Re: WARNING ~ TR ~ My experience
There is a time factor here, I will give GF that fact. But lets compare for a moment this issue the OP has to one someone may have with a vehicle.
Let us pretend someone buys a vehicle from GM and it is provided with a one year warranty- nothing beyond one year. Guy buy's the car, dealership deliver's it to his place. He sits in it, decides the rear view mirror isn't to his liking and he's not a fan of the floor mats; figures, whatever- I'll tweak the car at a later date so it's perfectly tailored to me. However, since he lives in NY and can take the subway, busses or train pretty much anywhere he needs to go... mixed with 60 hour work weeks, a mother in failing health and a couple young children; this guy just doesn't have the time to make his GM car a priority. So it sits- unused in his parking spot.
Two years later- He has some custom car shop pick up his car to install new review mirrors (color matched to his paint of course) and to custom make him some nice new floor mats. Tells them- hey, while you have the car, it's just been sitting for two years so why don't you change all the fluids, check the brakes, verify alignment... give it a really solid once over.
They call the guy back and tell him the following are issues with is car:
-Every bolt on his front suspension is missing; apparently they use tapered assembly pins to get everything aligned before pushing the bolts in and tightening it all down. Assembly pins are stilli in place, no bolts installed. This is not only a performance problem, but also a serious safety problem.
-There are no interior split-ring retainers for the universal join pins; ejecting a pin is a matter of when, not if. The reason there are no retainers? The joints were never machined for the retainer ring slots.
-The unibody was sent along entirely skipping the e-coat; the only metal surfaces protected are that from the spray booth. The entire undercarriage and unibody structure is rusting away.
So, keeping in mind that the warranty has expired, who should be taking the responsibility on these issues? I think we all know how this would pan out- GM would offer a settlement because of the alignment pins and no bolts holding the entire front suspension on, and prob the split ring retainers... but he would be on his own for the lack of e-coating. Why? He would have likely found out about the other issues from driving his vehicle... but not from observation, rather from failure. The e-coat issue, had he driven his vehicle, would have been identified at his first service when they went to change the oil and noticed the entire underbody of the car was bare metal/rust.
See what I'm getting at? The OP had no way of knowing the thread interference was so horrible on his rifle and that the supposedly trued action was possibly more out of spec than a factory rem 700. Sure, there could have been an indication (poor accuracy), but that is a symptom of a variety of possibly causes, and it may not even be a reason that a new shooter would realize as being cause to return the rifle. He could very well think it's him, or it's just the way the rifle shoots- much like a car that handle's poorly... how many car owner's would know their new car's steering should be tighter than it is? Most would just assume "well shit- wish I could have test drove this thing first; my John Deere handles better than this thing!"... All while having no idea that within the first 1500 miles they will have a catastrophic failure of their front suspension. Owner is on-hook for what he should have reasonably been able to identify. A safety related manufacturing defect however is something that a manufacturer can always be held accountable for. Might require a court case, but if this horrible scenario were real, we all know how it would play out.
So, I think this is the general idea that everyone is going on. The threading was without a doubt a safety problem. In correcting that, the new smith identified other issues that would have been otherwise undiscovered, that needed to be addressed. Ultimately, I don't think any reasonable person would expect TR to replace the stock that they did poor workmanship on, nor the tigger or trigger guard. Why? Because the OP did or should have reasonably been able to identify those issues in minutes after receiving the rifle. Those problems should have seen a phone call the same day he picked the rifle up, and he should have pursued it until the problems were solved. But other than having another smith disassemble the rifle and check all machine work, there was no reasonable way for him to know that the rifle was potentially unsafe. That is why everyone here fully support's the OP asking for reimbursement of the cost of the machine work, but not the trigger, stock and bottom metal.
EDIT: real life examples- Ford vehicles from about 95-2008 well over 1 million vehicles, most of them long out of warranty were recalled for a voluntary repair (actually modification to the wiring harness) of the cruise control brake interrupt switch which is screwed into the brake master cylinder. It was identified as the cause of numerous vehicle fires as a result of a defect in design. My old truck happened to be one of the ones that needed the modification.
A number of Ford trucks were recently recalled (again, my old truck included) due to gas tank straps that Ford determined to have not been of the correct alloy or had not been properly galvanized; they were rusting out and breaking within about 10 years. My truck had been traded in when the recall order came out, but I had already replaced one strap after finding the gas tank supported by the gas tank skid pad.
Dodge Dakota pick-up's from the 80's were recalled to have reinforcement material and welding done on the crossmember that supported the steering gear box as well as the pitman arm; they determined the metal and the welds were not up to par.
This stuff makes sense- they are design and assembly problems from day one that no consumer would have any idea there is a problem until their vehicle is on fire, their gas tank is skidding down the highway, or they lose all steering control at 70mph.
