If you were wondering why Remington would recall their entire line of .17 HMR Model 597 rifles just take a look at these photos which show a magazine and cases fired from a .17 HMR Model 597. This type of damage was not uncommon!
Cracked Remington 597 magazine
Blown out case head.
Split Case
Thanks to Joe for the photos.
Steve Aug 25th 2009 ammunition, rifles, rimfire Tags: .17 hmr, 597, ammunition, recall, Remington, rifles, rimfire 90 Comments
Comment Policy: I reserve the right to remove comments at my discretion. Think of comment threads like a dinner party at someone's house. If you make the party unpleasant for others or me, you won't be invited back. I am happy to tolerate a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but I'm not going to tolerate nastiness, rudeness, trolling, vitriol, or excessive snarkiness toward the author(s) or other commenters. You may make your case passionately, but civility is expected. Please stay on topic and respect the technical nature of this blog.
Spam Filtering: To avoid spam, comments are filtered using Akismet and then manually approved. Do not be alarmed if you comment does not appear instantly. I do not check the spam folder more than once per day.
So what’s the problem? Impressive photos.
Bad design? I.E., cartridge too powerful for the designed rifle & magazine specs? Or rifle designed too weak for the cartridge specs? (Not necessarily the same thing)
PS-What’s that black spot/indent on the case head?
The indent is from the firing pin, it’s a rimfire cartridge.
That, my dear Mr. Woodman, is a blowout.
All the more reason not to buy a new cartridge until it has been out for several years.
Why do I want to give Remington my 597 HMR for $200, when it worth $300 to $400. New 597’s in 17 HMR are still listed on gunbroker.com for $400. If Remington wants to buy back my gun, they need to offer me what it is worth.
@Danny – By issuing a buyback (not a recall-for-repair) Remington will eventually destroy the resale value of the 597. It’ll take a bit for word to get out, but this isn’t an occasional jam, its a massive break-everything design fault.
It’s also a cover-your-ass move by Remington. If one of these blows up on someone Remington can not only say they sent out notices that its unsafe, but that they were such nice guys that they even offered to buy it back and pay for shipping.
ITS NOT THE GUN”S FAULT.
NOTICE
Ruger has silently discontinued 17hmr versions of there 10/22 and
1. DID not notice the public about it.
At least remington is stepping up.
ALMOST EVERY manufacturer of semi automatic 17HMR makers have stopped making these guns.
Including.
Excel Arms
Remington
Ruger
Magnum Research
HELL Federal, CCI, Remington, and Winchester has sent notices out saying, Do Not use THEIR 17HMR in semi auto firearms.
Its not the design of the gun, its the round.
The problem 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.
Hey everybody if you look at the photo the shell has a Hornady stamp on the primer.
I also have a 597 in 17 HMR. I called Remington and they only offered $200 for a $350.00 rifle. I have shot less then a box of ammo on ground hogs. I will wear safety equipment and shoot it untill it blows up and find a good lawyer.
Oh, i don’t think I will ever buy another one.
Instead of offering me half of the value of my gun why don’t they give me a 22 mag barrel so can get some use out of what is now scrap. I don’t need the coupon I won’t be buying again from a manufacturer that won’t repair or offer market value.
I called them and I have around 500 loose shells and I was told because I did not have the boxes that the ammo originally came in they would do nothing for me. They would not send me boxes either. On top of that the ammo costs $15.00 and they were going to offer me $10.00. I am very upset that remington is handeling this error on their part with such neglet. They got our money why do they care now. I will make sure my hard earned money will not go to Remington for any reason.
Did none of you notice the post where its the design of the round, not the rifle? The rifle functions just like it’s supposed to. Sure, I’d be pissed too, but I’ve bought many things that were supposed to last longer than actuallity. At least Rem is buying them back. Go give your money on your next rifle purchase to someone who is not willing to be the bigger man.
Being the bigger man would own up to the problem. If there was not a problem with the RIFLE why are they buying them back. They are buying them back for a reason. They operate in an unsafe manner and are dangerous. They also would say send us your reciept of proof of how much you paid for the rifle and we will cut you a check. Not, offer you 60 percent of what you paid for it. When someone breaks my stuff or wrecks my truck I can assure you that I will ask for 100 percent of the repair cost not 60 percent. This is being the bigger man. Remington has really lost my money for good!!!
I smell a CLASS ACTION LAW SUITE
IF IT’S THE ROUND THEN PUT ME A .22 MAGNUM BARREL ON IT AND TAKE .17 HMR OFF BEFORE SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS.
“CLASS ACTION”
THIS SHOULD NOT COST THE CONSUMER FOR IT WAS HIGHLY ADVERTISED
I bought a Rem. Model 597 in .17 HMR for my son’s 11th birthday present three years ago. I paid c. $380 for it (including tax). We put probably around 750 – 1000 rounds through it–around 80% of them fired by my son. I was never particularly impressed with this rifle. My son loved it when he was 11, but hasn’t shot it much for the past year and a half or so.
I took it to the range two weeks ago along with a couple of my high-powered rifles just to make sure it was still shooting straight. I was shooting from sandbags and the 5th or 6th shot blew out the magazine. The shell case was split just like the one in the photo above; the blowout was much bigger, extending about halfway around the rim. I got two good-sized plastic splinters in my hand from the plastic magazine and the powder residue that blew out the ejection port didn’t feel too good on my cheek either.
A few days later I took the thing in to my local gunshop. I told the gunsmith there (who’s the one I usually deal with) what had happened and told him I wanted to get rid of the gun. I was just glad my son hadn’t been firing it when the thing exploded.
He looked it up and couldn’t find it in his computer database. He found the 597 in other calibers, and, probably based on that, he told me he’d give me $210 for it in trade. That sounded reasonable for a used (though not much used) gun with no magazine, so I accepted his offer. Then a few days ago I was in the store again, and he told me he’d discovered the 597 in .17 HMR had been recalled. Then I Googled the Remington recall and found this thread.
A few points, then: 1) Remington’s buy-back offer represents $10 less than what a gun dealer who is unaware that the thing has been recalled will offer for a gun that has blown out its magazine. So you could say it’s a pretty lousy buy-back offer, but you could also say that it’s about right, since you wouldn’t be able to get much more for the gun by selling to someone else. Either way, Remington is not doing anybody any favors.
2) If you read Remington’s recall notice (which I also found when I Googled the thing), you’ll see that it does not admit that there is anything inherently wrong with the round OR the rifle. It says Remington has been “notified” by its “supplier” of 17 HMR ammo that the ammo is unsafe for use in semi-automatic rifles. So Remington offers to buy back its ammo. Then it says, essentially, that because it’s recalling its .17 HMR ammo, it’s also recalling its Model 597 rifles in .17 HMR. But why recall the rifles when the problem is the ammo? This is classic CYA legal language, pure and simple. I was in fact shooting Hornady ammo in my son’s rifle when it blew out the magazine.
3) probably the primary fault was the round, but if the magazine had been made of metal instead of plastic, everything would have probably just blown out of the ejection port. I don’t know if this would have been better or worse.
4) Anybody out there who is planning to sue Remington needs to remember that when you sue somebody, if you win you get damages equal to the value of your loss. In my case, I lost the magazine on my rifle. You can also get damages for pain and suffering. What’s two plastic splinters in the hand worth? $1? $10? $100? If somebody loses an eye when his M 597 blows out its magazine, it will be worth suing over–but do you really want to lose an eye just to make a point? You can also get punitive damages if the person or company who injured you knew about the potential for injury but did nothing about it. Remington has covered that base with its recall and the CYA language referred to above.
5) Other stuff that came up when I Googled the recall suggested that the .17 HMR round just isn’t suited for use in semi-autos. I had a S&W M647 that I owned for a few years then got rid of because the round did not impress me. I like the flat trajectory of the .17, but I remember being able to shoot tighter groups with a .22 Mag when I was a kid than I could shoot with the .17 now. Since I don’t think I’m much worse of a shot now than I was then (I’m definitely a little worse), I think the difference was the gun and not the caliber. Still, I’m going back to the .22 Mag because I don’t think the .17 will still be around in 15 years.
6) I’ve been shooting for over 40 years now and I’ve had any number of misfires, a number of split cases, and some other freaky stuff, but I’ve never had a a blowout like this, and I don’t think I even know anybody who has in a factory-loaded round.
7) Because Remington’s handling of this mess–they did pretty much the bare minimum they could get away with and save themselves from legal liability–I’m never going to buy another Remington gun. This is my second bad experience with Remington. I’ve never had a bad experience with the 7 or 8 Winchesters I’ve owned, the two Savages, or the Marlin. And I’ll only buy Remington ammo when there’s no other choice. If Remington wanted to step up to the plate here, they would have offered replacement value so that you could go buy yourself another gun that’s just as good, not the value (or almost but not quite the value) of your used Remington with its blown-out magazine.
Man, this thing smells like the 5m.m. rimfire magnum all over again. There is not a cheap fix. Remington had a huge financial mess over this. It amazes me that a lot of gun mfg’s jumped on the 17 HMR way too early. Some custom gun builders had to order two or three chamber reamers because the original blueprints for the cartridge were huge compared to the finished ammo. Blown cases near the extractor cuts are not uncommon unfortunately. Remington had to start somewhere with the buyback or safety recall or whatever you call it. It is far from over. I am sure the lawyers decided which way they would go to minimize their loss.
Class action suit sounds fine to me.Its to bad the $250.00coupon must be used to buy another Remington rifle.Remington will lose alot of business,maybe they think we will forget.
Don’t know if it’s worth the paper it’s written or the stamp to mail, but I wrote lengthy letter to Remington CEO, Theodore H.Torbeck. Told him my views of being f***** over by Remington on this mater. Own six additional Remingtons, four rifles and two shotguns. Let him know I would never purchase another Remington and was going to spread the word when I could to all that would listen about how it dealt with its customers. Maybe if everyone would write him, maybe he’d get the general idea of maybe they should fall back and rethink this mater. I like the the idea of class action suit as well if that was to get started. Address follows
Theodore H. Torbeck, CEO
Remington Arms Co., Inc.
870 Remington Drive
Madison, NC 27025-0700
I talked with Volquartsen. They are continuing to ship 17 HMR semi auto rifles. They say that their tolerances are closer and their extractors are far superior to remingtons. I can attest to this. My Remington 597 in 22 Mag jammed repeatedly until I : 1. replaced the factory plastic magazine with the somewhat better metal one and 2. had Volquartsen replace all of the extractor parts with their own. After disassembling the 597 I was dismayed at the all the plastice and cheap springs. This rifle is headed down the road. I hope that remington takes it right up their *** when this recall is over.
I had no idea of the recall until this thing blew out when my wife was shooting it. I was actually trying to buy a new magazine for it. I thought it was just a freaky thing. How much will it cost to fix it or will I be better off to give it back to Remengton and of corse give then up to six weeks to send me 60% of what it should be worth so I can go buy another remington gun, “NOT”
My 597M remington blew up a couple of weeks ago and yesterday I called Remington trying to get parts to repair it and found out about the recall. I got mine from a dealer before the same gun was out in the stores for allmost a year. I’m told I cant get any parts, and if I keep it, it will just be a wallhanger. I have allways considered it a collectors item. Now if I send it back, they will give me a $250.00 coupon toward the purchase of a Remington product,,,,no thanks, I will never purchase anything produced, or marketed by Remington. My gun will allways be an expensive reminder of the fact that this company will screw the consumer!!!! Although I have a very good friend attorney, who will be looking into the possibility of a lawsuit. Thanks for nothing Remington.!!
I own 2 model 597 Remingtons in 17HMR and both guns failed exactly like the one pictured . I will tell you this both guns were inspected by myself and a gunsmith { I am a machinist } and we both came to the same conclusion that the 597 design was a poor choice for this caliber. The action is a spring rail design that was to weak to handle such a powerful cartrage as the 17HMR . These guns were purchased when Remington first offered them in 17 HMR before anyone even knew that there was a problem with the rifle. Both guns were sent back to the factory and Remington replaced them with no questions asked. The only thing Remington did to both guns was to replace the rail springs with stronger ones which leads me to think that Remington already knew of this problem possibly from their own test results . Both of the rifles have had at least 500 rounds fired through them with no more probems. I do not know if this was the correct solution to the problem but I guess Remington figured there might be to many legal problems out there so they discontinued the rifle.
Does anyone know where to purchase these rail springs? I’m not about to give up this rifle for $200.00 voucher for another Remington, if there is any chance of salvaging the rifle.
even if they can straighten out the rifle will rounds even be available down the line or is this going to be a long road to nowhere.I to have many remingtons.I dont think I will ever buy another if they dont take this Bull by the horns and deal with it properly.Long time fan.
I have not had this problem as of yet with my 597 but I don’t think I’ll take the chance. It’s disapointing to say the least looking at the miserable offer Remington has made to buy back a very expensive gun. I am a hunter safety instructor and will make sure many parents and kids know what kind of company they will be dealing with if they choose to buy Remington.
I own a 597 in 22 mag..I wish that I didn’t..it is a cheaply made gun.
Voquartsen Custom replaced all of the factory extractor parts with their own (machined instead of stamped) and the gun has finally stopped jamming. Volquartsen is continuing to produce their 17 mag autoloader
because with their tolerances it is a safe rifle. That quality and lack of mass production comes at a price however.
I’ve owned a .17 hmr for about 4 years now and have got to shoot about 300 rounds through it in that time. I’ve not had any of the problems listed above but none the less I will likely call Rem for a buy back. PROBLEM: I paid more for the rifle when I bought it. While I think their request that I buy another rifle with their coupon is perfectly acceptable (Remington has some good guns out there) I can not find a comparable Remington rifle for this price. (Agree Remington?) Also, the ammo the last time I checked was $18 a box so….uh… how is $10 dollars a deal? The ammo isn’t bad, your rifle is. What will you do with the ammo other than shoot it up in a bolt.
Class action just makes attorneys money so theirs no reason to go there. BUT if Remington is the proud american company they say they are do the right thing.
Hey everybody, this whole thing just really upsets me with Remington not fully solving the problem. The new 887 is just another bad gun. Don’t take my word for it just try to take one apart and TRY to put it back together. I am really disapointed in the actions of the company and will no longer back them in any way. I too am a Hunter Safety instructor and will do my best to inform people of the promblem and let them choose themselves what to buy.
I’d be interested to know if anyone who has seen the problem had a gunsmith fix it, and if the problem resurfaced.
Thank you all for sharing your experiences. I like the gun and will be looking into some the options laid out here.
Regards,
Jeff
See my comment 1-September. I had 597 fixed for free under warranty. I don’t know if this is still covered under warranty because of the recall.
It seems to me the majority of posters here are all part of a collective group of consumers caught up in this controversial issue over the Remington 597-17 HMR rifle. I too, purchased the Remington 597, laminate stock, bull barrel for a heafty $595.00. Unfortunately, it was only about 8 months ago. Remington is telling me what a fine rifle the 597 is, and there is no problem with the rifle, it’s the amunition that has created the problem.
Well then, how about getting together with the amunition manufacturer and design a cartridge suitable for shooting in the 597. Obvisously, the current round is entirely too hot.
No, that makes too much sense! Instead, Remington wants to offcer you and I a meassly $250.00 for the purchase of another Rmington product. Well then, what if I don’t want another Remington?
Lawman
Anyone know if you could use Remington “voucher” towards a Marlin firearm since Remington owns Marlin Firearms?
Lawman,
I went down this path with Federal/CCI and both maintain the ammo meets SAMMI specifications and the problem is in the design of the gun – semi-autos.
As I understand it, remjunk has attempted to modify an existing platform to handle the .17 HMR (and .22Mag) and have come to the conclusion that it is not up to the task.
Apparently all this platform is good for is a pellet gun.
So, Rremjunk has sold us a bill of goods and now feels justified in wanting us to eat the loss and throw good money after bad on a new gun from them for the privilege of owning a 597.
The whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth for remjunk.
The old saying goes…you get what you pay for.
I went cheap and got cheap.
Well Remington has screwed a lot of people on this mess. They can not fix or won’t fix it. Nor can they offer a fair price to buy it back. I will buy one more Remington only because I am being forced to with the coupon. However it will be the last Remington product I will ever buy. Nice job Remington. Should be proud.
Dear Ted,
If you don’t fix this the “right way” I will not EVER again sell another Remington product in my store. I don’t care who blames who, if you knew about the problem and are STILL shipping me 597s there is no excuse. DO THE RIGHT THING or we the people will….
I wonder if these guns will be worth more than $250 as historical curios after Remington goes under? Will we then refer to a company that “goes under” for stupidity as they got “17′ed” or “597′ed”?
Been in contact with Remington several times without any sucess on a better deal. Won’t sell .22 Magnum barrel replacement and won’t allow to use “voucher” towards a Marlin firearm that they own. Think I’ll keep cleaned and fire as “single shot” until least I’ve used up the 600 rounds of .17 HMR I have already bought.
I think it is both the rifle design AND the ammo. Here’s why. I own a Remington modle 506T in .17 HMR. About 18 months ago, I bought a whole brick of Remington brand ammo. I shot 15 rounds out of the first box and 5 of them split just like in the photo above. Contacted Remington and after sending back the first box (including the split cases), they agreed to reimburse me for the entire brick. Sent me prepaid mailing label. I finally got the check about 10 weeks later. The whole fiasco took probably twice that long. One final note: I’ve shot Federal, CCI and Hornady ammo in that 506T with no problems noted.
Can’t find any reference to a “model 506T”, is it a Remington?
If you go to buy any of the ammo there is only Hornady on the shelves at Bass Pro. They have recalled the Remjunk and Winchester. The Bolingbrook, IL store had some left if anyone needs some before it too late and it maybe gone for good.
Typo in my previous post. It’s 504T, not 506T. Sorry if I caused confusion.
I purchased a 597 about 5yrs ago. I havn’t had these problems yet but if I put over 4 rds in the magazine the rifle jams most of the time. It shoots alright but not worth the money I paid for it ($445). I bought a Henry 17 and it is has much better quality. The Remington felt like it had sand behind the bolt out of the box. A $200.00 coupon won’t go very far on a new rifle plus all the shipping hassle and why would I buy a Remington anyway? I Ain’t very happy……………..
I’m is the same boat as the rest of you. . . . .anybody out there have anything good to say about a Remington’s Model 5 in 17 hmr.That may be my only recourse in this situation.. . . . . ain’t too happy with this deal.
I simply plan on bringing my own action in small claims court in Texas( don’t need a lawyer) to recover the retail price I paid. If enough folks bring these actions and make the fight in many courts throughout the country, this may get the idea across to Remington that having lawyers in 50 states may be too expensive a proposition. Since retail was @$595 plus tax they may rethink the rebuy price after they add in a couple of hours of attorney time for each claim. Their own recall notice will sink their boat and I suspect that they were aware of the problem long before the Remington ammo manufacturer told the Remington gun manufacturer about it. That letter should be fun to read.
Interesting that in Remington’s ethics policy it says: “No amount of profitability is more important than the reputation and goodwill of the Company” I guess them words is just that…..words.
Having worked at Remington for over 40 years and retired I know that the company does everything possible to produce a quality product. As with any other industry sometimes new products don’t live up to expectations for one reason or another,the 597 .17 being a good example.I am also aware that no matter what reconciliation is offered it won’t satisfy everybody. many of the issues raised in the forum are justified and I think the company will be fair in their response.The thing that bothers me is the talk of lawyers and lawsuits. With Washington filled with antigun politicians we as gun owners should not be so quick to hobble a company that is in the forefront of protecting the 2nd Ammendment. You may say that I am biased but I would feel the same if it was Winchester,Mossberg or any other American gun maker.
Hi Guys,
I live in Ireland were we are screwed cost wise for just about everything, I bought a Remy 597 in .17hmr about 12 months ago.I paid 700.00 euro for it, approx 1040.00us dollars and am being offered the same deal as you guys recall value, and you guys are pissed!.
Its a shame really, as this gun shoots amazing groups at 100 yards if its possible to fix it I’m interested, will be keeping an eye to this site as to progress on the situation.
Best wishes,
Pat
P.s. own a Browning o/u shotgun exellent gun, shame Remmington are letting the side doun.
I’m ready for the law suite. Who’s got the money to put towards a remington there are not going to stand behind.
Let me respond to Joe and at the outset say that the thought of having to resort to lawyers and litigation is repugnant. However, the offer from Remington is even more repugnant. As you can see from the other comments on the page and other pages, the company has brought this upon itself by not even being in the ball park. If the recall price was what folks paid for the gun, there would not be this uproar. Clearly the common opinion is that the company is not being fair. I sincerely hope someone from Remington is following this and they immediately change their approach to this problem.
in feb.2003 i purchased a new 597 with laminated stock and heavy barrel in .17 hmr for $350. i based my purchase on a series of reviews in several gun mags. the 597 out shot the bolt rifles in the articles. i started having reservations the first time i disassembled it to clean it. i couldn’t get the springs back on the “tool steel” guide rods,the inner spring would tangle up in the outer spring on each rod. i had to take it to a gun smith for reassembly. that set me back $ 30.00, i contacted remington but recieved no response. i’ve probably shot 200 rounds thru it and have used gun scrubber spray to clean it . it’s resided in my safe un-fired for the past 5 years. its a sharp looking, accurate gun, but i too would like to at least break even on the recall refund. “sorry for any inconvenience” yea right ,they can keep their $250 as i also will never buy a remington product or anything from their other owned holdings marlin ,spartan, etc. my bolt action cz 452 fs, ruger 10/22 and future henry lever purchase will do just fine. luckly the 597 LS HB is the only remington purchase i ever made and ever will. besides the nice scope that resides on thr 597 will look good on the ruger.
You guys talk class action—Think again. I owned an 1100Sp 12ga Remington shotgun in the 80’s.(Chinese Metal) Sent it back to Remington because the steel shot cut the metal out of the barrel. Remington said
there was no problem with it. I sold it (for a big loss) and a year later
got notice of the class action law suit against Dupont & Remington for
using bad metal in their shotguns. I recieved $0.00 as a result of the
law suit.The only people that won in the law suit was the attonerys.
Remington needs to at minimum pay us what the gun retailed for.
(It’s not like there paying cash. It’s a rebate check towards another
Remington). Then again it’s only my opinion.
Sign the petition and let Remington know how you feel! I’m not going to stop until WE get a retail for retail swap at the least. Let the Better Business Bureau and your states attorney general know as well. Keep the phone calls and e-mails going to Remington and they will see there mistake. A copy of the petition is sent to Remington once a day via e-mail along with a call to make sure they received it. Lets make sure they know the consumer is in charge of there success not them.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/remingtonarmsrecall
I bought the laminated stock model about 6 or 7 years ago. Mine blew up 3 years ago. The bolt handle blew off and could not be found. Fortunately my buddys were not hurt. My ears rang for two days. Never got around to sending it back for repairs. I knew I would never fire it again. Even though the $250 is a lousy offer. I will gladly take it to get rid of this piece of crap. Chalk it up to experience.
I so disappointed with Remington Arms offer since they are part of our right to bear arms in our country. Why should a well respected company, who has produced some excellent firearms for our 2nd amendment rights be so small and try to cover their butts with an offer that is not close to the value of the product that was produced which was discovered to be faulty. If I was the CEO of this company, I would be ashamed of the attorney who proposed this offer. I would fire him and his company.
This is the time when a respectable firearm manufacturer would step up and do the right thing for the consumer of his American product. Either offer repairs or total replacement for similar product, not some shoddy buy back offer which is confusing to say the least. They also could have enough people on staff to answer the phones. They must think that all gun owners are stupid neanderthals who do not get it. I bought one of these for a specific safety reason and now find out that it may jepardize my own safety.
I tried to call them, but was unable to get through. Very disappointed to say the least. No more Remingtons for me. I will buy from someone else who cares.
Well after many phone calls and several letters written to Remington CEO and it’s Board of Directors, whos names I found via the internet, I got a satisfactory resolution with Remington. A Mr. Fred Roth, who identified himself as the “General Counsel” for Remington HQ’rd in Madison, NC, called me and we was able in a short time on the phone to swap me out a Marlin Model 917VR for my Model 597 .17HMR. Remington owns Marlin. I know the Marlin is worth a little less than the Model 597, but I was satisfied with positive articules I found on internet about it’s performance also I had them 16 boxes of .17 HMR gathering dust. I would have liked Remington’s Model 5, but I’m partial to the synthetic stock that the Marlin has and Model 5 doesn’t. The only complaint I have the whole deal is the $40.00 the local firearms dealer charged me to fill out the ATF forms that took approx. 10 minutes or less to do. I also suggested Mr. Roth go to this site and read what the dissatisfied Model 597 owners thought of Remington’s “buy back”, and carry this info to Board of Directors or whoever come up with the “buy back” deal and maybe rethink it’s negative appeal to Model 597 owners.
I CALLED ABOUT THE RECALL, my rifle shoots fine so far, I believe the problem is with the bolt return springs and dirt or gummy oil impeding the bolt to return to full battery. Remington is sending me the box and mailing label. I PLAN ON KEEPING THEM UNTIL REMINGTON EITHER RESOLVES A FIX OR IS WILLING TO SEND A REPLACEMENT RIFLE. Their offer was a CYA ONE AT BEST. REMINGTON IFV YOU ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN SELLING FIREARMS IN THE FUTURE, SEND ME AN EMAIL
I talked to someone in customer service and they told me that the $ 200.00 voucher was the best they could do. Needless to say I was’nt very happy I told this person that I would hang this gun on my wall as a reminder of why not to buy another Remington Firearm in the future I also shared my displeasure with all my hunting buddies and I have alot of them. If Remington would send me a replacement firearm of almost equal I would be happy with that but a $ 200.00 voucher is an INSULT.
I followed Howard’s lead and put in a call on 11/08 to Mr Roth,his secretary assured me that Mr Roth would return my call.She asked what I thought,and I told her I want the Marlin 917VR even trade. . . . . .I let ya’ll know of any developments. . . . . .
There’s strength in numbers.I have been following the blog below.Maybe,with enough dissatisfied people getting after Remington,we’ll get something done right.
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3824902#post3824902
Let’s keep some basic facts and premises in mind: Remington, along with Marlin, DPMS and some other firearms brands are owned by Cerberus Capital. Cerberus is a venture capital firm obviously engaged in a “roll up” to agglomerate a number of firearms brands into a larger “whole,” fatten them up, then sell them to the public in an initial public offering. We should also note that Cerberus was the most recent owner of Chrysler and delivered the coup de grace to that classic American brand. To date, their ownership of Remington can be characterized by poorly made, even unsafe, firearms, non-existent customer service and complete indifference to its buying public. Obviously, they seek to work their Chrysler “magic” on some more iconic brands. I, for one, have resolved not to buy current-production anything with the classic “R” on it — firearms, ammunition or accessories. It’s my quiet way of wishing Cerberus a journey on to other ventures while hoping they don’t manage to kill Remington (or Marlin or DPMS or anything else) en route.
The good news for us beleagured 597/.17HRM owners: Volquartsen Custom is looking at making another run of .22WMR barrels for the 597. In an exchange of emails, Scott Volquartsen advises they’ll be bull barrels if VQ procedes with the project. Obviously the .17HMR cartridge isn’t suited for autoloaders while the .22WMR has a long and satisfactory history in the category. While I already have a 597/.22WMR bull barrel rifle, I’ll happily convert the present .17HMR version into a safe and usable firearm that still has some value and utility. If a VQ barrel would be of interest to you, send an email to sales@volquartsen.com to let them know.
I have just written a blog post about this issue:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/11/the-remington-17-hmr-model-597-controversy/
My son and I own two 594 / 17HMR rifles with consecutive serial #’s that were the last firearms given to us by my late father. I too contacted Remington customer service first about the low ball offer, and then I asked could I use both rebate coupons toward the purchase of one Remington firearm due to the fact that Remington does not sell anything for $200 dollars and was told no. I asked to speak with his supervisor and was told no. I then asked to speak with the person in charge of customer service and was told no a third time. I have sent letters to both the CEO and customer service about this but as of two weeks have had no response. I was willing to take the rebates if I could have combined them toward the purchase of a Remington centerfire rifle, but I guess I will keep them as mementos of the past.
Kent
Why is it ok to shoot the ammo in a bolt? Retailers can not remove all 17 HMR ammo from their shelves because there are too many bolts out there. And so don’t worry about being able to by ammo for your 17HMR as one person at remcrap mentioned it would all be pulled eventually.
Are the tolerances tighter? I don’t know but I do know the bolt won’t fire until the bolt is locked in place. I have only heard of one poster mentioning he had the same problem in a bolt.
Isn’t it easier for remcrap to buy back the gun cheap and make you buy another rem at full retail value? They make money either way. I also have three other Remington firearms in other calibers. I will also be selling them and never buy another remcrap product again.
About DPMS, I have always thought it were a private owned company right here in Minnesota.
Would you go buy a car, then let them tell you to not use a certain gas in it or you will blow up? It’s not the cars problem it is the gas’s but we will offer you a coupon for half of what you paid towards the purchase of another of our fine cars. Yes a car is worth much more but the principal is the same. I don’t know, maybe their is a federal law that deals with how much money is involved. For example if the worth amount it over 500 bucks it is a felony and if under it isn’t. Isn’t this offer the same as stealing.
What the hell ever happened to doing the right thing?
I am sure it like any other company. Make stuff as cheap as possible and make as much profit as you can. That goes for labor and material.
Even back in the 70’s when I worked in a factory the company tried to cut costs by buying stainless steel sheeting from Japan. Stainless is not suppose to rust right? this stuff did and caused more problems down the road.
Most baby boomers know you pay for what you get. That’s especially goes for tools. We also know we would pay more for quality and would much rather buy something made in the good Ol USA.
Anyway sorry for rambling on.
I’ve not heard any talk of the “bolt-actions” having any problems with .17 HMR. As a matter of fact, Remington’s Model 5 has been recently been chambered for the .17 HMR and offered for sale to the public. I think from everything I’ve read it’s the simi-autos with the problem. Even Hornady’s website is still backing up the round. I hope the round is ok, after talking Remington in to swapping me out for the Marlin 917 VR.
“Even Hornady’s website is still backing up the round. I hope the round is ok, after talking Remington in to swapping me out for the Marlin 917 VR.”
At Gander Mountain they had flyers by the ammo with pretty much the same message about not using in semi-auto for all the brands. One flyer for each brand.
When I asked the service rep at remcrap about just using another brand such as Hornady, she said they were all made by the same manufacturer.
CCI, WInchester and Hornady. And so i guess I believed her. Or it was a right out lie. I don’t know.
Volquartsen Custom sells the extractor & hammer for our current rifles. They say their extractor won’t roll up like the factory stamped ones do, which causes ejection problems.
They also have a message saying they are going to keep selling their semi-autos. Did someone mention sending in our rifles to them and getting them reworked so they won’t blow up?
Could we find better quality springs? what exactly does it take to fix this problem? short of dishing out as much as we paid new to get it fixed?
https://www.volquartsen.com/category/13-accessories-and-upgrades/12-remington-597
Last week I exchanged emails with Scott Volquartsen at Volquartsen Customs. He advised the company is looking at making another run of .22WMR barrels for the 597. If they do it, the products will be bull barrels. I’d have to re-stock my 507/.17 as it’s just a basic model with sporter barrel…but I’ll do it if no other reason than to restore some utility and value to a firearm that I won’t surrender to Remington’s “recall on the cheap.” If that option is of any interest to you, let VQ know with an email to sales@volquartsen.com. Remington won’t sell you a .22WMR barrel so VQ may be your best (and only) choice short of going along with Remington’s laughable recall. As for the ammo, CCI makes virtually all the .17HMR for the major U.S. brands. There’s nothing wrong with the round; just no one, except maybe VQ, has designed a proper receiver and chamber for it.
You r speaking of stocks, I found a place web-surfing. http://www.Stockystocks.com has some pretty sharp stocks and they’re reasonably priced. They care for 597 and about everything else.
I had a 597 17hmr with a laminated stock that blew the extractor out of the rifle. See above. After contacting Remington, they sent me a UPS prepaid label for the rifle. I sent the rifle back to them for examination. They contacted me today and told me they could not determine what caused the problem. But they did offer me the option of choosing a 597 22mag with bull barrel and a laminated stock or a Marlin 917 in 17HMR as a replacement. I am going to take the 22mag.
I would mail Remington (at my cost) my 597 17hmr laminated in a heart beat for an even exchange for a 597 22 mag bull barrel, laminated gun.
That would be a fair deal. Compared $250 off on another Remington Gun.
————Are you listening Remington.—————
It looks like the .17 HMR semi-auto issue is based on the firearm (e.g. Remington 597…) and not the round itself.
See the below URL/comments posted yesterday by Bill Alexander the Founder and Chief Product Designer at Alexander Arms regarding their Valkyrie .17 HMR’s current development and release status:
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=526898
“The announcement from Remington regarding the problems they had seen in semi auto 17 HMR rifles obviously put a substantial delay in the work while we figured out what was going on and why they were having problems. No one ever wants to discuss a problem so there was a lot of back tracking and an equal amount of testing to see if the problem existed in the system we have built. This was not only in examining the rifle designs but also extended to the powder chemistry and what specifications the rounds were being loaded to.
Happily the problem with the 17 HMR was rifle related and the cartridge remains a sound proposition for a semi automatic mechanism just as long as the design accounts for the few oddities of this caliber. Our extractor claw has proven to be most annoying and we are now on generation 3 but with a lot of problems solved. Equally we are now on generation 2 for the recoil spring as the balance for the spring/mass in this system is exemplified by it being such a small cartridge with so little firing impulse. The spring has to be perfect every time and despite the diminutive cartridge the recoil spring takes a lot of work that was not expected.
The gun is a complete joy to work with. Recoil is mild and the cartridges ability at longer ranges taxes the trigger control and ability to judge wind. Routine hits on soda can targets at 200 yards off the bipod are the norm until you let the wind get away from you or the trigger breaks badly because you did not get the correct hold. Stepping out to 300 yards I can say this caliber continues to dazzle albeit only punching paper and we spent a few too many afternoons trying to group 10 shots into the head box of a silhouette target and being confounded by the wind. Arriving the little 17 grain slugs will still punch through 3/4″ ply with authority which was a surprise.
If I am raving about this gun it is not because of the gun so much as when you get back behind a full power AR. Unlike a 22 rimfire, the gun challenges you to extend ranges and then punishes mercilessly if you have the slightest err in your technique. Back on the Grendel at 600 yards, the silhouette is no longer any challenge and a 580 yard squirrel is better sport. The 17 is a phenomenal caliber in its own right but will definitely be a superb trainer.
I have already asked Grant in respect to posting pictures of the gun and the internals and he has consented to let me even though we do not currently sponsor the site. As soon as I get the pictures I will see if I cannot get them up.
I will be eschewing a stand at SHOT this year so will not be doing a formal release thing. As soon as the guns are ready I will get them up on my site and will also make sure that I let m4carbine.net know on this thread.”
I HAVE HAD MY 597 FOR ABOUT 4 YEARS, THE VERY FIRST TIME I SHOT IT ,IT JAMMED AND JAMMED AGAIN. I SENT REM. A LETTER AND SAID THAT I LIKED THE RIFE BUT THE MAGAIZINE WAS CHEAP AND CAUSED THE JAMMING. (NO RESPONSE). I SENT ANOTHER LETTER (NO RESPONSE)
I BOUGHT ANOTHER MAG. IT IS THE SAME CHEAP JUNK BUT IT HAS WORKED OK. I HAVE A NIKON 3X9 ON TOP AND IT IS VERY ACCURATE.
A GREAT SQUIRREL GUN.
NOW THEY WANT IT BACK FOR 200.00
THEY HAVE MY ADDRESS, AND MY LAST DOLLER .
COME AND GET IT
I was looking over my 17 HMR and had a couple questions.
The first one is if someone could look at their rifle and tell me if there is suppose to be a small opening just under the extractor about 1/4 inch back on the bolt? That is the only place on the entire bolt that the metal is thin where they cut the groove for the extractor. Mine has a opening there about an 1/8 inch long. I don’t know if that is normal or they just cut too thin. You can just pull your bolt back and take a peek for the hole.
I have three clips. Of those three I could only feed 8 rounds without them jamming while removing manually. They other two would not work with 8 at all and could only load about 5 or 6. I then took a flat screwdriver to the two that were empty and found they would stick. I kept running it up and down about 50 times till they flowed free.
My question is, if a round was not sitting right in the clip, could just the bolt coming forward to grab another round set off the round? When mine stuck the tip of the round was always below the clip inside.
And so the bolt would be driving the tip of the round into the inside of the clip.
Thank you
The round is safe in a bolt gun because of the locked breech. Still splits the cases though. I don’t care to much for the round for this reason.
I just spoke to a customer service rep at Remington and they are currently swapping out the barrels and converting this rifle to 22WMR at no cost
Call them @ 1-800-243-9700 option #3 and have your serial # number ready to have them send you a postage paid mailing label
Good Luck!
Michael
I followed Michael Jones lead and called Remington. They are sending a
mailing label so I can send my gun in to be converted to a 22WMR.
I told the Rep that finally Remington was doing something that I though
was fair (He agreed). Now I will have a usable gun and it did not cost me any extra.
Hallelujah! Remington seems to have had a change of heart about rebarreling 597-.17HMRs. I called customer service today and was told that is now an option. It’s one I intend to pursue. I’d rather have duplicate 597-.22WMRs in the collection instead of a “safe queen” .17HMR of no value whatever. To obtain a shipping label, call 1-800-243-9700, #3 when options come on the line. You MUST have your rifle’s serial number when you make the call. Maybe all the outrage has produced some results, after all.
I just called Remington today and they are going to rebarrell my 17hmr to a 22 magnum. Im happy that they did the right thing I now have a gun I can use and overall Im happy with the end result. I think we have sites like this to thank for the positive results to this issue.
17 hmr if you put a caliper body of the round it is about .239 , in checking fired cases the part by the shoulder is .242 then check back by the rim it is .245 to .246 . On my sons gun, if you put a round in the chamber you can wiggle it back and forth. A guns bore does not always run true to the barrel, if your not in alignment with the bore when they ream the chamber it could be off. This could be part of the splitting problem. Seems to me 22 mag would be easyer to mass produce as the amount of metal to cut for the chamber is less than the 17. If Remington is willing to put a 22 mag barrel on the 597 sounds like a good choice.
Anyone else receive their shipping label yet? Mine came today and the rifle is now on its way to Ilion. I initially called them on Jan. 14. After several weeks of nothing, I sent an email Moinday, Feb. 1 inquiring about when I might expect the shipping label. I still await a reply to the email but the label is here, postmarked Feb. 1 (coincidence?).
I SENT THE GUN IN TO BE RE-BARRELED TO 22 MAGNUM-i HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY CONFIRMATION OR ANYTHING FROM THEM TODATE. WAITING SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
I can’t believe Remington would treat their customers with such disrespect! We all make mistakes but it is what you do to rectify your mistake is what shows who you really are. I paid substantially more than $250.00 for my .17 and I will not be satisfied with anything less than at least a $400.00 coupon to replace it with a comparable model or at the very least repair or rechambering to a similiar caliber. I promise that if Remington does not do the above that I will investigate legal action and/or support any class action against Remington. I will also never support Remington by purchase of ANY products that either directly or indirectly benefits Remington or any other company that is associated with Remington. I respectfully ask that Remington do the right thing and make their mistake right to their customers!
Received my new 22 mag yesterday. Beautiful new stock and a great heavy barrel. I have no complaints.
Update, sorta. I received the shipping label Feb. 4 and dispatched the rifle that afternoon. UPS tracking said it was delivered to Ilion Feb. 8. Finally on Feb. 15 I received an email from Rem saying the rifle had been delivered and logged in. The email also provided a repair number so I can “track its progress through” the system. Dutifully I go to the site every day and get the same message: Rifle received and logged in. I hope the inertia is caused by an overwhelming reponse and not my loud and widespread objections to the initial terms they offered.
Hallelujah! According to today’s check with the Remington “progress” site, the rifle has moved to a repairman’s station.
The end of the saga is in sight (maybe, sorta). This morning’s emailbag has a note from Remington advising the rifle left Ilion yesterday. Obviously I’ll be tracking UPS now. Maybe it’ll arrive by midweek so I can prep it and take it to the range the 20th or 21st.
I own a 597 and I love the gun. I bought it chambered in the 17HMR because that’s what I wanted. I do not want a .22 Mag. I want a 17HMR! Remington needs to offer each customer the list price of the 597 so that they can purchase another Remington. By not offering the list price, I have already paid the profit on the first gun and now have to pay a profit on a second. This is not an equitable solution. The $250.00 that Remington is offering does not take into account the fact that I have already paid the dealer profit and the Remington stockholders market profit. I want to be able to have my gun replaced without anyone making any more money off of it! This is fair and an equitable solution. I too as well as many other Remington gun owners look towards Remington to make this right. Loyalty runs both ways and at this time, Remington is wearing thin on my loyalty towards them.
Daniel Rhome
Got my shipping label and box Friday the 12th of March 2010 shipped it off the same day, will have a 22 mag bull barrel put on, six to eight weeks for work to be completed. Looking forward to getting the gun back. Person at Remington was polite and very helpful, would not give reason for the 17 hmr failure.
The wait is over. The 597-.22WMR (nee 597-.17HMR) was delivered just minutes ago. According to the work order summary with it, all that was done is put a replacement barrel on it. Be interesting to see how it behaves at the range when i get the scope back on.
I had a Rem 597 17 HMR and experienced a few split cases, some nearly blown rims, and one blown rim which destroyed the magazine. The ammo was Hornady 17 gr Varmint Express. After sending the rifle back to the factory, I got a VQ Superlite in 17 HMR. On the 26th shot, a blown rim blew the mag to pieces and sprayed particles in my face. Fortunately, I was wearing glasses.
My personal opinion after all this, is that in some cases, such as with the Rem 597, there are design issues, but on top of that, there’s a definite percentage of ammo out there with defective cases. Anyone shooting a 17 HMR bolt action, lever action, single shot, or VQ semi-auto, would be wise not to forget the eye protection because you’re basically rolling the dice. As for me, I want a 17 HMR semi-auto and that it. I plan to wait until CCI starts putting out defect-free ammo before shooting my Superlite again.