A total of 3 men have suffered extensive injury from the Mossberg 100 ATR (which is a bolt action rifle). The assembly pin (sometimes referred to as the bolt head pin or retaining pin) is breaking. The gun will then fire when the locking lugs are not locked causing the gun to blow a user's face off. This happened to two of the men --and both were airlifted to a local trauma center, and the third has injuries to his hand. I am set for trial in April in Tampa Florida. Any information/input would be welcomed. Over the last two years I have learned alot but am always trying to understand all this a little better.

I seriously doubt anyone here would help you gut a great old American gun manufacturer.

Usually attorneys are better at asking questions.

Is there a question in that post?

Use the Search function and IIRC you will find what you are seeking.

I love attorneys.

If true, a bolt flying back into your face is a real joke...well worth "saving" Mossberg from attack.... I can't help but wonder about the fact that we rail against a manufacturer because a rifle won't shoot a 1/2" group; but if they peddle a defective design that kills or maims,.....well,that's OK(?)Pretty funny...

I guess you are a closet bottom feeder.

I'm not defending the poorly conceived rifle. It shouldn't be defended if it does that.

I DO take great exception that a bottom feeder would come to a Gun Forum and ask us to help him hammer yet another AMERICAN firearms maker.

Not "Pretty Funny", but pretty sad and nervy.

I hurt from just looking at an ATR, I can't imagine shooting one.

Travis

If you or a loved one have been injured by a Mossberg, you are entitled to a large settlement.

Get Bent Dueche Bag!

Scum of the Earth P.O.S.!

For a number of reasons I do not consider Mossberg a company worth protecting. I refuse to have anything to do with them and will not order them for folks under any circumstances. Unresponsive and reckless would be two fair descriptions of their business policy...

One has to ask how the pin gets broken. Overloaded handloads
could cause sticking. Not very long ago a guy was opening a
"stiff bolt" by putting the butt on the ground and stompin
with his boot. More background is needed before we make judgement.
Good luck!

If Mossberg put out a defective product as bad as what it may appear that they have (at least one case has a fellow catching the bolt in the face at the first trip to the range, using proper factory ammo, less than 10 rounds fired), then they should be "gutted".

If not, then that'll come out in court.

My guess will be for settlement.

What is really sad is that there are several fools on here that are playing right into his hand.

Mossberg makes some of the finest "heavy duty" canoe paddles in the world,some of them will even shoot occasionally.

I don't know about thier rifles, but if I had to choose between a Mossberg shot gun and a sharpened stick for hunting,based on my experiance with Mossberg shotguns I would get my pocket knife and an oak branch.

thats just my .02 and thats exactly what it's worth

While I'm not suggesting what a lawyer might say is not exactly true..having spent the last 35 years in the company of em'...I want to see real evidence to support his allegation ..something more than some so called expert!

I'm with friend Bob on this one.....100% Concur.

My Brother in Law just bought one of the damned things,he did not consult me first.

I am not a great fan of the tort system when used to punish buisness for honnest mistakes in order to enrich trial lawyers,but it appears there are legit safety and/or quality control issues here.

I'll tell you what I know,PM me your phone number and we'll talk.

Is this the medical term you plan on using in your trial?

Stuff like this is exactly what the tort system was designed to correct. Otherwise, Mossberg might decide that one or two severe injuries a year was lower in cost that spending an extra 50 cents on a stronger pen in 50,000 rifles per year. Sort of like Remington did with that trigger they knew was defective in 1 percent of their rifles.

I stiff judgment or two against Mossberg will change the cost/benefit analysis for them and give them incentive to make the change in design. It is the free market at work.

Somehow I think there are probably ways for a real lawyer to find this information besides entering a poorly worded run-on sentence on an internet gun forum.

Would any of our testimony hold up in court? C'mon. "The guy with the Joker avatar says: Mossbergs suck!! lmao! you just got PWN3D!!"

I am not a Mossberg owner, nor do I plan to be, but...the M590s we used when I was in the Marine Corps were hell-for-stout and very Marine-proof. I guarantee you the trials they put those weapons through before they put them out to us far exceed anything any of us will ever put a gun through.

Granted, I have no experience with their rifles or semi-auto shotguns, but negative diatribes against their pump guns are simply false. There are always bad individual units of any design, but as a class they are solid pieces.

Scott

Another cause might not be Mossberg's fault at all. Suppose someone disassembled the bolt and incorrectly reassembled it?

If Mossberg had an safety problem would not a "Recall" have been ordered???

Doc

I said I based that statement on MY experience with them.the ones I had run ins with were made in the 70's and 80's.
my one friends gun we called "the amazing wondergun" because we had to wonder how many parts were going to fall off of it after he shot it.it was a pump.

I was trying to add some levity to what was starting to turn into an ugly scene.

I love that term "Marine Proof" which just means you needed more than the alotted time to break it.

oorah! Devil Dog! thanks for your service

I have a brand new one in 270.I won it at a RMEF dinner and I've never taken it out of the box.Any one else out there with more info on this?Thanks

I have heard of this happening several times, have not seen pictures yet:

http://www5.usenet-articles.com/t_13063050751692381869_s_Exploded%2030-06.html

I would probably sell it, myself. Wasn't impressed with the quality of the ones I've handled at Gander Mtn. and elsewhere.

If people were injured by a bad product they deserve to be compensated. If they were not injured then Mossberg deserves the chance to defend its reputation. It is a basic foundation value underpinning the social compact.

Did this attourney find out much from this post that is relevent to his case? We probably won't ever know. But, are they dilligntly trying to help their client? I would say yes, and give them kudos for looking out for their clients interests.

The legal system is a far more appropriate place to determine matters of fact than an internet chat site.

I have a old bolt action 16 guage Mossberg and love the thing.Call it the warthog.Sorry to hear of people being hurt but, can't see anyone here giving you rope for the hanging.I won't be.

I have owned a number of Mossberg products, all shotguns, and to a one I have found them robust, safe, and never failed to go BOOM when the button was pushed.

Never owned any of their rifles. Guess anybody can make a bad product, but I don't hear them kabooming all over the place, like, say, Glocks -- and I'm a Glock fan.

Derek

I agree. If one needs a rifle in that price range, I think Savage leads the field with a proven, safe product.

Scott

My Savage 114 was a great rifle. I would second that opinion. Plus I think the Accu-trigger has the edge over most any factory trigger these days.

Your testimony doesnt amount to a hill of beans, I killed a boatload of ducks in Kansas with a Mossberg "Pump" as you call it, and not one piece ever fell off of it. Infact, I chose it because I tend to abuse my duck guns.

You have got alot of nerve to come into our website with your coat and tie and ask us to help you. I say get your lame a ss out of here, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I am with you AggieDog, I just don't think she wears a tie. Ambulance chasers suck a mean one.

Name : Holt Carolyn M Attorney

Address : 2202 North West Shore Boulevard Suite 200 Tampa FL

Zip/Postcode : 33607

Phone : (813)926-4866

I have no doubt that Mossbergs are junk...I've dealt with enough of them. However, I will not aid and abet an attempt to penalize the gun industry by mosquitoes. Mosquitoes have done enough damage to our industry and have given use horrible inventions such as the Remington J-lock and the Winchester Model 70 trigger redesign--a redesign that pushed a model back in time (a matter for a discussion of its own). I'll use a lawyer term in my conclusion: if we help on the downfall of Mossberg, who is to know whom is next? Remington, Kimber...this stuff works like a downhill slide.

Quote:if we help on the downfall of Mossberg, who is to know whom is next? Remington, Kimber...this stuff works like a downhill slide. UnQuote

Nuff Said, great statement, we stand for the right to keep and bear arms, and manufacure them also. As for Mossberg, they filled a much needed nitch. Bet they helped a boatload of young hunters join the ranks of us gun loving hunters, shooters.

Are you listening attorney girl? Stuff it.....

Would you buy an ATR for your son or grandson?

Reminds me of a quote my grandfather said: "give 'em [sic] an inch...they'll take a mile."

I think Mossbergs are like the Kias of guns...but they need to be defended for the sake of the important gun manufacturers.

If the gun is in fact defective, Mossberg needs to compensate the injured parties.

We DON'T need to help some attorney in doing it, however.

My late dad practiced law for over 50 years and was the Nevada Chairman of the Board of Bar Examiners for twelve of those years.

He once told me that practicing law was simply:

"I'm the azzhole who takes money from the first azzhole and gives it to the third azzhole...and some sticks to my hands." In later life he had little regard for where "The Law" had gone.

Of course, of course. I wish they would do it themselves. I don't want the "heavy hitters" of today's world to wreck another gun company, even if they are shi^.

And if they haven't already done so declare a recall.

There is obviously a design flaw.

I believe it was Beretta who drug their feet with the Sako barrel blow-ups. Screw Beretta IMO.

Extremely sleazy way to handle things.

This is not about wether or not Mossberg screwed up. (Of course they did, it's written on the internet by a lawyer.) It is about an ambulance chaser trying to create fear and doubt about a product, and hoping to get a few more on board so she can make more money.It is obvious gun mfgs. are evil, so this could be the case of her life. The term "blew his face off" is very shocking yet non-descript. Kinda telling don't ya think?

I am getting tired of the excessive shortcuts manufacturers are taking these days. That's what done the Model 70 in and will do a lot more models in if quality control doesn't step it up.

The key issue here is we don't have any background "facts", and to sit here and throw stones at Mossberg is ridiculous because you dont know if the rifle had been taken apart, or altered in any manner inconsistent with proper rifle maintenance.

Would I buy a Mossberg rifle, already have some. You are basing your comments on zero substantive facts of any reliance other than your biased opinion.

It's just like the Remington cases, the rifle should never have been aimed at anyone in the first place.

There is a place for low cost gun manufacturers, fact is, there are some that would never be able to afford to hunt were it not for companies like Mossberg.

I don't know you from adam, but I've shot too many Mossberg guns to have much interest in your biased opinion.

I didn't know I was in court Aggie,as for what I said not amounting to a hill of beans.
are you trying to tell me that I didn't actually witness the failure and poor quality of the shotguns in question?
mabey you just happened to get a good one,mabey my friends happened to get bad ones,but don't tell me I didn't see what I did see.
and yes they were pump action shotguns.is there another way you prefer to describe them?they were garbage and I would never buy one based on MY experience.

Exactly!! I have never understood why, we as shooters, Dad's & hunters will have the best rifles money can buy and then go buy our children a cheaper entry level firearm that we would not dare choose for ourselves.

Anybody notice the author of this thread has not posted in it again ??

Some of you fellas that think Mossberg could not have made such a POS must have missed this thread from a few weeks ago.......


http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2630486/page/0/fpart/1

Of course, not. She's thrown corn on the road and is just watching the animals come out to eat, waiting for one to slip up.

That said, after looking at the thread referenced above, it's obvious to me that Mossberg shouldn't be in the bolt-action rifle business.

Scott

Not all gun companies are good for the Second... Certainly S&W, Ruger and Colt did some ugly stuff to gun owners. I still resent Bill Ruger's actions tremendously.

Mossberg, by building junk that hurts people by poor design and construction, should be hammered for what they are doing. They know more about the problem than we do and are not doing anything about it.

I see a huge difference between cities suing gun manufacturers because they say guns are causing crime and injured parties suing for plastic surgery restitution... and more.

Has Mossberg earned any special consideration? Not to my way of thinking.
art

I said it before and I'll say it again. Lawsuits are the free market at work. Let Mossberg get hammered on a judgment or two and they will find it cost effective to fix their faulty design.

Let them do it on their own, and they may decide that the fact that .001 percent of all shooters who buy their POS will have said POS take a face off is an acceptable risk.

I mean really, they have been designing safe and effective bolt action firearms for about 120 years. It really isn't that hard to do. The possibility that any firearm operated with ordinary care could fail to engage the lug and have a bolt come back in your face is completely unacceptable.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=304405

"The bolt design is just like the Savage...a pin holds the bolt head on to the bolt body so that the locking lugs can bear evenly aiding accuracy. But if the pin should break than the bolt head could spin freeeeeely inside the bolt body and not fully lock into the locking lugs the rifle could still fire...The Mossberg rifles aren't the only ones with that design."

Which just goes to further indict Mossberg. Savage has been making a very similar design for 40 years or so without these kinds of problems. Obviously, Mossberg is getting something wrong.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/354/RipOff0354635.htm

Some more research into the background of the claim.

I agree free market at work. If the design or faulty manufacture is a risk, a judgement against the company will strongly encourage it to do better quality control or manufacture. Guns made today aren't necessarily manufactured with the same quality parts or quality control as those made 20 years ago. I've heard this mentioned by a few here. I find it sad that an attorney trying to find the facts for his/her client is treated so poorly by folks here, simply because a gun company may or may not bear some liability. If I had a traumatic accident possibly caused by some company's negligence, I would want such an attorney to go to bat for me or my loved ones. I'll bet many here would feel the same way. But then, that would imply that some folks are hypocritical, wouldn't it? Imagine that... What goes around comes around.

I bought a mossberg 800 I beleive in 243 from Speigals. it was deleivered to my door .I put a scope on it and sighted it in then went hunting and took a nice buck. it was my only rifle as I was a poor soilder and had to use it for anything I hunted.the deer diden't relize it was a cheap rifle with an under powered cartridge. and took them for many years most all one shot kills with ammo I reloaded with a Lee hand loader. I had to make sure I used the same cases as it only resized the neck.
1.Lee Loader
2.1 lb of powder
3.1 box hornedy bullets
4.1 box remington primers.

It's a wonder I ever got anything.

You find it sad that an attorney is treated poorly hear? Hello, I ve been in several lawsuits and I would nt give you ten cents for an attorney, and Ive several in my family.

What amazes me is all of you indicting Mossberg when you don't even know the facts. That is stupidity. And Art, I beg your pardon, Mossberg has done more over the years to provide lower priced arms that has helped an enormous amount of young hunters get into our sport. They don't make spit and polish like perhaps you were raised on (silver spoon intended), but I call BS on anyone to indict a company before all the facts are on the table. Isn't that what our legal system in America is all about?
You are innocent until proven guilty. Or are you a limey?

I know what my mossberg did for me, I doubt you really ever shot one. And no, I dont respect any of you here who jumped all over this stupid thread before the case has gone to court.

Ye doth protest too much.

I learned how to shoot with an old Mosserg .22 rimfire. Solid, accurate rifle that took hundreds of starlings, gophers and the occasional nasty tomcat. I wouldn't trade that ugly old rifle for anything.


On the other hand the recent built ATR model appears to be a supreme piece of chit. It's really a shame but is what it is.


I personally wouldn't shoot one, would you?

That right there outta tell you something.

I never said I wanted one, but my point is real simple, let's let it go to court and see what the results are.

I am just a little suspicious when something happens to a gun "WHILE HANDING IT TO SOMEONE ELSE"

I never said you wanted one either. Just asked if you'd shoot one.


This appears to be a serious issue with nasty consequences to unsuspecting shooters. I really hope Mosserg has sent out recall notices.


My father was severly injured a few years ago by a defective piece of farm machinery so I get a little riled up about this kind of crap.
(And no, he didn't sue...).

My guess would be a batch of badly hardened pins or much too soft.

I read(on the interenet)that, that was the case.

I'm just curious: for all the attorney haters out there - if you got seriously injured by a supposedly defective product, or got sued, who would you call to represent you in court: your car mechanic, your gunsmith, or someone else?

AggieDog
Please do not get upset if I fail to apologize for where or how I was raised. My first two shotguns were High Standard and Mossberg.

But let's get to the "good" Mossberg is doing for hunters... There is a certain POS named Buck McNeeley with a show backed by Mossberg. Buck stands in one edition of the show talking (strutting really) to the camera and twirling the barrel of his Mossberg shotgun into the concrete slab of a trap range.

I wrote Mossberg suggesting their backing might do more good elsewhere. Mossberg never responded. I referenced several acts over the course of several shows.

Shortly thereafter Buck was popped for shooting caribou on the same day he flew (landing and shooting caribou spotted from the air actually) and he pled guilty in Fed court on a Lacey Act violation. Among the many conditions of his sentence were a requirement to make some public service announcements about it being a good idea to follow laws and no hunting in the US for a few years. He never answered to AK charges.

When I wrote to Mossberg a second time they failed to respond again.

I will not order Mossberg for folks on my FFL. I will not own or use Mossberg myself. Mossberg going under would not bother me in the slightest. I do not consider their efforts a Public Service.

If there is a problem causing injuries to shooters I believe they deserve to sue Mossberg and let the courts decide what should be done. Knowing Mossberg standards, I have every reason to believe people have been hurt because of Mossberg. But I am not on the jury.
art

..... and if they got hurt from a defective firearm, wouldn't just about everyone here be looking for a lawyer?

If it's defective and a safety concern to the public, turn the lawyers loose, no mattert what company or product it is.



.

Has anyone considered contacting Mossberg and letting them know what kind of chickenskit garbage this "AttorneyHolt" is pulling?

I have a feeling they may be interested to know.

Some people try to leave a positive mark on this world, she will just leave a stain.

Auto Accidents
Medical Malpractice
Nursing Home Abuse/Neglect
Wrongful Death
Admitted in Florida, Maryland and Washington, DC.

I will personally provide
you with prompt aggressive
representation

Carolyn M. Holt
Attorney



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-866-LADY-LAW Toll Free

Look, everyone lay off the attorney. She isn't on here looking for information. I'll bet in year or so she has been on this case she has learned more about that rifle than anyone on this board could possibly know. She could probably draw you the specs from memory.

What she is really doing is beating the bushes for clients. She is hoping someone will say, "Hey, I know someone who got hurt with one of those..." and that the person will contact her. Judge her for that if you want, but everybody has to eat.

I have a hard time believing these pins shear when shooting factory ammo. I know guys that start at max in the reloading manual and work up from there, stopping when they have to pound their bolt open with their boot heal and a primer falls in the magazine well. Usually the bolt handle breaks off or rotates on the body(M70).
But maybe the 100's are bad. Time will tell, but a non shooting attorney should be aware and acknowledge that owner abuse can cause such problems before crucifying Mossberg.
dan

obviously she is trolling for customers, but it is not any of my business. If your missing the right side of your face from a mossberg I would think that you already have an attorney. On the other hand this post was a public service announcement for me, because if someone at the range asks for my help to sight in a rifle I will look carefully at the brand (among other things) before I agee to help. Sadly many first time and younger hunters or dads looking for an inexpensive rifle to start their children with might consider this gun. My own experience was a Mossberg 500 pump shotgun that ejected 2-3 shells from the bottom when you pumped it to load the chamber, gun gone in 24 hours and replaced with an 870 which I still have today.

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-flmdce/case_no-8:2007cv00262/case_id-190822/

Wow, and this from a guy that defended the abysmal Rem 700 trigger to the last breathe. The above could well have described Remington's actions for decades, until they finally gathered some integrity and re-designed their trigger group.

But it took multiple lawsuits to make that happen...

I was in the Navy and we used Mossberg shotguns for watches and they were shot quite a bit during quals and practice. They seemed to be fine. I wonder if they sell a better gun to the military? I bought a new 835 few years back and it was junk wouldn't shoot half the time. Mossberg should have replaced it, but instead chose to do nothing! I traded it on an 870 and tried to salvage the rest of my duck and goose season after wasting most of it on that junk Mossberg! I'll take the sharp stick!!

Good question Sam. I would not. I would like to know if Mossberg is addressing this potentially deadly problem and if not, why not?

g

I sure hope they are. Catching a bolt in the cheek is very serious business.


This might sound a little extreme but after reading about the Mossberg disaster I personally will never buy a centerfire rifle with a two piece bolt.

So if you think it should be done, are YOU going to do it, or are you just blowing smoke?

Brad
Why start the New Year with an idiot mark on your forehead? The sheer number of 700 triggers so far exceeds Mossberg's total production of firearms there is no comparison.

The woman shooting her son through the horse trailer is your best case and extremely weak. Remington negotiated a settlement; businesses manage risk that way.

Mossberg has built rifles for exactly how long? They imported the Howa in the late '80s but that was clearly too perfect for them. They have very little experience building rifles and very few on the market and they have more lawsuits against them than the Walker trigger with exposure in the millions of examples.

Shooting a Mossberg is the risky part, not waiting for someone to have an incredibly rare "failure" after someone Bubbas the trigger or forgets every basic safety tenet... Sheesh!

Happy New Year anyway!
art

Let's see, a troll who identifies himself as "Attorney Holt" appears on the Campfire. He has a total of TWO posts.

This thread alone has had 1588 hits and 78 responses.

Methinks that this is a "tempest in a teapot."

Personally, I believe that Attorney Holt is not what he says he is; heck, he cannot even spell. He is without a doubt a bored kid who likes to turn gunny folks upon each other. We need none of that.

Steve

Actually there are links to the case filing and such showing atty Holt is likely a real flesh and blood female atty... Involved in a suit against Mossberg, exactly as stated...

Here is a link to Mossberg's recall list.

http://www.mossberg.com/content.asp?id=557&section=safety


I don't see the ATR mentioned. This is all I need to know about their company. Let the lawyers eat 'em up, I really could care less.

Way too many good companies building things right for me to worry about losing one that prides themselves on producing a bonafide piece of chit.

Yeah Art, the new trigger was for no reason, right? Mike Walker's sworn and documented testimony wasn't real. The faulty M700 trigger design and FOSR's well documented both inside the Rem factory and by consumers isn't real. Your willful ignorance and double standard is fascinating.

The new ownership of Remington inherited a multi-million dollar slush fund because the previous ownership decided paying lawsuits was easier than fixing the trigger design... talk about not giving a chit about the consumer. At least the current ownership stepped up and finally did the right thing.

I'd actually own a Remington again... at least Mossberg, when it found the problem issued a recall. Remington did no such thing.

and after all that the damn remington bolts still fall off. I would own a savage first.

The older Howas are the ONLY ones with a recall mod available according to their website. The ATR's aren't mentioned. I've never handled one but have looked at the pics of the disassembled bolt. Looks to me like a pos. VERY POOR design & the engineers that designed it should look for work in another profession.

Well Mr Holt,

tell them they should have bought a Winchester or Remington

Hell,

Blasers have been doing this for years.


Flame on.

Let me get this straight. An attorney is seeking info to strengthen her client's case who has been severly injured by a faulty firearm design.

I see no recall info on this rifle on the Mossberg site. I feel safe to say that Mossberg knows about the incidents.

What is your problem with a search for info? I see nothing under the table here, all will come out in court.

If it had been me, minus half my face, I'd be damned proud my attourney was in search of more evidence of neglect.

g

I have a savage that somewhat failed in this manner. I was shooting some reloads that where under max. levels in one of my manuals and the bolt felt different when I closed it. The reloads where near the top of the chart listed, but I hadn't noticed any signs of high pressure. Upon checking out why the bolt felt "funny" I discovered that the pin holding the lugs and boltface had broke and the lugs wasn't engaged. Thank god I opened it up and checked before I went ahead and fired it.The pin looks rather large untill you take the bolt apart and realize it is nearly drilled in two to allow the firing pin to pass thru. I don't normally like the hotter loads, but this gun was grouping better as I increased the powder charge 1/2 grains at a time. In all fairness I had just bought the gun used at a very cheap price for a rainy day gun when I might not want to take one of my better guns out($150), and could tell it had a hard life.I spent a furtune on the gun ,new barrel(pitted badly- should have cleaned barrel before I bought it), new SS trigger(great trigger for a low budget design gun)and Devcon bed the stock, Replace plastic trigger gaurd with metal because of bedding issues. Wish I had never seen a Savage, not smart enough to quit putting money in it and cut my loses. Now on I will stick to machined bolt lugs design-Remington, Winchester,Ruger, Cooper( Iknow- bought before the USA Today article). This honestly isn't a flame, just my account of a gun and have resisted posting about because not wanting to appear as a flame. I still have gun, can't in good consious sell it to a friend as a beginner rifle because of what I think of the design.I still use it for bad weather, I never warmed up to synthetic-sucker for pretty wood, but only shoot factory ammo and inspect it after using it. Sometimes a manufacturer has to be forced to do the right thing. I think the poster asked for legitimate information in a honest question. I have never used a lawyer except for preparing a will, but all of us know that we may have to on any given day if it is the only option in a case where we have been hurt or wronged and can't closure by any other means.

If the guns were faulty and injured the shooters, they are entitled to compensation and if the compay was negligent, they are subject to punitive damages. If me or one of my family were severely injured by a faulty anything, I would sue. Minor injuries with no lasting damage are a different matter.

I have a Mossberg 500 12 ga pump, and it works well. I bought the synthetic stocked version for quail hunting in the thick brush where I would not take my old but clean Ithaca or my high-grade Browning. I don't care if the plastic stock or painted receiver get scratched up. I have an old 46B .22 rifle and I learned with a Mossberg bolt action .22 in the 60's. Those were and still are accurate, dependable guns. I can't comment on any other Mossbergs as I have no experience with them.

The Remmy 700/721 type bolts are not "machined bolt lugs design"!

Those Remmy bolt bodies are three piece with the bolt handle brazed on and yes the bolt lug section brazed on! Look at your Remmy bolt body a half inch behind the lugs and you will see a groove there where the bolt body is brazed onto the bolt lugs!

Wished I stopped reading this thread here on p. 2. Definitely the high point!

I've not had any failures with any Remingtons, My only problem has been with the small pin that holds the boltface on my savage and the way it is nearly drilled in two to allow the firing pin to pass thru. Not over engineered by any standard, just stating facts as I have seen them in the rifles I have owned.The retaining pin is huge weak link in camming open a stuck case. In doing so it can and has broke in the past and may not allow proper lug engagement. These aren't stories I've read about or heard 2nd. hand,just facts I've seen on a particular rifle I own.
Not internet law written in stone, just personal information I've actually seen. Actually Remington bolts aren't "brazed on" , they are silver soldered at around 90000# tensile strengh(close to the strengh of the carbon steel used in the bolt body), whereas brazing equates to 45000-60000# maximum.

Steve, I found her on another site. She is definately seeking information on Mossberg's ATR rifle. As someone who has been to court on several occasion's involving significant damages, my point is simple, we dont know her from ADAM, if Mossberg is at faut the process will take care of itself. But, I get pretty testy with some of the Campfire's "Hollyer than Thou" croud who forget just how important an impact Mossberg has made over the years providing low cost firearms frankly, to those who otherwise would never have been able to have been introduced to the sport of hunting,etc, shooting. Up until this stupid post by
miss rich bitch (probably a democrat) lawyer, I dont recall the world getting blown up by Mossberg. I am very disappointed in so many people ready to trass Mossberg..... We all know their fit and finish is terrible, but they do offer a low cost product.

I'd like little miss rich bitch to put me on the stand so I can trash her knowledge of Mossberg.

No Hi-jack here,....if you think about the simple and straightfoward way a pinned rotary bolt head design works,
( Savage 110, circa 1950s ),....with the action in battery, on a cartridge,.......the PIN takes little or no impact.

I personally LOVE the Savage 110, strong, reliable, accurate.

The PINS are not part of the breaching design, rather suplementary,.....and only for the LOCKING and UNLOCKING the action phase.

If the pins discussed were prone to shear from simple locking / unlocking,......something's really rotten in Denmark.

Let the chips fall where they may.

GTC

Aggie Dog
"But, I get pretty testy with some of the Campfire's "Hollyer than Thou" croud who forget just how important an impact Mossberg has made over the years providing low cost firearms frankly, to those who otherwise would never have been able to have been introduced to the sport of hunting,etc, shooting. Up until this stupid post by
miss rich bitch (probably a democrat) lawyer, I dont recall the world getting blown up by Mossberg. I am very disappointed in so many people ready to trass Mossberg..... We all know their fit and finish is terrible, but they do offer a low cost product.

I'd like little miss rich bitch to put me on the stand so I can trash her knowledge of Mossberg."

I guess you missed the part about Mossberg doing all they can to make shooters look like morons through their support of Buck... Or do you support Buck's actions, too?

I doubt Ms Holt needs anyone to trash her knowledge of mossberg... That is not an issue in this case. Your self-importance is really laughable. You are ready to defend Mossberg's lousy reputation for building crap.

I am ready to trash Mossberg because of what they have done. The additional action of building crap that has injured folks is pure bonus...
art

Yup, I'd wager that she's been schooled by some expert gunsmiths & knows that rifle inside & out.

She may or may not be looking for more clients, but I believe the reason she posted here is to get an idea of what the defense could possibly throw out there. She did get some pretty good fodder here.

Smart lady.

Oh & the "blow your face off" thing may not be a legal term, but I bet it works in front of a jury.

She could also be doing a little jury research. Does she want people who own guns on the jury or does she want to strike as many gun owners as she can? What do gun owners think of Mossberg? What will be their reaction to this sort of thing?

The responses she gets to these questions will give her some insight.

Excellent point. Don't know if there's a clear-cut answer for that one.

Art, I am not ready to defend anyone, I made it very clear,. I want to see the facts. Like I stated, the wolfs pounced at the opportunity to trash Mossberg, let's see what the facts are before we all get worked up.

Sent a pm, who's BUCK?

There never is.

Sounds like an ambulance chaser to me, or one of those nasty class action lawyers that advertises on TV.

Look, another internet feeding frenzy! Check it out--this gal's an attorney so is responsible for the decline and fall of the republic. That's a Mossberg, so must be a total POS/salvation for the less fortunate shooters out there. And anyone who doesn't agree with me can just line up against that wall over there.

An inquiry was made, perhaps poorly, coupled with a self-serving statement. No reason to beat each other up about it, is there?

If this is the case, I will never fire a Savage rifle...or a Mossberg centerfire.

Am I being too cautious?

I personaly know of this happening last year to the son of a man that I went to school with. The Mossbergs are a bad design and dangerous to boot IMHO and should never have been sold to the public the way that they are set up.

Yeah, I'm wondering who Buck is also so make it public, please.

Thanks

Started a thread earlier on the Campfire about Buck McNeely.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2698330/page/0/fpart/1

I have made several posts about him recently and apologize for not being clear.
art

It would be tragic if someone who could only afford a cheap rifle put his confidence in the manufacturer's design and ability and got hurt as a result.

I don't have the answer, but if there is a problem, the rifles should be recalled, and if it takes action from this attorney to force the recall and to bring this problem out so that everyone is aware of the danger when they purchase or fire one of these rifles, then, I can't fault her for doing that.

I had a Buick automobile once, that would just go dead for no reason, even while you were going down the road keeping up with traffic. I took it back to the dealer many times, and also spent a lot of my own money on it, trying to get it fixed.

Several years later, I read that Buick was aware of the problem, refused to recall the cars with that particular engine, and that there had been two deaths because of it. This was after Buick stopped manufacturing that particular engine.

I wish I could have found an attorney like her, when I was having the problem with my car.

Remember the problems with a certain brand of tires Ford was putting on the Ford Explorer? There were several deaths because of these tires, and I read that some attorneys knew about the defective tires, and had filed lawsuits, but had refused to make the knowledge public because they felt if people found out about it and quit buying the tires, it would hurt their chances of recovering damages.

Anyone remember the low-numbered Springfields?

Looks like they're suing Walmart, Olin, and Mossberg. Walmart for selling the gun,and Olin for making the ammo? I guess they'll see what sticks.

SOP to ensure the case stays in court... Let the court weed out the liability holders...

And not members of the campfire...............

Point taken, some Campfire members do seem to want to absolve Mossberg of all guilt before they go to court.

That is what you meant, isn't it?

here's the only story I found on Google about this "defect"....the plaintiffs story doesn't make a lot of sense...the gun misfired while he was handing it to his son, and also exploded for good measure.

http://www.cdapress.com/articles/2008/10/25/news/news03.txt

so I guess we assume it fired unintentionally while he was handing the loaded weapon to his son, and in addition to firing itself, it also self-destructed?

Firearms are subject to manufacturing defects like any other product, but US made guns are pretty heavily inspected so that gross defects affecting safety very very rarely make it to the consumer. Dangerously defective designs in the marketplace are even rarer....self-reporting and recalls stop most of those very quickly.

The vast majority of product liability claims against firearms manufacturers....other than the anti-gunner's bogus design claims.....are operator error....nearly always involving violation of Rule 1. Blow up cases are almost invariably gross overloads, wrong caliber ammo, or barrel obstructions.

I have represented S&W, Colt, Rem. and currently USRAC over the years, and have yet to see a valid design defect claim.

But unless Attorney Holt is in the process of committing malpractice, if he has an April 2009 trial date, he must already have an expert and an expert report, so why he would be trolling a firearms site asking semi-literate questions is a bit of a mystery, no?

If the design is proven defective, then it should be recalled and the victims compensated. Based on the limited sample of Attorney Holt's abilities, a betting man would have to go with Mossberg on this one.

That story you link is a different case and a different attorney. Somewhere in this thread someone already verified that his attorney was in Florida (I think) and not Idaho.

I know its a different case, its probably the hand case Attorney Holt refers to.

What I said is that's the only one a quick google search turned up, which indicates there ain't exactly an epidemic of injuries arising out of this design. Which was my point.

Once you get into the facts of these cases you almost always find something squirrelly that explains the blow up. If the design was really defective, there would be a lot more claims, and a recall.

Well, I've seen it on several other boards besides this one a good while ago. I don't really think it would be a design defect if everything worked perfectly but they got some bad steel in the pins.

I figure the attorney is either trolling for business or gauging the reaction of gun owners and doing a little jury research.

pretty tough venire for him

No it isnt what I meant. Look, if Mossberg is guilty, then they will be liable as it should be. My point was it sounds pretty fishy to me that a rifle blows up while handing it to someone else. What I meant was real simple: you are innnocent until proven guilty. What I also meant was, I dont care what your bias, or anyone else's bias is against Mossberg, that gun company met a need to provide low cost weapons to customers. Due to their efforts, and others like them, read Stevens, Savage, etc, many new shooters and hunters have entered our sport. The defense of our sport is best served when all Americans, or Canadians, etc, can afford a rifle, shotgun, or 22 rifle, etc, not just the rich or middle class.

Does that explain it well enough for your satisfaction???

I've had the "privelege" of being and working around lawyers for 31 years. Some of them and their obvious greed and disdain for common sense, has left me upset with the whole bunch. Let's face it, some are theives with a license. But!!!! If Mossberg put out a defective product that gets people seriously hurt then let the process go forward so the record becomes public and the whole world can see for themselves whether or not Mossberg is selling quality or is it selling junk? And, if this makes them produce a better product, who's the looser? kwg

Year before last the son of a man that I went to school with had a Moosberg bolt hit him in the face when he fired it at a Deer with factory loads (not reloads, the was/is not a reloader). The bolt lugs are pinned to the bolt body and the pin broke when the bolt closed and the lugs did not fully close. When he fired the rifle the lugs opend and the bolt him in the face. He survived and had to have reconsructive surgery. The doctor that performed the surgery said that he was the second victim that he had performed the exact surgery on another patient caused by another Mossberg.

IMHO the Mossberg rifle is a danger and I would not own or shoot one.

What a horror! Pulling the trigger on a buck and having the bolt come back into your face is a nightmare that most of us don't even imagine. If Mossberg is putting out bad products, they need to be held accountable. Let a jury decide.

The Marlin XL7 bolt action rifle that I looked at has a pin that holds the locking lug section to the bolt body. It may be similar to the Mossberg?

"Up front, the bolt is very similar to the Savage Model 110. The bolt head is a separate piece that is pinned to the bolt body."

http://www.shootingtimes.com/longgun_reviews/ST_Marlinxl7_200804/index1.html

One article or post said the Marlin bolt head had a slot and key so it would still turn if the pin was out. I'll see if I can find it again.

Bruce

-------------------------------
Here's one:
http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php?topic=29731.5;wap2

Here is why you won't have a bolt failure with the Marlin. I got to looking at the Marlin bolt to see how it could fail, and I don't see how it could. Mossberg, Savage and Marlin all utilize a bolt head that is pinned to the bolt body. Marlin however did design a safety feature into that bolt to insure that the bolt head will always turn with the bolt body in the event of a retaining pin failure.

The Marlin bolt head has a key slot that mates with a detent in the bolt body. Even in the unusual event that a retaining pin breaks, that bolt head will turn with the bolt and safely lock into the locking recesses in the receiver.

So I think you can be comfortable that you will not see a bolt failure in the XL-7

Sure am glad I consulted you about the Mossberg rifles so many months ago, and went with the Savage instead.

Wonder if the Savage keys into the bolt body similar to the Marlin ? Anyone here ever disassemble a Savage bolt ?

I found the following about Savage bolts on the web (so take it with a grain of salt):

"In a few early production rifles there were several reports of the "bolt head retaining pin" that holds the bolt head to the bolt body cracking under heavy usage . This would cause a major stoppage. This was apparently a fluke as there have been no further reports of this problem and I believe that bolt pin breakage is no longer an issue and that there is no need to be concerned.

However, when notified of these incidents Savage Arms, to their great credit (and something other firearms manufacturers could learn from), immediately investigated the bolt head pin problem. While they were unable to duplicate the failure after some exhaustive testing they did come up with a way to beef up this part of the their scout rifle by using their "magnum" bolt head assembly.

The Savage Arms' bolt assembly incorporates a floating bolt head to assure full bearing on both locking lugs. To achieve this, a bolt head retaining pin is used as a "pivot" point. The firing pin passes through a hole in the retaining pin and is ultimately guided/supported by the bolt head. To increase the cross-sectional mass of the bolt head retaining pin in their magnum assemblies, the diameter of the firing pin hole through the pin was reduced."

Also to Savage's credit, I have a Model 200 Stevens in 7mm-08 that would not properly eject the expended cases. Called Savage,and they sent at no charge to me a beefier spring with instructions on how to install it into the bolt. End of problem.

However, I am still shooting my Mossberg 22 rifle, and Mossberg shotgun. We'll let the jury decide the issue. I smell something really fishy personally.

+1

I don't know how my Savage got the lugs it did then. I thought I would check them for engagement and coated them with Dykem. There was about 25% engagement on one and 40% on the other. So much for full bearing.
That being said the rifle would shoot .35" five shot groups from a pencil thin barrel. It was a 22-250 and my cousin has it 15 years later. He shoots 2-3 deer a week with it year in and year out. Did have a funny trigger though. It was LIGHT.

is there an actual news article we can read bout these incidents? i havent seen any yet.

if you search on google for Mossberg Injury Idaho--you will find one of them--my clients hit the press back in 2006 when he was injured and i have a copy of the article but probably cant be found on the internet
the 3 cases are all pending in court
one in the middle district of Florida, one in Idaho, and one in Loisiana

to AGGIE dog--i'm not saying there is a problem with the Mossberg shot gun or the 22--just the 100 ATR bolt action rifle
You keep "smelling something fishy" because you were not airlifted to the trauma center when your 9 day old 100 ATR exploded blowing your face off. I didnt believe in the case at first, but now that 2 other people were injured with the same rifle in the same way--things start to look (or smell) alot different.

to AGGIE dog--i'm not saying there is a problem with the Mossberg shot gun or the 22--just the 100 ATR bolt action rifle
You keep "smelling something fishy" because you were not airlifted to the trauma center when your 9 day old 100 ATR exploded blowing your face off. I didnt believe in the case at first, but now that 2 other people were injured with the same rifle in the same way--things start to look (or smell) alot different.

looks like the Savage has been around for 50 years, and without significant problems. I still have difficulty understanding the design difference between the Savage and the Mossberg. I admit to my shortcomings--and just seeking input. My experts did a modification that took a matter of hours to design and install--so that the Mossberg will not fire out of battery.

I print and re-read your memo--but dont really understand. The Mossberg assembly pin has a hole through it for the firing pin--what is the difference you are trying to explain to me.

You can't recognize the difference between a gun that has a part failure and fires accidentally, shooting somebody that it never should have been pointed at in the first place, and one that blows up in the shooter's face when fired, due to no neglect of safety rules on the part of the shooter? Then you take somebody who can distinguish between the two, to task? You're a real piece of work Brad.

Cole
Hard to take him serious when he starts using trekking experience in Nepal as a substitute for hunting experience... Which is obviously pretty shallow. He did not even get the part about a Mossberg recall right...
art

Have you spoken with the man in Columbia, La that this very same thing happened to last year? with the same rifle also.

Suffice to say Art, I'm not impressed with the boy's reasoning ability on this and other threads.

The Idaho man you are referencing for people hear bought the rifle in Dec of 2005, and while Elk hunting in oct of 2006, and "while handing the rifle to his son" the rifle "misfired" and caused permanent injury to his hand. Again, I am not defending Mossberg, but Im not going to defend this hunter either. Why? Because there are too many facts we havent been told yet. For starters, I'd like some statistics on how many people have been injured from so called accidents with other rifles. I doubt the answer is zero. There are far too many things that may have caused this , not excluding the hunter perhaps being untruthful in his care, and use of this weapon. Did he ever take it apart to clean it? He had it a year, and I doubt that was the first time he used the rifle. If it was, some kind of hunter he is. Let's just get to the facts and then this story will have more legs. And Attorny Holt, yes I still smell something fishy when a rifle Misfires while handing it to someone else.

Dude, you need to learn how to hit the "reply" button so people know who you are talking to. For instance, I didn't reference any hunter in Idaho.

That sticker on your dad's bumper is my generation. Evidently, you did'nt learn much from it.

im sure your outlook would be different if your 11 year old daughter had a firing pin blown thru her right eye and suffered extensive facial burning from the blast.

Nah, you'd probably want to "stand up for the company", huh?

Holt,
The differences between the Savage and the Mossberg and the Winchester and the Mossberg are significant and obvious. As I mentioned in my PM though, I won't offer an education to an attorney for free just as an attorney would be unlikely to offer me free legal opinion (I once had one call me and ask me a question then try and bill me for a phone consult!). GD

I know that I'm jumping in on this late. I have been having trouble with a 100 ATR in .270 Win that I bought at WalMart last month and searched the web to see who else was in a similer situation when I found this. My problem started when I didn't find a warranty or registration card in the box. Also, the manual stated a 1-year warranty and the sticker on the stock stated 2 years. I emailed Mossberg customer service but did not hear back. I took two boxes of 130 gr. factory loads (1 from Rem., 1 from Win.) to the range after mounting a 3x9 Bushnell Banner. If I loaded 3 rounds or 1 round the last round would not feed (it would pop up and turn sideways). I thought I didn't put it together correctly when I took it a part for cleaning. Back home I re-assembled everything per the "exploded diagram" in the owners manual and tried some dummy loads. Still had the feeding problems. Emailed Mossberg again. Still no response. Called Mossberg told them of the problems and was told they would send a new follower/spring assembly to me. Was told that my sales receipt was my proof of purchase - no warranty/registration card provided. Still wainting on it to show up.

Did a close examination of the bolt. The bolt head/face, bolt body, and bolt handle are 3 separate pieces. All have to turn in unison for the locking lugs to engage. The firing pin passes through the pin that retains the bolt head and locking lugs. If the pin shears on one side there would probably sufficient friction/force on the firing pin that it would not move forward and hit the primer. This pin would have to shear on both sides, keep the firing pin aligned with the hole in the bolt face, and allow the bolt face to reamain stationary while the bolt handle was moved. More likely the bolt handle became dissengaged from the bolt body. During my military carrer I was trained to be the maintenance rep. for aircraft crashes (we called them "misshaps"). I am not an engineer, but for a great part of my adult life it was my job to find out what went wrong with aircaft and get them fixed. I would be very interested to see how this turns out for Mossberg. Also, I would think they would put registration cards in with new firearms to help "lawyer proof" themselves. -AimHigh

Remember that the Mossberg ATR-100 is a 3rd generation Raptor, probably not the greatest foundation upon which to build a rifle or a reputation. Raptor failed and the design went to Charter Arms. Charter Arms couldn't make a go of it, as their Model 2000, so the design went to Mossberg. IIRC, there was an article in American Rifleman or American Hunter in 2004/2005 about how Mossberg had reengineered the basic Raptor design to make it a much better rifle. It appears that their redesign didn't make it good enough. At least when Mossberg decided to build their 464 lever action 30-30, they built it around a proven/tested design, the Winchester 94.

PaulBarnard and I have a bet that the ATR-100 won't be in production on 08/16/2010. If it isn't, I win, if it is, he wins.

Regardless of whether Mossberg has success with the ATR-100 or not, it is too bad that folks have been hurt using them in the way that they were intended and it is too bad that attorneys are involved, as they seldom add value or seek the "truth".

Jeff

That would seem to be the problem. If you study the pictures on this link of an ATR bolt that came apart, you don't have to be a rocket scientist or an engineer to see why it's a problem. If I were you I wouldn't be firing that ATR of yours until there is some kind of fix on the way the bolt handle is attached.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2630486/page/0/fpart/1

Great pictures of the bolt in your previous post. The NOV 2005 edition of the "American Rifleman" says on pg 112. "The handle is an investment casting, swaged, press fit, and then brazed to the rear of the bolt body.....". If the handle was splined to fit the teeth of the body and brazed it probably would last forever. Can't tell from the pics if there was any brazing. Also wonder if a machine shop could run these two pieces through a collet and crimp them. Kind of like a giant Lee "factory crimp die". In all seriousness, Mossberg should do a recall of all ATR (and 4x4?) bolts to check them out for defects. -AimHigh

I would say that there was no brazing on that particular bolt joint.

Obviously there was no brazing. Plainly this is a quality control issue and perhaps, a manufacturing process issue. The same sort of thing occasionally happens on Winchester M 70's.
Now, what aspect of the Mossberg design as opposed to that of the Winchester turns this from a maddening inconvenience to a catastrophic accident? Anyone? What old Mauser 98 feature could be easily incorporated in a multi-piece bolt to absolutely prevent an unlocked bolt from firing? GD

My son (11) has and shoots his atr-100 super bantam .243 with about 90 rounds fired through it. He shot a 7 point and a doe this year!!! No problems at all with this gun. You guys got me wondering if he could get hurt firing this gun? Well I'll tell you guys one thing his ATR is retired untill I can find out more on this problem....

I agree



No I would not. But then I will not buy my daughter a Remington, Savage, Winchester, or any other factory made rifle either. She's getting a custom made 308 made by a close personal, friend of mine.

I have not fired a 100 ATR but I had a 500 for years and it was a great shotgun. I never had a problem with it and I sold it for more than I paid for it.

I believe the M70 has the cocking cam in the handle AND body, not just the handle. The cocking piece would force an unlocked bolt to rotate closed, then probably not fire due to loss of energy. At the head end, the Mossberg bolt head is pinned to the body. Most others are one piece, silver soldered, or brazed to the bolt body.

The Mauser has a ridge on the firing pin the fits into a valley at the rear of the bolt head when fired with bolt locked. If not locked, the ridge missing the valley prevents the firing pin from going fully forward and hitting the primer.

Bruce

Mauser firing pin

Good job Bruce!
The Mauser feature is one which illustrates the Mauser penchant for short curcuiting any potential failure. In the firing pin design they are preventing an accidental firing in the event of a firing pin breakage. Whether Mauser saw such a failure or was just using his imagination matters not. He prevented the problem before it occured. Mossberg created the problem with a flawed design and lacked the imagination to correct it or prevent the consequences. The Mossberg engineers didn't even need imagination; they only needed some knowledge of bolt action design and the willingness to apply it.
The pinned on bolt head is a non-issue for the most part. Many other actions utilize this design with no problems. The pins are sufficiently large as to make breakage very unlikely. With the safety feature of the Mauser bolt, even this type of failure would be covered.
If attorney Holt asks you for further info, be sure and tell him/her to "show me the money" first! GD

With all of the safety features built into the M 98, like the flanged cocking piece to deflect gas, the gas excape holes, and the way the bolt face encloses the cartridge head, Mr. Mauser must have been aware of many of the shortcomings of ammunition of that period.

There have been many improvements in the way brass is drawn and annealed. In the period the Mauser 98 was designed, cartridge case failure must have been a common problem in all rifles for Mauser to incorporate all of these safety designs in his design.

I know General Hatcher documents many case head failures in Hatcher's Notebook. I think the designers of the Springfield 03 and the Mauser 98 had in mind weak and defective brass when the strength and safety features were designed into their rifles.

Mossburg needs to start over. We now have improvments in the way brass is manufactured and hardened, with the breeching systems of most rifles designed to handle the escaping gas in the rare event of a case failure, or more likely, and over loaded cartridge.

Now, Mossburg needs to figure out a way to prevent their rifles from blowing up with loads that are normal and safe in other rifles.

lol Somebody who can't even hit the right reply button giving out advice. Hurry up before you miss the short bus son.

You can, if you are inept and very unlucky both, get a similar failure in an ar-15 by failing to replace the cam pin in the bolt carrier after cleaning. Without the cam pin, it is possible for the bolt to slip into the barrel extension but of course it won't rotate and lock without the cam pin installed. You can imagine what nifty results you get after you've converted your AR from direct gas impingement to direct blowback. At least the flying bolt carrier has to fight its way out of the closed receiver before direct impact to the shooter.
Was it American Riflemen that did an article on the old Ross Canadian straight pull battle rifle? The article said an improperly assembled bolt in that one could fire without locking up as well. It was rightly regarded as a serious design defect then when smokeless powder was still newfangled cutting edge technology.

I'm not your son, and I havent posted on this thread in over 2 1/2 weeks. You got a problem, get on a plane to CA, and we will just settle it, dude.......

New to the forum here guys but have been reading for a while to get reviews on guns and ammo. Usually a great forum but I had to chime in, join and ask...... Found this particular thread during research on the 100 ATR 30 06. I have seen very, very few bad reviews of this gun not to mention have not see any mention of this law suit ANYWHERE. I have searched and searched. Can anyone tell me if this is a real suit of just some nitwit decided to stir the pot on this forum?

I don't know if the lawsuit is real but the failures are. For the lawsuit we have only the word of a lawyer which isn't great. For the failure, I've seen only a picture but that was from a trusted source FWIW. Since I've not worked on a Mossberg, and likely won't, I am perhaps not a great source either! GD

Thanks, I would really like to know. I am in the market now for a 30 06. Was looking at a new Mossberg, new Rem 770, used Howa stainless, cz 550 premium (although just out of price range) or maybe one of the other staples like Smith I-bolt. Also saw a new Browning A-bolt walnut for $499 (same as the CZ). Liked the Mossy as I have a couple mossy shotguns and love them and have seen nothing but good reviews......

where did you see the pics of blowups and what is the cause? Any help on which model would help also.

Hey MAh,first off WELCOME to ya! Now,you won't find me anywhere on the MANY pages of this thread. I was involved in similar threads on other forums maybe a year or so ago and we found out what has been found out here. Something definitely happened. The reason I posted was to give you my opinion on that used Howa SS rifle. If it's a decent price on a Howa in decent shape,get it.

Thanks for the welcome..... very good informational site!!!!! RE Howa. Local shop has it.......... 30 06 stainless with polymr stock. $325.

Sounds like a decent deal. I've had a Howa(S&W)for more than 25+ years and it seems to get better with age.If you want more input maybe start a thread at"Hunting Rifles". I can tell ya though that Howas/Vanguards have a good following here and elsewhere. Some custom makers are using the actions as a basis for their work. GOOD LUCK!

Thanks EZ, as a matter of fact I started a thread under Elk hunting as this all started when I decided to do an elk hut in the fall and need a shooter for that trip. I was just about to purchase the Mossberg 100 atr until I read this thread..... I now have been overloaded with information. I am so confused right now it will take a week to sink in. NOTHING but great people and fantastic suggestions...... a lot of which would have taken months for me to pick up on. Please take a look at the thread and let me know what you think.

What ever happened to this controversy?

Anybody out there buying the Mossberg bolt action? Did they stop production?

I took pictures of one that disassembled its bolt after shooting less than a box of factory ammo.

No doubt you have purchased the used Howa by now. Smart move, but if you are interested, you can see the ATR pictures here.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...&topic=0&Search=true#Post2621471

Ted

I recently purchased a Mossberg Whitetail Lightning combo in .308 from Dick's Sporting Goods, then found this thread about the 100 ATR bolt issue (the combo comes with the 100 ATR Owner's Manual so it's the same gun but with the new Lightning Bolt Action trigger and a slightly different wood stock). Looks like the Fla. case originally cited in this thread was dismissed on 3/26/09 per item #250 on the link below.

Cotterill v. O.F. Mossberg [url=http://www.boliven.com/legal_proceeding/8:07-cv-00262-JSM-TBM?q=][/url]


Any legal folk around to peruse that page and tell us what happened exactly? Checked the bolt on the new gun and it still looks like the photo in the original post.

the lawyers from St. Louis who represented Olin are the ones I work with for Winchester ammo and Winchester/USRAC cases...they are very good. Looks like they beat up the plaintiffs pretty good in pre trial procedure.

Case was dismissed without prejudice....I can open the documents on Pacer when I get back to my office Friday and post them.

Thanks for taking a look. It would be interesting to know details of the plaintiff's accident/injury and the mitigating factors of same as presented by the defense. Please post any add'l info if you do take a look at the case files. Without looking it up, I assume "Dismissed without prejudice" is kind of a stalemate as opposed to a Summary Judgement?

talked to my friend who represented Olin on the ammo claim, they got dismissed early....nothing wrong with the ammo.


he said the plaintiff was a real piece of work.....he had broken the gun, then disassembled the bolt himself and "put it back together" but didn't get it right....his buddy looked at the bolt and said "that ain't right, better not shoot it like that" but the dumbass shot it anyway, and the improperly reassembled bolt flew out the back.

I'll get the dismissal order and see what happened and post it.

the dismissal order is a standard settlement dismissal....the amount paid, if any, won't appear in the court records.

Steve,
Why would there be an "amount paid" if the case was dismissed?

because they could settle out of court.

Lay out your reasons?

if i asked for a gun and you refused to order it, i would walk out and never come back again. your job is to sell me a gun, not be Obama and tell me what i REALLY want.

Ah ha - proof positive that it was Mossberg's fault. It was Mossberg who did not weld the bolt permanently closed at the factory and then did not take positive action to prevent it being sold to an idiot. Had they done either, this tragedy would not have occurred.

the case is dismissed when it is settled

It would appear from scanning the transcript that a summary judgement in Mossbergs favor was granted for charge V whatever that was and all other charges were given a dismissel without prejudice which as I under stand means the plainteff can refile these charges. I do hope no one on this forum ever needs an attorney and goes to one who has read some of these replies.

a dismissal without prejudice is entered when parties agree that the case is settled, but the deal isn't complete until the check is delivered and the papers signed.....after the money actually changes hands and the releases are signed, a "with prejudice" dismissal is filed with the court.

this is usually referred to as a "60 day dismissal" in federal court...if something goes wrong and the settlement blows up or doesn't get funded timely, the plaintiff can reinstate the case within 60 days.

I would love to know what Mossberg paid.....would bet it was less than cost of defense.

Not that it matters any, but one of the first mossjunks that i laid my hands on was broken! When you "closed the bold" the lugs did not enguage and you could remove the bold from battery by simply pulling it back. I guess these crap boxes are press fit. Granted it was a gunsmith who showed me this rifle, but the owner found out the hard way. Was not hurt fortunately. This is nothing like the remington deal. On a Remington, the only way someone would get hurt is if the 10 commandments of gun handling were not being followed and some moron pointed the gun at someone. With the mossy, safe use could mess you up bad! I hope they dont loose thier butt, but i do wish they would pull this piece of crap from the market.

Never mind...reading on, looks like im way behind here...moral...stay away from cheep junk

Thanks for following up Steve NO. Good to know it was an end-user fubar and not a manufacturing issue.

So, where'd the lawyer go?

I missed this fr some reason back when it was posted... But the ATR has come back up and I need to respond to this comment...

I transfer guns for friends for free. If you decide not to inconvenience me because of your own horrible taste I can live with that!

Gene L asked why I refuse to deal with Mossberg and that is simply because they sponsored Buck McNeeley and refused to dump him even after Buck got popped for same day airborne caribou hunting here in AK. After it was pointed out how Buck was spinning a Mossberg shotgun muzzle into a concrete pad while talking to the audience they refused to even respond... And there are other reasons atop the junk factor.
art

Well worth the read if you are interested in this injury case...

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/florida/flmdce/8:2007cv00262/190822/185/

The link doesn't work

Changing SNs...or getting friends, family, and employees to help?! CLass act.

The link worked for me. You have to down load the PDF.

"According to Willey, a second incident involving the gun being thrown resulted in
a long rod inside the bolt action, including springs and half-moon washers, falling out of the
rifle."

If there were such parts inside the bolt it would lead credence to this guys story.

The guy took the bolt apart trying to "smooth it up" & "fix it"
(sounds like a tweaker)

Also hitting it with a hammer to get the bolt closed???
(also sounds like a tweaker)

Wasn't legally entitled to own a gun because of his criminal background?
(more tweaking? )

Neighbor testified they were drunk every day before 8:00 AM.

Plaintiff testified he couldn't remember if he got [bleep] up on the day it happened???

IMO the plaintiff & his girlfriend should both be sitting somewhere in bright orange jumpsuits thinking about the lifestyle they're pursuing...
Not sitting in a courtroom looking at collecting "Damages" from a situation they created...

This is a lie...

Darwin nominee.....

You are the one that is lying, because one of them is the son of a man that I went to school with

This link will work , but doesn't as posted above if I try to clink on it

Link

Still don't believe any of this.

Stick your head in the sand, the young man that I know needed reconstructive face surgery.

Horrible, I will never buy one and advise against it as well.

After reading that court document, I wouldn't award the plaintiff anything but another ATR!

That idiot is a perfect example of morale hazard. Bet he can't get insurance either!

I can't believe he actually hammered the bolt back in! And the gunsmith testified that would be a symptom of improper assembly/damage.

In my opinion all guns should be sold with a tag that reads "buyer assumes all risks".
The first thing everyone does when they buy a new rifle is they start tweaking or they think they are a certified gunsmith and start hammering the bolt back in. whether it be adjusting the triggers, polishing a bolt smothing the lugs or cooking up some reloads; all risks associated with these common practices are NOT the manufacturers problem. YOU DID IT, NOW LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES. Quit trying to blame someone else for your lapse in good judgement. one other thing, Beer and guns do not mix. It's fine by me if you want to go to camp and get drunk but stay away from the firearms.

I believe in the owners manuals it does say problems with the firearm should be handled by a certified gunsmith. doubt the guy was a certified gunsmith that hammered the bolt back in. case dismised.

The gentleman that I personally know did nothing but purchase the rifle and factory ammo and the sight the rifle in and go hunting. He shoots a deer (killed BtW) and the bolt flies out and hits him in the face

Hardly see how it is his fault

What you "believe" doesn't matter at all.....the design is lousy.A broken or missing pin is completely foreseeable,in which case the locking lugs would not engage;nevermind that it is likely a cheap hunk of metal,likely to break or fall out.....I mean the lugs would not engage when the bolt handle was turned down!What a complete piece of junk.....

In addition, there was testimony the rifle would still fire without the lugs engaging,sort of reminiscent of the old Ross rifle,or the old two piece firing pin of the original Springfield.Bad design.

Even a drunken,incompetent stiff shouldn't have to suffer having his face blown off by a cheap design of that type.Mossberg will likely get what they deserve for putting crap like that on the market.

Exactly....... Spot on as usual!!!!!!

Did you read the court document outlining the testimony about what he had to do to get it to fire? This meth head could have made an anvil shoot!

The design is BAD, the guy that I know DID NOTHING WRONG. The rifle is an accident looking for a place to happen

everyone send the mossberg to me cheap and go buy your remington mine has 500 rounds through it and not a problem this is all bullshit

It doesn't matter at this stage of proceedings...A Motion for Summary Judgement is a procedural mechanism that allows the Court to "take away" the case from a jury because there are no material facts in dispute. The jury is the body that determines the facts in a case, not the Court.The Court merely found here that there are sufficient "facts" for the case to go to trial, therefore the MFSJ is (mostly) denied.

The Court is saying the root cause of the explosion appears to be a missing or defective pin(the experts seem to disagree which it was,presenting an issue of "material fact"),either of which situation would have prevented the lugs from engaging...whether the pin was missing, or broken,and what effect the actions of the Plaintiff had to do with this,is a question for a jury to decide,and presents an issue of fact at this stage of proceedings.

For purposes of a Motion for Summary Judgement,these are factual issues that must be determined by a jury(Trier of Facts),instead of by the Court(who applies the law)......all this decision says is that the case should go to trial(the jury).There is as yet no determination on the issue of liability resulting from this ruling.

All the stuff about the Plaintiff pounding on the bolt, tossing the rifle around, breaking it, and contributing to his own injury,is saved for trial later on.....however it may not matter in the end.....depends on how the facts (who the jury believes)squares out with the law on Product Liability.

Brilliant......

Consider your self lucky, the design and execution is flawed

The only thing I could find in a Google search is that Mossberg has a suit going with Timmey Triggers over some patent infringements. I thing this whole thread is BS. I knew a fellow that would dam near blow up a rifle at least once a year with his stupid hand loads. I been shooting rifles since I was 6 years old, 51 years now and never had I ever had any manner of problems, yea some needed a bedding job, I had one that had a barrel with a crooked chamber, nothing to really write to mom about. Its the piss poor language of the original poster that should be suspect. We all bit and the troll is laughing his or hers back side off.

I don't have time to read the whole thread...I was commenting on the Court's ruling; don't really care about anything else...

I have had few problems with blowing up rifles but there are undoubtedly a lot of idots out there.

I won one of these rifles at an FNRA dinner. I came upon this thread years ago and it helped me decide I didn't need the rifle - my umpeenth .30-'06 anyway. I traded it at Cabela's for one of the Remington/Zastava .22s.

I really wouldn't have been afraid of shooting the rifle - I'm not stupid enough to assemble the rifle without the bolt head pin and probably not ham-handed enough to break the pin.

But, accepting the allegations at face value - I was troubled to think that they short-circuited Savage's design which would prevent firing if the bolt head was not in locked position. I wonder of that is true? Has anyone of the us posting on these nine pages ever disassembled one of the ATR bolts and confirmed that? I wish I had, but I was keeping it all pretty and new-looking as trading material.

It's a simple matter to have an oblong cross-section to the firing pin and an oblong passage in the bolt head. Mauser figured this out several lifetimes ago and I think that's how Savage's design is done, if I remember correctly. What about the ATR?

I purchased one in 30-06 about 6 years ago in alaska. have never had a problem with it and for the money its pretty damn accurate.

jwp475,
Did your friends son take this incident to court and if so what was the judgement?
Does anybody know if Mossberg has changed their bolt design to address this problem?
Reason I ask a friend is/was considering buying a Mossberg MVP in .223..

Lawyers are hated until one is needed. (I'm not one, no ax to grind either way).

To whom does this carnage belong? Do the affected persons just suck it up? What if they don't have personal insurance? I don't like companies being "gutted", especially gun companies. But there are issues here, serious issues that just won't "go away".

What if it was you or a loved one? And what if Mossberg is at fault? Do they get a free pass and you or your loved one just take a hike?

These questions need to be answered and litigation is the only way to find out what's really going on and determine what's equitable.

And, I'm as pro gun as anyone here. Saved up money as a teenager to become a 50 year NRA Life member, bumped up to Benefactor a few years ago.

IMHO,

DF

Ignore Swampy. He's dumber than dirt and believes that all gun problems are caused by the user, all of whom are somehow inferior to himself.

He has no credibility on the Fire. Check around.

DF

So what happened after all?

Don't think it's over quite yet.