Great Gun Stuff Blog

There has been much controversy over the Model 597 (.17 HMR) buyback.

Split case neck. A common problem with .17 HMR Model 597 rifles.

For those of you not familiar with the buy back, I will summarize. Back in August Remington finally acknowledged that their .17 HMR semi-automatics had serious issues. They offered a $250 coupon, which could be used towards the purchase of another Remington firearm, for each 597 that was returned to them. A $10 coupon was also offered for each box of ammunition returned. Since then there has been a lot of anger and confusion.

The confusion regarding the .17 HMR cartridge.

This buy back does not mean that the .17 HMR is unsafe in your bolt action, single shot or lever action rifles. The problems occur in semi-automatic rifles. Matt Groom explained in the comments ...

With any bottle necked round, the pressure generated in the body of the case has to be compressed slightly to flow through the smaller diameter of the case neck. This is why the shoulder usually moves forward a tiny bit on rifle cartridges. The gases also accellerate as they travel through the neck area, which can cause the neck to soften and split. This all happens very fast, and is one reason why nearly everything with a bottle neck is fired from a locked breech. The PPSh and other Soviet SMGs are the only things I can think of that use a bottle neck in a blowback action before the modern .17 caliber rimfires came out, and I think those used steel cases.

This was likely the reason that Ruger never launched their once advertised, but never seen, 10/17 rifles.

Hornady .17 HMR V-Max

In September Hornady, who originally developed the cartridge, posted this noticed on their website ...

Recently there have been notices placed on several web sites warning about the use of 17HMR ammunition in semi-automatic firearms. Statements are to the effect of do not use 17HMR ammunition in semi-auto firearms or serious injury may result and do not use unless or until you have contacted the manufacturer of your firearm. Every ammunition manufacturer determines the warning it believes is appropriate for its product.

First and foremost, the safety of our customers is our primary concern, and the same is true for all other SAAMI member companies. We are making this statement to hopefully reduce confusion, answer questions and clarify issues.

We believe 17HMR ammunition is manufactured to the highest standard of care and quality and performs within the specifications established for 17HMR ammunition and is consistent with SAAMI standards for ALL ammunition.

We are not firearms manufacturers and we believe the firearms manufacturers are solely the ones responsible for determining if and how they should market and sell a model or type of firearm. WE STRONGLY URGE YOU TO CONTACT THE MANUFACTURER OF YOUR FIREARM TO DETERMINE IF IT IS SAFE TO USE 17HMR AMMUNITION IN YOUR SPECIFIC TYPE AND MODEL OF FIREARM.

So there you have it. It is safe, but be wary of using the round in a semi-automatic.

The controversy regarding the buy back.

Many owners of recently purchased .17 597 rifles are understandably unhappy about the buy back. Some have paid hundreds of dollars more for the rifle than what Remington is offering in the buy back scheme.

In the comments Rand said ...

A few points, then: 1) Remington’s buy-back offer represents $10 less than what a gun dealer who is unaware that the thing has been recalled will offer for a gun that has blown out its magazine. So you could say it’s a pretty lousy buy-back offer, but you could also say that it’s about right, since you wouldn’t be able to get much more for the gun by selling to someone else. Either way, Remington is not doing anybody any favors.

2) If you read Remington’s recall notice (which I also found when I Googled the thing), you’ll see that it does not admit that there is anything inherently wrong with the round OR the rifle. It says Remington has been “notified” by its “supplier” of 17 HMR ammo that the ammo is unsafe for use in semi-automatic rifles. So Remington offers to buy back its ammo. Then it says, essentially, that because it’s recalling its .17 HMR ammo, it’s also recalling its Model 597 rifles in .17 HMR. But why recall the rifles when the problem is the ammo? This is classic CYA legal language, pure and simple. I was in fact shooting Hornady ammo in my son’s rifle when it blew out the magazine.

Overseas customers are worse off as they have to pay much higher prices for their rifles, but are being offered the same buy back. Pat Gallagher said ...

I live in Ireland were we are screwed cost wise for just about everything, I bought a Remy 597 in .17hmr about 12 months ago.I paid 700.00 euro for it, approx 1040.00us dollars and am being offered the same deal as you guys recall value, and you guys are pissed!.

Shooters affected by the buy back have been emailing and snail-mailing Remington, complaining to the BBB, organizing an online petition and threatening legal action.

In the comments Joe argued that, on the whole, Remington are being fair ...

Having worked at Remington for over 40 years and retired I know that the company does everything possible to produce a quality product. As with any other industry sometimes new products don’t live up to expectations for one reason or another,the 597 .17 being a good example.I am also aware that no matter what reconciliation is offered it won’t satisfy everybody. many of the issues raised in the forum are justified and I think the company will be fair in their response.The thing that bothers me is the talk of lawyers and lawsuits. With Washington filled with antigun politicians we as gun owners should not be so quick to hobble a company that is in the forefront of protecting the 2nd Ammendment. You may say that I am biased but I would feel the same if it was Winchester,Mossberg or any other American gun maker.

What can Remington do to make this right?

I am going to write an email to my contact at the Freedom Group's Public Relations department and propose that Remington offer to replace any 597 purchased in the past X years with the closest equivalent .22 LR model. Customers could choose to have their 597 replaced or to take the $250 coupon. Sure this is not a perfect solution but I think it is more fair than the current situation.

Do you think Remington is being fair or not?

In 1973 a pair of pistol made for Pedro IV of Portugal, worth 100,000 euros, where stolen from the Military Museum in Lisbon. They have finally been recovered. The Publico reports (translated with google) ...

Designed by master gunsmith Arsenal Real in Lisbon Thomás Jozé de Freitas, weapons (one-offs that charge after he unscrew the pipes, which are embedded in gold and silver) were eventually stolen, along with a set of parts lowest, by a burglar who at the time was right pages in the newspapers but that, far from being an Arsene Lupine, it would reveal a "brick" because that stole not meet even the approximate value of the goods. Still, it was celebrated by the method, but effective, he chose to commit the crime: he hid inside the museum, behind a large clock, and when he was alone, plundered what was at hand.

The pistols. Beautiful guns!

Thanks to my Portuguese source for sending me the photo and links.

A few years ago, in a classic case of government bureaucracy covering their ass, the Portuguese Police decided that one requirement of their future pistol is that it must have a manual external safety. They, of course, then choose the one gun which is the epitome of manual safety-less pistols, the Glock. Glock shipped them 42,000 Glock 19s with external thumb safeties, similar to the Glock 17 safety I blogged about recently, worth 13 million Euros.

Portuguese Police Glock 19. Photo from Portal das Curiosidades forum.

The police upper management then proceeded to tell the public how wonderful their new pistols were. The cops on the street must have been given a different gun because their pistols were having all sorts of problems. They had magazines randomly falling out of the guns, magazines refusing to drop out when the mag release was pressed, brass being ejected into the shooters face and just plain failing to cycle. The Portuguese IPSC community, where I believe Glocks are popular, were not at all surprised.

FORÇA DE SEGURANÇA translates to Security Force (Police force)

A few weeks ago the Portuguese media discovered that the police have signed a contract with Glock to retrofit all their pistols with normal, safety-less, Glock 19 frames. No doubt at a significant cost to the tax payer.

The government fears that the other pistol manufacturers such as HK, Beretta, Walther and Mannlicher, who were passed over in the search for the new pistol, will sue them for choosing a faulty pistol and for stipulating that a safety was a requirement, only to drop the requirement a few years later.

Many thanks to my anonymous Portuguese source for the links and translations he sent me.

Defense Aerospace reports that many of the Walther P1 pistols, which Germany donated to the Afghan police force, have found their way onto the black market. Defense Aerospace reports:

German military pistols are being sold on the black market in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The weapons were sent in 2006 and were intended for local police and army personnel.

Arms dealers in the region told German public radio that hundreds of German weapons were for sale carrying a price tag of over 680 euros a piece ($1,000).

In 2006, the German Defense Ministry shipped 10,000 old Walther-P1 pistols to the Afghan Interior Ministry to equip Afghan police and army. However, both the German government and the responsible US-led security team in Afghanistan reportedly failed to properly monitor the guns' whereabouts.

The US unit said that it only had detailed records of 4,563 pistols out of a total 10,000.

Current and former Afghan soldiers and police officers are said to be among those illegally selling and trafficking the pistols, some of which have ended up in Pakistan's north-west border provinces and neighboring tribal areas.

...

The team of NDR radio reporters who discovered the black market guns said it's not clear exactly how they ended up there.

"Apparently, most of these pistols haven't been stolen, but were simply taken home and sold by former police officers and soldiers after they'd left the service," said Christoph Heinzle, who headed the NDR team. "But corruption and theft cannot be ruled out because neither the Afghan authorities nor the US and German armed forces carry out effective controls to prevent [theft]."

The United States has also come under criticism in the past for losing track of weapons donated to local forces. Short of retina scanning, which is being used to keep track of Iraqi M16 rifles, there is very little that can be done to prevent the end-users stealing the weapons they are issued.

Walther P38 (designated the P1 by the Bundeswehr)

Many thanks to Daniel for the link.

Spiegel Online reports:

And now it appears that the financial difficulties facing the weapons manufacturer have reached crisis point: its very existence is threatened. A businessman in Izhevsk has filed a motion to declare Izhmash Arms bankrupt because of outstanding debts of around 8 million rubles (around €180,000 or $265,000). The case has caused a sensation in Russia because for a long time the Russian armaments industry has been one of the only industries considered competitive on an international basis. And Izhmash, which was founded in 1807 by Russia's royals, is one of the largest firearms manufacturers in Russia.

A debt of $265,000! That would be petty cash to The Freedom Group.

Izhmash has made an official statement. Translated into English using Google (emphasis added):

Official commentary of the situation, established in connection with the statement OOO Gremikha " recognition "Izhevsk machine-building plant" bankrupt

As is known, the Arbitration Court of Udmurtia admissible statement OOO Gremikha "on the recognition bankrupt OAO Izhevsk Machine-Building Plant", as posted a message on the website of the Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia. Trial was to verify the validity of this statement is scheduled for October 7.

OOO Gremikha "to" Izhevsk machine-building plant "does not apply. This situation has arisen as a consequence of a dispute businesses. Right debt requirements this society was through the chain cessions rights from third parties, the validity of which "Izhevsk machine-building plant" is going to find out by contacting law enforcement authorities.

Note, this is not the first treatment of small company's creditors in the arbitration bodies, in which, as practice shows, then is not grounds for the organization of the bankruptcy process.

Which occurs in this case, the dispute between economic entities in no way affect the activities of the group companies Izhmash in particular on the work of the major groups of plants and its subsidiaries. Existing obligations under the state defense order and contracts for the supply of special equipment and civilian goods strictly enforced. The company has a long-term orders and plans for the development of production, including in the framework created by the CC Rostekhnologii holding company for the development and manufacture of small arms.

"Izhevsk Machine-Building Plant

Hopefully this means that exports of civilians arms will not be halted.

Many thanks to the anonymous person who emailed me the link.