New production of old designs... why not?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dionysusigma

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
3,671
Location
Okay City
The recent Kahr M1 carbine thread got me to thinking... why don't more companies make new runs good-ol' time-tested military rifles? I'm thinking of anything from the 1903 Springfield to Uzis. As far as I know, we're better equipped technologically now than when these were first made... and the originals are getting to be obscenely expensive. Semi-auto Uzis now cost over a full $1,000 dollars ($2,450 at one shop in the City), most 1903s were Bubba-ized thus making an unmodified one rare, STG44s are practically a legend, FG42s are worse off than STG44s, and so on...

If the demand for something is as high as it is right now, why aren't companies jumping on top of this opportunity to make a few bucks? I mean, new guns that are based on old ones that take obsolete cartridges like 8mm Mauser and 7.92 x 33 could easily be manufactured to use .308 and 7.62x39, respectively. The STG44 had a stamped receiver like 70% of the AKs out there, but an action like a G3. Uzis could be made with wooden stocks or non-collapsible replicas.

It's nice that we can get new production of Thompsons, M3 Grease Guns, M1 Garands (although they're WAY overpriced), 1911s, M1 Carbines (in time), etc. and that there's a ton of surplus of Enfields, Mosin-Nagants, Mausers, Garands, etc. But is there any reason why nobody's bothered with semi-auto MP-40s, Galils, and others?

What other oldies-but-goodies would you add to the list?

(P.S. I might have started a thread about this before, but this still bugs me...:mad: )
 
I'd like to see some of these in moder production; providing that they are true to the original design. (like a luger)

The problem (i think) is that there isn't enough intrest for "reproduction" arms to make it economicly a good idea by an arms company. I know that there is a greese gun being made, however the cool features were disabled b\c of ATF requirements. (no folding stock, the reciver had to be milled, had to have a longer barrel :rolleyes: ) And the cost? $700 IIRC. Now for a "cheaply built simple" gun - that is WAY over the top.

Nick
 
"...recent Kahr M1 carbine..." I could have sworn I responded to that one. Might have been on another forum. Oh, well. The manufacturers are forever announcing products they never make. Ruger's, Mini-14 in .308. Or they announce products that they haven't started making. All the WSM and WSSM rounds. Announced, when? Jan 03, but no rifles or ammo were available until June or July? I can just hear the marketing wallahs saying, "Let's run it up the flag pole and see who salutes." It also means there's another copy of the carbine. And $610US seems a bit steep to me.
"...why aren't companies jumping on top of this opportunity to make a few bucks?..." You must consider the time and cost it takes to tool up for producting anything. "...a stamped receiver..." Just to make the tooling to design one die set for one part, find the proper masterials, have the dies made, meet government regulations etc, etc is astronomical. Two years plus. Think about how long it takes to bring out a new car model. Same excrement. Different pile.
 
Fascinating as those old designs were and are, they were rendered obsolete in most instances because they became too expensive to manufacture. Milling out old Thompsons and p-08s took too many man-hours and ate up too much tooling to meet the needs of users, and that's why they are precious and rare today. In the case of weapons such as the MG-34, the wonderful intricacy and tight tolerances were liabilities in the field, and successors such as the rattley, stamped MG-42 did a better job (higher cyclic rates and fewer malfunctions) for a lot less money.

Some economies are based upon copying existing designs, so Pakistan or China may come to the rescue by virtue of inexpensive labor and hit-or-miss metallurgy. The attractions of these older implements, however, is that they are dinosaurs which remind us of a different time when a premium was placed upon craftsmanship and precision.
 
Well, AIA is making Enfields in .308 and 7.62x39. But they are definitely not cheap.
 
One of the problems is that reproductions would be either WAY expensive or subpar quality wise. Manufacturing has gotten BETTER but skilled labor has gotten more expensive. The more skilled labor (hand fitting/machining) involved in making something the more its gonna cost. Modern arms are built more with machines than with skilled hands. This is a complete reversal of how they used to be made.
 
I must admit, in our "magazine-fed-semi-auto-rifles-are-EEEEVIL!!!" climate, I have often wondered why no-one has thought of producing a modern version of the M1 Garand with an en-bloc ammo clip. I would think you could produce one in 7.62x39, or .308, with relative ease: and if you wanted to go for a major redesign and "shrink job", you could produce a "mini-Garand" with a 10-round clip in 5.56x45mm. I'd love one!
 
From what I've read the new/old SA M1 Garands backs up Mr. Yeager's observation. It's the worst of both worlds: quality seems to be subpar and the price is exorbitantly high.
 
I think it comes down to a company comparing cost of tooling up production vs. expected demand for the product. That plus the fact that a lot of the old designs have been surpassed in quality & reliability by newer designs (sorry, pre-'64 Winchester fans, the newer ones are a bit better..:( ).

That said, I'm eagerly awaiting the Kahr .30 Carbines. Even if they sell at MSRP, it's a lot better priced than most WWII-made carbines now on the market (excluding Universals & Planfields). And I'd be the first one in line for a new-production Krag-Jorgenson and Savage 99 lever-action rifles. Some things transcend "modern design"...:cool:
 
When will the Kahr .30 caliber carbine be available? I will soon receive a check for a freelance project that has absolutely no obligations attached, other than functioning as fun money. This is the first time I've been in such a position. I foresee several new guns in my future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top