Originally Posted by
vicious_cb
Why? Because actually doing something with the tail of carrier is a huge step forward in improving the M16 fow. Jim Sullivan and surefires carrier is similar in nature but it's vapor wear. I believe the ferfrans carrier also does something similar but you can't buy them anymore. Doing something like putting a miniature constant recoil system in the tail of carrier would be ingenious. Even if the nyx carrier is poorly thought out and executed it's still a step forward that I hope other designers will start toying with.
This is a valid point. It's also not the first time someone's experimented with the rear of a carrier, and I'm sure it won't be the last. In addition to the other examples, I recall seeing experiments with weight inserts. IIRC, I believe it was one of David Tubb's endeavors. It never really caught on, but I can appreciate the attempt.
Failure is a side effect of innovation, and I'll rarely knock someone for trying something new. If it doesn't pan out, what does the consumer actually lose? Probably nothing. But if progress is made, the consumer benefits. On the flip-side, the one attempting to innovate stands to lose a lot. Sure they also stand to gain, but they're the ones bearing most of the risk.
For the product at hand, it's a pretty tough sell. Even if it added value to the platform, at $500+, plenty of consumers are going to be priced out of the market. For those willing and able to shell out that kind of cash, it's still a tall order. It'd need to produce some truly groundbreaking results. While I'd agree there's opportunity to take advantage of the carrier's rear "real estate", I'm not sure there's $400 worth of opportunity.
Looking at the description of the BCG, they should probably start by working on their marketing. For the price tag, I'd want a much more detailed argument outlining the need for this product. Something clearly illustrating the benefit, along with tangible metrics, is another thing I'd personally want to see before even considering the product for purchase. It may be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but they're doing a pretty poor job of conveying that message.
Ultimately, I'd be shocked if this BCG captures even a small amount of adoption within the competitive shooting community. Frankly, it seems like that's probably their target audience. For the general shooting crowd, there aren't enough problems with traditional BCGs to warrant that kind of money. For the hard use crowd, and those that might use a rifle at work, one can already identify the concerns they'll have. Take the carrier key, for instance. It's claimed that the key doesn't need to be staked. Even if that's true, staking is feature that has some pretty deep roots in the community. Trying to get their buy-in that staking isn't necessary is a big ask.
A nice effort, but I'm not optimistic this will be the next big thing.
"I actually managed to figure this one out: you've got to find a woman who loves God more than she loves you -- albeit just barely."
-Army Chief
I did not know the man quoted above, and joined this Forum after his passing. He seemed to be a leader of men; both spiritually and physically. Someone we'd all be proud to emulate.
Senior Member
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks