Gun Prices

stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Cabelas has a few gems in there. That Panther 762x39 looks sweet. 439 for the ADL seems like a good deal to me. ADL is just a model designation for the trim level, sort of like a car, LE SE GT etc. I think the 700 comes in ADL, BDL and CDL but I don't remember the difference.
 
2quills

2quills

Well-Known Member
I think the ADL and BDL...etc. has to do with the design of the stock. BDL is a little fancier I think.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Found this on answers.com:
The BDL has a hinged floorplate assembly allowing ammo removal from the bottom of the rifle.
The ADL has a trigger guard, only it does not have a hinged floorplate in the rifle's stock. In addition, the magazine well on the ADL is a blind bottom.

One of my first deer rifles was a Remington 700 BDL. It had a nice balanced weight, and one of the most accurate bolt-action rifles I ever owned. I even purchased an upgraded barrel for more accuracy. When I started going down to Terlingua and hunting Mule Deer, I opted for the AR-15 because it was much lighter, and wasn't subjected to getting scratched as much going through the brush.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
I was watching History Channel tonight, and they had this story on about the controversy behind the Remington 700 safety. Apparently since the inception of the rifle, the safety mechanism doesn't secure the trigger properly, and just by touching the trigger while the safety was on, the gun would discharge. There's been several lawsuits filed, one due to the death of a child who was standing in front of his mother while she was holding the gun, and it went off and killed him. They had all these internal memos dated back as far as 1949 from the guy who designed the rifle saying that the safety mechanism wasn't safe. For and extra 5.5 cents per gun, they could've modified the safety so that it would securely lock the trigger. Remington didn't want to spend the extra money for the modification, and just kept producing the rifles with the defect. They said if they had to recall all the rifles produced since '49 to fix them now, it would cost over $300 million. Remington did change the trigger mechanism in 2007, calling it the "X-Mark Pro", but they say there's still plenty of the older trigger systems out there. May want to look for this tag when you're buying a Model 700 today.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
If someone points a loaded gun at their child then I'm not going to argue with Darwin when the gun goes off.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///forum/thread/382056/gun-prices#post_3332133
If someone points a loaded gun at their child then I'm not going to argue with Darwin when the gun goes off.
I'm not going to argue what the woman did didn't violate the most basic rule in gun safety. I didn't get to hear exactly what the circumstances were behind how the boy was killed. What the report stated was the boy and mother were together on a hunting trip, and the gun fired as she was trying to unload it. She stated her hand was nowhere near the trigger when the gun discharged. Did the bullet richochet and hit the kid? Was she holding the gun outward instead of downward while she was unloading it? Again, the report didn't say. The controversy is that it appears Remington knew about the faulty trigger/safety mechanism, and they refused to do anything about it because it would cost a whopping 5.5 cents more per gun to fix the problem at the time. If they would've simply put safety over profit, this incident with the kid could have very well been averted.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
It sounds nice to say it would have cost an extra 5.5 cents a gun to make them right but that isn't the cost to correct the problem. I find it hard to believe it is cheaper to keep making a product with a known defect even if the fix is 55.00 per gun to correct which is probably much closer to the cost. Product liability suits are expensive, Ruger had an issue with their pistols years ago and they stepped up and fixed the problem, Remmington should do the same if there really is a problem.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
If they knew the product was defective they should not have let the guns leave the door. I agree it's criminal.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
What you're saying is nothing new. I'm a bit jaded but I just don't believe that this is the case. I think you grt a few pissed off employees. They say some stuff because they are mad and turns into something much larger. There are these nasty stories about every product.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Did a little more reading on this. The Marines have been using these for better than 40 years and have no complaints. The failure rate on the weapon is .002%. Turns out the trigger pull is easy to adjust on this gun and if you take it to less than 3 1/2 pounds of pull anything is possible so how many of these failures are from someone tweaking the weapon? I know my brother has an old Springfield that will fire when you hit the safety once in a while. That's why you don't point a gun at something you don't want to put a smokey hole in, doo doo happens.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/382056/gun-prices#post_3332313
Did a little more reading on this. The Marines have been using these for better than 40 years and have no complaints. The failure rate on the weapon is .002%. Turns out the trigger pull is easy to adjust on this gun and if you take it to less than 3 1/2 pounds of pull anything is possible so how many of these failures are from someone tweaking the weapon? I know my brother has an old Springfield that will fire when you hit the safety once in a while. That's why you don't point a gun at something you don't want to put a smokey hole in, doo doo happens.
Hey, I just thought it was ironic that STD is looking at one of these rifles, and I'm flipping through channels the other night and see this report. It was some expose that apparently they were researching for several years. They actually tracked down the guy who originally designed the trigger mechanism for Remington. He's 98 years old. He was also the one who wrote all the memos about the problem with the mechanism. He said in so many words that he thought the safety was flawed. He ended the interview with, "You guys are going to get me in trouble with Remington."
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/382056/gun-prices#post_3332317
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/382056/gun-prices#post_3332313
Did a little more reading on this. The Marines have been using these for better than 40 years and have no complaints. The failure rate on the weapon is .002%. Turns out the trigger pull is easy to adjust on this gun and if you take it to less than 3 1/2 pounds of pull anything is possible so how many of these failures are from someone tweaking the weapon? I know my brother has an old Springfield that will fire when you hit the safety once in a while. That's why you don't point a gun at something you don't want to put a smokey hole in, doo doo happens.
Hey, I just thought it was ironic that STD is looking at one of these rifles, and I'm flipping through channels the other night and see this report. It was some expose that apparently they were researching for several years. They actually tracked down the guy who originally designed the trigger mechanism for Remington. He's 98 years old. He was also the one who wrote all the memos about the problem with the mechanism. He said in so many words that he thought the safety was flawed. He ended the interview with, "You guys are going to get me in trouble with Remington."
I know what your intent was. And I hope I communicated that I was referring to the documentary, and well most "major safety flaws" in general. Hell, on the lawnmower I purchased they have a warning not to pick it up, and use it as a hedge trimmer. (obviously someone did this) (on a side note, if you ever watch to entertain yourself, go read warning labels, assume that most of them are written after the company was sued by someone who tried, and imagine how they would try it.) this is hours of entertaining daydreams...
I've seen a portion of that documentary before... I just think realistically if this was a major issue that they'd be out of business by now, due to our litigious society. Think Toyota, they had a handful of toyota's take off, after months of testing, the conclusion was that it was driver's error. But they're still eating it...
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
There is a warning label on bags of marshmallows about young kids choking on them. Who knew it wasn't a good idea to give your 2 young kids a bag of the big ones for breakfast and go back to bed. First million dollar settlement check my wife ever processed. Another case was an ozonic air filter. The warning about not putting your face right on the vent because you like the smell of ozone wasn't big enough. Of course they found for the plaintiff but because the jury assigned more than 40% of the blame on the plaintiff they didn't get to collect a nickle of the award.
 
mantisman51

mantisman51

Active Member
I think the only warning a gun needs is "It is extremely dangerous to be on the business end of this tool. Please avoid pissing off the owner." ( :
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top