No Excuses for Poor Quality

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nope, I love my Remington guns. However, you picked the firearms industry poster child for quality control and corporate greed issues.

That people were injured and killed as a result is only what brought this to the attention of the public. The problem has been demonstrated numerous times on video and was even demonstrate in court. No illusion.

So you got a great barrel. That is nice.
 
Sanch said:
Remington's trigger didn't cause problems. Negligent discharges caused problems. What part of, "Keep your finger off on your gun's trigger until you're sure of your target and what lies beyond," caused shooters difficulty?
Click to expand...
Not to hijack the discussion, but in the interest of educating readers who may be new shooters -- that's a mis-statement of the rules. The rule is, "Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target and you're ready to shoot." (That's the Cooper version. The NRA version is, "ALWAYS Keep Your Finger Off The Trigger Until Ready To Shoot.")

"Be sure of your target and what lies beyond it" is a separate rule.
 
All I can say is
Consider what lies under a normal curve
and
Consider where your sample lies on it.

Your rifle is a Remington 700 made (supposedly) in 1975. By 1975, NC manufacturing was fully deployed in the manufacturing industries, so to say it was made without computers would be a misstatement.

BTW, that is a 2" group. You don't get to omit the flyers of your choice.
 
I have owned several Remington 700s and have never got .25" groups from them. One 243 carbine would come close. But then I'm not a big bench rest shooter. I load ammo and if it will stay around 1 to 1.5" off the bench with a bullet I like I'm ready to hunt.

And have never had any trigger troubles with my Remington rifles. I only have two left now. An old 30-06 made in the 1960s and a first version model 7 with 18.5" barrel and scnabel forend. Thats a deer killing machine.

Good shooting OP.;)
 
Scorch said:
BTW, that is a 2" group. You don't get to omit the flyers of your choice.
Click to expand...

And that 2" group was shot at 50 yds ;) . We all know sporter contour barrels don't like heat from consecutive shots. You don't need and uber tight cloverleaf group, you need just ONE shot placed where you need it to humanely down the prey.
 
There is no justifiable reason for any rifle to leave a factory in other than flawless condition and capable of MOA accuracy.
Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this statement a bit, and I think you're overlooking the two obvious reasons a rifle might leave the factory with less than the best possible finish and not capable of MOA accuracy.

They are price point, and actual mechanical design & tolerances.

Intentionally making less than the best possible product in order to make a serviceable one at an affordable price for the majority of your target market is not a flaw. It's a choice.

Ford (or GM or whomever) could make a car like Rolls Royce. They don't. By choice.

The other side is simply the designs themselves, some are not capable of MOA accuracy, because they were never meant to be.
 
44 AMP said:
I've been thinking about this statement a bit, and I think you're overlooking the two obvious reasons a rifle might leave the factory with less than the best possible finish and not capable of MOA accuracy.

They are price point, and actual mechanical design & tolerances.

Intentionally making less than the best possible product in order to make a serviceable one at an affordable price for the majority of your target market is not a flaw. It's a choice.

Ford (or GM or whomever) could make a car like Rolls Royce. They don't. By choice.

The other side is simply the designs themselves, some are not capable of MOA accuracy, because they were never meant to be.
Click to expand...
I think this pretty much sums it up with one additional thought, it’s cheaper to let the customers be your QC dept. and then just factor the cost of returned items into the price of the item. As long as your warranty service is excellent no matter how marginal the QC is people will sing your praises and your company will have a good reputation. Rugers business model comes to mind.
 
jetinteriorguy said:
I think this pretty much sums it up with one additional thought, it’s cheaper to let the customers be your QC dept. and then just factor the cost of returned items into the price of the item. As long as your warranty service is excellent no matter how marginal the QC is people will sing your praises and your company will have a good reputation. Rugers business model comes to mind.
Click to expand...
And Mossberg. The 930 is an excellent gas shotgun design, executed sporadically. We've got an old Field-Security Combo that's been great. My wife likes that one so I bought a 22" JM Pro, which had to be gutted & deburred right out of the box.
 
Hi 44AMP,

Cars and guns are not analogous.

The posts of other posters about which I referred to were quality brands rifles that should have represented quality of their brands.
 
Cars and guns are not analogous.
Click to expand...

In some ways, they are. In specific detail, not so much.

it’s cheaper to let the customers be your QC dept. ...
Click to expand...

I hear this a lot, but I wonder if it is actually true.

I don't have the beancounter's data or their ways of looking at it, so I can't say with certainty, but I wonder if it might be something that isn't a universal truism.

The story about the "evil" car maker who didn't fix a known defect because their beancounters determined the cost of pay settlements to the families of those injured or killed was less than the cost of changing the production line to do the fix is known and has been made into at least one movie.

But I wonder if that principle is something done by gunmakers, or if it is a common myth because, well, they're big companies, and all big companies all do business exactly the same...etc.. (intentional sarcasm) :rolleyes:

Ok, maybe it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and swims like a duck but maybe, its a goose. Or maybe its a witch, made of wood, like a duck, because both ducks and wood floats... ???

I don't think the gunmakers have done away with their QC people, because tis cheaper to just fix the bad ones. I'm not convinced that it IS cheaper to fix the bad ones. Consider receiving, inspecting, repairing then shipping back costs money that PROPER QC minimizes.

Now, I'm not saying there are no lapses or failure with QC, they are, after all people. However they are people who's jobs depend on their doing their work correctly. And those that screw up DO get fired. I've seen it happen.

So, I think that promoting the idea, either directly or by inference, that the factories don't care, and don't do QC and rely on their repair dept, "because its cheaper" is more BS than truth.

I also don't automatically buy in to the "they're producing more bad ones today than the used to..." It MAY be true, I don't know with certainty, but MAYBE it only SEEMS true because today, the entire world can hear of every bad gun with a few keystrokes. Are there really more examples of poor work, or are we just hearing about them when in the past we didn't??

I freely admit to not buying any new guns for some time, so maybe that's why I'm not seeing all the bad stuff reported out there. The reason I'm not buying new guns isn't because of their quality (or reported lack of same) but simply because there is damn little new that I am interested in.
 
Sanch, I have been following this thread with a bowl of popcorn.
Just a quick question - you have QTY 3 production hunting/ sporter configuration rifles that all shoot .25" all day long at 100 yards?
 
Mike Walker, whom I believe may still be living, was interviewed not so many years ago, regarding the Remington trigger problem. He identified the problem, and showed what was needed to correct it. That would have cost an extra .05/trigger, and was dead on arrival. The rest is history.
 
Is there any center fire rifle maker whose accuracy guarantee is for more than 3 shots?

In most instances, a 20 dollar fix is all that's needed.
 
Is there any center fire rifle maker whose accuracy guarantee is for more than 3 shot
Click to expand...

I believe that Sako does have a 5 shot guarantee for some of their models. There are probably a few other boutique manufacturers that offer a similar guarantee.

However, one 5 shot sub MOA is a LONG way from .25" all day long as has been claimed by the OP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top