Did Anyone View "Remington Under Fire"?

[macphisto]

You'll shoot yer eye out, kid.

[VikesFan1]

posted under the influence

We understand.

[VikesFan1]

A couple thoughts on this... I don't chamber shells with guns pointed at people. Any gun. Call it a healthy fear, or something about where the muzzle is pointed that stuck in firearms safety , or whatever. I just don't.

I won't be surprised if I ever hear that the owner of a 700 is being sued, or is charged with negligent homicide simply for owning one. Sure, Remington is provided a certain amount of immunity under laws protecting gun manufacturers, but what about the average joe? At some point someone is going to say 700's are known to be dangerous, the evidence is overwhelming, and that you took the risk anyway. Which leads to my next thought...

This provides more ammunition for the "guns are bad" people. Remington (not cnbc, or msnbc) has done a disservice to gun owners and I don't see myself forgetting anytime soon.

Mike Walker's candid statements alone makes it topical IMHO.

[traveler]

I've got a mid 60's 700. It's a great trigger. If I do the modification will it affect the trigger?

The show explained, if memory serves, that they modified the trigger as per the 1947 recommendation of the designer, but that they still market 700's with the new trigger and those with the old trigger.

I was ready to write all of this off as so much hogwash until (UNTIL) they showed the military types, on government ranges, demonstrating the rifles discharging by merely moving the safety from "on" to "off". They refer to it (mocking Remington's publicity campaign) the "Remington Moment". The cause seems to be this:

The inside of the trigger mechanism is closed making it inaccessible for visual inspection. What happens is that over time lubricants turn into a goo and gum up the trigger and safety mechanism preventing proper movement. The goo gets behind one of the trigger parts, throwing it out of alignment. The trigger sear doesn’t reset properly. When the safety is pushed to fire, or if the rifle is being unloaded, because the sears are in an open position it enables the firing pin to fall as if the trigger was pressed/pulled.

If the rifle is kept as pristine as it was new, apparently there is no problem. Dirt, corrosion, goo? = You get an unwanted "bang".


PS: I know the difference between CNBC, MSNBC, and NBC. My distain is focused on the NBC part. It is exacerbated by the MS part.

[VikesFan1]

demonstrating the rifles discharging by merely moving the safety from "on" to "off"

Maybe I'm mistaken but did they not also demonstrate 700's firing simply by applying downward pressure to the bolt handle? I was a little distracted at moments by the need to defend firearms (and even Remington which wasn't exactly easy) to someone with very little exposure whom I watched with.

[jdege]

There is no conceivable trigger design that won't malfunction given sufficient damage and/or neglect.

This is why you:

1. Never depend upon mechanical safeties, and
2. Always keep your firearm pointed in a safe direction.

The mother who "accidentally" shot her son was unloading her gun with the muzzle pointed at a thin-walled trailer. Had she been following basic safety rules, her son would still be alive.

[1911fan]

I can take any 700 rem made and in 3 minutes make it do all of these horrible things. i can also reverse it so that it will never ever happen, in just a bout the same time. The stock trigger was meant to be a hunting trigger, and as such, the design is rock solid and safe from 2.0 pounds up to 5 pounds and will never, ever let go if set right. The problem comes when people start dicking with the trigger and not understanding how it works. I am willing to be that the "government" types had someone working on the gun backing out the screws in the trigger until it was a "hair" trigger for sniper work. If you do that, the sear resets without enough contact and it becomes unsafe.



Image from http://www.theoutdoorwriter.com/shooting/images

The screw people need to leave alone is the one at the back, the sear engagement screw. It moves the contact point of the sear and the trigger from safe to unsafe, and while it can help "creep" to adjust this, it also makes the gun more likely that rough handling will allow it to move unexpectedly.

However, the point that seemed to be missed by these people, some of whom they interviewed who had lost loved ones, is someone pointed a loaded gun at their loved one, then started to dick with the firecontrols. What ever happened to DONT POINT A LOADED GUN AT SOMEONE YOU ARE NOT PLANNING ON KILLING?

[Davedon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_KVS1hIbQg

lol...

[rugersol]

This is something I've been wondering about for a few years now.

I've done some work on my own Winchester model 70's ... with excellent results ... no stoning ... nothing too scary ... jest adjusted it.

Seems like triggers got bad fer a while ... and now they're gettin' nice, again.

But there'll never be a shortage of folks who don't go far 'nuff outta their way to keep from pointin' a loaded gun at somethin' they shouldn't. And, 'less it's changed in recent years, 'stead of bein' one of the "big three", and more of an afterthought some couple dozen slides later, the lack of emphasis on "finger outside trigger-guard" in DNR Hunter's Safety surely ain't helpin' (no criticism on instructors otherwise only adhering to the content they're expected to present, implied, inferred, 'er intended).

Way I see it, anytime ya git a rifle with a nice trigger, keep it to yerself, and figure we're all on borrowed time, with that, and more.

[12smile]

I usually apply 100% skepticism to stories like this but it seems they've been making a defective product for decades...one that will go off without the trigger being pulled....they even interviewed the 98 yr old inventor who didn't give a dam about getting Remington into trouble.

The bottom line / bad news is that to fix all rifles would cost more than the company is worth .....

[gyrfalcon]

...one that will go off without the trigger being pulled....they even interviewed the 98 yr old inventor who didn't give a dam about getting Remington into trouble...

My take is that the Remington trigger is safe if it's kept clean and adjusted correctly, but the inventor found a way to make the trigger much safer a long time ago which fell on deaf ears at Remington. Eventually they implemented his design, but you have plenty of rifles that are not kept clean or adjusted correctly. Now their decision not to implement a safety design feature is coming back to haunt them. This happens with all sorts of products, like the breaks on Toyota's...

[westhope]

Remington's response:

http://m.remington700.tv/

[goalie]

What ever happened to DONT POINT A LOADED GUN AT SOMEONE YOU ARE NOT PLANNING ON KILLING?

That is not always possible. It is definitely not always practical.

Anyhow, sometimes you would like the killing to take place when you squeeze the trigger, not when you disengage the safety. The firing upon safety disengage phenomenon is something that I have witnessed on the line at Camp Ripley while doing a class for LE precision rifle guys. It was a trigger that had not been bubba'd. It was resolved easily, but it was not something to instill confidence in one's weapons-system.

[PileDriver]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_KVS1hIbQg

lol...

So I just watched this...

...And the pre-clip advertisement was "The Cape" on NBC.

[gyrfalcon]

I don't think Remington did anything horrible, but I've worked with a number of their firearms and they've been progressively cheaper in the design and construction. Maybe they should offer a solution of a rebate if you turn in any older Remington to buy a newer one? I'm sure there are a hundreds good ways to deal with a safety mechanism that is 99.9% effective yet still discharges for the 200 people out of 200,000 that buy the product. Even if the saftey was 99.99% effective you still have 20 rifles that will discharge unintentionally.