regardless of the reasoning behind the thread issue and the associated risks (whether perceived or real), I can think of countless other ways of identifying chambering than thread removal. In the end though, it is clear that remington is going to do things their way and we're gonna have to live with the fact that the old marlin method of manufacturing is gone.
Breaking News!
An email I received this morning from Remington's CS:
"Thank you for contacting us, this is not a quality control or machining mistake. The unthreaded sections are used for identifying what barrels are chambered for. The threading does not create a safety issue or lower the strength of the rifle.
If you have disassembled your rifle (barrel and lock nut taken off) to look at the threads, you have changed the headspace dimensions and should have someone qualified reassemble and reset it.
--Travis"
Lemme see, that makes, oh, three different Remington employees who've said this to me.
Now what do you say about the missing threads? Surely not every Remington employee is a liar.
"Thank you for contacting us, this is not a quality control or machining mistake. The unthreaded sections are used for identifying what barrels are chambered for. The threading does not create a safety issue or lower the strength of the rifle.
If you have disassembled your rifle (barrel and lock nut taken off) to look at the threads, you have changed the headspace dimensions and should have someone qualified reassemble and reset it.
--Travis"
Lemme see, that makes, oh, three different Remington employees who've said this to me.
Now what do you say about the missing threads? Surely not every Remington employee is a liar.1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Artillery peices have used interruped threads since breech loading became the norm. I see no reason to get in a tizzy about missing threads.
You have to understand something about the MFG business. You have to gear your training and process to the LEAST qualified person. If the missing thread patterns give a fool proof way designating the chambering, and it does no harm to the gun, who gives a rats behind.
You have to understand something about the MFG business. You have to gear your training and process to the LEAST qualified person. If the missing thread patterns give a fool proof way designating the chambering, and it does no harm to the gun, who gives a rats behind.
I would bet my spare .270 XL7 barrel it was the rethreading rem barrels from 16 to 20 tpi that
caused the issue to arise, and they simply decided to make a manufacturing aid out of a sucky situation.
caused the issue to arise, and they simply decided to make a manufacturing aid out of a sucky situation.
The guy has the same name as me... he has to be telling the truth!
I'll take that bet. Why would Remington ship M700 barrels from NY to KY? The 770 is made in KY, but it uses a totally different type of barrel--the bolt lugs lock up inside the barrel. I think that Remington is using this strange method of identifying barrels because they hired a bunch of hillbillies to make their guns--you know how Kentuckians are. ;D I'd better shut up now before I get blasted... :-Xseb21051 said:I would bet my spare .270 XL7 barrel it was the rethreading rem barrels from 16 to 20 tpi that
caused the issue to arise, and they simply decided to make a manufacturing aid out of a sucky situation.
Its a theory, as is mine, but as someone else said, there are many easier ways to mark a barrel . . .
And KY is not that far from NY, I used to be a trucker, and as hard as it is to get loads out of the NE,
I'm sure they could easily have gotten it for under $1.00/mile. (I often took sub $1 loads just to get back to the
Midwest). Figure it out, a sporter barrel weighs about 3lbs, packaged. Divide that by 45,000 lbs, and you
get 15,000 barrels. Figure its 700 miles, or $700, so the transportation cost per unit would be about $0.05/barrel.
Also, from a manufacturing point of view, the less cutting you do the longer your tools last, ie the lower the
per unit cost. They wouldn't do it unless there was a real good reason. And if The Kentuckians can be taught to build
Toyotas, I'm sure they could learn to assemble a rifle . . .
I am not convinced that KY (the Patron State of Shooters - according to Mark Wahlberg in the movie Shooter) needs that
particular kind of mechanical excess.
And KY is not that far from NY, I used to be a trucker, and as hard as it is to get loads out of the NE,
I'm sure they could easily have gotten it for under $1.00/mile. (I often took sub $1 loads just to get back to the
Midwest). Figure it out, a sporter barrel weighs about 3lbs, packaged. Divide that by 45,000 lbs, and you
get 15,000 barrels. Figure its 700 miles, or $700, so the transportation cost per unit would be about $0.05/barrel.
Also, from a manufacturing point of view, the less cutting you do the longer your tools last, ie the lower the
per unit cost. They wouldn't do it unless there was a real good reason. And if The Kentuckians can be taught to build
Toyotas, I'm sure they could learn to assemble a rifle . . .
I am not convinced that KY (the Patron State of Shooters - according to Mark Wahlberg in the movie Shooter) needs that
particular kind of mechanical excess.
I can't speak for rest of you guys but I personally don't want anybody associated with the words "least qualified" and "fool" manufacturing the guns that I buy
Why not? Its all in the QA. NASA did exactly that with their Shuttle fleet . . .
Also, you do need to understand the difference between design and manufacturing/assembly.
A well designed article can be assembled by trained low pay personnel, as long as the Quality
Control and Assurance (not low pay) do their job right. Most of the actual manufacturing is
done by CNC machines, attended by highly trained and paid technicians.
The other point is that you are buying an article designed and built to a price point.
The X?7 remains a good weapon, in terms of function, safety and flexibility. The fact that it sells
for so much less than the nearest competitor means that they have to be on their toes in terms
of cost control. Face it, its a cheap gun, but stands head and shoulders above its price competition.
Also, you do need to understand the difference between design and manufacturing/assembly.
A well designed article can be assembled by trained low pay personnel, as long as the Quality
Control and Assurance (not low pay) do their job right. Most of the actual manufacturing is
done by CNC machines, attended by highly trained and paid technicians.
The other point is that you are buying an article designed and built to a price point.
The X?7 remains a good weapon, in terms of function, safety and flexibility. The fact that it sells
for so much less than the nearest competitor means that they have to be on their toes in terms
of cost control. Face it, its a cheap gun, but stands head and shoulders above its price competition.
Hey MarlinX7---- If this Email you got is the truth then this coding system has to be "One for the books" in the field of design manufacturing/engineering. It doesn't appear we are going to see any new calibers coming out of Marlin because this would mean more missing threads to be included in their coding system and pretty soon there would be no more threads to screw the barrel nut on. What then, Gorilla glue to hold the barrel nut on? I'ts a pretty sad thing when it takes missing threads to identify a caliber so that some half-assed nincompoop doesn't assemble and headspace the wrong barrel. I think we can forget any new calibers coming out of Marlin unless they change their coding system, although they might be able to squeeze in a few more missing threads and still be able to screw on the barrel nut.
On second thought they might try eliminating some of the threads that screw into the receiver to add to their coding and there goes the receiver/barrel strength, ridgidness and possibly alignment.
On second thought they might try eliminating some of the threads that screw into the receiver to add to their coding and there goes the receiver/barrel strength, ridgidness and possibly alignment.
I thought it was Tennesse....seb21051 said:I am not convinced that KY (the Patron State of Shooters - according to Mark Wahlberg in the movie Shooter) needs that
particular kind of mechanical excess.
Yep, he said "Welcome to Tennessee, the patron state of shooting stuff."
Of course you would have caught that...Tennessee River and a mountain manBlueraider11 said:Yep, he said "Welcome to Tennessee, the patron state of shooting stuff."
You are quite correct, I confused the fact that his Spotter's girlfriend lived in Kentucky with his visit to the Gun Guru in Tennessee.
Not quite: The Marlin X7 barrel manufacturing machinery was sent to KY and began producing barrels in late January 2011. The chambering programs have the barrel coding system embedded within. If you call up and run a 243 chamber, there will be 2 thread grooves, and 1 face ring. Complete code is: 30-06 has no thread gap nor face ring, 270 Win has 1 face ring, 25-06 has 2 face rings, 308 has 2 thread gaps and no face ring, 243 has 2 thread gaps and 1 face ring, and the 7mm-08 has 2 of each. Sure, there are many other codes that could have been used, but this is the method chosen by Marlin engineers in CT. I don't know exactly when the coding method began, but it was in effect long before the move. It is not my intent to defend the 3-headed dog or its prodigy. I just hate to see the enjoyment of any product diminished based on a perceived defect.jbs04 said:regardless of the reasoning behind the thread issue and the associated risks (whether perceived or real), I can think of countless other ways of identifying chambering than thread removal. In the end though, it is clear that remington is going to do things their way and we're gonna have to live with the fact that the old marlin method of manufacturing is gone.
Unvarnish
when I said the old method I was referring to the guns made without the new barrel coding system(2008-??)..unless you're suggesting they were made this way for a few years now?Unvarnish said:Not quite: The Marlin X7 barrel manufacturing machinery was sent to KY and began producing barrels in late January 2011. The chambering programs have the barrel coding system embedded within. If you call up and run a 243 chamber, there will be 2 thread grooves, and 1 face ring. Complete code is: 30-06 has no thread gap nor face ring, 270 Win has 1 face ring, 25-06 has 2 face rings, 308 has 2 thread gaps and no face ring, 243 has 2 thread gaps and 1 face ring, and the 7mm-08 has 2 of each. Sure, there are many other codes that could have been used, but this is the method chosen by Marlin engineers in CT. I don't know exactly when the coding method began, but it was in effect long before the move. It is not my intent to defend the 3-headed dog or its prodigy. I just hate to see the enjoyment of any product diminished based on a perceived defect.
Unvarnish
It still don't make sense to me...why not stamp the chambering on the barrels or color code them, or sort them in lots, or...there are countless better ways to identify a barrel than removing threads.
And no matter how you slice it...less threads = weaker. (Whether or not is too weak, I don't know)
And no matter how you slice it...less threads = weaker. (Whether or not is too weak, I don't know)
"If you wish to strengthen a lie, mix a little truth in with it." - Zohar
The ring pattern on the breech face as a method of bore identification is true and I believe it. It is practical and makes good sense.
I simply don't buy into the idea that cutting out two sections of thread is a sensible means of identifying a short action from a long action.
If that was truly intentional, please do the world a favor and NEVER EVER listen to the idiot that came up with it again! Don't let him ruin a good rifle!
The fans of the X rifles bought them because they are a perfect blend of QUALITY & PRICE.
Big Hint: Cutting out threads for any reason messes with our perception of the products' quality, so please reprogram the equipment and find a more sensible method of identifying short actions.
The ring pattern on the breech face as a method of bore identification is true and I believe it. It is practical and makes good sense.
I simply don't buy into the idea that cutting out two sections of thread is a sensible means of identifying a short action from a long action.
If that was truly intentional, please do the world a favor and NEVER EVER listen to the idiot that came up with it again! Don't let him ruin a good rifle!
The fans of the X rifles bought them because they are a perfect blend of QUALITY & PRICE.
Big Hint: Cutting out threads for any reason messes with our perception of the products' quality, so please reprogram the equipment and find a more sensible method of identifying short actions.
Well then if this is true, I'm going to have to stop recommending the X7 to friends looking for a first quality bolt action at a decent price. Not because it is necessarily dangerous, but because I have ZERO confidence in the engineers responsible for the assembly line manufacture. If your willing to machine off threads to MARK a barrel, dang, that's a whole 'nother operation on the lathe. That takes time and money, just to ruin a rifle.... dumb dumb dumb.Unvarnish said:Not quite: The Marlin X7 barrel manufacturing machinery was sent to KY and began producing barrels in late January 2011. The chambering programs have the barrel coding system embedded within. If you call up and run a 243 chamber, there will be 2 thread grooves, and 1 face ring. Complete code is: 30-06 has no thread gap nor face ring, 270 Win has 1 face ring, 25-06 has 2 face rings, 308 has 2 thread gaps and no face ring, 243 has 2 thread gaps and 1 face ring, and the 7mm-08 has 2 of each. Sure, there are many other codes that could have been used, but this is the method chosen by Marlin engineers in CT. I don't know exactly when the coding method began, but it was in effect long before the move. It is not my intent to defend the 3-headed dog or its prodigy. I just hate to see the enjoyment of any product diminished based on a perceived defect.
Unvarnish
-Jim
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Marlin Firearms Forum
MarlinOwners.com is a community of Marlin Firearm Owners - Dedicated to discussing Marlin Firearms, Marlin Rifles and more. Pictures, help, discussions and more.
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
