Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AP story this morning...

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by SaxonPig, May 29, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SaxonPig

    SaxonPig Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    4,787
    The US military is looking for a new rifle. Colt has been supplying the M4 version of the M16 for over a decade but now the bidding will be open to other manufacturers. I think one reason Colt has pretty much withdrawn from the civilian gun market is that with the military arms contract it didn't need to bother with us pesky retail buyers. They were making a fine profit from the government sales.

    Soooo... if Colt loses the deal on Army rifles and the revenue from Uncle Sugar, think this will prompt the company into rethinking its position on not producing guns for the the civilian market? Could the loss of the federal contract sweetness lead to the restarting of the machinery over on the handgun production line that has grown cold over the years? Might Colt find itself in need of some Python and Diamondback sales to keep stockholders happy?
     
  2. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    I perfectly happy with my AR and 1911 "clones." Karma.
     
  3. statelineblues

    statelineblues Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    836
    Location:
    In PA
    From Colt's own website:
    Colt has never really been known for R&D and innovation - they tend to build one model then tweak it and sell the "variations" (i.e. - 1911 Government Model, then the Commander, the Officer's Model, Gold Cup, etc). Most of their most famous firearms were designs purchased from the original creators.

    The only rifle they have currently is the AR-15 platform - it's been decades since they put out a bolt action (the last was a colaberation with Sauer in the 1980s, IIRC).

    If they lose the .gov contract, I doubt they have the wearwithall to survive. The brand name will continue, but the actual firearms manufacturing were probably disappear.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2011
  4. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    11,450
    Location:
    TN
    I hope they have contigency plans in place. Bit I am not hopeful. It is a tough business.
     
  5. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,109
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    Hasn't Remington established itself in the sporting market for AR rifles while Colt focussed on military contracts? (Don't have my fingers on any pulses, just my impression.)

    In WWI Marlin focussed on military contracts as Marlin-Rockwell, and ended up on the auction block in the 1920s once the military contracts were over.

    For a major gunmaker to concentrate on military contracts, and ignore or slight the civilian sport, self-defense and police markets is a mistake that has been repeated over and over.
     
  6. Onmilo

    Onmilo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    Illinois`
    Put all your eggs in one basket,,,
     
  7. Rollis R. Karvellis

    Rollis R. Karvellis Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    878
    Location:
    JAX, FLA.
    A blue and wood Python, would be nice for the collection.
     
  8. buck460XVR

    buck460XVR Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,071
    Since the craftsmen are gone, the machinery is either gone or outdated and the massive expense of investing in modern equipment to produce a low volume product to sell at a cost that is prohibitive to most potential customers, I think not. Wishful thinking maybe, but even if they did reintroduce them, they would never be the guns they were. I think this scenario is more likely.........



    Since Colt just redid their equipment for producing their 1911s and they are selling well, I see that continuing till the demand falls or the equipment fails. This may be with the company as we know it now or after the name is bought by a investment conglomerate. Anything not profitable for the stockholders will be dropped.......this includes the great customer service Colt is known for.
     
  9. avs11054

    avs11054 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Location:
    AZ
    What is wrong with the rifles they've issued to the military that cause the military to want to switch guns? That was my biggest question from reading the article.
     
  10. SaxonPig

    SaxonPig Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    4,787
    What was wrong with the Garand in 1954? Or the M14 in 1962? Progress demands innovation and superior models come along making the old ones obsolete. I am hearing renewed complaints regarding the the M16 (M4... same thing) and the 5.56mm cartridge. I suspect the next Army rifle will be in a larger caliber. Maybe a 6x45?
     
  11. Owen Sparks

    Owen Sparks member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Messages:
    4,524
    Are they looking for a new rifle or just a new supplier?
     
  12. crm7290

    crm7290 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    62
    They want what's cheapest so they reup the contract every now and then is my guess
     
  13. Cryogaijin

    Cryogaijin Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    571
    Location:
    Portland Oreganon
    New rifle one can hope.
     
  14. PokeyOkie

    PokeyOkie Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    42
    Location:
    NOVA -too close to Congress
    It's more than just what's cheap. Government contracts are limited in scope & duration. Federal law requires them to recompete regularly to get the best value. They can select a more expensive gun if it's more durable or reliable. If you want to see where our tax dollars go, check out fedbizopps.gov. a search there will tell if it's the same gun or something new.
     
  15. Kliegl

    Kliegl member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    339
    I own a Colt LE model AR-15 and am quite happy with it. I also added that slide-fire stock, and that's even more fun.
     
  16. 68wj

    68wj Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,654
    Location:
    Upstate
  17. pikid89

    pikid89 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,556
    Location:
    The Gator Nation
    i dont think colt makes all their guns anyway...my cousin just got back from afghanistan with the marines and he said his m16 was made by FN
     
  18. Doxiedad

    Doxiedad Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    163
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    I'm all for our fighting men and women having the best possible weapons with which to defend themselves. If Colt can no longer provide that then the armed services need to find a rifle/supplier that can.
     
  19. Unistat

    Unistat Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    SE Michigan
    Yep.

    What Colt has is the Technical Data Package, which is the "Spec" in "Mil-Spec." Colt owns it and it is copywritten (or trademarked or patented or whatever) information. Only Colt can make a truly "Mil-Spec" rifle because only Colt really knows what that means.

    Except a couple of years ago, the DoD told Colt, "Show the data to FN so they can make us some rifles."
     
  20. Kaeto

    Kaeto Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    Location:
    Lincoln Park, Mi.
    Actually the specs are given to the manufacturer by the govt. And the manufacturer has to make the product to that spec or it don't get bought.
     
  21. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    +1.

    In the 90s, FN underbid Colt on the contract to produce M16s for the military, and started cranking them out of their factory in South Carolina. Colt was basically tossed the bone of the then-minor M4 contract to keep them from tanking at the time. They got lucky that the M4 subsequently went on to become the preferred US Army standard, but that wasn't the plan or intent when the contract was given to the Colt.

    The contract parameters are such that while a new caliber could be submitted, it is effectively discouraged, so don't expect to see anything but 5.56x45. Actually, I'll be surprised if anything out there beats the M4 under the released parameters, since cost effectiveness is the primary consideration. The whole thing will ultimately prove to be squandered and wasted tax payer money, like Big Army's attempt to replace the M9 several years back, etc.
     
  22. Unistat

    Unistat Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    SE Michigan
    The TDP is owned by Colt (sort of.) The TDP is all of the information required to manufacture the rifle to the Government specifications. Colt owns the TDP, but apparently the Gov can give it to anyone they want if they pay Colt a royalty.

    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=251061

    And

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/07/09/colts-exclusive-m4-production-right-ends/
     
  23. Kaeto

    Kaeto Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    Location:
    Lincoln Park, Mi.
    Or not pay a royalty like the govt. did with the jeep. The Bantam Motor Car Co. came up with the design beating out Ford and Willys in the procurement. And then the govt. decided Bantam wasn't big enough to produce the numbers needed so they gave Bantams design to Ford and Willys. As a bone to Bantam the govt. let them build the small trailer that was often towed behind jeeps.
     
  24. Heretic

    Heretic Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    310
    Location:
    Iowa
    All the parts in my AR are mil-spec, improved by hand fitting. Nothing was made by Colt.
    Mil-spec has to do with things like materials/hardness/durability/etc, not who makes it.

    If uncle changes rifles/ammo, I hope they have the sense to go back to a .30 cal.

    If Colt goes back to civilian sales, don't be surprised if it's just the nameplate on a chinese gun.
     
  25. Owen Sparks

    Owen Sparks member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Messages:
    4,524
    Hasn't the patent on the M-16/AR-15 design expired by now? Everybody and their brother makes one just like they all make a version of the 100 year old 1911 design which is now in the public domain.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page