Remington Under Fire--

Discussion in 'Gunsmithing Forum' started by JBelk, Oct 12, 2010.

  1. JBelk

    JBelk New Member

    CNBC is running a special this month. I post the following as a service to the gunsmithing community.

    ©copyright 2010, H.J. Belk


    This paper is published as a public service aimed primarily at gunsmiths and advanced amateur gun enthusiasts that have a curiosity about the fascinating mechanics involved in modern firearms and are willing to look at very easy facts and features and figure out how it works. Remington-Walker triggers are more complicated than pliers, but not by much. Much of their mystery remains because the design is so like others in appearance, but totally different in operation.

    The author has a life-long love affair and intense interest in what makes guns do what they do and how to make them do it better by design instead of blind luck. For the past seventeen years, much of the gun study has been as a result of law suits involving firearms and their design. It has been an enlightening experience that needs to be talked about. I'm in no way picking on Remington, but they're in the spot light right now and actual facts are hard to come by on this subject. I've testified as an expert in Federal and other courts in civil and criminal matters in several states. My testimony has never been disallowed.

    There is a difference between studying design and function by taking things apart and comparing what is seen by a parts diagram and testifying to how the gun operates to a great degree of mechanical certainty. When testifying of how something happens, certainty is essential. The rule of 'follow the forces' in gunsmithing is a good one. Once forces and pivots are seen and understood, the entire trigger is no longer a mystery. Just because it looks like any other trigger is no cause to think it operates like any other. It does not.

    Attacks on the author by those that have not read this paper while actually examining a Remington-Walker trigger and the patent language pertaining to it will be happily ignored. Facts are facts and I'm trying to explain how to actually see those facts so you can come to your own conclusions based on mechanical knowledge instead of what was heard or said somewhere.

    Questions on this paper are gladly answered but preferably in the public forum. The purpose is, after all, the education of a subject out of normal vision and experience of the shooter. If you want to talk politics or personal appearance or what you think of me or something else, please move it to another thread. This discussion is about one particular family of triggers that are present on more than seven million rifles spread all over the world.

    Remington-Walker-Haskell trigger---
    Please reference U.S.Pat. 2,514,981 That's the trigger we're talking about and it's different than all others. There are pdf download patents available without charge several places on the internet.

    To fully understand the operations and failures of the Remington-Walker trigger, the drawings and the text of the patent are MOST important. Print it out, if possible, for ready reference. It is the heart of the Remington 'problem' in 600 and 700 series triggers. This applies to all models but the M-788 which has a one piece trigger design in it.

    The patent drawings are probably different than the trigger you see in your rifle. Over the decades many changes have been made to the various parts. I'll explain the differences and what effect they have on operation and safety, later, but here's a rough test to see which 'generation' trigger is in your rifle.

    Remove the bolt and look down in the rear tang at the sear. If there is a stack of four parts, the outer housing and the two sears, it's an early gun and should be treated with special care. The more modern sears are chromed sintered metal and of one piece.

    The second test is to see if it has a bolt lock safety. Does the bolt open easily with safety ON? If so it was made after 1982. If you have a bolt lock gun, cut the lug off so it's defeated. Just grind off #32 Fig 1 of the patent.

    If the face of your trigger is smooth without the ridges commonly found on the face of triggers, it is a new X-MarkPro trigger that has a solid trigger and no connector. It was made after October of 2006. I have closely examined several X-Mark Pro triggers and their prototypes. It is as good as any trigger on the market and better than many. It's just 60 years late.

    With those comments I'll dive into a subject I extensively covered on this site and others ten years ago.

    The fact that the plane you're flying in has not crashed is no evidence that crashes don't occur.
    That pretty well sums up anecdotal evidence. Just because your rifle's trigger has never, ever done anything but what you directed it to do is no evidence of the lack of a defect. The defect is there and it's unpredictable and many times it won't repeat no matter what you do. The scientific method depends on masses of information when the occurrence is rare and non-repeatable. There are thousands of people that have written letters of complaints that describe the exact same failures time after time. The defect is in the trigger and just because it works now does not mean it won't fail in the future.


    The Remington-Walker trigger is an “Over-ride” trigger system. That means it's not a “Direct-acting” trigger that pulls the sear out of position with the cocking piece (like M-98, 03, etc). An over-ride trigger props up the sear and is not attached to it. Winchester started the over-ride, or 'negative angle' trigger in hunting rifles in the M-70 in 1937. Sako made an override trigger contained in a housing that was then fastened to the action. Many custom trigger makers copied it just after the War. Timney, Dayton-Traister, Canjar, Jewel, Ruger M77, A-bolts, Tikka - just name a modern bolt action rifle and it'll have an over-ride trigger in it. They are crisp and allow very good trigger pulls. They are the 'standard' in modern bolt action rifles.

    The Remington-Walker is different than all those others and patent #2,514,981 tells us why that is.

    Figure 1 of the patent shows a jumble parts that usually makes people slightly ill to try to cipher it out. Here's a better representation with the parts labeled in common language and direction of movements given to hopefully, though crudely, better 'see' what's inside.

    Notice the area inside the red circle. When the bolt closes, the cocking piece pushes the rear of the sear downward so that the sear rests on the rear corner of the connector. That overlap is the 'sear engagement'. Its usually .018 to .025 inches which means the rifle is prevented from firing by about .004 square inch of steel, at most. In this position, the cocking piece is held by the sear, which is pressing down on the top of the trigger-connector. When the trigger moves forward the sear falls and the firing pin rushes forward to fire the rifle.

    The safety cam lifts the sear off the top of the trigger-connector and locks the sear into the cocking piece so the gun can't fire, but the trigger and connector are free to move. When the safety is rotated to OFF, the sear comes back down on the trigger-connector. This is a simple 'Sako-style', modular, over-ride trigger. The fact that the sear is hinged at the front instead of the back makes no practical difference. It can be seen by this simple motion of the safety and sear that the trigger and connector HAVE to come back to the full rear position for there to be security in the sear / trigger engagement.

    In its simplest form, an over-ride trigger is two levers and two springs and two retaining pins. The M-70 is exactly that, plus an over-travel adjustment. The 'Sako style' over-ride triggers, contained in a housing having more parts, operate exactly the same---The trigger props up the sear and when the sear is allowed to fall, the gun fires.

    In the Remington-Walker trigger, the safety 'problem' is NOT in the safety. This is a common misconception but it's important to realize the Remington-Walker safety is not the cause of firing without a trigger pull. The safety could be called a 'victim of circumstance' in that it is converted to a trigger without the shooter's knowledge.

    How does it do that?

    Let's take a look at some patent language, shall we. Go to page 3, beginning on line 60 and read through to Page 4, line 61.

    This description has several parts and pieces that need examination. It starts by telling how the connector (you'll hear that word a lot) is not fastened inside the trigger housing, but 'flexibly mounted' in it. That means it's loose on the trigger but for the trigger return spring pushing against it. A lot of the verbiage describes nifty ways of making the housing out of a stamping, but that was discontinued many years ago.

    Page 4, line 22 through 40 is where it gets interesting to an experienced shooter.

    “This stop screw provides an adjustment to positively stop trigger movement just as the sear is released and makes possible the complete elimination of undesirable trigger slap or overtravel.”

    Page 4, line 40 starts a section that needs to be examined very closely:

    “ If we examine the functioning of the unit, we will observe that the trigger and connector move as a unit,...”

    and line 44,

    “At this point the trigger stops but the connector ….”

    Hold on, right there. Let's read that again and make SURE you know what that says, then try it on your UNLOADED rifle.
    Does the trigger stop it's motion as the sear drops off of it? If it does, the patent makes sense. The operation of the connector would shorten the overall travel of the trigger to only the amount of the sear engagement and nothing more. But, if the trigger is going to travel until it hits the stop screw anyway, why complicate the trigger with a part that has no benefits? The amount of motion in the trigger is as little as it can be made if the corners are square and the sear falls cleanly from the corner of the trigger.


    Take any unloaded, bolt action rifle with an over-ride trigger in it (anything bolt-action and civilian). With the rifle uncocked and bolt closed, carefully pull the trigger several times and note how much movement there is. It's usually about .020 inch or about two thirds the thickness of a credit card. What the patent is saying is that the trigger does not move that .020 after the sear trips. It says the trigger stops when the sear trips. That, of course is demonstrably not true. Try it on any rifle. The trigger 'follows through' as the gun fires. You can't stop it short of the stop if you wanted to. So, what are we left with?

    Using .020 inch as the sear-trigger engagement figure and assuming the pivot pin is near the center of the trigger, it can be said the trigger pull is .020”, plus a clearance after disengagement to allow the sear to fall without touching anything. Call the total trigger movement .030 inch when the trigger pull plus overtravel is figured. By actual experiment you can see that the movement of a Remington-Walker trigger is exactly the same as any other trigger having the same sear engagement and the nonsense on Page 4, line 30 does not apply.

    “...for it is not practicably possible to produce and maintain absolutely sharp square corners on the engaging surfaces of the sear and conventional trigger.”

    Nobody says that an absolutely sharp square corner is needed to make a good trigger, and everybody but Remington has done so.

    So, why the connector? If the connector really doesn't do anything, why have it? Is it cheaper than say a heat-treated trigger by any other maker? Possibly, but others have solid triggers.
    Does it, in ANY way, make the trigger a 'better' trigger? No, it's just different. It does not reduce the trigger movement at all, but it's different simply because it's more complicated.

    It seems to be the perfect example of a new design patent as the result of one little change to something invented prior. In this case, the improvements and attributes said to be present in the Remington-Walker don't perform the function claimed in the patent. The change in the trigger design was for the purposed of a patent and not for performance.


    An over-ride trigger must, absolutely MUST, return to full position after every shot. The trigger return spring is there to do that job. That's the spring you feel in the trigger when the rifle is not cocked. A trigger that does not return to the proper position reliably under the sear is more likely to cause the gun to fire without the trigger being pulled. That is simple physics and easily set up in demonstration. “Return to battery” for internal trigger parts is part and parcel of over-ride trigger operations.

    The Remington-Walker's 'trigger' is not the piece you put your finger on. The part that acts as the trigger under the sear is actually the connector which is 'flexibly connected' to the trigger body. The trigger return spring pushes the connector which then pushes the trigger body into position under the sear. The connector offers a complication that is not needed in the trigger. The addition of the connector only adds to the complexity of what is a very simple and amazingly reliable mechanism when its parts are limited to only what's necessary to do the job.

    Is a mechanism that's called upon to return one lever with one spring more reliable than a spring pushing on an intermediary part and then the lever? Of course it is. The fewer parts, the simpler the mechanism, especially when dealing with simple levers.
    With the re-positioning of the trigger-connector required after each shot, in the presence of recoil and powder residue and debris, the answer becomes even more certain. More parts means more complications without benefits.


    Remington-Walker triggers are subject to several failures all due to displacements of the connector inside the trigger housing. These failures are common enough to have acronyms for them:

    FSR-- Fire on Safety Release.

    How many people have pulled the trigger with the safety ON just to 'test' it out? I know of hunter safety instructors that teach it as a good thing to do every time the safety is applied. How many times is the trigger pulled while the safety is ON but not by the shooter? That's probably a rarer occurrence but it does happen, that's why manual safeties and trigger guards are put on guns.
    Should the trigger be pulled on a Remington-Walker, and the connector become displaced so that it does not return with the trigger, the shooter feels the trigger return not knowing the connector did not follow along with the trigger to its proper place under the sear. In that position, the safety lever is holding up the sear and the rifle fires when the safety is pushed to OFF.

    Prior to 1982, Remington rifles had a 'bolt lock' incorporated with the safety lever. (#32 Fig. 1) That bolt lock means the gun has to be taken off safe in order to unload it. FSR is one of the most common failures and the one that's caused the most damage, injury and deaths. In simple terms it's the improper displacement of the connector during the time the gun is ON safe. The 'trigger' is in the proper position, but the connector is not.

    JO—Jar Off

    When the gun fails due to impact it is said to have 'jarred off'. Precarious 'perching' of the sear on the very corner or edge of the connector causes a fragile connection that can fail with bumping or jarring. In all other over-ride triggers, this displacement is usually caused by improper adjustment of the sear engagement screw . A Remington-Walker can change that engagement dimension and drastically change the security of the system by simply capturing debris between two internal parts. It 'adjusts' itself to little engagement and just as quickly adjusts the other way as the debris is dislodged by the recoil of the shot.

    FBO and FBC--
    These refer to firing without a pull of the trigger when the bolt is opened or closed. This is a variation of a common 'Jar Off' caused by vibration of the bolt closing (easy to reproduce by mal-adjusting the sear engagement.) or the change in alignment of parts as the bolt handle is touched to open it. In both instances the most common cause is a connector being held out of position by debris, dirt, powder flakes, dried grease on any number of things that trickle through the mechanism as it's fired and stored. Fire on bolt close many times happens on the first loading after long storage. By design, the connector is pushed away from the trigger body when the rifle is in the fired position. That gives a chance for lint and debris to collect in sufficient quantity to alter the sear engagement the first few times the gun is then 'exercised'.

    Can any of these failures occur in other triggers? Yes.

    The operation of over-ride triggers, whether Jewel, Timney, Canjar, or Remington-Walker is the same. The trigger is a prop for the sear. If it doesn't properly support the sear under knocks and bumps a hunting rifle takes in doing its job, a discharge without a trigger pull can happen. The point is that the Remington-Walker has an extra 'trigger' that does NOT do the job it was patented to do and it's much more subject to become displaced than competing 'solid' triggers. Why is that connector in there?

    Over-ride triggers, by design, are very fragile things and scary to think about when you also consider the risk involved. That they work well enough for a hunting rifle could have been disputed before the M-70 made it a fact in 1937. What had been known as a 'target' trigger became mainstream and a hunting trigger.

    The M-70 has two parts pinned in a milled recess in the bottom of the receiver which keeps side to side motion to a minimum so the two parts are held closely in alignment with each other and the cocking piece. The M-70 trigger scrapes the sear surface clean into a trash trench cut in the trigger on each shot. There is no housing to catch debris. The sear comes up through a port in the rear tang which allows very little contamination of the trigger parts. The sear spring is nearly sealed and debris is blocked from entry into critical areas. 'Bad' M-70 triggers are the result of bad gunsmithing and usually found on match rifles. Otherwise they're very reliable and after a period of 'break-in' are usually very 'good' triggers.

    Points to consider---

    The Remington-Walker has an extra part that's free to move around inside the housing. That's the connector.

    The connector is displaced from the front of the trigger on every shot due to the angularity of the back edge of the connector which is impacted by the corner of the sear as it falls. That is by design. Page 4, lines 46-50.

    “...and, as the sear is cammed down, the radii existing on the points of the connector and the sear cause the connector to be cammed forwardly and completely clear of the sear step. ...”

    In a mechanism subject to environmental conditions as well as lubricants and powder residue, two parts that separate several times during recoil are subject to a wide variety of contamination between them. As can be seen by study of the mechanism and it's patent, the Remington-Walker trigger is not self cleaning and it is housed within steel walls, but the unit is open at the top where the greater amount of such contamination is present.

    The top of the Remington trigger housings are totally exposed in the rear tang of the rifle. At each operation of the sear, debris is 'pumped' into the housing. (Look at the top of the bolt release to see the stuff that comes all the way through the trigger.) Each operation of the bolt pushes more material into the vicinity of the sear opening. Remington-Walker triggers do get dirty and they can't be easily cleaned without disassembly. Disassembly of the trigger breaks the factory seals.

    The connector is, in reality, a separate flexibly mounted trigger. It cannot be felt by the shooter. The position of the connector can be different than the position of the trigger without the shooter knowing it. The shooter can not know the position of the connector, it's out of his control and out of his view.

    Practical gunsmith's test of the Remington-Walker trigger---

    Over the decades, standardized tests of Remington-Walker triggers have been developed to show a trigger that is prone to repeatable failures. These tests are simple, non destructive and can be very useful in identifying triggers that are demonstrably bad. It must be kept in mind that just because a trigger passes these test does NOT mean it's safe. As seen by the design, the defect is inherently present in the trigger. It just doesn't always fail. The shooter has no way of knowing when that failure might occur.

    “Tricking” a trigger is done by carefully placing the safety lever in the 'null' position between fire and safe. Some guns won't perch there, some will. With the safety perched between detents, pull the trigger and release very slowly. Pay careful attention to a tiny 'click' as the trigger is pulled. If it's there, the gun will likely fire when the safe is pushed to OFF. Try that test several times and flip the safe off after each careful pull. Tricking is a way to determine if the lift of the safety cam is enough to clear the top of the connector in half-way position.

    “Screw driver Test” is done with the gun cocked and ON safe. Push against the bottom of the connector, seen just in front of the bolt release leaf, with a screwdriver or punch and then push the safety to OFF. If the connector is sloppy on the trigger it will over ride the front of the sear so that the sear has no support when the safety is released. Guns that fail this test can sometimes fire on safety release after suffering common vibrations in a vehicle or on horseback.

    “Sear lift test” assures the safety cam raises the sear high enough to not drag on the connector when on safe. Place the rifle safety ON and pull the trigger several times and release it slowly. If the connector drags on the bottom of the sear it can't get back under the sear to catch it as the safety is flipped OFF.
    Guns that have been dropped while on safe can develop this failure by denting the safety cam.

    Trigger adjustments--

    Just be aware that the clear to cloudy-yellow sealer found on Remington-Walker screws is put there by assemblers as the trigger undergoes final adjustment at the factory. When that sealer is removed, the company has a certain amount of deniability and 'blame' is transferred to the one doing the adjusting. (I know, I know!!) I've adjusted Remington triggers for forty years because so many are useless without it. Just be aware of the liability involved and how it works so it's not made (much) worse by alterations of the surfaces or excessive adjustments.

    Trigger repair---

    The Remington-Walker can be made into a solid trigger system without using the connector by replacing the trigger and connector by an aftermarket or shop-made trigger, OR, the connector can be epoxied to the body of the trigger as long as one thing is done very carefully; The rear of the connector has to be ground square after the epoxy sets, BUT the actual disengaging corner of the connector has to be left in its' original position relative to the center line of the trigger pivot pin. It takes a precision grinder and fixture to do it right. Do it wrong and the trigger is even more unpredictable and could become very dangerous. Without grinding the rear of the connector square, the sear hitting the angle will soon break the epoxy bond and the trigger is worse than before.

    In the coming weeks, the Remington-Walker trigger is going to be in the news. Those that know guns will be answering questions from those that don't. Please have the facts and please, please just look at the mechanism and the patent and understand how it all works and it’s then very easy to see how it also fails.
  2. spittinfire

    spittinfire Active Member Supporter

    I saw this advertised on TV and thought no good could come of it.

  3. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    So, I just read that whole post - of which is a copy of some other post on some other website as referenced "ten years ago" - FTF wasn't around then. :eek:

    Basically, this Remington-Walker trigger has come "under fire" because of some slam-fire or jar-fire situations/potential and this is a well written piece to explain how the patent was initial meant to make the trigger better, but fell into a category of possible "ooops" and is a CYA broadbrush in case anyone is questioned?

    I'll print this out and have it by the phone in case KNN news calls me. :cool:
  4. HunterFreedom

    HunterFreedom New Member

    Can't trust Belk or Scott Cohn!

    Is this the same J. Belk who plays "expert witness" for trial lawyers aiming for a quick buck? The same Belk who -- under oath -- swore that he has never been able to duplicate his allegations against the Model 700? Yep, appears so and now the turncoat has turned to "Safety Scott" Cohn from NBC to drum up some more business for his lawyer pals. Here's a photo of "Safety Scott" -- a typical gun ignorant, gun hating media guy who can't even follow the most basic of firearms safety rules. "Gee, how'd that gun go off? My finger wasn't on the trigger."

    Attached Files:

  5. lauralizabe

    lauralizabe New Member

    Reminton's Response

    Hello! My name is Laura and I do web work for Remington. If you're looking for a credible source, see Remington's response to the biased CBS program: Remington

  6. JBelk

    JBelk New Member

    The mechanical facts of the trigger as explained above still stands without refutations.
  7. fixxer

    fixxer New Member

    Evading the question pal?

    I guess that's an affirmative to the question that was posed to you "JBelk".... I don't know if this is truly you or someone posing as you to stir emotions but I'm going to comment on this anyway.
    I watched this special report the other night on CNBC.
    I'm not taking Remington's side nor am I refuting that they could have a design flaw. It looks like there is some evidence that they may have a problem with the good ol' 700. Since the engineer looks to have admitted to a problem with his trigger design, I tend to believe this is the case. Unfortunately I cannot be sure that the interview was edited so as to manipulate the audience’s perception; therefore, I will not use your interview to form the whole conclusion. I personally own a Remington 710, chambered in 7mm Magnum and I can NOT get it to replicate this malfunction. In the CNBC report it was not stated that the 700 was the culprit. It was stated that the entire "700 Series" was problematic. I don't think that much is true personally but I cannot refute the idea since I have not personally checked every 700 Series rifle on the planet.
    Here is MY big problem with the story that I watched:
    Pertaining to the case that was described the most in depth. This is the case of the child that was killed by a rifle gunshot. I will state an irrevocable and inarguable basic fact. The boy’s mother took a LOADED rifle and haphazardly pointed the muzzle while she "cleared" the weapon. In this instance, "clearing" the weapon did not work out as intended and SHE killed her son with a rifle. I sympathize with her and her family for their loss. I am sure that they are good hearted people and I hope that they are able to heal as a family. I feel like maybe they are using Remington as an outlet for their frustration at this particular time. Unfortunately the fact is SHE UNINTENTIONALLY KILLED HER SON with a rifle that she was unloading. A rifle that she knew, should have known or at least should have prudently treated as loaded was pointed at her child. She violated MANY basic rules for fire firearm safety. The biggest and most irresponsible was pointing the muzzle of ANY firearm in an unsafe direction. There are several more that I will not go into. As a community of responsible gun enthusiasts; we know that every time a responsible fire arms operator unloads a firearm, they must point the muzzle in the safest direction. EVERY TIME. Maybe you should take that fact and post it all over the net as a "Public Service Announcement".
    Here's a shocker for you Belk: "Never point a gun at something you don't intend to kill or destroy!" :eek:
    In the future it might be best to reserve your PSA's/opinions to the UNINFORMED and the easily swayed.
    Thanks J
    -Eugene Williams
    Veteran and responsible firearms enthusiast
    NRA Member # 179804859
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2010
  8. fixxer

    fixxer New Member

    Plagiarizing technical material lately?

    Also, "A-bolts" are not a brand. A-Bolt is a system used by a brand. Just thought that I'd point out since I was busy comparing this post to some older material (thanks Dillinger). It's probably a good idea to learn a thing or two about the material you are plagiarising before posting it for everyone to see. Speaking of A-bolts, I'm pretty sure that will be my next rifle purchase. Of course I still won't point the muzzle at someone when I'm unloading it.
  9. JBelk

    JBelk New Member

    Fixxer-- If you own a M710 you can SEE the parts explained in my paper and figure out for yourself where the defect lies. It has the same parts mounted in a flimsy plastic housing!

    A rifle, by definition, 'points' somewhere at ALL times. There is NO way humanly possible not to endanger somebody if you have people within a couple of miles of you. THAT is why guns have's a switch to activate it. The safety should NEVER be that switch.
    It would help if you actually read the description, looked at the patent and look at a trigger and figure it out for yourself. It's just levers and springs. In the last week I've gotten very good questions from teen-agers and women that understood it and recognized the defect. Can't you?
    Your knee jerk reaction is similar to the libs that will eventually take your guns if you don't wake up and realize reality. It's painful sometimes but it sure is durable.

    That's a bad photo shop job of a trigger finger, don't you think?
  10. fixxer

    fixxer New Member

    Yeah, I get it.

    What did I say?
    The way I read it, it looks as if I’m not refuting the idea. Right?
    I also stated that I would not use CNBC’s “investigative report” to draw my conclusions 100% This is because CNBC (and every other network) is not in the business of publishing ALL the facts. They are in the business of selling advertisement slots. Once those are sold, it is their goal to keep those slots filled. Simple business practice. Creative editing keeps viewers captivated.
    Here’s an example of how the media would do this:
    First, I would take the following statement out of context and place it before the actual investigation scenes:
    Then I would insert this response:
    “What are you trying to say? Are you telling me that you believe women are only as apt as teenagers to understand the concepts of how a firearm work? That’s what it sounded like to me.”
    Then I would cut to a panel of women [insert names], and record their reaction to the statement which would leave the audience with the conclusion that you are a misogynistic jerk. From this point I would build a case against you under the guise of an investigative journalist. I use the audiences hate for you as a manipulative tool to convince them I am on THEIR side. Skipping and editing details against you would become progressively easier as the audience WANTS to believe that you are evil. By the end of the episode, I will have successfully gained most of the audiences trust so as to avoid actual fact checking of accusations.
    It’s the M.O. of the media. It’s why we can’t trust CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, etc.
    -Moving on-
    Again, what did I say?
    As I recall; and you can verify, I did not claim there was a finite direction that was 100% safe. I mentioned there was “unsafe” places to point a muzzle and there are “safer” places to point a muzzle. There is no “SAFE” place to always point a muzzle. That being said, I find it hard to believe that I am endangering someone “a couple miles” from where I am keeping it pointed down range or at a definite patch of earth that is unpopulated. The gist is that we know a firearm will destroy anything in the path of the muzzle if it discharges; be it with or without intention. Had said operator heeded this basic principle of firearms safety, her son would be alive today (regardless of finger inside or outside of the trigger guard).
    Again, please reserve your PSA’s to the uninformed. I didn’t join the NRA because I am a paranoid lib hater. Libs will be libs. The mere mention of “them vs. us” doesn’t make me cringe and forget about the topic at hand. Sorry
  11. JBelk

    JBelk New Member

    Fixxer-- I still invite you to look at the REAL evidence...the trigger and the patent. Forget what CNBC says, don't worry about what I say. Look at the actual mechanical device and please try to understand exactly how it works. That will show you exactly how it fails. Others have and have suddenly shut up!
  12. greydog

    greydog Member

    The connector is a superfluous part. The connector has not been shown to be the part at fault in any of the incidents. It has only been shown that it has the potential to be the cause of some of the indidents. I think the focus on the connector is off base but it's an easy target.
    There are aspects of the design, quite apart from the existence of the connector, that exacerbate dimensional quality control issues which are the culprit in every FSR case I have seen. That is, every case I have seen wherein the trigger has not been adjusted (incorrectly).
    The new Remington 700 trigger (the x Mark Pro trigger) eliminates the connector but I have already seen two which FSR'd. Both were misadjusted by the owners. Plainly, the elimination of the connector and the addition of a trigger block to the safety, was not quite enough to counteract the kind of klutzmanship practiced by some of the owners.
    The Barber family have, for years, wanted the opportunity to publicly flog Remington; the CNBC special is the first of what they hope will be many lashes laid on Remington's corporate back. I can't help but wonder if the accident might have been prevented if they had taken the rifle in for trigger replacement under the program initiated by Remington to address some admitted quality-control issues.
    I have no dog in this fight but I do disagree with the premise that it is the existence of the connector, as a part of the original design, which is the root cause of the accidents with Remington triggers over the years.
    The accident which has been the prime motivator in this case was not the mother's fault nor was it Mike Walker's. It was simply a case of something bad happening with a tragic result. The Barber's need to blame somone and something for their pain is understandable and, as I said before, the connector is an easy target. Remington has, by their mishandling of similar cases over the years, made themselves an easy target as well. GD
  13. RaySendero

    RaySendero Active Member

    I've got 2 Rem M700. Both actions will open with the safety in the "ON" position. Both past all the trigger/safety checks. Neither has had an acidental discharge.

    So...What's all this mean to me???
  14. JBelk

    JBelk New Member

    It means the trigger has a defect inside it that could fail at any time, or at no time. It is a random failure that's hard to see but IS there, as the document describes.

    I recommend contacting Remington for the new XMark Pro for both guns. I don't know availability, price or process, but I do know its a good trigger.

    Aftermarket triggers are all solid triggers without the defect. I've had experience with Timney, Shilen, and Jewel and like them all. I personally don't like a Remington style safety, so I use three position custom shrouds and safeties, but that's not to say the others are bad, just me. (I use a raised bolt handle as safe anyway.)
  15. cpttango30

    cpttango30 New Member

    Belk I see your back over here. Get tired of all the sheep at TFL?

    Why don't you just give it up already. Everyone knows no one really cares anymore.

    They screwed up. big deal......
  16. JonM

    JonM Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    the first thing you have to to believe this crap is believe that cnbc is credible source for anything. personally if some jack comes on a cnbc and claims that the earth has a moon i wouldnt take thier lying ***' word for it.

    this is the second poster today that has stirred up an anti-remington post on this forum with no proof other than a bunch of crap posted by cnbc with no other posting history.

    the fact that this behaviour cannot be replicated on a out of the box rifle when some paid person hasnt jiggered the trigger mechanism has yet to be demononstrated. just another faked story by the leftist media to create anti gun sentiment.
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2010
  17. greydog

    greydog Member

    As I said, I disagree with the premise that it is the connector which is the root cause of the accidental firings with Remington 700 Rifles. However, there is NO doubt that some triggers did malfunction "out-of-the-box". If any person doubts this, it is because they lack experience. Jack Belk and I disagree regarding the root cause and culpability but I cannot dispute that malfunctions have occurred with unaltered triggers. Such malfunction did occur and Remington has tried to address them over the years via re-calls and minor design changes. I dispute Jack's contention vis a' vis the connector because in EVERY case I saw where the rifle rifle fired when the safety was disengaged, the connector was not at fault.
    So, you can dispute the cause and you can dispute the responsibility, but you cannot dispute the occurences except out of ignorance. GD.
  18. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    Remington is, was, and always will be, my favorite brand of choice. I would sell all my rifles except for my Remington's. The bulk of my collection consists of Remington's. I have had only one...I will say that again to be clear...ONE...malfunction with a Remington during my 40 years of experience and ownership of them. It was a failure to eject on my latest Remington purchase...their 1911. That only needs a good breaking in period to solve as is the case with that particular design. I have never had a trigger go south on me.Never.
  19. Lefty O

    Lefty O New Member

    jbelk is just someone who is trying to make money off of this scare. i blasted him on another forum, because he doesnt know what he speaks of. he deleted his thread there and disapeared . it owuld be nice if he followed suit on all forums!
  20. JBelk

    JBelk New Member