Remington 870 woes...

cdncowboy

cdncowboy

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
80   0   0
I just bought a new Remington 870 express with 18" barrel to do a tactical build. I have an 870 special purpose magnum that I have used since '98 and think it is a great gun.

Upon receiving my 870 today, I do what I normally do when I get a new gun ... completely strip it, clean it, lube it and inspect it. When I look into the magazine tube and prepare to lightly oil it there are severe gouges and I mean severe about 2" long nearest the receiver... like someone took a dremel rotary tool to it. All I can say is wow. I can't believe a) someone at Remington did this and b) it got through Remington inspection.

Unfortunately that wasn't the only problem I found....

Upon looking at the bore of the barrel there is severe dimpling... looks like the surface of a golf ball along it's entire length. Either the barrel wasn't polished or it wasn't done correctly and once again, how did this get through Remington inspection?

The last problem I noticed, and which at least I could live with is that the bead sight is slightly off centre of the barrel... only enough to bother me but I wouldn't die if it wasn't fixed.

Once I put the gun back together I cycled several shells and, sure enough, the gouges in the mag tube chewed up the shell's like a file....

Anyways, I had heard about the decline in Remington products but again... all I can say is wow....

I am of course returning the gun for warranty work.
 
Last edited:
That sucks to hear. Must have been a monday build. I just bought an 870 express and it was perfect, both inside and out. From what I hear, QC at Remington is getting pretty lax. It now seems to be showing. Hope all goes well with your pump and good luck on the build.
 
From someone who has a great deal of manufacturing engineering experience, it makes no sense that their QC is going backwards. I am very familiar with design changes using alternative materials and manufacturing methods to lower cost but at the end of the day in my experience you have the same quality standards and inspection criteria just different parts. Normally a company doesn't just lower their quality standards... they may be negligent in their training of quality personnel but their quality assurance should be the same.

The fact that 1 part in particular on my gun got shipped "mangled" means their inspection point afterwards, worse case final inspection, either didn't check or they were texting while they inspected... oh noooo.... distracted drivers have now infiltrated Remington manufacturing.... :eek:
 
cdncowboy said:
From someone who has a great deal of manufacturing engineering experience, it makes no sense that their QC is going backwards. I am very familiar with design changes using alternative materials and manufacturing methods to lower cost but at the end of the day in my experience you have the same quality standards and inspection criteria just different parts. Normally a company doesn't just lower their quality standards... they may be negligent in their training of quality personnel but their quality assurance should be the same.

The fact that 1 part in particular on my gun got shipped "mangled" means their inspection point afterwards, worse case final inspection, either didn't check or they were texting while they inspected... oh noooo.... distracted drivers have now infiltrated Remington manufacturing.... :eek:
Click to expand...

whatever it is, do a little research. You're not the only one who has complaints with Remington in the past five years or so.
 
The quality problems actually started around 87/88 after Remington lost 200 million in revenue in 1986 and restructured.
They brought the revenue back by 1993 but something had to give to make that happen and it was quailty. When they were sold to Claydon, Dubilier & Rice in 1993 it got even worse.
From what I have seen collecting remingtons is guns made in the 86-93 years I check over a few times before buying since you could still get a good one or junk. After 1993 more bad ones than good but still some good ones but you really have to look it over big time before putting out the cash.
 
Apparently the bean counters at Remington don't pay attention to history. When Winchester damaged their brand with the introduction of the post 64 M-70 they never really recovered even though the M-70 classic was probably a better rifle than the pre-64. It seems that Remington is going the same way, which is good news for Mossberg, Savage, and Ruger.
 
I own a 2009 Express (non-magnum) and it has been an amazing gun from day one. But I have now heard enough horror stories about their QC to believe that I probably got lucky. I will not buy another one as long as these issues are not addressed.
 
Stuff like this is really scary, and I hope that I find one of those mangled jobs, just to see how much work it will take to fix it!:eek:
I've seen only one issue with a bad chamber that needed buffing, and that seems to be the biggest problem, but yours is simply bad!!
Cat
 
FLHTCUI said:
Why return it for warranty?
Return it for a NEW One, not one that has been abused from the get go.
Good Luck,
Rob
Click to expand...

I already called the store where I bought it as that was my first thought... just give me another one... no such luck. Apparently as soon as you buy a gun, at least with them anyway, it now becomes a warranty issue not an exchange.

I wish these gun stores would adopt the Canadian Tire return policy as it sure would make buying a defective gun less painful. Oh the good 'ol days when Canadian Tire sold guns :D
 
Boomer said:
Apparently the bean counters at Remington don't pay attention to history. When Winchester damaged their brand with the introduction of the post 64 M-70 they never really recovered even though the M-70 classic was probably a better rifle than the pre-64. It seems that Remington is going the same way, which is good news for Mossberg, Savage, and Ruger.
Click to expand...

I'm a Savage guy where centerfire rifles are concerned, and old Remingtons in the shotgun dept. (though, not nearly as knowledgeable as many people here). Reading your "good news for Savage" remark, they're guns that shoot well..but fit/finish is on the rough side for what they charge for the upper-end, Accu-stock centerfires. Don't get me wrong, I love them...but I think all Savage HAS going for it is barrel quality and trigger design...so I imagine them as a company on "thin ice" too. I know metal finishing isn't a priority. :)
 
First gun I ever bought new was a Rem 870 express back in 2004 I think. It never worked right and I swore never to by another Remington again.
I buy Stoeger semi's now and although others claim quality control is bad I have never had an issue. I just bought another last week so I hope it works as good as the first one.
 
My first gun was an 870 express super magnum and it has been great. Three of my friends have the 870 as well and no issues. They are generally very reliable, workhorse guns unless of course you get a dud I suppose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom