CNBC Exposes Remington trigger coverup

On Friday, Remington put up a response to the hit piece on:
http://m.remington700.tv/

Two of the main points were that the military specifies the Walker trigger on their M24 and M40 rifles & that Jack, under oath in the hrs old law suit, saying that such cases were likely the result of the user trying to cover up user error.

Regards,
Ron
 
If you fool with factory adjusted triggers your on your own. They are and have been set at a set margin for years.
Nothing is wrong with the triggers or the working parts. People just don't know how to adjust them.
That lets tthe companys off the hook. If you put a loaded round in your rifle and decide to take the ammo out of the rifle. < without leaving your truck your being dumb. Lets face it theres a lot of people who don't handle the firearm safely. Does that make the company liable?. I think NOT.
 
As usual, you're in the deep end of the pool. I will tell you a few things friend Busky, things you are clueless about. The Walker interview was edited and a fair bit left out, somewhat contradictory to what was left in. The claims guy with the shakey hand and the butts...he never spent a day in his life at the arms. The memos, there were plenty more that colored things quite differently, among them showing that under a quite unique set of circumstances, all a gross breach of safety ,procedures could create a misfire, none by the way ever repeatable by the hack lawyer in a courtroom. So at the end of the day you saw a TV show and know a couple guys that could'nt possibly have done anything wrong.....I know a lot of the folks at this outfit, many of them involved with the 700, a couple involved with the litigation over many years. What you saw was less than an objective, veiw from CNBC. Less than objective from the mainstream news...what's this country coming to?
 
Last edited:
A tip of the iceberg?

chrisj says:
October 21, 2010 at 5:48 pm

I have owned dozens and dozens of 700’s and the exact problem shown has happened to me a few times in the past. I had a 700 PSS that fired when the safety was moved fwd numerous times. I purchased the rifle brand new and it did this from day 1. I called Remington and they wanted nothing to do with me. They were not even cordial to me. I have called Remington a number of times for various reasons and never get a friendly/cordial person on the phone. That being said, I really like 700’s and think overall they are a well-engineered action.

Scott G says:
October 21, 2010 at 6:12 pm

I 2nd chrisj’s comments. I have had dozens of 700 and 1 had a problem of firing when the bolt was closed. also had 2-788s(both factory and unaltered) that would fire if the safty was moved or the bolt closed…called remington just a few weeks ago with this problem and they were rude and did’nt want to talk about it or do any thing to help with the problem.

Reynolds says:
October 22, 2010 at 9:00 am

I love the Rem 700. I’ve owned many of these over the years. I have had the exact problem occur to me on two seperate firearms and I witnessed it with a shooting buddy on his 700 on the first time he took it to the range right out of the box.
I hate the liberal media as much as anyone else… HOWEVER….
…a rifle should not fire by closing the bolt or taking it off saftey. Remington has know about the problem and even the gentlemen who designed the rifle felt convicted that something should have been or should be done.

Like I said… I love the M700…but Remington has a responsibilty to more than just their shareholders. They are responsible if only one death could be contributed to a fault of the rifle.

John says:
October 22, 2010 at 2:36 pm

I have a Remington 700 6mm BDL in like new condition with only one problem–the rifle discharged twice without touching the trigger. I have written Remington Arm Co regarding the problem several years ago. Remington informed me they were unaware of any problems and this was an isolated incident. Haven’t used this gun since.

Source: http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com...sponds-to-cnbc-investigative-report/#comments
 
Tim,

You always seem to have such great insider info. If the CNBC report was inaccurate, and intentially so as you and others suggest, Remington has legal recourse. They should sue CNBC for libel. Of course to do so they would have to open up all their records, and somehow discredit the memos that were leaked. If those people interviewed were not former employees, that should be easy enough to prove. One would think that Remington's response would address this. If you would like to cite your sources, that would be helpful.
 
Well I have NEVER trusted a safety or NEVER will regardless of design. I NEVER close the bolt on my rifles unless I KNOW I am going to squeeze the trigger. If I do not fire I open the bolt until such time as I close it again.

JMO

Calvin
 
Wow

Gene, you made some good points. Safety is constantly evolving. What was once considered an acceptable risk in the past, may not pass muster now. For me it comes down to this, they knew early on there was a problem, which they identified, and they could have changed/fixed at any point in the production run, including now. They could have done this without a recall and just upgraded it as an improvement, and they didn't. I agree that for injury to occur, poor gun handling was involved. The shooter was certainly partially at fault. Many accidents are caused by the failure of multiple systems. If the shooter had been safer = no injury. If the rifle had not been defective = no injury. We can't fix stupid but they could have fixed the defect. I had on AD, with a TC Hawken muzzle loader and witnessed another with a Win 94 when cold numb thumbs slipped while decocking the hammers. In both cases it was operator error. I was one who applauded when most hammer guns went with safeties and transfer bars. If something can be made safer (within reason) it's best to do it.

JJ-IA, to answer your question. If some idiot was pointing a gun at me with the safety on and pulling the trigger - I would be terrified, but I would want him to use a gun where the safety worked. It would greatly improve my chances of going over to him and break his fn nose.

This is where the naive really come out in the open. There is NO firearm that has a a 100% positive safety. Anyone who believes so is truly naive.
 
Jim I'm with you I don't trust anything that will kill me, and that means everything not just Guns. Thats the reason at matches we don't have bolts in guns until the range master gives the command.
Joe Sat
 
Try this as an acid test of your gun safety handling. Put 'yer noggin in front of a barrel muzzle, even (as in always) with the action open or bolt out and light being seen "at the end of the tunnel". If a little bell does not go off way in the back of your head, you have a gun safety problem. Same for a finger unnecessarily on a trigger.

Guns used outdoors should be unloaded outdoors. Guns should always be pointed in a safe direction, and that includes away from house walls, plant growth etc. that could be screening a person or domestic animal.

If Mike Walker’s expert testimony indicated Remington could have improved upon the trigger without undue cost, I'll rely on that. We don't need the stupidity of corporate greed amplifying gun safety problems. Manufacturers have a responsibility to improve their products where feasible to enhance safe operation. If such is not ethically driven or demanded, seat belts and air bags would not be savings many thousands of lives and injuries.
 
Sr. Lago,

You should post more than once a year amigo;-)

well stated.

saludos,

pf
 
With regard to NBC's "fairness"... I seem to recall a "Slime Time Live" type TV presentation on late-model GM Pickup Trucks being unsafe on side collisions because the gasoline tank was designed outside of the frame. GM later found out and proved with video that NBC had placed an explosive on the gas fill pipe which denotated on contact during their TV show demonstration. NBC once exposed, went public on their National Evening News that they had falsified the information and lied to the public.

I can't say that this TV show was the same.... but, I can say with a level of confidence, don't always believe what you see on TV!

Lee
 
Today I had a fellow call and come to my shop in a panic...

He had his 700 in one hand and an article about changing the "Walker" trigger for a Timney trigger...

A friend had told him 700's had a big problem...and showed him some news clipping.

This was compounded by the fact he had 3 failures to fire occur a little while ago moose hunting... and then after his friend cleaned the firing pin assembly they went to the range and he had it fire twice when he close the bolt...

He was sure he had one the the noted problem rifles...

I closed the bolt and hammered on the firing pin, it did not fire. I pulled the trigger and it fired. I re cocked and closed the bolt again and engaged the safety - and pulled on the trigger and hammered on the firing pin... and then disengaged the safety - it did not fire. I pulled the trigger and it fired.

He asked why it malfunctioned for him...

With the bolt out I tried the sear movement with a punch.. it was hard to move and very slow returning...

Then I took the trigger apart ... it was gummed up and very sticky with very old lubrication. I washed it lightly with lacquer thinner and assembled it and reinstalled it.

I went through all the tests again... it works perfectly.

I explained the cause of the no firing while hunting was due to old gummy lubrication in the firing pin assembly within the bolt body and the accidental discharge at the range was due to the filthy trigger gummed up with old lube. He had never cleaned or had this rifle serviced in the 15 plus years he has owned it.

He now has left it here for a thorough cleaning and a new scope and mounts and bedding, etc.

This trigger malfunction is typical.. caused by improper maintenance. That was explained to him and he left happy with the knowledge the rifle is sound. A complete opposite view from when he came in. He was bad mouthing Remington and was all hyped up about the trigger article, and really pissed about the junk Remington made...

I think a lot of the trigger problems that get blamed on Remington are very similar to this and have nothing to do with the quality or design - just lousy maintenance or improperly adjusted after the factory...
 
I have had Winchesters go off when the safety was released and even though I am not a Winchester fan, it was not the guns fault but someone who didn't know what he was doing when he adjusted it. I am amazed at how quickly some would side with the media on issues against a firearm co.. The firearm companies have been attacked for years by frivolous lawsuits and have made triggers horrible to protect them from lawsuits so that it would seem highly unlikely they would try to save a few bucks on a faulty trigger. As far as memo's, they are not reliable indicators of what the official stance of the company is. In the companies I have worked for I have seen some unbelievably stupid things written in emails and memos that people later admitted that they wrote when angry or thinking about one thing and doing another. Is their room for trigger improvement, probably, but no matter what, the first thing taught by hunters training is to point a firearm in a safe direction with finger off the trigger until you have positively identified your target. All firearms are to be treated as loaded even if they are not loaded.
As Dennis and others have said, the vast number of trigger failures is improper handling and maintenance.
But why not blacken the eye of the firearms industry and let a few get rich while all the rest suffer, amazing how the American system works!
 
I As Dennis and others have said, the vast number of trigger failures is improper handling and maintenance.
Nevertheless, I can't remember any new gun I got with instructions on how to maintain the trigger, or even a recommendation that it should be done.

All of that was learned word of mouth & only from target shooters of one sort or another. Your weeken hunter never came across that. Sure, there was a time when you'd read suggestions in a magazine here & there that you drop the shootin' pole down to the local gunsmith during the off season for him to give it a service, but do you know anybody who did that?
 
A couple of interesting final thoughts taken from a video I watched with an interview from a Rem. VP, former Marine captain. #1 several of those internal memos were dated before the actual production of the 700 and involve a lot of ideas where every concievable scenario with all possible outcomes is put on the table and reviewed as is the case with most prototype development. The one point I found rather interesting however is that he indicated there are in excess of 15000 700 based actions and guns delivered to the Army and Marines. I assume all of them maintained by properly trained armorers. Not one has ever found it's way back to the arms as defective, not one. I thought that a fairly interesting factoid.
 
Consider this:

(Bozeman MT Daily Chronicle)

By KATHLEEN O'TOOLE Chronicle Staff Writer 11/05/2000 00:00:00 (Montana)

Remington rifle involved in growing number of accidents

Pete Noreen was watching the television news two weeks ago when he saw a story about a 9-year-old boy, Gus Barber, who had been shot and killed in a hunting accident in Madison County. The boy's mother was unloading her hunting rifle and the gun accidentally discharged. The tragedy would sicken anyone, but Noreen, a former gunsmith, now a Belgrade machinist, felt a shiver roll down his spine. "I had the strangest feeling that I knew what happened and how it happened," he said. "I had a feeling in my guts that it was the same type of gun."

The gun is a Remington Model 700 series rifle. It's the same gun that went off in his daughter's hands while hunting in the Little Belt Mountains near Utica, three years ago. It's the same gun that Bob Ekey, another Bozeman hunter, had accidentally discharged on two separate occasions in two consecutive years.

It's the same gun that has been the center of more than 80 lawsuits around the country taken up against Remington Arms Co. in the past 20 years. One of those lawsuits ended in 1994 with Remington paying $17 million to a Texas man whose Remington Model 700 bolt-action rifle accidentally discharged and shot him in the foot.
The court earmarked $15 million of that order as punitive damages.

As it turned out Noreen was right. The gun that discharged unexpectedly and killed Gus Barber in the Gravelly Range on a family hunting trip Oct. 23 was a Remington Model 700 bolt-action rifle. It isn't only the number of incidents that raises eyebrows, but also the similarity of the incidents. Ekey said in his first incident in 1988 with the Remington Model 700, he returned from hunting with a buddy and was in the parking
lot unloading the gun. He released the safety and opened the bolt when the gun, which was pointing at the ground, discharged. He said his finger was not near the trigger. Barbara Barber, Gus Barber's mother, said Wednesday that was exactly what happened to her as she unloaded the gun. But this time the barrel of her gun was pointing at the open door of a horse trailer. The bullet went through the trailer's wall and hit her son in the abdomen as he stood on the other side. "My finger wasn't on the trigger," she said.

Even with mounting evidence many people like Jacob Martin, owner of Valley Pawn in Bozeman, don't believe there is a problem with the gun and say accidents happen because people aren't following basic hunter safety rules. "It's the most reliable gun out there," he said. "I have a difficult time believing this."

But Ekey said hunters have a right to expect more from the Remington Model 700, one of the most popular rifles on the market with more than 3 million sold since it went on the market in 1962. "You should handle a gun as if it will go off, but you should have a reasonable expectation that it won't," Ekey said Thursday. "Guns are inherently dangerous, but we as hunters don't have to accept a situation that is more dangerous than it has to be."

Not including Gus Barber's fatal accident, at least three other injury or death accidents in Montana have been associated with the Remington rifles. The most recent was this past Friday, when a Bozeman hunter, Justin Sabol, was unloading his Remington Model 700 .22-250-caliber rifle when it discharged. The bullet first hit the floor of his truck, then ricocheted and hit Robert Nase, 53, of Belgrade, in the forearm, causing a minor injury. In November 1988, Brock Aleksich of Butte was operating the safety of a Remington Model 700 rifle when the gun discharged and shot his brother, Brent Aleksich, in both legs. The teen suffered severe and permanent physical injuries, according to court documents on the case. The case settled out of court, but parties were not allowed to discuss terms of the settlement.
In June 1993, 11-year-old Hank Blacksmith was at the home of his friend, Jesse Coonfare, in Billings. Coonfare got his father's Remington Model 600 Mohawk rifle, a gun that Remington had recalled in 1978.
The gun slipped from Coonfare's hands and accidentally discharged, shooting and killing Blacksmith. That case also settled out of court in 1996 and the terms of the settlement were also sealed and confidential.

Remington Arms Co. denies that its Model 700 bolt-action rifle, which includes 19 different variations, is more dangerous than any other weapon, or faulty in its design.
According to a 1994 Business Week magazine story, a company spokesman said "We have believed in the past and continue to believe today that the Model 700 is one of the finest bolt-action rifles manufactured. We see the product as a safe and reliable sporting firearm."
Several attempts to reach a spokesperson for Remington for this article were unsuccessful. The Chronicle did reach Ron Bristle, chief operating officer for Remington, on Friday, but he said he could not speak for the company and that someone would return the call. No one did. Remington has admitted problems with another rifle, the Model 600, sister to the Model 700. After settling a case in 1978 with a man who became paralyzed when the Model 600 suddenly discharged, Remington recalled that model. The company calculated that 50 percent of the 200,000 Model 600 rifles it had sold would fail, according to minutes of a January 1979 meeting of the Remington Arms Product Safety Subcommittee.

The Model 600 and Model 700 rifles use the Walker fire control system and evidenced the same discharge problems leading to the same kind of injuries, the subcommittee minutes note. But Remington had sold 10 times as many Model 700 rifles and a recall would be much more costly to the company. Remington had 1979 tests that showed only 1 percent of the Model 700 guns could be "tricked" into a discharging inadvertently and argued that a recall "would have to gather 2 million guns just to find 20,000 that are susceptible to this condition," according to the subcommittee's minutes. But Attorney Richard C. Miller, a Missouri attorney who has represented more than 40 cases against Remington regarding accidental discharges of the Model 700, believes the real reasons Remington didn't order a recall because it would be too costly and hurt the company's future sales. "Every one can do it. There's not one out there that's safe," Miller said Friday.

The cause is an inherent problem with the Walker system in Remington's bolt-action rifle, something the company knew about from the original patent in 1950. The patent application states, "We have found it to be essential that the safety (mechanism) be so arranged that an inadvertent operation of the trigger while the safety is in the "Safe" position will not condition the arm to fire upon release of the safety."
Miller explained there are two problems with the Model 700 rifle. The first is a problem where the internal components of the system don't always return the sear-block safety, which blocks the firing pin from reaching the primer. When that happens, the only thing keeping the gun from firing is the safety. The second problem exists in guns made prior to 1982, when the rifle was made with a bolt lock. The lock wouldn't allow the bolt to be opened or closed while the safety was on. Accidents with these guns most often happen in camp, or parking lots, when people are loading and unloading the weapon, Miller said.

In 1982, Remington started making its bolt action rifles without the bolt lock and the number of complaints declined, Miller said. Accidental discharges with these newer rifles often happen when people turn off the safety, usually when they are ready to shoot.
"I want to give Remington credit where credit is due," Miller said. "That did reduce the likelihood of a malfunction. But Remington would never have made that change but for the fact that they were facing a bunch of lawsuits."

Miller and his associates have also uncovered evidence that Remington developed a safer gun with its new bolt-action rifle, or NBAR, program but never manufactured it.
The company also tried to keep documents about the NBAR program out of court, but more than 20 judges ruled the company needed to release its records, according to Business Week. "The NBAR program had as its goal improvement of the defective fire control on the Model 700," wrote Texas Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Dogget in December 1992. "(The documents) provide evidence of great significance ... as to Remington's knowledge of defects and of its ability to implement safer alternative designs."

All the evidence of what Remington knew or didn't do doesn't help the Barber family, Rich Barber, Gus's father said Wednesday. But he does feel the company was "unconscionable" by not notifying the public about the problem. "My son is a statistic," Rich Barber said. "He was one of 20,000 potential problems Remington knew about."
While the Barbers have been in contact with Miller, Barber said the family has not decided what to do on a legal front. For now, his focus is on educating everyone he can about the gun that killed his son. "We are considering (a lawsuit) at this time, but it's not one of my priorities," he said. "It's the middle of hunting season in Montana now. I want to make a difference." In the two weeks since his son's death, Rich Barber has been in contact with the news media trying to spread the word about the
dangers of Remington's bolt action rifle. He's also contacted several local schools offering to speak to classes about the gun and gun safety or be interviewed by the school paper's reporters, hoping that he can teach a new generation of hunters about the gun. Barber stressed repeatedly that this is not an anti-gun issue. "It's a gun-safety issue," he said. For 12 years he and his family had been happy with the Remington Model 700, he said. "It would out shoot anything that came out of the box. It was a very accurate weapon and a fine weapon for my family." The Barbers have another Remington Model 700, bought after being so pleased with the first one. Rich
Barber now looks at his remaining rifle and he's not sure what to do with it.

Miller said there are only two things that can be done with the Remington Model 700 to eliminate the problems. First is to get the bolt lock removed on models made prior to 1982. Second is to go to a gunsmith and have a new, after-market firing system of another brand installed.

Barber wants to pass this information along to as many people as he can, believing he only has a two-week window to do because that's as long as the general public will remember his son's death. He's also asking people to contact him about any mishaps they had with the Remington Model 700 series. In a small circle of friends, he said he already knows of 14 confirmed cases and four possible ones. "My goal is to document as many cases to show that the 1 percent (Remington claims is susceptible to the problem) is inaccurate in the hope that their consciousness will catch up with them and recall the weapon," Rich Barber said. "My emotion is gone. My mission now is to save lives. I didn't ask for this. I didn't search it out. It came to me. It's a God-given mission," he said.
 
Gary O,
1st- there are no internal parts which return a safety block, the safety is entirely manual. It is placed on manually and taken off Manually.
2nd- Any Attorney who has represented parties in 40 cases has looked
long and hard for them.
3rd- The greatest failure in all these cases, was the party holding the gun.
 
Nevertheless, I can't remember any new gun I got with instructions on how to maintain the trigger, or even a recommendation that it should be done.

All of that was learned word of mouth & only from target shooters of one sort or another. Your weeken hunter never came across that. Sure, there was a time when you'd read suggestions in a magazine here & there that you drop the shootin' pole down to the local gunsmith during the off season for him to give it a service, but do you know anybody who did that?

You are correct, they do not send instructions and with good reason, they should be periodically checked by someone who is qualified. No manufacturer will tell the general public how to clean and adjust anything that involves a safety / liability issue. Just imagine an auto manufacturer handing out instructions on how to adjust the anti lock brakes and proportioning valves on your brakes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob, is that why Remington has paid out millions to shut folks up? Just asking...
 
Bob, is that why Remington has paid out millions to shut folks up? Just asking...

Large companies will settle out of court for many reasons... even if they are dead sure they will win the case...

I was involved as an expert witness once in a case against Weatherby... I was tesifying on behalf of Weatherby... the case against Weatherby was very poor but they settled out of court and their lawyer told me it was cheaper in the long run and it was what the insurance company wanted to do, not Weatherby.
 
Back
Top