So why no STG 44 clones again?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Something that IMO would be worth reproducing is the Stoner 63 weapons system. Robinson Armaments tried that with their M96 Expeditionary Rifle, but that turned into a fiasco. For one thing, the different configurations (a major selling point of the design) were never made available. Plus they had lousy customer service. This is what happens when a project like this is grossly underfunded.
 
Much of the trouble can be seen above.
About half the market wants one in a different caliber--which may be significantly more complicated than appears on the surface (like getting a 45mm case into a 33mm action).

True collectors want "an original" so the defanged SA-only version is less desirable to them.
Getting the internal parts to will-pass-ATFE-muster and still fit in the action is not a trivial bit of engineering. And, it's not inexpensive engineering, either.

But, the biggest hurdle is actually demand.

Everyone wants one of [insert thing here]; the number willing to pony up dollars for [thing] are far, far fewer. That drives up the retail price significantly. Which further suppresses demand. To sell [thing] at $600, you need a production cost down around $200 out-the-door. If it costs you around $2000 to make [thing], that's where you get MSRP of $5000.

Everyone "got mad at" Brownells for announcing that they were no longer selling the AR-10 clones they were making; Brownells only contracted for about 400 of each version, and sold like 375 on average. "Thousands" wanted one, but only hundred actually bought any.

Despite individual fervor for one, there are, perhaps 300, maybe 400 willing to fork over hard cash for an 8x33 STG-44 clone. And, that's before having to deal with all the ones wh actually want one in their inexpensive, easy to find, caliber that's a completely different dimension.

Price magazines, too, they are neither common nor cheap; and magazine engineering is a non-trival task in and of itself.
 
CapnMac said:
Much of the trouble can be seen above.


Everyone wants one of [insert thing here]; the number willing to pony up dollars for [thing] are far, far fewer. That drives up the retail price significantly. Which further suppresses demand. To sell [thing] at $600, you need a production cost down around $200 out-the-door. If it costs you around $2000 to make [thing], that's where you get MSRP of $5000.
Click to expand...


Very true enough. Anybody would want a 700$ dollar rifle of something cool. "Oh look DUDE! It's that one German rifle in WWII, we used this one on Call of Duty Nazy zombies mode!"
But when that same rifle becomes a premium >$3000 rifle, demand goes down.

Sure i'd like a Stg 44 as they are very interesting rifles, very well engineered for their time. Historically significant. If I was to get a modern one I see no point to sticking to the original caliber because it's hard enough to find as it is. I'd rather buy a deactivated one (which there are a few out there).
 
Part of the cost of any product is the time to design it and also the cost of all tooling needed to make the product. Molds of any kind and metal stamping dies are not cheap to make and it takes trained tool and die makers to make them. The average hourly shop rate for machine shops s around $80 an hour and the average hourly pay for a journeyman tool and die maker is around $35 per hour or higher.

When you factor all of the costs in, you have to be able to sell in large quantities in order to have a lower priced product. Limited or small runs are always more expensive.
 
CapnMac said:
Much of the trouble can be seen above.
About half the market wants one in a different caliber--which may be significantly more complicated than appears on the surface (like getting a 45mm case into a 33mm action).

True collectors want "an original" so the defanged SA-only version is less desirable to them.
Getting the internal parts to will-pass-ATFE-muster and still fit in the action is not a trivial bit of engineering. And, it's not inexpensive engineering, either.

But, the biggest hurdle is actually demand.

Everyone wants one of [insert thing here]; the number willing to pony up dollars for [thing] are far, far fewer. That drives up the retail price significantly. Which further suppresses demand. To sell [thing] at $600, you need a production cost down around $200 out-the-door. If it costs you around $2000 to make [thing], that's where you get MSRP of $5000.

Everyone "got mad at" Brownells for announcing that they were no longer selling the AR-10 clones they were making; Brownells only contracted for about 400 of each version, and sold like 375 on average. "Thousands" wanted one, but only hundred actually bought any.

Despite individual fervor for one, there are, perhaps 300, maybe 400 willing to fork over hard cash for an 8x33 STG-44 clone. And, that's before having to deal with all the ones wh actually want one in their inexpensive, easy to find, caliber that's a completely different dimension.

Price magazines, too, they are neither common nor cheap; and magazine engineering is a non-trival task in and of itself.
Click to expand...
the Chinese gun maker Norinco if they wanted could make them in a couple of calibers in a few months and sell them for $400. they took their M14/M1A and easily converted it to the 7.62x39 and shortened the barrel. a US maker would have been crying about the machinery problems etc and if they did it they would be $2000
 
robin banks said:
the Chinese gun maker Norinco if they wanted could make them in a couple of calibers in a few months and sell them for $400.
Click to expand...
Perhaps 30 years ago, PRC has had any number of issues with labor costs in just the last decade.
Were they in the market, they'd have to go to Armscor to steal the IP and have it made in Laos or Burma.

they took their M14/M1A and easily converted it to the 7.62x39 and shortened the barrel.
Click to expand...
Yes, you can change a chamber for a 51mm cartridge and not ream it as deep for a 39mm one.
The barrel profile for .308 will also easily cope with 7.62x39 pressures.

It's quite different to take a 7.92x33 chamber and re-cut it to be 7.62x39 (long with a full barrel swap, new gas pressure dynamics, and the like. 300BO even more so (that's a bit like trying to get a 380acp to run a 38super).

a US maker would have been crying about the machinery problems etc and if they did it they would be $2000
Click to expand...
Given that engineers generally want to make a living, and have rather specific notions of what their time is worth, can you fault them? Machine tools are not cheap, nor the jigs and fixtures and cutting tools, either.

There's this notion that you merely make a CAD, dump it in a CNC machine, and out pops a [thing].
There's an engineering process to the method by which parts are made to be assembled into a finished whole.
There's a distinct design limitation based on how many of a thing are to be made, too.

If you are making one of a thing, maybe you can justify the time needed for 57 tool changes per part; maybe you can't. Cutting tools have limits on how much they can cut, and how rapidly, too. These are engineering values that must be considered in making the one part in question. Which compounds per part.

The STG-44 has rather a lot of intricate parts, each one requiring some amount of time to be machined. That time adds up.

All of that is why a run of a couple hundred US-made Semi-Auto STG-44 would like to be US$7000 or $8000 apiece, retail.
 
Now, to be fair, what is probably more vexing is the lack of interest in the STG-45, with its flapper-delayed blowback operation, which was meant for simple machine shop production. The only trouble being the stamping dies, which are only economical in runs of thousands.
 
robin banks said:
the Chinese gun maker Norinco if they wanted could make them in a couple of calibers in a few months and sell them for $400. they took their M14/M1A and easily converted it to the 7.62x39 and shortened the barrel. a US maker would have been crying about the machinery problems etc and if they did it they would be $2000
Click to expand...
@CapnMac pretty much covered it all, but I jus want to add, too, that Norinco is subsidized by the Chinese Communist Party in a myriad of ways. It's not a fair comparison.
 
D.B. Cooper said:
@CapnMac pretty much covered it all, but I jus want to add, too, that Norinco is subsidized by the Chinese Communist Party in a myriad of ways. It's not a fair comparison.
Click to expand...
telsa is subsidized by taxpayers and the cars start at 60K . GM propped up by the govt who is also paying the pensions of GM Ford and Chrysler and you can pay 100K for a pickup. that is just the tip of the subsidy iceberg
 
Jim Watson said:
Norinco is a wing of the People's Liberation Army. Buy Chicom, you are directly supporting enemy armed forces.
Click to expand...
the Chinese said DIEversity and multiculturism will and is destroying the west. they banned feminists and homosexuals. I would rather have them rule the US then the bolsheviks who rule it now. your phone computer all your electronics and half the stuff in your house are made in China. you are supporting the invasion of the US by China.
paranoia strike deep
into your life it will creep
starts when you always afraid
 
zaitcev said:
That is seriously funny when gas is $5/gal at Costco
Click to expand...

Gas is an inelastic demand. People are pretty much going to buy it no matter how much it costs. If I don't buy gas, I don't go to work. If I don't go to work, I can't feed my family. I can live a long, happy, and fulfilling life without a knock-off, gucci firearm, which is why it's an elastic demand item-any change in price impacts demand.
 
robin banks said:
telsa is subsidized by taxpayers and the cars start at 60K . GM propped up by the govt who is also paying the pensions of GM Ford and Chrysler and you can pay 100K for a pickup. that is just the tip of the subsidy iceberg
Click to expand...

True. How much do you think that Tesla would cost without subsidies? And electric cars are very much "en vogue" in D.C. right now. Do you honestly believe the Biden administration would write a big check to a start-up gun company to produce "assault weapons?" Not hardly. So we're back to comparing Norinco to any US gun company as apples to oranges. Norinco can do it, but a US gun company will never get that kind of support.
 
CapnMac said:
Perhaps 30 years ago, PRC has had any number of issues with labor costs in just the last decade.
Were they in the market, they'd have to go to Armscor to steal the IP and have it made in Laos or Burma.


Yes, you can change a chamber for a 51mm cartridge and not ream it as deep for a 39mm one.
The barrel profile for .308 will also easily cope with 7.62x39 pressures.

It's quite different to take a 7.92x33 chamber and re-cut it to be 7.62x39 (long with a full barrel swap, new gas pressure dynamics, and the like. 300BO even more so (that's a bit like trying to get a 380acp to run a 38super).


Given that engineers generally want to make a living, and have rather specific notions of what their time is worth, can you fault them? Machine tools are not cheap, nor the jigs and fixtures and cutting tools, either.

There's this notion that you merely make a CAD, dump it in a CNC machine, and out pops a [thing].
There's an engineering process to the method by which parts are made to be assembled into a finished whole.
There's a distinct design limitation based on how many of a thing are to be made, too.

If you are making one of a thing, maybe you can justify the time needed for 57 tool changes per part; maybe you can't. Cutting tools have limits on how much they can cut, and how rapidly, too. These are engineering values that must be considered in making the one part in question. Which compounds per part.

The STG-44 has rather a lot of intricate parts, each one requiring some amount of time to be machined. That time adds up.

All of that is why a run of a couple hundred US-made Semi-Auto STG-44 would like to be US$7000 or $8000 apiece, retail.
Click to expand...
the STG 44 was mostly stamped and made to be a throw away gun when it wore out. cause on the eastern front you did not live long. that was stated by the Germans
 
I have one of the GSG/ATI STG-44/22's which I bought from CDNN when they were clearing them out (~$300), which is the most I have ever paid for a .22.
Shooting it changed my mind about wanting one of the HMG reproductions. It's not the best designed rifle.
Next time I'm in Vegas, I would still rent an original at Battlefield Vegas just to experience shooting the real deal, but no way I would spend $1k+ for a reproduction.
 
BudrowBob said:
I have one of the GSG/ATI STG-44/22's which I bought from CDNN when they were clearing them out (~$300), which is the most I have ever paid for a .22.
Shooting it changed my mind about wanting one of the HMG reproductions. It's not the best designed rifle.
Next time I'm in Vegas, I would still rent an original at Battlefield Vegas just to experience shooting the real deal, but no way I would spend $1k+ for a reproduction.
Click to expand...
if you were a Russian with the clumsy Mosin getting shot at by the STG 44 you wouldnt think it was a bad design. when patton said the M1 was the best battle implement ever a few guys said well he aint getting his azz shot up by the STG 44
 
robin banks said:
the STG 44 was mostly stamped and made to be a throw away gun
Click to expand...
That was more true of the Haenel versions, which culminated in the various StG-45 variants, which were Volkswaffe, and not built for longevity. And, were hampered by all requiring Mp-43/44 magazines.

There's a modern notion that stamping is both cheap and easy. That's complicated. The dies required for stamping can be ludicrously expensive as they need to be made of hardened steel to incredible tolerances. In use, the dies can go out of tolerance quickly (and in differing rates for hot versus cold stamping), Beyond the die for the stamp cutting, you need others to achieve the bends, too. And, you'll need a very qualified machinist to test and check the assembled bits. Which usually then need to welded up in a jig. All the load bearing or specifically-hardened bits then need to welded or riveted to the parts you have.

The economy only occurs at scale, you need a run of parts in the thousands, and need dozens of skilled workers. Not the ideal for making a run of a hundred or so niche firearms.

Not even ideal at the millions, it took the Soviets a decade to be able actually make the Ak as a stamped weapon. And they had factories by the dozens, even hundreds to hand for the task.
 
CapnMac said:
There's a modern notion that stamping is both cheap and easy. That's complicated. The dies required for stamping can be ludicrously expensive as they need to be made of hardened steel to incredible tolerances. In use, the dies can go out of tolerance quickly (and in differing rates for hot versus cold stamping), Beyond the die for the stamp cutting, you need others to achieve the bends, too. And, you'll need a very qualified machinist to test and check the assembled bits. Which usually then need to welded up in a jig. All the load bearing or specifically-hardened bits then need to welded or riveted to the parts you have.
Click to expand...

As a retired tool and die maker, I can personally attest to all of this. Having to hold tolerances in the stamping dies to 0.001" is quite common. Dies are not cheap to make due to the high tolerances and having to be properly heated treated and properly tempered. I worked in shops making and maintaining stamping dies.

Smaller parts are made in a punch press using a stamping die while bigger parts are made using a multi ton press break and forming dies to make the required bends. And with either process, any time there is even a small change in material hardness or material thickness then the dies have to be adjusted in order to keep the parts within tolerances.

I spent all of my time working on the stamping/forming dies, Quality control had to check the parts produced. And then there is the machine operator. So right there you have three hourly wages. Add in the engineer's salary and time needed to design the dies and make the blueprints add to the cost too. And normally we would have to test and adjust the dies when we made them to make sure the production parts were in tolerance.

And with all those costs, it takes very large runs t keep the cost of individual parts prices down. The smaller the run, the more expensive the parts are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
MSAR STG-556 Review (Long)
Replies
6
Views
3K
El Tejon
E
KarateHottie93
  • Locked
Why doesn't the gun world have anything like Kickstarter, GoFundMe, Indiegogo, etc?
Replies
13
Views
615
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
J
  • Locked
My MSAR STG-556 experience
Replies
12
Views
2K
Paul Kersey
P
marksman13
  • Locked
Adding some Ruger No. 1s to the safe today...
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
3K
marksman13
marksman13
Combloc1
  • Locked
SSD's PTR44/BD44 In Detail The Semi Automatic MP44
Replies
18
Views
3K
Mizar
Mizar
Back
Top