Remington Arms, back when they cared about quality

[KoopaKGB]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee5Wn7KlFoc

I really enjoyed this 1969 video showing the process of manufacturing Remington firearms. Many (myself included) feel that the quality of Remington Arms has dropped. It's neat to watch what went into making em back in the day. I did a search and couldn't find this vid posted.

 

[tradertator]

I think quality has slipped with most American arms manufactures. Comparing an old Winchester, Remington, or even Ruger to the current crop of offerings, the old stuff seems considerably nicer.

 

[mikemcbride]

That video was very cool. I didn't realize all that goes in, or I should say did go into making a firearm.

 

[x10]

On the quality thing, I think the role of the craftsman has dwindled while the reliance on "quality" systems has went too far.

the thinking today is that if you have a good enough quality system that any idiot can produce a good product. and in that they pay people less and value them less and it's a downward spiral.

If you talk to Remington and ask them to measure the quality of a 69 firearm, and a current firearm, you would find out that the "measures" say the "quality" of the old firearm was terrible while the new firearm complies with all quality standards.

Also they were turning out less firearms and less models and over the last 35 years the bad remy's have been rebarreled and "fixed" by gunsmiths all over the country.

In my experience the current remington firearms do lack a little personal finishing and fitting but I can take 10 Rem 700 223's and get a better avg. group than 10 guns from the 70's,

My experience with older guns you will find one that Rocks and then one that's just a hunting gun at best,

I lament the changes in the Smith 41 but that has moved from a pure custom gun to a "high volume" specialty firearm.

Today if you want the feel of a gun made by a craftsman then you have to buy one from a craftsman

 

[KoopaKGB]

On the quality thing, I think the role of the craftsman has dwindled while the reliance on "quality" systems has went too far.

the thinking today is that if you have a good enough quality system that any idiot can produce a good product. and in that they pay people less and value them less and it's a downward spiral.

If you talk to Remington and ask them to measure the quality of a 69 firearm, and a current firearm, you would find out that the "measures" say the "quality" of the old firearm was terrible while the new firearm complies with all quality standards.

Also they were turning out less firearms and less models and over the last 35 years the bad remy's have been rebarreled and "fixed" by gunsmiths all over the country.

In my experience the current remington firearms do lack a little personal finishing and fitting but I can take 10 Rem 700 223's and get a better avg. group than 10 guns from the 70's,

My experience with older guns you will find one that Rocks and then one that's just a hunting gun at best,

I lament the changes in the Smith 41 but that has moved from a pure custom gun to a "high volume" specialty firearm.

Today if you want the feel of a gun made by a craftsman then you have to buy one from a craftsman

I understand modern CNC and other computer processes SHOULD produce better made arms, but I doubt the same level of pride is involved when a firearm doesn't receive nearly as much hands on time with workers. I would argue/guess that most folks who have taken their guns to a smith to be rebarreled do so after they have shot out the barrel rather then the barrel being messed up initially, since that kind of work would certainly be done for free with a simple phone call or letter to the factory. It would seem most folks are more interested in the old Remington with proofmarks such as "JM" as a sign of quality then brand new Remington rifles.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I suppose that one must define quality. Conformity with standards done consistently is a great thing and should be more easily done in the age of CNC machining. That said, ancient Mauser bolt actions had levels of consistency in their machining that the CNC boys rarely duplicate. Fit and finish are typically important to the end user. Cheapening the standard in the name of economic efficiency typically doesn't excite end users. I, for one, am more impressed with a quality machined part than a made to tolerance stamping. I am more impressed with a nice piece of wood than laminate which is made to a consistent standard. I am more impressed with a deep blue than a consistent, even durable, finish that looks like it was sprayed on the gun. I am not impressed with guns whose appearance is such that it might as well be stamped "IDGAF" as a proof mark.

While it is true that modern guns are ore consistently accurate out of the box typically, the Remington 700 of the early to middle '90's would consistently group 1/2 to 3/4 MOA out of the box in capable hands--and this was before fit and finish were disinvented.

 

[Sonney]

If you want the standards that is being talked about you must be will to pay for it. To keep the cost down they have to mass produce. I have a Remington 700 in the 308 and it does everthing I want it to do. It will shoot sub MOA at 103 meters and looks good in the process. It has a adequate stock that lets the barrel free float and is a pleasure to shoot. I have not dropped the rifle so I don't know if it will go off on its own. Since I don't carry loaded if I do drop it I will only worry about damage to the rifle or scope. You can still find that standard that you want it will just cost you a couple of thousand more.

JMO
Sonney

 

[tradertator]

The argument over accuracy is definitely a good point. The last couple Remington 700's I've bought were sub MOA right out of the box. I don't recall the older stuff being that way without putting some money into it.

 

[Sirshredalot]

If you want the standards that is being talked about you must be will to pay for it. To keep the cost down they have to mass produce. I have a Remington 700 in the 308 and it does everthing I want it to do. It will shoot sub MOA at 103 meters and looks good in the process. It has a adequate stock that lets the barrel free float and is a pleasure to shoot. I have not dropped the rifle so I don't know if it will go off on its own. Since I don't carry loaded if I do drop it I will only worry about damage to the rifle or scope. You can still find that standard that you want it will just cost you a couple of thousand more.

JMO
Sonney

This type of thinking burns my buttcrack!

Ive youve ever had any involvement in any type of modern manufacturing or production process...you would absolutely understand that your first statement is completely INCORRECT.
Modern production focuses on "quality process" and plain and simple ...the bottom line/shareholders....customer DEFINITELY comes AFTER the money.

The only reason you "have to pay for it" is because:
1: Many companies can charge a premium for their name alone without providing a quality product to back it up(colt, remington, marlin)... or the customers are not willing to realize that they are not getting a quality product and blindly spend money on these products...solely based on the companies reputation from 30, 40, 50 years ago.

2: Many companies would "rather go out of business" than take a profit margin cut to provide a more quality product(pay workers more for skill set/reduce customer price without reducing quality)...IE: unethical business practices....cut-throat business 101.

3: Some companies/people to genuinely produce a labor intensive, high quality, hands-on, and/or custom built product that is "worth" the extra expense...because that is what it takes to make their product.(kimber rifels/surgeon/les baer/etc)

Pay attention to what is being said here and look at the market...sure TV's are cheaper now....but how long does one last?
Sure glocks are cheap(not glock bashing)...but how many grand-kids are going to covet grandpas old G19?
Sure your 2012 f150 will get 20mpg and run for 200K miles(eh...maybe)....but 30 years from now....who is going to want to restore one?

I deal with this EVERY FREAKING DAY!....sorry....just got off work and it was a long one.(dealing with the same issues).

'39 fords where mass produced, '57 chevies where mass produced, 1911 colt pre-70 series guns where mass produced, model 19 smiths where mass produced, colt pythons where mass produced...mass production does not mean a loss of quality.

$.02
God bless
-Shred

 

[JonProphet]

I giggled at their groups. Talk about quality..... Wondering if Remington was pushing the "automatics" that year.

 

[Cerberus]

This type of thinking burns my buttcrack!

Ive youve ever had any involvement in any type of modern manufacturing or production process...you would absolutely understand that your first statement is completely INCORRECT.
Modern production focuses on "quality process" and plain and simple ...the bottom line/shareholders....customer DEFINITELY comes AFTER the money.

I deal with this stuff every day of my life for many years now, and his sttement does not strike me as incorrect

2: Many companies would "rather go out of business" than take a profit margin cut to provide a more quality product(pay workers more for skill set/reduce customer price without reducing quality)...IE: unethical business practices....cut-throat business 101.

I have never encountered this at any employer I've had over the past 20+ years.

3: Some companies/people to genuinely produce a labor intensive, high quality, hands-on, and/or custom built product that is "worth" the extra expense...because that is what it takes to make their product.(kimber rifels/surgeon/les baer/etc)

With the possible exception to Surgeon, I have heard many quality complaints about the others you listed.

Pay attention to what is being said here and look at the market...sure TV's are cheaper now....but how long does one last?
Sure glocks are cheap(not glock bashing)...but how many grand-kids are going to covet grandpas old G19?
Sure your 2012 f150 will get 20mpg and run for 200K miles(eh...maybe)....but 30 years from now....who is going to want to restore one?

I thought the same thing back in the 80s in regards to vehicles and firearms as well as other things, and now people are scrambling to get that stuff when they can find one.

I deal with this EVERY FREAKING DAY!....sorry....just got off work and it was a long one.(dealing with the same issues).

'39 fords where mass produced, '57 chevies where mass produced, 1911 colt pre-70 series guns where mass produced, model 19 smiths where mass produced, colt pythons where mass produced...mass production does not mean a loss of quality.

It's the looks of the old cars, more than anything else that drives the desire. That and a touch of nostalgia. Guns are better bulit on average now than even 20 years ago, and we wont get into the cars. The Lemon law was put into effect due to the classic car era.

$.02
God bless
-Shred

.