Removing Dimples on 870HD

3

357Wheelgunner

Inactive
My Remington 870 express HD has these stupid dimples on the end of the magazine tube, and I can't install a magazine extension...How do I remove them?

I am so upset with Remington for being "politically correct" and disabling my ability to stuff a few more shells into my shotgun, or just adding length so my spring does not set. I guess it is a good thing, though, because a shotgun is made many times more deadly once it can hold more ammo. I've even heard that they sometimes aim themselves and shoot people, but only if they have black "tactical" stocks and magazine extensions. Thank you Remington arms....
 
While we're thanking Remington, I'd like to mention the machine chatter marks that I've seen on all but one of the M11-87's that I've checked in the last two weeks. They're along the lower edge of the chamber opening.

Then, there's the wood on several M870 Wingmasters...not Express grades. Looks like it came off packing cases salvaged from the grocer.

Remington better wake up. They've just lost at least one sale to Beretta, even though the M391 Urika will cost me a lot more than an M11-87.

Lone Star
 
First, welcome to TFL 357Wheelgunner.
Second, please take a moment to write Remington to let them know how you feel. They do not read the boards and unless we tell them directly, they will never have the chance to fix these things.
Now, to remove the dimples.....
The easiest thing to do is simply drill them out. I have never done this as I can not bring myself to drilling my gun but in reality, it is an OK solution.
I removed the dimples on one 870 by finding a socket (like from a wrench) that was the same OD as the ID of the mag tube and using it as an anvil. I tapped it into the mag tube and hammered the dimples flat. I finished with a dremel and paint.
I also removed dimples with the dremel only but the metal will be thin when you are done.
I have heard of folks using hones (like one might use for a brake-job) for this process.
The area where the dimples live is covered by the barrel ring so looks are not that important but I like mine to look good (even when apart) and I like the socket-method best.
The most important thing is that the inside of the tube must be finished smooooooooth so that the mag follower does not hang-up or bind.
Good luck,
Mike
 
"The easiest thing to do is simply drill them out. I have never done this as I can not bring myself to drilling my gun but in reality, it is an OK solution."

I did it. I can't see any drawbacks to it. Takes about five minutes. After drilling, I smoothed everything out with a Dremel.
 
In fairness to Remington:
The dimples in the mag tube ARE NOT a "PC" thing.

Understand that Remington has competition from Winchester and Mossberg.

Winny and Mossy build their guns from much cheaper to make cast aluminum receivers, and stamped internals.
Remington makes the 870 from forged and milled STEEL, with higher quality internals.

The bottom line is, Winny and Mossy can make and sell their guns cheaper than Remington.
Aluminum and stampings are cheaper than forged and milled steel.

Remington needed to offer an 870 at a price that could compete, so SOMETHING had to give, and what "gave" is expensive hand labor.
People time costs more than machine time.

In order to eliminate hand labor, Remington introduced the 870 Express series of "budget" guns, specifically to compete against Winny and Mossy.

The saving over the more expensive Wingmaster and Police models is as follows:
Rougher unpolished exterior and interior.
Rougher less polished bore.
Plastic trigger group.
Hardwood or synthetic stock, instead of Walnut.
Rougher blued finish.

And most important, the new style magazine retention assembly.

Here the bottom line is this: A plastic retention assembly is cheaper than the more expensive old style.

Plastic parts can be moulded much cheaper.
The new style changes the expensive milled mag tube cap to a fabricated one, and eliminates the labor-intensive spring and plunger cap retention assemble staked in the barrel support ring.

The simple fact is, the plastic and dimpled Express assembly cost much less to make than the Wingmaster/Police steel assembly, which requires a lot of milling time and expensive hand labor to assemble.
That simple little spring and plunger in the support ring costs enough to run the price up significantly.

So, Remington offered a "budget" gun FOR SPORTING use, that could compete with Winny and Mossy.

Remington's bottom line was PRICE, not PC, and the only way to lower the price of a milled steel gun is to cut hand labor costs.

This is exactly what most any other manufacturer does: Offer a stripped-down budget model, and a more expensive Premium model.
 
I fail to see how adding dimples (another process) to an unblemshed magazine tube is a cost savings measure to compete with Winchester & Mossberg.

I must therefore conclude that it is, in fact, a PC move.
 
One more time:
A machine can cast plastic parts and another can punch-press a pair of dimples into a thin steel tube A LOT cheaper than having a full-benefit, per hour human standing at a bench inserting a spring and plunger and staking it in place by hand.

A machine can fabricate an Express magazine cap cheaper than a milling machine can mill the Wingmaster/Police magazine cap with it's intricate locking notches.

Plastic, and stamped-in dimples cost LESS than than a Union worker getting paid close to $40.00 per hour when you figure in all those benefits.

Figure out how many Express dimples and plastic retainers a machine can make per hour, then figure how many cap retainer plungers and springs a worker can install per hour, MINUS breaks, lunches, production meetings, etc.

For the cost of just ONE of the finished cup washers used in the old system, you can mould dozens of plastic retainers.

Again, it ISN'T PC. Remington does offer an Express with an 18" barrel and a factory magazine extension. If the standard Express was "PC" they wouldn't be selling this model.

The Express was designed specifically for sale as a budget gun to SPORTSMEN, who wanted the cheapest gun possible.
It was never intended to be set up as a combat gun, so no thought was given to adding magazine extensions to a bird or squirrel gun.
The average Express buyer has never HEARD of a magazine extension, and would not have use for one if he did.

The bottom line is, you can't sell a milled steel gun at cast aluminum prices unless you cut out as much of the human labor element as possible.
 
You fail to see my point. Whether it's a machine or a $40 fat ass union worker (no offense to the union workers out there) doing the dimpling, it is still an extra manufacturing process for the magazine tube to go through.

When you add additional steps to ANY manufacturing process, the cost of manufacturing the product increases.

Ergo, ADDING the dimples increases the cost of manufacture.
 
adding a simple mechanical stamping that eleminates several complicated labor process tends to lower costs. Ergo gun costs less. You can still buy the guns with the old more labor intensive design but they cost around another 100 bucks over the dimple model.
 
We're not talking about whether the dimples are being added by a "simple mechanical process" or with the three stooges actually manually stamping them.

We're talking about adding the dimples to a magazine tube that otherwise would not have to go through the dimpling process.

You're telling me that let's say...adding a hood scoop to a car hood via mechanical process is less expensive than leaving the hood unmodified? :rolleyes:

I give up. :confused:
 
BigD,
so, in what way would you make a spring retention device?
Customers would get upset if the spring went flying bye-bye when they took the magazine endcap off to take their 28" barrel off when they were done hunting.
Sure we do not like the dimples, and many of us wouldn't care if the spring is held in position or comes out, but many hunters and sportsmen would get upset to see their springs dissapear because they did not know or think about the loose spring.
 
In my old Rem 870 the mag spring is held in by a round spring cap that fits into the mag tube. No dimples. I fail to see why continuing to use the spring cap over the new plastic cap and dimples could cost more. The worker cost to install either would be the same - in fact a trained chimp could do it.

That said, I also have a much newer 870 Police model that I installed a mag extension on. I drilled out the dimples and smoothed the inside with a Dremel.

RIKA :)
 
It would have been far simpler to design (and manufacture) a retainer that used a couple holes (exactly where we drill out the PC dimples). This would have allowed a normal citizen to add scary, non-PC, mag extensions.
I could design this in my sleep.
Mike
 
I swaged them out.

Kinda like 9mmMike mentioned above, but I hadn't considered a simple socket for the tool. Duh, I ended up turning a piece of aluminum to fit.... :o
 
i almost got a remington but i decided not to. the stocks, when they are wood, look like they were made from produce crates salvaged from the trash bin behind a supermarket. they are too cheap to use actual blueing on the metal parts, the plastic parts are cheesy, and theres no respect for the consumer. they want to prevent you from taking their cheapest gun and doing what you want to it such as installing a magazine extension on it, they want you to buy a more expensive model instead. they do this by sabotaging the design and also by refusing to sell you certain replacement parts. remington is only pretending to be PC, its all for profit. its extortion.
 
I love discussions like this :D

Here is my take on the dimples:

Remington sells 870's as sporting guns. Sporting guns are used for hunting and clay shooting, and are not assault weapons. Only a microscopic number of 870's will ever have mag extensions added. Since the 5 shot mag tube must be plugged to reduce the capacity to three rounds per Federal laws for waterfowl hunting, the ability to install and remove the wood "duck plug" quickly is important.

The older spring retainer left something to be desired as to it's durability, as the usual removal procedure is to pry it out with a screwdriver. This often damages the retainer to the point where it no longer functions properly ( to wit: launching into space when the cap is unscrewed).

Remington designed the new retainer to be more durable in the hands of the average joe sixpack duck slayer. The new plastic retainer does not require the ministrations of a screwdriver to remove it.

And an injection molded piece of plastic is cheaper than a stamped piece of sheet metal. Especially if the part is probably purchased from and injection molding company and not produced in house.

This part was changed long before the PC movement started having an effect on the industry, unlike the annoying trigger lock safety on current production guns.

That is my opinion, thank you verry much. :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top