Just how stupid are rifle manufacturers?
- Thread starter Jubjub
- Start date
- Status
rockstar.esq
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,475
Bowfin you've got the right attitude (no pun intended).
If you really want to attack manufacturer stupidity consider that Ruger wouldn't put a laminate stock on a blued action nor would they sell a plastic stocked rifle that way. They still don't make bolt actions with removable magazines and the Ranch rifle has sucked since it came out. They offer exactly one lever action which has been catalogued for a long time and it's a .44 magnum! Add to that the horrid Zytel stocks and the imposing price for this bit of crap and stupidity is my only conclusion!
What I would consider a step in the right direction is for NEW gun designs to be usefull to both righties and lefties. A prime example that comes to mind is the new FN 2000S which has an ejection trough that sends the brass forward out the front where it neither batters the gun nor the shooter, nor the shooter alonside. The old Ithaca shotguns with bottom eject are another example of simple designs that work for everyone.
If you really want to attack manufacturer stupidity consider that Ruger wouldn't put a laminate stock on a blued action nor would they sell a plastic stocked rifle that way. They still don't make bolt actions with removable magazines and the Ranch rifle has sucked since it came out. They offer exactly one lever action which has been catalogued for a long time and it's a .44 magnum! Add to that the horrid Zytel stocks and the imposing price for this bit of crap and stupidity is my only conclusion!
What I would consider a step in the right direction is for NEW gun designs to be usefull to both righties and lefties. A prime example that comes to mind is the new FN 2000S which has an ejection trough that sends the brass forward out the front where it neither batters the gun nor the shooter, nor the shooter alonside. The old Ithaca shotguns with bottom eject are another example of simple designs that work for everyone.
Reminton now has a bottom-eject semiauto, and it's really nice.
Thumbing through my Ruger catalog, I can find several examples of blue/synthetic rifles and one blue/laminate rifle. The lever action comes in 3 calibers, not that I have any interest in one. The Ranch Rifle has been completely retooled.
I'll agree, though, that there aren't enough examples of the above improvements -- why not just offer a feature menu and let people order the gun the way they want it?
I look for things to change at Ruger with the departure of Bill Ruger's son and a new CEO in place. The Rugers seemed to have had an attitude that if they didn't like it, they weren't going to build it, and if they did, it was built, customers be damned. This included their suicidal policy on large capacity magazines for the Mini-14s.
Already Ruger has a new bolt action in .358, which I thought was a no brainer for any manufacturer for the last ten years. Also a rifle in .330 Federal, a new .375 Ruger cartridge, a new Mini-14, and some other models.
Already Ruger has a new bolt action in .358, which I thought was a no brainer for any manufacturer for the last ten years. Also a rifle in .330 Federal, a new .375 Ruger cartridge, a new Mini-14, and some other models.
BigFatKen
Member
two clicks
It only takes me two clicks on my CAD program to make a mirror image of a house plan. However, to get the carpenters and other tradesmen to get it right is a nightmare.
It only takes me two clicks on my CAD program to make a mirror image of a house plan. However, to get the carpenters and other tradesmen to get it right is a nightmare.
onemsumba
Member
Don't forget NEF, H&R, and Thomson Centers also Ruger #1.
highlander 5
Member
Sharps rifles can be had with a lefty stock I know as I have one.
I think their perceived problem revolves around market forecast; how many copies of any one particular rifle to roll out - and perhaps they see it as more difficult to predict how many left-bolts will sell. I would have thought it simply a matter of general population survey - what percentage of lefthanded folk are out there.
---------------------------------
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
---------------------------------
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
There's another component that I don't believe has been mentioned. And, I'm not 100% sure there's any truth in it, but...
Left-handed people are supposedly more right brained (something like that), which supposedly means that they're more inclined towards emotional and artistic personality traits being more strongly manifested.
That seems to me to be another likely reason few left-handed rifles are made: lefties are pre-dispositioned to be moonbats.
Left-handed people are supposedly more right brained (something like that), which supposedly means that they're more inclined towards emotional and artistic personality traits being more strongly manifested.
That seems to me to be another likely reason few left-handed rifles are made: lefties are pre-dispositioned to be moonbats.
Check the web site for Savage arms
and you will see that they are doing a survey and want your input regarding potential manufacture of left-handed rifles, perhaps others. The question they pose the public is something like this, "What model rifle would you most like to see Savage make in a left-handed model?" So, now is your chance to get some feedback to the company.
and you will see that they are doing a survey and want your input regarding potential manufacture of left-handed rifles, perhaps others. The question they pose the public is something like this, "What model rifle would you most like to see Savage make in a left-handed model?" So, now is your chance to get some feedback to the company.
Well, i grew up thoroughly confused...because I was ambidextrous...I "wanted" to do some things left handed (like shoot a bow or gun), others I did left handed (intricate, or very dextrous operations).
But, I even succumbed to the masses, and learned to shot both a bow and a gun right handed, simply because you could find many, many more choices that way.
So for 35 years, I've shot right handed. And I'm left eye dominant (I think) as well, so I close my left eye when I shoot (knowing that that's not really proper, but it works).
My best shooting buddy if a "true" lefty, and while it causes some problems, but he addapts pretty well, and can shoot my guns pretty accurate.
In short, I think left handed gunas are a bit scarce, because so many people have learned to adapt, not because they are a significant # of "lefties" out there. While the #age may be 10+% many, if not most, have adapted, lowering the demand even further.
But, I even succumbed to the masses, and learned to shot both a bow and a gun right handed, simply because you could find many, many more choices that way.
So for 35 years, I've shot right handed. And I'm left eye dominant (I think) as well, so I close my left eye when I shoot (knowing that that's not really proper, but it works).
My best shooting buddy if a "true" lefty, and while it causes some problems, but he addapts pretty well, and can shoot my guns pretty accurate.
In short, I think left handed gunas are a bit scarce, because so many people have learned to adapt, not because they are a significant # of "lefties" out there. While the #age may be 10+% many, if not most, have adapted, lowering the demand even further.
mainmech48
Member
Sometimes you can't get one even if the manufacturer has the tooling et al. I tried to get a ball rolling for a LH version of the Baikal Biathlon Basic to be imported with no luck whatever. Baikal makes (and EAA would import on special order) a LH version of the full-goose competition rifle, but EAA wouldn't commission them for a "basic" because the factory's minimum order for a special run was more than they wanted to handle. If I could've motivated even a third of that number of lefties to actually fire-off an e-mail asking for it, it might've happened.
The silence was deafening.
The silence was deafening.
Flyboy
Member
You might also look at a Blaser R93; right- or left-convertible just by changing bolts.
Manedwolf
member
Oh, really. Well. From a professional marketing graphics designer who spends their days doing creative stuff, and also enjoys shooting, I say you're so full of it that it's laughable. I'll get another laugh out of this nonsense next time I finish a magazine ad and go to clean my AK.
What, all artists are leftist peaceniks, and all gun enthusiasts are what...boring, beige-wearing monotone-speaking accountants? Are you boring and think only in numbers, being supposedly left-brain dominant?
What orifice did you pull this theory from?
Owen
Moderator Emeritus
um, no. It's not that simple.
Well, Manedwolf, what Caimlas said
appears to have some scientific basis behind that statement as written in the scientific literature over the years. However, this might be a tendency, not a definite personality trait or talent in each and every left or right handed person. And, Caimlas said, "supposedly" and I did not see him making any flat statements. What this theory stems from is that, based on a lot of scientific research, according to what I learned in college, is that right-handed people are considered to be "left hemisphere of the brain dominant" and left-handed people are more "right hemisphere of the brain dominant." Each hemisphere of the brain has differences and some of these relate to the tendency to be more artistic and intuitive and some more logical, linear-thinking, and mathamatically minded. Of course all people have two hemispheres of the brain and with 6 billion people in the world there is quite a variety of individual traits. Science has not gotten this concept down to anywhere near being able to predict a person's talents and abilities. Have a nice day everyone.
I will as soon as I get the house cleaned. (I am retired and my spouse is not so I do the housecleaning.)
appears to have some scientific basis behind that statement as written in the scientific literature over the years. However, this might be a tendency, not a definite personality trait or talent in each and every left or right handed person. And, Caimlas said, "supposedly" and I did not see him making any flat statements. What this theory stems from is that, based on a lot of scientific research, according to what I learned in college, is that right-handed people are considered to be "left hemisphere of the brain dominant" and left-handed people are more "right hemisphere of the brain dominant." Each hemisphere of the brain has differences and some of these relate to the tendency to be more artistic and intuitive and some more logical, linear-thinking, and mathamatically minded. Of course all people have two hemispheres of the brain and with 6 billion people in the world there is quite a variety of individual traits. Science has not gotten this concept down to anywhere near being able to predict a person's talents and abilities. Have a nice day everyone.
I will as soon as I get the house cleaned. (I am retired and my spouse is not so I do the housecleaning.)I am not sure that you can completely mirror a house without causing headaches for the carpenters and tradesmen. Most door knobs on the outside of a door are on the righthand side. Does your two mouse clicks keep them that way, or switch it to the left, meaning they need lefthand doors? How about the water faucets? Usually cold is on the right, hot is on the left, what does your two mouse clicks do for those? How about window latches?
Before I would get too down on a carpenter or tradesman, I think it might be best to go help build a completely mirrored house, and see how many nightmares your two mouse clicks create in the real world.
I have been the victim of CAD/CAM induced bad dreams myself more than a few times out on the shop floor, such as turning a huge punch press 180 degrees. and down the aisle. It seems that on the CAD program, that press didn't hit the roof or girders when the mouse clicked to make it magically disappear at Point A and then reappear at Point B. We showed the punch press and the girders where the Chief Engineer signed off on it, saying it was doable, but all the inanimate objects were unimpressed, and remained solid.
mainmech48
Member
What Owen and ARperson said; it ain't anywhere near that simple. While a couple of mouse clicks might get you "mirrored" drawings, CNC machines are not "self-programming" and that's where the comparison breaks down.
In the architectural model, skilled tradesmen read those plans and figure out what's needed to translate them into reality. Machines do not. They must be given parameters for everything from tool selection and cutting speeds to spatial co-ordinates for dimensional references. As they have no capacity to rationalize, process action sequences must be defined for them every step of the way. Contingencies have to be provided for and alternative actions defined.
While some of this can be "short cutted" to an extent with the proper specialized machining program, it still requires a bunch more than just telling it to "translate all operations 180 degrees" to make it happen. A new program must be created, tested, and de-bugged by engineers of several sorts, and that is not a quick or inexpensive process. To get a finished receiver, for instance, this may require that two or more machining centers be changed-over, each with a different task set. Multiply this by the number of subassemblies and ancillary parts which need to be changed to build the finished product and what machinery must be dedicated to making them.
Even then it's not quite as simple as just plugging in the new program and filling the parts trays. Fixtures and jigs must be designed and set-up for every sequence of operations. The initial set-up takes the most time, but even with an established procedure there will be some amount of potentially productive time lost while it is being done. Good manufacturing process engineering can help minimize it, but it can't be eliminated entirely.
All of it costs large money, especially the initial work. Unless they see the potential for timely return of that investment, plus profit, it obviously ain't gonna happen.
In the architectural model, skilled tradesmen read those plans and figure out what's needed to translate them into reality. Machines do not. They must be given parameters for everything from tool selection and cutting speeds to spatial co-ordinates for dimensional references. As they have no capacity to rationalize, process action sequences must be defined for them every step of the way. Contingencies have to be provided for and alternative actions defined.
While some of this can be "short cutted" to an extent with the proper specialized machining program, it still requires a bunch more than just telling it to "translate all operations 180 degrees" to make it happen. A new program must be created, tested, and de-bugged by engineers of several sorts, and that is not a quick or inexpensive process. To get a finished receiver, for instance, this may require that two or more machining centers be changed-over, each with a different task set. Multiply this by the number of subassemblies and ancillary parts which need to be changed to build the finished product and what machinery must be dedicated to making them.
Even then it's not quite as simple as just plugging in the new program and filling the parts trays. Fixtures and jigs must be designed and set-up for every sequence of operations. The initial set-up takes the most time, but even with an established procedure there will be some amount of potentially productive time lost while it is being done. Good manufacturing process engineering can help minimize it, but it can't be eliminated entirely.
All of it costs large money, especially the initial work. Unless they see the potential for timely return of that investment, plus profit, it obviously ain't gonna happen.
- Status
