BIGGBAY90
Member
They do not say which 700 rem model and also they did a change in 1982 and 2007---and you mean they are still selling guns made before 1982 brand new
Is a new Remington 700 safe to buy?
- Thread starter Happycamper
- Start date
- Status
alfack
Member
Or not, as they see fit.
Maybe, maybe not. Continous tinkering with a proven design can introduce new flaws and certainly will raise costs. And since they have chosen to stand pat, how much is it costing them in lawsuits?
The preponderance of evidence has been out there for 40+ years. Millions of customers have safely used these rifles, which begs the question how dangerous is the purported design flaw? Is there some conspiracy preventing those millions of owners from speaking out about trouble they have had? Can the 700 be made to be dangerous? No doubt. So can any other weapon, like AR15s that suddenly go full auto or Glocks that shoot their owners or blow up. My point is, you can not draw any solid conclusions from the puff piece NBC put out there. Judging by the responses in many of these threads, I have seen fewer suckers in a lollipop factory.
Average Joe
Member
I tried to make my 700 malfunction, and can't. Just make sure when you load, unload, or switch the safety from safe to fire, you point it in a safe direction. Otherwise its a great rifle. But, I have to wonder, how many of these rifles that fire accidentally, have triggers that have been adjusted by the owner, they don't say anything about that, I suspect it may have something to do with it on some cases.
My $.02 if you have any doubt about the Rem 700 you shouldn't get one. I did not see the program nor do I know much about the 700 but I believe that a person needs to have confidence in their equipment. If you have doubt about it you're not going to be comfortable with it. There are plenty of other rifles that are on the market in the price range. Get one that you have confidence in.
Here is a knowledgeable perspective on the whole deal in my opinion.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs...al-different-look-remington-model-700-trigger
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs...al-different-look-remington-model-700-trigger
Happycamper
Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2010
- Messages
- 9
Scary bolt Action
What scares me is if the gun fails to fire then you try to clear the round and as soon as you lift the bolt it fires.
You have to carry it around until you can fire it somewhere safe.
That sucks. the 700 should be one of the last rifles owned until you learn years of experience.
I wouldn't own one until they completely resolve that issue. If the price was right I would but I would be embarassed to take to a range. People are going to move away from you and that can cause distraction in itself.
What scares me is if the gun fails to fire then you try to clear the round and as soon as you lift the bolt it fires.
You have to carry it around until you can fire it somewhere safe.
That sucks. the 700 should be one of the last rifles owned until you learn years of experience.
I wouldn't own one until they completely resolve that issue. If the price was right I would but I would be embarassed to take to a range. People are going to move away from you and that can cause distraction in itself.
General Lee
Member
Did the goverment bail out Savage or something? Sounds like the Toyota recalls 
BIGGBAY90
Member
Well if the trigger on your rem 700 has a smooth surface then it does not apply--if it has grooves on the trigger then that is the one they claim has problem
HOWARD J
Member
I own about 30 guns.
I would not pay that kind of money for a gun that I would not have any confidence in.
I sold my " i like to fire as you unload the shells" Remington in the early 70's.
Remington has too many bean counters ///////////////////
The gunsmith I sold it to knew it had a problem//////////////
I would not pay that kind of money for a gun that I would not have any confidence in.
I sold my " i like to fire as you unload the shells" Remington in the early 70's.
Remington has too many bean counters ///////////////////
The gunsmith I sold it to knew it had a problem//////////////
david58
Member
Quote:
Supposing that your broad statement that "every design has flaws" is correct, it is Remington's responsibility to correct the flaws as they come to find them.
Or not, as they see fit.
At their risk. We wouldn't be talking about the CNBC piece if they had fixed the defect in the first place.
Quote:
Continuous improvement. Actually lowers costs, and shows an initiative on the part of the company to improve the performance and safety of their product - a good lawsuit innoculation, too. Remington has chosen to stand pat.
Maybe, maybe not. Continous tinkering with a proven design can introduce new flaws and certainly will raise costs. And since they have chosen to stand pat, how much is it costing them in lawsuits?
Appears to me that the conversation is about a design that needed "tinkering" as you call it. But embracing modern manufacturing and quality assurance and control isn't "tinkering." We are talking about an apparently poorly engineered product that has, in fact, been replaced in the recent past - after almost 60 years of reports of failures.
The preponderance of evidence has been out there for 40+ years. Millions of customers have safely used these rifles, which begs the question how dangerous is the purported design flaw? Is there some conspiracy preventing those millions of owners from speaking out about trouble they have had? Can the 700 be made to be dangerous? No doubt. So can any other weapon, like AR15s that suddenly go full auto or Glocks that shoot their owners or blow up. My point is, you can not draw any solid conclusions from the puff piece NBC put out there. Judging by the responses in many of these threads, I have seen fewer suckers in a lollipop factory.
Missing the whole point. :banghead: The issue is not millions that have failed, it's the few, and the fact that you can't tell one that will from one that won't. Remington has done a good job of settling out of court on the suits brought. Many folks that have had AD's with these guns were told they had an ND, because it just simply couldn't have gone off "by itself." Those don't get reported, because folks are simply embarrassed. Why don't you go ask a gunsmith or two and see what they've heard, or know, about the 700.
And Remington is standing pat not because this is a good design, but because the liability of simply fixing all the triggers out there is greater than the value of the company! The corporate lawyers have helped make the decision that a few lawsuits is cheaper than the fix - Remington has to hope it stays that way, because just a couple of jury trials could rather foul things up for them.
Again, somebody asks me if a 700 is safe to buy, I say without hesitation NO, unless it is a model with the modified trigger design that fixes the failure. Go buy the one-in-a-million lottery ticket - worst that happens is you lose a buck. Playing the lottery on a firearm is just dumb.
Supposing that your broad statement that "every design has flaws" is correct, it is Remington's responsibility to correct the flaws as they come to find them.
Or not, as they see fit.
At their risk. We wouldn't be talking about the CNBC piece if they had fixed the defect in the first place.
Quote:
Continuous improvement. Actually lowers costs, and shows an initiative on the part of the company to improve the performance and safety of their product - a good lawsuit innoculation, too. Remington has chosen to stand pat.
Maybe, maybe not. Continous tinkering with a proven design can introduce new flaws and certainly will raise costs. And since they have chosen to stand pat, how much is it costing them in lawsuits?
Appears to me that the conversation is about a design that needed "tinkering" as you call it. But embracing modern manufacturing and quality assurance and control isn't "tinkering." We are talking about an apparently poorly engineered product that has, in fact, been replaced in the recent past - after almost 60 years of reports of failures.
The preponderance of evidence has been out there for 40+ years. Millions of customers have safely used these rifles, which begs the question how dangerous is the purported design flaw? Is there some conspiracy preventing those millions of owners from speaking out about trouble they have had? Can the 700 be made to be dangerous? No doubt. So can any other weapon, like AR15s that suddenly go full auto or Glocks that shoot their owners or blow up. My point is, you can not draw any solid conclusions from the puff piece NBC put out there. Judging by the responses in many of these threads, I have seen fewer suckers in a lollipop factory.
Missing the whole point. :banghead: The issue is not millions that have failed, it's the few, and the fact that you can't tell one that will from one that won't. Remington has done a good job of settling out of court on the suits brought. Many folks that have had AD's with these guns were told they had an ND, because it just simply couldn't have gone off "by itself." Those don't get reported, because folks are simply embarrassed. Why don't you go ask a gunsmith or two and see what they've heard, or know, about the 700.
And Remington is standing pat not because this is a good design, but because the liability of simply fixing all the triggers out there is greater than the value of the company! The corporate lawyers have helped make the decision that a few lawsuits is cheaper than the fix - Remington has to hope it stays that way, because just a couple of jury trials could rather foul things up for them.
Again, somebody asks me if a 700 is safe to buy, I say without hesitation NO, unless it is a model with the modified trigger design that fixes the failure. Go buy the one-in-a-million lottery ticket - worst that happens is you lose a buck. Playing the lottery on a firearm is just dumb.
General Lee
Member
I think you are missing the point that the gun is not pointed at your head when you load it and it never should be. The trigger issue is messed up yes, but even if you own a gun with the problem it is not going to kill you unless you break the golden rule.
Last edited:
MinnMooney
Member
This seems to be an extremely over-blown problem.
With hundreds of Remington 700's at my large rifle shooting club, now once has this happened that anyone can remember. We have "Hunter Sight-In" going on now and it lasts for 3 weekends. That's 6 days of 7 hours each with 15-18 shooters at the line at all times. Many have Remington 700's of various vintages and never has there been a dangerous malfunction or AD.
This is why I believe this is an over-blown problem.
With hundreds of Remington 700's at my large rifle shooting club, now once has this happened that anyone can remember. We have "Hunter Sight-In" going on now and it lasts for 3 weekends. That's 6 days of 7 hours each with 15-18 shooters at the line at all times. Many have Remington 700's of various vintages and never has there been a dangerous malfunction or AD.
This is why I believe this is an over-blown problem.
Skylerbone
Member
I'm a 700 owner and here's what I've learned from my research:
1. The reported incidents of accidental discharges over the years have numbered into the thousands. Of those reported, 44 were found to be repeatable AND a) were not due to user error like pulling the trigger while moving the safety (yes, many were doing that) and b) not "modified" by expert or novice. 44 out of 5,000,000+ now manufacturered. Find any product out there that has that track record. Crib related deaths kill more infants and babies EVERY YEAR than that.
2. Those military videos showed something you may have missed. With the safety on, the trigger was "pulled" causing no discharge but doing so slightly disengages the sear. When the bolt is unlocked as in the video, the sear slips and the firing pin does what it was asked to do. Watch it again as the shooter removes his finger from the trigger then attempts to cycle the bolt. Why would you attempt to fire, realize the safety is on, then decide you dont want to fire but rather decide to unload the rifle?
3. The gun in question that discharged and mortally wounded the 10 year old was a model 721. That model was discontinued in 1961. I believe he died in 2001. That means that rifle was at least 40 years old. Anyone have a rifle that's missed a yearly check-up at the gun smith's? I'm betting there was plenty of grime inside that trigger housing, especially considering the 45 mile ride to the nearest hospital. How far away was the nearest qualified Remington gunsmith?
4. Any red flag run up the pole ought to elicit this type of discussion. If we were talking about Glock KBs, dozens of fanboys would cry foul, claiming faulty reloads, double charged factory ammo or user modification. They would not claim their Glocks were ticking time bombs waiting to go off. At the same time, it gives non-owners a better insight into potential issues for consideration.
My research gave me pause and I am now looking at replacement triggers for my older 700. While I have never experienced a problem it has been modified by a smith and it is one that does not include the newer bolt lock. For those who asked, Remington produces the new X-Mark Pro trigger with the long proposed "Walker fix" but also sells the same trigger (the one in question) on otherwise same model rifles.
Call me a bit paranoid if you wish but I like to think of it as a long overdue upgrade to a rifle that has given me 20 great years of trouble-free shooting. Besides, I just shelled out over $500 for new glass and nearly $350 for a custom stock.
1. The reported incidents of accidental discharges over the years have numbered into the thousands. Of those reported, 44 were found to be repeatable AND a) were not due to user error like pulling the trigger while moving the safety (yes, many were doing that) and b) not "modified" by expert or novice. 44 out of 5,000,000+ now manufacturered. Find any product out there that has that track record. Crib related deaths kill more infants and babies EVERY YEAR than that.
2. Those military videos showed something you may have missed. With the safety on, the trigger was "pulled" causing no discharge but doing so slightly disengages the sear. When the bolt is unlocked as in the video, the sear slips and the firing pin does what it was asked to do. Watch it again as the shooter removes his finger from the trigger then attempts to cycle the bolt. Why would you attempt to fire, realize the safety is on, then decide you dont want to fire but rather decide to unload the rifle?
3. The gun in question that discharged and mortally wounded the 10 year old was a model 721. That model was discontinued in 1961. I believe he died in 2001. That means that rifle was at least 40 years old. Anyone have a rifle that's missed a yearly check-up at the gun smith's? I'm betting there was plenty of grime inside that trigger housing, especially considering the 45 mile ride to the nearest hospital. How far away was the nearest qualified Remington gunsmith?
4. Any red flag run up the pole ought to elicit this type of discussion. If we were talking about Glock KBs, dozens of fanboys would cry foul, claiming faulty reloads, double charged factory ammo or user modification. They would not claim their Glocks were ticking time bombs waiting to go off. At the same time, it gives non-owners a better insight into potential issues for consideration.
My research gave me pause and I am now looking at replacement triggers for my older 700. While I have never experienced a problem it has been modified by a smith and it is one that does not include the newer bolt lock. For those who asked, Remington produces the new X-Mark Pro trigger with the long proposed "Walker fix" but also sells the same trigger (the one in question) on otherwise same model rifles.
Call me a bit paranoid if you wish but I like to think of it as a long overdue upgrade to a rifle that has given me 20 great years of trouble-free shooting. Besides, I just shelled out over $500 for new glass and nearly $350 for a custom stock.
Ok, so of the thousands only 44 were repeatable consistantly. That does NOT mean those thousands of other malfunctions never happened,they did and will occur again. It's not a matter if you can repeat the faliure over and over, it's if it ever happened at all and it did otherwise so many people wouldn't be complaining about this issue. I was just at the range today with a friend and we were talking about this very issue,and we tried to make his 700 malfunction and could NOT. On the other hand, I have an uncle whose owned his 700 since the 70's (trigger or anything for that matter has never been tampered with) and he has told me on more than one occasion his gun has fired while racking a new round into the chamber and locking down the bolt with out ever touching the trigger. Up until last year my father and I were calling him crazy, then we saw this first hand.It was a pretty eye opening experience 
He has never reported this rifle to remington or anyone else, he just retired it and blew it off as being an old worn out rifle. I'm sure there are a lot more cases like his that nobody ever hears about. Every product out there has probably had some kinda issue at one time or another, but most manufactures are responsible enough to correct their mistakes instead of blowing it off like remington has. With something as dangerous as a firearm there is no room for error,especially when it comes to something safety related.
He has never reported this rifle to remington or anyone else, he just retired it and blew it off as being an old worn out rifle. I'm sure there are a lot more cases like his that nobody ever hears about. Every product out there has probably had some kinda issue at one time or another, but most manufactures are responsible enough to correct their mistakes instead of blowing it off like remington has. With something as dangerous as a firearm there is no room for error,especially when it comes to something safety related.content
Member
Hello friends and neighbors // Are there any other Remington Models with this trigger?
BIGGBAY90
Member
Handleo2
You mean that you uncle gun fired more then once without hitting the trigger and he never took it to a gunsmith---after the first time it would be gone---SAFETY FIRST
You mean that you uncle gun fired more then once without hitting the trigger and he never took it to a gunsmith---after the first time it would be gone---SAFETY FIRST
Omaha-BeenGlockin
Member
Not a big fan of the 700----I've owned numerous 700's and they're gone due to poor accuracy----never had a problem with any of the triggers.
I own two mod 700's and like them both. I have never had any issues with either one and have no plans to get rid of them. Should the want for another rifle come up I would have no problem buying another.
If any of you guys want to get rid of your scary, dangerous mod 700's really cheap just let me know. I'll take them off you hands because your safety is important to me!
If any of you guys want to get rid of your scary, dangerous mod 700's really cheap just let me know. I'll take them off you hands because your safety is important to me!
Skylerbone
Member
Handle, have you ever replaced brake pads on your car? Did you ask the manufacturer to replace them due to the serious defect (read normal wear) on this dangerous (read multi-ton) death trap?
Gun owners are a group that need be keenly aware of the dangers associated with the products we own. There is but one purpose in any firearm; it was built to kill. Sure lots of people shoot nothing but paper but we all know cars were not built to make left turns all day on Sunday.
I can polish a sear for a smoother disengagement and I can file one to the point of failure. If I modify the gun, plug the barrel with mud or allow dirt to enter and interfere with proper operation of the firing housing I can't expect Remington to beat down my door with a recall team to "fix" the problem.
Again, any tool can be be made to fail, try stepping on your reloading scale and see what sort of powder measurements it gives you. Ultimately we are all responsible for our own safety. I have modified every one of my firearms save an 1100 12ga. and am therefore accepting some part of the blame if failure occurs. With all the mishandling of firearms I've seen at the range it's a wonder most firearms continue to function as long as they do.
I've stated my case and my option to replace what has been an otherwise trustworthy part. It has functioned correctly for 20 years but I have no confidence it will continue to do so for the next 40 years I plan on owning it for. Therefore, I will treat it like a recoil spring, AR barrel, spark plug or brake pad and consider it a wear item.
Great discussion all and stay safe out there. Get those oldies cleaned and inspected and keep those "10 Commandments of Firearms Safety" at the front of your mind.
Gun owners are a group that need be keenly aware of the dangers associated with the products we own. There is but one purpose in any firearm; it was built to kill. Sure lots of people shoot nothing but paper but we all know cars were not built to make left turns all day on Sunday.
I can polish a sear for a smoother disengagement and I can file one to the point of failure. If I modify the gun, plug the barrel with mud or allow dirt to enter and interfere with proper operation of the firing housing I can't expect Remington to beat down my door with a recall team to "fix" the problem.
Again, any tool can be be made to fail, try stepping on your reloading scale and see what sort of powder measurements it gives you. Ultimately we are all responsible for our own safety. I have modified every one of my firearms save an 1100 12ga. and am therefore accepting some part of the blame if failure occurs. With all the mishandling of firearms I've seen at the range it's a wonder most firearms continue to function as long as they do.
I've stated my case and my option to replace what has been an otherwise trustworthy part. It has functioned correctly for 20 years but I have no confidence it will continue to do so for the next 40 years I plan on owning it for. Therefore, I will treat it like a recoil spring, AR barrel, spark plug or brake pad and consider it a wear item.
Great discussion all and stay safe out there. Get those oldies cleaned and inspected and keep those "10 Commandments of Firearms Safety" at the front of your mind.
PedalBiker
Member
I have an old Rem 700 passed along by a family member. It's old enough it didn't have the bolt locked by the safety - so you can unload without going off safe.
I'm wondering what aftermarket triggers would eliminate this "risk". Is the Timney designed differently?
I'm a little reluctant to replace the trigger, though, because it's just about perfect for hunting. It's around 5 lbs and quite crisp. I put a Timney on my Ruger and even though I set it for 3 lbs it took some getting used to.
Speaking of safety. I'm not terribly confident in many safties. On both the Ruger and the Savage the safety only blocks trigger movement. Too much play and the safety doesn't work. On the Ruger it's set by the size of the trigger blob, but on the Savage it's set by screws. At least on the Ruger the "full safe" setting does grab the firing pin.
I'm wondering what aftermarket triggers would eliminate this "risk". Is the Timney designed differently?
I'm a little reluctant to replace the trigger, though, because it's just about perfect for hunting. It's around 5 lbs and quite crisp. I put a Timney on my Ruger and even though I set it for 3 lbs it took some getting used to.
Speaking of safety. I'm not terribly confident in many safties. On both the Ruger and the Savage the safety only blocks trigger movement. Too much play and the safety doesn't work. On the Ruger it's set by the size of the trigger blob, but on the Savage it's set by screws. At least on the Ruger the "full safe" setting does grab the firing pin.
I own several 700's and 788's dating from the late 60's until now (I purchased 3 this year, 2 new and one was from the 80's). I have shot all 3 at the range and put at least a hundred or so rounds through each getting ready for hunting season this year and have not been able to get these guns to fire without pulling the trigger. Two of these guns have the smooth trigger with an adjusting screw on the trigger and the other has the one with the grooves. I have no reason to question the claims made by those that have owned these guns with faulty triggers as I have had other problems with 2 Remington 700's I purchased this year (300 Mag that I could eject the brass and a 7 mm Mag that had several bad burrs in the chamber causing deep cuts in the brass). I personally think Remington should do what Winchester did when they had problems with the firing pin in the model 100 and at least offer to replace the triggers in these guns. I'm sure most wouldn't bother taking them up on this offer since they would have to pay shipping charges but at least is would show the company is taking right steps to protect their customers. Had it just been a couple individuals making these claims I may have had a different opinion about this matter. As it appears this isn't going to happen, it would be nice if they would make a statement as to what can be done by us to prevent this from happening. In other words, will replacing the trigger with a Timney or other brand guarantee this can't happen? I have no intention of selling nor to I intend to stop shooting and hunting with my Remington's but I admit I will be a lot more careful with where I'm pointing the barrel from now on (I'm referring to when I'm sitting in my tree stand and when just walking through the woods as my guns are never loaded in camp or until I am in my stand but I do spend a lot of time walking through the woods with my guns loaded). This is no slam on Remington as I really like my 700's but if they do know there is a possibility of these triggers being defective they need to do the right thing.
It appears Remington is trying some damage control with their new "Remington Model 700 Online Network" which includes this video explaining CNBC's biased report.
http://m.remington700.tv/
http://m.remington700.tv/
Skylerbone
Member
I'll post this for all these new 700 threads. Remington has posted a response on their website including a series of videos which show some of those "witnesses" in a less than credible light. Very interesting. The smoking man never worked at the plant, he worked in munitions in another state. The expert witness has never been able to duplicate an accidental discharge. The woman "shot through the wall in the head" while husband was "carefully cleaning and inspecting" his 700 was actually shot in the same room when the husband and a 14 yr. old were admiring his loaded, safety off 700. No reported complaints from the military or any police units.
Judge for yourself.
Judge for yourself.
- Status
