What we need now for the Remington 700.....

Eventually,this will lead to my selling the rifle and replacing it with something else that doesnt have a "theoretical flaw" in its design.
Click to expand...

So you're theoretically replacing a rifle because of a theoretical flaw. That seems like a theoretical waste of time and worry.

Scientists theorized that Africanized Bees would invade my home by 1992. In response, I theorized that I needed some protection. The media says the bees never made it, but I don't believe them. I have a theory that they're all trying to lure me from my hermetically sealed anti-bee shelter. It's all theoretical, but I'm going to continue living in fear. Theoretically, it's easier than thinking for myself.
 
+1000 Frankenmauser!!!!:) It's too bad we live in a society that can be lead by the nostrils to the beat of some groups drum!!!:rolleyes: Listen if Remington decided that it could or would for that matter, another trigger assembly to substitute the one assembly in question, that would be like confessing poor quality, possibly not the best thing to do at this time, as far as publicity. And what kind of quality trigger could 40.00 buy???:rolleyes:
 
I guess the problem I have with the original design trigger is uncertainty.If I went out and bought a 2010 Whatever runabout and loved it & then saw an TV show that said its a great car but if you ever get rear ended there's a good chance its going to explode into flames,I would always be uneasy driving it around town.Its that simple.As soon as I could afford it,I would be looking for a solution to the problem.
 
I guess the problem I have with the original design trigger is uncertainty.If I went out and bought a 2010 Whatever runabout and loved it & then saw an TV show that said its a great car but if you ever get rear ended there's a good chance its going to explode into flames,I would always be uneasy driving it around town.Its that simple.As soon as I could afford it,I would be looking for a solution to the problem.
Click to expand...

How would you feel if I told you the Ruger M77 Mk II and M77 Hawkeye have a tolerance of 0.003" for their safeties? 0.003" is all that stands between you and a safety that doesn't work.

As for all these "uncertainty" posts... Do none of you have ANY understanding of mechanical devices or the compromises of mass production? (And mass production is unavoidable, if you want the rifle to be affordable.)

Remington's admitted potential failure rate is better than what any company would consider unacceptable. Their real word "failure"* rate is even lower.
*(In the documents available on the Remington and CNBC websites, almost every one of the real world "failures" had doubt cast upon it by LEOs, witnesses, or the shooters themselves - which lowers the actual rate even further.)


If you can't live with a device that can "potentially fail", you need to sell everything you own. Vehicles have major safety issues. Electronic devices have major safety issues. Household wiring almost never meets code (those bare wires are supposed to be hot, right?). The fatigue life of Aluminum is very short (don't ever fly or take a train).

You're all scared to death of the minuscule chance of some kind of failure. If you applied the same logic to your daily commute, you'd never leave the house.

If your rifle is having issues, or has in the past - get it checked out immediately. Don't pawn it off on some one else, without fixing it.

If your rifle is not having issues, why are you jumping on the Chicken Little band wagon?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top