Why are AR-15's so expensive?


PDA






Remander
October 1, 2006, 02:27 AM
I have a Bushmaster AR-15 (love it) and was carrying it the other day when I looked at it at wondered why such a light, simple rifle costs so much.

The patent has expired, so no licensing fees to Colt.

I thought about the many other guns that cost so much less and seem to be as complex or require as much material. Most all revolvers, basic semi-auto pistols, bolt hunting rifles, basic semi-auto shotguns and the like cost much less than the basic AR, which looks like it could be stamped out in a tin can factory.

I'm not dogging AR's, I love them, but why do they cost so much?

And don't say supply and demand. I know that is what all prices come down to, but there are plenty of AR suppliers out there these days. Why can't one of them get the price lower for the product.

I'm not bitching. I've got mine. I am genuinely curious. There must be something about the construction/compostion that keeps the price up there.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why are AR-15's so expensive?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
beerslurpy
October 1, 2006, 02:34 AM
Because they are machined out of a single billet of aluminum and they have fairly close tolerances that must be respected in order for the finished gun to work properly.

AK's can be stamped (rivet holes and all) in a big press all day long and then assembled for a few dollars of labor per receiver.

Handgun Midas
October 1, 2006, 02:57 AM
There are sub-$500 kits complete except for the stripped lower receiver available online, and said receiver can be had for around $50.

So one could expect a complete AR for around $550, less than I paid for my Kimber, which is just a simple, old pistol design.

I don't have my AR yet, but this is the entry I was planning on. Correct me if I'm mistaken.

beardownwildcat
October 1, 2006, 03:30 AM
how about the m14 or m1a? i love the design, but i have not clue why just a simple new one is over 1000 bucks usually. and they don't lose value. i think the FS posts are great. FS- used M1A, put couple thousand rounds through it. i paid $1400 for it six months ago. asking.......$1395. where does that money go???? are they carving the recievers out of ivory with a dull butter knife?

Raygun
October 1, 2006, 03:40 AM
Because they are machined out of a single billet of aluminum and they have fairly close tolerances that must be respected in order for the finished gun to work properly.
Not exactly. While AR receivers have been made using several methods, most are made from aluminum forgings. You take an aluminum billet, stick it in a big hammer machine with dies in the basic shape of an upper or lower receiver, squish the billet between the dies a bunch of times, and you get a few solid receivers out of one chunk of aluminum. The excess is cut away (look inside your trigger guard) then the forgings are machined as necessary. While there are a few smaller shops that do it, machining a receiver straight from a billet requires quite a bit more time and thus expense than doing so from a forging.

As for tolerances, they don't have to be mind-bogglingly close, at least not in this age of CNC machining. Certainly the AK is a more cost-effective design, but they also tend to be made in places where the labor is cheaper. Those that are "made in the US" (Arsenal, for example) tend to be assembled from imported parts with only the furniture and trigger group (read: relatively inexpensive to manufacture) parts being made here. And those also tend to be some of the most expensive AKs of the lot (perhaps justifiably so).

My answers are going to have to be politics and economics. Politics is the reason why all guns are as expensive as they are here, the scary-looking ones especially so. Economics because most AR parts are made in the US, and US labor isn't as cheap as it once was. We pay $1200-1500 for a US-made M1A, Canadians pay $360 USD for a Chinese knock-off. Why? Slave labor and no trade embargo.

Jackal
October 1, 2006, 04:11 AM
RAYGun: your comment about the chinese M1A's makes me think that a trip to Canada is in order.... I live just a boat ride away.

Kenneth Lew
October 1, 2006, 04:52 AM
RAYGun: your comment about the chinese M1A's makes me think that a trip to Canada is in order.... I live just a boat ride away.

Illegal in so many ways.

Raygun
October 1, 2006, 05:10 AM
RAYGun: your comment about the chinese M1A's makes me think that a trip to Canada is in order.... I live just a boat ride away.
There are some laws on both sides of the border that are designed to deter you from following through with that particular plan. But so long as you're not opposed to fracturing them a smidge, maybe Ricky and Julian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trailer_park_boys) can hook you up. ;)

TexasRifleman
October 1, 2006, 09:16 AM
are they carving the recievers (M14s) out of ivory with a dull butter knife?

The M14 pricing is a simple law of mass production. The more of something you can sell the cheaper each one will be. M14/M1A's just don't make the large quantity cut needed to drive the price down.

Compare an M1A to a Smith and Wesson Model x29 for example. I'd bet there is a 10 or 20 to 1 ratio of Smiths sold to M1As, maybe more.

jerkface11
October 1, 2006, 09:54 AM
Glocks cost about $80 to make. An AR is probably around $250. Both are sold for what the company can get people to pay. Welcome to capitalism.

Sistema1927
October 1, 2006, 10:07 AM
You said that you didn't want to hear about "supply and demand", but the simple answer to your question can be summed up in two words: "Market Forces".

Sellers will sell for whatever buyers will pay.

baz
October 1, 2006, 10:26 AM
You said that you didn't want to hear about "supply and demand", but the simple answer to your question can be summed up in two words: "Market Forces".

Sellers will sell for whatever buyers will pay.That's not an entirely satisfactory explanation. If markets are competititve, and Glocks can be manufactured for $80, and AR's for $250, then why aren't competitors making knockoffs to bring the market price closer to the cost of production?

I can think of some reasons, but I'd like to hear what explanation others might have first.

2TransAms
October 1, 2006, 10:35 AM
The answer really is supply and demand,or in this case the answer is simply demand. There's no shortage of rifles,but we continue to pay top dollar because they're selling what we want. This isn't the forum for an Economics 101 discussion,but I don't blame the AR manufacturers one bit. It's not greed,it's capitalism...and most of those companies aren't making a fortune to begin with.

2TransAms
October 1, 2006, 10:41 AM
That's not an entirely satisfactory explanation. If markets are competititve, and Glocks can be manufactured for $80, and AR's for $250, then why aren't competitors making knockoffs to bring the market price closer to the cost of production?

I can think of some reasons, but I'd like to hear what explanation others might have first.Glock still owns the patents for their designs.Nobody else can make one,but we can come close(XD).

AR's are for the most part made in America,which quite simply has a higher cost of labor and benefits to the workers. If Taurus made an AR15 it would be $500.

Onmilo
October 1, 2006, 10:45 AM
With todays dollar and basing the manufacturing cost on a basic rifle with no frills, the cost of production of a single M16 is about $425.00 US
The AR15 cost runs slightly less because there are fewer parts involved and a few less machining steps, about $400.00.

Mind you these are basic rifles, add machining for flat top receiver, special forend assemblies, special muzzle attachments, ancillary accessories, attachable sighting systems, etc. and the price goes up from there.

If you look you can find brand new AR15 rifles available for about $700.00 with machined, not cast, receivers.

Add 35% manufacture profit, 20% distributer, 10% shipper, and 15% retail markups and the rifles are really not at all expensive in todays market.

DougW
October 1, 2006, 10:48 AM
+1 to waht 2TransAms said. It is totally the market. Look around and you will see it in all areas. Why is ammo getting so much higher? Why does it cost more today (by nearly X2) than it did only one year ago? Are the ammo makers still working off the same profit margin, or have they jacked it up and are involved in "gouging" us? Hmmmmmmm.......

People underestimate the power of the free market. If a manufacturer wanted to they could produce a perfectly functional AR for around $350.00. But, what would be the motivation? When the next downturn in the market occures, watch to prices of AR's and ammo drop drastically.

Just to stay on topic, the 5 AR's that I have built range in cost from $575 to over $1200.:D :D :what:

erict
October 1, 2006, 10:50 AM
What about the "It's what our military uses" factor.

You know how some guys see a certain weapon in a movie and they just "got to have it". I think the same theory holds true with military issued weapons.

It might not drive the price up as much as things mentioned above but it still has to have some factor in the equation.

P99guy
October 1, 2006, 12:26 PM
I remember the month preceding the AWB, brand new Colt SP1's retailed for about 425-450.00 and in the course of a week...dealers hung 1200.00 (and up!)pricetags on those very same guns, and the distributers soon followed.
People was buying them left and right(end of the world, hurry get the last one ever made) and the price never came down after the dust cleared...soon it just become the accepted price. While there has been some lowering of price by a few manufacturers down to the 8-900.00 range...
its still the same 450.00 weapon it was.....and they sure dont charge military customers 1400.00 for a basic M16A2. I love AR15's but there was no good reason for the price of a weapon that is copied by almost as many companies that make M1911 knockoffs, and never once went out of production at any time....its not inflation as the price of making them didnt quadruple overnight, not something that "HAD" to be sadly passed along to the end user like a fuel sircharge. it was simply price gougeing like sheet plywood before a hurricane...that never reverted back when the storm turned out to a neusense rather than a world ending event.
yep, I remember those 900.00 Mini 14's and was rightly sure somebody was freebasing.

Medusa
October 1, 2006, 12:39 PM
Well, the cost is a relative thing.

For example, I envy you guys tremendeously, since I can't get my hands on a AR-15 type gun anyhow. I'd love to have a Bushmaster M4 flat-top type rifle, or AR-10A4 from Armalite, to get it accurised to create a pseudo-SR25, or heck, go big, and get the real 20in SR-25.

The cost for SR-25 I saw was 3,000 bucks or so. Expensive? not too much for me. For example, if I asked from the Sako importers for the cost of TRG-22 Green, they told me that the regular TRG-22 is running on 5,000+ bucks, and it is a discount prize they told me, since usually it's over 6,500 for regular version and a grand more for Green/Stealth model. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? EDITED: We're around 100 km south of Finland.

Only things I get for 600 bucks in rifles are CZ and Walther .22LR ones, or cheap IZH in centerfire calibre.

Jackal
October 1, 2006, 12:55 PM
AR's are overpriced because they can be. Now I'm no basher, as i own a Bushmaster XM15 and spent plenty of $$$$ on it. Bottom line is, if it's over your price range dont buy it. Get something else like the Kel-Tec .223, the poor mans AR.

Spencer
October 1, 2006, 01:04 PM
AK's can be stamped (rivet holes and all) in a big press all day long and then assembled for a few dollars of labor per receiver


Yeah except the milled ones are better than ARs.

I think ARs are overpriced.
The aluminum receiver could not make it cost that much more, and the stock is plastic.
I think the reason they are overpriced is because when some idiot sees them in a movie and thinks they look cool, or because the military uses them, they want to go out and buy one. Then they get the real AR.

aka108
October 1, 2006, 01:15 PM
Wonder what the price of product liability insurance is? Most likely a pretty high amount for American manufacturers.

TexasRifleman
October 1, 2006, 01:18 PM
Wonder what the price of product liability insurance is? Most likely a pretty high amount for American manufacturers.

That's why you can't buy a small Cessna airplane anymore, it probably has a lot to do with guns as well.

ID_shooting
October 1, 2006, 01:43 PM
I have asked myself this same question over and over again. But then I take a trip down to my local AR dealer. He carries everything from >1K Bushmaster/Colt rifles to $600 Oly plinkers. He never keeps plinkers in stock long and I have seen the same high-end guns in there for over a year now.

An A1 plinker is on my short list as soon as I get this house sold. I just have to wait for it to come in.

So yes, there are budget AR's out there, they just get bought up quicker. It is economics.

Oh, and like we used to say in motorcycle racing when I was younger, what wins on Saturday, sells on Monday. People will forever buy what they percieve the winner is. Even if that winning bike, NASCAR, boat, plane or rifle was so heavily modified the only thing matching the "normal" one was the name on the side, people don't care. It is all about the name. That is why ARs are more popular than AKs. Each has thier strong points, I have an AK myself but my wife wants the AR. What can you do?

Spencer
October 1, 2006, 02:59 PM
Oh, and like we used to say in motorcycle racing when I was younger, what wins on Saturday, sells on Monday. People will forever buy what they percieve the winner is. Even if that winning bike, NASCAR, boat, plane or rifle was so heavily modified the only thing matching the "normal" one was the name on the side, people don't care. It is all about the name. That is why ARs are more popular than AKs. Each has thier strong points, I have an AK myself but my wife wants the AR. What can you do?


Key word, what they PERCEIVE the winner is. This is because it's used by the military and seen on television. Truth is there are much better guns than the AR out there.

mrmeval
October 1, 2006, 03:52 PM
Someone did a milled plate ar15 receiver, it just bolts together similar to an AK. I suspect you could stamp out an AR15 receiver if need be.

MechAg94
October 1, 2006, 04:14 PM
What is the tax on a semi-auto rifle in the US? Didn't one of those laws add some taxes about the same time the AWB went into effect?

I think too many people are getting spoiled by cheap imports and surplus. Notice that most American made or even American assembled AK's cost almost as much as domestic AR-15's.

On M14's, wasn't cost and difficulty of manufacture one of the issues that led the US Military decided not to use them?

ArmedBear
October 1, 2006, 04:18 PM
What does the military pay for them?

I thought it was something like $350.

10-Ring
October 1, 2006, 04:20 PM
The smart a$$ in me is thinking...expensive??? My RRA middy is ALOT cheaper than the HK 91 & 93 I had :scrutiny: and honestly, comparable performance to boot :D

RNB65
October 1, 2006, 04:48 PM
What does the military pay for them? I thought it was something like $350.

That's probably about right. Very close to the manufacturers cost to build. Add a markup for the distributor and a markup for the retailer, and you get a retail prices beginning in the mid-700's. Which is very close to the starting price on Bushy's at Buds gun shop.

Compared to M1A and FAL's, I don't think AR's are particularly expensive at all. When you consider their easy to repair modular design, I think they're a great bargain.

MechAg94
October 1, 2006, 04:58 PM
Last I saw, the govt was paying more around $500. It was quoted last year sometime on a thread. One of those threads talking about how great Colts were since they did all the extra QAQC testing the govt requires.

I was thinking that the govt has a $100 or $200 tax on some guns. Maybe that was something else.

1911user
October 1, 2006, 05:37 PM
11% excise tax on complete firearms. This is one reason it is cheaper to buy the 2 halves of an AR-15 seperately vs. a complete one; no excise tax. Also no sales tax on most of the parts (mail order) so it's only the (possibly stripped) AR lower receiver that has sales taxes applied (maybe) compared to a complete rifle at the gunshop. There are no warranty or service costs in assembling your own vs. buying factory complete.

The military doesn't pay excise or sales taxes (govt. use) saving $100 minimum per rifle compared to buying a complete rifle locally. Also the military gets quantity discounts that we could only dream about.

Crosshair
October 1, 2006, 05:53 PM
AK's can be stamped (rivet holes and all) in a big press all day long and then assembled for a few dollars of labor per receiver.
Properly made AK recievers have the holes drilled in a seperate operation after the reciever has been folded.

my-rifle
October 1, 2006, 11:28 PM
Why not build an AK-47? They're cheap to build and have much the same characteristics of the AR-15 within 300 yards which is far enough that most of us can't even identify a target. I can build an AK-47 or an AK-74 (5.45x39mm) in a weekend for about $300. The AK-47 I can build for about $150, and is even easier. The AK-74 is more expensive, because everyone seems to want to smaller caliber rifles. Anybody who wants to build one can do so in the states. It's legal, and you don't heve to register it in any way unless you transfer it. The Romanian ones easily available cost $99, and they're brand new. Remarkable, really.

swingset
October 2, 2006, 12:55 AM
I was just fondling my $600 AR build and wondering, "How is it such an accurate, fun and reliable gun is so inexpensive?"

Odd how perspectives vary.

Texas Gunman
October 2, 2006, 01:26 AM
I didnt mind spending good money on a well made ARs, what I cant understand is people buying generic ARs, like DPMS, Olys,RRAs & thinking their all that.

Colt,Bushmaster and Armalite is the way to go.

TG:evil:

swingset
October 2, 2006, 02:04 AM
I didnt mind spending good money on a well made ARs, what I cant understand is people buying generic ARs, like DPMS, Olys,RRAs & thinking their all that.

I could just as easily marvel at people paying $1000+ on an Armalite or Colt, and wondering why they didn't just buy quality components and assemble a nicer gun themselves for less. Brand loyalty cool-aid is just silly anyways. If you buy a DPMS and it runs and shoots accurately, guess what? You win. You got a good gun, without spending Colt money. How that isn't something to be happy about is beyond me. It's not like the upper tier manufacturers don't let some dogs out of the factory too.

yongxingfreesty
October 2, 2006, 02:11 AM
built mine for 650. not as expensive as some of my handguns.

1911.45
October 2, 2006, 02:37 AM
I think that a basic AR is pretty reasonable. A Stag complete lower is $260.00 retail. A Stag complete flat top upper is $465.00. Total for the lower and upper is $725.00 plus $20.00 shipping less sights/optics.

A Model 1 might be even cheaper.

You can also look for parts and build you an AR yourself for less. On the other hand, you can also build a cusom rifle with the best free float rail, match-grade barrel, top-grade bolt and carrier, top-grade compensator/hider, bipod, mounts, lights, and excellent optics and easily spend thousands. Just the free-float rail on one of my rifles was $300.00. It depends on your use and the money that you want to spend.

I think of AR's a lot like I think of 1911's, since there are so many opportunities for customization. However, I think that there is more consistency in basic AR's than 1911's.

In the alternative, you could buy a Saiga in 7.62 or .223 for $229.00 or so and have a reliable, reasonably accurate, and dependable rifle.

MachIVshooter
October 2, 2006, 02:48 PM
I didnt mind spending good money on a well made ARs, what I cant understand is people buying generic ARs, like DPMS, Olys,RRAs & thinking their all that.

Those specimens tend to run fine, the lower price seems to come a the cost of fit and finish. I personally favor Armalite, but I have seem plenty of RRA's and DPMS rifles that are just as reliable and accurate, simply less refined. I can't comment on Stag's and have only handled (never fired) Oly's.

Eagle arms is Armalite's economy subsidiary, but I have no experience with them, either.

I will continue to buy and recommend Armalite, but will not call the others junk.

One of the things I have come to like about Armalite as a company is their non-PC, no BS approach to everything. Anyone who has dealt with them knows what I'm talking about.

Euclidean
October 2, 2006, 02:58 PM
In the world of AR15s often the same people that make Part A for Brand X resell it cheaper as the same Part A with Brand Y stamped on it.

I have two AR15s, one is a modestly used factory assembled Bushmaster I traded for and while it's not the perfect AR15, it was such a good trade I took it anyway. Realistically I was out $650 on it. The only thing wrong with it is it has a Post Ban upper, so basically no removing the accessory on the end of the barrel and no bayonet lug. The latter is of no consequence, the former annoys me but I see this upper as merely a spare anyway.

The other is "my" AR15. It's a mutt made of Stag, DPMS, and Bushmaster parts. Works just fine, although I do need to replace the magazine catch button. Managed to lose it somehow.

The only advantage of the Bushmaster seems to be slightly better fit and finish, as if the parts match ever so slightly better.

MechAg94
October 2, 2006, 03:06 PM
So how much labor would the average manufacturer spend to assemble all the parts into a fully inspected and functioning AR to ship to a customer?

I have an Armalite as well for around $700. I think be box says eagle arms, but the rifle says Armalite. No complaints at all.

MachIVshooter
October 3, 2006, 12:27 AM
I have an Armalite as well for around $700. I think be box says eagle arms, but the rifle says Armalite. No complaints at all.

Eagle arms purchased Armalite some time back. They changed the name back to Armalite in 1994, IIRC. AFAIK, they still sell the economy models under the Eagle name.

A new M15A2 will run ~$900, so for $700 ya done good.

GYPSY51RIDER
October 14, 2006, 04:46 PM
I have quite a few of these are they legal to sell? 5.56

Bartholomew Roberts
October 14, 2006, 04:56 PM
In the world of AR15s often the same people that make Part A for Brand X resell it cheaper as the same Part A with Brand Y stamped on it.

A more accurate statement would be that in the world of AR15s the same people that make Part A for Brand X, also make Part A for Brand Y; but to a different standard and tolerance - this is why Brand Y can sell it cheaper.

Another thing that happens a lot is Brand Y buys the Part A that Brand X rejected because Brand Y has lower standards and most of the time it doesn't make a difference. This is particularly prevalent where the standard has some military purpose (like being able to function in -60F weather) that 99% of Brand Y shooters will never know about or use.

And that is fine; because the whole reason Brand Y exists is that not everybody needs what Brand X offers, so why pay extra for features you don't need? Just don't think you are getting Brand X at Brand Y prices.

Molon Labe
October 14, 2006, 05:05 PM
Supply and demand is the reason.

Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to take an Econ 101 course.

EdLaver
October 14, 2006, 05:05 PM
AR 15 rifles are so expensive simply due to demand...kinda like gasoline. They are quite possibly THE most popular rifle on the market and thats another reason why there are so many modifications, upgrades, and accessories available for them. They are interchangable with the bigger calibers by the push of two pins and they just outright look intimidating to BG's.:evil:

Texas Gunman
October 14, 2006, 05:14 PM
I have owned many rifles and still do have a few, if we paid by the pound, the older rifles would cost alot more.

The AR & M16 are light weight, well designed fighting rifles.

Also it being in 223/556, it is supper accurate, also can tote alot more ammo.

Considering today cost for living now days, ARs dont really cost that much, heck I pay right at $400 for my monthly light bill.

TG

redneck2
October 14, 2006, 05:36 PM
Supply and demand is the reason.

Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to take an Econ 101 course.
Uhhhh, no...

Since so many of you think every manufacturer is the epitome of a rip off, we go back to the old answer...

Make 'em yourself. Yes, you too can be in the firearms manufacturing business. You apply for the permits to be a manufacturer, pay the liability, pay the employees, the distribution costs, advertising, etc.

I love it when everyone says "yeah, we're getting screwed!!!" Well, go into business, make a quality $350 AR and I'll be first in line.

If somebody could make a $350 AR at a profit, it would have been done a LONG time ago. Take the Econ 101 course and learn that, in a free economy, the guy that does it the cheapest/best typically wins out. If a $350 AR were possible, it would have been done a long time ago.

Patents have expired. Nothing to stop you. Heck, you don't even have to pay engineering, patent, or design people or fees. Just set up and go for it.

There ain't no free lunch.

Fosbery
October 14, 2006, 05:59 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

Euclidean
October 14, 2006, 06:57 PM
A more accurate statement would be that in the world of AR15s the same people that make Part A for Brand X, also make Part A for Brand Y; but to a different standard and tolerance - this is why Brand Y can sell it cheaper.

Another thing that happens a lot is Brand Y buys the Part A that Brand X rejected because Brand Y has lower standards and most of the time it doesn't make a difference. This is particularly prevalent where the standard has some military purpose (like being able to function in -60F weather) that 99% of Brand Y shooters will never know about or use.

And that is fine; because the whole reason Brand Y exists is that not everybody needs what Brand X offers, so why pay extra for features you don't need? Just don't think you are getting Brand X at Brand Y prices.

But that's exactly what's happening. It's like buying LEDs. The supposedly higher quality ones come out of the same bin as the rest of them, the only difference is you're paying someone to sort through them for you and say "I think this one is marginally better" based on whatever arbitrary criteria. In the case of LEDs it's normally "Well I think this one looks better when I test it so it costs more..."

Pick any part of the AR15, let's say the trigger. Let's take a box of 1000 triggers from the plant and dump them out on your desk. There is someone out there who feels they must absolutely have the best trigger out of those 1000. You can make money by playing on their demand. Now maybe they have a good reason for that or maybe they don't, it doesn't matter, you're here to make some money.

But you've got to make it sound good to the buyer, so you say "Well you see this particular batch of five triggers, I just did a test and I can guarantee you they all have a minimum Rockwell hardness of 58." You talk it up somehow.

It's nothing dishonest, that person was willing to pay you to say that 5 out of 1000 should cost more for some arbitrary reason. The buyer is not paying for a better quality part, the buyer is paying for scrutiny and reassurance.

The truth is in reality, those triggers all came from the same assembly line on the same tooling made by the same people. While there is no guarantee the rest of them meet that same spec, the likelihood they do not is quite poor.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 14, 2006, 08:26 PM
The truth is in reality, those triggers all came from the same assembly line on the same tooling made by the same people. While there is no guarantee the rest of them meet that same spec, the likelihood they do not is quite poor.

Well, you'd be surprised. Particularly on areas like 1913 rails. As I mentioned earlier, the first place manufacturers will cut costs is by reducing standards that most of their customers don't need. The military might specify a certain item be made out of a particular steel and subject to certain specifications because it determined that using a cheaper steel meant a 10% increase in failures over the lifespan of the part and that the cost of replacing the amount of parts they planned to buy amounted to more than the cost of machining it out of the more expensive steel.

However, the average joe has no way to even recognize that problem since they don't buy in quantities, test or do statistical analysis over a significant sample size. In a market where cost is a major consideration and the warranty liability can be limited by limiting warranty to one year or so, a manufacturer can use the cheaper steel and cut costs to make his product more competitive.

If I have to replace a $50 part 10% more often, chances are good I won't recognize a difference to begin with - and even if I did, it probably doesn't make much sense to pay $60 for that extra 10% chance unless I am buying that part by the thousands. It is these kind of tiny differences that let manufacturers undercut price on a rifle that meets the military acceptance standards by several hundred dollars usually.

>SHOCK<^>WAVE<
October 14, 2006, 08:32 PM
Euclidean
But that's exactly what's happening. It's like buying LEDs. The supposedly higher quality ones come out of the same bin as the rest of them, the only difference is you're paying someone to sort through them for you and say "I think this one is marginally better" based on whatever arbitrary criteria. In the case of LEDs it's normally "Well I think this one looks better when I test it so it costs more..."


We had a very accurate machine that measured wavelength
brightness and voltage of every one of the 13000 dies we got
out of one 2 inch sapphire wafer. I can't image some one doing
by hand or eye considering there the size of a grain of sand.


http://www.compoundsemiconductor.net/articles/news/5/8/2/1

mrmeval
October 14, 2006, 09:05 PM
It depends on the capacity and the state. The Federal ban is over so you can legally sell them in any state that hasn't banned them.


GYPSY51RIDER
I have quite a few of these are they legal to sell? 5.56

GYPSY51RIDER
October 14, 2006, 09:25 PM
I have 20's and 30's where would a good place to sell them be?
thanks

mrmeval
October 14, 2006, 09:50 PM
Um, how about here? :)
http://www.thehighroad.org/forumdisplay.php?f=23

You might look around online for prices. I can get factory new colt 30 rounders for under $25
some of the 20 rounders bring more but I have no idea why.


GYPSY51RIDER

I have 20's and 30's where would a good place to sell them be?
thanks

Kaylee
October 15, 2006, 01:16 PM
Even when I was making a hair above minimum wage as a just-out-of-college kid, a basic AR was still only two weeks pay,give or take. Now even after absolutely insane confiscatory taxes, a good AR and optic is still about two weeks pay. That's well within the normal range of a quality arm through history - considerably cheaper than many of our ancestors would have paid actually! So I don't consider them expensive at all in the grand scheme of things.

Compared to imported AKs and such, the're expensive sure. But you're looking at a product manufactured by American labor, typically in expensive areas (northeast, Illinois,etc) and comparing it to imported military leftovers and newer products manufactured by much much cheaper labor in the old Combloc countries.

Apples and oranges. A new production AK with similar QC from Vector or the like easily reaches into the same pricerange as ARs, and that's with a fair amount of imported parts.

and oh yes - Onmilo? You said..

With todays dollar and basing the manufacturing cost on a basic rifle with no frills, the cost of production of a single M16 is about $425.00 US
The AR15 cost runs slightly less because there are fewer parts involved and a few less machining steps, about $400.00.

Can I ask where that info is from? I'm presuming it's referring to the 3-shot burst models, yes? The safe/semi/full mechanism should be if anything cheaper to manufacture than the ARs I would think.

Redneck with a 40
October 15, 2006, 01:33 PM
8 SKS rifles = the price of one AR-15.:D In a harsh environment with sand, snow, rain, mud, I'd bet my life on the SKS, as it will continue to fire. I'm not sure the AR could handle very harsh conditions without jamming up.

The soldiers in Iraq clean their M-16's 3 times a day, regardless of whether they fire them or not!

TechBrute
October 15, 2006, 03:45 PM
It never ceases to amaze me when people ask why something costs "so much" the answers they get.

First, what are you comparing an AR against that you consider it "expensive?"

Second, do a little research:
1) Look into the price of machining something.
2) Look into the price of assemblers. Don't forget to include benefits, and don't forget that they are american workers.
3) Look into the price of high quality materials.
4) Hire some lawyers to defend you against every junk lawsuit that doesn't involve doctors.
5) Look into the price of advertising.
6) Look into the price of insurance.
7) Look into the price of facilities.
8) Don't forget to contribute: PACs, Lobbyists, etc.

Any questions left?

Remander
October 15, 2006, 07:16 PM
Thanks for all the answers. Some took my question as a complaint, but it was just curiousity about the price of AR's relative to other guns.

I'm pretty rich, so I buy whatever I want and don't worry about the price. :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Why are AR-15's so expensive?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!