On my Chest Rig Design [Archive] - M4Carbine.net Forums

View Full Version : On my Chest Rig Design

Diz

11-08-09, 18:34

Guys I've been trying to stay quiet about this, especially after my talk with USMC03, but you guys keep stating publically that I had no input, to speak of, on this new BCM design. I beg to differ.

If you go to a custom gear maker and have him make a chest rig to your design specs, is it entirely your design, or does the gearmaker also make some contributions to it. I think the answer is obvious here, it's a collaborative effort. Obviously others do not.

It's not so much that one of my former customers has taken a design that we collaborated on to another company to be made commercially. It's the fact that this customer and his buddies continue to insist that this is soley his design work, and it pre-dates anything I've done on the subject (as in before M4C). This is ridiculous. First, I have been working on chest rigs since the mid-80's. I was working on this particular concept since early '04. Second, you cannot take a design to a custom gear-maker and then claim the resulting product is 100%, lock, stock, and barrel yours.

For example I made the back panel even with the front pouch. This allowed for a 360 grip of the mag. As far as I know, no one else was doing that at the time. All other back panels were taller than the front pouch.

I also sewed down in between the individual pouches instead of a single panel with dividers. As far as I know, nobody else was doing this either. You either had a Hellcat type set up or a TT MAV with your own pouches.

I experimented with several different pouch dimensions, kydex inserts, and various retention systems (shock cord, flaps, etc.).

I experimented with various webbing types and widths. And the accompanying hardware.

I experimented with various shoulder strap systems.

I experimented with various sew patterns and construction techniques.

Now you want to say that all this R&D is included in your design idea, because you came up with the general layout? That's pure bullshit. None of this effort was specified in the design order from USMC03. It was just incorporated into his "design" because it was what I had determined made the best chest rig to date. Did he have some input into the process, as well as many others? Of course, I had many different pieces of kit that I drew inspiration frm, as well as talking to guys in the field. But in the end, other than the particular layout he specified, I picked what features to use and made the rig.

I think it's kind of ridiculous to sit here and pretend the photo on the BCM website doesn't resemble the rigs I made USMC03 and others. Or to say this is USMC03's sole design.

That's it, said my peace, God bless.

Tzoid

11-08-09, 19:23

Diz

Thanks for setting the record straight. I continue to enjoy my rig and hope you're doing well. I'm glad I was able to get one of your rigs before you stopped
making web gear.

Be well friend

BigCity

11-08-09, 19:34

I don't post much, mostly lurk to gain knowledge, but damn Diz, I am truly sorry for the actions of some dillwad to take advantage of you.

militarymoron

11-08-09, 19:54

If you go to a custom gear maker and have him make a chest rig to your design specs, is it entirely your design, or does the gearmaker also make some contributions to it. I think the answer is obvious here, it's a collaborative effort. Obviously others do not.

hey brother! good to see you here, but sorry it's under these circumstances.
IMHO, both answers can be correct, depending on whether it's just an idea/concept/general layout supplied to the gear maker, or a full set of drawings with dimensions, seams, patterns etc all laid out that can be made by manufacturer. or somewhere in between.

unless the designer supplies the entire design with all the details, without any knowledge of pattern making, construction methods etc, the custom maker has to figure out how to turn the idea into a real product. that, i'd feel, would qualify as a collaborative effort, which is probably most common, since most people who come up with ideas may not have much experience with the actual manufacturing process.

i'll use the machine-shop analogy. if you supply a machine shop with a drawing, specs etc, and have them make a part without needing any input or additional info, they have no claim to your intellectual property.

however, if you go with just a concept/idea, with just general ideas and specs, or a layout sketch, and they help develop the product and produce the actual drawing, then there should be some agreement about who owns the final design as it's a collaborative effort.

whatever it is - i'd highly recommend having a simple contract agreement between the two parties to avoid conflict in the future.

just my .02 based on my experiences collaborating with various companies in designs.

calicojack

11-08-09, 21:05

mike,
i haven't had the pleasure of meeting you ftf.... yet....

but i feel like i know you well enough through our mutual acquaintances. This topic was discussed around the table at dinner and over the phone a lot. your old buddy threw this (http://www.youtube.com/user/JamesYeager#p/u/9/quMoPMzxYgM) out there.

Outlander Systems

11-08-09, 21:13

Damn, Mike. I was previously under the impression you and Jeff were buds.

USMC03

11-09-09, 12:15

Diz and I have been friends for several years and have discussed a lot of gear ideas over the years at different forums. Unless I am mistaken, or typed a post to fast, I have given him credit and never excluded his valuable input: http://www.m4carbine.net/showpost.php?p=463411&postcount=37

Diz has also credited me on design features: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=15249

Hey it's cool to see some of my stuff scuffed up a bit! Looking good, USMC03. This particular rig was the first to use a "H" harness with a hydro bladder. After the SOFIC, I am leaning more towards this design than the "X" panel which is heavier (and hotter). Props to USMC03 for the idea.

The USMC03 rig(training) would run $175.00.

There is always a bit of brainstorming by all parties involved. To include or exclude features on a final product. Ideas go back and forth both ways. The final design decisions were ultimately made by me as it was custom set up just for myself, and I think the finished product Diz built for me is awesome!

When you take a design to a gear builder he will add his own touches to the design. When I decided to get a bunch of these rigs built, Diz was no longer in the sewing business. So, the current production version of the 03 MSF is being built by Blue Force Gear. When I took 03 MSF design to Stephen at Blue Force Gear he added his own touches to it. Incorporated in this product are changes that I made, and changes that Stephen suggested as well.

Tzoid

11-09-09, 16:16

eggroll

11-10-09, 01:59

I have a memory like an Elephant and recall when Mike started selling Chest rigs again on this Forum. I was one of the 1st to PM him for details after " Hawkeye" asked about getting a "Split Front " design of the Rig I believe you were working on and co-designing. The Lumbar support and hydration was added. I did a search looking for the old threads but I can't find them.:confused:

Bottom line the design is Top Notch and "Diz" turned out top notch gear. There are others in this Forum making statements like Diz had NOTHING to do with this gear design so maybe that's not a fair statement. see Eggrole's post in the BCM thread.

Really? Memory like an elephant? then it would be EGGROLL not EGGROLE, not too hard :p

ROLE of an Egg is in pancake batter or as the main ingredient in an omelet ...
personally I prefer them diced in a Cobb salad :D

I never said/inferred/ or stated that DIZ put out less the top notch gear, in fact I consider his gear some of the best out there, and I have studied in DETAIL his sewing techniques via various pieces. Same goes with TT, SOE and HSGI.

lastly, bear in mind that design and implementation are two VERY different things

KellyTTE

11-10-09, 02:43

I have one piece of gear that Diz made for me, a little pouch that holds a modified Desantis G26 holster as a BUG on a plate carrier. It has to be one of the most ingenious pieces of gear that I own and its just one small pouch.

I had the pleasure of sharing a home briefly with Diz and considered it great learning experience to hear what he had to say on making gear (he's a quiet guy). There are a few innovators and a lotta copiers out there, and I'm proud I have a little bit of that innovation on my plate carrier. I wish you nothing but the best out there Mike.

calicojack

11-10-09, 07:16

No it was not mikes design. This design evolved from a configuration USMC03 was using WELL before this M4carbine.net even existed.

this configuration (which echoed his work configuration) comprised of the following -
2003 vintage 2 piece MAV, 2003 Padded Xharness
3 single shingles on each side, a MP dump pouch and a hydrocarrier clipped on.

USMC03 approached DIZ to create a simplified configuration that shaved off weight, an removed extraneous components - hence the TAN rig you see USMC03 wearing.

It is indeed sad that SOME here have taken USMC03's IP and claimed it as their own.... perhaps to cover their own shortcomings.

Anyhow, dont make this issue out to be anything more that misappropriation of concepts.

Cheers

really.

Tzoid

11-10-09, 10:19

Eggroll , Forgive me for the typo of your name in my previous post.

The above post by calicojack is what I was referring to and did not intend to say you implied anything about Mikes quality of work.

My Post..
" There are others in this Forum making statements like Diz had NOTHING to do with this gear design so maybe that's not a fair statement. see Eggroll's post in the BCM thread."

I don't personally know any of the parties but if the soon to be released product is a duplicate of what I own made by "Diz" I'm sure there will be plenty of happy customers.

Is Hawkeye and USMC03 the same person? Here is an old thread and it should clear up a few things.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=11257

militarymoron

11-10-09, 11:31

i'm closing this thread to allow the involved parties to work it out amongst themselves.