Remington .17 HMR Recall / Buyback: Ammunition and Model 597
Remington have decided to recall and buyback all .17 HMR Model 597. They have also announced they will buyback any Remington .17 HMR that was purchased for use in any semi-auto rifle.
If you have a semi-automatic firearm chambered for 17 HMR ammunition, immediately discontinue use of Remington 17 HMR ammunition. If you have any Remington 17 HMR ammunition that you wish to return to Remington contact the Remington Consumer Service number below. Do not return the ammunition to the dealer. Remington will provide you with a $10.00 coupon for each complete box of 50 rounds of Remington branded 17 HMR ammunition you return to Remington. This coupon will be good for the purchase of any Remington ammunition at your local dealer.
In light of the ammunition manufacturer’s notice, it is very important that you immediately stop using your Remington Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle. If you own a Remington Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle and wish to return it to Remington please contact the below Remington Consumer Service Number. In return for your Remington Model 597 17 HMR synthetic stock semi-automatic rifle, Remington will provide you a coupon valued at $200.00 good for the purchase of a replacement Remington firearm. If you have a laminate stock Remington Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle, Remington will provide you a coupon valued at $250.00 good for the purchase of a replacement Remington firearm. Remington will also reimburse you for the actual postage to return your Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle to Remington.
Please allow up to 6 weeks after Remington receives your Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle or your Remington branded 17 HMR ammunition for the appropriate coupons to arrive. Instructions for redemption of the coupons will be contained on the coupon.
For any consumer questions or instructions on how to return of your Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle or your Remington branded 17 HMR ammunition, please contact the Remington Consumer Service Department at 1-800-243-9700, Prompt #3.
Problem with the Model 597 and .17 HMR is not uncommon. Gun manufacturers seem to have a very hard time in trying to convert .22 blow back actions to the more powerful .22 Magnum and it’s child cartridge the .17 HMR.
A reader of TFB recently had the exploding-597 problem (darn … I lost he photos he emailed me) and Remington said they would refund the purchase price, instead of fixing it. I did not read too much into their response at the time, but in hindsight I can see now that they were considering this action a couple of months ago.
I think Remington have taken the right action. I hope they let this offer stand for sometime so that all potentially dangerous guns can be returned.
I am confused about this 17 HMR issue. I have a 17 Mach 2 conversion kit for a Kimber .45 pistol, and a round exploded in my face. I picked up the rest of the cartridges, and found they were splitting…two different brands of ammunition.
Is there an inherent flaw in the .17 rimfire cartridge that I am unaware of?
-Chris
The flaw is in the action construction – you have a simple spring-loaded blowback action that opens immediately, and a thin-walled rimfire cartridge unable to deal with the pressure still in the chamber.
There might also be an issue with the ammunition generating overpressure, since they are recalling the ammo too (which should be save to use in any regular bolt action or similarly rigid construction, but that might be a lawyer’s decision).
I think the inherent flaw is that of all rimfire cartridges. The rim has to be thin enough to be reliably crushed by the firing pin, which in turn limits the case construction. Bottlenecking a cartridge has the effect of increasing pressure – that’s the whole point, pushing performance to the outside of the envelope. But QA is never good enough to not have some lemons getting through, so regularly pushing toward tolerances is always dangerous. Especially for rimfire, when the end facing the shooter is where the unsupported, thin brass is. It has been a problem before and probably always will be with bottlenecked rimfire cartridges. See the bottom of…
http://www.cci-ammunition.com/education/rimfire_evolution.aspx
…for the sad story of the 5mm Remington.
History once again reliably repeats itself.
Okay, so they’ll pay $10 for the return of each box of ammo that the customer probably paid $12-$16 for. Awesome.
Chris, I’m not an expert on internal ballistics, but I suspect that the .17s are a little hot for use in a blowback action. Your experience, plus the fact that Remington’s recall is specifically limited to ammo purchased for use in semi-autos, seems to point in that direction.
With any bottle necked round, the pressure generated in the body of the case has to be compressed slightly to flow through the smaller diameter of the case neck. This is why the shoulder usually moves forward a tiny bit on rifle cartridges. The gases also accellerate as they travel through the neck area, which can cause the neck to soften and split. This all happens very fast, and is one reason why nearly everything with a bottle neck is fired from a locked breech. The PPSh and other Soviet SMGs are the only things I can think of that use a bottle neck in a blowback action before the modern .17 caliber rimfires came out, and I think those used steel cases.
As some others said above, the problem with the 597s was the increased pressure from the .17 HMR. However, from what I’ve heard case ruptures aren’t caused by the action opening too early or the mouth of the case splitting. Rather, it is the bolt not fully going into battery and leaving a part of the casehead unsupported. With the lower pressure .22 LR it is very rare to have a case rupture in this condition, but the hotter HMR will blow the bottom of the case open.
Even if it is a safety issue, I have a feeling many people won’t return the rifles to Remington. $200-$250 is way below the purchase price of those rifles. Plus, people remember what happened to the .22 WMR 10/22s, which shot up in price after they were discontinued for a basically the same reason.
Most of the .17 caliber cartridges actually have LOWER pressures than their .22 caliber counterparts. For example, according to Quickload: .17 Hornady Magnum Rimfire has a Pmax of 26,600 PSI., .22 Magnum, 27,557 PSI., .22 Long Rifle (including Stinger), 29,733 PSI. I can’t seem to find .17 HM2 or .17 PMC/Aguila PSI ratings, but I can almost guarantee they’re not higher than .22 Long Rifle Stinger.
So, I took out the .17 Mach 2 slide for my 1911 pistol AGAIN. I (actually my gun-nut engineer buddy) tried another batch of ammo. It had a face-denting explosion and several cracked cases AGAIN.
In the end, I’m sticking with the .22 LR or nothing. I’ll see about getting in touch with Kimber — this is probably the reason they discontinued the .17 conversion kit in the first place, though it is a shame to get rid of with .45 prices so high.
Thank for all your comments.
Side Note: Mark LaRue of LaRue Tactical makes the meanest, best smoked brisket and smoked sausages I have ever had. He rolled up to a three-gun match this weekend in his smoking trailer, armadillos and all, and churned out about 650 brisket wraps so good, I hit my momma. She was there and didn’t mind, because the barbecue was that good.
I bought my 597 .17HMR new almost exactly two years ago for $399.98; I’m still waiting for the $50 factory rebate offered with it. Now, Remington tells me my rifle is worth half its purchase price to them as scrap? Further, I am to be reimbursed with a coupon good only toward the purchase of another Remington firearm? And I’m supposed to wait six weeks or more for that coupon? In what lifetime? At what they’re offering, I’ll just let the rifle grow whiskers in the gun safe. Over the past three years I’ve bought several new Remington products (870; 597s in all three available calibers) and more were planned, emphasis on “were.” Faced with this sort of episode, I believe it would drive Mahatma Gandhi to a fist fight, Dr. Norman Vincent to cuss and Bill Clinton to marital fidelity. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
I love my 17HMR and own two bolt action rifles as well. I would feal they are being fair if they offered to rebarrel to a 22 Mag. This is really bad for Remington not the time to lose loyal customers. If you are reading up the offer or fix the gun!
All,
I said I would keep you guys updated, I finally decided on a “trade in” for my .17 597. At the end of it all I just figured, since I already had a .22, that I just would buy a new deer rifle. I went with an Remington SPS 700 Varmint in .308.
The Remington tech had an amazing memory, and rememebered my call. LOL. She told me my total with a local FFL will be 200 plus shipping and tax. The only problem is it won’t be available until October, guns america has one listed for 700 dollars so that seems like a fair deal to me. I gave her my credit card over the phone.
Overall I am happy with Remington and how they handled this.
I do know this, if I want semi auto, there’s just no replacement for my ar-15 clone.
‘Astah!
The problem with the Remington 597 is excessive headspace. I had the same problem with my rifle. The first time, I thought it was an ammo problem and sent the empty case back to Hornady. The second time, the bottom of the magazine was shattered and the extractor was blown off.
I called the closest Remington repair center and told them that I had a 597 in .17HMR. His immediate response was “Has it blown out the magazine yet?” He claims that there is a known headspace problem, but they could fix it.
They set the barrel back, rechambered it, recut the extractor slot, and replaced the missing or broken parts. All of this was done under warranty.
I have fired half a box of ammo through it with no problems and there is no bulging of the empty cases.
I wouldn’t buy one, knowing what I know now, but I’ll keep shooting it unless I have problems again. Always wear safety glasses while shooting! I’ve had a .22LR case fail before also (out of tens of thousands fired).
I have the Magnum research semi in bull stainless and I have fired 3000 plus rounds and I can tell you that as long as you keep the breech clean, as I do, I have not had ONE failure of any type. Not one not ever.
You get what you pay for I guess……
Remington will not see anymore of my dollars.I paid over double what they want to offer now & did not mind because it was “remington”. How about at least trade it for a equal priced gun.I will continue to spread the word reference my unhappiness.Thanks for nothing remington.
Chris with the kimber conversion….. I would be interested in purchasing or trading a 22 conversion for your 17
brokenhelo at yahoo dot com
i will loose 200 on the deal never buy a remmy again savage all the way
I have shot over 1500 rounds through my Rem597 17HMR. I have never had a problem other than the odd miss fire. I’m not sure what is going on, but I will not give my gun away for $200.00. What a complete rip-off. I have always been cost conscious when purchasing firearms, but wanted a good quality gun that I assumed would last the test of time. Remington should be ashamed of themselves for this ridiculous act of trying to cover their behinds. I bought this gun as soon as it came out to go out west on a prairie dog hunt. I have always been happy with this gun, until now. My problem is, if it has never happened to me, and I have shot so many rounds, is it actually the ammo manufacturers who have continued to increase their prices. Have they just started using bad or cheaper brass?
Quote from http://www.handgunrepairshop.com/17_Mach_2.htm
“The chamber of the .17 HMR is so much longer and larger than the .17 Mach 2 cartridge that the .17 Mach 2 case would rupture when fired in a .17 HMR chamber, causing the bullet to enter the bore crooked and create a bore obstruction that would raise pressure to disastrous levels.”
This SUCKS! I love shooting this gun and waited a few years to buy in hopes the “kinks” would be worked out.
I agree with some of the others, it will be my last Remington! I have a safe full of their guns and have always been a loyal customer. In fact, I don’t own another brand of long gun – until now!
After two call to Rem, to the contact on the letter, I feel like I have been sold a bill of goods. Being told the offer is fair for a used gun was like a smack in the face.
I’m not selling the gun, they are calling it back for bad design/manufacturing, and feel justified making us take the hit. It also incensed me that they are unwilling to pay more as they wont cover the dealers costs yet they wont sell (or trade) me a gun directly.
Piss poor customer service and a real clear picture of how they (don’t) stand behind their products.
I think there might be a new Ruger 10/22 in my future.
Thanks for sharing your experiences on line.
Jeff
Seeking advice.
I have a synthetic stock 597 with Burris variable scope; the caliber is perfect for my needs as a 100-150 yard .22; great accuracy and the rifle functioned essentially as a single shot! I share everyone’s resentment re 250 back for a 350 dollar gun, but considering the money I invest (wife says waste!) in hunting, not a huge issue.Three questions:
1. Is there any chance of a reasonable fix on this weapon? After the photos, using as is not an option!
2. My thoughts are to get a bolt action in .17HMR, move current scope to new rifle, send in the 597, and maybe get a new .22 rimfire Remington just to get their 250 bucks credit. Any recommendations on make of bolt action- I looked on line at Marlin varmint version but haven’t priced anything.
3. Other option- just get a 22 magnum or move up a bit to something in .223. Again, I have been delighted with the fairly low noise, lack of recoil, and performance of the .17. Thanks! Hammond Cole
I surely appreciate the discussions on this topic.
My beloved 597 is currently sitting on my bench ready for de-scoping and shiping, but i just can’t seem to go through with it.
I spent a considerable amount of time and money on this little rifle so that it could be my go to , in the Polaris ranch gun. It has preformed excellently on coyotes, fox, nutria rats, even hogs. I did have trigger smoothed up and the feed ramp polished but other than a very cheaply made magazine issue all has been well…till now.
I’m keeping mine for now and will be paying close attention the the spent cases and cleanliness of the bolt and chamber.
I think that if Remmington offered to replace this rifle I might consider going to the 22 mag but to offer me 1/2 the replacement cost is offesive.
No more rems for me.
Who covers recalls and consumer protection for firearms? Its not the CPSC they lead me to the ATF. The ATF lead me to the FTC. Has anyone tried the FTC? They have a complaint form online. Its my last Remington. This is crazy. There seems to be a huge hole in consumer safety when it comes to firearms.
Just received my recall letter yesterday. Like most others, I purchased mine new about three years ago and paid $300 to $350. I have had zero problems and kept the gun clean after every use. With the exception of the marks from the ring mounts and cosmetic wear on the action, the gun looks brand new. Offer me $200 dollars, no way! If will lock it up in my safe, and and never purchase another Remington firearm. Maybe one of our democrat congressmen can pass on some stimulus money to amke up the difference.
I talked to Remington twice about the recall as they made it seem confusing. They made it sound like an ammo problem if you read the letter.
first off it is 200 for the synthetic and 250 for the laminated.
Key points here are
Remington said the same manufacturer makes CCI , Remington and Hornady ammo for the 17.
I asked is it ok in a bolt and they said yes as some have the savage ect.
here is the kicker!!!! they are telling the retail stores to pull not just Remington ammo but all brands 17 cal.
I asked well if you are asking them to pull all brands what are they bolt shooters going to do? Remington said gee i don’t know that is their problem and it is going to be tough for the bolt shooters to buy ammo in the near future.
So yes it is a scam and I am not going to take a coupon for 250 to buy another Remington gun at retail cost.
I did tell them I would not be buying another Remington product unless they corrected the problem.
They also said this is a problem with any brand semi auto
So much for their engineering staff…
Bruce,
They gave me the same line of shit too and I told them I didn’t buy any other brand of gun, I bought a Remington – or as I now call them “REMJUNK.”
Ammo still is very available here in Michigan, I was looking at Gander Mtn the other day and they had it.
I have 2,000 rounds collecting dust now that I have a 597 hanging on my wall next to the velvet elvis and dogs playing poker pictures!
I actually think the ammo guys are being put in a bad light on this one. The round came out for bolt action and a few gun companies tried their hands at a semi and failed.
That is what gets me, Remjunk feels justified in giving us a token as they know the gun is junk. And who wants to buy junk, let alone buy it BACK?
I bought the gun for its perceived value and they pretty much told me there is no value in the gun – unless they offer me what I paid it will be the last Remjunk I buy.
For the bit of shooting I do I need a reputable maker to stand behind what they build, not shove it up my back side.
Jeff
I dont know exactly what caused it (cartridge thinness or poor design of the Rem .17HMR) but last night my remington 597 magazines blew apart after only 8 rounds. (it was a new out of the box gun I had bought a few years ago). I was shooting Hornaday VMax 32 and the bottom of the cartridge had a hold blown in the bottom and the top of the cartridge had a tear in it.
The exploded cartridge blew apart the magazine and shot plastic into my face. Since this was originally purchased to give to my 12 year old son its going into the scrap heap at Remington. I was not aware of the recall until I got home last night and searched the WEB. Not happy at all with the $250 I will get back. With the now useless scope mount, rings, non-remingtom Ammo for this gun I am out over $400 total…That comes to $50 per shot before exploding….
This was my first Remington purchase as I typically stay with Browining…Not impressed at all with what I have read in this blog regarding thier response to this issue…
Can’t believe it.I was shooting today and went to a differnt ammo and my 597 blew back at me. I had already shot about 500 rounds through it. I found the same as was said elsewhere, casing that was fractured and magazine blow off. What to do? I love my 17, my favorite rifle, bought brand new. I am not confident that remington will do the right thing and reimburse fully for retail which is what everyone paid so I guess another brand is my next step. Anyone interested in an used 17HMR?
My very first rifle is a Remington Model 721, this comment section isn’t large enough to list the numerous Remington guns that I still own today but the last 3 Remington guns that I have purchased have been the junkiest piece of shit. Quality at Remington has gone to hell their customer service is the biggest jerk you around bunch of SOB’s I have ever delt with\when you finally get to deal with one of them, and my LAST Remington is the 597, I didn’t give $200.00 for it nor will I take $200.00 for it, this slap in the face offer from Remington is exactly why I will never have another dealing with Remington. Just another CAUTION to anyone that is a Remjunkie, the Model 1100 Comp. 12ga. the barrel is not bored correctly to the choke tubes that they are using, mine actually shot the neck off the bottom of the choke, leaving the threads and extension in the barrel Exciting, this gun is 2 yrs old I have probably shot 10k rounds thru it and so far I have replaced the Barrel, the Extractor 3 times, the feed latch 2 times, firing pin 1 time the adj\comb fell off the first day of use, I finally threw the reciever away and use the barrel for a Jack handle! Browning will recieve my business in the future!!!
What say we all go to the media and tell them our story. I bought a .17 597
at a gun show and found out 30 minutes that there had been a recall.
If the media thinks they have a story, they will take it and run with it. I don’t think Remington would like that.
If they want the consumers to be happy with there company, and keep buying there products they ought to stand behind there products 100%. $250 for a $600 dollar gun how is that realistic! Only supplying a voucher to buy another Remington product from one of their distributors not directly through Remington where I will have to pay the distributor there profit again. How about a retail for retail swap for another firearm directly through Remington that costs the same amount? It states on there website retail is $587 but it is OK for them to give me $250. Is it OK for every one to keep there money they made on the sale of the firearm besides Remington! How about the money I spent on a product that in the end turned out to be worthless. Does that mean my hard work to buy a faulty product is OK and I ought to bend over and take it?
When I build a house I eat whatever it takes to make it right, I don’t charge the customer again because my product was faulty. Any and all companies ought to have a 100% satisfaction guarantee if they can prove within a reasonable doubt that it is the companies fault. I don’t know how you run your business if you own one but I sure am glad I’m not one of you customers if you do!
Another point Remington made was that it is the ammo’s fault not there faulty engineering! When a gun manufacturer gets the specs. for a new round they know what it can do and how it will perform and the pressures in which it operates. So my point is they knew exactly what was going on but they didn’t care about it enough to fix the problem before they sold them. I hope a company with that quality of service bites the dust.
I’m in the process of finding a way to start a C.A.Lawsuit against these chumps or at least away to get a Retail for retail swap!
YOU WANT TO TALK ABOOUT A JOKE, MY DAD BOUGHT THIS GUN 12/16/08 AND IT JUST BLEW UP AFTER 11 ROUNDS. IT IS STILL UNDER WARRANTY AND THEY WILL DO NOTHING BESIDES THE $200. THEY WILL NOT EVEN FULLFULL THE WARRANTY WHICH IS TO REPLACE OR EXCHANGE. DOES NOT SOUND AGAINST THE LAW. ANYBODY GOT ANY SUGGESTIONS?
I’m going to stick with HI POINT I like the way they do business, lifetime warranty. send it in, they fix it and return it and throw in an extra clip at the same time , no charge. I’ve got a 9mm & .40 they are fine guns as far as I am conerned. I have never had a jam in either weapon.
Please help me out get this going. I believe gun owners should get a little more respect from the manufacturers when they goof up! Thanks to all that decide to participate!
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/remingtonarmsrecall
I sent the Better Business Bureau a complaint about the way Remington Arms was handling this issue. The BBB has some great pull in matters like this and I believe whole heartedly that if we stick together and let the BBB know about this Remington will get the message loud and clear. I have attached the info that I sent Remington arms:
NAME:
Remington Arms Company, Inc.
BBB MEMBER:
NO
CONTACT:
Mr. John Loschin
ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 700
Madison, NC 27025
PHONE:
336 548-8700
FAX:
336 548-7801
Website:
http://www.remington.com
I own a Remington model 597 .17 HMR rifle. I paid $587 for my rifle which was MSRP. Remington has just issued a recall on this model rifle in the .17 HMR caliber. The recall states that the rifle is unsafe to fire. Remington is blaming the safety issue on the ammunition. If the ammunition was the problem then it would be recalled as would other rifles built by other companies. However; Remington issued to only recall. The are offering $200 or $250 (depending on the model) voucher on a Remington products to return the rifle on recall back to Remington. This is insufficient compensation as I paid almost $600 for this rifle 2 years ago. This is an issue that will cause many Remington customers to lose confidence in the Remington brand. The $200 or $250 voucher for the rifle is a slap in the face. This is obviously a problem with the rifle and Remington is not owning up to it. I would have been very happy with Remington offering to swap the rifle in question with another gun of equal value. I have called Remington many times and cannot get any help so I am turning to the BBB. I hope you can help. Thanks
In reguards to the model 597, this actually happend to me. My obversation was the round was not fully chambered as well as prooer head sapce was not obtained this allowed the firing pin to strike and rupture the shell casing. I actually still have hearing loss associated with this incident.
597BG
Here is Remington’s responses to my e-mails.
Dear Mr. Millner,
I am writing you in regards to the recent recall of the 597 magnum .17 HMR rifle. I have started a petition to show you how many loyal customers are dissatisfied with the way Remington Arms is handling the recall. I believe a fair way to handle this issue would be to give a retail for retail swap of the firearms. Remington’s website states, that you will replace a faulty firearm at no expense to the consumer. It states no where that it has to be replaced with the same fireaarm if the company deems yours to be worthless. “If you make a claim within the warranty period following the instructions given in this warranty, we will, at our option, repair the defect(s), or replace the firearm at no cost to you. If we send you a new firearm, we will keep the defective one.”. I believe my request is very realistic and would cost Remington far less in the long run, because your consumers would not be worried about how the next recall would go and would continue supporting a good American company that stands behind it’s products. I hope you consider this and let me know how Remington is going to handle this situation.
Thanks for your time,
Jeremy Porter
Response (Daniel) 11/18/2009 10:26 AM
Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding the product safety notice. We appreciate your feedback and wanted to take this opportunity to try to explain in greater detail the product safety notice.
All 17HMR ammunition is loaded by one manufacturer and then sold and branded by other companies, which is common in the industry for proprietary cartridges like the 17HMR. This allows companies, like ourselves, to offer these proprietary cartridges to our patrons without the additional cost of royalties, and added manufacturing tooling.
We were recently informed by our supplier that the 17 HMR ammunition being manufactured is no longer compatible with a Semi automatic firearm, of any make, not just ours. We were informed that continued use could result in property damage or personal injury.
Because of this new development with the ammunition in this caliber it left owners of 17HMR semi-autos with guns that while perfectly functional, are now inoperable because there is no suitable ammunition available. We have extended this redeemable coupon program to those owners in an effort to allow them to trade in a gun that is now rendered useless due to lack of ammunition, toward the purchase of a new firearm from our product line.
I do apologize for any inconvenience this has caused, but there is not a gun recall in place, it is simply that there is not any ammunition, from any company, that is compatible or safe for use since this ammo notice came out a few weeks ago.
Thank you again for contacting us, and for your interest in our products, if we can be of further assistance please feel free to call us at 1-800-243-9700 Mon-Fri 9am-5pm EST.
Daniel,
In your recent email you stated that ALL .17 HMR ammunition is not compatible with with a Semi automatic firearm, of any make, not just ours. That is a false statement as there is two companies still producing .17 HMR semi-automatic rifles.These companies are Volquartsen and Magnum Research which I am sure you already knew.These two companies have no problems with the compatibility issues with the ammo and their products because of the way they designed there firearms. When a company designs a
firearm around a cartridge it is the companies responsibility to ensure their product is safe and can handle the round in which it is chambered. If the cartridge is too powerful and the gun can not handle the power ie. blowing out the magazines it is not the ammo’s fault it is the faulty engineering of the firearm. The stance Remington has taken on this issue is that their engineering is not faulty and there product is” perfectly functional”, When in fact a gun that cannot shoot the cartridge it is designed
for is not functonal at all no matter how you look at it. All I am asking as the consumer is for a retail for retail swap of the firearm. If the MSRP is $587 and the cost of remington to produce it was $250 let the consumer pick another firearm of equal MSRP in which to replace it with since it cost $250 to produce it. I will say again I believe this to be fair and not asking Remington to bend over back wards in any way. I will be looking forward to your responce.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Porter
Here is
the link to the petition if you would like to see what other Remington customers have to say.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/remingtonarmsrecall
Response (Daniel) 11/19/2009 08:21 AM
The statement that ” ALL .17 HMR ammunition is not compatible with with a Semi automatic firearm, of any make, not just ours.” is in fact a true statement, as it was issued to us, by the company that actually manufactures the ammo, whether or not these other companies are stating their guns are safe is irrelevant because ultimately we have been informed by the ammo manufacturer that they are in fact not.
I do understand your opinions on the matter, but I am afraid ultimately when a company making an ammunition tells us it is not safe to use in a particular style of gun, we are not going to recommend its use. If you would like to participate in the trade in program please let me know and I will gladly provide a shipping label and return box at no charge to you, but the terms of this program are set I’m afraid and there is nothing I can do but offer you the redeemable coupon. We would encourage you to participate as these guns and the available ammunition are not compatible now and their continued use together could result in personal injury or property damage.
Daniel,
Here is the definition of true from Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: 2true
Function: adverb
Date: 14th century
1 : in accordance with fact or reality
The fact and reality is, the product is faulty. A properly designed firearm does not blow out the magazine or have any other possibly catastrophic problems. Big corporations stick together when a problem occurs to limit the liability for all that are involved(Remington,your supplier”CCI”), except for the consumer. The consumer is left alone to fend for themselves because there is not much power behind one unhappy customer. Soon I will not be the lone unhappy consumer, I already have 63 Remington customers that have openly stated that they will not own any more Remington products if this is not resolved in a much better fashion. Most of these people are lifelong Remington customers and probably still would be if Remington steps up to the plate and admits they made a faulty firearm. The number is growing every day, yesterday when I replied back to you it was only 51 loyal Remington customers and today it is 63. I can only imagine what tomorrow will bring. Again I will ask that Remington offer a retail for retail swap of the firearm. I will say once again, I believe this to be fair and not asking Remington to bend over back wards in any way. I will be looking forward to your responce.
Thanks again,
Jeremy Porter
Porter, I am, going to publish your comment as a separate blog post.
EXCEL ARMS IS COMING OUT WITH A NEW .17 MACH 2 SEMI AUTO RIFLE AND ALSO A PISTOL AND THEY LIKE HI POINT HAVE A LIFE TIME WARRANTY . WHY CAN’T REMINGTON HAVE THE SAME, THEY ARE MUCH LARGER THAN THESE NEWER AND LESS KNOWN MANUFACTURERS I TOO HAVE CONTACTED THE BBB IN REGARDS TO THE RECENT PURCHASE OF A 597. $250 WONT COME CLOSE TO WHAT I HAVE INVESTED. I AM ATTEMPTING TO GET THE MEDIA TO DO A STORY ON THIS. TOO MANY OF US HAVE BEEN HORNSWAGGLED BY REMINGTON. I HAVE TALKED TO A COUPLE OF MAJOR SPORTINGGOOD DEALERS IN REGARDS TO THIS. THEY AGREE WITH US THAT THIS IS NOT RIGHT.
HANG IN THERE PORTER, THE CALVARY IS ON THE WAY.