Remington Customer Service!

Originally Posted By: Nikon_ManOriginally Posted By: tuneredSavage is no different, my brother sent back a 17 with a crown that looked like it had been cut with a chainsaw, the rifle would not group 2in. at 50 yrds. Was sent to savage, was returned with a 5/8in. group they say they shot at 100yrds, BS. took it to my local smith and had it recrowned, problem fixed, they didnt want to mess with it. ed


I would rather have a gun that that would shoot 2in. than have one that would blow up in my pretty face. Maybe your gunsmith can fix all of these remmys?

My smith probally cant fix yours, but i know what you can do with it. ed
 
Originally Posted By: Jeff MockI just called and left a message for Al Russo of Remington. I will keep you guys posted as to the results of our discussion when he calls me back.

Jeff

Jeff it has now been 14 days. Has any attempt been made from remington to contact you?

I'm sure their lack of response is sending out a big message to all of us.

Skinner
 
As fate would have it, they called me this afternoon at about 1:00p.m. They have asked me to forward them this very thread so they can review all of your issues.

I have not forgotten about you guys. I am sending this thread to them right now.

I will keep you posted as to what I hear back from them.

I will say this, they were very interested and want to review all comments that have been made.

Thanks for your patience.

Jeff Mock
 
The link to this thread has been sent. I hope to hear back from them on this issue soon.

Again, thank you for your patience.

Jeff
 
Thank you very much Jeff..With a capital J too
wink.gif


Skinner
 
I just spoke with my contact at Remington today. He has forwarded this thread to the head of customer service for review.

I will let you guys know more when I receive more info.

Jeff
 
Wow here is a good one.

I stopped in a decent sized Mom and Pop type gun shop yesterday. They had a 597 laminated .17HMR right on top of the counter. I asked if they were aware of teh issues with the .17HMR auto's and they replied yes. I told them of my issue and of posting it here. They replied good and were glad to hear people complaining about this.

The Owner then told me the reason the 597 was on the counter and NOT sent back was because he was offered LESS money (voucher/credit) then what he had to pay for the gun.

Skinner
 
Last edited:
Since the 17 hmr 597 is no longer for sale I'm useing the 22 mag's current prices. A heavy barrel laminate stock price: $444.99 dealer cost and msrp of 587.00
mad.gif
regular barrel synthetic stock 369.99 dealer cost and msrp of 492.00. I own a heavy barrel laminate stock 17 hmr 597 that was purchased for $350.00 used over 2 years ago. I looked the price up before purchasing and it was 497.00 dealer cost. I thought I got a great deal.
blush.gif
I am sorry if I upset any ffl holders out there for listing these prices, but I feel that this is an outrage. I think that remington could at least offer to replace firearm with equivalent 22 mag 597. I am not sure if there were cheaper versions offered or not.
 
Im just glad that Remington is takin predatormasters seriously. You can tell by the quick responses and the open dialogue with Al Russo that Remington wasnt just shelling out money trying to buy credibility when they signed up as sponsors here.
 
I find it sad that Remington will stick it to the dealers like in skinners post. I guess they don't understand how much influence a dealer has on his customers. That said, there is no way I'd have that gun out for sale. I would have took what Remington offered and been done with it. Better safe then sorry. As I said earlier, I'm as big of Remington fan as anybody, but they do pis* me off at times.

 
Last edited:
The gun I saw was NOT for sale. It was on the counter so they could box it up and get it off the rack. They were going to hold on to it waiting to see if remington was going to offer a decent price.

This was a brand new gun and was never fired. This gun was never owned by any individual, just the shop! FWIW!

Skinner
 
Well then... at least we have established that remington is not being selective in how they are handling this situation... they are just flat out screwing everyone. How could they not replace a brand new gun. I think I'll ask around at my local gun shops, and make sure they know about this issue.
 
Originally Posted By: Jeff MockI just spoke with my contact at Remington today. He has forwarded this thread to the head of customer service for review.... ....i know this discussion is supposed to be about 17HMR OR rem's 597 but timing is everything...
a friend deeply scratched the bolt handle on a new 700 & sent it back for polish'n &re-blue'n...got it back...fired 1 round & case wudn't extract...NO EXTRACTOR INSTALLED...(was there cause he shot half box of rem ammo)....it's times like these that i miss the little guy slappin his head....
 
Last edited:
It would save Remington lots of money in the long run to either replace or refund at MSRP every 597hmr on the market. It's too bad the bean counters never see the big picture or the potential long-term damage to a brand icon. I don't think they know a way to factor that cost in or they would have jumped on it. Brand loyalty only goes so far. Just ask GM or Chrysler. (Bad example, Cerberus owns them too).
 
Originally Posted By: filmitIt would save Remington lots of money in the long run to either replace or refund at MSRP every 597hmr on the market.

IMO I would think if Remington just reimbursed the owners what they had paid originally they would be happy (the owners) it would not have to be MSRP. Right now Remington wants to stiff the owners out of a lot of cash and try to "buy" their way out of a mess at a mere pittance of cost without taking blame for such a bad decision in marketing the rifle.
 
Should rem have to Repay what the dealers made? Rem is only paying what the rifle cost them, the difference is the dealer profit. I dont have the answer. ed
 
"the difference is the dealer profit" - I wish this was true, but it's not.

The difference between manufacturing cost and what the dealer sells it for, is far from all dealer profit! The dealer gets very little of that.
 
Originally Posted By: filmitIt would save Remington lots of money in the long run to either replace or refund at MSRP every 597hmr on the market. It's too bad the bean counters never see the big picture or the potential long-term damage to a brand icon. I don't think they know a way to factor that cost in or they would have jumped on it. Brand loyalty only goes so far. Just ask GM or Chrysler. (Bad example, Cerberus owns them too).

You are correct, filmit.... Its a bad example because Cerberus never owned Chrysler or GM in total. Cerberus is an investment capital firm.

In reality, Cerberus has never publicly disclosed what its exposure to Chrysler is since Chrysler failed/filed bankruptcy, but it is far less than the total Chrysler acquisition value of ~$7.4 billion because the company (Cerberus) invested in it along with a number of co-investors - in fact a huge outside consortium of investors not tied to Cerberus in any way.

Financial experts will say that none of Cerberus' investments make up more than 5 percent of its total assets (~$23.5 billion), which makes its exposure to Chrysler and Chrysler's financing arm (Chrysler Financial) maybe at the extreme as much as $1.7 billion, and it is likely that Cerberus will still make a good return on its investment in Chrysler Financial.

In fact, Cerberus now has their fingers in both Chrysler Financial and GMAC (GM's financial arm), which may have been what they wanted all along. So, even though they took on a risky investment and were publicly tied to the Chrysler failure, they might consider their loss as a worthy risk for what they got and will get in the future, which might make $1.7 billion look paltry by comparison..

But in reality, they don't own Chrysler or GM or their respective financial arms and they never did... A 5% investment cap on their liquid assets won't buy too many large US corporations today without some other major outside/non-Cerberus players being involved. Cerberus is different in that they do not mind throwing their name into the game. Other investors like to remain "silent" with their dollars.

In the case of Chrysler and GM, the silent dollars far out stripped the public dollars in terms of who actually owns what...

It seems like everywhere you post here on PM you are becoming "notorious" (an extractor term) for posting incomplete "facts" to make your point.

-BCB
 
Back
Top