I was told that today.

Anyone seen anything official?

So will the Dakota big bores now feature the same fine finish and attention to detail we're seeing on Remington 798's?

funny!!!

Sad to say, things have to get better at Dakota; but knowing Remington the first thing they will do is jack the prices about 20% and introduce plywood stocks as an environmental ploy. I just hope Rem never gets CZ.

Rich
Buff Killer

Remington put out a press release:

http://www.remington.com/libra...corporate/2009-2.asp

Not sure if that is good or bad, although they needed something.

The custom shop at Remington can still turn out a good weapon so hopefully they're aiming at something akin to the CZ "Safari Classics" series of guns in the 2-2,500 dollar mark that have all the traditional big bore features and have been worked over for reliability.

Most likely, though, what we'll get is a Dakota 76 dipped in Realtree camo with a triangular barrel. Call it the "Feed-plot Express."

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oregon45:
so hopefully they're aiming at something akin to the CZ "Safari Classics" series of guns in the 2-2,500 dollar mark that have all the traditional big bore features and have been worked over for reliability.
]

I wish but I doubt it! More like $5K-7k, I know corprate works

I'm glad I got a Dakota before this happened.

I guess now Dakota will specialize in push feed deer rifles!

What a sad turn of events.

As to the Remmy Custom shop I looked at a Remington ABG ay Cabelas in Dundee and it was horifically inletted. The fit and finish were in no way worth the asking price (can't exactly remember). The stock design made the sights completely useless. The comb was so high I don't care who you are you could not line up the sights on the rifle. I am not a Remmy hater and own several but that rifle was a piece of way overpriced crap. I hope it was just a fluke.

I see it as a way for Rem to get a claw machine at the other end of the Zastava .

I just gave my son my 35 year old Rem 700 BDL in 270. It's functioned perfectly, shot nickle sized groups (edge to edge) with 130g Noslers at over 3000 fps since the day I got it. It's claimed its fair share of bears, elk, deer and javelina (not to mention too many praried dogs to count). I've slid down a small hill or two with it, but outside of a few nicks in the stock it looks and shoots as good as new. It's still wearing the Redfield scope I bought with it 35 years ago.


Regards,

Chuck

It's hard to believe that Remington could make Dakota a worse run company than it has been.

It will be interesting to watch this unfold.

chuck375 and Oregon45 (pro and con on Remington rifles),
After shooting his first game with my old M70 .308, my son shopped around and then bought a new Remington VTR in .308, with the triangular barrel as seen below:

Much to my surprise, the rifle handles well and is a tack driver with Hornady 165gr ammo; no handloading required.
So, regardless of personal preference, (and I do like nice wood and bluing)the VTR style seems to be highly functional, if not traditional. And of greater import, he now wants to shoot more and go hunting with me!

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
It's hard to believe that Remington could make Dakota a worse run company than it has been.

It will be interesting to watch this unfold.

Don Allen had a heck of an idea and a good company. When he died in 2003 and the "new guy" entered the picture, the stability of the organization went to hell. New Guy decided to play fortune 500 and started acquiring other businesses like Nesika, Miller Arms and Dan Walter cases. While there were good companies in their own right, they filled different niches. There were no real economies of scale to be had, so all that they did was add to voer head without some of the key players from the old companies.

Remington will look for economies of scale and will enforce them. Their large shareholder, Ceberus, is all about return on equity and investment. Whether they increase their prices, cut back on quality, or both, remains to be seen. Like the pre-64 Winchesters, we may be seeing the birth of pre-09 Dakotas.

yeah -- reemington has been so horrible and controlling of marlin and bushmaster ..

wait a minute, those companies now have the management and cash to develope new products and increase quality .. remmington already survived the 788 and 660 crap, and make great products ...

i have YET to see a remington product with a huge KNOT in the stock, and that "upgrade" cost more than an entire factory m700 NEW

Give it a rest guys, Dakota has been run into the ground .. remington will make it better, or it wouldn't be worth the money to invest

get the STUMP off your shoulder .. remington wouldn't buy dakota if they didn't believe in the $$$ of the company, and that it was mismanaged.

Jeffe I really hope you are right...but remember what they did with the Mark X, Charles Daly Mauser line and who can forget the M710.
I guess time will tell!

quote:

Originally posted by congomike:
Jeffe I really hope you are right...but remember what they did with the Mark X, Charles Daly Mauser line and who can forget the M710.
I guess time will tell!

They didn't BUY markX, zavasta allowed that quality of actions to leave their factory on a spec. Like the guys buying primers for $100 a box, no one is holding a gun to their head, and zavasta could have passed...

i never thought i'd hear anyone call the daly markX a quality gun .. everyone complains that daly ruined the markX,.. and THEN pre-markX, everyone raves about how wonderful the interarms actions are..

the 710 was (is?) sold at customer demand.. and SELLS OUT ... you can't argue with the buying public.. they said that wanted a cheap m700, with a scope and ready to go.. and it kills alot of deer, from walmarts...

but that aint what remmy did with marlin or dpms or bushmaster ...

There goes the neighborhood!

The Rem 700s though push feeds are usually extremely accurate out of the box, though you need an artist to really tune the trigger. Norm Thompson now deceased of Colorado Springs was a wonderful man and gunsmith and he was truly an artist with the 700s.

If I was going to buy a new 270, or 30-06 today it would probably be the new Model 70s. However this is the big bore forum, so let's hope they get Dakota back to where they were when the first started and hopefully at a price point to compare with the CZ Safari Classics (around $2000). If not, there's always Empire (save save save).

Regards,

Chuck

Glad my 375HH is an older, Don Allen era, Dakota, and bought used at a good price. The clown running the company the last 6-7 years made a mess of it, damaged what once was a company with a good product and reputation. I fail to see how Remington can do anything but improve matters.

Big corporate is crap, they will cut,cut,and more cut and the price goes higher, the profit motive. Maybe I'm wrong but customer satisfaction is a foreign language,now shareholder return is the only goal.

quote:

Originally posted by crshelton:
chuck375 and Oregon45 (pro and con on Remington rifles),
After shooting his first game with my old M70 .308, my son shopped around and then bought a new Remington VTR in .308, with the triangular barrel as seen below:

Much to my surprise, the rifle handles well and is a tack driver with Hornady 165gr ammo; no handloading required.
So, regardless of personal preference, (and I do like nice wood and bluing)the VTR style seems to be highly functional, if not traditional. And of greater import, he now wants to shoot more and go hunting with me!

I instructed a law Enforcement Sniper School last year where a fella had one of "them" Triangular barreled Remington 700's in 308.

We shot from 100 to 1000 yards. I shot his rifle also. It shot VERY GOOD.

quote:

Dakota purchased by Remington

About the same as "Chrysler was purchased by Fiat ..." or K-Mart was Purchased by Sears ...

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
yeah -- reemington has been so horrible and controlling of marlin and bushmaster ..

wait a minute, those companies now have the management and cash to develope new products and increase quality .. remmington already survived the 788 and 660 crap, and make great products ...

i have YET to see a remington product with a huge KNOT in the stock, and that "upgrade" cost more than an entire factory m700 NEW

Give it a rest guys, Dakota has been run into the ground .. remington will make it better, or it wouldn't be worth the money to invest

get the STUMP off your shoulder .. remington wouldn't buy dakota if they didn't believe in the $$$ of the company, and that it was mismanaged.

I like this kind of optimism!

What Remington got was a lot of machinery for less than they would have paid for otherwise.

I agree with Jeffe if Dakota remains then they will make it profitable.

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

Dakota purchased by Remington

About the same as "Chrysler was purchased by Fiat ..." or K-Mart was Purchased by Sears ...

Hmm, "chrysler"
Purchased by the US Govt, and bought back
Purchased by Mercesdes, and sold
Purchsed by Cerberus, and lost it.
Can fiat be any worse?

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty:
What Remington got was a lot of machinery for less than they would have paid for otherwise.

I agree with Jeffe if Dakota remains then they will make it profitable.

The Russian and Yugoslavian made "Remingtons" need some high end "Remingtons" to balance out the offerings.
I have an engineer/gunsmith buddy in Remington Firearms R&D here in KY.
Remington should move all that machinery to KY, I shall so advise them.

Presuming the Cerberus that owns Remington is the same Cerberus that took a multi-billion dollar bath on GM, I wouldn't get my hopes up too much about their brilliance.

Hopefully they won't wring the towel trying to squeeze more pennies out at the expense of quality. I can envision the new, bolt action single shot, tuperware-stocked Dakota 700 DGR, with environmentally friendly plastic internals coming soon to a store near you. I dearly hope I'm wrong!

Bob

Bath on Chrysler, not GM

Cerberus is entirely willing to milk the company for one fiscal year and then dump the assets off and take a fat tax write off. Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Look at what they have done with Remington:
1. the 710
2. the 798/799
3. the old Remington in general.

Rich
Buff Killer

Those things at Remington predate their purchase by cerberus.

quote:

Originally posted by RyanB:
Those things at Remington predate their purchase by cerberus.

Yep

Look at what Cerberus has BOUGHT with remington

DPMS
MARLIN
BUSHMASTER
H&R
Dakota
Neseka
308 marlin
6.8 SPC
30 (something) AR ...
LOTS of new stuff...


ludites..

Of course ruger quality has also shot through the roof once it was owned by a PROFIT driven company. You can't make a profit off a good name by selling shite. That explains the, what, SEVEN ownership changes of winchester before FN Herstal, but post 63? (not 64, 63, when management decided to make it a pushfeed)...

1 fiscal year? no, sir, .. those plans are AT LEAST 4 years, with a normal range being 4-8 ... that's the market in general, call em one afternoon and i'll splin why come i KNOW that .. that's not conjecture

there AINT no such thing as a tax write off, unless you OWE TAXES ... that's like the idjiots that say "oh, but you get to take a tax write off on home interest and tax"...

BULLOCKS -- you "get" to take your TAX RATE off that amount of money .. if its 10K, and your tax rate is .3, you are still PAYING at least the 3000 in taxes to be able to get that "writen off" and not pay it.

Tax write off ONLY work when you are wickedly PROFITABLE ....

the remington/zavasta is ZAVASTA agreeing to release JUNK for a spec price ... who's the low quality/doesn't care price player there?

And, the price is STILL less than, adjusted for inflation, a then new santa barbara parker hale

I have 2 Dakota rifles a 375 and a 404 jeff. They both are very accurate with nice wood and quality workmanship. The inletting is superb and they handle well with good pointability.

After viewing the Empires at SCI two years in a row I decided they weren't that much different. I did like the Empire but bought the Dakota and really hope the boys in green don't screw up a good thing.

Makes one wonder if Big Green is all that solvent, or if the whole thing is likely to collapse like a shell game.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Cerberus is entirely willing to milk the company for one fiscal year and then dump the assets off and take a fat tax write off. Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Rich
Buff Killer

Rich, I take it you've been studying big bores longer than finance and accounting. "Milking the company" beyond the income generated would result in a return-of-capital for tax purposes lowering the basis in the asset and reducing or eliminating the potential for any "fat tax write off". The folks at Cerberus have made some big stumbles but I'll bet they all made A's in accounting.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Bath on Chrysler, not GM

Jeff, you're right but Cerberus also held a majority stake in GMAC (formerly GM's finance unit) that has largley turned to dust.

Just keeping it real.

GMAC isn't a GM company anymore, as that is also the captive finance arm of chrysler .. it was an also included when they bought chrysler, iirc .. but I think i had left the bank before they bought that ... i KNOW i did before they bought chrysler.

wow what will the bitching be like when remington makes a better model 70 than winchester

quote:

wow what will the bitching be like when remington makes a better model 70 than winchester

That right there IS funny!

Hello,
Quick search on Cerberus will reveal that it is a Greek mythology underworld creature of a vicious multi-headed dog which guards the Gates of Hell. Usually portrayed as having three or more heads. Not sure whether he was to keep you in or what, but why would one name a firm with a name like that?? Further question, why would they buy Dakota Arms? Most likely in a package deal?? Not a question of a quality product, supposed to be anyway w/ price point being what it is, but what would their production be on an annual basis?? Doubt that it exceeds 100 rifles, could be wrong on that, but if the average sell price was 5,000/copy that is some 500,000.00/yr and if you take any decent salary at all, plus overhead, insurance, payrolls, etc., it certainly does not appeal to capital investors. Perhaps the "owners" just want to offer a "first cabin" rifle to the market and overlook the sheer dollars involved for the pure enthusiast aspects. I think not and would not predict long term production, but who knows these days and perhaps through the magic of "creative accounting" they will continue w/ the product. As for FN/Mod.70, I would not look for a bright future for them w/ Remington and Ruger most likely burying them w/ market share and production capabilities of the two firms. Military contracts of FN would most likely be the key producer for them, but continuing the legendary Model 70 name is a smart move, but time will tell if it survives.
Kind of basic similar to "windage and elevation..." it's all in unit cost/profit/per copy. If you can't maintain a No 1 or very close 2nd in the market, you are in trouble sooner or later. Hope I never see that dog in the future!!

martin

ForrestB,

likely, but what can they do with Dakota? They darn sure can't make enough money on their (Dakota's) volume to pay the interest on the loan. Ford makes lots of $$$ on every Shelby Mustang sold, but where is the tie-in here? Corporate Remington is getting the reputation of the reverse-Midas Touch...everything they touch turns to shite.

Rich
Buff Killer