I think many people that come on websites arguing that they've never had it happen and they will just keep using them assume way too much like you stated. They figure that whoever had a misfire did something wrong to cause it when the inventor himself found out shortly after production started that his design itself increased the chances of something bad happening. It's almost impossible to make a foolproof firearm, but manufacturers try to make them as close to foolproof as they can because there are so many people that don't even know which end to point where! This particular problem probably wouldn't occur very often in a perfect scenario where the rifle is kept in immaculate condition inside to lessen what exacerbates the misfires. Unfortunately, the vast majority of owners have no idea how to disassemble these rifles or any other firearm they may have to keep them clean and greatly lessen problems that might crop up. Nope, they just run a brush or two down the barrel, give it a wipedown on the outer steel and call it good. That may work most of the time, especially with modern firearms and the way manufacturers can control their assembly. That was not the case on the old guns like RR pointed out and that increases chances of a misfire. Rather than mess with Remington my advice is to just bite the bullet and have an aftermarket trigger put in them that has less chances of malfunctioning.

Actually, NOW, the Marlins are getting better again. When Remington first bought Marlin, there were a lot of fitment issues with both the 'parts guns' that were assembled from old Marlin made inventory and from the 'remington first run' new production weapons after they moved the equipment and started building in Illion.

I've handled a few, and bought a few, of the new manufacture Remlins that are pretty well on par with the late model JM Marlins made in the last years at Connecticut.

But there were, without a doubt, a lot of growing pains when Remington first took over. I was in the market for a 3rd Marlin 1895 Guide Gun (or SBL) for a couple years before I found one in proper form to bring home. I saw a couple on the shelf that I didn't even consider safe to fire, let alone terrible fitment of the stocks, or even mismatching colors between the forend and the buttstock. I even saw one 1895 (blued and long barrel, so I had no interest) that had a checkered buttstock and a slick forend!

Luckily for the Marlin brand and my beloved 1894 and 1895 rifles, Remington seems to have gotten their act together.

Now, as for the quality of finish on the SPS's and ADL's, well, that's another story... I have every confidence that it will withstand the years, but when a gun's finish starts life looking like a dogs @sshole, you know it won't ever look any better than that...

NM448---I was just relating what many people were saying about Marlins and it's good to hear what you stated about newer ones. I about spit my Pepsi when I read that last comment of yours about a gun's finish starting out looking like a dog's a.... :guiness:

Nomercy.., I handle a 1895 last week fit and finish was good, nice wood, action was smooth. If that one rifle is the "norm" rather than the "exception" theyre fine. Id buy one.

I,m a Coke drinker and I gag when I hear the word Pepsi.:s5::s14::s201: Seriously though,you are right on.These Rifles were discharging when they were new with no chance to get dirty and out of adjustment.I know ours did and those other comments that were posted just ignore em,I did.

That's funny! When I was growing up Coke was all we drank, but as I got older I went to the hard stuff, LOL! I don't ignore naysayers because this is a serious issue and anyone that reads these types of threads that isn't aware of the problem and gets it fixed is just one more accident waiting to happen that is prevented.

I just saw this on another well known and respected hunting website I frequent and felt it may change some people's idea that there is nothing wrong with the Remingtons. Here is the post that I C/Pd:

On Black Friday I got up early and made it to the Wal Mart in Laurel Montana. In the back room was my new model 700 adl 223. Well a few minutes later we went home together.

A few minutes ago I contacted the Remington recall number and spoke to a nice young lady. I gave her my serial number and it had been in for the recall in September. I then asked her if it was normal for the firing pin to release if I lifted the bolt handle and then let it down but not move the bolt back...........There was a long pause She transferred me to the service dept. I spoke to a guy "also professional" and told him of the problem. He said send it back that's not right. I asked him if a Timney trigger would fix the issue. He said yes that should take care of it. On a side note I asked him if the adl synthetic stock should be free floated. He said, no not on a adl the stock will not free float correctly and suggested a aftermarket stock if I wanted it free floated. I thanked him for his candid answers and then concluded the call.

So the moral of my story is you can follow the recall and still have a possible problem. At this point I think a Timney trigger is in my future.

I also want to thank the employee's of Remington for their help.

I hae this gun at home

It was built in 1846, It belonged to my grandfather, its 45 cal, 44" barrel 1.25" across the flats. It has a double set trigger,if you adjust it and give the sear all the engagement it can possibly have it breaks at 4oz. pull.
In todas world if there were 7.8 million of these out there, how many folks would have them "misfire" as you call it, so is it something wrong with the trigger, or something wrong with people deaming the trigger unsafe?
any mechanical device is prone to being out of adjustment, broken, or worn, being able to determine something is amiss and what we do about it determines how unsafe it is.
do you fix it or take it to someone qualified? or do you put it back in the safe and never use it, or just sell it to the unsuspecting public?
RR

Did Walker ever disclose what made the trigger unsafe? Because this statement: In a 1946 memo, he warned of a "theoretical unsafe condition" involving the gun's safety-the mechanism that's supposed to keep the rifle from firing accidentally..., leaves a whole lot of speculation!

Yes Jerry, and you should be able to google his interview and watch it. He supposedly lost his Remington pension for violating a court order for speaking out about it, but I can't confirm that. Some will never admit that the design increases the chance of a misfire even after watching the inventor discuss it though! The post I C/Pd a few minutes ago is very revealing and I hope you read it because that dispels the theory that it only causes problems if someone tinkers with it or doesn't keep it clean when that one was brand new, had never been fired, and records showed that it had even been back to the factory for the other recall and was still defective. If people do what RR mentioned in his previous post I wouldn't argue at all that it would be their fault. I also have a percussion 50 caliber rifle that I just took out this evening during our 3 week ML deer season and it has a double set trigger. It's the only rifle in my safes that is used to hunt with that has a very low pull weight. I have it set at less than 6 ozs. because it's always at half cock and isn't ever brought to full cock until it's up and pointing at a target or deer. I also keep my finger out of the trigger guard and take my glove off before I plan to shoot it because of that low setting. One of these days now that I'm getting older I'll probably set it up to about 3 pounds like all my centerfire rifles are set at, but if I make a mistake with it that would certainly be my fault and not the manufacturer.