Lets talk about this wonderful piece of equipment. "COLT"

[Extremely Pro Gun]

So I work at a gun store. This particular gun was leaned up against the wall when it slid over and hit the floor. It wasn't surpassing to see a broken in half Colt AR-22 LR. I have heard some bad stuff about these Colts but has anyone seen something like this:

Sorry the pics were taken with a camera phone because I don't waste my time carrying a digital camera.

 

[scythefwd]

Wow, I would expect the sights to be a little off on a rifle that was dropped, maybe a ding or two but a completely broken lower? Aluminum doesn't have to be that weak.

 

[rich636]

Well at least its parkerized under the FSB right?

I would guess maybe they cast those receivers instead of forge them?

 

[kwelz]

One minor detail. It isn't a Colt. It is a cheap .22 made by Uramex, who also owns Walther. They made it out of the same pot medal that they used on the P22 with similar results. Colt licensed their name before i was even produced, something I am sure they regret now.

However don't try to claim it is a Colt and use it as an excuse to bash them.

 

[Extremely Pro Gun]

One minor detail. It isn't a Colt. It is a cheap .22 made by Uramex, who also owns Walther. They made it out of the same pot medal that they used on the P22 with similar results. Colt licensed their name before i was even produced, something I am sure they regret now.

However don't try to claim it is a Colt and use it as an excuse to bash them.

Do me a big favor and look at this picture, and read the manufacturer:


IT IS LICENSED BY COLT!!! COLT PUT THEIR NAME ON THE GUN, THE QUALITY WAS OVERSEEN BY COLT, EITHER THAT OR COLT IS AN EVEN WORSE COMPANY FOR GIVING THEIR LICENSE TO ANYONE. It also is by no means a "cheap 22" It is our most expensive at $579.

 

[kwelz]

I am well aware of the Roll Mark on the gun. And it means absolutely 0. It isn't produced by Colt, overseen by Colt, or QCed by Colt.

You need to get a better understanding of how Licensing works. It doesn't give you absolute control over the product the company makes. If I license a logo from a company to make shirts and some people aren't happy with those shirts, the best the company I go the logo from can do is pull my license if the contract allows for it. And that takes time even if they do.

 

[Extremely Pro Gun]

I understand your point, however I can see this in only 2 possible ways and neither look good for Colt:

1. They gave away their license without knowing or having any idea of the quality behind the product they were endorsing... BAD

2. They looked over the ROYAL POS and deemed it suitable to wear the Colt name, which its not... BAD

To me this is pretty simple.

 

[kwelz]

On that we do NOT disagree it was a monumentally stupid move by Colt. However it is a fallacy to try to say that this is indicative of an actual Colt product and it seems like that is what you are trying to say.

I almost bought one of these the day they came out but something just didn't feel right about it. I am very glad I did not. I am going to get one of the S&W guns or a Spikes Dedicated upper.

 

[Speedo66]

May have been broken intentionally.

Nasty report a day or so ago here of a member's problems with a Colt .22.

Maybe wrapped around a tree like a discouraged golfer with golf clubs.

 

[Extremely Pro Gun]

On that we do NOT disagree it was a monumentally stupid move by Colt. However it is a fallacy to try to say that this is indicative of an actual Colt product and it seems like that is what you are trying to say.

No you've got me all wrong. I am not bashing their actual AR-15 rifles but I am bashing the slippery slope they are headed down as a company.

At the prices that Colt sells parts for AR-15 I will expect NOTHING short of perfect if I buy one, however this slip up leads me elsewhere to find excellent quality parts in the price range.

Last I heard DPMS, RRA or CMMG have not licensed their names to crap. Thats a plus for them.

May have been broken intentionally.

Nasty report a day or so ago here of a member's problems with a Colt .22.

Maybe wrapped around a tree like a discouraged golfer with golf clubs.

If that was the case I would be looking for a new job. There are security cameras. This gun is NEW and still has the tag on it.

 

[kwelz]

I think this is the one he was talking about in another thread that fell off the shelf and broke. I have seen similar breaks out of P22s

 

[kwelz]

No you've got me all wrong. I am not bashing their actual AR-15 rifles but I am bashing the slippery slope they are headed down as a company.

At the prices that Colt sells parts for AR-15 I will expect NOTHING short of perfect if I buy one, however this slip up leads me elsewhere to find excellent quality parts in the price range.

BTW: DPMS and RRA make two of the best lower receiver parts kits I have ever used. NEVER a problem from either one. Colt doesn't make one, nor does S&W.

Sorry about that then. I misunderstood!
I have seen a couple issues with DPMS LPKs, some hands on, some over on M4C. Mine was fixable but involved the sear. The last I head about over on M4C was a broken hammer or Trigger Pin.

RRA kits seem pretty good. I have never seen a problem with them.

Oh and you can get Colt LPKs. SAW carries them. http://www.specializedarmament.com/products/LOWER_REC_PARTS_KIT_COLT_0_155_SEMI-262-4.html
Never seen a S&W LPK. I used one of G&Rs kits for my latest S&W lower Build.

 

[Extremely Pro Gun]

HAHA, Colt toilet plunger:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=140641947#PIC

 

[kwelz]

I think that same dealer had a few of those up. Each one had a different theme. It was great.

 

[nwilliams]

Colt should have never attached their name to anything made by Umarex:banghead:

Now that HK has contracted Umarex to make .22 clones of some of their guns I bet they'll turn out to be equally as crappy as all the other Umarex guns have been. HK put a stop to the only decent .22 MP-5 clone, the GSG-5 and now the new .22 MP-5 clone will be made by Umarex

I think that same dealer had a few of those up. Each one had a different theme. It was great.

I started a thread on it not too long ago but it was closed.
Here are some gems from that seller
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=141283218
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=140385240
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=140382362
www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=140387169

 

[Girodin]

You might argue it is not indicative of the quality of other Colt products but if the company has made agreements to put their name on it then it is a Colt plain and simple.

It is unfortunate they would but their name on such a POS and in doing so likely damage their reputation, much like the Sig mosquito.

That is a Hess-esque break of the receiver.

I was interested in these things but was very happy I did a bit of research first. This thread has made me even happier I didn't buy.

Is the S&W gun any better? It is less expensive at the gun shop I go to.

 

[kwelz]

the S&W is getting good reviews. However it is a Polymer gun, not a dealbreaker but just know what you are getting.

 

[ifit]

wow, judging by the 2 clear pics its a brand new rifle never bought and still has the price tag on it, but i notice the front and rear take down pins seem to show some wear/sratches indicating probably somebody had a stab on trying to remove them

 

[qajaq59]

On that we do NOT disagree it was a monumentally stupid move by Colt.

Boy, I'll say....

 

[Extremely Pro Gun]

Yes the s&w 22 is a much better gun. I would buy a real 223 ar and convert it to 22 lr by using the cmmg conversion kit when needed. it's a ton of fun.

 

[rangerruck]

THE uMarex made colt, is all hype, and mostly crap, from all that I have read about them. Also, in the one pic of it on it's side, take a look at the rear site...

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

However don't try to claim it is a Colt and use it as an excuse to bash them.

I'm sorry but that's a ludicrous statement, in my view. That's precisely the point - it most certainly IS a Colt, by definition, and is most certainly every good and great reason to bash them mercilessly. The definition of a brand's product, is whatever product the brand CHOOSES to slap their name on. Colt CHOSE to slap their name on this junk, regardless of where it was made and by whom. They CHOSE to represent to the public that "this is good stuff; you can trust it, because we did the research and we vouch for it and we thus put our name on it; buy with confidence." Then they utterly failed in that regard. It's completely irrelevant which factory authorized by Colt to make it, made it. What matters is that their NAME is on it, and it sucks. That means Colt cheapened it's brand. Yes, they no doubt regret, but deserve every single bit of bashing that it gets, most deservedly.

 

[DiverDown]

I'm sorry but that's a ludicrous statement, in my view. That's precisely the point - it most certainly IS a Colt, by definition, and is most certainly every good and great reason to bash them mercilessly. The definition of a brand's product, is whatever product the brand CHOOSES to slap their name on. Colt CHOSE to slap their name on this junk, regardless of where it was made and by whom. They CHOSE to represent to the public that "this is good stuff; you can trust it, because we did the research and we vouch for it and we thus put our name on it; buy with confidence." Then they utterly failed in that regard. It's completely irrelevant which factory authorized by Colt to make it, made it. What matters is that their NAME is on it, and it sucks. That means Colt cheapened it's brand. Yes, they no doubt regret, but deserve every single bit of bashing that it gets, most deservedly.

Well said.

 

[HeavyDuty]

And people wonder why I'm building a dedicated .22LR AR out of actual AR components...

 

[Shawn.L]

wow, wonder if the S&W's fair better?