Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: SJSAMPLE
Very few are capable of meeting these requirements

I disagree. The Mil-Spec requirements are well known and almost every single domestic manufacturer already meets them. Colt so vigorously defended their 'rights' that they threatened to sue ANY manufacturer who used the phrase "Mil-Spec" anywhere in their advertisements.

They claimed that since they were the sole source for them, no one else could ever be "Mil-Spec".

It's bull. My Rock River is in many ways superior to Colts offering, and it was a good deal less expensive as well.

While I have no doubt that Colt has spread enough cash around to secure additional contracts, I'd look for a couple of other makers to take a significant portion of the business.

Perhaps Colt could work on improving their civilian offering a bit, too.

L

6 posted on 07/23/2009 11:16:32 AM PDT by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Lurker

Rock River makes a good product. I was sad they stopped production of their 1911s.


8 posted on 07/23/2009 11:28:16 AM PDT by edpc (01010111 01010100 01000110 00111111)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Lurker

No, almost no other US domestic manufacturer meets the FULL MILSPEC requirements. They may look like it, but they DON’T.

Colt and FN both meet the current MILSPEC requirements for the rifle’s they’re making for the government. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be making the rifles.

Bushmaster doesn’t MP the barrel or parkerize certain surfaces.
Some manufacturers don’t shot-peen the bolt.
Some don’t air-gauge the barrels.
The list goes on and on.

This doesn’t mean they’re bad rifles.
I have a Colt, a Bushmaster and a Rock River.
My Colt is a civvy 6721 carbine, and even parts of that might not be MILSPEC.
The Bushy and RR definitely don’t meet all the MILSPEC requirements, but I don’t NEED my rifles to meet every requirement. The all function just fine, and I doubt I’d pay $1300-$1500 for a rifle that is, to me, the same as the $900 model.

That doesn’t mean they can’t change and meet the specs, but they currently don’t have the facilities to MP the barrel or perform other operations. Given that a standard govt. contract rifle will sell for almost half that of a civvy model, these companies may feel that it’s not worth it to tool up and buy the required equipment. Remember, a large contract may make it worth it for a manufacturer to add certain expensive processes, because the manufacturing cell and equipment can be spread across a large number of rifles.

However, future contracts won’t be 400,000+ units and Colt’s already got the equipment, the facilities and the process.

Sorry, but those are FACTS.


10 posted on 07/23/2009 11:32:45 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson