Remington wingmaster of yester year better quality than today's .

I have to say cosmetically, fit and finish seems nicer on early Wingmasters. But having owned and shot early Wingmasters, late Wingmasters and Express guns in most gauges (except .410) I have to say the built in quality and durability has not changed. Yes I know there has been some quality control issues but overall I feel the Remington 870 is as good as ever.

Darryl
 
Its been discussed over and over.....many people say it, but what is the reasoning? A new wingmaster is a lot of cash for what it is. It better be a good gun
 
Last edited:
I think that this is a time honoured sport and because of that the peopl here have a appreciation for old world craftsmanship. I know that we’re mass produced then too but more human contact was involved in the whole process, which translates to a better product with fewer imperfections due to a multi level Q.C. Quality control now a days is for function only. Materials have come a long way but it lacks in fit and finish.

I also feel that it is the times we live in. People just want to do their job and go home not too many people place pride in their work anymore.
 
Its pretty simple for me. I see absolutely no way my two vintage Wingmasters could be any better then they are. They are both flawless and have never let me down. Not once. Smooth and reliable, with a finish that has held up well in the field.

I dont know that the new ones are worse, but I know they cant possibly be better. Given the trend in manufacturing to cheaper product, and give the massive controversy about Remingtons quality control over the last 10-15 years, I know where I'd place my bet.
 
I have a recent Express... very thin metal on the action, compared to a Wingmaster I've fondled. Is it safe to say that that's the big difference in the Remington 870s: The Wingmaster is good, heavy metal, and the Express is lighter weight?
 
blasted_saber said:
Its pretty simple for me. I see absolutely no way my two vintage Wingmasters could be any better then they are. They are both flawless and have never let me down. Not once. Smooth and reliable, with a finish that has held up well in the field.

I dont know that the new ones are worse, but I know they cant possibly be better. Given the trend in manufacturing to cheaper product, and give the massive controversy about Remingtons quality control over the last 10-15 years, I know where I'd place my bet.
Click to expand...

Lol and this is EXACTLY what the OP is talking about. Never handled/fired a new Wingmaster. But the old ones are better. Because reasons.
 
simpleman said:
I think that this is a time honoured sport and because of that the peopl here have a appreciation for old world craftsmanship. I know that we’re mass produced then too but more human contact was involved in the whole process, which translates to a better product with fewer imperfections due to a multi level Q.C. Quality control now a days is for function only. Materials have come a long way but it lacks in fit and finish.

I also feel that it is the times we live in. People just want to do their job and go home not too many people place pride in their work anymore.
Click to expand...

Remington dropped the time honoured craftsmanship starting in the 50’s. Stamped metal parts, pressed in checkering, mahogany stocks with bowling pin hardness finishes, increased machine finishing and fitting with greater tolerances. The last good shotguns they made were the model 31 and to some degree the 3200 (and I own a 3200). I have owned several wingmasters (all older) and several 1100’s and I think they are ok, though I have had neither in my possession now for over 20 years but certainly don’t deserve to be in the old world craftsmanship category.
 
Scotty454 said:
Lol and this is EXACTLY what the OP is talking about. Never handled/fired a new Wingmaster. But the old ones are better. Because reasons.
Click to expand...

Ive handled one. I thought the finish on the rib was rough in particular.

What could possibly be better about the new ones? Mine have been hunted with for 50 years and still perform flawlessly.

And the "reasons" I provided are legitimate. My guns are proven effective workhorses. The OP, you, nor anyone else in this thread has not provided any reason why the new ones are better.
 
Just to be clear no one in this thread has even suggested the new ones are better. I suggested that the actual functionality is as good as ever but not better. It is the sad truth that a quality pump action shotgun in North America will cost 900.00 to 1100.00. I am talking current production Ithaca 37 and the 870 Wingmaster. The Browning BPS is creeping up on 900.00 retail too. I do consider the BPS a quality pump. Randy Wakeman (take him or leave him) did a review of the latest 870 Wingmaster and said it was good as ever. For what that is worth. I have a feeling that stating the older Remingtons are better (based on hear say) is akin to claiming every Winchester made before 1964 is better. A lot of people have heard and repeat the statement but as the OP stated do we actually know the engineering or science behind the statement that makes them better.

Darryl
 
My 870 experience=old Wingmasters vs. new production 870s (not new Wingmasters)....so maybe not relevant to the question...but..

I'm no expert on 870s (or anything else for that matter) but I have been shooting them for almost 30 years. I've owned old Wingmasters, new Expresses, and currently use an 870P with a 28" VR barrel for hunting/clays. In my experiences with them~treat them right, they'll all go "bang" when you need them to. Period.

The only REAL issues I've seen on new Expresses tend to be things people blow way out of proportion..with one exception~SOME chambers on 870 Expresses leave the factory kind of rough. They tend to cycle good quality ammo with no issues...but cheap/lumpy stuff like Winchester white box can get hung-up after firing. Some people attribute that to the single extractor, some to rough chambers and on one gun I worked on....a burr on the shoulder the rim sits in directly opposite the extractor. In all cases, a little Google work and 20 minutes of TLC remedied it. I used a Dremel to remove the burr. I do hear allot about the poor finish on Express guns and yes, they aren't polished/deeply blued like old Wingmasters. Not as nice to look at, and more inclined (in my opinion) to hold moisture. BUT...the biggest complaints seem to come from guys who put these guns away wet, then complain they're rusty when they take them out of the case next time. Would the same guys put a nice Wingmaster away wet? Yeah...don't think so. I think the cost of the Expresses seems to invite poor treatment by some guys..who subsequently yang about the finish on web forums. I've removed allot of stuck choke tubes from guns like this.

Where I think I see the biggest differences (besides aesthetics, smooth cycling, etc.) is when you tear them down to dry them out, clean them up, work on them, etc. No question, the old Wingmasters (and my new 870P) have nicer internals, fewer...or NO nasty/sharp edges, etc. I've never worked on an Express TO smooth things out (they run fine new) because they'll honestly smooth themselves out after enough shooting.

The only hole in my 870 experiences so far...I think...is with NEW production Wingmasters. Since 2-3/4" shells do everything I need them to do, and, since I have that 870P with spare barrels that cover all bases...the need for a snazzy/polished new Wingmaster just isn't there.
 
the spank said:
Remington dropped the time honoured craftsmanship starting in the 50’s. Stamped metal parts, pressed in checkering, mahogany stocks with bowling pin hardness finishes, increased machine finishing and fitting with greater tolerances. The last good shotguns they made were the model 31 and to some degree the 3200 (and I own a 3200). I have owned several wingmasters (all older) and several 1100’s and I think they are ok, though I have had neither in my possession now for over 20 years but certainly don’t deserve to be in the old world craftsmanship category.
Click to expand...

I get wthat you are saying and it may have started in fifty’s but look at stock footage of their plant in 70’s and early 80’s you can’t deny while on a downhill slope they definitely had better q.c than today’s standards
 
The problems for today's wingmaster all started in 1987 when remington introduced the express and was stupid enough to still call it a 870
To this day there are many that don't know one from the other and think a 870 is a 870
Many issues one hears today about the junk wingmasters remington produces after some digging yopu will find the owner doesn't even own true wingmaster
Then they did it again with the 870 Sportsman field express or what ever they called it a couple of years ago. I call it the fancy express. That for sure is a wingmaster to many
Cheers
 
Last edited:
Having closely inspected new wing masters in the last few years and done the same with old ones I gotta say I’m still stuck on the old ones. Kinda like the 70’s Winchester 94/22 I just received. I had a like new one made in 1992 and now looking at this old one I can easily tell there was more care being put into making the steel parts abd machining. It’s a sad truth but many companies are skimping on the quality part. Some are picking up the pace though. I’d have to inspect the new wing master before buying it. My early 90’s 14” 870 police is one I don’t ever wanna sell!
 
simpleman said:
I get wthat you are saying and it may have started in fifty’s but look at stock footage of their plant in 70’s and early 80’s you can’t deny while on a downhill slope they definitely had better q.c than today’s standards
Click to expand...

I honestly cannot compare their qc from years ago to today’s as I have not owned or shot a Remington product of any kind manufactured after 1983 except for an 11-87 the first year they were released. Three shots and the forend split in two and fell apart in my hand. That was the last Remington I bought until I bought a used 3200 last month.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom