Why did Colt fade away?


PDA






smartshot
October 13, 2010, 05:54 AM
Maybe this is in the wrong forum, but what happened to Colt? They had alot going for them with the 1911, M16, and DS? Three of the most popular firearms in the 60's and 70's. Was it financial or was it the competition (S&W) or was a mix of the two?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why did Colt fade away?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
LHRGunslinger
October 13, 2010, 06:01 AM
For the most part as of late they've pretty much gone the way of HK and dropped the vast majority of their civilian department in favor of government contracts.

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 13, 2010, 06:02 AM
High prices and their primary focus on government contracts. They stopped trying to make affordable arms for civilians.

SlamFire1
October 13, 2010, 06:15 AM
Colt's problem has been greed.

One year at Camp Perry I was squadded next to a gentleman who had been offered the job of running Colt.

The owner of Colt was simply enriching himself and not putting money back into the company. The machinery was old, and I mean antique.

Colt has a real problem now that their M4 Monopoly has ended.

Their product line consists of the AR15, Colt Single Action revolvers and M1911's.

LHRGunslinger
October 13, 2010, 06:18 AM
And from what I have seen their SAA's are WAY overpriced.

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 13, 2010, 06:21 AM
And Colt's problems are going to get worse once the military switches from the M4 to something else. It may not happen soon, but it will happen eventually. And unless Colt is the designer of the Next Big Thing in military small arms, they are going to be left without a hand in the game.

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 07:51 AM
There is no future in making or selling Military scrapped designed firearms. Colt did not design the AR 15 or the 1911 for that matter either. Stoner designed the AR 15 and Browning designed the 1911.

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 13, 2010, 08:07 AM
Yet Colt acquired the license to mass produce both firearms, and generally created their modern military empire out of those two firearms. The difference between then and now is that there are other firearms companies that have the ability and marketing savvy to produce their own stuff. When the military picks the next rifle, companies like HK or FN are not going to be selling their guns to Colt. Colt cannot ride the M16/M4 horse forever. When the military switches, to the SCAR for example, Colt is going to be out of luck.

EMC45
October 13, 2010, 08:07 AM
Their clame to fame has been, for quite a long time, the 1911A1, SAA, and the AR type rifle. There are so many more companies making ARs, 1911A1s, and cowboy action pistols that they couldn't compete. It used to be if it wasn't Colt is wasn't good (in regard to the AR or 1911A1), but you have companies that have built quality 1911s that have upgraded features that if it were a Colt you would have to send it away to have the work done. Same with the ARs. There are a ton of Companies that churn out ARs that are BETTER than most if not all of the offerings of Colt. Then you have the SAA style pistol. The sky is the limit. From 299 bucks for entry level to high end custom shop style guns. Parts in the newer SAA style pistols are more durable as well. You can have them nickle, Stainless, blued, case hardened, "antiqued", flat, etc...etc...I don't think they are doing too well.

JTQ
October 13, 2010, 08:20 AM
I'll guess you guys aren't 1911 guys, or at least Colt 1911 guys.

Every Colt 1911 is produced on CNC machinery.

They sell them as fast as they can make them, which is probably why you don't see them sitting on the dealer shelves like other brands.

They don't run a bunch of ads since they don't have to.

Take a look here.

http://www.coltsmfg.com/

Spend some time on the Colt pages of these two forums.

http://forum.m1911.org/

http://forums.1911forum.com/

ForumSurfer
October 13, 2010, 08:42 AM
They sell them as fast as they can make them, which is probably why you don't see them sitting on the dealer shelves like other brands.

They don't run a bunch of ads since they don't have to.Yep. Every time I see a brand spankin new 38 super on the shelf, it's overpriced (according to MSRP) and gone within a week before I have time to convince myself it's worth paying over msrp for.

Edit:: I'm not the world's greatest Colt fan, but I would like to own an unmolested Colt complete with a spur hammer.

skimbell
October 13, 2010, 09:49 AM
Why did Colt fade away?

Here's a little secret. They haven't.

rklessdriver
October 13, 2010, 11:14 AM
About 3/4 of the people in this thread don't have a clue.

Affordable?
A new COLT Govt Model MSRP's for $750.00 and can be bought for a little less. I have bought more COLT's in the past 2 years than I had in the preceeding 10yrs. Next up is the XSE "enhanced" COLT pistols... all of $850.00 and the Combat Elite is less than $900.00 if you shop around as is the COLT Rail Gun and Lightweight Govt. The top of the line COLT Special Combat cost about $1700.00 and that is a 100% Custom Shop built gun. COLT's prices are in line with every other USA mfgr'd of 1911's and less than many when start comparing build quality, materials utilized and features. COLT offers forged frames and slides. The fewest MIM parts of any mass prouduced 1911. Their pistols are still built to last several lifetimes.

No features?? Have to have it worked on??
What are you taking about... Take a look at the Wiley Clapp Commander or Night Defender they mfgr and market thru Talo... Beautiful functional pistols at a fair price. Even the XSE's are using real Smith and Alexander beavertails and ambi safety's today. One thing COLT is know for today is 100% function out of the box with any ammo. The "dimpled barrel" feed ramp is another COLT innovation that along with CORRECT slide to frame and barrel to bushing tollerance has made COLT THE leader in building reliable 1911's.

Relying on Govt contracts and forgot about the civilian market??
COLT mfgrs 2 of the finest CCW pistols availiable in todays market. The Defender and the New Agent. Both are availiable in .45ACP and 9mm Par.

COLT has a brand new line of DAO pistols they are tooling up right now. Everything from 5" duty guns to 3" CCW peices. Alot of COLT purist are spinning around dizzy right now about these new fangled contraptions... But I think COLT will sell every one they make just as fast as they can make them.

COLT even has a factory rep over on one of the boards (I'm not saying which) that answers questions and I have seen him personally take care of COLT customers when there was a problem or custom shop order.

Can't compete in the AR/M-16 market??
If you go to any AR board and take a look at what the real pro's compare their weapon platforms to - you will see that only 2 other mfgrs (LMT and BCM) can compare with COLT. Just look at the famous m4 carbine "Chart". There are with AR's (as anything else) a bunch of suspect, sub standard, non milspec weapons available for plinkers at cheap prices.... Pure BS play toys. You better check your info because it is flawed.... NOBODY builds a BETTER civilian base AR than COLT. You CAN buy as good from LMT and BCM but not better. Trust your life to one of those "as good" carbines of you want but I know the difference...

The few who have replied that do have a clue - already mentioned every COLT is now CNC mfgr'd and that you won't see them for sale on dealers shelves because they sell out as soon as they hit them. I'd like for every gun owner in the US to own a new COLT, just so they could see that a US company can build a quality product at a fair price but we all know that ain't going to happen.

As Mark Twain said: " The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated". COLT is doing just fine.
Will

JohnBT
October 13, 2010, 11:31 AM
Colt is hanging on, but hardly setting the world on fire and prospering as the ATF figures show. These are the latest. They are compiling the 2009 numbers now.

www.atf.gov/statistics/download/afmer/2008-firearms-manufacturers-export-report.pdf

PISTOLS -

Colt - 23,178

STI - 5,905

Kimber - 62,603

Springfield - 10,878

Ed Brown - 1,248

Kel-Tec made something like 117,000 iirc. It's fun to look at the production figures.

Meanwhile, my WWI Repro/Blue is my favorite plinker. It has a nice trigger, great accuracy and it's pretty too. I bought it the day the store got it. It was on the shelf, but didn't even have a price tag on it yet. I was allowed to be the first person to dry fire it - after I promised to buy it. :)

Guillermo
October 13, 2010, 11:33 AM
Certainly anyone has to admit that Colt went from being one of the premier gun manufactures to just another 1911, SAA and AR company.

Maybe you love their products but there are a LOT of choices in those categories.

Why did Colt fade from the markets where they needed to innovate? Obviously because they couldn't compete on the cutting edge.

Why could they not compete? Unions, bad management and corporate arrogance.

When the walls were about to crumble they made a decision to only produce guns designed 50 years ago or earlier. It was a smart decision that probably saved them. The three basic products to which they cling to are enduring designs, instantly recognized and largely beloved and or respected.

So if you want to own a gun designed in the Vietnam era, turn of the 20th century or before, Colt is still there to help.

If you want something designed since LBJ was president, look elsewhere.

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 11:59 AM
What sealed the fate of Colt can be summed up in one word "GLOCK"

Tommygunn
October 13, 2010, 12:01 PM
And from what I have seen their SAA's are WAY overpriced.

Colt has made very good guns. But they have also always been on the expensive side.
During the Civil War Colt sold their .44 Caliber 1860 Army to the U.S. Government for $24.00 a piece. Remington sold their basically similar .44 for $18.00. In fact, Remington offered to make the Colt design for the Army for $18.00 apiece .... but the govt. decided to start buying Remmies and save $$$

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 13, 2010, 12:04 PM
The Defender and the New Agent?

When's the last time you saw someone carrying either of those pistols? Now compare that to how many people carry Glocks, M&Ps, XDs, and the rest. Colt is not a serious contender in the modern semi-auto category. They make their millions making M16s and M4s for the military and police departments, and a few niche guns like SAAs. But you go to any CCW class or defensive/tactical pistol course, you are going to see a lot of Glocks, Sigs, XDs, M&Ps, and a few others. Those guns own the market on CCW pistols.

PRM
October 13, 2010, 12:36 PM
There may be more choices today ~ but, I would argue Colt still has a strong following. When I was into 1911s, I only owned Colts. I still shoot the Detective Specials and Police Positive .38 Specials. Although, no longer in production, they can still be found in new and like new condition fairly easy. Colt still works on guns that need repair. One of my all time favorites is a Colt SAA in 45LC that was made in the 1960s. I sent it back to Colt in 2000 and had a .45ACP cylinder fitted to the gun and had it refinished while at the factory. It came back looking like a new gun and I can now shoot the cheaper more easy to find ammo.

Got several ponies in the stable.

Carl N. Brown
October 13, 2010, 12:45 PM
Product diversity would be a better strategy than focussing solely on (a) hunting (b) military and (c) police product lines. Putting all your marbles in the military bag, when military contracts are either feast or famine, is not good long term strategy.

Full Metal Jacket
October 13, 2010, 12:46 PM
for about 10 years, i saw far more overpriced colt SAA's in gunshops than their 1911's.

what kind of business sense lead them to that decision? :eek:

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 01:05 PM
American Stupidity.....the same stuff that put the mistake we now have in the White House and that buys overpriced hollow point ammunition because someone else says it is a "Better Man Stopper" We have become a nation of mindless sheep to crafty and shrewd advertising schemes and lost our edge as proactive thinkers. The fact of the matter is Americans don't make anything of value anymore besides mistakes and blind allegiances. And you wonder why we are at 10% unemployment to overseas markets.

m500'92
October 13, 2010, 01:17 PM
"There is no future in making or selling Military scrapped designed firearms. Colt did not design the AR 15 or the 1911 for that matter either. Stoner designed the AR 15 and Browning designed the 1911."

Sam Colt himself technically didn't design the Peacemaker either, as it was created in 1873 whereas he died in 1862 (Although I'm assuming much of the design would have been the same as his designs).

"What sealed the fate of Colt can be summed up in one word "GLOCK""

I doubt glock had much of anything to do with it, the glock is far different from the all steel, quality materials made 1911 (different markets). What would have helped put them under in the commercial market is how many other companies started making less expensive 1911s of equal or possibly even greater quality (Same with the AR15).

Cosmoline
October 13, 2010, 01:18 PM
Glock is certainly a factor, as noted. There was a time when Colt revolvers were the Cadillac of LEO sidearms. They made THE revolvers to which all others were compared. Colt utterly failed to adapt to the wondernine trend, and lost their position as a result. You could see Ruger, S&W and others scrambling to try to adapt to the market since the 80's, but Colt had its cheddar from Uncle Sam and hasn't even bothered. That's going to cost it.

That said, when the dust settles the name "Colt" still has cache and may still reappear, as the name "Winchester" has since that company essentially ceased to exist in the early 80's.

m500'92
October 13, 2010, 01:25 PM
"American Stupidity.....the same stuff that put the mistake we now have in the White House and that buys overpriced hollow point ammunition because someone else says it is a "Better Man Stopper""

There's cheap hollow point ammo too, it doesn't cost that much more. And it actually would work better as it expands to up to double the size as a fmj, to rip up more organs and such.

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 01:26 PM
When you lug a gun around on you hip all day for a living you soon will find out that the lighter it is the better you like it, hence Glock fits the bill very proficiently and has. Just look in any LEO holster and tell me what you find. Even LAPD went from Beretta to Glock for many reasons. Glock has totally changed the handgun world forever and set the bar for all future handgun designs to come

Carl N. Brown
October 13, 2010, 01:29 PM
Why did Colt fade from the markets where they needed to innovate?

I worked from 1969-2003 at a plant that started in 1923 and closed by 2004; my sneaking suspicion is that the decline and fall was caused by out of state and out of country owners who bought it to milk it dry, not grow it by investing. That is my suspicion from the floor level (I was never privy to a stockholder meeting).

Marlin was run by Rockwell in WWI to make machineguns. When the war was over, Rockwell dropped Marlin on the auction block. Marlin could have died, but the McKennas bought it on their faith in Marlin employees who believed that they could again become a priemer sporting gun maker.

I suspect short term corporate and investor decisions have hurt more than Colt or Marlin, but large sections of US manfacturing.

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 01:29 PM
How do you know that? You only believe that because someone told you it would. That's the problem with Americans, they just don't want to think for them selves anymore. A conclusion is not a destination, it is only a convenient place to stop thinking.

m500'92
October 13, 2010, 01:30 PM
"Glock is certainly a factor, as noted. There was a time when Colt revolvers were the Cadillac of LEO sidearms. They made THE revolvers to which all others were compared. Colt utterly failed to adapt to the wondernine trend, and lost their position as a result. You could see Ruger, S&W and others scrambling to try to adapt to the market since the 80's, but Colt had its cheddar from Uncle Sam and hasn't even bothered. That's going to cost it."

Yes that is true in some ways, however if they just remained more competitive in the 1911 market and the markets they were already involved in, they would have been still been well off. (Lots of companies make their money off the 1911 and AR alone)

W.E.G.
October 13, 2010, 01:33 PM
I'm sure this is one of the reasons.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd7/rkba2da/trivia/colt_commander_hrom.jpg

m500'92
October 13, 2010, 01:33 PM
"When you lug a gun around on you hip all day for a living you soon will find out that the lighter it is the better you like it, hence Glock fits the bill very proficiently and has. Just look in any LEO holster and tell me what you find. Even LAPD went from Beretta to Glock for many reasons. Glock has totally changed the handgun world forever and set the bar for all future handgun designs to come"

Sigs are still all metal designs and I would pick them before a glock. And 1/3 of American law enforcement uses the Sig, as you can see here.

"In the USA, nearly 1 in 3 law enforcement professionals use SIG SAUER firearms. “We are proud that many elite military and government forces including the U.S. Navy Seals, the Federal Air Marshals, the Department of Homeland Security and the U. S. Coast Guard carry SIG SAUER firearms” "

http://www.sigsauer.com/AboutUs/Default.aspx

And by the way, glock wasn't the first polymer pistol, H&K was for pistols and the Remington Nylon 66 came before that, but was a rifle.

m500'92
October 13, 2010, 01:39 PM
"How do you know that? You only believe that because someone told you it would. That's the problem with Americans, they just don't want to think for them selves anymore. A conclusion is not a destination, it is only a convenient place to stop thinking. "

Not sure who you're talking to, but if it was about hollow points again. It's not because thats what I'm told, it's because it makes sense, hell i live in Canada, nobody talks about guns around here, I look it up myself and make my own conclusions. Double the size of hole in a guy, I'd say will help take them down, isn't that why the military has to use fmjs, because they've been deemed less cruel or something. Either way, both have their own purposes and either will generally work fine for people, nothing to get excited over.

MattTheHat
October 13, 2010, 02:21 PM
Funny thread...

I guess I'm stupid and like to pay for over-priced junk. I own a dozen or more 1911s, all Colt. I also like to "throw away" more cash by buying American and having my pistols fully customized and tuned.

Stupid me. :banghead:


-Matt

CDW4ME
October 13, 2010, 02:22 PM
Colt doesn't advertise much, maybe they don't feel the need.
Kimber advertises heavily.

Kimber vs. Colt:
-All three of my Kimbers (CDP Compact and two different versions of Ultra Carry) came with factory night sights, I had to install them on my Colt Lightweight Commander XSE since they are not offered as a factory option.
-Kimber barrels are "in the white" whereas the Colt has a stainless barrel.
-Both Kimber and Colt make use of MIM parts.

Price: A stainless ColtLightweight Commander XSE ran me about $950 OTD, my Ultra Carry stainless TLE with night sights was about $100 more. Night sights cost me $120 on the Colt (installed myself). The Ultra Carry TLE has checkered front strap, while the Colt has a stainless barrel. The price between the two I have seems roughly equivalent, especially considering the Colt did not require an extensive and expensive 500 round break-in.

If the 10,000+ Springfields vs. 23,000+ Colts production figures are accurate, maybe they are not doing too bad afterall considering a near absence of advertising.

JohnBT
October 13, 2010, 02:57 PM
Those production numbers are from the BATFE, as required by law/regulation. There are people on that list who only made 1 or 2 guns. They reported them.

"Kimber barrels are "in the white" whereas the Colt has a stainless barrel."

Some Kimber barrels are stainless. I have one. They're listed in the chart of the models that Kimber publishes. They aren't the less expensive guns. :)

verdun59
October 13, 2010, 03:07 PM
Could someone please get DonRon an antacid.

W.E.G.
October 13, 2010, 03:16 PM
Colt seems to have trouble with its advertising.

They have had the pic with the "idiot scratch" on their web site forever.

http://www.coltsmfg.com/products-c5-q69-COLT_PISTOLS.aspx

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd7/rkba2da/trivia/idiotscratch.jpg

ForumSurfer
October 13, 2010, 03:26 PM
When you lug a gun around on you hip all day for a living you soon will find out that the lighter it is the better you like it,

That isn't a good comparison since different people have different needs.

Cops and military also carry radios, cuffs, batons and countless other items. Yes, then ounces count.

I carry a full sized 1911 IWB all day, most every day. About the only other items are keys, wallet, spare mags and a cell phone. I honestly can't tell any difference between a 1911 (full or commander)and a glock 19 when I'm wearing a good belt. The only time I notice a difference is when I put them on a set of scales. Now maybe if I had health or back issues, it would be a different story. But as it sits, carrying the 1911 makes no more of an impact than carrying the glock. Honestly, the glock is less comfortable at the end of the day because of it's thickness.

Guillermo
October 13, 2010, 03:27 PM
Could someone please get DonRon an antacid

come on Verdun...be nice. :D

this is a good discussion and we even have a fellow chime in who was "on the inside"

yeti
October 13, 2010, 03:34 PM
They have had the pic with the "idiot scratch" on their web site forever.

You are assuming that it is a scratch, it could just be an unadvertised, advanced design feature, disguised as a common user applied cosmetic enhancement.:rolleyes:

Never assume, you know what that does.:evil:


Colt is smart enough to get the cartridges into the magazine the right way... or at least keep them hidden if they're not.:uhoh:

Cowboybootnut
October 13, 2010, 03:36 PM
More competition. In the 1980s, S&W, Ruger, and a few others were the main competition. Now it is about a dozen more companies.

Zerodefect
October 13, 2010, 03:44 PM
Colt is doing fine out my way. In fact they are making a huge comeback. Sig and Kimber keep dropping the ball, ironicly, Colt seems to be picking up the slack.

My local gun shop has about a dozen of the nicest Colt 1911's I've ever seen. Much more tasteful than the old 1911s on Colts website. I don't know if they are custom shopped or not, but I haven't seen them anywhere else.

The Colt 6920 is still a staple of Ar15 collectors. And a fine place to start a custom rifle build.

Full Metal Jacket
October 13, 2010, 04:09 PM
i can't imagine why products like this didn't make colt a world arms leader again...:eek:

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/colt_aa2000.jpg

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 04:41 PM
Then you have never seen the Remington Rand, Ithaca or Singer 1911 pistols that were also produced for the military over the years. The Remington was a far better working pistol. In fact, Remington just released a new 1911 style pistol and I want to say it is made in the Philippines from what I have heard. Don't take that as fact please just something I heard that's all.

mooner
October 13, 2010, 06:08 PM
No one here has even mentioned the political leanings of Colt's leader. Big time Chuck Chumer and George Soros supporter. SCARY. These are the guys who wanted to develop the Smart Gun.

I here plenty of people talking about how S&W caved in to the Clinton's. Colt's past under it's current leader is EXTREMELY suspect and something I certainly won't support.

Bottom line really is though, I think it is hard to be a premium brand in a commodity market. 1911's and AR's are everywhere. All Colt really has going for them is the old name. All the talk of "The List" for AR's is a bit of a stretch. Yes there are better AR's and worse AR's, but the number and quality of the good ones is on the rise.

Colt won the M4 contract uncontested, not because they were better. Basically give the M16 a new design specification to give yourself a contract.

DonRon
October 13, 2010, 06:38 PM
No one here has even mentioned the political leanings of Colt's leader. Big time Chuck Chumer and George Soros supporter. SCARY. These are the guys who wanted to develop the Smart Gun.

I here plenty of people talking about how S&W caved in to the Clinton's. Colt's past under it's current leader is EXTREMELY suspect and something I certainly won't support.

Bottom line really is though, I think it is hard to be a premium brand in a commodity market. 1911's and AR's are everywhere. All Colt really has going for them is the old name. All the talk of "The List" for AR's is a bit of a stretch. Yes there are better AR's and worse AR's, but the number and quality of the good ones is on the rise.

Colt won the M4 contract uncontested, not because they were better. Basically give the M16 a new design specification to give yourself a contract.
Yankee Hill Machine and DSA just to mention a few. Great weapons makers.

Full Metal Jacket
October 13, 2010, 06:49 PM
Then you have never seen the Remington Rand, Ithaca or Singer 1911 pistols that were also produced for the military over the years. The Remington was a far better working pistol. In fact, Remington just released a new 1911 style pistol and I want to say it is made in the Philippines from what I have heard. Don't take that as fact please just something I heard that's all.

go onto remington's site under Q&A. the R1 is made in NY. however, it's still a piece of junk.

no where near the quality of the remington rands, which was a different company, by the way.

rklessdriver
October 13, 2010, 07:00 PM
No one here has even mentioned the political leanings of Colt's leader. Big time Chuck Chumer and George Soros supporter. SCARY. These are the guys who wanted to develop the Smart Gun.

I here plenty of people talking about how S&W caved in to the Clinton's. Colt's past under it's current leader is EXTREMELY suspect and something I certainly won't support.


No one mentioned it because it's NOT TRUE. You better check your info source because it's pure BS.

The CEO of COLT is (retired) USMC LT GEN William Keys. I can guarantee you that he is no supporter of communist scum bags like George Soros and Chuck Schumer. Just take a gander at his personal political contributions last year....

http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/william-keys.asp?cycle=08

Will

Tecolote
October 13, 2010, 07:13 PM
I can only speak for my area, but Colt's 1911s run in the $800 plus, and that's for their basic model. I don't understand why they keep cranking out the 80 Series when most people prefer the 70 Series.

Colt's was caught flat flooded by the Wonder Nine revolution. The polymer cataclysm caught them asleep too. They make a great 1911, but they can't even begin to compete in the DA/SA or polymer markets.

MolleMan
October 13, 2010, 07:43 PM
Just curious but people keep saying that Colt CAN'T compete but technically isn't it because they haven't. I believe they could if they decided to.

Guillermo
October 13, 2010, 08:00 PM
I believe they could if they decided to.

what in the last 30 years has led you to believe that?

The Python that is based on pre WWII design? The "delightful" Double Eagle?

Guillermo
October 13, 2010, 08:02 PM
dbl post

dcarch
October 13, 2010, 08:22 PM
In my opinion, I think Colt would do better if they offered more "semi-custom" guns, like Kimber's Custom II. (Yes, I know about the XSE.) Some sort of 5'' barrel 1911 with a extended thumb safety, a beavertail, and some good 3-dot sights. Maybe around 750-800 MSRP. I think the reason they are having some trouble is because they make so many pistols that are "retro". If they made some more modern style 1911's, I think they would do better. Just my two cents. Mil-spec lovers can start ranting... NOW!:D

JTQ
October 14, 2010, 07:47 AM
In my opinion, I think Colt would do better if they offered more "semi-custom" guns, like Kimber's Custom II.

The new Combat Elite is pretty close to what you are asking for.

EMC45
October 14, 2010, 08:06 AM
Government contracts are just that. The government goes with the lowest bidder. Just like when Mossberg picked up the contract for the pump shotgun. Was it because it was better than the Remington 870? Not even close! It was because Mossberg presented more product and service for a lower price. That is fact. Now the Air Force has gone back to the 870 on a modular platform. They are quite nice too. No one can argue that the M500-590 from Mossberg is better than the 870. The are just cheaper for Uncle Sugar....

SpodWo
October 14, 2010, 08:10 AM
Just from the perspective of Advertising - Colt Fails. And from the perspective of Distribution and market share - Colt Fails.

And inovation? Again - Fail.

It is a firearm company stuck on it's history and not looking to some future.

Glock actually was getting "stuck" because some desirable features where implemented on other tupperware pistols [like adjustable back and side straps] where lacking in Glock. So Glock adapted and changed with their Gen 4 offerings.

Ruger - again coming up with some interesting pistols and inovations - the LCP for example.

Yes - S&W...

But Colt? Just look at the front of their 2010 catalog and look inside of it and you get exactly what I mean. It's stuck in the past...

Double Naught Spy
October 14, 2010, 08:11 AM
Why did Colt fade away?

They aren't gone.

Maybe this is in the wrong forum, but what happened to Colt? They had alot going for them with the 1911, M16, and DS? Three of the most popular firearms in the 60's and 70's.

I don't know that I would call the M16 a popular firearm in the 60s and 70s. It was a military firearm, but not in the hands of too many in the populace. As for the 1911, the Series 70 seemed to be an exercise in crap. As Alex Hamilton, former president of the American Pistolsmiths Guild, noted, Colts were his bread and butter in the 1970s. Folks would buy new Colt 1911s and ship them to him directly, brand new, to be made reliable.

The last decade hasn't helped Colt much either in terms of popular appearance. If you look at the posts from various gun forums of the period, you will see the oft-repeated rumor that Colt would not longer be selling to non-government civilians which many folks took to mean that Colt would not be selling to the civilian market. The rumor was true, but misunderstood. Colt stopped most or nearly all direct sales to individual customers, instead deciding to only deal with its government contracts and wholesalers/dealers. Of course, folks in gun shops feed the fear, repeatedly claiming to buy now as there may not be any more.

mooner
October 14, 2010, 08:24 AM
"No one mentioned it because it's NOT TRUE. You better check your info source because it's pure BS.

The CEO of COLT is (retired) USMC LT GEN William Keys. I can guarantee you that he is no supporter of communist scum bags like George Soros and Chuck Schumer. Just take a gander at his personal political contributions last year...."



Sorry for not explaining myself. I was not referring to the CEO, which surely could be called the leader. I was referring to the financial group that owns Colt which is headed by Donald Zilkha. Ultimately, this is who the CEO answers to. Go ahead and look him up.

tinygnat219
October 14, 2010, 08:53 AM
Bad management, expensive union labor, lack of new product, discontinuation of product that sold well, lots of hand fitting, general disregard for civilian sales.

Need anything else?

JohnBT
October 14, 2010, 08:58 AM
www.newsweek.com/2000/04/16/unmaking-a-gunmaker.html

Great article on Mr. Z and Colt.

His super-rich family thought it was a dirty business and he was on his own...

"Now here he was, in the summer of 1999, sitting in his office 46 floors above midtown Manhattan, listening on the speaker phone as Colt executives told him the dream was dying. Colt was deep in debt and paying more than $300,000 a month in legal fees. The bank wouldn't loan him any more cash"

Guillermo
October 14, 2010, 09:18 AM
thanks John

Been a long time since I read it.

Was a sad read but informative.

kentucky_smith
October 14, 2010, 09:20 AM
There is some hope.
http://www.defensereview.com/dr-exclusive-scar-who-meet-the-colt-cm901-modular-multi-caliber-7-62mm-nato5-56mm-nato-battle-carbinesbrrifle-for-u-s-military-special-operations-forces-sof-and-general-infantry-forces-gif/
Also, Colt got a contract to build 240B's. :scrutiny:

SlamFire1
October 16, 2010, 12:14 PM
Take a look within the article. the Colt Defense Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (COO) Maj. Gen. James R. Battaglini USMC (Ret.) stated quite clearly that Colts primary customer is the US military, not the commercial market.

http://www.defensereview.com/dr-exclusive-scar-who-meet-the-colt-cm901-modular-multi-caliber-7-62mm-nato5-56mm-nato-battle-carbinesbrrifle-for-u-s-military-special-operations-forces-sof-and-general-infantry-forces-gif/

That explains why Colt has walked away from the civilian market.

Joe Demko
October 16, 2010, 12:18 PM
Colts primary customer is the US military, not the commercial market.

Throughout its history, Colts has chased government contracts in preference to servicing a civilian market. They've also had many brushes with collapse over the years. The only thing that's different this time is the date.

JohnBT
October 16, 2010, 12:26 PM
"Colt Defense’s" is the exact quote in the article. Of course they concentrate on the military (and law enforcement). www.colt.com

There are 2 different companies...

" Colt's Manufacturing Company has a separate website that you can access at www.coltsmfg.com "

buck460XVR
October 16, 2010, 12:51 PM
Always amazes me how, CEO's of major corporations, their advisers, designers and marketing directors know less about their product and what the general public wants, than the self-acclaimed internet forum experts. Don't matter if it's guns, motorcycles or sandwich meat.:rolleyes:

Gotta feeling, despite all the gloom and doom predictions here, that Colt will still be around long after we're dead and gone.

Guillermo
October 16, 2010, 02:37 PM
gloom and doom predictions here

I didn't see any of those.

Just sadness for what might have been

aryfrosty
October 16, 2010, 05:22 PM
My dad gave me a Colt 1911 in 1961. I bought my first new Colt 1911A1 in 1975 for a nice crisp $100 bill and carried it on the job until I saw a satin nickel Combat Commander in 1978 and traded for it. I haved owned Pythons and Old style Troopers since. I still own a Trooper .357 and a 6" Trooper Mk III .357 and shoot them as often as I can. The last "new" Python in stainless I saw I wouldn't have on a bet. The Agents, Detective Specials, Cobras and Diamondbacks are gone forever unless you luck into one somewhere. Handling "new" Colts sets my teeth on edge like scraping fingernails on a chalkboard. The quality ain't there. I don't much care for Colt's reasoning that they are a "military" supplier first and foremost. They don't get the picture...think "Double Eagle"...that their mission should be Colt quality built into anything they make regardless of who the end user is. I wish the Colt quality I grew up knowing was still here.:barf:

m500'92
October 16, 2010, 05:38 PM
"No one can argue that the M500-590 from Mossberg is better than the 870. The are just cheaper for Uncle Sugar...."

Personally I would take the Mossberg over the 870, especially if it's an express. However I think it would be a matter of personal preference, I definitely wouldn't say the Remingtons a better gun though. But when it comes to military uses it only makes sense to take the less expensive product if their equal in performance.

DPris
October 16, 2010, 11:04 PM
Again- THERE ARE TWO COLT COMPANIES, both owned by the same parent.
Colt Defense deals with military & LE.
Colt's Manufacturing deals with everything else (i.e. so-called "civilian" sales).
When you read statements or quotes about "Colt", pay attention to which Colt company is being referenced.

Of course Colt Defense's primary mission is military. That's what Colt Defense does.
Colt's Manufacturing is a much smaller operation, volume-wise, but they're still chugging along.

Interesting side note: Colt's Manufacturing buys the "civvie" AR variants it catalogs from Colt Defense to sell through regular non-LE channels.
Denis

DenaliPark
October 16, 2010, 11:53 PM
High prices and their primary focus on government contracts. They stopped trying to make affordable arms for civilians.
They are sucking at the government teat, strangled by their union, they had no choice about the civilian market. They simply could not compete in it, their existence is based upon government contracts alone....

MAKster
October 17, 2010, 01:14 PM
I think the Beretta handgun business has the same problem as Colt. For years Beretta has been trying to find a replacement for the 92FS which has declined in popularity because it is considered too big and heavy, especially for concealed carry. The Cougar did not sell well and the PX4 is a fine gun but is not a big seller either. No matter, Beretta keeps selling hundreds of thousands of M9s to the military so they just keep making them. At least Beretta's main focus is shotguns so the handguns are just a small part of the overall business.

SpodWo
October 17, 2010, 02:35 PM
I think the Beretta handgun business has the same problem as Colt.

Not quite the same...Colt has done nothing inovative or new - again look at their 2010 catalog. Beretta has offered a new pistol - the PX4 is quite an excellent weapon and the dressed up 92 - the "90 Two". That's something...

But I would have to give the "innovation" award to Ruger with S&W up there.

Guillermo
October 17, 2010, 04:36 PM
I would have to give the "innovation" award to Ruger with S&W up there

I am no Ruger fan but they are producing some interesting weapons. And unlike Smith, they seem to have a handle on quality control.

Average Joe
October 18, 2010, 06:39 PM
They priced themselves out of the market.

RhodesianRLI
October 18, 2010, 07:35 PM
I think lack of advertising, and that Colt doesn't really seem to care about civilian sales.

I would rather buy a Colt 1911 than a Kimber, but I never see Colt advertised in magazines, and I hardly ever see them for sale at gun stores. I see kimber advertisements in every magazine, and most gun stores always have Kimbers in stock. It seems like Colt is not really pushing their 1911s and doesnt really care if they sell too many.

DenaliPark
October 18, 2010, 08:00 PM
I am no Ruger fan but they are producing some interesting weapons. And unlike Smith, they seem to have a handle on quality control.
Sure they do, two major ongoing recalls(SR9/LCP)and a .45 auto so flawed(P345)that nobody will but them despite being available for $400.00 new! Topping that off with the release of a Rugerized Glock twenty-years after the fact is a lot of things, inovative not being one of them.....

420Stainless
October 18, 2010, 09:54 PM
I'm enjoying my XSE and new Delta Elite just fine. They may not be everyone's cup of tea, but work for me. As for innovation, the SAA does the same thing as the most technologically advanced handgun. A good first shot with either is generally all that is required for civilian purposes. It shoots a lead/copper based projectile out of the barrel in the direction pointed and traveling at the same speed as the newer weapon. Ain't much innovation in any firearm shooting self contained cartridges. Heck, even from a military standpoint, how much fighting is done with handguns? The police are also moving to carbines and semiauto shotguns. The biggest advantage for modern designs is better resistance to environmental fouling, which can be mighty important, but not often in home and self defense situations.

m500'92
October 18, 2010, 10:13 PM
"Sure they do, two major ongoing recalls(SR9/LCP)and a .45 auto so flawed(P345)that nobody will but them despite being available for $400.00 new! Topping that off with the release of a Rugerized Glock twenty-years after the fact is a lot of things, inovative not being one of them...."

The way I see it is Ruger's just good at taking other people's designs and merging them into a gun at a fairly low price that appeals to some people. I can't think of much that they did that was ever truly innovative. And their quality control sucks.

Taroman
October 18, 2010, 10:25 PM
I once read that an economic constant was that the price of an ounce of gold would purchase a Colt revolver, a fine suit of clothes, or... an ounce of gold.

As far as I have been able to see over the past 100+ years that this has pretty much been the truth.

So, Colts do not appear to be no more overpriced than they were in the past 100 years.

That said, I recently sold my SAA and bought three nice S&Ws with the proceeds.

What does this all mean? I have no clue excapt that I now have 3 fine firearms in my safe.

And, I'm hoping to get a 2011 centennial 1911..

smartshot
October 19, 2010, 06:18 AM
thanks for your posts, I now know more about colt than ever before. I think i'm just upset they didn't continue to make the DS. Or offer a Colt DS classic.

Guillermo
October 19, 2010, 10:55 AM
Sure they do, two major ongoing recalls(SR9/LCP)

I should have qualified my statement.
I was thinking of the revolvers as I am not a fan whatsoever of their bottom-feeding brass-chuckers.

Every week I read about someone disappointed in their Smith revolver. The last 3 new ones that I touched had factory defects. (horrible yoke to frame fit and two barrels that needed resetting)

Such does not seem to be the case with SP101s and Redhawks. Not saying that it doesn't happen. Just not as often.

testosterone
October 19, 2010, 11:24 AM
Colt marketing is just flummoxed.

In Connecticut, we have a Cabelas. It is literally just a few miles to where Colt makes guns, but there are hardly any Colts even in the showcase.

That is pathetic and sickening. Colt could easily work with the local sales counter over there, get some prominent position and market it but they don't do ****.

Also, I notice that SIG can't make enough P238's. pocket pistol sales are insatiable.

A P238 is a 1911. Colt used to make one, the mustang.

Why can't the tool up to sell to what the market wants? Are they really that inept?

ForumSurfer
October 19, 2010, 11:29 AM
but there are hardly any Colts even in the showcase...but there are hardly any Colts even in the showcase.

Why do that when you're already turning a profit and selling them as fast as you can get them to distributors?

Guillermo
October 19, 2010, 12:31 PM
Why do that when you're already turning a profit and selling them as fast as you can get them to distributors?

because if a union worker turns out too much product he gets a "talking to"

DPris
October 19, 2010, 02:23 PM
"Why can't they tool up to sell to what the market wants?"

Colt doesn't have the money, for that or for advertising.

Most people don't realise that Colt, as a split corporate entity, is just not the Colt it used to be.
Back in the early 90s, when the biggest crash struck, they let a bundle of people go. They had little operating capital, none for an ad budget or marketing campaigns, almost none for product development.
People I'd been dealing with there were suddenly gone. It became hard to even get a phone call answered, much less returned.

It's been a very slow process, but Colt has been steadily coming back, with both personnel and manufacturing capability.
I was talking to a contact there yesterday, and with the new CNC machines acquired recently, there are both new options available and a more hopeful look for QC. They open the door to more flexibility.

There were many factors that led to where Colt is now, not the least of which was decades of Colt Corporate Arrogance on the part of senior management.
Since he stepped in, General Keys has accomplished quite a bit with what he inherited.

Until recently, Colt was still using antiquated machinery & processess, almost entirely because they had to. No money for upgrades.
About five years ago, serious money was spent on upgraded CNC machinery for the Defense side, since that's where the worldwide contracts were coming from.
On the Manufacturing (civilian) side, it was limping along.

Investment money has been problematical for quite some time. When it's limited, hard decisions have to be made about where it goes, and that obviously includes which areas will produce the biggest return.

Of the two greatest names in American handgunnery, Colt and S&W, Colt was hampered by a basic DA revolver design that required expensive hand-fitting and specialized service people. By the mid-90s, that design was simply pricing itself out of the market. Colt had begun to build more modern (cheaper) revolver types in the late 60s, but even into the early 2000s those were also not selling well enough to keep in production, concurrent with Colt's money situation.

Smith & Wesson, on the other hand, was fortunate in that their DA revolver design dating from the late 1890s (unlike Colt's) WAS adaptable to increasingly more efficient manufacturing technology, and could be kept competitive on the market right on down till today. S&W was never crippled by strikes, has been financially viable by & large, and managed to overcome spells of managerial incompetence (such as the Clinton Agreement) to continue on with new development and new products in a strong position in today's marketplace.

Colt is coming along. I was told yesterday that the current new 1911 railgun came along about the same time as the acquisition of new CNC equipment at Colt's Manufacturing as no coincidence. On the older equipment, it couldn't be done viably. Now it can.
It remains a slow process, though. Advertising? It'll probably stay low for the immediate future.
The Colt's Manufacturing Marketing Division, at the moment & for some time now, consists entirely of one guy.

It ALL comes down to money.
They're not "that inept", they're just tight on funding.

Denis

JohnBT
October 19, 2010, 02:50 PM
I was rooting through the bookcases at home last night because I knew I had a recent Colt catalog handy. It was right there. Somewhere. Dang.

I found it at last.

It was from 1990. :o

jyo
October 20, 2010, 05:01 PM
I was in the firearms indusrty for many years---what killed Colt was old tooling, BAD quality control (United Auto Workers union-big strike), really BAD management and poor new designs (remember their "Glock clone" the 9mm P2000?). And, of course, Glock pistols---guns that worked well right out of the box. Only lately are we seeing any signs of life at Colt.

varoadking
October 20, 2010, 09:38 PM
The way I see it is Ruger's just good at taking other people's designs and merging them into a gun at a fairly low price that appeals to some people. I can't think of much that they did that was ever truly innovative.

Ummm, ever hear of the Mark I, II, III Series of pistols, or the 10-22 rifle? Only two of the best selling, original designs in history...

CZguy
October 20, 2010, 09:45 PM
Ummm, ever hear of the Mark I, II, III Series of pistols, or the 10-22 rifle? Only two of the best selling, original designs in history...

Oh sure........muddy up the water with facts. :D

Tachardiapsyche
October 20, 2010, 10:44 PM
I never seen a Colt with an internal lock, that's why I buy Old Colt's - better products that hold the value both monetary and aesthetically.

and in case you want a new catalog http://www.coltsmfg.com/products-c117-PRODUCT__MSRP_CATALOGS.aspx as for the new one's compare a New Combat Elite or 1991 to a Springfield or whatever else is made out there. More gun for the price.

welldoya
October 20, 2010, 10:52 PM
I just wish they (or SOMEBODY) would start making a decent line of double action revolvers again........without an internal lock.
Just think of the guns Colt has made in the past - the Python, the Diamondback, the Detective Special, the Trooper, the Woodsman, the Frontier Scout and a whole lot of others.
Dang, if they ever came out with those again , they would make a killing. I'm sure they would be expensive but I think people would pay it.

DPris
October 20, 2010, 11:10 PM
Those models using the older actions are not feasible in today's market.
A few people would pay the high prices, but not enough to bother re-development.
Colt has to go for volume, not high-priced niche guns.
They most certainly would not make a killing. :)

USFA currently owns the "Woodsman" trademark, for the one they have in development.
Colt can't legally re-introduce that one.

Basically, ANY model that required extensive hand fitting is too expensive for Colt to do.

The past is just that- the past.

Denis

JohnBT
October 21, 2010, 10:57 AM
Yep, old Mr. Usedtobe is dead and gone. Sad but true.

m500'92
October 21, 2010, 05:29 PM
Ummm, ever hear of the Mark I, II, III Series of pistols, or the 10-22 rifle? Only two of the best selling, original designs in history...

Oh you mean the Mark 1 series, which was made to look just like a baby nambu and just has a tubular receiver design that has a similar operation of a 22 semi rifle and is more complicated than most other designs? (especially takedown) Or the 10/22 that most people strip everything except the receiver to make a custom gun, that is still far less popular than the Marlin 60 and is still just a regular blowback semi-auto .22 (Thats about as innovative as building a rifle that has a slide). And those were two of Bill Rugers first designs, the most recent ones aren't even his and seem even less innovative.

Guillermo
October 21, 2010, 07:48 PM
the most recent ones aren't even his

in my experience, in this space/time continuum, dead people are not very productive or innovative.

Your Mileage May Vary

(though if it does I am scared)

:eek:

Dr.Rob
October 21, 2010, 08:00 PM
I think Colt really erred with the All American 2000. It was a late entry in the wondernine race, purchased from another designer and not fully tested (by all accounts) for the paltry sum of Colt's full auto collection. That really smacked of selling out 'history' to make a buck. It was a gamble that failed. There was a time that you could pick up a 2000 model in aluminum or ploymer for under $300. They are back way up over $500. Why?

Because in spite of their misteps Colt still has a mystique and a history that's interwoven with the very fabric of American culture of the past 150+ years.

Colt's gambled before... opting into a 'non-agression pact' with Winchester, taking the AR-15 to the civilian market (AR's were RARE at rifle ranges in the 70's-80's) and they never sold in large numbers until someone said 'we can't have those.' And by that time, EVERYONE was making AR's, now even SW & Ruger are in that game. Pre 1980 you'd be hard pressed to find a 1911 maker besides Colt. Sure there were Randalls and Detonics but they were made in small numbers. Now EVERYONE makes a 1911. Including S&W and Sig. Colt was late to get into 'rail' guns. The iColt seems like a boondoggle but it kept gov't money coming in the door and it kept them afloat. Colt sold off thier .380 carry gun market to Sig, at a time when there wasn't a lot of interest in .380 carry guns. Kel-Tec certainly re-vamped the interest in that niche. Colt stopped making DA revolvers and sold off a large chunk of their 'shop collection.' There have been rumors of new wheel guns, but that's all.

And yet they are still here.

I own a bunch of Colts. Some bought new, many used. I hope to buy more Colts, new and used as we approach the 200th anniversary of the company's founding. I'd like to see new designs from the storied maker, and I'd love to see a return of some older models, particularly the DS. They have weathered many a storm and I'm crossing my fingers and spending my money when I can on their wares. Because I don't want to see the 'institution' of Colt go the way of Indian Motorcycles and Lawn Darts.

Colt is making great stuff these days.

HisSoldier
October 21, 2010, 09:18 PM
Sad little surprises like plastic mainspring housings doesn't help much.

HisSoldier
October 21, 2010, 09:20 PM
What sealed the fate of Colt can be summed up in one word "GLOCK"

There are still lots of us who require high quality materials, that means steel.

m500'92
October 21, 2010, 10:26 PM
in my experience, in this space/time continuum, dead people are not very productive or innovative.

Your Mileage May Vary

(though if it does I am scared)

Yes but what I meant by that was the examples of Bill Ruger's designs used rather than current ones.

Tachardiapsyche
October 21, 2010, 11:04 PM
Yes but what I meant by that was the examples of Bill Ruger's designs used rather than current ones.

You mean like when he said we don't need more than ten rounds in a magazine or a gun smaller than a toaster?

Not an example I am interested in.

I like where the current Colt is headed. Nobody makes the 1911 I want, but I know who's the closest.

Guillermo
October 21, 2010, 11:14 PM
meant by that was the examples of Bill Ruger's designs used rather than current ones

I know Mossberg...just teasing you.

(don't think that you are any different...I tease everyone)


:neener:

wyocarp
October 22, 2010, 06:00 AM
Those who haven't read the reply from rklessdriver on the first page ought to. I sell a lot of 1911 pistols and rarely does one work as smoothly and shoot as accurately out of the box than a colt.

larryh1108
October 22, 2010, 11:58 AM
Just from the perspective of Advertising - Colt Fails. And from the perspective of Distribution and market share - Colt Fails.

And inovation? Again - Fail.

It is a firearm company stuck on it's history and not looking to some future.

Glock actually was getting "stuck" because some desirable features where implemented on other tupperware pistols [like adjustable back and side straps] where lacking in Glock. So Glock adapted and changed with their Gen 4 offerings.

Ruger - again coming up with some interesting pistols and inovations - the LCP for example.

Yes - S&W...

But Colt? Just look at the front of their 2010 catalog and look inside of it and you get exactly what I mean. It's stuck in the past...

Bingo!

Americans are funny. American businesses can be stupid. The "old school" American public used to have brand loyalty. "My first car was a Chevy and I've driven Chevy ever since and Fords suck" or vice versa. The auto industry is a perfect example of American Corporations sitting in their ivory towers, sucking on $50 cigars and laughing that American buyers who were loyal and blind. The imports started to arrive in numbers in the late 70's and now run the auto market. Look at the last few years. Gone are Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Plymouth and on and on. American icons now gone. Lee Iacocca saved Dodge in the 80's with the K-car design which were made to compete with the imports. The imports made the American cars better but lazy and content American bigwigs thought Americans would never stop buying their (fill in the blank) Ford, Chevy, whatever. American cars did not get better on their own (innovation) but the were forced to get better by foreign competition. Today's car of all makes are technological marvels when compared to the cars made in the 80's. Previously, when a car hit 100,000 miles they were toast... done... get rid of it (by design). Now cars are still considered almost new at 100,000 miles.

My point is Colt suffered from the same arrogance. They didn't get better (innovation) because they didn't NEED to waste money on R&D... they had their market and the new guys with plastic guns were all short term and "flash-in-the-pans". Well, the Colt bigwigs were wrong and as their target market shrinks (age does that) and the latest gun buyers are all wowed by the plastic guns Colt has been left in the dust. If Colt does not decide to ramp up to the 21st century buyer's needs they will end up sellling a limited number of "niche" handguns and go the way of Pontiac and Oldsmobile. "It's not your Daddy's Oldsmobile" killed Olds and the same thinking applies to Colt. Join the 21st century or perish. Too bad, Colt was once the standard everyone else measured up to. They aren't any more with a few exceptions. Greed gone bad is how I see it. I hope the bigwigs choke on their cigars.

Guillermo
October 22, 2010, 12:46 PM
One thing that must be said is that Colt is doing something pretty amazing by surviving.

Think about it...how many companies have made it with the "retro" thing. Certainly Harley Davidson is a good example. Their product is very poor in quality (yes they have gotten better) and performance yet they have a cult-like following. It is truly a phenomenon.

Colt has done the same thing (on a MUCH smaller scale). They crank out old designs, some from over 100 years ago. They are a retro company that has made it. In that respect they are amazing.

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