I’m done with Remington

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bayourambler

Bayourambler

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2017
Messages
447
Location
Louisiana
I emailed Remington last November about my unhappy 1.5” to 2” groups with the 300 wm sendero I bought last year. In my initial email to Remington I described how I tryed a couple of premium factory loads and 15 plus handloads , the best results I could achieve was around 1.5” group at 100 yds. They quickly emailed me back and said “ this is not the accuracy typical of our sendero line”. Please send it to our support facility in Tulsa Ok. for corrective measures. I looked at the return info and it clearly stated that I would have to pay shipping to repair facility and they would fix it and return it to me at no charge. 2 months after I shipped it , I finally received an email from Remington saying I needed to contact the repair facility . I called them and they notified me that the gun would not be covered under warranty because I had shot handloads in it and voided the warranty!!! The guy I talked to at the gun shop said “ for 140 bucks he could grab a box of bullets and shoot my rifle and see what it does”. I called Remington and asked him why I was not told my warranty was voided when I sent the initial email to them?!! I would have NEVER sent it there!!! The person I talked to was very unhelpful And really didn’t care about my frustration .Now they have my gun and want $35 to send it back to me. I can’t believe how poorly I have been treated after buying one of the most expensive guns that Remington offers!! The main reason is their lack of caring enough to inform me that it was void for the get go!!! I would have licked my wounds and brought it to someone local to see what’s up with it. It’s no wonder they are going bankrupt. Treating customers like <removed> will catch up one day. I hope they close!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would call back and get someone else on the phone and Bch up a storm. Shooting handloads didn't hurt anything and they know most shooters will handload for best accuracy, Call and call. Plus mention the negative thread you started here. They are aware of what negative stuff on the net can do and they aren't doing good.
 
That is mess up! Often, I discount people's complaints since I don't think they are always well founded. However, yours is a solid shafting that they are trying to give you and is wrong on several fronts. I would keep calling until you get some better answers.

Good luck with it and keep us posted. I would like them to survive but if they treat people like this they may need to go.
 
Arkansas Paul said:
It is pretty much SOP for a company to void a warranty if you shoot handloads. That is in nearly every instruction manual I've ever seen.

However, they knew you shot them from the beginning and should have told you before they had you ship the rifle.
Click to expand...
And holding his gun for ransom, to boot.
 
I actually just pulled up a digital copy of a Remington manual and I can't find where it says that reloading voids the warranty. That surprises me.
In fact, they even have a section in there about safe reloading practices.

Of course they do put that clause in there "Remington, at its sole discretion shall repair.........."
 
Eh, take heart; you might still get your gun back after the bankruptcy settlements, assuming they haven't had to pay creditors with it

It could be worse; they could have told you to only fire Remington brand ammunition from it (R51 owner, here)
 
it should do better than 1.5-2" at 100 yards, hell I have a rem 7600 pump carbine in 3006 that puts 3 shots into a inch and some times a little better at 100 yards with reloads.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0589.JPG
    DSCN0589.JPG
    117.6 KB · Views: 8
And here I was thinking about building off of a Remington 700... Looks like I'm buying a Savage.

I'm sorry they are screwing you. Reading these posts def makes Big Green sound shady.

Having said that, not that I've ever had to, but I'll never tell a company I'm using handloads as that's the most common escape clause. Not that I currently handload.
 
I’m going to call Remington today and demand they pay the shipping to return my gun back to me. I have to dig up my old emails so they can see where they misled me.
 
Last edited:
No doubt the initial person didn't handle things correctly if they knew it had fired hand loads, as that is without question very standard that mfrs. normally include that as reason for voiding warranties-below is right from Remington's warranty statement:
Remington does not warrant against any type of defect to the firearm that Remington did not cause, including but not limited to damage or defects arising out of:

1. Failure to provide proper care and maintenance,
2. Accidents, abuse, or misuse,
3. Barrel obstruction,
4. Hand loaded, reloaded, or improper ammunition,

Do understand the frustration regards telling you to send at your expense if they clearly understood it had hand loads fired through it, but the rest seems like what I would've expected. May have been a miss-understanding regards the hand loaded use (not trying to pee the op off, but seems a possibility).

I'm a hand loader as well btw. and as such, it's certainly no surprise to me that any mfr. includes the standard statement above.

I've had 1 warranty claim with a Versa Max when they 1st came out and they had it totally corrected and returned it with a few extra parts in less than 2 weeks, so my only experience was excellent.
 
There is not one Old School American firearms manufacturer that is worth there weight in salt. Remington, Colt, Winchester, .... Henry, Ruger, Savage might be a few that are displacing them. They have all been bought and sold so many times there isn't a remote resemblance to what they once were. Buy a Savage, a Japanese Browning, Sako next time. You won't be disappointed.
 
lovethosesooners said:
that Remington did not cause, including but not limited to damage or defects arising out of:

1. Failure to provide proper care and maintenance,
2. Accidents, abuse, or misuse,
3. Barrel obstruction,
4. Hand loaded, reloaded, or improper ammunition,
Click to expand...

The hand loaded ammunition DID NOT cause the damage. Remington caused the damage when they manufactured an in accurate rifle.
 
The Earl o Sammich said:
The hand loaded ammunition DID NOT cause the damage. Remington caused the damage when they manufactured an in accurate rifle.
Click to expand...
That’s a good point, but it’s also very standard practice that warranties are void once handloads are fired through them, regardless of mfr.

And agreed, no one should argue it should shoot better than 1.5”, but I’ve had more than 1 from other very reputable mfrs that did not shoot even 1.5”....1 of which is 1 you mentioned above and it took several MONTHS to get it back-they replaced with a new rifle so kudos for doing the right thing, but much different from the 2 weeks I’ve had on the only 2 other times I’ve ever sent a firearm back, 1
Of which was the versa max and the other a Barrett....it can and does happen from every mfr.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DM~
I called Remington about my Marlin having two completely different pieces of wood for the stock and they said to send it back to them and they would match the wood up and the guy was very nice but after reading several threads on a Marlin forum about guns coming back worse than before I declined. They did try and make it right for the most part. As for Remington quality now days... I have handled and fired rem 700, 870, etc the last 10yrs and i am not a fan of the quality of shotguns they are producing or the accuracy i see out of rifles. I was helping a buddy handload for a rem 700 and using the Hornady OAL tool you couldn't touch the lands unless the bullet was seated maybe 5k into the case. It was super long so i told him just load to factory/book length and be done and it still wont touch holes like my savage does and ive got a freaking axis rifle.
 
MEHavey said:
Using handloads does not void Remington's warranty.
https://www.remington.com/support/firearm-warranty-information/limited-lifetime-warranty

Call them up and read their own words back to them.
Click to expand...

I believe you may have confused yourself in their wording. The link you posted specifically calls out the following (condensing the text for clarity, but copied in full below): Remington does not warrant against defect Remington did not cause, including damage or defects arising out of hand loaded ammunition.

Remington’s Limited Warranty website in the link above said:
Remington does not warrant against any type of defect of the firearm that Remington did not cause, including but not limited to damage or defects arising out of:

1. Failure to provide proper care and maintenance,
2. Accidents, abuse, or misuse,
3. Barrel obstructions,
4. Hand loaded, reloaded, or improper ammunition
5. Unauthorized adjustments, repairs, or modifications, or
6. Normal wear and tear.
Click to expand...

So indeed - if Remington is claiming there is damage to the barrel, which has now been exposed to handloads, which are explicitly included as disqualifiers for warranty coverage, such the repairs are not included under warranty. Your warranty is not “void,” if you had a problem with the stock, they’d cover it, but your current problem is the barrel, which you’ve taken off of the table by feeding it hand loads.

Lesson learned I guess. Now you know handloads invalidate barrel work for factory warranties. It’s in the user’s manual and/or warranty text for almost all of the major manufacturers, if not all. There have been threads on forums about this since the 1990’s. Ignorance of a rule doesn’t make a guy exempt from said rule.
 
It's SOP because it introduces factors outside of the manufacturer's control. Almost any warranty writer will include that kind of verbiage because the liability clause is torn wide open when you introduce uncontrollable factors. Having been on both sides of these situations, it's frustrating for both.

They may be able to see/recognize immediately that the firearm is defective, but they're bound by the rules. If they repair a rifle that has been used outside of their specs, they assume liability for what happens with it going forward. And that is something they absolutely should not do.

You rightly feel cheated that you paid for a high end rifle that isn't performing, and moreover, you have no recourse.

I think the best resolution would be for them to keep/scrap the rifle you sent in, and send you a new one. That way the repair of one used with handloads is non-issue.
 
The Earl o Sammich said:
The hand loaded ammunition DID NOT cause the damage. Remington caused the damage when they manufactured an in accurate rifle.
Click to expand...

Nope, but in mentioning the use of handloads, the OP gave them the only information they need to wash their hands of it.

It's difficult for people not in the manufacturing business to understand how stupid the general public is when it comes to use of products, and why we have to put out such long, encompassing, borderline overreaching disclaimers about warranties and liability. This is mine:

WARRANTY

ALL ECCO MACHINE SOUND SUPPRESSORS (SILENCERS) CARRY A LIMITED LIFETIME WARRANTY AGAINST DEFECTS IN MATERIAL OR WORKMANSHIP, OR FAILURES THAT OCCUR DURING NORMAL, APPROVED USE OF THE SUPPRESSOR. ABUSE IS NOT COVERED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO USE OF ECCO MACHINE SUPPRESSORS THAT ARE NOT FULL AUTO RATED ON MACHINE GUNS, USE OF ECCO MACHINE SUPPRESSORS WITH CARTRIDGES OR BARREL LENGTHS NOT APPROVED FOR THE MODEL, BAFFLE STRIKES RESULTING FROM IMPROPER MOUNTING OR FAILURE TO SECURE THE SUPPRESSOR, OR DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE END USER ATTEMPTING TO SERVICE THE SUPPRESSOR. DETERMINATIONS ARE AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF ECCO MACHINE. ECCO MACHINE ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY FOR ANY DAMAGE TO WEAPONS OR INJURY TO PERSONS RESULTING FROM ANY COMBINATION OF IMPROPER USE OF SUPPRESSORS AND FAILURE TO OBSERVE PROPER FIREARM SAFETY, INCLUDING PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT

Virtually all manufacturers have disclaimers about using handloads voiding warranties. Remington is part of the rule here, not the exception.

Now, I agree that the individual who handled the original RMA screwed up in not detailing that, and they should definitely send the rifle back free of charge.
 
In an earlier discussion of this rifle you had posted you made a mistake with R22 and fired groups with rounds loaded 5 grains over max. Also note you stated recoil lug was bedded, barrel sanded, and a few other mods. I suspect Remington can see the mods and it's entirely possible the lugs had some peening from the overloads. Plus you stated there have shot a lot of ammo through the gun, which if loaded hot in the 300 may exhibit some throat erosion. I would hazzard a guess most folks who return a rifle have left it mostly unmolested and not fired it much so when Remington inspects the comparison may not look like a new gun out of specs.

Did you ever try a different scope and mounts to rule out an optics issue? I recall the post insisting it wasn't necessary but my personal experience over the past 30 years has found more than a few bad guns were simply bad optics/mounts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Bayourambler
  • Locked
Emailed Remington about accuracy issues, let’s see what they say..
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
Robert
Robert
G
  • Locked
Remington 700 REcall Time Line
Replies
3
Views
648
Doug S
D
M
  • Locked
Remington Repair Code "M101" Sendero
Replies
9
Views
1K
mewachee
M
R
  • Locked
Wolf .223 Safe to use?
2
Replies
41
Views
1K
maskedman504
M
Eb1
  • Locked
Just received my Marlin 30-30 back from repairs and..
Replies
9
Views
744
ole farmerbuck
O
Back
Top