Quote:

---

I am concerned about people that buy the components and routinely sell the finished product. I think there are liability issues there, as well as legal issues.

---

Quote:

---

If I was looking at two AR15s on a table, I would always pick the factory Eagl/Armalite/Bushmaster/Colt/RRA over the identically configured homebuilt with Model 1 parts. Even for more $.

WHY??????

I PERSONALL KNOW OF ONE POLICE DEPT. THAT HAS AN OFFICER THAT WORKS ON AND MODIFIES ALOT OF IF NOT ALL OF THE DEPT. RIFLES.

AS FAR AS LIABILITIES FOR THE GUN SHOP OWNER THE FOLKS WHO CHOOSE TO SELL INDIVIDUAL PARTS ie MODEL 1 OR THE DOZENS OF OTHERS HAVE THE SAME LIABILITIES.

IF YOU WILL CHECK THE MAJOR GUN MAKERS S&W REM, THEY DONT EVEN MANUFACTURE ALL OF THEIR OWN AR PARTS.

THE LIABILITY ISSUE IS ONE THAT CAN ALWAYS BE TURNED IN A DISCUSSION TO SUPPORT WHATEVER SIDE YOU CHOOSE.

---

Quote:

---

Personally, I don't even consider Remington, DPMS, Armalite, and Eagle to be front-line suppliers for AR's as of right now. But that's just me.
WHO IS FRONT LINE THEN????

IT HAS JUST BEEN MY EXPERIENCE (AND THAT IS ALL IM SAYING ITS JUST MY EXPERIENCE) THAT ALOT OF GUNSMITHS,FFL DEALERS ETC. ALWAYS SEEM TO DISCOURAGE BUYING AR PARTS AND THE COMMON GUY BUILDING HIS OWN RIFLE. THEY DONT SEEM TO DO IT IN A DIRECT WAY JUST WITH INUENDOS sp AND BRINGING UP THE WARRENTY ISSUE. THE AR15 IS NOT YOUR TYPICAL RIFLE. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE SPECIALIZED TOOLS AND EXPERIENCE THAT SAY A BOLT ACTION OR SEMI AUTO SHOTGUN ETC. AND DOES NOT LEND ITSELF TO TYPICAL FIREARMS INDUSTRY ie GUNSMITHS ETC.

I HAVE 4 ARS THAT I BUILT FROM SCRATCH. 2 OF WHICH HAVE OVER 1000 ROUNDS DOWN THE TUBE WITHOUT A SINGLE MALFUNCTION. THE OTHER 2 I HAVE NOT SHOT ENOUGH TO SAY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. THE FIRST 2 HAVE PARTS FROM AT LEAST 8 DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS.

WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN OPINIONS I AM ONLY TRYING TO DEFEND THE QUALITY THAT I HAVE EXPERIENCED BUILDING MY OWN RIFLES USING VARIOUS DIFFERENT PARTS.

WE ALL HAVE TO RUN OUR BUSINESSES AS WE BELIVE WE NEED TO. BUT FOR ME TO IMPLY THAT ANY OF YOU COULD NOT GO OUT AND BUY A WRECKER AND HAUL YOUR OWN CARS WOULD BE SILLY ITS NOT THAT HARD TO DO AND MOST FOLKS COULD DO IT. I DONT SUGGEST IT, BUT YOU WILL NOT GET A MORE QUALITY TOW FROM ME OR ANYONE ELSE IF YOU CHOOSE US OVER YOURSELF.

(WELL I HAVE SUCCESSFULLY CONFUSED MY SELF NOW SO I AM GOING TO BED. SEE YALL TOMORROW.

---

Front line...Colt, HK, FN, Bushmaster, maybe Rock River and Smith and Wesson. Here's why, they all have won major contracts with government agencies that have done a lot more testing than I can afford to do. I can't do that much testing, and have to rely on that data

I am not saying anything about someone building their own, or about their quality. In fact, I said I would defend your right to do so. I know that tighter-built tighter tolerance guns are going to be more accurate, at the cost of reliability. I know that I would trade the other way, reliability for accuracy...but again, that's my opinion.

Do I think that the average Joe can build one as good as the major companies....no. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I was just stating my opinion as well.

I do think that you would do a better job towing my truck than I would, even if I had the same equipment. I'd think you would have training and experience on your side. I'll call you for that!

Surely if someone called and said, "My Lexus is broke down on 75, can you come get me or is it ok to let Bubba pull it with a chain?", you'd advise against using the chain on the Lexus.

I am happy to sell parts to customers. Usually we can offer a good price with the volume that we generate. Do I promote most people building their own over buying a complete rifle from a major manufacturer, no. Like I mentioned somewhere, it's like computers, can you build your own? Yes. Can I, Maybe. Do I trust mine as much as Dell's? No.

Quote:

---

WHAT SPECIFIC TOLERENCES ARE YOU SPEAKING OF THAT ARE TIGHTER WITH COLT etc. YOUR STATMENT SEEMS TO BE VERY GENERAL ABOUT TOLERANCES.
IF YOU BELIVE THAT JUST BECAUSE A CO HAS A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT THAT THEY MANUF QUALITY ITEMS YOU SHOULD TALK TO SOME OF MY FRIENDS THAT HAD TO USE THE POS M16s THAT FIRST CAME OUT IN VIETNAM, THEIR OPINION OF THOSE IS THAT THEY WOULD MAKE GOOD BOAT OARS. GOVERNMENT MILITARY PURCHASING IS JUST AS BAD AND CORRUPT AS ANY OTHER, BEING MILITARY LENDS IT NO ADDITION QUALITY, IF YOU THINK THAT THE MILITARY ONLY PROVIDES THE BEST FOR OUR SOLDIERS THEN YOU NEED TO TALK TO THE GUYS IN IRAQ WHO SPEND THEIR OWN MONEY ARMORPLATING THEIR HUMVEES.

ALL IM ASKING FOR IS SPECIFICS ie STUDYS OR ACTUAL COMPARISONS WITH FAILURE RATES OR COMPARISON CHART THAT SHOWS THOSE MANUFACTURING COs SPECS VS OFF THE SHELF FOR GUYS LIKE ME.

I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND YOUR CHOICE TO SELL THOSE TYPES OF RIFLES. WHAT I DONT UNDERSTAND IS YOUR STATEMENT THAT THEY ARE BETTER QUALITY WITH NO ACTUAL FACTS TO BACK UP THAT STATMENT.
ONCE AGAIN THIS IS JUST MOHO.

---

Me too on the opinion thing...

I'll try to clarify...I think we are closer than it appears...

Any gun, the tighter things fit, the more accurate it will be....and likewise, the less reliable. Competition grade guns will be closer tolerances than sporting or combat guns.

I never meant to imply that the ones I mentioned were tighter, nor more accurate. I do not have the time or money to do scientific testing that would be required to show that. I have read and heard and learned and handled hundreds or more of them in 22 years in business and that's where I am coming from.

A competition grade AR, or a 45, whatever, will be tighter and more failure prone than a duty gun or carry gun, or atleast it should.

I don't have any idea what your MRBF is, never implied that I did.

I know there are testing programs for everything that the military and major law enforcement agencies acquire. I have seen some of their data, but I don't have it readily available. So if that's what you're looking for I am out. But I'd be willing to be you don't have the same data for personally built guns either."

What I am stating is opinion, based on 22 years of being in the gun business, being a certified armorer for several companies, and having an AR or M16 rifle since 1984....

Now for Vietnam, there are VOLUMES of data and reports on that. I have read several. I have written one after doing extensive research (American Historian, 1988; East Texas State University Register, 1988; I have a copy around here somewhere). (note: While my Bachelor's degree is in mathematics, my college required a double major of Honor's program students, as opposed to a major/minor; and my second major was in History, with an emphasis in military history, hence the research and publication that was necessary in that endeavor).

The guns being built today while kin to the old M16's, are vastly improved. Several reasons for the early failures included poor or no training with that weapon; poor cleaning and maintenance; inadequate repair facilities and knowledge; improper powder (powder used was changed after the adoption of the weapon); and poor manufacturing processes and quality control. We just have learned so much about the weapons since their rushed introduction by the air force, and later the army, lastly the marines.

Several other military weapons rushed into service without proper training and doctrine changes were also early failures. The early M-14's had heat and stoppage issues; Early B-17's lacked protective firepower; early P-51 Mustangs lacked endurance....Early M-9 Beretta's had slide failures (ammo issues, primarily using +p carbine ammo in handguns) I could go on and on...great topics all. All of those devices became a lot better as time progressed. Just like the M4's of today.

I guess I could ask the same of you, show me the data where your off the shelf guns are as good as major manufactured guns? It's a great topic, but probably not able to be settled without great testing and expenses.

I do know that it is quite common for major law enforcement agencies to conduct testing, and lesser agencies have to rely on that data and results in purchasing their weapons, or selecting what weapons to be allowed.

I also know that the "deep pockets" theory is very prevalent. Only buying from and using products of manufacturers with deep pockets...for that eventual lawsuit.

I never intended to say that your firearms you built are inferior to others. I did say that in my opinion the average guy can't build one as good as COLT, BUSHMASTER, et al. I don't think I can, and I have worked on a bunch of them over the years. I guess that makes you above average

I have to base business decisions on what works and has worked for us. I try to use all the knowledge and experience I have to make the best decisions. I always wish I had more knowledge and experiences on which to base those decisions.

I have enjoyed our discussion. Maybe it will convince me to stock more AR components....

Quote:

---

I have had harleys....
So I guess it is kinda like those. I can build one and it run okay and constantly have to bend to fit, paint to match, and redo, and so on and so forth. OR.... I can by one off the shelf and start it and just go...

So If I want to build one and delve into how they work and what is better than this or that and tweak and fiddle with, then build it, right? Or if all I want to do is pull the trigger, load magazines and maybe clean it once in a while, then buy one off the shelf...
Thanks, a bunch for all the debate, really, I wanted to know, and I feel like I learn just a little bit all the time. Your discussions brought to light issues I had not even considered. I think a responsible consumer considers the source as much as the information.

---