Difference between Remington 870, 870 Express, and 870 Express Magnum?

[leadcounsel]

I would like to point out for the record, I had nothing to do with this one.

Alas, I probably did since it was my original posting! But since I stated originally that I OWN examples of each, it's not clear why someone would then say that they don't exist...

Either
1) Person didn't read my post or doesn't believe me
2) Person was in fact stating that according to Remy's website, they don't exist or there is no difference.

The picture proves there are variations. I suspect that it's the latter of the two

 

[natman]

Alas, I probably did since it was my original posting! But since I stated originally that I OWN examples of each, it's not clear why someone would then say that they don't exist...

Either
1) Person didn't read my post or doesn't believe me
2) Person was in fact stating that according to Remy's website, they don't exist or there is no difference.

The picture proves there are variations. I suspect that it's the latter of the two

Bingo. The point was that Remington's website isn't consistent with what's stamped on the guns.

And when I was misquoted it made it appear like *I* was claiming they didn't exist, a different meaning entirely. That's why it's important to quote people accurately.

 

[natman]

Your original post if quoted would have been four paragraphs (not one line). I was trying to be polite with my apology, at this point I am no longer sorry. Get your panties out of a wad. Your bitterness is hijacking the original post.

Try harder. The only one bitter or upset here is you. It's doesn't take a lot of character to say "oops, my bad" when you make a mistake, but apparently it's more than you can muster.

You're only young once, but you can be immature forever.

I'm done. You can save some more space with another rebuttal if you want.

 

[Virginian]

Enuf already.

 

[RugerMcMarlin]

I would like to point out for the record again, I had nothing to do with this one.
Though I think I've been misquoted. And protocol demands an apology, tell you what we'll call it even.



Important....quote....people.....accurately.....got it.




see post 25

 

[jmr40]

So there must be some significance, but I just don't know what it is...

You are making this a lot harder than it needs to be. They are the same gun. Over the years Remington has slightly changed the the way they stamp the receivers

 

[kb0zos]

Bingo. The point was that Remington's website isn't consistent with what's stamped on the guns.

And when I was misquoted it made it appear like *I* was claiming they didn't exist, a different meaning entirely. That's why it's important to quote people accurately.

You ever stop to think that a mfg like Remington may only list current offerings on the website? ... not consistent...
Not trying to put word's in Leadcounsel's mouth, but it seems he said you were wrong and you proudly touted it (and quoted his post) as if he said you were right. Open mouth and insert foot.

Sent with my Samsung Intercept using Tapatalk

 

[RugerMcMarlin]

"So there must be some significance , but I just don't CARE what it is...."

I read the previous quote , 3 times, and this is how it came out every time.

 

[Dave McCracken]

Everybody, chill.....

First, Remington has made at least 70 variations on the 870 platform.

Heck,fonts on barrel codes have changed at least three times,and that's with an incomplete search by me.

Fonts on receivers have morphed a few times also, not to mention what they say.

Two WMs here date to 73. The fonts do not match each other. They do not match my 50s guns either.

Remington has gone through at least 3 acquisitions since the 870 came out. Styles change with the decades, and various folks think this or that is better.

It really matters very little, they're all 870s.

 

[115grfmj]

Also ...

My 1992 870 express magnum, has a metal trigger group, hardened steel extractor, and no gooofy trigger lock thingy. Also I've never had a rust issue.