their way to disavow and knowledge or responsibility. Playing percentages when firearms are involved is poor business. Other companies have had guns with safety issues; Ruger and Browing (if I remember correctly) have had advertisements in gun mags announcing recalls for firearms that were swift and informative. Remington fixed this issue in the late 70s or early 80s, I don't recall the exact change over. They should have had a recall for the older guns. Management and their bean counters will have to live with their decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I agree with you GunNutty Remington's handeling of the situation was not to be commended. I don't believe that they don't have a responsibility to make the best product they can or accept consequences for their actions but my point was/is that gun safety accounts for mechanical failure and is always the priority. I made son memorize the gun safety rule's before he was ever allowed to touch a gun. I also made him do 'drills' with an unloaded gun for weeks before he was ever allowed to fire one and now he occasionally checks me when I have a lapse.

 

Train a child in the way he should go and when he is older he will not depart from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago when I lived on Kodiak Island, I asked about a m-700 at Macks sporting goods and was surprised when an employee told me they didn't sell them because of trigger problems. :angry:

 

I have an older 700 in 30-06 that I have used to take a couple dozen big game animals and thankfully I have never had any mechanical problems with it.

However, I also make it a habit not to chamber a round until it's time to shoot. This goes for all my sporting arms except shotguns of course. It would be pretty slim pickens if I waited until flushing a ruffy before loading. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×