Perhaps someone could direct me to all of these Remington rifles that feed poorly, extract poorly, shoot poorly, have bad triggers and safeties that don’t work?

I was at the range awhile back and watched a guy take a brand new Remington 700 out of the factory box and he shot the thing all day long without a single problem that I could see. I didn’t go over and measure the size of his groups, but he didn’t seem the least bit pissed or troubled with whatever he was getting.

He never had an accidental discharge, when he closed the bolt and pulled the trigger it went boom, and when he pulled the bolt back a shiny brass thing flew out the side, and believe it or not...the bolt handle seemed to still be attached to the rifle!

Alberta Canuck: “Speaking of hard facts, I see none in your rant.â€

You make my point AC. The premise was that Remington is declaring bankruptcy. “I heard it at the gunshop. A fellow there said Remington was declaring bankrupcy……†– El Caballero

It’s hard to find facts when trying to prove a negative. I don’t have to evidence facts that Rem is not going to file for bankruptcy ‘cause no on has evidenced that it will. This whizzin’ contest has been goin’ on for a while (and it looks as though it may continue!) and there’s yet to be the first fact that has anything to do with a filing, actual or contemplated, of bankruptcy by Remington - much wishin’ and hopin’ and testifyin’ but no evidence yet.

AC, you see your experience as relevant in a possible bankruptcy scenario but there’s no scenario related to Remington as outlined in this thread. I’m a long way from a bean counter and it’s been some kind of a while since accounting classes so I’m not about to debate the financial analyses offered here but I also know that there are “profitsâ€, “lossesâ€, cash flow (planned and unplanned) and management strategies. Again, to quote you, “An interview of the CEO hardly counts as "hard factsâ€â€ but armchair financial analysis on the ‘net doesn’t exactly qualify as hard facts either.

On the other hand, I think this thread has served to elevate the status of the bean counter and otherwise bring enlightenment of their contributions to society to the masses of the great unwashed.

Vapodog
Making a better product than your customers are willing to pay for is certain death in the manufacturing business. Don't blame me, I didn't invent the rules.

Absolutely no doubt at all that Remington has it's share of problems..... like keeping production up to the demand for their excellent firearms.

quote:

Originally posted by Mikelravy:
Vapodog
Making a better product than your customers are willing to pay for is certain death in the manufacturing business. Don't blame me, I didn't invent the rules.

My description of problems at Remington are reflecting direct conversations with three close friends that run their own retail gun shops and gunsmithing services.

Further I have a close friend that is a design engineer at Remington and have shared a campfire with him as well.....

My own personal experience with Remington has been excellent.....but I haven't bought anything from them in many years as I'm quite fond of the M-70 in centerfire rifles, Citori in shotguns and Marlin in rim fires.

I've further seem things from Winchester that boggles my mind (drill/tap of scope mount holes) and my own very poor experiences with Savage, Ruger long guns, and Weatherby.

Added to the complaints I'm hearing first hand by these dealers and the plethora of internet complaints I feel justified in posting as I did.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Roque
AC, you see your experience as relevant in a possible bankruptcy scenario but there’s no scenario related to Remington as outlined in this thread.


Rogue, I guess if you are determined to try to put something in my post that isn't there, you can have it your own way. If it makes you happy, good.

You still don't seem to understand that my point was not whether Remington is going bankrupt, but that looking at financials without other knowledge is inadequate.

To be more specific, one looking at he financials of the example I gave could think, "Oh, a great company!" It wasn't. Likewise,looking at Remington's financials one might think several different things, but none of them are necessarily correct. THAT was the point I was trying to make, by showing an example of an instance where just looking at the financials could be misleading.

There was NOTHING else, either more or less, inferred in my post(s).

Now, I am outta this thread. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think.

Alberta Canuck,

It is amazing sometimes isn’t it, how people can read the exact same thing and come up with completely different ideas about what the writer said...or didn’t say!

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
Perhaps someone could direct me to all of these Remington rifles that feed poorly, extract poorly, shoot poorly, have bad triggers and safeties that don’t work?

Rick,
I recently purchased a 700ADL in 204 that does all of the above and doesn't eject very well either. Well, the safety does work. I'm not whining, just stating facts. I bought it sight unseen from an out of state party. Was looking for a SA donor rifle and came accross this one in 204. Cool, said I, might be a fun gun. Sorry bro, but this rifle is a perfect example of some of the piss poor quality control that your beloved Big Green exhibits these days.

I can't believe it. THREE PAGES of HS from "Has anybody heard anything about Remington going broke?" What a place this AR is.

While I am on the subject of what a good sight this is I posted a question about the date of manufacture of a Savage 99 on the savageshooters.com forums while back took three days to get a responce and all it said was I had to be a paid member to get that info.
Thank you for THIS FREE sight SAEED.

AC:

From your post - “………..but that looking at financials without other knowledge is inadequate.â€

From my post - “…………….but armchair financial analysis on the ‘net doesn’t exactly qualify as hard facts either.â€

What exactly is the difference in these two statements?

quote:

Originally posted by craigster

Rick,
I recently purchased a 700ADL in 204 that does all of the above and doesn't eject very well either. Well, the safety does work. I'm not whining, just stating facts. I bought it sight unseen from an out of state party. Was looking for a SA donor rifle and came accross this one in 204. Cool, said I, might be a fun gun. Sorry bro, but this rifle is a perfect example of some of the piss poor quality control that your beloved Big Green exhibits these days.

craigster,

First of all, it ain’t “my†beloved Big Green.

Secondly, I have bought a grand total of one new Remington complete firearm in my life...an 870 shotgun.

I have never, and would never, buy a new factory bolt action rifle from Remington, Winchester, or any of the other big factories, so I could give a rats ass what their box-stock rifles are or aren’t.

I can get a brand new, or used action and build a rifle that I know works and that fits me perfectly...and that’s what I choose to do rather than buying something off the shelf.

Wake up and smell the coffee...Firearms manufacturers(and just about every other manufacturer around) ain’t what they used to be, and there aren’t many signs that they ever will be again...so get over it, or start your own company and show them all how to do it the right way.

quote:

by Rick 0311
...Firearms manufacturers(and just about every other manufacturer around) ain’t what they used to be, and there aren’t many signs that they ever will be again...so get over it, or start your own company and show them all how to do it the right way.

Rick,
You didn't get the drift of my post. You reiterated the point I was making, quality control by the big mfgs ain't what it used to be and probably never will be again. Ain't nothin' to get over cause I wasn't whining (read my post again), just stating facts. I have many more than a few firearms myself and this is the only new Remington I have ever purchased, and I'm not impressed with this NEW factory rifle. Geez, that's what you, me and a lot of posters in this thread are talkin' about.

Semper Fi

Craig

If they depended on my business they'd sure as hell be bankrupt, and that's Chapter 7, not 11.

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
Perhaps someone could direct me to all of these Remington rifles that feed poorly, extract poorly, shoot poorly, have bad triggers and safeties that don’t work?

Rick,
I recently purchased a 700ADL in 204 that does all of the above and doesn't eject very well either. Well, the safety does work. I'm not whining, just stating facts. I bought it sight unseen from an out of state party. Was looking for a SA donor rifle and came accross this one in 204. Cool, said I, might be a fun gun. Sorry bro, but this rifle is a perfect example of some of the piss poor quality control that your beloved Big Green exhibits these days.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Rick, You asked for this, you got it then complain?

quote:

Originally posted by craigster

Rick,
You didn't get the drift of my post. You reiterated the point I was making, quality control by the big mfgs ain't what it used to be and probably never will be again. Ain't nothin' to get over cause I wasn't whining (read my post again), just stating facts. I have many more than a few firearms myself and this is the only new Remington I have ever purchased, and I'm not impressed with this NEW factory rifle. Geez, that's what you, me and a lot of posters in this thread are talkin' about.

Semper Fi

Craig

craig,

Sorry, brother...didn’t mean to come off nasty, you’re a fellow Jar-Head!

This topic just always amuses me because it would appear (if you believe all the stories) that Remington is the only factory that has gone to the dogs.

Awhile back there were some posts on here about SAKO’s barrel problems that caused some blow ups and a recall. Had that been a Remington, the thread would still be active and would have 10,000 hits on it.

I also pointed out a week or so ago that there were no fewer than four threads going on one page concerning feeding, extraction and ejection problems that guys were having with new classic and/or pre-64 Winchester 70’s.

For whatever the reason, I just don’t see that many posts on this site from people having problems with 700’s. Yes, there are a few now and then...but certainly not more, and most times far fewer than guys having problems with Winchester 70’s.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
problems that guys were having with new classic and/or pre-64 Winchester 70’s.
.

Am I to take it that we with post 64 Push feeds are the lucky ones haveing no trouble?
My M70 458 is going great. (The one no one wants to talk about.)
Whats a Jar-Head?
JL

quote:

Whats a Jar-Head?
JL

I believe it's a member of the U S Marines.

quote:

Originally posted by JAL:

Whats a Jar-Head?
JL

Slang term for a Marine.

Sure Remington, sell me a new model 700BDL piece of crap in .25-06 and split. At one time I really liked Remington. However, my last three have required glass bedding the actions, floating the barrels and trigger work ($250.) just to make them shoot as well as my Remingtons of the '80s. This .25-06 still doesn't group well, about 1 1/4" (5 shots at 100yds.). If I send it back to Remington they'll only say that's acceptable accuracy. Let them go under, good riddance. It's hard to believe a company could make so many bad business decisions in such a short time. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

I bought a 700 adl youth for my daughter the thing is difficult to load, doesn't feed well,jams in the mag, the bolt is very stiff.seems to group about 2 1/2 inches. I expected a little better. Wasn't planning to buy a project.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
...Oh, wait....

Remington is going to become a closely held, or even closer held company..

watch and see

jeffe

Bought out by private equity, looks closer held to me

Cut and paste from various news stories:

NEW YORK, April 5 (Reuters) - Private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP [CBS.UL] will buy closely held firearms maker Remington Arms Co. Inc. for $118 million, the companies said on Thursday.

As part of the acquisition of Remington, which makes guns for hunting as well as police and military uses, Cerberus has agreed to assume $252 million of debt, including a revolving credit line and subordinated notes.
________________________________________________________________________________________________

Remington Arms sold to N.Y. firm
Staff reports
Remington Arms Co. Inc., based in Madison, will be acquired by an affiliate of a New York investment firm for $370 million.

The deal with Cerberus Capital Management L.P. announced today includes the assumption of Remington's $252 million debt.

Remington is already owned by two New York-based private-equity firms, Bloomberg News reported. Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherrill & Co. owns 61.3 percent of the company, and Clayton Dubilier & Rice Co. holds 13 percent and controls 26.6 percent of the voting power, Bloomerg reported.

The sale is set to close in June. Remington is the nation's top producer of shotguns and rifles, selling to hunters and sports shooters as well as the military, government and law enforcement.

"...This new partnership signals our intent to continue the path of enhancing our production capabilities and product offerings, in order to further grow our presence domestically and internationally," Remington CEO Tommy Millner said in a statement.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remington Arms sold in $370M deal

April 5, 2007
Bloomberg


Remington Arms Co., the gunmaker that has equipped U.S. soldiers for 150 years, agreed to be acquired by private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP in a $370 million deal.

Cerberus is buying Remington for $118 million and will assume $252 million of debt.


The company, based in Madison, N.C. and which has a large manufacturing plant in Ilion, produced its first profit in three years in 2006 after struggling with rising materials costs and increased competition from Smith & Wesson Holding Corp., maker of the .44 Magnum used in the "Dirty Harry'' movies.

Remington employs 2,500 workers, including 1,000 in the Ilion plant.

Remington was sold by New York-based private- equity firms Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherrill & Co. and Clayton Dubilier & Rice Co., according to a company statement today.

Cerberus is entering the $2.1 billion U.S. firearms industry, whose sales grew an annual average of 28 percent from 1998 to 2005, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. Remington is the country's largest and oldest maker of rifles and shotguns.

Cerberus is "getting a brand that has leadership in the rifle market,'' said Cai Von Rumohr, a Boston-based analyst at Cowen & Co. who follows Smith & Wesson.
Remington was founded in 1816 by Eliphalet Remington II, who built his flintlock rifle in Ilion Gulch, New York, after placing second in a shooting match and attracting the attention of other contestants.

The company was rescued by the U.S. government after Russian revolutionaries defaulted on a contract in 1918 and benefited from its purchase during the Great Depression by DuPont Co., which made improvements to gun powder.

Von Rumohr said Remington may be able to gain market share after U.S. Repeating Arms Co., which licenses the Winchester brand, discontinued three models and closed a factory in New Haven, Connecticut, where the rifles and shotguns were made for a century and a half.

Remington, led by Chief Executive Officer Thomas Millner, stopped making handguns in the 1990s. Stricter federal and state laws governing the sale of pistols prompted gun manufacturers to narrow their focus on shotguns and rifles used for hunting and target shooting. The company's guns include the $812 700 BDL Custom Deluxe and $996 11-87 SPS Super Magnum.

In December, Smith & Wesson agreed to buy Thompson/Center Arms Inc. for $102 million to enter the hunting-rifle market. Springfield, Massachusetts-based Smith & Wesson, whose revenue is about half that of Remington, is known for its revolvers and pistols.

Last year, Remington posted net income of $300,000 after three years of losses. Sales rose 8.7 percent to $446 million. Smith & Wesson last month said it anticipates earning $12 million on $225 million of sales in fiscal 2007. Remington had 2,150 employees at the end of February.

Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherrill owns 61.3 percent of Remington, and Clayton Dubilier & Rice holds 13 percent and controls 26.6 percent of the voting power.

Clayton Dubilier bought Remington's assets from DuPont in 1993 for $300 million. The Wilmington, Delaware-based chemical company purchased a 60 percent stake in the gunmaker in 1933 and acquired the remaining shares in 1980. During its 191-year history, Remington branched out to produce typewriters, sewing machines and cash registers, businesses it later divested.

Cerberus's acquisition adds to one of the busiest years for buyouts. The value of announced leveraged buyouts jumped 40 percent to $188 billion during the first quarter, led by the record $44.1 billion agreement to acquire Dallas-based power producer TXU Corp., data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Remington expects to complete the transaction by June 28. Credit Suisse Group advised New York-based Cerberus, which manages $23.5 billion.

Remington will be a pimple on the ass of Cerberus - they are a huge investment operation. Of all the private equity shops that might have purchased Remington, Cerberus may be the best bet though. They are good at what they do (fixing up poorly performing companies) and at least their chairman owns a rifle and has been hunting before.

Cerberus also purchased Bushmaster Arms recently.

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:

Cerberus also purchased Bushmaster Arms recently.

Do either of these firearms companies have military contracts?

Rem sells 700's to the Marines for sniping. And I would be surprised if Rem did not sell ammo to the military.

Rem's costs have gotten out of control and their quality is shit. Also, they don't seem to have any engineers who know anything about guns or safety.

An example of costs out of control: Asking retail $33 for a box of 45 acp ball ammo.

quote:

Originally posted by ElCaballero:

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:

Cerberus also purchased Bushmaster Arms recently.

Do either of these firearms companies have military contracts?

Both firms have military cntracts. Remington supplies the M40 to the USMC and M24 to the Army. BushMaster is building M16A3's for the Navy and I believe one of the M16A4 and M4 Carbine suppliers.

quote:

Originally posted by M1Tanker:

quote:

Originally posted by ElCaballero:

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:

Cerberus also purchased Bushmaster Arms recently.

Do either of these firearms companies have military contracts?

Both firms have military cntracts. Remington supplies the M40 to the USMC and M24 to the Army. BushMaster is building M16A3's for the Navy and I believe one of the M16A4 and M4 Carbine suppliers.

Interesting!