Damn Rem. 11-87 fell apart on me :(

Dear Brad,

Firts of all let me introduce myself to you: I'm a Greek Lawyer aged 33, vivid bird hunter and shotguns' collector, who lives permanently in Greece. I have been amazed by the accident that happened to you with your Remington 11-87 because exactly about 3 years ago I have had the same accident which has put myself in danger. To be more specific, after firing a couple of 12 GA 2 3/4" shotshells factory loaded with 32 gramms of shot, the shell carrier of my Remington 11-87 was suddenly thrown out of the receiver. The shotgun has fallen apart on me and in just a few seconds I just found muself swinging only the Rem's forend in the air !!! Needless to say that I undertook legal action against the Remington Dealer in Greece after consultuing the best gunsmiths in Athens. The result of the employed Gunsmiths was a real verdict against Remington's production procedures on teh 11-87 semi auto shotgun: serious constructional failure of the Remington 11-87's connection betrween receiver and shell carrier. The trial goes on for the time being with me as demanding party for serious money compensation due to ethical damage against the pre-mentioned Remington's Dealer in Greece. If you want my advise, proceed legally against Remington. If my case is of any interest to you I could send you any material needed, including some digital photos of my Rem's remains.

Best regards: Thalis Polychronakos, Attorney at Law, M.L.E.

P.S. Keep up the good work in shotgunworld. Yours discussions, points and arguments are very serliously taken into consideration overseas!!!

ysr_racer, please post what has been done to repair your Remington 11-87. Did the factory repair it or did you have it done locally?

For those of you that posted that this shows the poor quality of Remington 11-87s, you are mistaken. I have been a full time gunsmith for 15 years and have only seen this 2 times. When you consider the # of 11-87s and 1100s out there, that's not too bad.

I have also done induction brazing. It's damn near impossible to tell if the braze flowed properly. Sometimes the flux gets contaminated or the temp is not consistant, which will result in a weak joint.

What I'm saying is - it's not common but it's not a big deal either. No one was injured. And I'm not sure how you could be injured by this unless the barrel fell on your toe.

I guess you could sue. Maybe we can dig up the original Mr. Remington and sue him. Hell, he had the nerve to put his name on a quality product. He should have forseen what was going to happen 190 years in the future. Maybe with all the emotional stress you've suffered, you can get a new house, car, boat ....

Damn, ya'll. Chill out. It's no big deal.

Lee

I would say, "HOLY ****!!!", then check to see if I was injured. If I was not, I would pick up the pieces and go home.

I have been on ranges when guns blew up. It is quite exciting for all concerned. What I am saying is that if no one was injured, there is no reason to sue.

Are you sure the ammo OK? I've seen factory ammo that was overloaded.

I have no affiliation with Remington or any other gun maker. I am a professional gunsmith that calls them like I see them.

I was Head Gunsmith for Scattergun Technologies before Wilson bought them out. I worked on 1000s of 870s and 1100s and 1187s, and even though they looked like hell on the outside, most still functioned properly. I'd say 1 out of 300 needed a part or adjustment.

As for as loyalty goes. that's part of what's wrong with people today. NO LOYALTY!

I certainly disagree with Hadaway's opinion as far as it comes to SAFETY of a modern and currently still produced hunting shotgun as the Remington 11-87. Without willing to be dogmatic at all, the Remington 11-87 as design dates back to 1987. In other words there is no need to "dig out Mr. Remington from his grave", who certainly had no idea of this modern gas operated semi auto shotgun (as the 11-87 Model has been produced only the latest 15 years), eventhough it carries his name. Without being neither a gunsmith nor an authority on shotguns (just a well informed hunter and shotguns' collector), allow me to point out that the already 102 years old design of Browning Auto 5 (a classic semi auto shotgun invented by John Moses Browning, which according to today's standards appears to be a vintage shotgun and has been accepted unanimously as being the first semi auto shotgun worldwide and the only one untill the Remington 1100 showed up at the early 60's) has a much more sturdy construction and connection between receiver and shotshells' tube, as its receiver is strongly screwed on the shotshells' tube. This way there is absolutely no possibility that receiver and shotshells' tube of the Browning Auto 5 ever come apart during repeated or single firing of any number of shotshells through this gun. Of course the same can be told about the Remington 11, which has been an exact copy of the Browning Auto 5, produced under FN licence in U.S. between the years 1911 - 1948, and certainly Mr. Remington's personal trade victory, because he has been able to forseen this shotgun's huge commercial success, in vast difference to Winchester which rejected J.M.Browning's proposal for an industrial production of his revolutionary invention (Auto 5). I really can see no point on Hadaway's argumentation. If a certain product of whatever origin is defective, then the producer commits a heavy violation of his obligations towards the consumers which can lead to various and serious legal action and civil - penal penalties against him. At least the U.S. jurisprudence is worldwide recognised as containing the leading cases and precedents in producer's liability matters (like this one), and - to my modest opinion - Hadaway should be rather aware of that.

I agree that if this was a common occurance or if someone was injured, legal action should be considered. But, and listen up cause I'm only gonna say this one more time, THIS IS NOT COMMON AND NO ONE WAS INJURED!!!

About 10 years ago, a group of "fine, upstanding lawyers" got together a class action lawsuit against Remington. They claimed that the chambers on Rem 1100 12 Ga were too weak and they were prone to rupture. They were able to convince the jury of the validity of their claim and won. (You know what they say about jurors - 12 people who were not smart enough to get out of jury duty.) Everyone who signed on the suit got a check for $12 - $18, whether their barrel had ruptured or not. About that time, I had a customer that brought in a Rem 3200 28 Ga with a ruptured chamber. He had a legitimate claim, but because it was not a 1100, nothing was done.

Now let's see. Who benifitted fron the above suit. The 1100 owners, they put $12 in their pockets and had to sign away all rights to sue Rem if they had a problem with their 1100s. Remington, they had to pay millions. The lawyers who started the suit, HELL YES!!! They got most of the millions Remington had to pay.

Ya'll also have to remember, all gun manufactorers get sued everyday by anti-gunners. If pro gun people, like our lawyer friend here, start going after the gun makers, don't be surprised if the makers shut their doors.

We live in a country (and obviously, world) of frivilous lawsuits. I would like to see a law on the books that states that if you sue someone and lose, you have to pay all legal fees for the defendant, PLUS pay the defendant the amount of money you sued for.

That would stop some of this crap.

I have nothing more to say.

If I have a heart attack over this discussion, can I sue Thalis?

Lee