Remington 597 .17HMR Recall

Discussion in '.22-Rimfire Forum' started by MemphisJim1, Aug 20, 2009.

  1. MemphisJim1

    MemphisJim1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    68
    Location:
    Suburban Memphis (Mississippi side)
    Any fellow 597 .17HMR owners care to share your views?

    PRODUCT SAFETY WARNING
    AND RECALL NOTICE

    17 HMR AMMUNITION AND MODEL 597® HMR SEMI-AUTOMATIC



    DO NOT USE REMINGTON 17 HMR AMMUNITION IN SEMI-AUTOMATIC FIREARMS.

    DO NOT USE THE REMINGTON MODEL 597 HMR SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE.

    Remington has been notified by its supplier of 17 HMR ammunition that 17 HMR ammunition is not suitable for use in semi-automatic firearms. The use of this ammunition in a semi-automatic firearm could result in property damage or serious personal injury.

    If you have a semi-automatic firearm chambered for 17 HMR ammunition, immediately discontinue use of Remington 17 HMR ammunition. If you have any Remington 17 HMR ammunition that you wish to return to Remington contact the Remington Consumer Service number below. Do not return the ammunition to the dealer. Remington will provide you with a $10.00 coupon for each complete box of 50 rounds of Remington branded 17 HMR ammunition you return to Remington. This coupon will be good for the purchase of any Remington ammunition at your local dealer.

    In light of the ammunition manufacturer’s notice, it is very important that you immediately stop using your Remington Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle. If you own a Remington Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle and wish to return it to Remington please contact the below Remington Consumer Service Number. In return for your Remington Model 597 17 HMR synthetic stock semi-automatic rifle, Remington will provide you a coupon valued at $200.00 good for the purchase of a replacement Remington firearm. If you have a laminate stock Remington Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle, Remington will provide you a coupon valued at $250.00 good for the purchase of a replacement Remington firearm. Remington will also reimburse you for the actual postage to return your Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle to Remington.

    Please allow up to 6 weeks after Remington receives your Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle or your Remington branded 17 HMR ammunition for the appropriate coupons to arrive. Instructions for redemption of the coupons will be contained on the coupon.

    For any consumer questions or instructions on how to return of your Model 597 17 HMR semi-automatic rifle or your Remington branded 17 HMR ammunition, please contact the Remington Consumer Service Department at 1-800-243-9700, Prompt #3.

    We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

    Safety First
    Always observe the ten commandments of safe gun handling and wear approved eye and ear protection anytime you are shooting.
  2. TOOHSOTKIL

    TOOHSOTKIL New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    315
    Location:
    Curracus
    This seems to be the Remington way, I remember the introduction of the 597 after the sorry failure of the 522 Viper. They made folks pay for improved replacement magazines and still claimed it was not their problem.

    Has anyone bought a 50 round box of .17HMR for $10.00?? Did it even start out at $10.00??

    Did the 597 cost $200.00 new, the laminate at $250.00?
    You just have to love these folks, they don`t even kiss you after a reach around..............
  3. mwmjones

    mwmjones New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    I just spoke to a customer service rep at Remington and they are currently swapping out the barrels and converting this rifle to 22WMR at no cost

    Call them @ 1-800-243-9700 option #3 and have your serial # number ready to have them send you a postage paid mailing label

    Good Luck!

    Michael
  4. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,638
    Location:
    Hesperia, CA
    Both the 17HMR and the 17HM2 seemed to be very poorly thought out by Hornady. A couple of years ago many were converting 10/22 to 17HM2 with disastrous results because of the pressure characteristics of the 17HM2 ammo and the bad concept that you only had to bolt on a barrel and you were suppose to be good to go. These modifiers forgot that the bolt mass, the recoil spring and the cartridge pressures all have to be in balance in a blow back semi-auto design. Then they found that the 10/22 was so crude as to have excessive head space if not adjusted. The excessive pressure peak of the ammo with these two problems left the shooter with blow out cases and all kinds of similar problems. Some were able to solve the problems, some not, and some only temporarily. The whole key to the problem was the pressure peak Hornady needed in this cartridge to make it perform significantly better than a 22LR cartridge. Their attempt to create a market where their was not one before apparently has turned into a disaster.

    Now we see the 17HMR with perhaps similar problems in at least the Remington 597. Hornady ought to be ashamed for putting such ill conceived cartridges on the market place.

    Too bad I bought a 17HM2 (CZ bolt gun). Even though I have not had any problems, the ammo will eventually disappear and I'll be stuck with a gun and no ammo. I'll have to re-barrel it to 22LR, I guess, when that happens.

    LDBennett
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2010
  5. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    UT
    It's not a problem with the ammo. The problem is using a bottle-necked cartridge in a blow-back operated action. Firing with this combination means that the brass begins moving backward in the chamber before pressures have subsided enough to be safe, leaving the shoulder, neck and base of the casing unsupported. This means the possibility of cartridges bursting and venting hot gasses and debris out the action.

    This is not an issue in bolt-action rifles.

    The ammo will continue to be available.
  6. mr.t7024

    mr.t7024 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2009
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Near a brook & pond in Ma
    As much as I like the Henry I had a problem. I bought a lever action .17 in August of 08, because of problems with blowback, and unusual marks on the empties, I called Henry they told me send the rifle back and they pd. the postage. Got the rifle back in less than a week.Barrel and bolt were replaced. There customer service was impressive.All problems fixed! Any one else have a problem with the .17 Henry Lever Action. Or was mine a fluke
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2010
  7. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,638
    Location:
    Hesperia, CA
    LurpyGeek said:

    ".... the brass begins moving backward in the chamber before pressures have subsided enough to be safe, leaving the shoulder, neck and base of the casing unsupported."

    That's is exactly why the mass of the bolt and the force of the recoil spring (and the hammer spring too) are a balancing act against the pressures. The timing can be adjusted with those components to assure the bolt is closed long enough so that the remaining pressures will not bulge the case as the bolt opens. So if that timing is not possible (for whatever reason???) then the cartridge is not a good choice for a semi-auto blow back action. Remington apparently found that out as the 597 is a blow back operated semi-auto rifle.

    I still stand by my initial premiss that the cartridge is a poor design because it has an unusually high peak pressure that occurs as a fast spike. While some claim to love these two cartridges my preference is still the good old 22LR. The ammo choices are huge with 22LR whereas with the 17HM2 (I know little about the 17HMR) you have CCI/Hornady, Remington, and Eley.

    I have, as you indicated, had no trouble with my bolt 17HM2 but while ammo is available today it may not be tomorrow because the popularity of both of these 17 rimfire cartridge is hugely waning. That is the first sign that they will eventually quit making ammo. The cartridges, 17HM2 and 17HMR, were mistakes that we will have to pay for in the end.

    This is my opinion and, of course, you can have yours.

    LDBennett
  8. mr.t7024

    mr.t7024 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2009
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Near a brook & pond in Ma
    I am with LurpyGeek on this one. The Firearm makers should have had the specs on this cartridge, they should have built the firearm to handle it. I would like to know where the Remington folks had their heads on this one... just saying!:eek:
  9. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,638
    Location:
    Hesperia, CA
    The 597, like the Ruger 10/22, is a cheapy design. It doesn't surprise me that it too has problems with the 17 cal rimfires. It may be as I said before:

    That's is exactly why the mass of the bolt and the force of the recoil spring (and the hammer spring too) are a balancing act against the pressures. The timing can be adjusted with those components to assure the bolt is closed long enough so that the remaining pressures will not bulge the case as the bolt opens. So if that timing is not possible (for whatever reason???) then the cartridge is not a good choice for a semi-auto blow back action.

    LDBennett
  10. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    UT
    LDB, I'm with you in that I prefer good old .22 LR. I've never really understood the niche that any .17 flavor fills. If I want to reach out further, I'll go centerfire.

    Also, I see what you're saying, but this is an issue that will occur with a bottle-necked case in any blow back operated action. The amount of force that a blow-back action can handle can be tuned with special attention to weights and spring tension, but the "timing" cannot be adjusted since by definition, the cartridge begins moving backward immediately upon firing. This is why there are so many different methods of delaying the extraction of cartridges until chamber pressures subside.

    My knowledge is by no means complete, but the only successful blow-back operated bottleneck cartridge I can think of is the 7.62x25mm Tokarev in various sub-machineguns. I don't know how this was accomplished, whether pressures were kept low or extra material was included in the casing in critical areas.

    Straight walled cartridges don't have these issues. This is why there are blow-back operated firearms in many pistol calibers (hi-point for example).

    Most bottlenecked calibers use something to delay the extraction of the casing whether it's short recoil, gas operation or some other method. I'm not sure .17 has enough power to be compatible with any of these methods.
  11. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,638
    Location:
    Hesperia, CA
    LurpyGeek:

    If you make anyone of those components heavy enough then the bolt will not open at all. The area between wildly opening the bolt and not opening it at all is the timing and is controlled even in blowback operated guns. It can take time for the pressure to build to a point that it overcomes the inertia and the spring forces from the recoil spring and the hammer. I have never heard that the bolt starts moving immediately and that doesn't match the mechanics of the situation.

    Having said that, it may be that the delay in starting opening can only be so great that the bolt will never fully open or so little of a delay that the pressures are too high and the case bulges as it moves to the rear out of the chamber. That is, the "good" zone is miniscule. Analysis like this needs to be done by engineers who design guns. Obviously Remington didn't do this analysis adequately and it was never done by the guys modifying 10/22's. The fact that so few manufacturers (was it only Remington???) brought out a 17 cal rimfire blow back operated semi-auto may be revealing as to the toughness of the task and that the 10/22 modifiers were just blowing in the wind with their conversion. I don't know for sure but always suspected the 10/22 modifiers were not doing it right (no engineering, just trial and error with lots of error).

    But I have a hard time accepting your premiss that:

    "the cartridge begins moving backward immediately upon firing"

    That does not match the physic of it all, to me. Perhaps you would like to expound on the science of your premiss so I can understand it???

    LDBennett
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2010
  12. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    UT
    I believe we're thinking along the exact same lines here, and that the narrow "good" zone is the issue with the .17.

    As far as when the cartridge actually begins to move to the rear... There is no locking mechanism between the bolt and the barrel. As soon as pressures rise enough to propel the bullet, force is being imparted in the opposite direction as well (against the bolt). Newton told me about this.

    Energy great enough to force the projectile through the rifling is great enough to begin to move the bolt / casing to the rear, although with lower velocity since it has more mass to move. Nothing is making the bolt stay closed and wait until the pressures have subsided. The high pressures are the very thing that makes this kind of operation happen.

    Perhaps my use of the term "immediate" can too easily cause confusion (Immediate in regards to what? The trigger pull? The hammer impact? The motion of the projectile?). If we really pick the timing of these events apart then nothing is immediate.

    Again, I think we are in agreement for the most part, but are puzzling over semantics.
  13. mr.t7024

    mr.t7024 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2009
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Near a brook & pond in Ma
    Volquartsen uses the Ruger 10/22 action with their parts for a semi-auto .17 rimfire, !Expensive yes, but very shotable yes, for over 1000$ no.As far as the Ruger 10/22 being cheaply made, then LDB,that is your opinion and I wonder how many people would agree with you. I have yet to see one worn out.
  14. MemphisJim1

    MemphisJim1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    68
    Location:
    Suburban Memphis (Mississippi side)
    Our long day's journey into night is almost over. Apparently Remington has changed its approach to the recall. They're now offering to re-barrel to .22WMR. To get a shipping label, call Remington at 1-800-243-9700, then #3 when the options come on. Have you rifle's serial number handy as they'll require it. I just made the call.
  15. ponycar17

    ponycar17 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,053
    Location:
    South Carolina
    I don't know that I'd call the .17 HMR a mistake. I know a few people who enjoy the .17 HMR greatly, myself among those. The problem is, as everyone else said, about the blow back semi-auto and case pressures. The cartridges, I don't believe are at fault. The .17 HMR is not on par with centerfire calibers and isn't supposed to be, but it is a VERY flat shooting small game round that packs a significantly stiffer punch than .22 LR at all effective .22 LR ranges. The .17 HMR is a versatile round that can either be explosive with ballistic tipped ammo, very shocking with hollow points, very disruptive and heavily penetrating with jacketed soft points and hard penetrating with fmj ammo. I know little about the .17 HM2 but the .17 HMR has its place in the proper firearm.
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2010
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington 581 problem? Sep 14, 2014
.22-Rimfire Forum Putting an Old Remington 40X Back into Service Aug 10, 2014
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington nylon .22 Jul 12, 2014
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington 522 Viper Jun 4, 2014
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington 513T, Have Questions, Need Advice Jun 1, 2014

Share This Page