Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Remlin 1894 .357's?

Yeah, there ARE a lot of "emotional generalizations" involved in this issue, if that's what you want to call them, or classify them as being. However, it still remains that if the buying public is dumb enough or neglectful enough, to allow the companies that serve them and fulfill (or fail to) their needs and wants, then .... well, where do you think THAT leads us to??? I'm not a chronic complainer, but I DO resent (appropriately, I think) when a company tries to foist off a bill of goods on us, or raise prices to cover their mistakes and lunacy, or simple hubris. It's every man's right to interpret and act as he deems most fit, and while I would despise shunning Remington if it comes to that, if they are no longer the Remington Arms Co. we've always been able to depend on ...... well, why not????

Anti-gun cooperatives have bought or tried to buy some gun producing companies in the past, and I sincerely don't want to see that, either. But if Remington can't or won't produce what we need, and at a price that's at least semi-reasonable, what have we lost, really, if it should come to that? We live in "modern times," and in these modern times, it seems we've come to expect to get whatever we want, when we want it, and how we want it. But it takes real knowledge for companies to produce products that fulfill the needs of the buying public, and talent and care and precision in manufacturing, whether the product be orange juice, or guns. If the folks heading up Rem. right now can't do what ALL companies HAVE to do to stay in business and prosper ...... who really wants to continue supporting them?

We were once a nation of essentially honest businesses and it was kept pretty much that way via competition. Now, in these days of super-dyna-whoppin' conglomerates buying up smaller companies, and running them like rented mules are worked ........... well, what can we expect to grow out from that, but poor products that tend to get poorer ovet time?

Remington needs an attitude adjustment, IMNSHO, and I'm about prepared to introduce them to the concept. I'd do so reluctantly, but also very disappointedly, and, I think, justifiably. If they can't get t his right - the production of an essential product - what reason do we have to support them any longer???? I've waited a long time now for one of these guns, and STILL they can't get it right. I suspect their "engineers" don't understand tolerances, or where they need to be and how much there needs to be at critical points, but that's just a guess. I was mainly just wondering how others felt about this fiasco. Thanks for letting me know. I hope Rem. pulls their heads out of their rearmost receptacle, but .... that all depends on THEM! But there seems to be a lot riding on whether they will or not. A lot of the folks I talk to have just about had it with Rem., and the number is growing. And it's going to take an EFFECTIVE Remington to pull this out of the dive they've put themselves in, I think. Nothing else will suffice. No song and dance, no cajoling, no rationalizing - NOTHING can overcome abject incompetence, except a return to competence. NOTHING.

Sounds like sour grapes. Blah blah. Blah blah. Blah blah. "Whatever." If you want the product you have to pay what it costs, you're not going to get a rebate for bitching about it.

I had one. Good gun, accurate, and other than one screw breaking (extreme cold?), very reliable. The only reason I got rid of it was I mis-guessed how the drop in the stock would work out with a scope.

Tom

just buy a Marlin built when the people building them give a schidt.......

357 & 45 Colt

Remington management doesn't call the the shots--ultimately Remington is owned by Cerberus, one of those multi-national equity outfits that specialize in bleeding companies dry. See Colt and S&W.

Marlin is part of Remington Outdoor company which is simply a holding company. Although made in the same plants, Remington doesn't own Remington Outdoor, nor do they own or have the final say with Marlin, either.........

Until there are owners who are gun people in these old-name companies the current situation, unfortunately, probably won't change.

I don't have any issues with the quality of the one I just purchased that I am going to sell. The quality of my sample is way better than the Rossi's being made in the last few years. My action was a bit stiff, but it seems that's what you can expect across the board now, unless you want to spend the big dollar. I am sure a spring kit and or a little polishing would work wonders. I may buy another in a larger caliber if I can sell the one I have now. No complaints here. Some will argue you should not have to spend any effort polishing or altering a $700 gun new and I agree, but it is what it is if you don't want to wait for a used one and potentially pay more.

Prarie Creek, check your PM's. And I can deal with a stiff action. Part of the way I spend my time these days is slicking guns up to work like I want them to. I really want one with 6-groove rifling, so I can better shoot a wider array of cast bullets in it. To tell the truth, though, I may yet settle for one with the micro-grooves. I already have an Guide Gun and a .44. The little .357 is just such a neat "truck gun," though, plus a very fun gun to shoot casually or otherwise, that it may well wind up being my favorite daily "go to" rifle for fun and games, or the field. There's really not much out there in my neck of the woods that a .357 won't take pretty handily, if using the right bullet. If Prarie Creek responds to my PM, I may have the situation solved, so this is NOT just a blah blah, bitch bitch post. It's motivated by some very real concern about the path and results of one of our oldest and heretofore most reliable companies in the sporting fields. We the "unwashed public," CAN, if we will, affect what these companies do. If the current mgt. can't or won't or doesn't know how to get results, the shareholders can and likely would, throw them out and hire new ones who DO know how to run a company for real. I confess, I'd really like to see that. It would help to ensure Remington's continuance as a provider for us shooters/hunters/collectors, and how can THAT be a BAD thing????

Brian Pearce's article was a great one, and a valiant effort to save Remington from their own delusions and idiocy. Even a fan and promoter of these little guns can't overcome outright incompetence, though. If asked to pick a gun off the shelf that would shoot MOA, for many years I'd have chosen a Rem-700. Now? Well, I'd probably go with the Savage 110's. Remington's quality across the board has NOT been increasing for a number of years now, and the only explanation I can think of is that they simply aren't as serious about their jobs as they once seem to have been. Companies go through all sorts of changes, some good, some not so good. Whether Remington can pull themselves out of the downward spiral they seem to have been on for several years now is a good question that as yet, has no answer. I'm pulling for them to get back to business like they once were. If they don't, I simply refuse to feed their kitty to help them get farther down a bad road. It's all I can do, and really, the least i can do if I genuinely care about seeing them serve my grandchildren, who are coming along rather swiftly now.

So take all this as you will. I just want to see Remington perform competently. That's really all there is to it on my side of the issue. And I don't feel any need to apologize for that, to them or anyone else.