-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
~ TONIGHT ~ Remington Under Fire 9-10PM on CNBC *TONIGHT*
- Thread starter 6hold
- Start date
All "accidental" gun deaths or injuries are a result of pointing a gun at someone. I always assume something could break in a gun and cause it to fire. Anyone who points a gun at someone because "it can't go off if my finger isn't on the trigger" is a moron.
It won't bother me to have a loaded carry firearm. I only meant that it won't necessarily be pointed in a safe direction, but I trust myself and those I'm around to have no issue with it. I grew up around guns, and in the past month converted my wife from "no guns in the house" to "I want more" by showing her how safe/fun they actually are, in the right hands and with the right mindset.
HooVooLoo
NES Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,525
- Likes
- 235
Awesome! Funny how that always works out, eh? Hehe.
I have a Remington 700 ADL in 30-06 I bought it used at Four Seasons back in the late '90's.
Three years ago I was up in Maine hunting with my father and was exiting the woods and went to unload the rifle. At the time, the rifle still had the original “bolt-lock mechanism” the bolt would not open unless the safety was off (Never did care for that). With the rifle pointed at the base of a tree a few yards away I released the safety so I could open the bolt to eject the rounds and BANG! I spent the remainder of the week beating myself up trying to figure out how I managed to pull the trigger while releasing the safety. To me it was a severe breach of handling safety that I had done this and could for the life of me couldn't figure out how I had done this. Back a camp I was looking at someone else’s 700 and noticed that the safety did not have to be released to open the bolt. This made me decide to see if I could remove the bolt-lock mechanism.
Turns out this incident was not me messing up with my handling.
The week came to an end (no deer that year) and I go home and start looking into what it would take to get rid of the bolt-lock and through a Google search on bolt lock and Remington I came across what is called the “Safety Modification Program” by Remington. For $20 plus S&H they would replace the trigger and safety systems, removing the bolt-lock. I also came across quite a few reports of this exact thing happening including fatal occurrences. Now I do feel the fatalities would have been avoided if proper handling was adhered to but this was happening way too much to be a coincidence. It still amazes me that this program is not more widely distributed.
Here is a link to the “Safety Modification Program”.
http://www.remington.com/pages/news-and-resources/safety-center/safety-modification-program.aspx
This program covers Remington bolt actions manufactured prior to March 1982. Weather or not this issue exists with newly manufactured rifles or not, if you have a pre 1982 Remington bolt action you might want to look into this.
In the end, I sent my rifle to Remington for the modification and enjoy the lack of a bolt lock and have not had another [STRIKE]unplanned[/STRIKE] accidental discharge ([STRIKE]I won’t call it an accidental discharge[/STRIKE]). I hope I never do, but since then I have been even more aware of my handling.
Three years ago I was up in Maine hunting with my father and was exiting the woods and went to unload the rifle. At the time, the rifle still had the original “bolt-lock mechanism” the bolt would not open unless the safety was off (Never did care for that). With the rifle pointed at the base of a tree a few yards away I released the safety so I could open the bolt to eject the rounds and BANG! I spent the remainder of the week beating myself up trying to figure out how I managed to pull the trigger while releasing the safety. To me it was a severe breach of handling safety that I had done this and could for the life of me couldn't figure out how I had done this. Back a camp I was looking at someone else’s 700 and noticed that the safety did not have to be released to open the bolt. This made me decide to see if I could remove the bolt-lock mechanism.
Turns out this incident was not me messing up with my handling.
The week came to an end (no deer that year) and I go home and start looking into what it would take to get rid of the bolt-lock and through a Google search on bolt lock and Remington I came across what is called the “Safety Modification Program” by Remington. For $20 plus S&H they would replace the trigger and safety systems, removing the bolt-lock. I also came across quite a few reports of this exact thing happening including fatal occurrences. Now I do feel the fatalities would have been avoided if proper handling was adhered to but this was happening way too much to be a coincidence. It still amazes me that this program is not more widely distributed.
Here is a link to the “Safety Modification Program”.
http://www.remington.com/pages/news-and-resources/safety-center/safety-modification-program.aspx
This program covers Remington bolt actions manufactured prior to March 1982. Weather or not this issue exists with newly manufactured rifles or not, if you have a pre 1982 Remington bolt action you might want to look into this.
In the end, I sent my rifle to Remington for the modification and enjoy the lack of a bolt lock and have not had another [STRIKE]unplanned[/STRIKE] accidental discharge ([STRIKE]I won’t call it an accidental discharge[/STRIKE]). I hope I never do, but since then I have been even more aware of my handling.
Last edited:
boilermaker
NES Member
I think this is a great point. When you are out hunting, you might not realize there is a house 400 yds from you, but a .308 round can find it.
I think the bottom line is if you can fire the gun by not touching the trigger, I think you have a problem. It is a small percentage of the guns you make, but if you can make your design safer, so that it acts how a normal person expects, then you have an obligation to do so, or stop making it.
My Rem 700 has a hair trigger, sure wouldn't want to drop it. It's pre'82 model, think I'll send it in for Rem to do that $20 up-grade, maybe get a new trigger out of the deal.
I used a possibly unreliable online Inflation Calculator and it stated $.05 in 1948 would equate only $.44 today. If that's accurate I can't say that would really hurt Remington's overhead, ya know?
Actually, that is what I would call an accidental discharge -- one caused by a mechanical failure.
That's different from a negligent discharge -- that is one caused by operator error (booger hook on the bang switch).
See that's just it - aside from bench-shooting or competition shooting, I don't see the desire for a "hair trigger". There IS something to be said for a light trigger for less resistance + less movement = more accuracy. But I certainly wouldn't have my hunting rifle set at anything less than 3lbs; my ARs have mil-spec single stage triggers at around 5lbs and my carry/duty pistols are at 5lbs. In my eyes anything less than that would be unsafe. There is something also to be said for having trigger discipline and pull control.
My 1911 carry guns are around 4 lbs. I think that's plenty safe. YMMV.
M1911,
I agree with your point on AD/ND.
I have spent so many years with the idea of there not being ANY AD's I just don't like the term. But I appreciate your point, and have fixed that, Thanks.
I agree with your point on AD/ND.
I have spent so many years with the idea of there not being ANY AD's I just don't like the term. But I appreciate your point, and have fixed that, Thanks.
You're quite welcome. I think it is appropriate to differentiate between equipment failures and mental failures. Equipment failures are rare, but they do happen.
As I tell my students, the safeties on guns are mechanical devices. Mechanical devices are in one of two states: 1) broken or 2) about to break. So you can't count on a safety to protect you from unsafe gun handling.
Last edited:
There's also cooked off rounds, slam fires and generally malfunctioning firing pins... No "negligence" required - just a bad day and some physics working against you... Safe direction, know your target, finger off the trigger...
What cost $0.055 in 1947 would cost $0.52 in 2009.
By the way, the Remington 700 is not the only gun in the world that can fire when the safety is moved or when dropped, or when the bolt is moved.
Actually, the real question I want to know is "is a 1% failure rate normal for most hunting rifles??". It may very well be. The reason CNBC is beating up on Remington could be because it is America's best selling rifle, makes a big target and has lots of data points.
Last edited:
HooVooLoo
NES Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,525
- Likes
- 235
I believe it was already proven anecdotally that firearms do not "fail". Any failure of a firearm lies with the mishandling of the operator of said firearm. Firearms do not malfunction. People do. Any mechanical device can fail to perform it's function, yes, but a firearm is designed to fire. And it fires perfectly fine. Perhaps the SAFETY on said firearm fails, or malfunctions, to perform it's function or purpose. But that is not the firearm. The firearm is designed to fire. The safety is designed to prevent the firearm from being fired. (By a person? On it's own?)
But that is why we all are taught, and teach, that safeties are mechanical devices that can fail. They are not safe.
maee, I am not going to be civil with you and continue to have a calm intelligent debate on this issue simply because of that blatent bolding which was uncalled for in response to my post. And since you cannot accept a logical argument and instead are trying to appear loud, boisterous and having the last word, I will not give you one inch of wiggle room on this.
Thusly, I state it again. All firearm safety rules, if followed 100% of the time, will result in a 0% casualty rate 100% of the time, and it is impossible for it to be otherwise. It is also impossible to disprove this theory without breaking any of the firearm safety rules. You lose, I win. Now STFU and stop typing responses to my posts, because it is obvious to me you are reaching for a troll's bridge for the sake of self-induced chest inflammation.
And I now retire from this thread, because I just heated some Jiffy-Pop. I like mushroom clouds in the kitchen that smell like movie theatres.
Bill Nance
Banned
ROFL....Dude, that reminds me of blue-collar comedy..."Pick me!!!"
I knew there was a reason I didn't use the/have safeties on any of my firearms!
It would be interesting to see, like maee was asking about, to see how many firearms from other manufacturers experience similar issues. I know I've heard of the SPAS-12 doing it.
It would be interesting to see, like maee was asking about, to see how many firearms from other manufacturers experience similar issues. I know I've heard of the SPAS-12 doing it.
codfish
NES Member
I did. Started a thread on it and someone pointed out it was duplicate. Here is what happened with me:
In the early 80's I had a Remington 700ADL in 30-06 that I hunted with. Coming out of the wood one day I flipped off the safety to unload it and BANG it goes off. Had the gun cradled in my left arm to operate the bolt so I though maybe my coat was in the trigger guard or some thing. After that I was very careful in how I cradled the gun to unload it. One year later the same thing happened. That night at camp with the gun unloaded I flipped the safty on and off about 30-40 times and it happened again. So I had my local gun shop send it back to Remington. I got it back supposedly "repaired" but I never got a detailed explanation of what they did. I never hunted with it again and eventually traded it in at a gun shop for something else. Now I see this has been a known problem in these rifles and Remington has never addressed it. Consumer reports even did a review of a 700 back in the 60’s and noted the discharge issues in their review.
In the early 80's I had a Remington 700ADL in 30-06 that I hunted with. Coming out of the wood one day I flipped off the safety to unload it and BANG it goes off. Had the gun cradled in my left arm to operate the bolt so I though maybe my coat was in the trigger guard or some thing. After that I was very careful in how I cradled the gun to unload it. One year later the same thing happened. That night at camp with the gun unloaded I flipped the safty on and off about 30-40 times and it happened again. So I had my local gun shop send it back to Remington. I got it back supposedly "repaired" but I never got a detailed explanation of what they did. I never hunted with it again and eventually traded it in at a gun shop for something else. Now I see this has been a known problem in these rifles and Remington has never addressed it. Consumer reports even did a review of a 700 back in the 60’s and noted the discharge issues in their review.
Last edited:
Was thinking that for the money, they wouldn't be that bad.
After a Gun Tests review, I would be more interested in a Weatherby Vanguard. Or in that tasty offering from snipercentral that Jose showcased a while back.
EDIT: Did not see the special. Just read the thread. Wouldn't turn my nose down at a free or close to free 700
After a Gun Tests review, I would be more interested in a Weatherby Vanguard. Or in that tasty offering from snipercentral that Jose showcased a while back.
EDIT: Did not see the special. Just read the thread. Wouldn't turn my nose down at a free or close to free 700
I just finally got around to watching the whole thing tonight and I totally agree with this thread. If you follow the safety rules 100% then there is 0% chance of a fatality. Safeties fail and should never be relied on (you learn that in your basic safety class). I wouldn't turn down purchasing a 700 because a small amount of people have had issues.
So, the vibe I'm getting from this thread is that everyone is cool with a manufacturer refusing to correct a known defect in a product because they can work around it?
While I agree the safety of firearms is in the hands of the user, literally, I've got an issue with a company that has a known, correctable issue and won't remedy it. Not the kind of folks I want to buy from whether it's a firearm or a TV.
While I agree the safety of firearms is in the hands of the user, literally, I've got an issue with a company that has a known, correctable issue and won't remedy it. Not the kind of folks I want to buy from whether it's a firearm or a TV.
Whatever, Remington should have been more upfront about WHY they introduced this new X Mark Pro trigger. It wasn't to fix something that wasn't broken, was it?
I'm not suggesting in the slightest that we go Clinton and sue them to death. The verdict is in, and manufactures are not responsible for improper gun handling or usage. But that doesn't mean they don't have a responsibility to be more upfront about issues.
And yes, I will be buying the new 700 after I save up.
Yes I do believe that gun makers should make guns that only go off when you pull the trigger. Much like I expect car makers to make functioning gas and brake pedals.
Furthermore, I don't see how hard it is to do either.
Furthermore, I don't see how hard it is to do either.
So, after reading thru all this I am still confused. Does this thing only accidentally fire (1% of the rifles) if you pull the trigger with the safety on, then cycle the safety to off; or if you did a trigger job on the mechanism (like those snipers most certainly did)?
You could easily "pull" the trigger inadvertantly when walking thru the brush here in new england while hunting. You safety would be on, but you would not know it was pulled until you went to turn the safety off some time later.
You could easily "pull" the trigger inadvertantly when walking thru the brush here in new england while hunting. You safety would be on, but you would not know it was pulled until you went to turn the safety off some time later.
Last edited:
I called them asking about the 12/31/10 deadline. The service rep. said not to worry about it they been extending the program for years.
It is my understanding that 700s have had this problem straight from the factory, without any trigger job. It is also my understanding that it doesn't have to require someone to pull the trigger with the safety on.
Yup.
dixidawg
NES Member
Very interesting responses from Remington:
http://www.remington700.tv/#/home then click on the video
http://remington700.tv/pdf/Remington10-29-10.pdf
Funny, I don't recall seeing any of this on CNBC. I wonder when they are scheduled to air this? (0_0)
http://www.remington700.tv/#/home then click on the video
http://remington700.tv/pdf/Remington10-29-10.pdf
Funny, I don't recall seeing any of this on CNBC. I wonder when they are scheduled to air this? (0_0)
