Remington 597 .17HMR Recall

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

  1. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Sep 25, 2007
    I agree that the 10/22 is cheaply made. I have one, and I like it, but it is neither an engineering marvel nor a manufacturing work of art. As to seeing one worn out, that's not a good measure. I've never worn out an adjustable wrench, but that hardly makes it a finely made specialty tool.

    The 10/22 is less than $200 new. It's a cheap gun. It's a cheaply made gun. That's not always a bad thing. It's certainly a value. But it's still cheaply made.
  2. mr.t7024

    mr.t7024 Member

    I would rarher use the term inexpensive, rather than cheap. To me, cheap takes on a completely different meaning.When I can pick up my 10-22 sporter, shoot it and it does not jam that means reliability,and that is not cheap. Being that, I believe semantics is our problem,not the 10-22. With that said,I hope y'all have a great day,take care and keep shooting!:D

  3. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Dec 20, 2003
    Hesperia, CA
    OK, lets get specific about the 10/22:

    Its tolerances are very loose. Its barrels only moderately accurate compared to a Volquartsen barrel or its own match barrel on the super target model. Its chamber is very loose so it feeds anything from almost any magazine. But I would add that my Volquartsenized 10/22 ONLY feeds ammo reliably from Ruger magazines due to the tight chamber dimensions.

    When modified to 17HM2 the headspace is often too much but interestingly the 22LR cartridge doesn't seem to care about the excessive headspace. (Headspace in this gun is investment cast into the bolt face). This modification to 17HM2 is my concern. It seems to give problems unless every detail is covered in the modification. I know some have been successful in the modification but others have not. More than one of these modified jewels badly splits cases. I'd hate to be a left hand shooter when one of these 17HM2 cases spits out its remaining contents through the ejection port and into the guys face!

    There are those here who po-po my concerns and claim theirs works but I'll not do one or suggest anyone else do one. Remington's removal of the 597 from the marketplace along with their claim that the 17 cartridges are not safe to shoot in any semi-auto gun adds credence to my decision.

    As I said, I have a 10/22 that has been Volquartsenized (barrel, stock, trigger parts... all Volquartsen). It shoots extremely accurately regardless that it has loose tolerances on its remaining Ruger parts. I like this gun... in 22LR, but would not consider ever modifying it to any 17 cal. rimfire cartridge. It has never bulged a case, it feed ammo well from RUGER magazines, and is astonishingly accurate, for a semi-auto gun.

    My measuring stick is a gun like the Browning Auto Take Down or an original Winchester Pump 22 (1890 or 1906 but not the Rossi or Taurus clones of those guns). Those are precision made guns but if made today (and the ATD is) they would be expensive (and the ATD IS!!)

    So you see I DO NOT hate 10/22's but do understand what they are and what they can successfully be made into, and it is not a 17 cal gun, in my opinion.

    And remember this is all MY opinion and yours may vary.

  4. 300 H&H

    300 H&H Active Member

    Apr 1, 2007
    The 17 HRM is the only rimfire to exceed the preasure of the 22WMR. (except the 5mm Remington mag.) it operates dangerously close to the design limit of the rimfire case. The case can only be so thick for the firing pin to be able to crush it, setting off the round. The 17HRM operates at 26,000 psi and the 22 WMR at 24,000. Hornaday wanted more performance and got it, but only with a price. In bolt actions it is fine, but in semi auto's it is too close to the limit. Out of battery firing, ie., excessive head space with this much preasure destroyes the case heads, and damages guns and shooters. It would work, but careless cleaning, or lack of cleaning contributes along with slack tolerances, common in semi auto actions, won't let it. These are the problems that have lead Remington to this recall. The 17 HRM is just a bit to close to the practical limits of the rimfire case. I hope the ammo is available for many years to come though. It would be a shame if it went away.

    Regards, Kirk
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2010
  5. Popeye

    Popeye Member

    Jul 3, 2005
    Sacramento area, CA
    I would change only one thing.

    The 17 HMR is just a bit to close to the practical limits of the rimfire case to be reliably and safely used in an inexpensive, blow back, semi-automatic weapon.

    The round works as advertised when chambered in a bolt-action rifle.
  6. mr.t7024

    mr.t7024 Member

    Popeye I agree!.

    I would still like to know where the folks at Remington had their heads. Marlin never made a semi-auto in 17HMR, I believe Ruger was going to, Remington did to their ultimate dismay! I find it difficult to believe Remington did not pay attention to the specs on that cartridge, I also find it difficult to believe they did not cross reference the specs to the 597. Making it right now,is a good thing.

    When I teach a firearm saftey course in Massachusetts, I stress Saftey, Remington did not with 17HMR 597. I am more than chagrined with their R&D. I am glad no one got hurt, that I know of, because of their stupidity.
  7. pensacola don

    pensacola don New Member

    Nov 10, 2011
    I had a malfunction/premature ignition with a 597 17HMR. It blew the mag out, the bolt handle and extractor. No injuries. I contacted Remy. Their first question, "Was anybody hurt?", I felt it was honest. They sent prepaid postage. They were very timely in their response. They are sending a replacement rifle. I am well pleased!!!

    Thanks Remy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  8. mrfreefall

    mrfreefall New Member

    Dec 20, 2011
    597 Investigation and Legal Action

    I have decided to pursue legal action because my 597 blew up and I cannot get fair compensation from Remington. My attorney has a long and successful history in gun cases. He and his team are investigating and would like to make contact with other 597 owners. If you would be willing to talk with him, please respond privately to me at

  9. jlloyd73

    jlloyd73 Active Member

    Nov 28, 2010

    Most people's idea of "FAIR COMPENSATION" is not really fair for someone...namely the company. Did you get hurt when the gun blew up? Did they offer to replace the firearm, or give you the retail amount for the gun?

    I have no issues with someone being reimbursed for or a defective product or pain and suffering, but typically when someone lawyers up it means they want more than they deserve.

    Most companies will go out of their way to make a person happy in a situation such as "my gun blew up due to a defect".......even more so when that defect was well known to the public.

    IMO.....there is always more to the story and yours don't really say much.
  10. Ledslnger

    Ledslnger New Member

    Dec 12, 2011
    I have heard...since Volquartsen is somewhat local to me....(fairly close to my parents and some of my friends) that they "fix" Remington 597s for a fee. From the same people I heard they function superbly after they get them back. They won't tell you what they do to them I guess either. As far as cost I heard $150 roughly dropped off and picked up at their door. I haven't seen or shot one of them that has been "fixed", but as impressive a company as Volquartsen is I definitely would not discount their work.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington model 41 targetmaster Dec 31, 2016
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington 12C pump .22 rifle Dec 12, 2016
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington matchmaster 513t Sep 20, 2016
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington Model Five — a little open-sight shooting Aug 15, 2016
.22-Rimfire Forum Remington Arms Browning Rifle Aug 14, 2016