Why do I have the urge to join a cult now?....
Sometimes I see the Other Side’s Point
- Thread starter Acmemfg
- Start date
Fight the urge. If you own any out of production cult talismans I can help you. Send them to me for disposal.
simon1
Self Ignored by Vista
Mongo belong to cult...has fun messing with little men who don't like cult.
IIRC, the lock was added when S&W was sold to foreigners. I don't recall any government involvement in that decision(stupid as it was). It takes about ten minutes to remove it, which I have done for others, don't own any revolvers new enough to have been equipped with one.
So, are you saying, Colt isn't quality?
You should print a list of all the popular brands of massed produced assembly line AR's, and show us where Colt rates among them?
Eugene Stoner invented that design and it absolutely sucked in Vietnam. Colt, again, was THE FIRST, to take that design and make it work successfully. Any others after that, again, had to COPY Colt's Success with it. Surely, you would't try and make an argument over Ford's model T and today's Tesla because Tesla didn't design the first car? Trust me, John Browning isn't rolling over in his grave because Elon Musk has made improvements on his original design?
My question to you is, why would you even think this? For one, I absolutely LOVE Fabrique Nationale (FN) I would take a FN AR any day of the week.
Why would you make the debate that FN isn't lower because Stoner designed the original, but say Colt isn't all that because Stoner designed the original? Doesn't make any sense if you ask me. Is it because you are making the wrong assumption? You think because I say Colt is good, all others are bad?
I think you might be having a closed mind or only being singular in thought? Question: What is your purpose of keeping up with the Cult verbage? Are you mad at Colt? Are you mad at me? Are you trolling? if you are, why would you want to do that? We are just discussing about firearms? Does that have to be adversarial or disrespectful? I don't think so.
Maybe take a chill pill and rethink how we might want to politely continue our conversation, while maintaining the art of being gentlemen? Whatcha think?Anything less would be embarrassing for both of us I think.
I think that speaks volumes too! See, I agree with you.
What I know is that the market has spoken with regard to their products. If they were superior, in any fashion, there would be far less competition in the AR and 1911 markets. They would also still be producing more than just 1911's, AR's, and the SAA. They don't because nobody finds anything else they produced to be worth the inflated expense. I call them Cult because it's a correct application of the word....the following of the company defies any sort of reason or logic. I honestly don't see how the company is still in business even with military contracts.
I really don't care one iota what brand is stamped on an AR as long as it functions properly and is mil spec or higher quality. For that matter, I don't even like AR's much. I prefer reciprocating charging handles and piston gas systems.
Cult "fixed" the AR?
You really can't be serious? The early M16's did not have chrome lined barrels/chambers, cleaning kits weren't issued, and the powder type was changed from extruded to ball(because Winchester chose to, and they held the ammo contract)...despite Stoner having designed it for extruded. The pressure curve isn't the same, and ball leaves more fouling. So we have bare steel in a humid environment, powder residue to attract moisture and encourage corrosion, and a pressure curve that tries to cycle while the case is still jammed against the corroded, dirty chamber walls. Pretty sure the AK's and SKS's of the time had chrome lined barrels and cleaning kits, so I'm confident in saying that virtually any gun manufacturer could have looked at the problems and fixed them. For that matter, none of it should have been a problem in the first place, but that's how government works(mil spec and all). Also, Stoner originally designed the platform for 7.62x51/.308, and then redesigned it to fire the smaller .223/5.56. I think they'd have been far better off going with a 6/6.5/7mm instead as has been considered time and again since the development of the M1 Garand...but I digress.Also quite confident in saying that Tesla's cars have required significant engineering on their part to make work, unlike Cult being delivered a fully engineered product and told to replicate it. There's really no comparison here.
Speaking of Tesla, did you know that the first production electric car was developed in 1884? I didn't until a minute ago. 
- Thread starter
- #128
“On March 17, 2000, Smith & Wesson made an agreement with US President Bill Clinton under which it would implement changes in the design and distribution of its firearms in return for "preferred buying program" to offset the loss of revenue as a result of anticipated boycott.[7] The agreement stated that all authorized dealers and distributors of Smith & Wesson's products had to abide by a “code of conduct” to eliminate the sale of firearms to prohibited persons, dealers had to agree to not allow children under 18 access, without an adult, to gun shops or sections of stores that contained firearms.[7]
After an organized campaign by the NRA and NSSF, thousands of retailers and tens of thousands of firearmsconsumers boycotted Smith & Wesson.[9]”
.......a bit more.....
“The 1990s was an especially difficult decade for firearms makers. The Federal “assault weapons” ban in 1994 was a demoralizing hit to the whole industry, and the political outlook was generally bleak. On top of that, civilian firearms ownership was stagnant and hunting was on the decline. The lifelines keeping many of these companies alive were sales to military and law enforcement. S&W had come out on top as the favorite maker of police-issued revolvers in the 20th century, and enjoyed a strong reputation with decision-makers among the nation’s peace officers as a result. As the switch to semi-auto pistols became inevitable during the 1980s, S&W had plenty of 9mm and .45 ACP offerings for departments to choose from, and the reputation of their revolvers often made S&W pistols a shoe-in against the competition.
Then, along came Glock. The Austrian plastic fantastic hit the scene and crushed S&W’s market share in the law enforcement world. It didn’t help that the perception was S&W’s quality was also slipping at the time, making it almost impossible for them to regain the ground lost to their new competitor. Adding all of that to their political woes threatened to bring an end to the 150-year-old company.
S&W was against the wall and the Clinton White House offered a deal that looked like a way out. But S&W would have to “compromise”, and that involved, among some other ridiculous demands, pledging to include an internal lock in all of their new guns. The agreement was inked in March 2000, and and that’s how the internal revolver lock was born. Though today’s political situation is much different than it was 14 years ago, the S&W revolver locks remain. Similar locking devices have shown up on a few S&W semi-auto pistols and long guns, but almost every new revolver from the company includes the infamous internal lock.“
Tomes have been written about the potential for civil court (or even criminal) actions which may occur when using a firearm that has had “safety features disabled”
in a defensive shooting.
Sure...easy as pie to remove the thing. I just don’t need the hassle.
After an organized campaign by the NRA and NSSF, thousands of retailers and tens of thousands of firearmsconsumers boycotted Smith & Wesson.[9]”
.......a bit more.....
“The 1990s was an especially difficult decade for firearms makers. The Federal “assault weapons” ban in 1994 was a demoralizing hit to the whole industry, and the political outlook was generally bleak. On top of that, civilian firearms ownership was stagnant and hunting was on the decline. The lifelines keeping many of these companies alive were sales to military and law enforcement. S&W had come out on top as the favorite maker of police-issued revolvers in the 20th century, and enjoyed a strong reputation with decision-makers among the nation’s peace officers as a result. As the switch to semi-auto pistols became inevitable during the 1980s, S&W had plenty of 9mm and .45 ACP offerings for departments to choose from, and the reputation of their revolvers often made S&W pistols a shoe-in against the competition.
Then, along came Glock. The Austrian plastic fantastic hit the scene and crushed S&W’s market share in the law enforcement world. It didn’t help that the perception was S&W’s quality was also slipping at the time, making it almost impossible for them to regain the ground lost to their new competitor. Adding all of that to their political woes threatened to bring an end to the 150-year-old company.
S&W was against the wall and the Clinton White House offered a deal that looked like a way out. But S&W would have to “compromise”, and that involved, among some other ridiculous demands, pledging to include an internal lock in all of their new guns. The agreement was inked in March 2000, and and that’s how the internal revolver lock was born. Though today’s political situation is much different than it was 14 years ago, the S&W revolver locks remain. Similar locking devices have shown up on a few S&W semi-auto pistols and long guns, but almost every new revolver from the company includes the infamous internal lock.“
Tomes have been written about the potential for civil court (or even criminal) actions which may occur when using a firearm that has had “safety features disabled”
in a defensive shooting.
Sure...easy as pie to remove the thing. I just don’t need the hassle.
Last edited:
Yeah, I am very much into the Constitution, as well as history.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Good post @machinisttx. Why do you keep referring to the bolded? Your post shows you know some history, so why do you ignore the fact that again, Colt was the first to successfully mass produce the M4. And it is that very business model, that everyone else who has came after, had to copy that business model to be successful also. So if you want to recognize actual history, then you should recognize that fact. When Colt started, there was no other game in town to find the quality of a massed produced AR, M4 or other.
Now, LMT, BCM, Daniel Defense, Noveske and a few others, make top grade AR's, but they don't mass produce them, because of that same quality standard; and people will pay and see the higher sticker prices on those particular rifles Which reflect that commitment to quality.
There is a reason @machinisttx, a person can pick up an Olympic Arms AR for under $400. There is a reason you can get a DPMS for $500. Are those two brands serviceable for the civilian market? Yes. Do they have the history of quality that Colt has? Or even LMT, or Daniel Defense? Or even S&W or a Aero Precision? You can keep suggesting that I am saying Colt is superior "to all others."
This may continue the debate, but it won't be factual. FN is a fantastic rifle of name, history and quality. So is Noveske, LMT, Daniel Defense and many others I have not mentioned. But you know as well as I know, when those companies started, they LOOKED to the successful business model and standards that Colt had already established for decades in building quality M4's and AR's and they copied that model of success.
This is why Colt is called the "Gold Standard" then and it is why they are called that now. And just because other companies have learned and gleaned to make great AR's DECADES later, doesn't take away the meaning or definition of the Colt Gold Standard.
Regardless that your argument is there are other rifles out there that are just as good. I have never once denied that. Colt superiority has never been any of my points on my side of the debate, so why keep pushing that cart?
I can agree with you @machinisttx, that in this day and age, it's very uncommon for guns to be total "crap fests", and even the lowest end AR's generally will work fine "as basic shooters." I personally think that for the money, some of the "bad" ones are Bear Creek Arsenal ATI, Del-Ton Olympic Arms, DPMS. Those are the only ones I've dealt with where I really thought that the quality was poor, but that doesn't mean I'm not saying they "absolutely suck" and they're too terrible if you are just looking for a cheap shooter or that they wouldn't work if you got one of those brands.
But let's be clear. Many AR owners and buyers who purchase a $500 AR are buying it with that expectation of getting a $500 value. Similarly, the guys dropping $1500-2500+ on DD, Noveske, etc, are looking for specific features and quality you'll find in that price range. Just because everyone's generally happy, doesn't mean the rifles are even close to the same level of quality.
For example:
I can buy a car for $500, and if it gets me from home to work and back for one year before crapping out, I'll be very happy. Another guy might buy a $500 car expecting it to have AC, a nice sound system, offer a quiet, smooth ride, etc. He's gonna be disappointed.
So the question is, what are you looking for? If you are looking for a $500 DPMS? It's an exceptable AR and shooter for the bargain you are paying for. And while I am a total supporter of owning any AR, DPMS owners shouldn't say a Colt, LMT, DD, Noveske isn't a superior rifle. Because that's just not a factual reality.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #131
@OkieStubble
Jeez, You’re making me want to unload my S&W and go buy a Colt!!!
Jeez, You’re making me want to unload my S&W and go buy a Colt!!!
If you ain't expecting a Mutant, Ninja, biker Horde to infiltrate your woods and home, keep your M&P. Hell, I know you better than many others here do. I wouldn't infiltrate those woods around your house if I had a fully automatic SAW and you had a bow & arrow.
You know those woods and I don't. I was born at night, but it wasn't last night...
Somethings are just more important to know and realize, other than what type of weapon you have strapped to your chest.However, in saying this Tim, I know you like the absolute best in everything out of your firearms; and nothing less will do.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #133
Shame Browning doesn’t make anything in an AR platform
Last edited:
Similar threads
