View Full Version : Reason #674 to not buy a Bushmaster
TangoSierra
09-30-13, 21:01
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/10/01/etu8y2a5.jpg
This was one of the firearms I received today at work. Bushmaster Carbon 15 OCR, yes the receiver broke in shipping.
Sent from my NSA Monitoring Device using Tapatalk 2.
ETA: correct the model.
This was one of the firearms I received today at work. Bushmaster Sportical, yes the receiver broke in shipping.
Sent from my NSA Monitoring Device using Tapatalk 2.
Edit: There it is. That's what recycled coke bottles gets you. Actually, recycled coke bottles would probably be stronger than that.
TangoSierra
09-30-13, 21:03
Fixed now, tapatalk hiccups
Sent from my NSA Monitoring Device using Tapatalk 2.
Awesome.. #twitter #facebook ;)
I think we are past #674 though. How did BM respond? Did they blame it on the fact you unpacked the BM to fast?
Did they blame it on the fact you unpacked the BM to fast?
Lmao!
Grand58742
09-30-13, 21:10
Looks like nothing a little crazy glue and duct tape wouldn't fix.
Daniel defense has LAV do their torture test ..... and BM has has the UPS guy. Sounds about right.
eh! it will buff right out. that is exactly what i want in a rifle to protect me and my family.
Glad to see another Spokane guy that doesn't think BM/DPMS/Oly are battle ready. Cruising the local forums or classified can be unnerving sometimes.
I went to Wally mart the other day and spotted a new BM Mforgery in the case. I asked to look at it. It's 2013 and they are still not staking the castle nuts, using carbine buffers and crappy stakings on the BCG.
I went to Wally mart the other day and spotted a new BM Mforgery in the case. I asked to look at it. It's 2013 and they are still not staking the castle nuts, using carbine buffers and crappy stakings on the BCG.
And folks still buy the damn things and then tout what a great gun they own. Halo effect at it's finest.
Sure that isn't their new takedown edition?
trackmagic
09-30-13, 21:32
Are the remington M4's going to be made in bushmaster's plants when they fill thier mil contract. (Assuming that is still the plan. I have not heard an update since the colt protest)
That contract is not happening. It has been awarded to FN.
Are the remington M4's going to be made in bushmaster's plants when they fill thier mil contract. (Assuming that is still the plan. I have not heard an update since the colt protest)
GUNSLINGER733
09-30-13, 21:53
Good thing for soldiers. That pic did make me laugh. That sucks for you but damn...
SPARTAN HOPLITE ARMS
09-30-13, 22:01
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/10/01/etu8y2a5.jpg
This was one of the firearms I received today at work. Bushmaster Sportical, yes the receiver broke in shipping.
Sent from my NSA Monitoring Device using Tapatalk 2.
Is that their uber carbon fiber super tactical edition? The box doesn't even look damaged. Looks like an idiot in the factory dropped it and quickly packaged it so it wouldn't fail any QC tests thereby throwing their 100% successful packaging rate.
DMViergever
09-30-13, 22:04
Wow...that is all kinds of special.
Not to come down on all the Bushmaster hate but......
I didn't know they where using that old style stock,every one I've seen has the M4 type stock.
Ya'sure that's a new gun,sport?
*ETA*
Okay the Carbon 15 ORC does but there's no "Sportical" in their line up.
I could see the plastic ones doing that if you dropped it hard enough.
Looks like nothing a little crazy glue and duct tape wouldn't fix.
There are two ways to look at this:
1. That would be a waste of perfectly good Crazy Glue and duct tape.
2. Including Crazy Glue and duct tape in this purchase would double the value.
And I still have friends who want these over a colt, to save only couple hundred bucks... :haha:
But but but it's mil spec just like Colt bla bla bla. Just when you think you have seen everything. I have never seen anything like that even from our beat to shit issued weapons in basic.
Grand58742
09-30-13, 22:50
There are two ways to look at this:
1. That would be a waste of perfectly good Crazy Glue and duct tape.
2. Including Crazy Glue and duct tape in this purchase would double the value.
Touche sir. Touche.
BoringGuy45
09-30-13, 22:54
And folks still buy the damn things and then tout what a great gun they own. Halo effect at it's finest.
Ehh, most people don't use them heavily enough to break parts that would normally hold up on a quality ARs and, even if they do, they assume that the problems associated with low end ARs are just endemic to all ARs. Unfortunately, this is what gives the AR it's reputation for being fragile and unreliable: Low end manufacturing. For every person who buys a Colt there are ten people who decide to save $50 and buy a Bushmaster or Stag. The funny thing is, they'll insist that you're just paying for the name when you buy a Colt or BCM while admitting that their Bushmaster jams and breaks all the time. They'll chalk it up to the AR being a fun range toy but a POS service rifle and talk about how it's a tragedy that the stupid politicians insist on always going with the lowest bidder when they should go back to the M14 or go with the AK.
All in all, I can understand not wanting to spend a lot of money on something that is only going to see 100-200 rounds a year and not caring about milspec or what not. If you're really into it, or need a rifle you can depend on, that's when you need to take quality into account.
So this thing comes with a sawed off FSB and hand guards. No option for backup sights?:neo:
Ohhhh, it's F marked. I'm OK with that.
So this thing comes with a sawed off FSB and hand guards. No option for backup sights?:neo:
Ohhhh, it's F marked. I'm OK with that.
Why would you need back up sights when you could have an NC Star red dot?
There are two ways to look at this:
1. That would be a waste of perfectly good Crazy Glue and duct tape.
2. Including Crazy Glue and duct tape in this purchase would double the value.
LMAO! That's like the old Yugo joke: How do you double the value of a Yugo? Fill up the gas tank...
The cardboard box arrived in better shape than the rifle did!
TangoSierra
09-30-13, 23:52
Sorry not a sportical that is the DPMS flat top. The BM that broke is the Carbon 15 OCR. I fixed my OP.
Sent from my NSA Monitoring Device using Tapatalk 2.
Boba Fett v2
09-30-13, 23:53
The cardboard box arrived in better shape than the rifle did!
Lol. The money that should've gone into better R&D, parts and assembly went into the packaging instead.
TS, I was wondering when you'd have that posted here. I am curious how your supplier and Bushy try to pass the blame on this one.
Krull, I know the OP personally. That is a new POS Bushy as they don't sell used weapons. The stupid thing is the siblings of this Bushmaster sit right next to perfectly good Colts and Sig M400s on the rack and the Bushy sells first. You really can't fix stupid.
coastwatcher42
10-01-13, 00:37
If you bought a Bushmaster and a few inches of the barrel broke off, would you have to get a tax stamp for it?
TacticalSledgehammer
10-01-13, 02:39
Ah, just gorilla glue it back together. Good as new!
I see that the same people who worked in shipping when my Bushmaster was returned to me from warranty repair are still employed there.
Krull, I know the OP personally. That is a new POS Bushy as they don't sell used weapons. The stupid thing is the siblings of this Bushmaster sit right next to perfectly good Colts and Sig M400s on the rack and the Bushy sells first. You really can't fix stupid.
He corrected it,I was just being picky and wanted to know just what we were dealing with.
Like I said I can see the Carbon i.e. all plastic receiver group ones cracking like that-I had one in pistol form and could see it wouldn't take much to have a problem.
Overall Bushmaster is a good way to get into AR's and if you're smart,and admittedly some gun owners aren't,you'll get a better one later on.
For plinking or hunting they aren't bad,even the plastic ones.
Never had the $$$ to see how much shooting it would take to kill one :eek:
The sad thing is, I have out several rifles together now using PSA. The total cost was less then what most BM on the shelves are and at they were sprotting FN made CHF barrels and MPI tested bolts and properly staked carriers. I am not bragging on PSA quality, I am just saying if your on a budget, there are so many better choices then BM, yet that is what everyone buys who does not know better.
Don't understand the plastic ar receivers when normal lowers are so cheap.
When I decided to buy an ar I picked a bad time in history. The bushmaster I bought was all that was available. So a bushmaster 14.5 was my first ar. I still have it.
I understand they have their problems but I don't view a simple castle nut stake as one of them. It's my understanding that KAC doesn't stake their castle nuts either but nobody makes a big deal out of that.
I had changed out stocks on one of my DD rifles and had the moe left and decided to put it on the bushy. Bushy had a commercial receiver extension on it naturally so I had to change that out.
It took damn near an act of God to get the extension off the bushy. It wasn't going to loosen up from use.
3ACR_Scout
10-01-13, 09:16
And I still have friends who want these over a colt, to save only couple hundred bucks... :haha:
Some of the low end AR manufacturers definitely have a great ad campaign going, even if it's often just word-of-mouth. I've run into a number of people in the military who bought a Bushmaster or Rock River and never even heard of BCM, LMT, DD, etc. I was talking with my brother-in-law a couple months ago - he bought an M&P with Magpul furniture a few years back, and he told me "but what I really want is a Bushmaster." I spent a few minutes trying to fill him in on better brands, but I'm not sure it sunk in. I'm not sure where people learn about these brands, but I think part of the name recognition unfortunately comes from news stories about incidents like Sandy Hook.
Dave
Advertising.
In every gun magazine that never says a negative thing about the companies paying big money to advertise in their rags....
http://www.motherjones.com/files/BushmasterAd-Maxim_0.jpghttp://blogs.jamaicans.com/gwgraeme/files/2012/12/man_card.jpg
steyrman13
10-01-13, 09:43
H
For plinking or hunting they aren't bad,even the plastic ones.
Never had the $$$ to see how much shooting it would take to kill one :eek:
Didn't even need to send one round down range to find out! ;).
I'm glad bushmaster likes to assume we all lost our man cards. Maybe they should get card instead.... The one that says QUALITY RIFLE MANUFACTURER on it.
I mean, they fuct up the Magpul Masada too....
Boba Fett v2
10-01-13, 10:17
Some of the low end AR manufacturers definitely have a great ad campaign going, even if it's often just word-of-mouth. I've run into a number of people in the military who bought a Bushmaster or Rock River and never even heard of BCM, LMT, DD, etc. I was talking with my brother-in-law a couple months ago - he bought an M&P with Magpul furniture a few years back, and he told me "but what I really want is a Bushmaster." I spent a few minutes trying to fill him in on better brands, but I'm not sure it sunk in. I'm not sure where people learn about these brands, but I think part of the name recognition unfortunately comes from news stories about incidents like Sandy Hook.
Dave
Dave, an article everyone should read: http://www.cracked.com/article_20396_5-mind-blowing-facts-nobody-told-you-about-guns.html
Doc Safari
10-01-13, 11:23
I've always secretly believed that our government sent a bunch of Bushmasters to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia as a "false flag" to make the Russians think all our small arms are crappy.
Didn't even need to send one round down range to find out! ;).
One downside to the plastic rifles:you can break them fairly easy,Armalite made that AR-180B and the lower was plastic,heard they can crack the front pin hole if you let the upper flop down when you take it apart.
Wonder why plastic handguns are teh hotness but plastic rifles suck ze dokey nads?............
I could see a "shoot little,carry a lot" all plastic AR being cool if you realize the limits.
I've always secretly believed that our government sent a bunch of Bushmasters to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia as a "false flag" to make the Russians think all our small arms are crappy.
Didn't we give an arse load of Sigmas to the Afghanis? I guess giving the least to the worst just makes sure if they shoot them at us we can know when they'll crap out.
Or the quality of arms we give you shows how much we trust you......
Have we given anyone HiPoints yet? :jester:
CrazyFingers
10-01-13, 12:07
Wonder why plastic handguns are teh hotness but plastic rifles suck ze dokey nads?............
Possibly because one was designed from the start to be made from polymer, maximizing its benefits while reducing or eliminating its drawbacks during the testing phases.
The other was designed to be made from 7075-T6 aluminum, with ~50 years of proven success using that material. Then some companies made the questionable decision to shoehorn this functional design into a material it was never intended to support.
That would be where the donkey testicles enter the equation.
Possibly because one was designed from the start to be made from polymer, maximizing its benefits while reducing or eliminating its drawbacks during the testing phases.
The other was designed to be made from 7075-T6 aluminum, with ~50 years of proven success using that material. Then some companies made the questionable decision to shoehorn this functional design into a material it was never intended to support.
That would be where the donkey testicles enter the equation.
Yea but that new HK...forget what it's called,THAT thing was made from the start of plastic....and I've heard tell it softens up in the sun...
So far the only plastic rifle that works is the AUG.
albatrossarmament
10-01-13, 13:09
Dont forget the plastic lower on the SCAR.
steyrman13
10-01-13, 13:58
Yea but that new HK...forget what it's called,THAT thing was made from the start of plastic....and I've heard tell it softens up in the sun...
So far the only plastic rifle that works is the AUG.
The AUG is not made of plastic on the receiver, nor is the rods that guide the BCG.
Again. Designed from the start is different than retrofitting a metal design into plastic. Also not all plastics/polymers are the same quality or material.
So, from what I've read here, is BM the worst of the worst?
CrazyFingers
10-01-13, 15:55
So, from what I've read here, is BM the worst of the worst?
Nope.
Now, think about what that means for the companies below it. :fie:
Pierced Armor
10-01-13, 15:59
The extra money you save is in no way worth the headache!
PA
Some of the low end AR manufacturers definitely have a great ad campaign going, even if it's often just word-of-mouth. I've run into a number of people in the military who bought a Bushmaster or Rock River and never even heard of BCM, LMT, DD, etc. I was talking with my brother-in-law a couple months ago - he bought an M&P with Magpul furniture a few years back, and he told me "but what I really want is a Bushmaster." I spent a few minutes trying to fill him in on better brands, but I'm not sure it sunk in. I'm not sure where people learn about these brands, but I think part of the name recognition unfortunately comes from news stories about incidents like Sandy Hook.
Dave
I would be perfectly content with an AWB that banned all BMs and nothing else. Maybe it would help eliminate stupid and all of the rednecks out there that talk about how great their 223 Remington BM AR-15 is...since metric is too much for them to understand.
There are two ways to look at this:
1. That would be a waste of perfectly good Crazy Glue and duct tape.
2. Including Crazy Glue and duct tape in this purchase would double the value.
Don't you know duct tape fixes everything???
SeriousStudent
10-01-13, 21:08
Advertising.
In every gun magazine that never says a negative thing about the companies paying big money to advertise in their rags....
http://www.motherjones.com/files/BushmasterAd-Maxim_0.jpghttp://blogs.jamaicans.com/gwgraeme/files/2012/12/man_card.jpg
Holy poop, is that real??? :eek:
I don't read gun mags anymore, unless a friend has written an article in one. Does Bushy really have that ad campaign about man cards?
I guess calling it a "drooling moron card", while accurate, might offend their customer base.
I remember that marketing campaign and from a marketing standpoint it's actually brilliant for appealing to the male buyer of an AR type rifle. I've found that people who buy rifles, pistols and gear from most gun rag ads aren't doing a lot of research and the flashiest ad gets their dollar. Look at the BCM ads in the back of SWAT magazine then compare it to the Bushmaster, Kimber and DPMS ads in the same magazine, pretty boring with just gear and prices.
SeriousStudent
10-01-13, 21:45
Yep, you are definitely right. But it does make me shake my head.... :(
Possibly because one was designed from the start to be made from polymer...
I keep seeing this repeated over & over again, but that's not why the Glock frame worked. A Glock frame works because there's still steel in it where needed. Glock engineers actually started with a steel frame design and removed metal from places it wasn't needed and left it in place where it was, then molded a polymer frame to hold the steel pieces in place. If someone would do the same with an AR receiver, it would work just as well
A Glock frame works because there's still steel in it where needed.
Where would that be, other than the frame rails and locking block area?
CrazyFingers
10-02-13, 08:42
Glock engineers actually started with a steel frame design and removed metal from places it wasn't needed and left it in place where it was, then molded a polymer frame to hold the steel pieces in place.
So, they took a M1911A1 pistol frame and removed metal from places it wasn't needed, and left it in place where it was, and huzzah, they created the G17?
Because that's essentially the argument you continue to use. I was talking about taking Eugene Stoner's design which has used aluminum for 50 years, with a center-fire rifle cartridge, and trying to adapt it to use polymer. A rifle design, with a thin receiver extension attachment point which has a disturbing tendency to break on polymer rifles, as shown by the OPs picture.
We're not talking about a pistol designed from scratch to incorporate polymer, using a pistol cartridge, with no receiver extension.
There is a significant difference between adapting general handgun engineering theory into a brand new design using new materials, and making a carbon-copy of an existing rifle design using wildly different materials, regardless of whether you add steel reinforcement points.
You're making a logical fallacy known as "hasty generalization", which states that because X is true for A, and X is true for B, then X must be true for Z, without accounting for significant differences between A/B and Z.
Glock (A) and Smith & Wesson (B) frames successfully use polymer, therefor AR receivers (Z) can successfully use polymer. This does not logically follow.
(PS: carbon-copy, get it?) :D
I keep seeing this repeated over & over again, but that's not why the Glock frame worked. A Glock frame works because there's still steel in it where needed. Glock engineers actually started with a steel frame design and removed metal from places it wasn't needed and left it in place where it was, then molded a polymer frame to hold the steel pieces in place. If someone would do the same with an AR receiver, it would work just as well
There must have been a LOT of chips on the floor after they milled away everything but four small rail sections.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
Holy poop, is that real??? :eek:
I don't read gun mags anymore, unless a friend has written an article in one. Does Bushy really have that ad campaign about man cards?
I guess calling it a "drooling moron card", while accurate, might offend their customer base.
Makes you kind of understand why the libtard media thinks of all firearms owners as irrational freaks trying to over-compensate for something.
Thanks, Bushmaster, for supporting that incorrect and ignorant stereotype!!!
CrazyFingers
10-02-13, 09:57
Thanks, Bushmaster, for supporting that incorrect and ignorant stereotype!!!
Wait...
You mean that Bushmaster's corporate motto isn't "Incorrect and Ignorant(tm)" ???? :confused:
So, they took a M1911A1 pistol frame and removed metal from places it wasn't needed, and left it in place where it was, and huzzah, they created the G17?
Because that's essentially the argument you continue to use. I was talking about taking Eugene Stoner's design which has used aluminum for 50 years, with a center-fire rifle cartridge, and trying to adapt it to use polymer. A rifle design, with a thin receiver extension attachment point which has a disturbing tendency to break on polymer rifles, as shown by the OPs picture.
We're not talking about a pistol designed from scratch to incorporate polymer, using a pistol cartridge, with no receiver extension.
There is a significant difference between adapting general handgun engineering theory into a brand new design using new materials, and making a carbon-copy of an existing rifle design using wildly different materials, regardless of whether you add steel reinforcement points.
You're making a logical fallacy known as "hasty generalization", which states that because X is true for A, and X is true for B, then X must be true for Z, without accounting for significant differences between A/B and Z.
Glock (A) and Smith & Wesson (B) frames successfully use polymer, therefor AR receivers (Z) can successfully use polymer. This does not logically follow.
(PS: carbon-copy, get it?) :D
First, I did not say they started with a 1911 frame. I was around when the Glock first came out and read a lot of articles about it. In one article in particular, the author went to the Glock factory and interviewed people. It was explained to the author that basically what they did was start with a metal frame and eliminated all parts of the frame that didn't need to be metal and replaced it with polymer. The Glock people wanted to make it clear that the frame was not 100% polymer. The Glock polymer frame does nothing a steel or alloy frame does not. It is very little different than it would be if the frame were metal. Study handgun designs and this will become clear.
The problem with the polymer AR lower is the fact no one has left in place metal where the design needs it nor have they significantly beefed up areas that require it to return the strength lost by going to polymer. So what if the AR receiver has been made from aluminum since time immemorial? The same was true for some pistol frames as well.
To turn it around, if someone were to design an AR frame from the beginning to be made from polymer, it would still look and function like an AR lower and likely have metal inserts where structurally needed- just like a Glock frame still looks and functions like a pistol frame
There must have been a LOT of chips on the floor after they milled away everything but four small rail sections
Probably so! But I think they made extensive use of a Cad program
CrazyFingers
10-02-13, 11:03
First, I did not say they started with a 1911 frame.
Exactly, that's my entire point.
So what if the AR receiver has been made from aluminum since time immemorial? The same was true for some pistol frames as well.
You're still using the same logical fallacy. Your argument is based on a false assumption that because Glock and S&W use polymer successfully in their pistol frames, then someone must be able to successfully make an AR rifle lower receiver out of polymer. That does not follow. They are not the same thing.
To take your argument one step further, FN should be able to make a polymer receiver for the Browning M2, since Glock makes them for their pistols, right?
Here's an example of who buys Bushmaster ARs.
My favorite gun store employee, "Bob":
1) Has only Kimber 1911s and highly recommends them because "they're the best, period".
2) Tells people not to buy Colt, to buy anything but Colt, and when asked what he owns, the answer is "Bushmaster".
I feel so good about myself when I talk to Bob.
glock30_27
10-02-13, 11:20
Daniel defence can get run over by a jeep, dropped out of a helicopter, and blown up,and this POS cant even make it through shipping. Holy crap thats bad I think someone should take bushmasters man card and rip it up and piss on it.
Exactly, that's my entire point.
You're still using the same logical fallacy. Your argument is based on a false assumption that because Glock and S&W use polymer successfully in their pistol frames, then someone must be able to successfully make an AR rifle lower receiver out of polymer. That does not follow. They are not the same thing.
To take your argument one step further, FN should be able to make a polymer receiver for the Browning M2, since Glock makes them for their pistols, right?
You'll just have to do your own research into manufacturing & design
I agree that a polymer lower designed using sound engineering judgement should be possible, but the economics of the process may be unsound:
An AR lower would probably need metal at a minimum at the receiver extension threads, pistol grip attachment, all pin locations, and the mag release. For these features to be structurally effective, they would need to me made from a single stamping or welded assembly, thus creating a single piece to absorb and distribute load. This piece could then be over-molded with Glock polymer or whatever polymer you want.
Considering the economics of designing at least a 2 piece steel substructure, plus the up-front costs of tooling for the steel and molding process, the investment required would be substantial, ~$150-200k easily.
Considering the potential manufacturing and raw material costs, I question whether this process would yield a product with sufficient margins to be cost competitive with standard aluminum receivers: Raw stock of any "high-performance" polymers is not cheap and a manufacturing company typically needs at least ~40-50% gross margins for respectable net profits. And I'm talking about margins to the distributors, not based on the price we pay at BCM, RainerArms or anywhere else. If you can buy a stripped lower for $250 from a dealer, they bought it from the manufacturer for probably $130 or less.
Compare the above burden with buying a ~$25k CNC machine and sending it the CAM model of a lower and hitting the start button. Al billets are not cheap either, but the tooling investment is comparatively small, and you can use the mill for other things like uppers, BUIS, trigger guards, hand guards, etc just by changing the program.
CrazyFingers
10-02-13, 14:47
Krusty783:
Not to mention that the primary benefit from this is noticeable weight savings.
Corrosion, breakage, and/or additional features of existing aluminum lower receivers does not appear to be a significant issue, so the main driving factor here would have to be weight savings. Look at the existing polymer lower offerings without the requisite metal reinforcements we're discussing. There appear to be differences that are certainly measurable, but not really overwhelming. Weight savings need to be considered within the context of a percentage of the entire rifle. Adding metal components to increase structural strength would of course add weight, potentially making the entire exercise pointless. How much lighter would a lower receiver need to be to make this worthwhile? One ounce? Six, etc.?
Perhaps a better strategy would be to design a 5.56 rifle from the ground up with polymer as a significant component.
Krusty783:
Perhaps a better strategy would be to design a 5.56 rifle from the ground up with polymer as a significant component.
http://www.berettausa.com/arx100/ ??
-rvb
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/10/01/etu8y2a5.jpg
This was one of the firearms I received today at work. Bushmaster Carbon 15 OCR, yes the receiver broke in shipping.Actually, it's the ultimate adjustable stock version. Goes from carbine to pistol to junk all at the same time.
Here's an example of who buys Bushmaster ARs.
My favorite gun store employee, "Bob":
1) Has only Kimber 1911s and highly recommends them because "they're the best, period".
2) Tells people not to buy Colt, to buy anything but Colt, and when asked what he owns, the answer is "Bushmaster".
I feel so good about myself when I talk to Bob.
I talked to Bob the other day. The gun store had a bravo company complete rifle trade in they were selling.
Bob told me the BCM and the Bushmaster were the same quality.
Suwannee Tim
10-02-13, 17:47
I don't know how rugged or fragile a carbon fiber BM is but I do know how destructive UPS is. Very destructive. Very, very destructive.
I really hope someone from BM corporate is having a good, long look at that picture. Then take a long, hard look at their business model and make some needed changes. I'd love to see them roll up their sleeves and become an American company we could all be proud of.
Grand58742
10-02-13, 21:30
I really hope someone from BM corporate is having a good, long look at that picture. Then take a long, hard look at their business model and make some needed changes. I'd love to see them roll up their sleeves and become an American company we could all be proud of.
Think about what you just said there...
Fast, cheap or correct. Pick two.
Krusty783:
Not to mention that the primary benefit from this is noticeable weight savings.
Corrosion, breakage, and/or additional features of existing aluminum lower receivers does not appear to be a significant issue, so the main driving factor here would have to be weight savings. Look at the existing polymer lower offerings without the requisite metal reinforcements we're discussing. There appear to be differences that are certainly measurable, but not really overwhelming. Weight savings need to be considered within the context of a percentage of the entire rifle. Adding metal components to increase structural strength would of course add weight, potentially making the entire exercise pointless. How much lighter would a lower receiver need to be to make this worthwhile? One ounce? Six, etc.?
Perhaps a better strategy would be to design a 5.56 rifle from the ground up with polymer as a significant component.
Assuming the top few google results are correct, a Plum Crazy lower weighs 7.5 oz less than an aluminum one. Steel is 3x denser than aluminum, so a substructure would eat up that weight delta pretty quickly.
Upon reflection, I'd bet that one would need to install some bushings in the steel frame because the frame would probably end up being .080" thick or less and that's not enough material to support the pins. So, you would need 2 bushings for every pin and you'd have to press those into the sub-frame. The process costs for this are adding up quickly and I'm not a manufacturing engineer, though I have worked at an airframer and a durable goods manufacturer. I don't have a hard time believing that a polymer over steel receiver is just not cost competitive with either aluminum or polymer options.
What about the other alternative: Skeletonizing a steel receiver? You could probably remove a lot of the mag well, and the bulkhead in front of the FCG. I doubt this would yield anything weight comparable to an aluminum receiver.
If guns didnt have a coolness factor how many would really sell? With adds for real guns in video games these days marketing is more creative everyday. Nobody that buys these guns actually needs them, they are a luxury item that selling well in a bad economy due to the fear of them being banned.
As far as bushmasters mancard thats nothing. Go to LWRC or any other high end AR site and you will find tons of marketing about how operator the product is and it makes the average 60k-200k a year guy want one to tell his buddies at the office about. Its way better than any mushbaster! I have this cool coating on my AR or it cost this much etc.
sugerwater
10-03-13, 09:25
Big box store has Package Value Now $799.99 Includes:
1- Carbon 15 .223 Rem. Semi-Auto rifle with Red Dot Sight,
2- 30-rnd magazines,
1- Box of 20-rnds 5.56 FMJ Ammo,
1- Tactical Gun Case.
I'm guessing the shooter who buys this will have everything he will ever need in an Ar. Load 5 rounds in each mag to function test. Save the other 10 bullets for when SHIF.
CrazyFingers
10-03-13, 09:26
If guns didnt have a coolness factor how many would really sell? With adds for real guns in video games these days marketing is more creative everyday. Nobody that buys these guns actually needs them, they are a luxury item that selling well in a bad economy due to the fear of them being banned.
As far as bushmasters mancard thats nothing. Go to LWRC or any other high end AR site and you will find tons of marketing about how operator the product is and it makes the average 60k-200k a year guy want one to tell his buddies at the office about. Its way better than any mushbaster! I have this cool coating on my AR or it cost this much etc.
http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/scale_super/2/24820/967660-tommy_lee_jones_no_country.jpg
texasgunhand
10-03-13, 12:07
OK, thats just bad,the box doesnt even seem tore up at all!
One thing ive seen over the years is that most things that are in magazines like the man-card thing are crap. Thats why there trying to sell them. Really good products sell themselves. As far as "Bob" goes i just went through that at a new Gander mount. store here in Austin TX.
Were they had Colt, Sig and pretty much every other m-4 made there, and the one "Bob" was trying to sell was the bushmaster becouse he carried it as a duty rifle. The colt was about 180 bucks more than the bushmaster,,, 180 bucks..... And these are the experts they hire to help you make a choice...My local gun store was almost as bad they just closed after 30 years but i never once got a correct answer to anything there...
Funny how the difference between $920 and $1,100 seems like a lot to some, especially when the quality difference is worth more than $180.
texasgunhand
10-03-13, 23:24
Right!! its like spending 100 grand on a car but not wanting to spend 30 bucks to get the tires and rims for it...
steyrman13
10-17-13, 21:52
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=134715
Check out post #4. Looks like it isn't the first with the carbon bushmasters!
Glad to see another Spokane guy that doesn't think BM/DPMS/Oly are battle ready. Cruising the local forums or classified can be unnerving sometimes.
Not from Spokane but from Washington but agree they are not Battle Ready!!!
Wishing was back in WA!!
texasgunhand
10-21-13, 16:06
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=134715
Check out post #4. Looks like it isn't the first with the carbon bushmasters!
I dont get it why even bother? A colt 6920 is like what 6.5 pounds? how much lighter do you want? these things are a dream compaired to humping an m1 garand or such all day...
leibermuster
10-22-13, 12:06
I dont get it why even bother? A colt 6920 is like what 6.5 pounds? how much lighter do you want? these things are a dream compaired to humping an m1 garand or such all day...
because people are fatter and weaker more than ever...combine that with people have never done a days work in their lives...
$180.00 represents a lot of money for some.
I know a guy who works for Walmart, makes very little money and owns a BM. He's embarrassed to admit he owns this brand as he knows it's loe quality level, but told me it was all he could afford. He bought it used for a fairly low cost.
He loves to shoot and so far his BM has delivered.
As long as it works and he isn't planning on taking it into Kabul or Chicago then whats the problem?
Dist. Expert 26
10-22-13, 19:31
A lot of us here carry/have carried a gun for a living, so the thought of having a weapon that's not 100% reliable is something we would never consider, especially when you can get that reliability for just a couple hundred dollars more. I'd rather wait a little longer and get a rifle I can depend on than buy a sub-par gun RIGHT NOW.
Just because you live in small town USA doesn't mean you'll never be put in a situation where you'll have to defend your life or the lives of your family.
I agree, for just a few hundred more, a much better base gun could be had. Not to mention resale value. When you can't rely on it 100%, it's a range toy.
RogerinTPA
10-22-13, 21:47
Anyone who purchases a BM or any other commercial grade AR with out using due diligence gets what they deserve.
A lot of new people get into ARs all the time. Lots of LGS will push cheap guns for a quick sale to people that don't know better at the time. They rely on some idiot at the store, and they get stuck with a retarded product.
It's really sad to see that our own industry does this to us, from manufacture, to gun store, to consumer. It seems to collectively dumb down the masses.
I cringe when I hear about somebody buying some DPMS, Bushmaster, RRA, Olympic, etc crap. I especially cringe when they buy some way overpriced shiny shit like BRO for a higher price than a true tier one gun! Drives me crazy.
Serious question: Is the BM sold today inferior in quality to one from the late 90s? Or has BM always been a "hobby gun?" How would we know?
They definitely did not have their act going right back then.
texasgunhand
10-23-13, 00:13
$180.00 represents a lot of money for some.
I know a guy who works for Walmart, makes very little money and owns a BM. He's embarrassed to admit he owns this brand as he knows it's loe quality level, but told me it was all he could afford. He bought it used for a fairly low cost.
He loves to shoot and so far his BM has delivered.
But if 180 bucks is a lot? You shouldnt be spending a thousand on a toy. If you join the army etc, you cant take the gun with you they will be giving you one. These things are like owning a vett, when a toyo corrola will last longer,you dont need it, you want it. You can have just as much fun with a ruger 10/22, I didnt buy mine becouse i had to, I bought it becouse i wanted one, for a grand you can buy one hell of a nice rifle.That has pretty checkered wood etc.
It doesnt help that every gun store you walk into,the guy behind the counter tells you these things{bushy rra dpms} are the best ever. BUT they are there to make a buck! Thats it. BUY IT AND ENJOY IT, Dont let people make you feel bad about it,for most people they will be tired of it before it breaks anyway and part are everywere for these things.
I dont thinks theres a rifle on the market any more easy to work on or fix than these things, be real! They have no recoil and you can pick one up made on the 80s and put the parts in one made today and it should work. thats the point, the problem with the internet is everyone has something to say EVEN if they know nothing about what their saying!
Funny how on here RRA rifles are a piece, but the feds are using them so are the prison systems and the only problems their having is breaking bolts in high round count rifles. Which ones dont do this? they all do. Some guys always gona have more money than you always, dont let people run you down becouse of that, becouse those people talk all that crap becouse their unhappy,BE happy and live life its way to short for this crap! If you carry a gun for a living, you will be given one,very very few police etc, let you carry what you want ,you carry what they give you, I have been there!
walkin' trails
10-23-13, 08:52
I can remember back back in the days before we had to deal with enemies in unpleasant places around the globe that there was plenty in controversy regarding the commercial grade ARs of the day, which I'm pretty sure included Colt and BM. I had a CA ban version of the Colt, and while I didn't have any problems with it, neither did I shoot it enough to really stress it's parts. In those years, there was as much scuttlebutt about Colt's problems as anyone else's.
I run ranges for TFs now, and see a mix of Colts and commercial grades, to include BMs and RRAs. All of these guns were acquired by their agencies before the mass hysteria of 2012-13, and I haven't seen any having problems other than an older RRA LAR15 that had to be repaired by an armorer, and it was probably spring related. LE guns are not always acquired fir cost reasons alone, and most departments perform some type of testing and evaluation before buying.
I realize that the quality of commercial grade guns makes them what they are, but that, in it's own does not make them less reliable for what they're built for. The problem is quality control at the factory, and some respected handgun manufacturers have had the same problems during the past couple of years. Gun makers can't keep up with demand. Gun shops are going to sell whatever they can get their hands on to make money. My suggestion is to be an informed buulyer before rushing in to plunk down money on something that you're either going to run like heck or use as a closet dust magnet. And if a manufacturer shoots like a piece of garbage, hold their feet to the fire.
"He bought it USED at a fairly low cost." I posted this earlier... He didn't spend a great deal for this BM and it works.
Had he bought it new, I'd rag on him too, but since he makes damn little money and wanted an AR, so he did what he could.
I too believe in quality and have the means to afford it, so I own Colts. This poor guy can't afford quality right now, but once he finishes school, I'm sure he'll move on up in quality. He knows the difference.
In the mean time...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.