Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Remington 700's under fire! Linked to Multiple deaths......

Apparently only popular with us morons? ;O)

Don't sleep with a 700, you might shoot yer dick off Barney. LOL.

You should take a look at the Remington website. A gun "expert" who admitted in sworn testimony that he tried and tried to get the 700 to discharge without pulling the trigger and couldn't. An "employee" who said Remington covered up but subsequently admitted he only worked at the ammunition plant not the firearm plant. Last but not least the NBC reporter standing in a field talking about the 700 with the bolt closed and his finger on the trigger. NBC has always had an agenda to see the complete ban of firearms.

Years ago I adjusted my Rem 700 trigger down to where it would drop if I slammed the rifle butt on the ground. Easily fixed.

I can't say how bad this will be for Remington, but I suspect their using Brett Favre as an adman for their products will hurt them worse.

WHen ol' Brett talks about his well used gun, we'll all wonder which is his rifle and which is his gun...and which one was photo'd and e-mailed to his penpal.

Golly Gomer,

If there is a problem with 700's, the last place I'd look for the truth is on the website of the manufacturer who makes it.

Let's use your logic in another scenario:

Capone Trial:
Prosecution question to Al:

"Did you ever order the murder of anyone?"

Al's response:

"Nope, I posted that I am innocent on my website"

Judge Swampman:

"Ok, Case dismissed."

Bag of hammers...

The only problem with looking at the Remington website would be that.....well....they may be biased, therefore not as objective as they might could be. I'm not buying into either story until a disinterested third party does a credible investigation.

JM...ya beat me to it

He couldn't duplicate an accidental discharge in the specific rifle involved in the Williams v. Remington case.

The plaintiff's case revolved around the "defective design" theory of the connector/trigger arrangement and included high-speed video.

Extracted from the MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, SIDNEY A. FITZWATER, Chief Judge.

This defect theory is based on high-speed video footage that demonstrates the separation of the connector and trigger body, personal examination of the firearm, evidence that many other customers have experienced involuntary discharge of this rifle model, and tests performed for the purpose of confirming that debris between the connector and trigger can result in precipitous engagement.

There is certainly anecdotal evidence virtually everywhere on the Internet of Remington 700 AD's that never repeat. The theory presented by plaintiff's experts posits that contaminates interfere with the connector's repositioning on the trigger and cause AD. In this case, the very act of firing and the forced movement of the connector again could cause contaminates to be expelled........which would make the incident difficult to repeat.

In any event, I'd like to see this high speed video in public domain. And perhaps more of the same beyond just a firing cycle. Perhaps a "jarring" video to see how the connector moves under impact other than a firing cycle.

You sure are being mighty hard on Gomer....just sayin'...

Let's look at a few things here, in a factual kind of way ...

The Rem-Walker trigger uses a floating connector that allows itself to kick forward when pulling the trigger, which means that as soon as the sear 'cams over' the connector, it kicks the connector out of the way so that the 'break' of the trigger is clean and crisp, and more 'instantaneous' than if you had to physically move a one-piece trigger shoe fully out from under the sear. This also allows for less (or possibly no) trigger backlash because the trigger shoe is not in direct contact w/ the sear, and thus does not get kicked forward when the sear drops.

The PROBLEM with this design, as far as I can see, is only one small issue. IF the connector - for whatever reason - ever gets stuck in such a way that it does not fully return to it's position against the trigger shoe, the user of the rifle will be able to move the trigger (manually) back into 'full battery' prior to letting off the safety, while the connector (which is the part of the trigger mechanism that makes contact with the sear) is not actually in position under the sear. This can/will most likely result in the sear not being blocked, and thus the firing pin will fall forward when the safety is let off.

THAT seems to be the ONLY flaw in the design - at least by virtue of analysis.

What most people seem to forget though, is that ANY trigger (firing mechanism) that is similar in design - and also incorporates a safety system that ONLY blocks the sear or locks the firing pin in the cocked position CAN allow the firing pin to fall when the safety is released - that is, if whatever part of the trigger mechanism that contacts and supports the sear is not in full battery prior to releasing the safety.

Again, what CAN potentially happen with the Rem-Walker trigger design, is that the user might THINK that the trigger is returned to full battery, but there is really no way of knowing for sure since the connector might not be in full battery.

What I personally don't know is how the trigger can be adjusted and set at the factory in such a way that the connector is 'guaranteed' to not be able to clear itself out from under the sear - simply because no matter how you set it up, if it's set up to allow the trigger to be able to drop the sear, there MUST be room enough for the connector to fully move out from under the sear.

In the case of the law suits I've looked at - and by no means am I any expert in law, mechanical engineering, etc. - the issue that seems to be at the forefront is the RESULT of the AD - not the AD itself... which of course brings "poor firearms safety" into the equation. The act of using poor firearms safety MUST be considered when liability for the results of the AD are brought up.

IMHO, while nobody should EVER trust a mechanical safety to keep a firearm from discharging, there should be a "reasonable" amount of trust that one can put on the ability of the safety and firing mechanism to function properly. THAT seems to be at the heart of the law suits as well - not JUST the examination of whether or not the firearm can/will AD based on the Rem-Walker design.

Now, like I've said before ... I can see the POTENTIAL for an undue failure of the firing and safety mechanism re: the Rem-Walker design ... but I've also never seen it happen when the trigger is properly adjusted and maintained. Even after making post-factory setting adjustments myself, I've always been able to set the trigger system up to work as intended, and with better results (pull weight, over-travel and creep) than it came from the factory.

Do I consider the trigger to be "flawed"? Yah, I guess, in a round-about sort of way ... but do I see the trigger being reasonably safe and dependable? Sure, I do ... as much as I would consider just about any other standard trigger on a typical rifle... and that opinion is based on my own experiences, as well as the many experiences of others I know who have used Remington rifles with the Rem-Walker trigger design for years and years.

Not sure what else can really be said about the issue, outside of a court of law, simply because it's up to them each time the case is brought to bear, and the judge, jury and "experts" have to fight it out there, and it's for them to decide at the end of the day what happens to Remington.

Excellent synopsis, WGM.

WGM

I like and appreciate what you posted above especially when you use the words "can see the POTENTIAL" rather than "there is NO way". I have no axe to grind with Remington what-so-ever and surely don't wish to see them harmed over this situation. But, I doubt this whole thing is going to go away quietly. Right now I hope the ball is still in Remington's court and they act wisely.

I can see this whole mess turning into a situation, on a smaller scale, like the "Toyota sudden acceleration" theory. There have been few, if any, DOCUMENTED cases to substantiate what people claim happened yet look what happened when certain people got involved. I doubt Remington can afford to offer a recall on every rifle plus face a potential fine to boot.

Here is an excellent take on the CNBC "investigative report".

It is written by Field and Stream's Dave Petzal and appears on their blog. Just about the best summation I have seen.

QOUTE-

Petzal: CNBC�s Remington 700 Trigger Coverage A Clean Miss

Editor�s Note: In light of the recent controversial CNBC program that deemed Remington Model 700 rifles unsafe, we asked Rifles Editor and Gun Nut blogger David E. Petzal to view the broadcast and offer his thoughts in this extended post. Petzal, a 54-year shooter, NRA Certified Rifle Instructor, former Army Drill Sergeant, and one the country�s foremost gun authorities, had this to say:

On October 20, CNBC ran a program entitled �Remington Under Fire: A CNBC Investigation.� Claimed to be the result of 10 months� of investigation by CNBC, it was narrated by a Senior Correspondent named Scott Cohn. The focus of the program was the trigger designed in the late 1940s for the Remington 721 (the predecessor to the 700) by Remington engineer Mike Walker. According to CNBC, the trigger was known to be defective almost from its inception; its design allegedly allows the rifle to be fired without the trigger being pulled. This has resulted, the program claimed, in thousands of complaints caused by accidental firings, as well as injuries and deaths.

Those are the bare bones. As I expected, �Remington Under Fire� was a hatchet job. The verdict is guilty from the get-go. No one from Remington would come on the program, nor would anyone from Cerberus, Remington�s parent company. This is not because they have something to hide, but because they know that if they appear on a program like this they will be made to look like liars or fools or both. If you�d like an example, consult any of the �documentaries� made by the lovely and talented Michael Moore.

Scott Cohn�s program exhibits an unsubtle mix of ignorance of the subject as well as serious journalistic deficiencies. First is the attitude toward guns as a whole. There were references to �safe� guns. Memo to Mr. Cohn: There is no such thing as a safe gun. Guns are inherently dangerous, and unless you handle them with care the results can be tragic. Everyone shown on the program who was killed or wounded by a 700 suffered because either they themselves or someone else pointed a 700 at them.

This is poignantly illustrated by the death of Gus Barber, a Montana boy who was shot by his mother Barbara in 2000. Mrs. Barber was unloading a 700 whose muzzle was pointed at a horse trailer. On the far side of the trailer was her son. The rifle went off; the bullet passed through the trailer; Gus Barber died. This was a terrible tragedy, and I am very sorry for the unbearable pain the Barbers suffered.

Rich Barber, Gus� father, believes his son was killed because the rifle went off accidentally. In fact, Gus Barber died because a rifle was pointed at him. If the rifle had been pointed in a safe direction, all the Barbers would have gotten was a bad scare.
This kind of tragedy can happen to anyone, with any gun, if he or she ignores the prime directive of safe gun handling, put best by Jeff Cooper:
�Do not cover with the muzzle of a gun anything you do not wish to destroy.�

The CNBC program has a scene showing a Portland, Maine police sniper setting off a 700 by simply tapping the bolt. Incredibly, Mr. Cohn asks no questions at all about the rifle. Any journalist with even a modicum of gun knowledge would have dragged the department�s armorer on camera and asked this one simple question:
�Have you modified the trigger on this rifle?�

There is an interview with a West Coast range officer who states that 700s fire accidentally with such frequency that these incidents are called �Remington moments.� This is yet another example of more journalistic ignorance. If the rifles are so unreliable, why did Cohn not ask the gentlemen why they are allowed on the range?

In the course of the entire program, only one shooter is allowed camera time to say what a great gun the 700 is. One. There are 5 million Model 700s out there. Surely more than one person must like them. Could he possibly have found two people to say nice things?

It is mentioned that Remington has just been awarded a contract to build 3,000 more Model 700 sniper rifles, but that the Marines have had problems with accidental firing. I guess it was too much trouble to have someone explain that the 700 has been in continual service as a sniper rifle for more than 40 years, and that is has served with distinction under some of the most adverse conditions imaginable. Otherwise, why would the U.S. Government be buying 3,000 more? Are the Marines and the Army crazy?

Here�s what I can tell you about the Model 700 with the original, Walker-designed trigger (the new 700 trigger, the X-mark Pro, is a different design).

� I got my first 700, actually a Model 725, in .222, in 1960. There has never been a time since then when I have not owned at least one 700. I�ve never had an accidental firing with any of them, nor have I seen one, and we are talking hundreds of rifles and tens of thousands of rounds over 50 years.

� I�ve seen one 700 that should not have been handled. It was an ADL in 6mm that was made in the late 1960s. Its owner allowed a shooter who supposedly knew how to do so, to work on the trigger. He botched the job.

�And there we come to the crux of the matter. If the original 700 trigger has a fault, it is that it can be fooled with by anyone who has a small screwdriver. The adjustments are delicate, and if you don�t know how (or know enough) to keep sufficient engagement between the sear and the trigger connector, the rifle can slam fire, or fire when it�s dropped, or fire when the safety is flipped off. The same thing happens when you set the trigger pull lower than 3 pounds; it is not designed to function below that level, and there are some fools who love to take it down to 2 or 2 �.

Right now I have an old 700 with a Walker trigger that has had over 5,000 rounds put through it with never a problem. But give me 5 minutes and a jeweler�s screwdriver and I can make it dangerous.

Enough. I eagerly await Mr. Cohn�s next program. I�m hoping it will be on why the public has so little confidence in news reporting.

UNQUOTE

Petzal adds no information other than a denial that things happen. Of course you should watch where the rifle is pointing, on the other hand safe should be just that. I have a friend that
shot the transmission on his car. He is an idiot but the rifle
fired just the same.
Good luck!

Petzal does not deny that m700s have misfired or accidents happen with m700s.

He adresses the several instances of guns misfiring on the program.

He simply disagrees with the CNBC program's conclusions as to WHY they happen.

My latest varmint rifle and current love has a Remington trigger (modified with a Kepplinger finger piece) and no safety on either the trigger or the bolt, on a Nesika single-shot action.

The "safety" is an open bolt and an empty chamber.

No live round until I'm ready to shoot.

Yep. Some concepts are so simple and pure, that they defy any attempts at contamination. ;O)

Petzal does point out one critical mistake made by Cohn in his investigation.

He never once asked any of the folks who claimed to have experienced AD's if the triggers had been altered....

He knew the direction he wanted to take the story, this was a "career moment" for him.

The show did everyone a disservice by not asking that 1 question IMO, and by not demonstrating that a safe rifle could be made unsafe with a little tinkering.

The likely result will be that all the manufacturers will go back to 7 lb lawyer triggers.

And we are still no closer to the truth.



JM

When my Rem 700 chambers a round on its own and then fires it, THEN I will get rid of it. Anyone who assumes that a rifle with a round chambered and the safety on is 'safe' is making a (possibly deadly) mistake. The old maxim about always assuming a firearm is loaded (and handle it as such) is x2 when a round is already chambered. If anything the Rem trigger in question is lacking in 'idiot proofing', which might or might not be a 'bad thing'. I've not seen any convincing evidence that is as flawed as has been claimed.

You can talk about all the "safe" Remington rifles in the world, but the fact remains that the very design of the trigger makes this kind of incident possible. A rifle could be used for 50 years, and have one malfunction of the type, and then work as intended for another 50 without malfunction. But it happened once because the design was such that it COULD happen. And anytime you are looking at 5 million rifles fired, in some cases, hundreds or thousands of times, then there are lots and lots of chances for that one malfunction to happen.

Most of the time as has been demonstrated by the letters and complaints, no one was harmed. But in a few instances, people have been hurt. Do the people hurt or those holding the weapons bear responsibility as well as Remington? In most cases, undoubtedly yes. But that doesn't change the fact that Remington put a trigger out there that they KNEW could malfunction in this manner.

Gunowners and gunwriters look a little silly when they simply put their fingers in their ears and go "Safe gun handling...safe gun handling". Yeah, we all know that safe gun handling as far as muzzle control and the like will most of the time trump an otherwise careless mistake or a malfunction and prevent serious injury, but to mindlessly repeat it as if it makes up for a manufacturer KNOWINGLY making a weapon it knows can discharge on occasion without anyone touching the trigger...well that is just stupid.

While I have a safety, I don't close the bolt until I am ready to shoot... (Except for Levers)

Simi-autos I do not charge.

This doesn�t really affect my hunting cause I don�t see that many deer� or Hogs for that matter.

Many folks think I am too cautious� I may be.