It appears the last official act of Remington Outdoors a few days ago was to fire almost all of its furloughed employees and then refuse to pay severance and accrued benefits in defiance of the collective bargaining agreement with the union. That happened a few days ago. And, as of the last day or two, Remington (firearms) no longer has a website. The Remington site is for ammo only. All links to Remington firearms are gone. I know Remington firearms and Remington ammo were bought by two different buyers, and I guess Vista Outdoors, which bought Remington ammo, got the site.

I truly hope the new buyers make Remington great again. It's bizarre knowing once great Remington now only exists on paper.

https://www.remington.com/

This is 2020.
I have never been enamored with Remington, and I imagine a new site for the guns will be up soon (maybe?), but there is nothing about all this that a gun owner should be happy to see.

That is one company that has been bent over time and time again.

They can't sell guns until their FFL is in order, so they don't need a website. lol

Plus going away and coming back sells the "this is a whole other company" (and the union contracts no longer apply) idea a bit more.

Did someone buy Remington just to kill it?

And in other news, there's a new tin foil hat maker at Fifth and Broadway. Police are responding code 3.

Best news to come out of this whole mess is that Ruger bought the Marlin brand. I can think of a more suitable company to own Marlin.

The buyer of Remington is the Roundhill Group. One of the owners of the Roundhill Group is Richmond Italia. Richmond Italia is the creator of, CEO of, and board member of GI Sportz, a paintball company. Another member of GI Sportz's board is Ken D'Arcy. The same Ken D'Arcy that was the CEO of Remington Outdoors, which ran Remington into the ground, and the CEO that broke faith with the employees of Remington.

That Ken D'Arcy is anywhere near Remington makes me uncomfortable. And that it was bought by a capital company, which generally buy businesses to squeeze as much profit from them as possible before they are sold, make me more uncomfortable.

I want the best for Remington and would like to see it great again. But it sold for less than Marlin did. I think it would have been better for the Remington brand if another firearms or outdoor company had bought it instead of a capital group that appears to have at least some ties to the CEO that help kill Remington.

Remington only had 2 things of value:

Marlin (thank you Ruger)
Ammunition factory in AR

Hopefully Remingtons displaced employees in NY will land on their feet in the next few months.

Nothing left to sell (^"noting of value") because they killed the "brand" long ago with dropping quality, lower grade finishes (nice wood and beautiful bluing traded for matte and plastic), poor QC, rebranding imported junk not worthy of Remington's heritage. It's a shame what they did to the brand over time.

They did try to dress up the Baikals and Zastavas a little bit, and the Zastavas generally did provide a solid foundation for what Remington could've turned into pretty darn good rifles. It would have just cost a bit to do it.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
They did try to dress up the Baikals and Zastavas a little bit, and the Zastavas generally did provide a solid foundation for what Remington could've turned into pretty darn good rifles. It would have just cost a bit to do it.

I forgot about those 798 rifles. I never bought one and am sorry I didn't. Those Zastava/Interarms actions are solid.

quote:

Originally posted by Micropterus:

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
They did try to dress up the Baikals and Zastavas a little bit, and the Zastavas generally did provide a solid foundation for what Remington could've turned into pretty darn good rifles. It would have just cost a bit to do it.

I forgot about those 798 rifles. I never bought one and am sorry I didn't. Those Zastava/Interarms actions are solid.

I had one in 300WM for a little while. Solid rifle.

I have a Zastavas purchased recently at Cabelas. It is really an Interarms Mark X. Calibre 308 with a Mannlicher stock.
Excellent shape, great looking rifle. But I think it will prove poor in feeding. Some rounds fail to make a clean catch under the claw extractor. Not sure why yet. I think that they made a long action to use shorter 308 rounds with a filler but the rails are made for longer rounds. Or maybe the bullet needs to be longer out front. The dummy rounds I made used a short round nose bullet. I will try the longer bullets.

There’s nothing wrong with Zastavas, but traditionally that’s not why you bought a Remington. (those were “what can we buy cheap“(er) and sell at a profit, items) As was the Baikal stuff, which was sad. Add in products like the 710, (the disposable Bic lighter of rifles) problematic .22 semiauto designs, managing to make the venerable 870 unreliable after making them forever. It took a lot of effort to kill themselves.

It's a shame how Remington went downhill and ended up like this.

The 788 my Dad bought me for Christmas in the mid 80s is still with me and likely to stay that way. Same for an 870 Express I've had for going on 30 years. Wish I still had the 1187 12ga., 870 Marine magnum, 700BDL .270, and 700ADL .243 from years ago but that's life sometimes.

It's a shame.

I also have several Remingtons 721, 722, and one 725. Plus a couple 700s. I was a Remington accumulator from age 16 on. I am aka Rem725 on the Remington Society forum where I set up a long list of serial numbers and mfg dates for the people who can't figure out the date codes on the 721, 722, 725. Plus the contributor sometimes has an interesting story behind the rifle.

I love Remington firearms and I've never had a bad one. Oh, I know they are out there. I've just never had one.

I had a SP10 autoloading 10 gauge. Other than being heavy, it was the best patterning shotgun I ever had. I killed turkeys with it out to 50 yards. And its recoil was incredibly modest. Essentially it was a licensed built Ithaca Mag 10. It was a beast.

On the light side, I had an 870 NWTF Commemorative gun. Killed a lot of birds with that.

Had an 1100 and shot my first quail with it.

Remington management killed it looking for shortcuts to increase profits. But they had the ability to build guns that became the gold standards.

quote:

Originally posted by apprentice:
Same for an 870 Express I've had for going on 30 years.

IMO that was the very thing that did them in. Possibly the very gun. They made a "cheaper", less polished (literally and figuratively) version of the 870... and then did the same thing to every day gun they made. The division didn't stay there, over time the "good" guns got more like the cheaper ones. Until there really weren't any, or at least very few good models.


I love Remington and have owned many of them, many models, rifles and shotguns. But the reality is the newest one was probably made in the 1980's. The oldest ones were made in the 1870's.

I recently picked up a 1966 Remington 700 in .270; and it is fantastic. I have zero interest in their modern stuff.

It is a shame what happened to them, but it’s like being mad that Indian motorcycles aren’t what they used to be. Both are just a vintage marque, purchased for a reputation the current owners didn’t build.

Until this year I've gone 39 years in this world without a non-milsurp bolt centerfire rifle. That changed last month when I got the hankering for a Rem 700 heavy barrel .308 C prefix I found on Gunbroker. Several weeks later I found Mark at Summit Gunbroker had a BDL .308 and a BDL .30-06 and I've always wanted a backup bolt rifle for deer hunting (I normally use a BAR Mrk II Safari .308 which is plenty good for my Missouri minute-of-deer sub-100-yrds hunting) and .30-06 because, why not. I just picked up Mark's 700s today, I'm very pleased.

Rem 700 .308

Rem 700 .30-06