Your problem may be the result of not applying Loctite or a similar product to the adjusting screw heads after messing with them.

Once the factory installed sealing is removed the adjustment screws move quite easily and it is very possible to have them move enough to lighten the pull to the point where the sear will no longer hold the firing pin back when closing the bolt.

Just a thought since Loctite is allot cheaper than a new trigger mechanism.

Rick

Hello, Hot Core, Do you remember me by chance, did you miss me in my absence?

I have made every attempt to avoid posting publicly like the plague concerning this issue, but for you I will make a special exception. Debating this safety issue has come to seem like such a waste of time for me because I have yet to see you or anyone for that matter who has brought much anything to the table of this debate to challenge what I know to be true other than some mere conjecture, rumors or as in your case an opinion which lacks objectivity or facts...

After reading your posts over a period of time in my absence it has become clear to me that without someone actually knowledgeable to oppose your dangerous and irresponsible remarks and to keep you in check you simply become more melodramatic and outrageous with your claims, so here we go again my old friend and adversary....

Now that we have dispensed with the pleasant formalities and foreplay, brace yourself!

Here are some recent posts I have made on another thread for you to digest and then deny their historical truth and then we can begin where we left off a couple years ago....

http://www.accuratereloading.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB5&Number=698782&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&fpart=1

If you care to talk off the boards, my email address is available, I have attempted to contact you but you still continue to be a ghost in the shadows....

Sincerely Yours, Augustis ><>

RocknAR,
I owned one 700 Remington about 20 years ago. It was a 30-06 I bought used. Two different times it fired when I released the safety and moved the bolt handle. That is the one and only 700 Remington I will ever own. Bryan

My Other Post, For You To Digest:

Re: I can buy a R 700 with no bolt...... [Re: Cold Bore]
#704812 - 06/29/04 06:53 AM Edit Reply Quote



Cold Bore

<<"What's your favorite rifle?">>

Mauser M/98 (Customs), Remington 40X with 2 oz trigger (No Safety on this model), M/700 employing a Gentry 3 POS, Winchester M/70, Ruger M/77...

In about this order (most of the time), but to be honest I enjoy them all very much!

<<"Would you point it at your wife/kid/best friend/dog while it's loaded, and release the safety?">>

No of course not, not intentionally, but the option to raise the bolt handle to extract a chambered cartridge with the internal components (Sear & Cocking Piece) blocked would certainly be a "Safer Alternative Design" in the event someone inadvertently walked in front of the muzzle or the handler of the arm were to haze someone through their own neglect or freak error, lets face it in the real world it happens and it is "Foreseeable". The majority of the industry has responded to this "Added Element Of Safety" not withstanding the mention of "Prior Art" of design that existed before the introduction of the M/700 in 1962, being of course the 3 POS incorporated on the M/725....

I know you said you will not reply, Fine, but I will ask the question anyway, maybe someone will ponder this question to draw a conclusion of their own from?

If you had to through the neglect of someone else, human error, or if you were to ever inadvertently walk in front of the muzzle while the handler of the arm was in the process of clearing the action, Would you prefer him to be *forced* to move the safety to the fire position first, before he could raise the bolt handle to remove the bolt from battery and extract the chambered round or would you have a strong preference at that moment in time of the firing pin being blocked while the handler of the arm was in the process of unloading?

I think this might be a question people are faced with after the fact in that they did not have a choice in the matter! You do not seem to have the option to the degree of the severity of the injury opposed to a lingering death after the fact, however you can make a sound decision for prevention before hand if you consider this very simple question...


<<"Would you point it at them and pull the trigger with the safety on?">>

Again, No... But interesting you should bring this up (Rule # 2). I wonder if you have ever heard of the term "The Trick Condition" realized and termed by Old Remington in or about 1975?

If you fail Rule #2 you better remember rule #3 after you pay specific attention and strictly adhere to Rule #1...

This "Safe Gun Handling" message was implemented through S.A.A.M.I on or around Feb.23,1979 in the "Half Safe Is Unsafe" Add complements of (Old) Remington Arms Co.

Excerpt from Walker/Haskell Patent issued to Remington Arms Co. July. 11, 1950 Patent Number 2,514,981

"The value of any safety is proportional to the positiveness of its action. To this end we have found it to be essential that the safety means be so arranged that an *inadvertent opperation* of the trigger while the safety is in "Safe" position will not condition the arm to fire upon release of the safety"

What do you make of that language contained in the Patent, what does it mean to you?

Remington realized this actual malfunction in the 70s and termed it the "Trick Condition"...

I will close with that for tonight...

My Post From The Other Thread:


RocknAR
new member


Reged: 06/13/04
Posts: 7
Loc: Montana Re: I can buy a R 700 with no bolt...... [Re: Alberta Canuck]
#701751 - 06/25/04 07:47 PM Edit Reply Quote



<<"Sounds like the old Ford/Chevy opinions again.'>>

Your Point?

Both Ford and Chevy had models with exploding gas tanks upon impact, both companies performed "Cost Benefit Analyses" associated to their specific model design defects which placed the public with a factual statistical risk which Ford and Chevy were willing to take at the publics expense....

Dont buy into the theory of "I never had a problem with mine" so there for the danger must not exist when history dictates otherwise....

To compare apples to apples:

The problem you describe with the M/70 fire control/safety are not inherent of the design, we can agree to that, However, the problems encountered by the public associated with the M/700 have existed since its conception as a design, compounded by manufacturing process, assembly and finally plagued with inspection errors & omissions but also to include post manufacture modifications by the un-educated public concerning this spicific system...

It is a very good concept (in theory) but probably would be much better suited for something other than a mass production system, or if Remington Engineers would have proceeded forward with the intended "Trigger Sear Block System" proposed by Merle (Mike) Walker the designer in 1943, 1948 and 1982.

The Sear Block of course preventing "Jar Off" and the Trigger Block preventing the "undesirable trigger movement" that potentially Precipitates safety induced discharge (FSR) and other malfunctions.

I for one certainly grow tired of all the BS I see associated to this issue here and else where. The last thread I read here at AR seemed to attack the individual for asking a reasonable question IMHO related to his problems he encountered which is a tatic I find offensive, simply to silence discussion of this very polarized issue.

http://www.accuratereloading.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=604053&page=70&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=93&fpart=1&vc=1

Maybe it is finally time I interject some factual data for a change instead of the typical BS the readers have come to expect with regard to this issue?

OK, let the flaming begin, but a Rose by any other name is still a Rose, is it not?

AR, AKA: Augustis ><>

--------------------
To Be Safe, First Think You Might Not Be.