remington enfield?
 

hi,

I just inherited my dads old Remington enfield 30-06. he killed over 20 deer with it and Iv'e killed three. it hits hard, and shoots straight but that's really all I know. i'm wondering what everybody else knows about it. and what grain shell would be the best to use. I know that there are the real old enfields, and some that are a bit newer. so if somebody wants to see a pic just let me know.

Remington brought out their Model 30 after World War I. They had built Enfields during the war and modified them after the war to create the model 30. It was the forerunner to the model 700. The Enfield action is quite strong and will take any sporting 30-06 load. The best load to use would be the one that groups the best for you. They all will kill deer quite dead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_30

Ya might get better feedback in the firearms forum, but Wingbone covered it pretty good.

Wingbone was also correct about which grain bullet to use. All rifles are different. Some will eat anything ya feed em, and shoot them well. Others are fussy eaters, and will only shoot certain bullets/brands and grains well. Ya might have to shoot threw a few boxes of ammo if ya got a fussy eater.

I think wingbone pretty much covered it.the 30-06 is a great round its what i used for the first twenty years of hunting.iv killed deer moose elk bear antalope and a few other critters with it.like already stated you just have to find what grain it likes best and it will deliver,mine liked the 180 grain winchester silvertips and thats what i used on everything.

Remington used the Enfield safety on its model 725. They made the model 30, 720, 721/722, 725 and then the current 700. Model 30 remington go for a pretty penny. There is a model 30 on gun broker they want $4000 for buy it now. All of my 30/06 all 8 shoot rem 180 corelocks the best might want to try them.

The safety has been modified, at least from the 722 to the 700. I know this because I have a buddy that owns a 722, and I own a 700.

There was a recall on the 722 safety's because the rifles could not be unloaded with the safety on. What happened with my buddy was that he had the safety repaired by a gunsmith, he sent the receipt to Remington, and somehow (I don't recall) he got credit from Remington in the form of a credit for Remington gear.

If anyone else owns one of the other models mentioned, and has the same issue with the safety's you can go threw the same process.

I own a rem 721,725 and 13 rem 700. The rem 721/722 has the same safety has a rem 700. Some of the older 700 can not be unloaded with the safty on, I have several. The 725 has a 3 way Enfield safety. The only difference between the old safeties on the 721/722 and older 700 safeties are if you can unload with safety off or on. Not sure when rem changed this. I never change the old safeties to new ones on my rifles, but that's me.

I thought you had to send it to remington before they would do it or replace it. The old weatherby vanguard where the same way. You had to send the bolt back to weatherby for them to do it or they would not pay for it.

Nope, an approved gunsmith can do the fix. You have to pay the gunsmith, and Remington reimburses you threw a Remington gear credit... They don't give you the cash back.

I haven't followed the history closely, but would bet that when our society started to become so dang litigious Remington decided it would be best to offer some sort of a fix:confused0024:

I know this because in 2006 I had my buddy's girlfriend sneak me the gun, and I had the safety fixed, and had his trigger pull set to 3lbs for his Christmas present... We had just started to get into reloading at the time.

I wish I had taken the pic of the confused look on his face when he received his own rifle as a Christmas gift!!!

I have rem classic 35 whelen made in 88 you can't unload with safety on, have a 89 classic in 300 wby you can unload with safety on. Must between 1988 and 89.

Was doing a bit of editing when you posted this... I'd look into it, I'd bet there is some sort of a fix... Not saying it will be worth pursuing, but may be worth looking into.

BTW, we did a serial # check on my friends gun, it is a 1957 model.

My 721 is made in 1954 and has to he on fire to unload and my oldest 700 made in 71 has to be on fire to unload.for some.reason the model 725 made between the 721/722 and 700 has a Enfield safety. All my other 700 you can unload on safety. So 3 out of my 13 700 can only be unloaded on fire.
http://www.remington.com/pages/news-...odel-40-X.aspx
On this website it's states made before 1982 but my 1988'classic you must put on fire to unload.

There are a lot of rifles from various manufacturers that can't be unloaded without taking the safety off. Remington changed the 700 to a 3 positon safety around 2007 after the Barber court case where they were sued when in 2000 the Mother of the 9 year old kid had her's fire with the safety off and the bullet went through a trailer and killed her boy who was standing on the other side out of sight. The case was originally sealed like Remington was famous for in all the 700 rifle death lawsuits against them, but a Judge later unsealed that one and the father is pursuing matters further trying to take more action against Remington for knowing the rifles needed to be redesigned and not doing it until about 2007 after that Barber lawsuit. A class action lawsuit was just filed this month in regards to all the rifles that remain out there with what is call the "Walker Fire Control" trigger that can go off at any time without touching the trigger.

Remington does not have a 3 safety. They have their standard 2 way safety. Only difference is you can unload with safety on now. Bought my news model 700 204 tiger about 2 years ago. Same safety as they all have a 2 way. The only 3 wa y safety I know remington made was on the model 30 and 725. got 13 700 all have the factory 2 way safeties.

*** Thanks for that information. I've never handled one and just assumed they changed it to a three way like my pre 64 Model 70 Win.

Most of the accidents from remington rifles came from home gunsmiths missing with the triggers, and not knowing what to do. Have never had a remington 700 go off by itself. I have a licenced gun Smith adjust my triggers yo 2- 2 1/2 lbs. Had a brand new remington 700 back in 25/06 come.from to refractory with a 9lbs trigger pull. I think that was dangerous.

*** Not true at all if you read everything involved with the Walker trigger and what causes it to malfunction. However, many that own Remingtons say exactly what you did in your post. Mike Walker, the gentleman who worked for Remington and designed the sytem tried to get them to change it because he found out back in the 40s when they came out with it that it could do exactly what happens and it doesn't involve home gunsmithing. Documents from Remington files show they didn't change the system because it would have cost 5 1/2 cents more rifle. They finally made the changes he wanted, but not until a few years ago after they have paid out millions of dollars in court settlements. read up on it and you may change your tune. If I had any Remington rifle that still has the old Walker trigger in it, I would immedately put a Timney or other good manaufacturer's trigger in it. By the way, what is dangerous is a real low poundage trigger pull, not a 9# one.

What is dangerous is a heavy trigger pull. Instill not shot myself put the person beside me when I have to yank the heavy trigger the gun moves. Also a heavy trigger pull makes and inaccurate rifle and may result in crippling game. I know a lot of people with remington never herd of one firing by itself. The new remington x trigger I don't like as much as the old ones. I really don't like timney triggers. Remington my opinion pays out to keep the press down, and would coast more to fight it out in court then to.settle. people go after the biggest companies because they now they can get easy money. my oldest 700 was bought new in 1971 and has been hunted with hard killed 45 plus deer with it never a problem with the trigger. Have older 712, and 725 with same triggers never a problem. Most of the people I know that hunt and shoot use remington and I never heard them complain only about the new heavy trigger pull.

Yes, the trigger in any rifle is the key to accuracy for sure and is the first thing to check and take care of on one that isn't shooting good groups! I have no idea what the average pull weight used to be on rifles, but I believe it was up around 7# and it was definitely to lessen nimrods from shooting somebody and the companies getting sued. Yes, Remington has settled almost all of the lawsuits against them out of court to keep things quiet and in doing so most cases also required the complainants to keep their mouth shut and the records were sealed.

The problem with the Walker control trigger mechanism is that it may happen one time in a particualr rifle and never again. I have read an awful lot on many different gun and hunting forums and it's unbelievable how many guys reading about it say geez, that happened to me! Thank God they had the gun pointed in a safe direction like they should be at all times and they thought maybe they had goofed and touched the trigger, but were sure they hadn't. The thing that alarms me is that the designer himself, Mike Walker, told Remington not too long after his trigger was put into production back in the 40s, that the design needed to be changed to prevent accidental firing when it started happening. The top brass found out it would cost just 5 1/2 cents per rifle, but decided not to do the change and this went on for decades until 5 million are now out on the market. The new trigger you dislike was finally introduced a few years ago after the Barber court case I mentioned was settled. Anyway, when you have 5 million of something out in the market place that's why you and your friends may not have had it happen YET. However, it has happened to thousands of folks that never attempted any home gunsmithing on them and when talking of firearms safety one accident because of a design flaw is one too many!!! There were even internal Remington documents introduced in various court cases showing that they had figures estimating what percentage of rifles going out of their factories had the chance of accidental firing without touching the trigger. It was a small number, but was in the thousands based on the millions being produced.

They finally changed to the Accumark trigger just a few years ago in the 700, but as far as I know they are still putting them in that cheap, junk 770 they're selling and people are having the bolt handles break off, plastic parts breaking, etc. Read all the terrible reviews on that POS sometime when you get a chance and yet Remington keeps right on manufacturing them too!

IMHO the trigger on a hunting rifle should be set no lighter than approximately 3-3 1/2 pounds and the delicate trigger pull left to the bench shooters where they are in a very controlled situation and bad stuff won't happen since they should always be pointing down range. The first thing I did on the 03A3 I sporterized was to put a Timney trigger in it, adjusted it to 3#, and it was unreal how the groups came down to MOA compared to that heavy pull in the military trigger that was in it. I know from all my reading on this system that if I had a Remington with the old Walker trigger in it, I would be putting a good aftermarket trigger in it. If you don't like a Timney, there is the Jewel and several other good ones that will do the job. To me it's not worth the risk not doing it when you read all the evidence that is out there.

If the triggers are dangerous then why haven't they recalled them. Just the older rifles for the safeties for unloading them on fire,not the triggers. If they replace the trigger it is and old type trigger with the new safety not the new mark x trigger. I call remington today to find out.

***Because it would have to be a voluntary recall that they've been asked to do a number of times over the years and they won't do it. It's much much cheaper to settle cases out of court than doing a recall now. I believe I remember in my readings that they did have a partial recall at one time, but it was poorly done and IMO was probably not publicized because they would have really spent a lot of money. If they were forced to now with the millions of old ones still out there, it would probably bankrupt them. Believe it or not, there is no Government Agency in the US that has jurisdiction or that can force a recall on firearms!!! You would think at least the ATF would, but firearm safety defects like we're talking about isn't under them either.