Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Ben on October 20, 2010, 12:58:58 AM
-
I was reading today's Wall Street Journal in the hotel lobby this morning while waiting on some coworkers, when turning to the back page of one of the sections I found:
A full page ad by CNBC about a show they're doing on the deadly and unsafe Remington 700. Mentioned how it "just goes off" and that Remington has hidden the problem for 60 years. Sounds like a hit piece. I just got home and Googled it. Show airs 20OCT.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/39418714/CNBC_PRESENTS_REMINGTON_UNDER_FIRE_A_CNBC_INVESTIGATION
-
The story smells already.
-
From the article: "Dozens of deaths, scores of injuries, and more than a thousand customer complaints have been linked to the alleged problem."
Over a time period of *SIXTY YEARS*, and sales of MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF RIFLES. While I don't want to minimize the impact of each of those injuries and deaths to those most affected, let's be honest - we're apparently talking about annual death numbers countable on one hand, yearly injury numbers countable on the other, and enough yearly complaints that some might be forced to take off their shoes to total those up.
That doesn't particularly sound like an enormous customer-safety issue to me, to be honest. Oh, I'll agree that if Remington actually did cover up a known mechanical or design defect, they should be held responsible for any injuries or deaths resulting from such - I have no problem with that notion. Don't know that I'd trust the movers and shakers behind the linked report to get to the bottom of it, though - they certainly appear to have an ax to grind, and a very definite end in mind for their special.
-
I had heard of this problem several times in the past:
According to attorney Rich Miller (who has handled many cases against Remington), all Remington bolt-action rifles - not just the Model 700 - built since 1950 contain a trigger group known as the Walker Fire Control System. Miller says "At one time, and maybe still today, the Remington 700 was the world's best selling bolt action rifle. They knew from day one they had a fatal flaw. The downside is that the same mechanism can fail and that was recognized on the face of Walker's patent in 1950 that if you don't do this right the gun might fire on safety release."
See more at:
http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/a/aacbsnewsrem700_2.htm
Saying "I had heard of this problem" does not make it true, but a quick Google search reveals a few references to it.
The Wall Street Journal has published a number of op-ed pieces which seemed to me to be fair-minded with respect to firearms. I don't think they'd just blow something out of proportion the way a lotof the media would. Dozens of deaths over sixty years, if true, is a lot for a commercial firearm defect, and is worthy of a bit of publicity, frankly. Just my opinion.
Terry, 230RN
-
One of the first things we teach in Hunter Safety Ed (and it's on the test as well), is that:
A Safety Is A Mechanical Device That Can, And Will, FAIL.
The only "safety" that you can rely on is the 6 inch one between your ears.
We point out that there's an ad for a basement waterproofing company running on the radio around here that starts by asking "How many sump pumps will fail? Answer: ALL OF THEM."
How many cars will breakdown: ALL OF THEM
How many computers will eventually crash: ALL OF THEM
-
I wonder how many of those "defective" rifles had a trigger job done....
-
Right, never violate the 4 rules and guns firing at will becomes a non issue in terms of injury and death. One of the first things I learned was never trust the safety mechanism with your life.
That said, if Remmy knew there was a problem they should have taken steps to correct it.
-
The Wall Street Journal has published a number of op-ed pieces which seemed to me to be fair-minded with respect to firearms. I don't think they'd just blow something out of proportion the way a lot of the media would.
Just to clarify my first post, this was an advertisement by CNBC in the WSJ, not anything put out by the WSJ itself. The WSJ has always been a "go-to" printed media for me for fair-minded news.
-
I wonder how many of those "defective" rifles had a trigger job done someone who pulled the trigger....
FIFY
-
The famous African hunting guide/writer Peter Capstick claimed that the closest he ever came to being killed was when a client's [Remington?] rifle fired upon safety release and the bullet just missed his neck.
-
IIRC, the main culprit was users never cleaning the FC group, leaving it with factory gunk, and letting it get gunkified over time.
FTR, I am a mauser-man.
-
The famous African hunting guide/writer Peter Capstick claimed that the closest he ever came to being killed was when a client's [Remington?] rifle fired upon safety release and the bullet just missed his neck.
I noticed each time I went on safari the guides watched closely how I handled my guns for a day or two before they were satisfied that I wasn't going to shoot someone by accident . . .
-
I wonder how many of those "defective" rifles had a trigger job done....
This was my first thought. The Rem 700 a rifle that has been commonly customized by shooters and gunsmiths for years. How do you narrow failures down to blaming just Remington?
-
With my Mosin the only thing I use for a mechanical "safety" is either leaving it unloaded and/or with the bolt open.
-
This again? When I first got into shooting back in the early 80's, I recall seeing something on television about the dangers of the Remington. As said above, in some cases the rifle will fire when the safety is disengaged. Didn't know this is still newsworthy almost 39 years later...
-
Turns out my custom 1911 is prone to slam fire. I recently had it do a 3 round burst on a new shooter. I THINK she kept the trigger mashed hard after the first shot. The original owner did tell me you should hold the hammer back when you release the slide. I gave the shooter kudos for hanging on to the thing. We were shooting ball. Sad part is the 3rd round probably launched off over the berm. Maybe not though because, suprisingly enough, it did not hit the skyline thingie. I couldn't believe it there was no hole in it. I looked and looked that's how much I couldn't believe it.
First time I ever saw the gun do that. =|
-
With my Mosin the only thing I use for a mechanical "safety" is either leaving it unloaded and/or with the bolt open.
i use the safety on my CZ bolt action every time i shoot it. it's holding the bolt together. i thought that was it's only job. =D
-
280plus:
Right, never violate the 4 rules and guns firing at will becomes a non issue in terms of injury and death. One of the first things I learned was never trust the safety mechanism with your life.
You just said exactly why I do not carry 1911s cocked-and-locked. Now you go ahead and argue with all the folks who do, and who loudly point out that carrying C&L (what is that, Condition 1?) is the way the gun was designed --even though, according to a retired military person who was in the MPs, the Army will not allow you to carry a 1911 C&L unless you were escorting a prisoner.
seeker_two said,
I wonder how many of those "defective" rifles had a trigger job done....
According to the "stuff" I've heard and read, it was an actual design problem with them coming out of the factory.
And you did not have to have your finger on the trigger for it to happen.
280plus, again:
Turns out my custom 1911 is prone to slam fire. I recently had it do a 3 round burst on a new shooter. I THINK she kept the trigger mashed hard after the first shot. The original owner did tell me you should hold the hammer back when you release the slide. I gave the shooter kudos for hanging on to the thing.
I had a brand-new RIA 1911 which would double-tap. I quickly fixed it by burnishing some burrs off the disconnector, which was investment-cast and had burrs all around it on the parting line. I also dressed down the three-fingered spring contact points with an aluminum oxide stone. Cured the problem forever.
I loint: when you buy a new auto, load only two rounds in it for a while.
That's what I loint.
Chris, althought the problem has been known for +/- 30 years, people are still selling used 700s to folks who might not have heard of the defect.
saglant, there's an old story about the difficulty of using the Mosin Safety which usually goes something like this:
Somebody complains to a Russian General that the safety on the Mosin is useless. General answers: "Safety? What need safety for? Gun is for killink. Not need safety!"
I'm not signing this one so nobody will know who posted it.
-
Interesting that they never actually say what the problem is, ;/ I remember reading about this some months ago. More actual info here, http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/a/aacbsnewsrem700_2.htm
According to an internal Remington memo, the actual sequence required to make a gun malfunction, or "trick," is to place the safety between the "safe" and "fire" positions, pull the trigger, and then place the safety in the "fire" position - which causes affected guns to fire. I can't make my model 700 fire in this manner, but it is allegedly possible.
Sounds like doing that would be improper gun handling to me. And why exactly would someone have the rifle pointed at someone when they are disengaging the safety!? Especially while KNOWING it is loaded! Do they not know the basic rules of safe firearm handling? ???
-
I will admit to carrying my BHP C&L although I agree with you and it DOES rub me the wrong way to do so. All things considered it makes the most sense in terms of fast response to an immediate threat so I've come to terms with it.
Once I did find that the safety was not on for some reason. That was kind of spooky.
Therefore I hardly ever carry the BHP, it's too bulky for my purposes anyways. I keep it in the quick safe by the bed. I was pocket carrying a S&W 332 for quite a while but lately I've started carrying my P-32 instead and now I'm spoiled by it and don't really want to go back to the bulkier wheel gun. :facepalm:
:laugh:
The 1911 is a top quality custom job so I have to imagine any factory quirks and all the honing and stoning have been dealt with. I assume its propensity for this is inherent in the accurizing of the trigger set. I personally don't understand them well enough to get in there and start fiddling and I'm not sure I know anybody I trust to do so. The original customizer was quite reknown so I feel no qualification to go in there and mess with his setup. And he's dead now too so we won't be talking to him. Alton Dinan III. The pistol range at Blue trails in Wallingford, Ct is named after him. It's a real sweet shooter. I was in the right place at the right time and with money. :lol: ;)
I've never had if fire by just closing the slide and forgetting to hold the hammer back (which I've done) but that little burst was a real eye opener. :O
My intent is to get back out there and see if I can recreate the situation myself but I haven't done so yet. The two round rule sounds like a good one.
-
I find it a little hard to believe that CNBC, or any news organization, has somebody on the payroll with more detailed knowledge on any particular firearm than the collective hive found on internet gun boards.
-
They have to come up with news somehow... :laugh:
-
Sounds like doing that would be improper gun handling to me. And why exactly would someone have the rifle pointed at someone when they are disengaging the safety!? Especially while KNOWING it is loaded! Do they not know the basic rules of safe firearm handling? ???
This. Ever since I noticed the *click* of the firing pin "firing" when disengaging the safety on my (empty at the time) CZ .22 rifle (with a trigger job) after it had quite a bump, I've consider disengaging the safety to have the potential to equal pulling the trigger as to where I have the gun pointing, with any firearm. If I'm not pointing downrange, the safety doesn't come off.
-
280plus:
Right, never violate the 4 rules and guns firing at will becomes a non issue in terms of injury and death. One of the first things I learned was never trust the safety mechanism with your life.
You just said exactly why I do not carry 1911s cocked-and-locked.
How does C&L carry of a 1911 violate the four rules, or put undue trust in a safety mechanism? If it did, wouldn't that be true of all sidearms?
-
I believe he's referring to my referring to not never ever trusting the safety. Carrying C&L implies implicit trust in the safety.
-
I like a hammer-block safety when carrying an automatic with a hammer that can be thumb cocked and is double action like my Model 59 S&W. I would rather it didn't de-cock the hammer when it was engaged though. Because of it's design, I carry it hammer down, safety on, one in the chamber so all I have to do is draw, thumb the safety and pull the trigger when the SHTF.
Having a rifle that was "prone" to discharging when taking off the safety would have me never using the safety but instead leaving the bolt slightly open until I was going to make a shot, THEN I would close the bolt and fire.
-
Can I trust multiple safeties though? The chain of events that would lead to a 1911 firing without the safety disengaged, the grip squeezed and the trigger pulled at the same time is implausible to say the least.
-
Carrying C&L implies implicit trust in the safety.
No, not at all. Not unless you carry with your finger on the trigger. Or maybe Mexican carry, with the grip safety pinned. But with a holster that covers the trigger...
If the manual safety fails on a Beretta 92 or a Sig or a 1911, the trigger still has to be pulled.
-
I've been suspicious of our government especially since our president and his administration refuses to allow Korean surplus M1's and M1 carbines into the US because they present a danger. Coming after the same government publishes a list of suspects likely to engage in anti-government actions, nefarious characters like militia members, former military types, and so forth. Then I read this promo. Does anyone draw any significance to the fact that the Remington 700 is used as a military sniper device? Don't know about you but I'm picking up on a pattern of action.
-
I believe he's referring to my referring to not never ever trusting the safety. Carrying C&L implies implicit trust in the safety.
Which is why I carry 1911-style guns in Condition 2....hammer can't fall if it's already down...
-
I remember seeing the problem with the 700s back in the 90's on a news show. People would load the rifle, close the bolt, move the safety to the safe position, and the rifle would discharge. I don't know how common this was, but I think Remington did a recall.
This is proof that you should always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. My semi-auto pistols have decockers, but I make sure the muzzle is pointed in a safe direction.
-
saglant, there's an old story about the difficulty of using the Mosin Safety which usually goes something like this:
Somebody complains to a Russian General that the safety on the Mosin is useless. General answers: "Safety? What need safety for? Gun is for killink. Not need safety!"
sorry man, wires got crossed somewhere down the line. i was saying i use the safety to hold the bolt together, not to prevent the trigger moving back. =D
edit: dropped a "to prevent" and a "moving" =|
-
I wonder if they are counting the 721 and 722 in this as they are all 7xx's?
My 722 is on the recall list but I'm not letting anyone else touch such a fine shooter. I just stay extra careful with it.
jim
-
Okay folks, whether we trust the safety or not, a firearm should darn well function as advertised and intended. Any company that knowingly manufactures a firearm with a defective safety ought to pay to fix it, period. It's beyond unreasonable to demand any less.
-
Let's try this again.
280plus:
Right, never violate the 4 rules and guns firing at will becomes a non issue in terms of injury and death. One of the first things I learned was never trust the safety mechanism with your life.
You just said exactly why I do not carry 1911s cocked-and-locked.
How does C&L carry of a 1911 put undue trust in a safety mechanism? If it did, wouldn't that be true of all sidearms?
-
Let's try this again.
You just said exactly why I do not carry 1911s cocked-and-locked.
How does C&L carry of a 1911 put undue trust in a safety mechanism? If it did, wouldn't that be true of all sidearms?
If you consider the sear a safety mechanism, I guess, in that it prevents the hammer from falling without pressure on the trigger?
-
Thank you. =)
-
Let's try this again.
You just said exactly why I do not carry 1911s cocked-and-locked.
How does C&L carry of a 1911 put undue trust in a safety mechanism? If it did, wouldn't that be true of all sidearms?
Try carrying a SAA cocked all day and tell us how that works for you....
-
No, not at all. Not unless you carry with your finger on the trigger. Or maybe Mexican carry, with the grip safety pinned. But with a holster that covers the trigger...
If the manual safety fails on a Beretta 92 or a Sig or a 1911, the trigger still has to be pulled.
In my case my BHP has no grip safety. I get the part about the grip safety on the 1911 it does add redundancy. Still when it was first ingrained in you as a wee pup to never trust the safety it's hard to come to terms with doing otherwise. Meanwhile, I'm not familiar with any of these inferior automatics of which you speak. Their are ony two automatic handguns that are worth their salt in this world, that is the Colt 1911A and the BHP. My motto is, "Why bother arguing .45 vs 9mm? Just get both!" :P
:angel:
-
Again, if you call it a "safety" I immediately don't trust it. I'm more inclined to think in terms of just plain old dropping the thing. I'm not real up on all the different designs. All I know is I look at both my BHP and my 1911s and feel that IF I were to drop them directly on the hammer on a hard surface in "Cond 1", regardless of how remote, there is a chance that they could go off. Maybe I'm wrong. But I have come to terms with this anyways and when I DO carry my BHP, it's C&L. I tend to check the safety by feel periodically because to this day I do not know how it came to be off that one time. Clothes snag maybe? Don't know. =|
-
Which is why I carry 1911-style guns in Condition 2....hammer can't fall if it's already down...
Till your finger or thumb slips. All it takes is once.
Also, how do you get that into action quickly?
Maybe its my little hands, but I can't reach the hammer on most modern autos without changing my grip.
Okay folks, whether we trust the safety or not, a firearm should darn well function as advertised and intended. Any company that knowingly manufactures a firearm with a defective safety ought to pay to fix it, period. It's beyond unreasonable to demand any less.
Agreed. But, the model 700 is also one of the most popular and highly modified hunting rifles around. Alot of people have the trigge reworked to make the pull lighter and crisper. I'd be real curious of the condition of the rifles that were involved in accidents.
Oh, and someone was wondering if this was a hit piece.
IMHO, if it were a hit piece, they'd be after something scarier, like AR15's or AK47's.
-
They showed it twice in a row last night.
-
The friggin BHP instructions tell you to thumb the hammer down on a live round, set the safety and carry in that condition. So you'd have to release the safety AND cock the hammer to fire. That was the easy part. The tough part is lowering the hammer on the live round trick. I practiced this at the range. Yup, I set 'er off with a thumb slip alright. NEVER TRIED THAT AGAIN! ;)
-
Till your finger or thumb slips. All it takes is once.
Practice (esp. dry-fire practice) makes perfect....after a lifetime shooting SA revolvers & SA autos, I've never had that problem....
...working a P7 without a ND (none with live ammo, thank God)...that I have problems with....so I don't own one....
Also, how do you get that into action quickly?
Maybe its my little hands, but I can't reach the hammer on most modern autos without changing my grip.
Again, practice makes perfect....and, if a BG is close enough that you can't thumb-cock, then he's too close to draw anyway....go to hand-to-hand and get some distance....
-
Draw and wop him upside the head with the gun, that'll slow him down. ;)
No, I've done Tueller drills. It does take practice. The thought for slow guys like me + 2 seconds) is to begin moving diagonally away from the threat as it approaches and hopefully gain some time for the draw. It took me a long time to completely break the draw / extend habit and learn to shoot from retention.
-
Agreed. But, the model 700 is also one of the most popular and highly modified hunting rifles around. Alot of people have the trigge reworked to make the pull lighter and crisper. I'd be real curious of the condition of the rifles that were involved in accidents.
Oh, and someone was wondering if this was a hit piece.
IMHO, if it were a hit piece, they'd be after something scarier, like AR15's or AK47's.
Yeah, that's definitely something to check. Trigger jobs and such would play a role in most of the accidents, I'd think. I recall seeing a diagram or workup on THR (or somewhere) explaining how the 700 mechanism could be made to fire without pulling the trigger though...seems to be more to this issue than simple anti-gun sentiment or sue-happy customers, at least.
I'd like to see one of the plaintiffs come up with some technical explanations and numbers on accidents.
-
Well, I watched the show . . . in each case where a person was injured/killed by a "malfunction" the rifle was pointed where it shouldn't have been. (One guy shot his own foot off! Who in their right mind points a loaded rifle at their own foot when loading/unloading/fiddling with it? It's not just unsafe, it's awkward.)
The incidents mentioned just reinforced my own policy of never allowing the firearm to point at something I'm not willing to destroy. (That's one reason I don't do dry fire practice in my home - without a basement, I don't have a solid wall to use as a backstop, and any bullet I discharge is going to penetrate walls and follow a potentially dangerous trajectory.)
On the other hand, there was a fair amount of information presented that seemed to be the sort of thing that makes you take notice and go "Hmmmm . . . ????" Unless they were faked, the videos of M700s going off in the hands of police/military shooters without the trigger being pulled looked pretty damning.
My own take is that yes, there could be a trigger/safety malfunction, but its going to be very rare . . . sort of like "The Lock" self-actuating on recent S&W revolvers. In each case, it's the sort of thing the manufacturer could have and should have have fixed, but didn't.
-
Practice (esp. dry-fire practice) makes perfect....after a lifetime shooting SA revolvers & SA autos, I've never had that problem....
...working a P7 without a ND (none with live ammo, thank God)...that I have problems with....so I don't own one....
Again, practice makes perfect....and, if a BG is close enough that you can't thumb-cock, then he's too close to draw anyway....go to hand-to-hand and get some distance....
I disagree. I've practiced with a water gun and a willing neighbor. I was able to keep him from overwhelming me (bigger guy who trained MMA), draw and shoot (squirt) him in the chest from retention. I also let him take me down and was able to draw and point blank squrit him in the side of the face. The takedown knocked the wind out of me, too.
-
Since we are on the subject of safeties, I've never understood the whole Glock Safe Action thing. What would the difference be if that wasn't on them? Seems to me there wouldn't be.
-
In my case my BHP has no grip safety. I get the part about the grip safety on the 1911 it does add redundancy. Still when it was first ingrained in you as a wee pup to never trust the safety it's hard to come to terms with doing otherwise.
The grip safety isn't the point. The point is, when you say that a person is "trusting the safety," you're saying that they feel free to point their gun at people carelessly, or pull the trigger carelessly, because they trust the safety to keep the gun from firing. Cocked and locked carry isn't about that.
Again, if you call it a "safety" I immediately don't trust it. I'm more inclined to think in terms of just plain old dropping the thing. I'm not real up on all the different designs. All I know is I look at both my BHP and my 1911s and feel that IF I were to drop them directly on the hammer on a hard surface in "Cond 1", regardless of how remote, there is a chance that they could go off. Maybe I'm wrong. But I have come to terms with this anyways and when I DO carry my BHP, it's C&L. I tend to check the safety by feel periodically because to this day I do not know how it came to be off that one time. Clothes snag maybe? Don't know. =|
I definitely understand that. I once had an Uncle Mike's kydex holster that disengaged the safety every time I holstered my 1911. That was scary.
Try carrying a SAA cocked all day and tell us how that works for you....
Touche.
-
the point of the glock safety system is to make a market for these (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/stb.html). :laugh:
but really, here's the marketeer's take (http://www.glock.com/english/pistols_adv01.htm). is it better than any other handgun's safety system? i have no idea.
-
Well, it's true that when I was young enough to go bounding around the mountains and prancing around the Grasslands, I did carry it C&L, but I had a holster strap under the hammer.
But not for day-to-day carry around town. Sorry. I'll never convince anybody that C&L with a 1911 is an unsafe practice, and you'll never convince me that it's safe.
230RN said that, and that's the way it goes, 21 Oct 10.
-
something you might want to read. (http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/tech/ad_tb.htm) =(
-
Well, it's true that when I was young enough to go bounding around the mountains and prancing around the Grasslands, I did carry it C&L, but I had a holster strap under the hammer.
But not for day-to-day carry around town. Sorry. I'll never convince anybody that C&L with a 1911 is an unsafe practice, and you'll never convince me that it's safe.
230RN said that, and that's the way it goes, 21 Oct 10.
So, how do you feel about Glocks being cocked & unlocked (Condition zero)?
--even though, according to a retired military person who was in the MPs, the Army will not allow you to carry a 1911 C&L unless you were escorting a prisoner.
The Army just plain doesn't trust most enlisted men with ammo of any sort. This is not unique to the 1911, but a function of leadership not investing in much training for folks in the "big Army," as I refer to most of the Army outside my (former) community.
I'd bet you dollars to donuts that units issued 1911s nowadays have no problem carrying C&L, when loading weapons is called for.
-
So, how do you feel about Glocks being cocked & unlocked (Condition zero)?
Glocks are not fully cocked. If every internal safety gave way at the same time there's not enough potential energy for the striker to ignite the primer. They're closer to Condition 2 than Condition 0.
-
Glocks are not fully cocked.
But plenty of comparable designs are. My XD45 and my M&P9 are basically single-action, with a firing pin block safety like a series 80. Sure, they have the stupid trigger widget of some sort, and the XD has a grip safety, but they are basically cocked and (not even) locked. Just because you can see the hammer on a 1911 doesn't make it more dangerous.
-
Which is why I like my CZ 75P06 which I can carry double action.
IMO, You can carry any way you feel like as long as YOU are fully aware of what it takes to make the gun go off and YOU make sure that doesn't happen unless you intend it.
-
The only real difference is in the stock trigger-pull. The trigger-pull weight on an XD is higher than that on a 1911, which makes an ND a touch harder over an un-safed 1911. Equating a Glock/XD to a cocked & unlocked 1911 isn't quite accurate.
IMO, You can carry any way you feel like as long as YOU are fully aware of what it takes to make the gun go off and YOU make sure that doesn't happen unless you intend it.
+1
-
Well, it's true that when I was young enough to go bounding around the mountains and prancing around the Grasslands, I did carry it C&L, but I had a holster strap under the hammer.
But not for day-to-day carry around town. Sorry. I'll never convince anybody that C&L with a 1911 is an unsafe practice, and you'll never convince me that it's safe.
230RN said that, and that's the way it goes, 21 Oct 10.
Also sprach 230RN
-
This is literally 28 year old news.
The original Remington 700 trigger system WAS prone to doing this. In 1982, Remington re-designed the trigger to stop this from happening and issued a recall. They will still fix any old rifles that haven't been to a shop.
If the rifle was made after 1982, the most likely culprit is either gunk and rust in the mechanism, or someone doing some shade tree gunsmithing on the trigger.
Here's a more detailed post about it:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/10/21/my-take-on-remington-under-fire/
-
That's right, I said it... http://www.magazineart.org/main.php/v/ads/sportsandguns/gunsandammo/ColtAutomaticPistol-1911A.jpg.html
=D
-
I watched all of Remington's videos and saw.... nothing. They showed an "expert witness" handling a rifle in an unsafe manner (bolt closed, finger on trigger. Don't know if it had just been fired or what) and another who worked at an ammo plant that may or may have not made their ammunition. There was no substance at all. They showed an apparent "expert witness" saying he couldn't make the rifle misfire but it was again shown with no context at all. So far what they show on their own site amounts to a small pile of nothing I am afraid.
-
This whole news hatchet job smells a lot like exploding gas tanks. ;/
-
Anyone remember what killed the Samurai?
http://www.aim.org/aim-report/aim-report-a-black-eye-for-consumer-reports/
Consumer reports felt that they had to save consumers from something. The thinking being that this would give credibility to the their testing. The supervisor in charge of the testing ordered the drivers to roll the Samurai, or she would find someone who would. They couldn't get it to roll on the course they'd used for 15 years, even driving it at a higher speed than the other vehicles. Solution? Drive the snot out of it, get it to lift two tires off the ground, then redesign the test course around the conditions that they used to get the Samurai's wheels off the ground. The testers still reported that even under the new test conditions, it was difficult to get the Samurai to lift tires, much less roll.
After dozens of tries, they finally got it to lift two tires again. The result? They had advertising material for years to prove how they exposed an unsafe product.
-
Consumer reports felt that they had to save consumers from something. The thinking being that this would give credibility to the their testing. The supervisor in charge of the testing ordered the drivers to roll the Samurai, or she would find someone who would. They couldn't get it to roll on the course they'd used for 15 years, even driving it at a higher speed than the other vehicles. Solution? Drive the snot out of it, get it to lift two tires off the ground, then redesign the test course around the conditions that they used to get the Samurai's wheels off the ground. The testers still reported that even under the new test conditions, it was difficult to get the Samurai to lift tires, much less roll.
After dozens of tries, they finally got it to lift two tires again. The result? They had advertising material for years to prove how they exposed an unsafe product.
Unfortunately, any test can be gamed.
SUVs can be made to roll if you drive them excessively fast into corners, hitting the brakes hard at the apex, then letting off the brakes as well- but these aren't real world driving conditions.
Gas tanks can be made to explode if you rig them with explosives.
Police sniper rifles will 'fire by themselves' if the armorer stets the sear engagement way too thin on purpose for the camera. (If the video remington 700 on the police range fired by itself without being set to do so, the armorer of that department needs to be buttstroked with the rifle and then fired.)