Is Colt Dead?


PDA






mm1ut1
July 27, 2009, 09:12 AM
S&W seems to come out with new or "Classic" models every year, but Colt appears to be content with sitting on its hands. With their history of small pistols you would think that they would come out with a new pocket 380.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is Colt Dead?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
22-rimfire
July 27, 2009, 09:28 AM
You would think so, but don't count on it. Colt seems to be content with their military contracts and they are apparently selling all the semi-auto pistols they can manufacture. I have hoped to see a small carry revolver, but that is unlikely. Smith just has more sales and capital for expansion than Colt as I understand it. Plus the Classic lines are just re-do's of former revolvers with the "classic" name attached to the model.

hinton03
July 27, 2009, 09:31 AM
Colt announced several new 1911 models in 2008, including a rail model. Check out their web page.

Quiet
July 27, 2009, 09:43 AM
During the mid/-90s, the management made the decision to get out of the civilian market and concentrated all their efforts to secure/maintain government contracts.

During the late-90s, Colt sold off the majority of the tooling they used to make their double-action revolvers and non-1911 pistols and converted what was left for M16/M4 production.

During the early-00s, Colt sold off the rights to their .380ACP handguns to SIG.

watchman101
July 27, 2009, 09:48 AM
Colt worth more dead than alive.

cityslicker
July 27, 2009, 10:18 AM
Maybe one day Colt will loose their military contract, and then they'll take a hard look at the civilian market. I would like to see them succeed with both.

Old Fuff
July 27, 2009, 10:30 AM
Colt's handgun division is a small part of a larger corporation that isn't (at least so far) interested in putting any money into new handguns. Without some considerable investment there will be no new handguns, just variants of the 1911 platform or the even older 1873 Single Action Army. It is doubtful that any new double-action revolvers will be introduced, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for something chambered in .380 ACP. All of this is sad for those that have enjoyed the substantual mix of guns once made by Colt, but right now the future doesn't look bright. Put bluntly, the handgun part of the operation is being starved to death by a brain-dead, bean counter, corporation management. :banghead:

1911Tuner
July 27, 2009, 10:39 AM
Don't count Colt out just yet. Can't say more than "stay tuned"...no pun intended.

oneounceload
July 27, 2009, 10:46 AM
Maybe one day Colt will loose their military contract, and then they'll take a hard look at the civilian market. I would like to see them succeed with both.

They did just lose their exclusive contract for the M4.

Maybe another company can buy them out.........like S&W

feedthehogs
July 27, 2009, 10:49 AM
Maybe one day Colt will loose their military contract

Since they lost the patent so to speak on the M4 with the military, the military now can shop the M4 to many other makers for a better price.

This could very well motivate Colt back to civilian sales.

ArmedBear
July 27, 2009, 10:52 AM
Colt is shortsighted not to get into the CCW snubbie market, but some of that's water under the bridge. I don't think they have the in-house tooling, machinery, or skilled people on any level, to build good DA revolvers any more.

Deanimator
July 27, 2009, 11:40 AM
Maybe another company can buy them out.........like S&W
Hope not. I wouldn't buy a Colt with the ILS either.

I'd rather see Cimarron buy them.

Dr. Fresh
July 27, 2009, 12:37 PM
I'd be happy if all they did was reintroduce the Cobra/DS series.

Old Fuff
July 27, 2009, 12:38 PM
Well Colt's handgun division has been on the block for years, maybe decades - and no one has been willing to pay what the owners want. As it is, each year the company's value to a potential buyer goes down while new buyers come into the market witn no particular knowledge or interest in what have been offering.

Yes, what they make is very good, but they make much less then they're competitors who turn out guns using the same Colt designs.

Old Fuff
July 27, 2009, 12:43 PM
I'd be happy if all they did was reintroduce the Cobra/DS series.

Even if the MSRP (Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price) was in the $800 to $900 ballpark? Colt couldn't produce those old designs for less. Come out with a similar but new revolver? That would take a lot of money to design and tool - and they don't have the money. :banghead:

larry starling
July 27, 2009, 12:45 PM
Colt isn't dead yet! Though they do seem to go down that road very often. Colt has a history of bad management and poor timing with product releases. Colt releases a 1911 with a rail several years after everyone else has done it and the popularity is on the down slope. Just one example mind you! we could have several pages of examples of Colt's mistakes! But as a Colt supporter I hope they continue to survive! But they better start making what we consumers want or they might be in trouble once again.......:evil:

SaxonPig
July 27, 2009, 12:45 PM
The 1911 and the limited production SAA is all Colt offers. Colt has been DOA for a long time. Used Pythons sell for $1200+ but Colt can't built a new one and turn a profit. Mismanagement, vultures wearing union badges, and terrible QC doomed the once great handgun maker. Was it about 10 years ago a retired general took over as president and all the magazine touted the changes that were coming? Yeah, right. Look at all the changes that have occurred. Throw the dirt in.

RIP.

CoRoMo
July 27, 2009, 01:06 PM
...vultures wearing union badges...

The plague of far too many of today's firearm manufacturers.

Vern Humphrey
July 27, 2009, 01:09 PM
Colt has a very bad track record with new introductions -- the Double Eagle (AKA the Double Turkey), the Colt 2000, the Colt Anaconda. None of these succeeded. I suspect Colt will not bring out anything new in the near future.

watchman101
July 27, 2009, 01:28 PM
I do want Colt to be successful. But all they have introduced since their divorce from us civilians have been junks. Before all they had to do is have the word "Colt" on their piece and it would sell. Now Colt = junk. Colt is a good company. They came from bankruptcy before, and showed everyone that they are one of a kind. But they can't continue like this. They need a major cleansing job in their intestines.

fireman 9731
July 27, 2009, 01:33 PM
Straight from the Colt website:

Despite Colt’s storied history, we know that our legacy for the 21st Century will rest on our continuing responsiveness to customer needs and the same inventiveness, innovation and commitment to quality and excellence that made Colt firearms famous 150 years ago. Accordingly, while we continue to offer classic model Colt pistols, we are proud to offer new pistol models designed to meet all the needs and to exceed the highest expectations of the most demanding customers.

Just be patient...

Vern Humphrey
July 27, 2009, 01:34 PM
They need a major cleansing job in their intestines.
Presumably by cr*pping on the consumer. :-)

I'm a Colt man -- I've only owned one S&W in my life, and that was found in the wreckage of a shot-down C-130. But all my Colts are old Colts.

BBQLS1
July 27, 2009, 02:37 PM
Who bought the DA revolver tooling?

Blakenzy
July 27, 2009, 02:40 PM
No, Colt is not dead yet, but it has been trying real hard to bite the dust. Ever see Bill Murray Groundhog Day?

vit
July 27, 2009, 02:53 PM
The Colt Koolaid is strong stuff. Folks will bash S&W and Ruger for their past doings, yet will fall over themselves for a Colt "LE only" models. Their civilian AR's come w/o flash hiders and bayo lugs, collapsible stocks are pinned open.

ArmedBear
July 27, 2009, 03:26 PM
WRT Colt pistols, there are plenty of 1911s out there. REALLY NICE ONES.

For Colt to really be "alive" they'd have to be doing more than rehashing their old military guns from 1873 and 1911.

Vern Humphrey
July 27, 2009, 03:41 PM
For Colt to be really alive, they'll have to do what Winchester did -- get out of their old, union-ridden contracts and move to a modern facility.

trbon8r
July 27, 2009, 04:15 PM
I've never seen a firearms manufacturer that folks like to kick around and wish ill upon as much as Colt. For the life of me I don't understand why. Colt has certainly produced some lemons, and went stale on much of their R&D over the last two decades. They made several poor business decisions and paid a price for that in the form of a painful and embarrassing bankruptcy. Then again I can think of some lemons and horrible business decisions from S&W, Kimber, Sig, etc.

While the other 1911 manufacturers around Colt's price point have lowered their quality, Colt has moved towards improving quality, and use only 3 MIM parts in their guns. If the buyer deems necessary, the offending MIM parts can be replaced for less than a hundred bucks. Colt has installed new CNC machines in their plant, and made a substantial investment in their civilian firearm production capability. However all we hear is that Colt is only interested in military contracts and doesn't care about consumers. All I know is, there has never been a point where I could not find a new Colt handgun on the shelf, or at least order one if I wanted to.

I too would like to see Colt be more innovative, and produce a handgun that is competitive in today's market for military and police contracts. In the meantime, I'm content buying their current offerings. You can't go too wrong as a company when you produce a version of the best designed fighting pistol in history. ;) For what it is worth, from what I have read Colt is currently profitable and sells every handgun they can make. They don't sound dead to me.

Vern Humphrey
July 27, 2009, 04:19 PM
All I know is, there has never been a point where I could not find a new Colt handgun on the shelf, or at least order one if I wanted to.
As long as it's a Model 1911 variant.

Where's the Cobras, Anacondas, Detective Specials, Diamondbacks, and so on?

rbernie
July 27, 2009, 04:24 PM
For Colt to really be "alive" they'd have to be doing more than rehashing their old military guns from 1873 and 1911.I think very highly of my Colt 1911s. But there is no doubt that they've been riding the same few models for a very long time. Perhaps the AllAmerican2000 and DoubleEagle soured them on new design efforts. ;)

Where's the Cobras, Anacondas, Detective Specials, Diamondbacks, and so on?In general I don't see it as unreasonable for Colt to have abandoned their hand-fitted models, but this is an excellent point - why discontinue the TrooperMKIII and other models that require little/no hand fitting?

trbon8r
July 27, 2009, 04:30 PM
Where's the Cobras, Anacondas, Detective Specials, Diamondbacks, and so on?

Where are they? The same place the hand fitted S&W revolvers are, the graveyard because they weren't profitable. Blame the consumer for that. In other words the guy who was happy with a Taurus or Rossi because it cost 200 bucks less.

Vern Humphrey
July 27, 2009, 04:34 PM
The Anaconda and Diamondback were not handfitted, as I recall. In fact, the Anaconda was the last revolver Colt brought out.

chuckusaret
July 27, 2009, 04:41 PM
Why would Colt want to jeopardize their military business? The military contracts provide steady income and are not based on the whims of a small number of civilian gun buyers. Millions of guns vs. thousands. I have a 1991 series Colt Combat Commander and enjoy it more than I would any that are produced by other companies. Colt still has a very large following of gun buyers. I buy Colt because they are Colt and IMO has the best overall reputation of all the gun manufacturers.

Vern Humphrey
July 27, 2009, 04:45 PM
"a small number of civilian gun buyers?"

There was a recent story that claimed since the election, American have bought enough guns to completely arm both the Chinese and Indian armies (the two largest armies in the world, by a long chalk.)

And how would selling guns to civilians jeopardize their military contracts? FN manages to sell guns to both civilians and the Army with no problems.

Ky Larry
July 27, 2009, 05:17 PM
Colt doesn't have the skilled people to hand fit and finish their products like they used to. New guns probably wouldn't have the "feel' of a 50 year old Colt. No machine can build a gun like a dedicated craftsman can. I f you don't beleive me, just compare a standard, off-the-shelf S&W revolver from 40 years ago with what comes out of their custom shop today. It's a good thing "They don' build 'em like they used to." If they did, we couldn't afford "em.

I would like to see Colt develpoe new designs. It's important to our national defence to have a healthy gun industry.

damien
July 27, 2009, 05:25 PM
Colt's handgun division is a small part of a larger corporation that isn't (at least so far) interested in putting any money into new handguns. Without some considerable investment there will be no new handguns, just variants of the 1911 platform or the even older 1873 Single Action Army.

I have to assume they still have the rights to the Mustang/Pony. People still talk about those and they fetch good money used. Colt should bring those back. The market can still support a reliable all-steel compact pistol.

Also, isn't Colt still making the Anaconda after a long hiatus? There were some new ones floating around a couple of years ago.

I have an 8" Anaconda I bought in 1994 for about $479. Best looking .44 in my opinion.

Mike OTDP
July 27, 2009, 05:28 PM
if I were running Colt, I'd put money into a good set of CNC milling machines. VERY good milling machines.

Then design a New Python that didn't need hand fitting (or needed a minimal amount). Hand fitting was partly a compensation for machining tolerances...tighten the tolerances, and you can get away with less fitting. At a minimum, be able to measure parts so the hand-fitters could pick parts that will work together properly.

After that, I'd be tempted to cut against the grain...to exploit the Civil War Sesquicentennial with a new production 1851 Navy and 1860 Army revolver. No, not an Italian repro made to a price point, an AMERICAN gun made to the original quality specifications. If you've ever handled an original Colt percussion gun in good shape, you know what I'm talking about. The originals were built as if a man's life would depend on them, while the repros are made for plinking. BIG difference.

Beyond that? I'd look at a service pistol with an electronic trigger. And maybe a squeeze-cocker...an HK P7 with the bugs worked out, and in .45ACP.

yongxingfreesty
July 27, 2009, 05:32 PM
in the ar15 platform, colt isnt dead.

ArmedBear
July 27, 2009, 05:33 PM
an AMERICAN gun made to the original quality specifications. If you've ever handled an original Colt percussion gun in good shape, you know what I'm talking about.

I doubt Colt can do it.

USFA, on the other hand... More Colt than Colt, anyway.

Then design a New Python that didn't need hand fitting (or needed a minimal amount). Hand fitting was partly a compensation for machining tolerances...tighten the tolerances, and you can get away with less fitting. At a minimum, be able to measure parts so the hand-fitters could pick parts that will work together properly.


Exactly. CNC can make parts that fit together quite well.

And what's wrong with S&W's "Performance Center" model? Not every gun has to be a Python to be considered a good revolver. Surely, not all old Colts were, either.

in the ar15 platform, colt isnt dead.

What have they done lately? I don't mean churning out rifles and parts, I mean what's new from Colt? All the innovation in said platform seems to be coming from elsewhere.

ConstitutionCowboy
July 27, 2009, 05:52 PM
Who better to come out with a new production of 1908s?

Woody

DougDubya
July 27, 2009, 06:49 PM
if I were running Colt, I'd put money into a good set of CNC milling machines. VERY good milling machines.

Then design a New Python that didn't need hand fitting (or needed a minimal amount). Hand fitting was partly a compensation for machining tolerances...tighten the tolerances, and you can get away with less fitting. At a minimum, be able to measure parts so the hand-fitters could pick parts that will work together properly.

After that, I'd be tempted to cut against the grain...to exploit the Civil War Sesquicentennial with a new production 1851 Navy and 1860 Army revolver. No, not an Italian repro made to a price point, an AMERICAN gun made to the original quality specifications. If you've ever handled an original Colt percussion gun in good shape, you know what I'm talking about. The originals were built as if a man's life would depend on them, while the repros are made for plinking. BIG difference.

Beyond that? I'd look at a service pistol with an electronic trigger. And maybe a squeeze-cocker...an HK P7 with the bugs worked out, and in .45ACP.

You are my hero. Where's the slush fun to start this project?

(For shame not wanting to do a Dragoon or Walker reissue.)

damien
July 27, 2009, 06:49 PM
Who better to come out with a new production of 1908s?

Woody

They would probably have to rework the safety features to get them to modern standards. I wonder what they could sell them for.

Ky Larry
July 27, 2009, 07:15 PM
ArmedBear, I never said anything was wrong with the new S&W's. To me, they just don't feel as slick as the older ones do. YMMV.

ArmedBear
July 27, 2009, 07:19 PM
ArmedBear, I never said anything was wrong with the new S&W's. To me, they just don't feel as slick as the older ones do. YMMV.

I agree. Got both. Actually, my newer alloy J-frame feels a good deal slicker than the old ones, but the other guns, not so much.

I should have been clearer: I meant the Performance Center business model. Produce a good gun using whatever technology you can, then offer expensive versions that take more hand 'smithing.

There's no reason Colt couldn't do that, if they had CNC machines making GOOD revolvers. They could also still offer REALLY AMAZING revolvers to those willing to pay for them (well, if Colt got some gunsmiths like they used to have).

That's what I meant by the "Performance Center model.":) I just meant the idea of multiple tiers to serve multiple market niches.

ThrottleJockey72
July 27, 2009, 07:31 PM
I think Samuel Colt died quite a long time ago.

Ky Larry
July 27, 2009, 07:36 PM
ArmedBear, I agree about the Multi-tiered approch to marketing. Most of us drive Chevy's and Fords. A few of us drive Lincolns and Cadillacs. If Colt would take that approch, they would sell a lot more guns. They would sell a few new Pythons and a lot more Troopers. It would give them the cash to do R&D.

LRaccuracy
July 27, 2009, 07:54 PM
Remington, DPMS and Bushmaster are now owned by Cerberus. You know the company that bought Chrysler a few years back. Cerberus may be looking at giving Colt a run for their money in the Government contract arena. Cerberus has the capital and the civilian market is a good one, however with their clout, they could handle a Government contract too.

Hammerhead6814
July 27, 2009, 08:35 PM
I do not understand Colt these days. For over one-hundred years they were the innovators and mold-breakers in the firearms industry. Whether it was the .45 Long Colt, or the M1911A1 (M1911 was John Browning's design), or the BAR, they were the company that made new and interesting designs that would pave the way.

Today they aren't coming up with anything. Polymer pistols are Glock's territory, piston AR's are viewed abroad as an H&K idea (although everyone has been doing it), bullpup's are in use/being developed by Britain, France, Germany, Iran, China, Singapore, India, Australia, Austria, etc etc. What's Colt doing? Jack-****.

It's like something just took the life out of them.

Pietro Beretta
July 27, 2009, 10:57 PM
I just sent in my Colt XSE for warranty repair. I asked about the turn-around time for the repair. I quote per cary at COLT MFG: "The factory is shut down until next monday, I expect about a 30 day turn around time"

Cost cutting measure, or perhaps something else!?

2RCO
July 27, 2009, 11:01 PM
Don't count Colt out just yet. Can't say more than "stay tuned"...no pun intended.

I hope you are right Tuner. I'd love to see some new colt offerings. My dream would be an update 1903 or 1908. Now that'd make me happy.

Mags
July 27, 2009, 11:03 PM
Yes.

ArmedBear
July 27, 2009, 11:36 PM
It's like something just took the life out of them.

Laziness. It was too easy to do what they've been doing and live off past designs and reputation, and government contracts. The problem is, when someone beats them to a really great new design, they're finished.

Of course, you can do it in the civilian market, too. See Remington.

Dirtpile
July 28, 2009, 01:38 AM
The plague of far too many of today's firearm manufacturers.

Not just firearms manufacturers. Or just limited to manufacturing for that matter.

No, Colt is not dead yet, but it has been trying real hard to bite the dust. Ever see Bill Murray Groundhog Day?

A better analogy there never was.

And what's wrong with S&W's "Performance Center" model?

Hole in the frame? Lock or no lock it doesn't have the choked barrel or the vent rib and from what I've seen from S&W the bluing leaves a little to be desired.

GojuBrian
July 28, 2009, 01:44 AM
I was recently in the market for a 1911. After reading up on several brands, colt, Kimber, Dan Wesson, Para, Taurus, and the like I decided to go with the Kimber Pro CDP II. I like the looks of the Colt, but I've read way too much about their lackluster quality and not being what they use to be. It's sad imo that their quality went so lax.

I hope they change things back around soon.

hwp
July 28, 2009, 03:17 AM
Colt's military contracts are in NO danger of going away. How many other AR makers are unionized? None that I can think of. Obama will payback the village idiot vote (unions) with another contract.

Don't think for a second union loyalty to the left goes un-noticed by BHO. The BHO admin pushed a major auto bail out plan IMO only to appease organized labor. The govt is not required to accept the low bid. They WILL give preference to unions and minority owned suppliers.

stevemis
July 28, 2009, 04:25 AM
If they're not dead, they are certainly irrelevant. When was the last time you saw something innovative? from them? Oh yeah. They put some rails on a 1911. Please.

Lead, follow or get out of the way.

WVleo
July 28, 2009, 07:51 AM
After finding a sock drawer Colt Lawman MKIII 2" .357 at the LGS in mint condition and shooting the revolver I am surprised Colt couldn't keep manufacturing these guns ? I know they next improved the model to MK V and while neither were hand fitted, both seem popular today when You can find 1 ? These were machine produced I think ? Mine is a sweet shooter.........WVleo

StrawHat
July 28, 2009, 08:04 AM
Colts has a history of courting military handgun contracts. Some of the C&B revolvers, the Model P and the Model 1911 were all military contract guns only and civilian sales were not made for many years. It's the way they like to conduct business.

Maybe not what you or I would like but it seems to have worked for them.

Bringing out a new revolver would be an expense that considering the craving the American public has for self loading pistols, would not help them. Even reworking old models to new standards would be difficult. Everytime S&W chnages something on thier models you can hear the hue and cry for years, even if the change is for the good.

Old Fuff
July 28, 2009, 10:04 AM
Some of the C&B revolvers, the Model P and the Model 1911 were all military contract guns only and civilian sales were not made for many years.

Excluding the Walker model, where only 1000 plus a small over-run were produced before it was discontinued, all of the Colt's you mentioned were available within a year or so (often less) for commercial sales. The only Colt military model that was made exclusively for the Army was the model 1909 .45 revolver, but a commercial New Service chambered in .45 Colt was an exact duplicate except for the stocks (black hard rubber vs. plain walnut), and they were available before the government's order.

RDak
July 28, 2009, 11:14 AM
If I were running Colt, I'd put money into a good set of CNC milling machines. VERY good milling machines.

Trbon8r was correct about Colt buying new CNC machinery. I read an article at the Colt Forum by a member who toured the factory in December, 2008. He stated $3 million of new CNC machinery had very recently been purchased by Colt according to the supervisor. (I assume it is good machinery?)

So, let's hope they start making new models. I think they might just do that.

You'd think Colt would like to at least cash-in on the concealed carry snubbie market.

But, I really have no idea. However, $3 million in new CNC machinery was purchased by the civilian factory company. (IIRC, I don't think he was allowed to tour the military factory.)

Old Fuff
July 28, 2009, 11:46 AM
Sometimes you learn things in strange places…

Earlier this year Colt sold their archival collection… So what was that?

Well the collection mostly consisted of examples of their regular production models, kept for future examination; prototypes of possible new guns or mock-ups to show something being patented, or to show customers looking into special runs of a commemorative or what-not. In other words everything that they had done, were doing at one time or another, or proposed to do in the future. Some of the pieces in the collection dated back to before World War Two. You might have been dumbfounded while looking at handguns that should have been built, but never were. There were even some that they had planed to have made in China.

And they auctioned off the whole thing…

Because they wanted the money and also decided there was nothing in the collection they need down the road.

So much for the chance of Colt reintroducing some of those older models we all loved. Nope: They are gone… gone… gone. They didn’t even want to keep a collection to look at.

ArmedBear
July 28, 2009, 11:49 AM
Sounds like they ate the seed corn.

Interestingly, this collection could also have been good for PR. Sounds like they aren't interested in marketing, either.

Now, did USFA buy some of those prototypes, by chance?

collector14
July 28, 2009, 11:50 AM
I really love my Colt revolvers, but I agree with a few other posters. If Colt would come out with new versions of the 1903 and 1908 pocket hammerless models, I think there would be a lot of folks lined up to buy them (including me).

Old Fuff
July 28, 2009, 12:02 PM
Now, did USFA buy some of those prototypes, by chance?

There is no way of knowing because the buyers' identity would be considered confidential information.

One member of this forum did buy some pieces, but I won't name him unless he does so himself.

Among the "junk" :rolleyes: they got rid of were updated versions of the 1903/08 Pocket Model and 1908 Vest Pocket Model. Both original designs required that they be made using fully machined steel forgings, and in this day and age it wouldn't happen. Forget both as Colt won't bring them back.

RDak
July 28, 2009, 12:08 PM
Yes, I read about that Old Fuff. But I'm sure they still have the "blueprints" for all models.

I mean, they certainly still have the manufacturing plans and designs on paper for the snubbies and other revolvers don't they?

I assume they could program the CNC machines to make the parts from those plans. I'm not a machinist though.

illinois brass man
July 28, 2009, 12:44 PM
He stated $3 million of new CNC machinery had very recently been purchased by Colt according to the supervisor.

That is not a lot in the CNC equipment world if you are talking machines for mass production. That might set up a small jobshop, to build a few firearms a month.

ILBM

lanternlad1
July 28, 2009, 01:15 PM
Who bought the DA revolver tooling?

Armscor.
http://www.armscor.com.ph/revolvers.htm

Old Fuff
July 28, 2009, 04:16 PM
Yes, I read about that Old Fuff. But I'm sure they still have the "blueprints" for all models.

I wouldn't bet on that. For the record during the First World War they couldn't provide the War Department with a full set of blueprints covering the 1911 pistol, and the same was true when the Navy ask for a full set covering the 1903/08 Pocket Model during World War Two. :what:

I mean, they certainly still have the manufacturing plans and designs on paper for the snubbies and other revolvers don't they?

Maybe, maybe not. Since they go rid of all the production models I wouldn't bet they kept the blueprints. Somehow I can't get through to people that Colt will never produce these guns again because they couldn't make them for a price people would be willing to pay. I believe that everything related to them has been sold, auctioned or thrown away.

I assume they could program the CNC machines to make the parts from those plans.

Again I doubt it. If they do have the prints, dimensions and tolerances are set up to make parts with extra metal for hand fitting at certain points. Hand fitting is no longer acceptable in the 21st century. Guns aren't forged steel anymore - they make them out of molded polymer.


I'm not a machinist though.

Doesn't matter. Gun parts are molded, stamped or made on automated machinery.

Vern Humphrey
July 28, 2009, 04:30 PM
I wouldn't bet on that. For the record during the First World War they couldn't provide the War Department with a full set of blueprints covering the 1911 pistol, and the same was true when the Navy ask for a full set covering the 1903/08 Pocket Model during World War Two.
True. For all of Browning's genius, his designs required tweaking when it came to mass production. Colt had developed all sorts of little gimmicks -- and not documented them. Even if they had blueprints, those showed the M1911 as designed, not as actually built.

I would seriously doubt that Colt could mass produce a quality revolver nowadays -- especially a new design.

Mike OTDP
July 28, 2009, 04:37 PM
I figure that the potential market for a 1903 or 1908 isn't that big...and there are too many old guns floating around. There might be a good market for refinishing and restamping, but it's not that big.

The key is to go where the competition isn't. Don't bother doing a New and Improved 1911...EVERYBODY is making them. Ditto for the polymer DAO 9mm/.40.

A revived snubby? Ruger and S&W have that market pretty well sewn up. You would need something new, like the Ruger LCR, to make a serious inroad. It WOULD be possible to break in...if you had a dramatic change in the lockwork geometry. Remember, S&W has a better DA trigger pull than Colt - and it's all in the geometry of the lockwork. Address that issue, and Colt would have something.

Personally, I still like the idea of a remanufactured Colt percussion revolver...remade to a very high standard.

However, in the long term, I think the future may lay with electronics. People have gotten accustomed to having a rail...and electrical gadgets on the rail. And the high-end target pistols are rapidly making the transition to electronic triggers...which can deliver a dazzlingly good trigger pull, even by free pistol standards. There would seem to be a potential market for a fully electronic pistol...electronic trigger, built-in light/laser, etc. Maybe even with a red dot or holographic sight - possibly with a flip-up display that pops up and turns on when the gun is drawn.

The industry is having a good year, but that will end sometime. And whoever is ready for the future will stand a lot better chance of surviving than a firm that was geared to the past.

AJD
July 28, 2009, 04:51 PM
All this talk of old Colt designs...

I would imagine that if there was such a market for these pistols and revolvers than somebody else would already be a making them. I can't imagine that Colt's patents on these old designs are still in effect.

Colt makes 1911's, AR15's and SAA revolvers...and those are three extremely popular handgun designs among civilian shooters. The 1911 and AR15 in particular are probably the most popular auto pistol and most popular rifle in the United States today.

I've come to understand that Colt will never win with the consumers much like S&W will never win with the consumers.

The reason is that they have to compete with their past as well as the other companies like Glock, SIG, etc.

You have a great divide of Colt "fans". Those that want nothing more than Colt from the 1940's with a line-up consisting of nothing but blued steel, walnut, DA revolvers, SAA's, 1911's and 1903's and 08's.

Then you have the Colt fans that want anyting BUT "more of the same". A small .38 Special and .380 ACP pocket pistol for CCW, a new auto pistol design to compete for military and police contracts, a new rifle designs to replace the M16/M4, etc. etc.

If they introduce new handguns designs like a polymer frame hi-cap 9mm people will complain and say "Why don't they just bring back *Insert classic model name here* instead of producing a Glock clone like everyone else?".

And if they bring back the Python, Diamondback, Anaconda, Mustang, etc. people will complain and say "Ugg...more "replica" models like they did with the Series 70 and Delta Elite.....When will Colt introduce a NEW model!?!"

BTW: Colt is already planning to introduce a new auto pistol in January 2010 known as the Colt Tactical Pistol

Vern Humphrey
July 28, 2009, 05:08 PM
One of the problems that Colt faces is lack of familiarity to new shooters.

For example, there was a comment above about S&W having better triggers. That's not true -- the triggers on my Colts will equal or beat any S&W in single action shooting. In double action shooting, Colt triggers aren't inferior, but they are different, and call for a different shooting style. If you're shooting a S&W, you pull straight through. For a Colt, you "stage" the trigger -- there is a stopping place in the DA pull just before sear release. If you understand and practice, this staging will allow you to do some excellent fast DA shooting.

trbon8r
July 28, 2009, 05:12 PM
AJD, I think you just did a good job of summing up the dilemma Colt has with the civilian market. The only thing I would add is that folks like myself that are happy with their current production Colt don't necessarily fall into either of the categories you defined. I would like to see Colt produce a modern mass produced high-cap autoloader that the military, police, and civilian markets would fall all over themselves to buy. Basically if Colt ever wants to grow beyond what they have become which is a small boutique gun manufacturer, they need to build something that has mass market appeal. But at the same time I don't want Colt to stop doing what they do so well, which is building great 1911s and SAA revolvers.

ArmedBear
July 28, 2009, 05:14 PM
If they introduce new handguns designs like a polymer frame hi-cap 9mm people will complain and say "Why don't they just bring back *Insert classic model name here* instead of producing a Glock clone like everyone else?".

And if they bring back the Python, Diamondback, Anaconda, Mustang, etc. people will complain and say "Ugg...more "replica" models like they did with the Series 70 and Delta Elite.....When will Colt introduce a NEW model!?!"


The alternative, apparently, is to sell off all their machinery and prototypes, and do nothing...

One has to understand the value of a "flagship" product, too. There are reasons to make a Python even if you don't profit directly from it. Colt once had a reputation as "the best" revolver maker, whether or not their standard fare was superior. They threw that baby out with the Python.

If you understand and practice, this staging will allow you to do some excellent fast DA shooting.

Allow, yes. But why switch? Colt's window of opportunity for proving that people should want to re-learn DA shooting, just so they can buy a Colt, is completely shut now. Besides, even back in Colt's heyday as a DA revolver maker, competitors didn't care for the Colt DA trigger all that much.

Colt does appear to be dead.

Too bad. But it's so.

Extremely Pro Gun
July 28, 2009, 05:19 PM
Is Colt Dead?

Yes! Colt no longer cares about civillian sales because military contracts can easliy keep their pockets full. Their quality has gone waaaay down and now people just pay for the name on the gun.

New Colt models definately do not live up to the Colt herritage. This is sad but true. I was once a huge Colt fan, now when I am looking for the upmost quality I have to look elsewhere like Kimber (1911s), and Ruger (revolvers and I HATE ANTI GUNNERS!!).

:( ****

trbon8r
July 28, 2009, 05:29 PM
Yes! Colt no longer cares about civillian sales because military contracts can easliy keep their pockets full. Their quality has gone waaaay down and now people just pay for the name on the gun.


Really? Care to tell us more about your theory regarding why Colt doesn't care about the civilian market, or are you just repeating what you heard at the gun store? You do know that Colt no longer has the exclusive patent rights to manufacture the M4 carbine for the U.S. government? I'm guessing that now would be as good a time as any for Colt to be trying to sell as many guns to the civilian market as possible.

I'm also interested to hear specifics about how Colt's quality is getting worse, considering my own personal experience and anecdotal evidence from various internet forums seems to point in the opposite direction. What was wrong with your Colt?

AJD
July 28, 2009, 06:00 PM
Many of you are still talking like its still 2001.

I could write a page on how Colt has been making a comeback since standing on the edge of oblivion but its pretty obvious if you are actually paying attention to what Colt is doing and has been doing.

Vern Humphrey
July 28, 2009, 06:07 PM
Allow, yes. But why switch? Colt's window of opportunity for proving that people should want to re-learn DA shooting, just so they can buy a Colt, is completely shut now.

True. Colt allowed the window to shut -- there are so many urban legends about the inferiority of Colts that they'd be swimming upstream if they started producing revolvers again.
Besides, even back in Colt's heyday as a DA revolver maker, competitors didn't care for the Colt DA trigger all that much.
That's because Colt had already fallen far behind in the revolver business when double-action shooting became standard. A generation earlier, Colt might have won against S&W. But there just weren't that many Colts being purchased by police departments any more.

trbon8r
July 28, 2009, 06:56 PM
I could write a page on how Colt has been making a comeback since standing on the edge of oblivion but its pretty obvious if you are actually paying attention to what Colt is doing and has been doing.

Maybe some would listen, but so many won't. There are lots of folks that would rather make comments about Colt's union goons, and blah blah.

Keep in mind there is another side to the union debate. If another manufacturer like Kimber or Springfield had stood up to the union like Colt's management did in the '80s culminating in a 4 year strike, people here would be cheering them on for fighting the good fight against the union "goons." But because Colt did it I guess that doesn't count. :rolleyes: In fact it was the strike that did much to cripple Colt and lead them down the road to bankruptcy.

If it happened to be another company that had fought the union demands as hard as Colt did, many here would be back slapping and standing in line to buy their products. But once again Colt can't seem to please some folks, except for the ones that buy their firearms and enjoy them for being a pretty darn nice piece of equipment.

Vern Humphrey
July 28, 2009, 07:11 PM
I think the question is not how Colt is doing financially, but whether it is producing products we like. I, for one, would like to see the Anaconda with the bugs worked out on dealer's shelves again.

ArmedBear
July 28, 2009, 07:14 PM
I think the question is not how Colt is doing financially, but whether it is producing products we like.

True.

I, for one, would like to see the Anaconda with the bugs worked out on dealer's shelves again.

Me, too. And we won't.

Vern Humphrey
July 28, 2009, 07:41 PM
Quote:
I, for one, would like to see the Anaconda with the bugs worked out on dealer's shelves again.
Me, too. And we won't.

Let me dry my eyes before the tears fall on the keyboard. <sniff>

Old Fuff
July 28, 2009, 09:37 PM
As I pointed out (or at least implied :uhoh:) among the stuff that Colt had auctioned off were the prototypes and production samples of all the post-1970's double-action revolvers, including everything connected to the Python

All of it went... everything. :( :banghead:

If (big if) Colt comes out with any new handguns they will be entirely new, and designed to be made using 21st century manufacturing technology. They will most likely be autoloaders, have polymer frames, stamped lockwork and CNC machined slides. They will never look back.

Oh, and a single new product isn't likely to lift them out of the hole they're in.

AJD
July 28, 2009, 09:53 PM
If (big if) Colt comes out with any new handguns they will be entirely new, and designed to be made using 21st century manufacturing technology. They will most likely be autoloaders, have polymer frames, stamped lockwork and CNC machined slides. They will never look back.

Oh, and a single new product isn't likely to lift them out of the hole they're in.

I think you are correct.

Colt will do much the same as Springfield Armory, Beretta, Smith & Wesson and others if they introduce a new polymer handgun.

Push new polymer handguns(which are more profitable and more widely adopted by military and police forces) while still relying on their "staple" handgun or handguns that continue to sell well.

Beretta now treats the 92FS as an afterthough in advertising and web space compared to the PX4. Springfield Armory is doing the same with the 1911 getting back seat treatment to the XD series. Smith and Wesson the same with the M&P auto pistols compared to their revolvers and 1911's.

Mike OTDP
July 29, 2009, 09:25 AM
True. But what gun does EVERYBODY except Ruger make?

The 1911.

atomd
July 29, 2009, 10:19 AM
Really? Care to tell us more about your theory regarding why Colt doesn't care about the civilian market, or are you just repeating what you heard at the gun store? You do know that Colt no longer has the exclusive patent rights to manufacture the M4 carbine for the U.S. government? I'm guessing that now would be as good a time as any for Colt to be trying to sell as many guns to the civilian market as possible.

Then why haven't they done anything about it? Maybe they are working on it but I haven't seen anything happening in years. Unless they have something really big in the works I think it's going to be too little too late for the civilian market. What are they selling anyways? A couple of 1911 models? 1911s that aren't what they used to be....that lack many of the features that today's 1911 buyer wants. Sure they have some ARs out there but now they are just one of many many AR manufacturers.

I would like to ask what evidence you see that shows that Colt does care about the civilian market? Put "COLT" into a search engine and then click on the first website that shows up. It's colt.com of course. Colt.com is a LE/Military/Contractor website. coltsmfg.com is their civilian website. The first thing that pops up on their civilian site is a recall notice about 6 of their pistols. Yikes. Both of their websites look like an amateur made them. They are horrible.

I like a lot of Colt's older products. I hope they can get it together. As of now, I don't see any evidence of that. I wish them well though.

Old Fuff
July 29, 2009, 11:30 AM
Regarding Colt's handgun business. They are down to two players - the 1873 Single Action revolver and 1911 pistol. Both were originally Colt designs, and exclusively Colt products. Yet today they are a minor player in both markets. For example, Smith & Wesson - a historic competitor - makes more 1911-style pistols then Colt does, and I believe they make more commercial AR-15 style rifles then Colt does. These realities have reduced a once proud manufacturer to the status of a large custom shop. Turning all of this around will literally cost many millions of bucks, and no such investment is in sight. :banghead:

Vern Humphrey
July 29, 2009, 12:48 PM
Wouldn't I love to see the Anaconda come back, made right. Or even, be still my fluttering heart, the New Service with adjustable sights.

ArmedBear
July 29, 2009, 01:21 PM
I think a real frustration here is the extent to which Colt has squandered the value of its brand.

I think it's great that Colt fought the union. I know that the few guns they still make are okay players in their niches -- though not much beyond okay.

I don't necessarily think that the Python would have been the ticket to profits. What something like a reintroduced icon could have been was a brand rejuvenating event.

As it stands, Colt's name means little or nothing. They will have to compete -- starting from a disadvantaged position -- against old rival Smith and Wesson, but also against relative upstarts from Austria, Croatia, Brazil, all of whom have a MUCH larger footprint than Colt does, especially among shooters under 50.

It didn't have to be that way.

That is the real frustration.

I wish Colt's Mfg. well. I hope they survive, and thrive. I'm glad they fought the union rather than dying the death of USRAC. But they aren't offering much that I'm willing to pay a premium for, right now.

trbon8r
July 29, 2009, 03:16 PM
I would like to ask what evidence you see that shows that Colt does care about the civilian market? Put "COLT" into a search engine and then click on the first website that shows up. It's colt.com of course. Colt.com is a LE/Military/Contractor website. coltsmfg.com is their civilian website. The first thing that pops up on their civilian site is a recall notice about 6 of their pistols. Yikes. Both of their websites look like an amateur made them. They are horrible.

I like a lot of Colt's older products. I hope they can get it together. As of now, I don't see any evidence of that. I wish them well though.

Where do I even start? I've got several examples.

Colt listened to buyers, and realized it had a rich history with its production of military 1911s. Colt knew that buyers wanted a pistol that closely resembled an authentic GI 1911, so they came out with the WW1 repro 1911. Likewise, buyers have long lamented the passing of the MK IV Series '70 model. Colt decided to bring back the original Series '70 as it was produced, minus the dumb finger bushing, and the tiny hard to see sights. This is a great example where Colt brought back a classic design the market had been longing for, but upgraded the gun in a couple areas where the original was lacking.

If you want something modern, Colt offers that too in the XSE lineup. This is another example where Colt listened to buyers that wanted the Novak sights, ambi safety, front cocking serrations (:barf:), and other items that buyers currently want or at least think they want. While a bit late to the market, Colt now offers a 1911 with an integral light rail, another feature many buyers want. I'm not sure what you mean by Colt not having 1911s with the types of features people want. It seems to me like they offer a great variety of 1911s, both old school and modern. They even brought back the Delta Elite 10mm. How much more variety do you want? Not to mention if you don't see exactly what you like, Colt has a custom shop that will build what you want. Yes folks, that is a custom shop with a wide variety of services available to the civilian market that Colt cares nothing about. :confused:

As far as Colt's guns not being what they used to be, please tell us about the new production Colts you have personally examined and some of the problems you have uncovered? I'd like to know. What complaints I have seen have for the most part been cosmetic far more often than functional.

I have no interest in what website comes up in an internet search engine first, last, or anywhere in between, or whether the quality of that website is good, bad or indifferent. I care about the quality and desirability of the products I can buy off the shelf. This is where Colt excels. Regarding the recall, big deal. It happens to every manufacturer. Ruger fans always like to point out how up front Ruger is with their recalls by publicizing them in magazines, on the web, etc.

watchman101
July 29, 2009, 04:01 PM
Colt doesn't care about civilians. If you combine everything Colt ever made, then yes they are still one of the top company in the firearm history. But I sure can't live for another 200 years to see if Colt will live or die. As far as some people are concerned we are talking about present. Presently, Colt has been heading in the wrong path when they say that they want to get out of civilian market. To get them back to the right path will be hard because all they "introduced" thus far have been crap. They may still have some good handgun lines but the new styles from them are pure junk. If they reintroduce their single action revolver lines, I think they I would get it. They don't need to compete with S&W on double action. Their single action lines are in a class of itself. When Colt stop caring about us, that is when they started their wrong path. Colt may say that they do care about us on their website, but when have you heard the truth from a politician. I don't think bankruptcy did anything to the company. Because it is the end products and money that really decide if you live or die. In my mind, Colt is almost dead.

trbon8r
July 29, 2009, 04:09 PM
Damn, I need a snorkel the S is getting so deep in here.

Old Fuff
July 29, 2009, 04:27 PM
Wouldn't I love to see the Anaconda come back, made right. Or even, be still my fluttering heart, the New Service with adjustable sights.

Sure... But would you be willing to pay $1,200 for the Anaconda and more for a target-sighted New Service? Many yearn for these older revolvers, but how many would pay the price necessary to produce them during the 21st century?

Vern Humphrey
July 29, 2009, 04:30 PM
The Anaconda was a modern design, and could probably be produced at a price competitive with other big-bore DA revolvers. The New Service is another matter, of course.

Old Fuff
July 29, 2009, 04:38 PM
The Anaconda was a modern design, and could probably be produced at a price competitive with other big-bore DA revolvers.

It was "a" more modern design, but still expensive to make. Other top-quality large frame, double action revolvers aren't exactly inexpensive and Colt has some extra built-in overhead.

Vern Humphrey
July 29, 2009, 04:45 PM
Given good management, the Anaconda could probably have been competitive. If it had been made right -- with throats and forcing cones cut for accuracy -- it would have been worth a few bucks more.

ArmedBear
July 29, 2009, 04:59 PM
People pay $1200 for revolvers all the time.

Obviously, these aren't just any revolvers, but there is most assuredly a market for the right $1200 revolver.

Old Fuff
July 29, 2009, 04:59 PM
Given good management, ...

I thought this thread was about Colt... :neener: :evil: :D

Vern Humphrey
July 29, 2009, 05:02 PM
I thought this thread was about Colt...
Touche!

atomd
July 29, 2009, 05:44 PM
I have no interest in what website comes up in an internet search engine first, last, or anywhere in between, or whether the quality of that website is good, bad or indifferent. I care about the quality and desirability of the products I can buy off the shelf.

The main statement that you were debating is whether or not Colt cares about the civilian market. I say they don't. You seem to think they do. A website is a HUGE DEAL these days. Do you know how much marketing is done on the web now? When I go to Samsung.com for instance, I see a picture of a laptop on the front page. I see lots of information on products that people buy every day readily available. I don't see a picture of a natural gas tanker or a bulldozer (yes, they do make those). The reason is because Samsung wants MY business. Their focus is on consumer electronics. I am not a fan of Samsung, I'm just using them as an example here.

Colt's main focus does not seem to be the civilian market. While they may have made a few minor changes to some of their 1911s and re-introduced one that they had previously discontinued (big deal), they are certainly not out there competing with the big players in the civilian market right now. In every gun shop I've been in, there are all sorts of slick looking Kimbers all over the place. There seems to be a good variety of Springfield and Taurus 1911s also. I don't see too many Colts. I don't see any Colt ads in any of the gun magazines I read. Most of what I see on the market is in the used cases at the shops. They simply don't market their products to us.

Now, about the quality of the product: I actually think Colts are pretty good. I have nothing against them and I would buy one over a Kimber or Taurus if it were just based on who made it alone. I said they aren't what they used to be, I didn't say they were junk. That is just my opinion but I think many will agree with me. The same could be said about S&W wheel guns too. Things aren't made like they used to be.

Old Fuff
July 29, 2009, 06:02 PM
Do keep in mind that the folks in Colt's handgun division do care about the civilian market, because they have very little to sell in the law enforcement segment and nothing for the military. It is the Colt corporation that has signed off on handgun sales. My point? Don't pick on the wrong people.

Given enough money (which at the moment seems unlikely) the handgun management could and would take off.

HexHead
July 29, 2009, 06:05 PM
Cost cutting measure, or perhaps something else!?

Vacation. It's less disruptive to a small company with skilled workers to just shut down for a week and let everyone take vacation at the same time.

HexHead
July 29, 2009, 06:45 PM
Oh, and a single new product isn't likely to lift them out of the hole they're in.

Funny, an entire dynasty was launched with the Glock 17. So it can happen. They just need to come up with a game changer like Glock did.

ArmedBear
July 29, 2009, 06:57 PM
They just need to come up with a game changer like Glock did.

True.

All they have to do is revolutionize a large part of the firearms market, and they're golden.:D

Colt has a long history of doing that. The 1851, 1873, 1911 and AR are all arguably even MORE significant than the Glock 17, in firearms history. Of course, the 1911 and AR weren't exactly designed in-house, and even if they'd been, those involved are long gone.

The problem is, Colt's revolutionary products are ANCIENT history.

But you're right. If Colt can come up with another new product as significant as the 1851, 1873, 1911, or AR, they'll do quite well with it.:)

Joe Demko
July 29, 2009, 06:57 PM
Glock wasn't in a hole. It was already a successful company making plastic products when they introduced the pistol.

HexHead
July 29, 2009, 07:08 PM
Colt's main focus does not seem to be the civilian market. While they may have made a few minor changes to some of their 1911s and re-introduced one that they had previously discontinued (big deal), they are certainly not out there competing with the big players in the civilian market right now. In every gun shop I've been in, there are all sorts of slick looking Kimbers all over the place. There seems to be a good variety of Springfield and Taurus 1911s also. I don't see too many Colts. I don't see any Colt ads in any of the gun magazines I read. Most of what I see on the market is in the used cases at the shops. They simply don't market their products to us.

Now, about the quality of the product: I actually think Colts are pretty good. I have nothing against them and I would buy one over a Kimber or Taurus if it were just based on who made it alone. I said they aren't what they used to be, I didn't say they were junk.

There's a reason you see so many more Kimbers in gun stores than Colts? First of all, they have different types of distribution networks. Colts are only available to the stores through distributors. They don't sell direct to the retail stores like Kimber does. Kimber also does like Rolex. in that if a store wants to be a "Master Dealer", they have to carry a certain amount of inventory Kimber wants them to stock. Some of those pistols may not move as quickly as Colts do, so it seems like the store never has any Colts but plenty of Kimbers on hand. Also, Colt doesn't need to spend a lot of money on advertising. Why, if you're already selling every pistol you make to the point people are asking on the internet where they can find a store that has any Colts? New Colts rarely spend much time on the retailer's shelf.

As for their quality or innovation, nobody in this thread has mentioned the New Agent. When I was in the market for mine, I did a lot of research on them. I knew from spending time on the 'net Kimber's Ultra had a reputation for being inconsistent as to whether they worked right or not. I must have looked at 60-80 forum pages on various websites looking for info on the NA. I found two posts with a negative comment about the New Agent. And one had problems because it turned out he was putting his recoil spring in backwards. Like 99% of the comments I read about them, my New Agent has been 100% reliable.

So if you want to talk about innovation, Colt figured out how to make a completely reliable 3" 1911. Something no one else has been able to do.

1911Tuner
July 29, 2009, 07:25 PM
Of course, the 1911 and AR weren't exactly designed in-house, and even if they'd been, those involved are long gone.

While that's true of the AR15...the 1911 was done in-house by Colt's engineers and John Browning...and of course, the Army Ordnance Department had a lot of input.

No. Browning didn't do it all by himself.

ArmedBear
July 29, 2009, 07:34 PM
Oh, don't worry. I'm not a Browning worshipper. He was a great gun designer, but he wasn't God or anything. I don't even like some of his major designs.:)

The point is, they called in a significant outside figure to do a lot of the innovating, even 100 years back.:)

If all Colt has to do to really make it big again is totally revolutionize some major part of the firearms market, though, I'm not sure where that innovation is going to come from.

1911Tuner
July 29, 2009, 08:07 PM
The point is, they called in a significant outside figure to do a lot of the innovating,

Sure. Colt was a revolver company. Like any other manufacturer, when they get a contract for something that they're not familiar with...they hire outside help.

He was a great gun designer, but he wasn't God or anything. I don't even like some of his major designs.

No, he wasn't. He didn't even have an engineering degree...but his fingerprints are all over many modern designs...even the innovative Glock. It looks new...but at its heart, it's a Colt-Browning. Short recoil operated. Locked breech. Tilting barrel. Gaston got his Eureka Moment from two of Browning's best. The 1911 and the P-35.

Nothin' new, though. At the heart of a Ruger single-shot rifle beats the heart of Christian Sharps.

Joe Demko
July 29, 2009, 08:15 PM
Further, Gaston Glock could look to the HK VP70 as proof of concept for polymer frames. He made a great success of it, but there is very little about the Glock pistol which was new or original. Glock deserves full credit, however, for making polymer framed, striker fired pistols marketable.

1911Tuner
July 29, 2009, 10:38 PM
I had a VP70 for a while...with 2 spare mags. If it hadn't been for that gawdawful trigger, I'd have kept it. Wish I had anyway. I hear those things are bringin' a mint these days.

atomd
July 29, 2009, 10:43 PM
There's a reason you see so many more Kimbers in gun stores than Colts? First of all, they have different types of distribution networks. Colts are only available to the stores through distributors. They don't sell direct to the retail stores like Kimber does. Kimber also does like Rolex. in that if a store wants to be a "Master Dealer", they have to carry a certain amount of inventory Kimber wants them to stock. Some of those pistols may not move as quickly as Colts do, so it seems like the store never has any Colts but plenty of Kimbers on hand. Also, Colt doesn't need to spend a lot of money on advertising. Why, if you're already selling every pistol you make to the point people are asking on the internet where they can find a store that has any Colts? New Colts rarely spend much time on the retailer's shelf.


Kimber sells WAY more 1911s than Colt. It's not even close. That being said, I'll still take a Colt over a Kimber.

Guillermo
July 31, 2009, 01:22 AM
There is a huge market for an ultra high quality revolver.

Smith and Wesson is way too mass marketing, quantity-over-quality minded to do it. Ruger is not the company to do it. Heck...they are happy producing revolvers that require a spring kit when brand new. Taurus...:cool:I crack me up...forget it.

So who could come out with an ultra high quality revolver? STI is a good thought. Sadly I can't think of anyone else.

And I love Colts old revolvers but sadly these days Colt wears a blue dress...and it needs laundering.

Mike OTDP
July 31, 2009, 10:27 AM
I'm not so sure about S&W. I do think that S&W has quietly realized that the average shooter never appreciated the quality that went into the old revolvers, and would be content with MIM parts, etc. So S&W established the Performance Center to build top-of-the-line guns.

Guillermo
July 31, 2009, 10:42 AM
I probably overstated it when I said "huge market" but there is a "significant" market.

HexHead
July 31, 2009, 12:01 PM
Kimber sells WAY more 1911s than Colt. It's not even close. That being said, I'll still take a Colt over a Kimber.

Because they make way more. If Colt flooded the gun stores like Kimber does, their sales numbers would be as high. As it is, Colt sells every pistol they make and you have to look for them. Kimbers are a dime a dozen.

I've had two Kimbers and both were fine pistols, but I wouldn't buy another one for a variety of reasons. I'd buy another Colt without hesitation.

Joe Demko
July 31, 2009, 12:28 PM
Flooding the gun stores? The law of supply and demand comes into play here. There is a high demand for 1911 pistols. Kimber services a larger portion of that demand than does Colt. That is less a result of flooding gunstores than it is Colt servicing only that small segment of the market that specifically wants a Colt. That segment is small compared to the market as a whole. Colt produces as many handguns as they are sure they can sell at the price they want for them. Producing more would drive the price down.
I own a Colt and a Springfield. The Colt is not of better quality than the Springfield. Of the two, it is the Colt that required repair. It is, however, marked Colt. That is, in itself, worth something for now.

RDCL
July 31, 2009, 12:34 PM
I find it sad that Colt dropped it's classic Python. Yes, it was expensive to produce and it's price reflected that. Even though I'd likely never buy one ....( I'm a Smith-guy)....I wish they were still making them......just because:)


....ditto the "Trooper" "Diamondback", etc...

Just my 2-cents
Russ

Old Fuff
July 31, 2009, 12:50 PM
I find it sad that Colt dropped it's classic Python.

....ditto the "Trooper" "Diamondback", etc...

I wish they were still making them......just because

Even though I'd likely never buy one ....( I'm a Smith-guy)....

Maybe that's why they don't make them any more... Think? :scrutiny:

RDCL
July 31, 2009, 04:20 PM
But.....it's still sad.


Russ

ArmedBear
July 31, 2009, 07:27 PM
Nothin' new, though. At the heart of a Ruger single-shot rifle beats the heart of Christian Sharps.

I was talking about guns that revolutionized one segment of the firearms industry, though. The Ruger No. 1 isn't even on that RADAR. Hell, neither was the Sharps (much as I like falling blocks).

That's what HexHead suggests: if Colt can come up with another game-changer like the first Glock, they'll do well.

Of course, so can anyone... IF...:D

1911Tuner
July 31, 2009, 07:44 PM
I was talking about guns that revolutionized one segment of the firearms industry, though. The Ruger No. 1 isn't even on that RADAR. Hell, neither was the Sharps (much as I like falling blocks).

Never said that it was an earth-shaker. Just used it as an example of how one designer feeds off another.


if Colt can come up with another game-changer like the first Glock, they'll do well.

What? A striker-fired Colt/Browning with a plastic frame, one locking lug and no manual safety that requires pullin' the trigger in order to strip it?

Yep. That one changed the game all right. It generated a lotta traffic at ERs for leg surgery.

atomd
July 31, 2009, 08:18 PM
.....

atomd
July 31, 2009, 08:24 PM
Because they make way more. If Colt flooded the gun stores like Kimber does, their sales numbers would be as high. As it is, Colt sells every pistol they make and you have to look for them. Kimbers are a dime a dozen.


That is absolutely ridiculous. If Colt could sell 10 times more pistols and they don't, they need a new business plan. That's like saying that if Ford made 1000 times more ford F150s they would sell 1000 times more of them. You have to know how to design and market a product that people are willing to pay for and that the demand exists for. Kimber sells more guns because they make guns that more people want and market them better. You simply can't "flood the gun stores" with a gun that people don't want to buy. People are buying them.

kansas coyote
July 31, 2009, 08:49 PM
I didn't read them all but , Interarms has been making colts stuff for a few yrs now maybe now you understand the drop in quality .

1911Tuner
July 31, 2009, 08:52 PM
I'm not a Glock lover OR hater. It's a pistol. It serves a purpose. It's apparently a solid design, or it wouldn't have made it this long. Okay...

What exactly has it revolutionized? What has it been able to do that hasn't already been done?

Let's see...

Double-stack/Hi-cap 9mm. FN did that with the P-35 and Beretta did it again with the M-92.

Locked breech/short recoil operated. Yep Already been covered.


Polymer frame. I'll give it that one. Light...but it does tend to make the gun a tad top-heavy as the magazine gets close to empty.

Striker fired. Another score...but what exactly makes that feature somehow superior to a hammer fired design. They both accomplish the same thing. Firing the primer in a metallic cartridge.

Basically reinventing the wheel...and marketing. The cardinal rule of marketing is to convince the buying public that the product is needed because it's somehow better...or just because it's a new, innovative thing...and then sell it to'em.

It's a magazine fed, semiauto pistol that's recoil operated. It goes bang when the trigger is pulled and it launches projectiles at high speed. If the operator does his part, the projectile hits the intended target. If not...it misses. In other words...it does exacty the same job that any other pistol does. A lot like the .308 and the 7-08 cartridges. Ballistic twins that perform pretty much exactly the same in the field, and one can't show a distinct edge over the other.
Well...at least the deer can't tell the difference.

Now, if somebody would come up with a pistol that can't miss regardless of operator error...that would well and truly change the game. The Glock...the XD....the whatever polymer framed/striker-fired wonder that enters the market next week? Same game, different ball.

atomd
July 31, 2009, 09:00 PM
I deleted my post about Glock because I didn't want to take it too off topic. I wonder if anyone from Colt reads THR and has seen this thread. Hmmmm....

1911Tuner
July 31, 2009, 09:11 PM
I deleted my post about Glock because I didn't want to take it too off topic.

I saw that. Not quick enough, though. ;)

I wonder if anyone from Colt reads THR and has seen this thread.

Oh, yeah. Bet on it.

JohnBT
July 31, 2009, 09:13 PM
"The problem is, Colt's revolutionary products are ANCIENT history."

So are Glock's. They're all so 20th century. http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/images/smilies/okie.gif

kbellis3
August 1, 2009, 12:13 AM
The major difference is Glock is making them and selling them as fast as they can. Despite (Descriptive deleted) gunners who think the grip angle is awful, hate plastic, a think the back strap should be adjustable.

Colt on the other hand survives(d) on the sales of rifle to the military.

As for the Colt Tactical Pistol meh I will not hold my breath, I remember the Colt Awful Beagle, (Descriptive deleted) that it formed a singularity that ate whole worlds on the other side of the galaxy. The people responsible for that abortion masquarading as a firearm should have been beaten to death with a lead pipe.:fire:

1911Tuner
August 1, 2009, 12:38 AM
Well, kbellis...I'm definitely not in the category that you described...and I don't care for the things that you mentioned. Not a slam. Just a personal preference. It's part of what makes us human...and choice is part of what makes us Americans.

You'll notice that I edited your comment out. It was uncalled for and most assuredly not high road. We have ladies and kids who visit the forums. If you wouldn't say it in front of your grandmother...don't say it here.

I agree that the Double Eagle wasn't the best design to come down the pike...but it really wasn't all that bad. The ones that I've handled were functional and as accurate as I could prove without a sandbag...and I ain't a half-bad marksman.

Chindo18Z
August 1, 2009, 01:41 AM
I once owned a Colt Awful Beagle (Officer's Model). Actually a pretty damn fine gun...accurate, reliable, and enough weight to handily soak up rapid fire .45 ACP.

Essentially just a DA/SA 1911...with the same exposed-spring-covered-by-the-grip plate fault that Beretta 92 fans conveniently seem to ignore.

Colt isn't going to do a Python Redux (for reasons stated by others). Maybe someday USFA will make that leap for a high-end niche market.

COLT SHOULD CAPITALIZE ON THE MODERN CCW MARKET BY DOING WHAT THEY FORMERLY DID BEST...SELL 6 SHOT, FIXED SIGHT, ALLOY FRAMED .38 SPECIALS: SNUB COBRAS & AGENTS.

Back in the day, the S&W Models 36/60/37/49, etc. were a bit smaller, but the little Colt Cobras and Agents offered lighter or equal weight, another shot, and better practical accuracy.

I'm a Smith & Wesson accumulator, but I'd buy a new Cobra, Agent, or 4" Viper for CCW in a heartbeat.

Oh yeah...another positive...no lock.

C'mon Colt...take a chance on pocket .38s.

1911Tuner
August 1, 2009, 08:43 AM
I guess the answer to the ORIGINAL question is:

Obviously not. They're still there, makin' guns.

Will Colt survive for another 10, 20, 30, years?

Who knows. In this volatile market, anything can happen...sometimes almost overnight.
Companies thrive and fail for a variety of reasons.

I hope that Colt makes it. It's seen slumps before, and managed to pull through. Damaged, but viable. I guess we'll see.

12131
August 1, 2009, 09:28 AM
Original by 1911Tuner:
Who knows. In this volatile market, anything can happen...sometimes almost overnight.
Companies thrive and fail for a variety of reasons.

Yeah, like Daniel Defense.:(

Old Fuff
August 1, 2009, 09:36 AM
COLT SHOULD CAPITALIZE ON THE MODERN CCW MARKET BY DOING WHAT THEY FORMERLY DID BEST...SELL 6 SHOT, FIXED SIGHT, ALLOY FRAMED .38 SPECIALS: SNUB COBRAS & AGENTS.

I'll point out again... but thankfully for the last time. :banghead:

Colt has little or no money to develop and tool new models. As it is they have diffficulty generating enough cash flow to keep making what they are.

What they do make is pretty good, but with only two basic platforms they can never be a serious player in the handgun industry. To make things worse, the production of the company's two handguns (1873 Single Action revolver and 1911 pistol) as well as commercial sales of their AR-15 rifle/carbine are dominated by more successful competitors.

Colt cannot put their former products (snub-nosed revolvers in particular) back into production. The basic designs go back to 1908, and cannot be made at a price they would sell because of the manufacturing environment and costs that now exist during the 2000's. Without money they cannot design, develop and tool new revolvers, and if they could they wouldn't - because it is less expensive to make polymer-framed pistols then it is to make any kind of revolver.

The bottom line is this:

Colt is now nothing more then a large custom shop. They may be able to continue as they are, but they won't grow. The introduction of a new platform might (or might not) help their situation, but it wouldn't transform the company into a serious competitor to the big guys - Smith & Wesson, Ruger and Taurus (revolvers) and Glock, Smith & Wesson, Beretta, H&K, Ruger, Taurus, etc. (pistols). Without substantial outside investment, Colt's future is nothing more then wishful thinking.

And nobody is more unhappy about it then I am... :banghead:

TexasBill
August 1, 2009, 11:55 AM
I owned one or more examples of just about every Colt DA revolver available as new in the 1970s, the ones I really miss are the Detective Special and the Police Positive (Yes, I really bought a brand-new Police Positive many years ago). It would be very nice to see them come back, especially if they were chambered for .357 Magnum. I even owned a DS with the 3-inch barrel.

Yes, I know the market has shifted to autoloaders but I think there is still a good market for revolvers. As for price, the S&W Model 10 M&P that sold new for $78.50 when I first started buying guns now lists for nearly ten times that much. There's room for a new Python or Diamondback at the high end. And, judging by the prices J-frame Smiths command, there's room for a new Detective Special, Cobra or Agent, too.

Chindo18Z
August 1, 2009, 01:22 PM
and I'll point out again...

COLT SHOULD CAPITALIZE ON THE MODERN CCW MARKET BY DOING WHAT THEY FORMERLY DID BEST...SELL 6 SHOT, FIXED SIGHT, ALLOY FRAMED .38 SPECIALS: SNUB COBRAS & AGENTS.

Their only serious competitors are S&W and Taurus.

Colt could beat Taurus because their design quality, accuracy, trigger, and resale value would beat a Model 85 hands down (I own both). Historically, Tauri haven't gone bang every time. Colts & Smiths usually have.

Colt could beat Smith at their own Airweight J-Frame game by producing a CNC manufactured revolver with redesigned lockwork, retaining the size and shape of the late model ALLOY D-Frames. No rails. No Hi-Viz sights. No Locks. 6 shots.

Colt's .357 Magnum Carry and .38 DS II designs were overweight and overwrought. Few people actually carry the relatively heavy baby .357s of today; those that do tend to migrate to Ruger SP101s and 2.5 -3" Smith 19s, 65s, etc.. I'd bet that most folks with Titanium snub .357s rarely carry full house loads, but default to .38 anyway.

Lightweight .38 J-Frames (or Tauri) are ubiquitous among home defenders, CCW holders, and LEOs. From neophyte to expert, compact alloy revolvers continue (as always) to sell like hotcakes.

Tooling gone? Unions? Corporate finances on a razor's edge? Yeah...got it...understood. I'm pretty familiar with Colt's history.

But...If Colt ever found itself financially in a position to introduce something that would sell (for a profit), what should they manufacture? My point is not what CAN they do today, but what SHOULD they do when they CAN.

Lightweight (15 oz or less). 6-shot. .38 Special. Fixed Sight. Cobra. Agent. With a Colt Pony on the side...

Vern Humphrey
August 1, 2009, 01:34 PM
Colt could beat Taurus because their design quality, accuracy, trigger, and resale value would beat a Model 85 hands down
The question is, can Colt actually make a revolver whose design quality, accuracy and trigger beats Taurus?

A case in point is the Anaconda -- it should have been a runaway best seller. But many of them had throat and forcing cones that militated against fine accuracy. Surely, you would think, if Colt was selling what was essentially a hunting revolver, they would ensure evey one that left the factory was capable of fine accuracy. But they didn't.

Guillermo
August 1, 2009, 01:48 PM
kbellis,

Don't know what you got edited and don't care. Just wanted to mention that 1911tuner is being VERY nice. A bad comment or two can get you banned. A gentle warning is about as mild as it gets.

a "thank you" for explaining the rules is in order

Chindo18Z
August 1, 2009, 01:50 PM
Vern: Good point. You can lead a horse to water...

If Colt can learn from past mistakes then the buying public will commission them or promote to NCO. If not...they ETS from the marketplace as PFCs.

Colt management could learn a lot from simply reading this thread.

weisse52
August 1, 2009, 01:56 PM
Obviously not. They're still there, makin' guns.

I love Colts, I do hope / wish they stay alive.

I will always buy Colt, older ones if possible.

New ones when I must.

Vern Humphrey
August 1, 2009, 01:57 PM
I think learning from mistakes is passe in today's climate -- if a company fails, they get a government "bailout" and go on as before.

Ky Larry
August 1, 2009, 02:08 PM
I think Old Fuff nailed it. R&D costs lots of money and does not guarantee any return on investment. Colt needs a new source of capital investment. R&D, tooling, training, and initial production calls for deep pockets which Colt doesn't seem to have. Who knows what the future will bring? If we knew all the answers, what would be the point of living?

Chindo18Z
August 1, 2009, 02:22 PM
I've still got a 1980's era Taurus 85CH (purchased around '90). A good little nightstand gun. Stainless, concealed hammer, fairly accurate...

It has a few faults: tool marks, slightly misfitted grips that wiggle under recoil. However, it's reliable and a deal at the ~$225 NIB retail I paid for it at that time.

IMHO, the current plethora of Tauri models have a spotty quality control record and cost as much or more than a nice used S&W J-Frame (which I prefer to any of the Taurus offerings).

A new J-Frame Smith retails for $550-$700 where I'm located. With a lock I hate, MIM parts I hate, and some with two-piece barrels (which I also hate).

I haunt the pawn shops, gunshows, and classifieds for pristine pre-lock S&W incarnations (and am able to find them for $350-$450).

There is nothing small and compact currently made by Smith that remotely interests me with the exception of their current Model 42 Classic (and I'd rather have a nicely blued original).

Ruger's LCR has yet to be proven in my estimation. Time will tell.

Colt's D frames offered comparable concealed portability (vs. S&W or Taurus), six shots (vs. 5 for Smith), and (in my experience) significantly better accuracy than Smith or Taurus.

I'd buy a new Cobra/Agent offered in the $550-$700 price range.

I wont buy any any current Smith at that price point and I wouldn't pay full retail for a current Taurus.

BTW: I own a dozen or so S&W revolvers (just in case anyone took my comments as a Smith & Wesson bash-fest).

BTW (2): A 4" Stainless Colt Python .41 Special would have been my ultimate fantasy revolver. Too bad they never went down that road.

Old Fuff
August 1, 2009, 05:09 PM
A 4" Stainless Colt Python .41 Special would have been my ultimate fantasy revolver. Too bad they never went down that road.

Actually they did. :what:

The prototype/model was among those they recently auctioned. The cartridge was a modernized .41 Colt because S&W made the .41 Magnum on which the .41 Special is based to big to fit in any Colt platform being made at the time.

But neither the revolver or cartridge were ever produced. Now they won't be. :(

.45FMJoe
August 1, 2009, 05:21 PM
Yeah, they come out with a couple new models this year, manage to sell every semi-auto they can produce and here we have people calling them dead.

I guess the 3 million dollars Colt's MFG spent this year on tooling and infrastructure upgrades means they are looking to be sold or close up shop. Some of you must work at gunshops because your ignorance sure sounds familiar... :rolleyes:

coltdoctor
August 1, 2009, 08:41 PM
Holly Smokes,

That's some Colt talk! In my opinion the Unions killed Colt. Just because you're in the Union doesn't make you a Master Gunsmith. The products from the mid 80's forward seem to be lacking... (Save the Custom Shop) Even some of those don't meet my expectations. Hmmmn? Same years as the Union problems...I've had to return more than one with QC problems. But, BUT the Colts from the earlier years really show the craftsmanship! What amazing AMERICAN products! Some of the people over there are very full of themselves. Some are Awesome! Oh well, there's always retirement! Slow to change...people are afraid of change.

JoshM
August 1, 2009, 11:37 PM
Old Fluff

Do keep in mind that the folks in Colt's handgun division do care about the civilian market, because they have very little to sell in the law enforcement segment and nothing for the military. It is the Colt corporation that has signed off on handgun sales. My point? Don't pick on the wrong people.

Given enough money (which at the moment seems unlikely) the handgun management could and would take off.

Good point. In regards to Colt's handgun business I recall an article, from the 90's - American Handgunner Industry News section, that noted the CT State Government had "requested" that Colt limit its involvement in producing handguns, especially new civilian handguns/"assault weapons".

The article indicated that CT had gained some leverage with Colt due to its bailout of Colt's pension plan/commitments (memory hazy on that point). Here (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3197/is_n5_v37/ai_12306439/) is an article from Shooting Industry noting the bailout.

Also having an avowed anti for a CEO (Ron Stewart), who actively backed Clinton's proposals over his own customers, is probably not the smartest move Colt's Board ever made !

Frankly, I'm surprised that Colt hasn't been bought out by a more competent manufacturer simply for the "name value" and rebranding opportunities. Say a Steyr M9 offered domestically as the new Colt Trooper (Auto).

Guillermo
August 1, 2009, 11:47 PM
I was told PERHAPS THIS IS NOT TRUE that the state of Conneticut loaned Colt some money and the strings attached are around the...well...better stay High Road.

DougDubya
August 2, 2009, 02:56 AM
You know, Colt could really win my love if they made a Commander with the same DAO trigger as their Colt Agent (even if it were just a concept gun). I know Para-Ordnance makes one like that, but it just feels more right to say Colt Commander.

Old Fuff
August 2, 2009, 09:25 AM
Frankly, I'm surprised that Colt hasn't been bought out by a more competent manufacturer simply for the "name value" and rebranding opportunities. Say a Steyr M9 offered domestically as the new Colt Trooper (Auto).

Colt would love to sell their handgun division - it's been up for sale for decades, but the asking price is way over what anyone's willing to pay. The various contenders can make Colt-style guns (1873 and 1911 models) under their own names, make more money, and out-produce Colt while doing it. In addition some of them do what Colt would be doing if the parent corporation supported them – which is make other guns as well.

Obviously a competitor does not need the Colt name to sell Colt's own handguns - or AR-15 rifles for that matter.

Hopefully it will dawn on everyone that the top-brass at Colt’s don’t give a rip about making handguns beond what they are doing now. They might or might not come back into the polymer frame/service pistol market and try to cut themselves a piece of the law enforcement & military pie. They have noticed that Smith & Wesson successfully did that with their new Military & Police lineup of guns.

But in and of itself, that won't make Colt the kind of major player they once were.

HexHead
August 2, 2009, 09:44 AM
Lightweight (15 oz or less). 6-shot. .38 Special. Fixed Sight. Cobra. Agent. With a Colt Pony on the side...

I'd buy one of those. I've been keeping my eye out at gunshows for an original one. I'd like to see them capitalize on the pocket .380 craze and bring back the Mustang too.

There's nothing wrong with the stuff Colt is turning our today. Most of my pistols are carry oriented, yet my New Agent has turned into my default. I realllly like that little pistol. And my Mustang probably gets carried second as often. So on any given day, I'm probably being protected by a Colt.

HexHead
August 2, 2009, 09:49 AM
What? A striker-fired Colt/Browning with a plastic frame, one locking lug and no manual safety that requires pullin' the trigger in order to strip it?

Yep. That one changed the game all right. It generated a lotta traffic at ERs for leg surgery.

I'm sorry, but anyone that field strips a firearm without first making sure it's unloaded is just askin' for it. ;)

Harve Curry
August 2, 2009, 09:49 AM
Colt should leave Connecticut , better late then never. Montana would be a good choice to consider. Connecticut is not a firearms friendly state and one of their laws requires Colt SAA's have a rediculously heavy trigger spring when it leaves the factory. Mine came with a note in the box stating so. Simple to fix but the tip of the iceburg of what Colt is up against.

goColt
August 2, 2009, 10:00 AM
I don't often post but I thought I put in my $0.02...as you can tell by my screen name, I like Colt firearms a lot so bear that in mind.

Is Colt dead? Definitely not. No company that is on its last leg puts out new models as Colt has done in the past few years. Yes, I know some are 're-issue' and therefore are not really NEW but that is splitting hairs.

Is Colt ever going to regain it's past glory? Most likely not but stranger things have happened.

What happened to Colt is what has happened to almost all manufacturing in the US and most recently with the US Auto Industry. Labor costs have skyrocketed, fierce competition from abroad, intrusive government involvement and finally poor management. Some of these are the fault of Colt some are not. Sadly, all have taken a toll that seems to have damaged Colt to the point of almost putting them out of business several times but they've survived.

You can google Colt and read the various problems that have plagued Colt for decades.

As for wishful thinking of Colt getting back into the DA revolver. I don't see any chance for that. As much as I'd like to see many of them return, I think it would be catastrophic for Colt to expend its limited resources on a part of the market that does not seem to be rapidly expanding and already has vast and varied models to choose from. They tried that with the Magnum Carry and that ended poorly for one reason or another. I think Colt should stick to what it does best, and that is make 1911 style automatics. However, I think they should expand their automatics to the ultra-concealable realm by introducing a silly-small 9mm, sorta like they did with the Pocket 9 but without violating copyrights this time.

Finally, I would like to say that many of Colt's competitors that have been mentioned including Kimber, Glock, even S&W (specifically they 1911 and AR entries) as well as many others are now standing on the shoulders of giants...and one of those giants is Colt. The 1911-style handgun and the AR-15 style rifle are two of the most copied models in the world and as the old saying goes imitation is the best form of flattery. Can Colt rest on its laurels and survive? Absolutely not!! However, if the recent models and recent news coming out of Hartford is any indication of what is to come, I think we will enjoy Colt firearms for a long time.

Old Fuff
August 2, 2009, 10:00 AM
Colt SAA's have a rediculously heavy trigger spring when it leaves the factory. Mine came with a note in the box stating so.

Well at least they didn't put in a :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: internal lock...

Yet....... :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

skoro
August 2, 2009, 10:11 AM
Sure doesn't seem that way to me. If I'm not mistaken, they're selling all the handguns they can manufacture about as quickly as they're coming off the production line.

To me, that signals healthy interest.

Of course, I realize that the company is mostly concerned with government contracts on their M4 these days. And that status is always dependent on political whims.

As far as their handguns go, they're obviously a niche producer. I don't have any interest in their SAA line, but their 1911s appear to be alive and kicking. Should they expand into other offerings? That may be too risky and require captial investment that could doom them if it weren't successful.

Personally, I like their 1911s and hope that they continue production of that fine pistol well into the 22nd century and possibly beyond. The 1911 is one of those "all-American" icons. People who've never held a handgun recognize the term, "Colt 45."

atomd
August 2, 2009, 10:44 AM
People who've never held a handgun recognize the term, "Colt 45."

Billy Dee Williams sells that, right?

Old Fuff
August 2, 2009, 11:42 AM
If I'm not mistaken, they're selling all the handguns they can manufacture about as quickly as they're coming off the production line.

True, but misleading. The main reason they sell all of the guns they make is because they make very few of them. Colt's competitors make substantially more 1911 style pistols or 1873 revolvers, and they are also successfully selling product - but they are selling much more of it.

Colt isn’t growing much because they’re sales don’t generate enough cash flow to do more then what they are doing; which in terms of a manufacturer (as opposed to a custom shop) is very little. To grow they need outside investment or cash from the parent corporation, and they are getting neither.

People who've never held a handgun recognize the term, "Colt 45."

True again, but most of them aren't interested in buying guns. They also recognize the name, Smith & Wesson - and S&W makes more 1911 style pistols and AR-15 commercial rifles then Colt does. :uhoh:

HexHead
August 2, 2009, 11:52 AM
Colt Defense is generating enough product to keep them going. For now. Colt Mfg. is keeping them in the public eye. I think if they lose the M4 contract, we'll see all kinds of emphases on their commercial product with them releasing some of the best AR platform and 1911 based product.

And if they're making SSA revolvers, there's no reason they can't make DA revolvers again too. They just need to target the hot carry segment and rerelease a snubbie.

Joe Demko
August 2, 2009, 12:30 PM
WRT selling all the pistols they make: I think that they are able to do so only because of the lingering cachet of the Colt name. I doubt that SAA's and 1911's at the same quality point could be sold for as much by a maker without the famous name. People who buy them specifically want one made by Colt. The exact same gun at the exact same price marked "JAD Inc." would never leave the shelf.

Old Fuff
August 2, 2009, 12:38 PM
And if they're making SSA revolvers, there's no reason they can't make DA revolvers again too. They just need to target the hot carry segment and rerelease a snubbie.

Yup, and because the decision makers at Colt have the same foresight and insights that you and some others do, they just went out and auctioned off their whole engineering archival collection. They sold all of the production samples of what they used to make, and the prototypes of new ones they might have made. So now everything relative to snubnose revolvers is gone. For that matter everything they had concerning any double-action revolvers – going back to before World War Two is gone.

What would make anyone believe that Colt’s top management had any thoughts or plans to resume revolver production in the future, when they disposed of everything they had that might facilitate doing it?
:uhoh: :scrutiny: :banghead:

5knives
August 2, 2009, 01:07 PM
I've learned to constantly remind myself that the current owners of the various brand names, has little or nothing to do with my memories of those companies from the forties through the sixties, their traditions or commitment.

re: The recent history of the U.S knife manufacturers, brand names.

The names remain the same, but nothing else is.

Regards,
:)

Guillermo
August 2, 2009, 01:09 PM
How long will it be when the Colt logo is molded into a polymer frame?

I think I am going to vomit :barf:

earlthegoat2
August 2, 2009, 02:34 PM
I would love to see a reintroduction of the Magnum Carry. I dont even care if they use MIM parts and farm it out to India as long as it looks and works good. Im in dire need of a six shot snub that is smaller than a K frame.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is Colt Dead?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!