[Min]

Of US firearms manufacturers that make their products here in this country, I realized that only Smith and Wesson is left. True, Ruger is another, but I would not consider them in the same premium class as Smith and Wesson. Don't get me wrong, Ruger makes some fine firearms, but their products do not reach the legendary status of the Smith and Wesson revolvers. Comparing Ruger to Smith and Wesson is like comparing Glock to HK. The heritage, the mystique, etc still belong to Smith and Wesson.

Other companies, like Browning and Winchester, though with US legacies, are now controlled by foreign interests. And they don't actually manufacture arms any more.

Springfield Armory makes some guns here in the US, but many of their models are contract from Brazil and imported from Croatia.

Colt is another premium arms maker, but the company does not match Smith and Wesson in terms of corporate size and products offered to the CIVILIAN market. Colt makes most of its profit from government/military sales.

Smith and Wesson have turned out some flops - like the Sigma pistols - but their revolvers continue to be the benchmark, and enjoy world renown. And they are ALL made in the USA.

That said, if you want to support the American economy, then the only guns you should buy are those made by Smith and Wesson!

[Kenneth Lew]

What about Kimber and Remington?

[Schuey2002]

Or Wilson Combat? :scrutiny:

[Greg L]

Freedom Arms

[Min]

Of the two companies suggested - Kimber and Wilson - they are still relatively small. Some of Kimber's guns/frames/components are imported from other countries. Wilson started out as a 1911 tuner. They have expanded to shotguns etc but in my opinion they are still semi-custom, and not a premium manufacturer i.e. they outsource some components.

[J Miller]

That said, if you want to support the American economy, then the only guns you should buy are those made by Smith and Wesson!

BUNK! :cuss:

Using yor criteria, that is the age of the company as a factor to determine wheather or not it is a premium manufacture is faulty.
Quality, quanty, durability, consistancy, inovation, is all part of the criteria that must be considered.
Another criteria is support of our gun rights.

I believe strongly that even though Ruger has stepped in it with the mag ban issue, it hasn't soiled itself near as bad a S&W has.

To support the American economy you should buy from an American owned, American run, American supplied company as much as is possible.
Weather or not it is S&W, or Ruger, or Kimber (I belive S&W makes their frames) or Dan Wesson, or Freedom Arms is not important.
They are all American.

S&W isn't the only game in town.

[hanko]

Freedom Arms (another vote), Armalite, Bushmaster, DSArms, the list goes on.

How can you recommend anyone spend money with a gun company that hopped into the bed of Bill & Janet??

Disgusting.

-hanko

[Min]

I'm not as hard on Smith and Wesson for that move as some of you guys. It was more of a PR tactic, in my opinion. They wanted to survive. They sought to make a deal with the devil. Okay, so they made a mistake. Their products have transcended to icon status in the American pop culture, however. I say forgive and go on.

[Standing Wolf]

Colt is another premium arms maker, but the company does not match Smith and Wesson in terms of corporate size and products offered to the CIVILIAN market.

Colt was a premium arms maker, but to judge by the quality of $1,000+ Pythons I've seen in the past six months, it thinks it's competing with Taurus and Charles Daly.

Smith & Wesson's quality is no higher than Ruger's, and the company hopped into bed with the Snopes Clinton-Liar Gore régime.

[bogie]

Premium small arms?

Methinx you've missed Kelbly's, Viper, Hall, BAT Machine, Farley, etc...

[cratz2]

I do believe that if I were to be stuck only shooting Colt's guns, I'd be pretty happy.

An AR15/M4 type gun, their Ultralight bolt guns were decent if a bit overpriced and a selection of my favorite handgun. All that's missing is a shotgun.

Ruger wouldn't be bad either... Not crazy about their pistols but they work. Smaller revolver for carry and tons of rifles and shotguns from which to chose.

I still stand by my statement that CZ is probably the best balanced gun company around. FN is amazing but I'm more in tune with the CZ offerings.

[Apple a Day]

American companies?
Pick one
http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/stats/afmer/afmer2001.pdf

[BigG]

I agree S&W is the only game in town for a DA revo. Like Cratz2, I would also be happy to stick with my Colt's pistols and rifles if I had to. Luckily, we are not yet on the horns of such a dilemma.

[Dave R]

Wow, according to the BATF site that Apple lists:

-Ruger outsold S&W in pistols 2-to-1 last year.
-BRYCO! Sold more pistols than S&W last year.

Ruger even sold more revolvers.

[Peetmoss]

What ever your smokin please share cause it must be good.

[hanko]

I'm not as hard on Smith and Wesson for that move as some of you guys. It was more of a PR tactic, in my opinion. They wanted to survive. They sought to make a deal with the devil. Okay, so they made a mistake. Their products have transcended to icon status in the American pop culture, however. I say forgive and go on.
Not a PR tactic, and not a matter of survival; they caved. I hold Glock with their penchant for BF-ing and WmRuger for his hi-cap magazine attitude in the same category. I'll vote with my $$, but you're obviously welcome to do the same with yours.

I'm not sure I'd brag about being an icon in American pop culture. I'd say true icons as far as weapons makers are concerned are Colt and Winchester.

Was your opening post on this thread serious, or a troll??

-hanko

[AR-10]

It was more of a PR tactic, in my opinion.

That statement leaves me nearly speachless. Maybe it's the whole internet/thought translation/getting the wrong impression/thing.


Signing the agreement was not a PR tactic.


Signing the agreement was more of a spineless/survive at any cost/ throw our customers to the lions tactic.

Buying the company with the agreement intact, that was a whole other list of sins. The New American Owners need to rectify that.

Ignoring the agreement and pretending it is not the five ton elephant standing in the middle of your living room is a PR tactic.

"Don't look it in the eye, maybe it will leave."

[The Rock]

Funniest title today...

The No Prize is in the mail.

Slick and Weasel must die.

That is all.

TR

[Zundfolge]

I agree S&W is the only game in town for a DA revo.

:rolleyes:

*cough* Dan Wesson *cough*


It was more of a PR tactic, in my opinion.
Have you actually read the agreement?

If so, go re-read it (http://www.nraila.org/FactSheets.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=31&1=View) ... it was designed to use S&W's position as a leader in the industry to force other companies into the agreement too (thankfully the Clintons have no idea how the free market works).

[TechBrute]

Good god... there is so much wrong with your first post, I don't even know where to start, except to say "puff and pass, dude, puff and pass".

[rebbryan]

isn't springfield still American :confused:

[Gewehr98]

What, they're not American? :D

[Tamara]

...STI, Les Baer, Caspian...

[John G]

Don't feed the trolls, folks. :rolleyes:

[rebbryan]

i like trolls, with their cute little hair you style it anywhere!

http://collectdolls.about.com/library/graphics/troll.jpg

[Ala Dan]

Greeting's All-

In double-action revolver's, I agree with Min's comment's;

but

In self-loader's, how about SigArms of Exeter, NH?


Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[Min]

Hmm...I'm not a troll, but I'll make controversial statements as I see fit.

You people are letting politics cloud your judgement. I guess the old bitterness is still alive and well.

What I meant by PREMIUM and AMERICAN some people may have mistunderstood. Winchester is not an American company. They're owned by FN Herstal of Belgium. Springfield Armory gets its frames and some of its guns from Brazil. Others from Croatia. Remington is another premium American company, but they are not primarily an arms maker anymore. They're more into accessories now like shooting glasses, ammunition, etc. Sure they make good rifles, but that's not their primary profit-maker.

Caspian, STI, Freedom Arms...they're still small potatoes against the corporate size of Smith and Wesson, HK, Glock, etc. When I say premium I'm talking about name-brand recognition, too.

Also, by AMERICAN, I mean Smith and Wesson does not outsource any of its frames, or other components to other countries. All guns and parts are 100% US-made.

I really like their revolvers. What are you gonna do, crucify me for sticking up for them?

[CZ-75]

Remington is another premium American company, but they are not primarily an arms maker anymore.

So? They're AMERICAN and they make GUNS.


You've placed so many conditions on the answer that S&W is the only one anyone could come up with. How's that for leading? :rolleyes:

[USGuns]

Kahr would be a good one to add to your list of US owned/made premium small arms manufacturers Min. They're slowly expanding their line and growing. Some here probably have problems with the Moonie connection though...

I agree though, we need to get past transgressions by previous owners/managers and support the new S&W.

Here's a list of US manufacturers:
https://home.attbi.com/~americanfirearmpage/firearms.htm

[TechBrute]

I really like their revolvers. What are you gonna do, crucify me for sticking up for them? No, we'll crucify you for the inflamatory and somewhat ignorant statement that you started your post with.
http://images.ar15.com/forums/smiles/anim_bs.gif

[sm]

Ok so I misread the "current" part.

What about Marlin?

Careful now, we have some lever-gun fans here...

[hanko]

I agree though, we need to get past transgressions by previous owners/managers and support the new S&W.
and, even more nonsensical...
You people are letting politics cloud your judgement. I guess the old bitterness is still alive and well.
for the two of you who cannot fathom why we should support a weapons manufacturer who wants to sell out the concept of the 2nd amendment, here's the text of what Smith bent over backwards for. Note that the "new S&W" has done nothing to rescind this agreement. Further, isn't it kind of special that the "new S&W" just happens to have their trigger locks all over everything??

I believe the 2nd was clear in its intent; if you need further clarity as to what it means, check the journals and notes of our Founding Fathers.

SAFETY AND DESIGN

All handguns must meet the following safety and design standards:

Second "hidden" serial number, to prevent criminals from obliterating serial numbers.
External locking device sold with all guns within 60 days.
Internal locking device on all guns within 24 months.
Smart Guns -- Authorized User Technology.
Manufacturers commit 2% of annual firearms revenues to the development of authorized user technology.
Within 36 months, authorized user technology will be included in all new firearm models, with the exception of curios and collectors’ firearms.
If top eight manufacturers agree, authorized user technology will be included in all new firearms.
Child Safety. Within 12 months, handguns will be designed so they cannot be readily operated by a child under 6.
Performance test. All firearms will be subject to a performance test to ensure safety and quality.
Drop test. All firearms will be subject to a test to ensure they do not fire when dropped.
All pistols must meet the following additional requirements:

Safety device. Positive manually operated safety device.
Magazine disconnectors must be available on all pistols to customers who desire the feature, within 12 months.
Chamber load indicators on all pistols, showing whether the pistol is loaded, within 12 months.
Large capacity magazines. New firearm designs will not be able to accept large-capacity magazines that were manufactured prior to September 1994. (Manufacture of such magazines has been prohibited since that date.)
Law enforcement and military exception. If law enforcement agencies or the military certify the need, exceptions to these requirements may be made. Manufacturers will ask that these guns not be resold to the civilian market.

Warnings about safe storage and handling included with all firearms within six months.

Illegal firearms. Manufacturers will not sell firearms that can readily be converted into fully automatic weapons or that are resistant to fingerprints.



SALES AND DISTRIBUTION

Code of Conduct. The manufacturers will sell only to authorized dealers and distributors and allow their authorized distributors to sell only to authorized dealers. Authorized dealers and distributors will agree to a code of conduct. If manufacturers receive notice of a violation by an authorized dealer or distributor, they will take action against the dealer or distributor, including termination of sales to the dealer or distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.

The code of conduct will require authorized dealers and distributors to:

Gun shows: make no gun show sales unless all sales at the gun show are completed only after a background check.
Brady checks: wait as long as necessary for a completed Brady check showing that the purchaser is not a felon or otherwise prohibited before selling a gun to the purchaser.
Safety training for purchasers: transfer firearms only to individuals who have passed certified safety course or exam and demonstrate to purchasers how to use all safety devices and how to load, unload, and safely store the firearm before completing the sale.
Multiple handgun sales: all purchasers of multiple handguns to take only one handgun from the store on the day of sale, at which point a multiple sales report will be filed with ATF. The remainder of the guns can only be collected after 14 days.
Employee training: require all employees to attend ATF-approved training and to pass a exam on firearms laws, straw purchasers, illegal trafficking indicators, and gun safety.
Insurance: carry liability insurance where available, with a minimum coverage of $1 million for each incident.
Inventory control: maintain an electronic inventory tracking plan within 24 months
Security: implement a security plan for securing firearms.
Child access: require persons under 18 to be accompanied by adults in gun stores or gun sections of stores.
Weapons attractive to criminals: not sell large capacity magazines or semiautomatic assault weapons.
Compliance: provide law enforcement, government regulators, and the Oversight Commission established in this Agreement with access to documents necessary to determine compliance; cooperate fully in the Agreement’s Oversight mechanism.
Crime gun traces: maintain an electronic record of all ATF trace requests and report trace requests to manufacturers.
Indicted dealers: forgo firearms sales to licensed dealers known to be under indictment.
Straw purchasers: not to make sales to straw purchasers.
Manufacturer commitments. Manufacturers will:

Provide quarterly sales data to ATF.
Not market guns in any manner designed to appeal to juveniles or criminals.
Refrain from selling any modified/sporterized semi-automatic pistol of type that cannot be imported into U.S.
Reaffirm policy of not placing advertisements in vicinity of schools, high crime zones, and public housing.
Implement a security plan for securing firearms.
Designate an officer to ensure compliance with the Agreement.
Corporate responsibility for crime gun traces. If an authorized dealer or distributor has a disproportionate number of crime guns traced to it within three years of sale, the manufacturers will take action, including possible termination or suspension, against the dealer or distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.



Hmm...I'm not a troll, but I'll make controversial statements as I see fit.
You can be as controversial as you want, but the responses you garnered were replies to the original thread you started.

I really like their revolvers. What are you gonna do, crucify me for sticking up for them?
Crucifixion is currently illegal. I really like their revolvers myself, but I buy used ones made prior to the Clinton/Smith matrimonial ceremony. I'll not comment on the 'quality' of Smith's apparel, luggage, or "cutlery", other than to say you can get better quality for less money, unless you need the self-esteem boost that you get by walking around with some company's name on your duffel bag.

-hanko

[Tamara]

Caspian, STI, Freedom Arms...they're still small potatoes against the corporate size of Smith and Wesson, HK, Glock, etc. When I say premium I'm talking about name-brand recognition, too.

Porsche makes considerably fewer autos than Chevy every year, too.

Corporate size has diddly-all to do with brand recognition; every adolescent male in my high school knew what a Lamborghini Countach was, despite the fact that Lamborghini's annual production run of the car wouldn't have filled a drug-store parking lot.

[John G]

It seems every time I read a post by Tamara, I say to myself "I wish I'd said that!"



Carry on. :cool:

[winwun]

I see the subjective term of "quality" as being a depreciated value in the new generations that have been raised on the concept that "junk" is OK.

Who can say that stamped lettering that raises and defaces and distorts the surface of the metal is OK ? Is not machined lettering better, more toward the unattainable goal of "perfection" ?

Who can say that a perceptibly rough, gritty action is OK, when all one has to do is to pick up an old Colt or Winchester and feel the "oiled velvet" of a mechanism as it should be ?

If all you are going to play is Turkey In The Straw, then you don't need an Amati.

I suggest that there are few under the age of 50 who would recognize quality if it bit them in the butt.