• Winner! Quick Shot Challenge: What’s the dumbest shooting myth you’ve heard?

    View thread

CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

#51
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SDWhirlwind</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It seems however that the majority of lawyers/attorneys look at things a bit different than us commoners!!!!! Their justifications it seems is all about the 'good deed' to society and not about the money but what percentage of large settlements are pro bono????</div></div>I don't know: What percentage of large settlements have had significant costs advanced, with no guarantee of a recovery, by attorneys on behalf of poor people who could not otherwise afford to bring their claims against large corporations? <span style="font-weight: bold">So yer sayin because I am on disability(not poor but surely not flush with cash) that you will pro bona a claim for me against Medtronics and my recalled defib leade wire installed 34 days before official recall??? You know as well as I that any attorney with an IQ above 50 won't pro bona or percentage a case without the odds in their favor!!! Give me SOME credit will ya? </span>
wink.gif


There is no inherent contradiction between making money and wearing the white hat. Pro bono work has its place in the system. So do class actions. So do statutues that award plaintiffs attorney fees and make civil lawyers the equivalent of private Attorneys General. <span style="font-weight: bold">See above!!! It will be for the children, well most of it </span>
wink.gif


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SDWhirlwind</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Graham, care to share your occupation? Just for giggles?????
smile.gif
</div></div>Unlike some others who have posted on this topic I do know what I am talking about. <span style="font-weight: bold">Not gonna argue and am done with this but pisses me off that someone will make a comment on the net with their 'opinion/knowledge/intelligence' but not willing to disclose their occupation to validate their credentials and reasoning to others who make comments, MAN UP DUDE, TAKE ONE FOR EVERYONE WITH A LAW DEGREE! Would be same as me stating why's/ why nots on machineing, bedding etc but not willing to verify my comments are because of first hand experience, make sense?? </span>

Whether one identifies as a Liberal or a Conservative, the important thing in my view is not to be a victim of political propaganda by simply repeating what you hear other people say on your favorite cable news channel. <span style="font-weight: bold"> Didn't get to college, just the school of hard labor, common sense and super parents that taught me to be honest, don't lie and don't take something you didn't earn so don't know what this is about????? </span>
</div></div>
Done with this topic as I refuse to argue on the net. You have your view and I mine and I am old enough to know a few comments or sentences won't change yours so let us agree to disagree and appreciate gun talk and not legal or lawyer talk. Our town had 4 attorneys, I am good friends with 3, 2 of which I have taken pheasant hunting, 3rd don't hunt and the 4th was disbarred a few months ago
smile.gif
There was a reason why he and I never became friends.lol

Respectfully,
Dennis
 
#52
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cgmaster1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The M24 has a completely different trigger than the standard trigger. So the rifles in Iraq may have an discharge but it is not becasue of this same problem.

I have personaly never had a discharge with any of my 700 rifles but I know my dad did have one with an older rifle that the safety had to be turned off before opening the bolt. Since I have learned of this problem a few years ago all of my rifles have been converted over to 40x triggers. The new rifles I have had come in have all had 40x trigger in them from the factory. I know the regular rem 700 also has had a new trigger in them for the last few years but I have no experience with it.

</div></div>

Since you know this to be true, could you please tell us exactly what the "problem" is, & how one fire control functionally differs from the next please? I would start with a diagram & compare the two systems part for part... sir I believe you are mistaken.

Aug ><>
 
#53
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

I've had it where the sear was set wrong and I took it off safety and it fired on me.
 
#55
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

Here is one of the "sneek peeks" posted on YouTube - Observe the LE Sniper Rifle footage. Remington terms this malfunction a "FBO", fire on bolt opening. IF the sniper were to attempt to raise the bolt after a fail to fire incident - on a call out... but hey, I suspect he would most certainly have "the rifle pointed in a safe direction" at the instant of the malfunction as everyone points out, so this should not prove to be a serious "problem". Also observe this is not one of the "older rifles" that everyone eludes to exclusively having this problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2oZtWRyDu8


Aug ><>
 
#56
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

I want to correct my post above - I had a Jewell trigger/safety in my rifle and it was apparantly worn and dirty.

My smith cleaned it but still suggested being safe of course.
 
#57
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

Someone forgot the golden rule of firearms safety...
<span style="color: #CC0000"><span style="font-weight: bold">Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction</span>...</span>
 
#58
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MueveloNYC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my point exactly! Next thing they'll do is make mandatory 12 lb triggers... *rolleyes*</div></div>

40lb triggers won't cure stupidity
 
#60
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blackwinch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Someone forgot the golden rule of firearms safety...
<span style="color: #CC0000"><span style="font-weight: bold">Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction</span>...</span> </div></div>

That was brought up by one of the guys on the show "what is a safe direction?". Honest and true question I believe.
 
#62
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

The Serpa recalled one? LOL That was so bad they took them all back from NYPD who had them.

Then there's plaxico. Safety didn't help him. LOL Then again the gun was illegally possessed in NYC and NJ making him an instant felon.

Or that ATF guy in the kindergarten classroom. "I am the only one here in this room qualified to handle this firearm" *POW*
 
#63
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

While you are correct (one should always follow basic saftey rules), this is still a design issue. A rifle should NEVER fire unless the trigger is pulled. If there is a repeatable set of events/circumstances which allow it to fire sans trigger pull, there is a serious problem that needs to be addressed by Remington.

There is just no getting around it.
 
#64
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

No. Regardless of how stupid a user may be, a rifle should NEVER fire short of pulling the trigger with the safety off.

Your question is akin to asking whether a driver might be responsible for an accident for not putting their seat belt on when the real problem is that the brakes have a repeatable malfunction which doesn't allow for the car to stop.
 
#65
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

Yeah! Let's just forget that there is a repeatable set of circumstances which allow for the rifle to fire when it absolutely should not fire.

Anytime you have this, there is a serious design flaw. One cannot fault a user for a mechanical problem not of their own making, stupid as they may be.
 
#66
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eleaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No. Regardless of how stupid a user may be, a rifle should NEVER fire short of pulling the trigger with the safety off.

Your question is akin to asking whether a driver might be responsible for an accident for not putting their seat belt on when the real problem is that the brakes have a repeatable malfunction which doesn't allow for the car to stop. </div></div>

Just to stir the pot, I happen to remember a number of cars that crashed killing people because the "Brakes didn't work." Come to find out that our great GOV that led the charge to sink said company found that there actually wasn't a problem with the cars but the drivers. Who Knew?
 
#67
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eleaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No. Regardless of how stupid a user may be, a rifle should NEVER fire short of pulling the trigger with the safety off.
</div></div>


When it is new/clean/unaltered and in good repair of course.

I'm sure you meant to qualify your simplistic statement beyond what you wrote as otherwise, one might conclude you are shilling for 1-800-Who-can-I-sue.com.

And we wouldn't want that.

As to my opinion on the subject, it's quite simple really; I believe nothing that comes from NBC.

As a service to any who are concerned, I'll sacrifice and pay $50.00 each for any Remington 700 in order to "Take them off the streets."
 
#68
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

quote=Captain Kick-Ass]you would have to have torte law before there is a torte reform. I don't thing there is any kind of comparative negligence on the books for shooting your own kid yet.


this is on par with suing the auto manufacturer for not making rear-view cameras a standard feature asserting "but for". But for the car not having a rear camera, I would not have squished my kid in the pavement. When in reality, you're the negligent dumb fuck who squashed your precision little pumpkin. [/quote] <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MueveloNYC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Story gets deeper:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/17/eveningnews/main301947.shtml

Here's the main issue. Mother was handling the firearm, and was turning the safety off while her son was in front of the rifle. (seriously WHY?). Always point the muzzle in a safe direction and don't mess with the firearm unless you're absolutely ok to destroy what the muzzle is pointed at...

Yes, the story is tragic, but a death could've been avoided if they followed the cardinal rules of firearms handling.</div></div>

Both you guys are thinking in the right direction. What are we all taught about handling firearms?
1.Always Assume it's LOADED
2.Always point the muzzle in a safe direction.
3.Never Trust The Safety, assume the gun could Fire at Anytime

I could be wrong I mean it has been about 20years since I learnt this from an instructor with the Boy Scouts. Hell that was even with a .22 pellet rifle.

Anything Mechanical can Fail it's just that simple. Safety, Trigger, Ammo all of it.
Maintenance helps to prevent failures but doesn't guarantee that it will. If Remington knew the problem existed and could happen with poor maintenance, etc then what do you guys think they should have done?

I think they should recommend annual cleaning and inspection by a certified gunsmith. Oh wait they do

I also think they should have safety instructions for handling the firearms. Oh Hey they do that too.

In High School I worked with a girl whose little brother was killed by his dad while cleaning a .22 revolver. The dad was in a different room and the bullet went through the wall. Sad, Tragic, Yes absolutely but could it have prevented?
Mechanical Failure and User Error are separate things, but when combined have horrible consequences that are often fatal.

Personally I think this was another attack by anti-gun enthusiasts to try to scare people away from guns. Remington's are far from the only guns to have AD's. M240B's can have worn sears that lead to some impressive AD's. I've witnessed that first hand, and was glad it was on the range. People have ND's and that's a totally different animal once the gun is ruled out of the equation. Sorry for going on about this but I just wasted an Hour of My LIfe watching that CNBC Liberal Rant. Perhaps they could have told us what the investigation of the firearms had said rather than just the reports. I know a bunch of guys that think cleaning a firearm is running a patch down the barrel and spraying it with some lube, and then wiping the dust off every now and then. All right Rant off
 
#69
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

WHoa, just found this thread, crazy shit.

Just this very night, my old rem 700 went "KAFUCKINGBOOM" when I took the safety off to eject a round. Remington owes me and my buddy new undies. I only chambered the round because a buck ran out, he made it to safety before I could get a shot. Did not attempt to unload until we got back to jeep. My gun is exceptionally clean and appropriately lubed. Trigger is untouched as far as I know. Lucky I had it pointed up in safe direction, or I could have dead friend/Jeep.

BTW, can't wait to print what ive just found out about these, show it to my buddy, so as he does not continue to think I am a complete unsafe moron. I was seriously second guessing myself, trying to figure out what I could have done to make it go boom. Still shaking as I think about it.
 
#70
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

I've already put a request in to my Dept. to have the rifle sent back for the installation of the X-Mark Pro trigger. In LE to know that you have a piece of equipment which has been shown to have a defect or malfunction that is unpredictable.....& there is a relatively quick & cheap fix to problem, but you don't take the steps to fix it, is stupid.

My rifle doesn't come out of the trunk to go hunting in the woods....it only comes out in the City amongst the public on call-outs......I can't take the risk of a round popping off because I touched the safety or bolt handle.....that bullet is going somewhere......

Although my Dept. Remington has operated flawlessly.....I'll still try & get the trigger switched out......just makes me feel better...
 
#72
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Victor N TN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not sure that anyone can make a firearm of any kind that is "idiot proof". </div></div>

Who said anything about making a firearm "idiot proof"..? I just don't want mine to go off unless I pull the trigger.....
 
#73
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mgd45</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Victor N TN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not sure that anyone can make a firearm of any kind that is "idiot proof". </div></div>

Who said anything about making a firearm "idiot proof"..? I just don't want mine to go off unless I pull the trigger..... </div></div>

Victor wasn't responding to you MGD.
 
#74
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mgd45</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Victor N TN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not sure that anyone can make a firearm of any kind that is "idiot proof". </div></div>

Who said anything about making a firearm "idiot proof"..? I just don't want mine to go off unless I pull the trigger..... </div></div>

Victor wasn't responding to you MGD. </div></div>

Oh....oops...sorry...
blush.gif
 
#75
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mgd45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've already put a request in to my Dept. to have the rifle sent back for the installation of the X-Mark Pro trigger. In LE to know that you have a piece of equipment which has been shown to have a defect or malfunction that is unpredictable.....& there is a relatively quick & cheap fix to problem, but you don't take the steps to fix it, is stupid.

My rifle doesn't come out of the trunk to go hunting in the woods....it only comes out in the City amongst the public on call-outs......I can't take the risk of a round popping off because I touched the safety or bolt handle.....that bullet is going somewhere......

Although my Dept. Remington has operated flawlessly.....I'll still try & get the trigger switched out......just makes me feel better... </div></div>


If you have not already seen this recent article other departments are also being proactive in this regard. If your Dept. denies your request, according to all the experts here, just keep it pointed in a safe direction, keep it clean, Oh - and of course any adjustments that are made (even by your certified armor) are always good to go, unless the rife inadvertently discharges at some future date even though the malfunction can not be duplicated - so it must of course be shooter induced.

http://www.pressherald.com/news/craig-faulty-rif-les-taken-out-of-police-service_2010-10-28.html
 
#76
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

I have nothing against Remington and I clearly see the arguement about user error but I watched this special tonight. When the designer of the rifle knew of this problem, lobbied to fix it (documented), and was summarily ignored for years...there's far more to this than some unwitting consumer breaking a golden rule.

Due to 2nd amemdment protections, gun mfgrs cannot be forced by the government to issue recalls and this is a good thing. If the government were to get involved we'd all have firearms that would require a plethora of mechanical manuevers and interlocks just to fire a single round and semi-autos would be extinct.

Problem here is that Remington knew of a problem and did nothing. Now the media is running with it and there's no telling where it will end but one thing's for sure...Remington's inaction puts all firearm manufacturers and gun owners at risk.

We have enough to worry about with professional lefties challenging our 2nd amendment rights and freedom.

What Remington did was hand them the ammunition at our expense. Gun owners everywhere should demand that they make this right.
 
#77
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

Is this a Remington Trigger issue? You would think that the new updated x mark pro would of fixed any potential firing issues if they already had settled lawsuits over the older trigger. Seems odd that this has struck all the different types and generations of Remington 700s. I have personally never heard of a Remington going off like they claimed, has anyone here firsthand seen this?
 
#78
Re: CNBC to expose Remington on 700 phantom discharge

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankythefly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is this a Remington Trigger issue? You would think that the new updated x mark pro would of fixed any potential firing issues if they already had settled lawsuits over the older trigger. Seems odd that this has struck all the different types and generations of Remington 700s. I have personally never heard of a Remington going off like they claimed, has anyone here firsthand seen this? </div></div>

Has to do with the trigger and safety. Apparently the rifle can fire without trigger pull under certain situations such as simply turning the safety off. This was demonstrated for the camera during the documentary. Remington now sells both the old and new trigger side-by-side and won't pull the old one. I suppose in doing so they'd be admitting there was a problem.

What was striking about this documentary was that (aside from the reporters obviously) these complaints are NOT coming from left-wing anti gunners. The guy who's little boy was shot was interviewed in the desert while playing with his sniper rigs...these are gun people. A fix for this problem was apparently shot down back in the 70's because it cost too much...5 cents per rifle. Of course their inaction and the passage of time has increased this cost to $5 per rifle which could likely bankrupt them.

There's an unwritten code in the gun industry that mfgrs police their own when it comes to safe design and is one of the things that has kept the government from stepping into the gun safety arena. That and the 2nd amendment. It's stupid crap like this that can really screw things up for gun owners. Internal Remington documents confirm something like 1% of all 700's are prone to unexpected firing. That's HUGE considering that there are millions of them out there.

I believe very little that comes from CNBC but there was something about the interview with the rifles designer that struck a chord. This retired 98 year old designer of the 700 was in his garage still building rifles. He didn't seem like he had a disgruntled bone in his body and was reluctant to speak. He seemed way too honest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
2024 Legion Memorial Run and Gun, Honoring the Fallen as a Family
Replies
13
Views
828
FatBoy
F
hermosabeach
Remington 700 - Trigger Recall- class action settlement
Replies
18
Views
1K
Maxduty
Maxduty
Paulie771
AAR: K&M Precision's 4 Day Comprehensive Precision Rifle course, Oct 9-12, 2021 (Long)
Replies
4
Views
1K
mountainman308
M
B
A story
Replies
18
Views
2K
6.5SH
6
sirhrmechanic
Just thought this merited a re-post... A bit late, but, hey. Worth the read.
Replies
41
Views
3K
sirhrmechanic
sirhrmechanic
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts