ST911
06-18-08, 11:31
This exchange...
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Bushmaster. I would rather have it than a Colt! Why are they being hit so bad with bad publicity? Who is putting it out? Why? At one time they were considered the best! Why has that changed or has it? Magpul, it goes without saying, is quality !
If I may, humbly (or not so), suggest you look here. http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6642 Bushmaster today is not the same Bushmaster it was, and the playing field has gotten substantially stronger and the competition substantially steeper. It's not a good idea to be heading down while your competition is heading up.
and an old dusty AR brought to me the other day, reminded me to post the following for discussion.
It's common to see references to declining trends in quality, and mentions that manufacturers are not what they once were. In this example, Bushmaster, but this post isn’t unique to them.
Where the clones/aftermarket guns are concerned, I question whether or not much, if anything, has changed. I think we have.
Long before I got some training, took pictures, kept notes, or contemplated things beyond "kewl!, I recall malfunctions of various sorts that I hadn't yet learned to diagnose or differentiate. I recall dialing windage knobs all the way left to zero. I recall guns going back to manufacturers because they didn't work right. As always, some were better than others, but they were always there, and they were the usual suspects.
A series of events, paradigm shifts, and trends gave the type greater exposure. Depending on what you consider and how you do it, beginning in the early to mid-90s, we saw (in no particular order)…
…a variety of high profile incidents prompting inception of LE/gov patrol rifle programs.
…a shift away from traditional PCC and SMGs.
…increased accessibility and open-enrollment options for citizens in high quality training.
…increased interest in crime prevention and disaster/contingency preparedness.
…incidents prompting anti-government sentiment and preparedness.
…broader, mainstream acceptance of the type.
All producing greater demand, use volume, and performance data.
During that time interval, and especially more recently, there was also more deliberate and meaningful contemplation of many variables by industry and end-users, as well as an increase in the quality of contemplation already occurring. Newcomers brought genesis. We also got smarter.
Add now rapid information sharing via web, and we become more informed, more quickly.
Certainly, there are peaks and valleys in production quality, influenced by component availability and schedules, but are some “not what they used to be”…really?
The old dusty AR mentioned I mentioned above was little different than the same configuration produced by that manufacturer today. If not for the serial number and some subtleties, most would never know its age, in inspection or live fire.
Short: I think the bar went up, and everyone is what they always were.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Bushmaster. I would rather have it than a Colt! Why are they being hit so bad with bad publicity? Who is putting it out? Why? At one time they were considered the best! Why has that changed or has it? Magpul, it goes without saying, is quality !
If I may, humbly (or not so), suggest you look here. http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6642 Bushmaster today is not the same Bushmaster it was, and the playing field has gotten substantially stronger and the competition substantially steeper. It's not a good idea to be heading down while your competition is heading up.
and an old dusty AR brought to me the other day, reminded me to post the following for discussion.
It's common to see references to declining trends in quality, and mentions that manufacturers are not what they once were. In this example, Bushmaster, but this post isn’t unique to them.
Where the clones/aftermarket guns are concerned, I question whether or not much, if anything, has changed. I think we have.
Long before I got some training, took pictures, kept notes, or contemplated things beyond "kewl!, I recall malfunctions of various sorts that I hadn't yet learned to diagnose or differentiate. I recall dialing windage knobs all the way left to zero. I recall guns going back to manufacturers because they didn't work right. As always, some were better than others, but they were always there, and they were the usual suspects.
A series of events, paradigm shifts, and trends gave the type greater exposure. Depending on what you consider and how you do it, beginning in the early to mid-90s, we saw (in no particular order)…
…a variety of high profile incidents prompting inception of LE/gov patrol rifle programs.
…a shift away from traditional PCC and SMGs.
…increased accessibility and open-enrollment options for citizens in high quality training.
…increased interest in crime prevention and disaster/contingency preparedness.
…incidents prompting anti-government sentiment and preparedness.
…broader, mainstream acceptance of the type.
All producing greater demand, use volume, and performance data.
During that time interval, and especially more recently, there was also more deliberate and meaningful contemplation of many variables by industry and end-users, as well as an increase in the quality of contemplation already occurring. Newcomers brought genesis. We also got smarter.
Add now rapid information sharing via web, and we become more informed, more quickly.
Certainly, there are peaks and valleys in production quality, influenced by component availability and schedules, but are some “not what they used to be”…really?
The old dusty AR mentioned I mentioned above was little different than the same configuration produced by that manufacturer today. If not for the serial number and some subtleties, most would never know its age, in inspection or live fire.
Short: I think the bar went up, and everyone is what they always were.