RemingtonOwners.com

Do you own multiple 380's ? Bought new at different times ? Have you noticed any improvement in trigger pull and break between older and newer pistols? Remington says 380 introduced in 2016. They also advise "NO" design, engineering, or manufacturing improvements since introduction. Personally I find this very hard to believe. I just purchased a RM380 with CT laser from RKGuns - took delivery 4/29/2019. Weapon was very dirty on receipt and had some obvious wear marks - more than I would expect from test firing. Stripped and cleaned - loaded a snap cap and dry fired. Lots of pretravel, long trigger pull and doesn't beak until almost touching frame. Tried to find serial # vs date of manufacture info but no joy. Went on Remington's website and using chat window provided serial number. Remington's response was my 380 has manufacture date of 5/2016. Find this unacceptable - 3 years old - RKGuns has strict no return policy but not sure if my order ( dated 4/25/2019) was filled from RKGuns stock or Remington. Still investigating !

I haven't heard any announcements regarding trigger changes since the RM380 came out.

That said, I think that those of us who own/carry one see that trigger pull as a feature, not a bug. I like a longer DA for IWB/pocket guns...then again, I like revolvers, too, and for much the same reasons.

FWIW, I put in all the Galloway upgrades except the Tyre trigger, and those springs really lightened the pull considerably. And now, with about 600 rounds or so through it, it is also significantly smoother. Mine is a joy to shoot now...still a longer pull/reset, but it's like butter now. (I should probably point out that I have smaller hands, so the geometry of the trigger breaking all the way back doesn't bother me.)

I think the RM380 is the best 380 out there for its particular niche...an amazingly reliable micro geared to up-close, self-defense scenarios that is also safe to stick in a waist or pocket. And the bonus factors that it is not punishing to shoot and eats whatever you feed it mean you can practice as much and as often as you want/need.

But I have found that more and more shooters have gravitated to the lighter, crisper, shorter-reset we've come to expect from striker pistols. Nothing wrong with that (I've got a Sig P365 that I love). It just means that a lot of shooters will buy the RM380 and be disappointed that it a more old-school type of EDC.

Thanks for your feedback. Reliability was the primary factor in my purchase despite the trigger characteristics. I've also got a Seecamp .32 but it's very fussy about what ammunition is used. I haven't fired the 380 yet but suspect that I'll end up installing either the Galloway or M-Carbo springs and possibly the trigger bar too.

jth737 wrote:Thanks for your feedback. Reliability was the primary factor in my purchase despite the trigger characteristics. I've also got a Seecamp .32 but it's very fussy about what ammunition is used. I haven't fired the 380 yet but suspect that I'll end up installing either the Galloway or M-Carbo springs and possibly the trigger bar too.

Funny you mentioned the Seecamp, as I almost used it as a comparison in my post. I've got the .32 as well, and I find the two pistols to be very similar. I have shied away from the .380 Seecamp, however...they seem to be too prone to breakage, and I've heard they are no fun to shoot. I'm hoping that I can get the Underwood ammo to work in my .32, which I think will make it a more viable EDC option.

An interesting tidbit is that when I first bought the RM380, I much preferred the Seecamp trigger. Now, after breaking in and upgrades, I find the Remington's to be significantly better.

I didn't know M-Carbo did upgrades for the Remington...I've got some of their stuff for my Kel Tecs, and it is top notch.

jth737 wrote:Weapon was very dirty on receipt and had some obvious wear marks - more than I would expect from test firing.

This is very interesting - I had a strikingly similar situation. Purchased a RM380 little over a month ago and it was also very dirty upon receipt, what appeared to be gun oil with powder residue was dripping out of the barrel - having no experience at that time with Remington I thought just a bad job on their part with regard to test firing... I always field strip and clean any new gun upon receipt and in the process I used a magnifying visor to inspect build quality and found wear marks in a number of places which I found odd being this was allegedly a new gun - top of the front sight and rear sights had scratches all the way down to the bare metal.

Seller claims it must have come from the manufacturer that way, and later on manufacturer (Remington) claims must have come from Seller that way - no joy there. Remington says they do test fire their handguns but they don’t clean them so that the new owner knows they were test fired.

Sending it back to the Seller would only result in them sending it back to Remington which would just add more time to the return process so I sent it straight to Remington for those reasons of the wear marks AND also light primer strikes and a non-functional trigger. Allegedly after three and a half weeks it is by their own words “repaired” - that was a couple of days ago but so far there has been no notice of it being shipped.

I thought that dirty & wear marks thing must be a singular anomaly but this is quite interesting now!

I purchased an RM380 "Executive" a few months back and experienced nothing like that, my pistol was relatively clean with no visible wear. I did install the Galloway "reduced power spring kit" and it worked fine until about 130 rounds and I started getting light primer strikes with failures to fire. These ftf went from one or two per mag to every round ftf, it would take two pulls to get the round to go off regardless of what ammo I was using. I reinstalled the factory springs and no more failures, will not re-install or try any other springs.