View Full Version : Franklin Armory blacklists InRangeTV at SHOT Show 2019
I'm pretty sure most of you are familiar with InRangeTV. If not, then you should be. It's a very entertaining and informative show. It's primarily a firearm focused program, but they cover other subjects as well - I particularly like Karl's history vignettes.
The hosts of InRangeTV are regulars at SHOT Show, and manufacturers typically welcome them into their booths. Last year at SHOT Show Franklin Armory debuted the "Reformation" - their "non-rifled AR" - which Karl and Ian gave a critical review of. This year Franklin Armory debuted their new "Providence" non-semiautomatic AR, and they have barred InRangeTV from their booth and from reviewing the weapon.
Not a wise business decision in my opinion.
https://youtu.be/LmDQch8U8Y8
Franklin Armory's side:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cbWZ8MJnok&t=258s
MountainRaven
01-25-19, 09:59
If you watch the original IRTV video, Karl and Ian didn't try to trip the Franklin Armory spokesman up - he did that himself, just fine, tripping over his own toes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hkiVc0n_Yg
I completely disagree with InRange's methods at these events.
They did the same bullshit at the Mossberg booth about the shockwave in 2018.
They ask gotcha questions which put the vendor's item in a negative light.
They are like little kids that keep asking "why?" Why? WHY????!!!!
If someone doesn't get the concept behind the Reformation, that person is retarded.
If you watch the original IRTV video, Karl and Ian didn't try to trip the Franklin Armory spokesman up - he did that himself, just fine, tripping over his own toes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hkiVc0n_Yg
You gotta love the "audio only" portion of the video...
I completely disagree with InRange's methods at these events.
They did the same bullshit at the Mossberg booth about the shockwave in 2018.
They ask gotcha questions which put the vendor's item in a negative light.
They are like little kids that keep asking "why?" Why? WHY????!!!!
If someone doesn't get the concept behind the Reformation, that person is retarded.
Missed the reformation video, usually really like their stuff, but did catch the shockwave one and have to agree.
And the thing is, they do know why on the reformation and shockwave because in at least one of their bullpup vids they mentioned as being a way to sbr size without nfa.
While I am not a big shotgun fan in general and have never shot a pistol gripped 12 gauge, based on shooting .44 magnum Blackhawk and .44 Redhawk I have to assume shooting a 12 gauge with traditional versus the shockwave was not an apples to apples comparison either.
Missed the reformation video, usually really like their stuff, but did catch the shockwave one and have to agree.
And the thing is, they do know why on the reformation and shockwave because in at least one of their bullpup vids they mentioned as being a way to sbr size without nfa.
While I am not a big shotgun fan in general and have never shot a pistol gripped 12 gauge, based on shooting .44 magnum Blackhawk and .44 Redhawk I have to assume shooting a 12 gauge with traditional versus the shockwave was not an apples to apples comparison either.
I think the InRange guys' objection to the Reformation and the Shockwave were not that they exist, because I recall them saying they get the whole idea of giving a finger to the NFA, but that the manufacturers of those products were trying to pass them off as being something other than just simple NFA workarounds. As though their NFA-skirting quirks somehow made them superior to other, more conventional options for practical purposes. Mossberg was basically describing the Shockwave as like the "ultimate home defense weapon" for women or something. And Franklin Armory was practically portraying the Reformation and it's Nerf bullets as the next great leap in kinetic energy projectile technology.
Something about the Shockwave did seem to rankle Ian (The milder mannered, long haired guy) in particular though. As I recall comments made by Karl (Who is usually the bigger jackass of the two) later that even he was caught off guard by the way the normally laid back Ian went after the Mossberg rep.
To be fair to the companies though, I suppose it's probably a smart move to at least try and portray these products as having some kind of purpose beyond "Get bent, NFA" because while there's nothing illegal about that, it is in their best interests to maintain good relations with the ATF.
SOL-INVICTUS
01-26-19, 17:25
Pretty low class at InRange. Not even men enough to face up straight up. Never watched them and now never will.
Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk
Yeah I am not big on marketing buzzwords either, but not to the point of ragging on someone presenting a product and what seemed to be on the edge of pissed off.
That kind of reaction over gadgetry isn't limited to those 2 either. There is a lot of stuff that makes me shake my head, but at the end of the day I think the more people getting an interest in firearms, and more so stuff that triggers statists, is a better thing for all of us. Things never got better by making them happy.
I do enjoy watching InRange TV and Forgotten Weapons. Anyhow, Franklin armory's gimmicky products are just that... gimmicks to work around existing man made (not all wise) laws. Give it a few years and those non rifled non semiautomatic long guns will be featured on Forgotten Weapons...
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
Yeah it likely will be on Forgotten Weapons.
I wonder if a rifled muzzle device could be screwed on to the Reformation...not permanently attached of course. Kind of like a rifled choke tube with the twist direction aligned to not unscrew it.
I think the InRange guys' objection to the Reformation and the Shockwave were not that they exist, because I recall them saying they get the whole idea of giving a finger to the NFA, but that the manufacturers of those products were trying to pass them off as being something other than just simple NFA workarounds. As though their NFA-skirting quirks somehow made them superior to other, more conventional options for practical purposes. Mossberg was basically describing the Shockwave as like the "ultimate home defense weapon" for women or something. And Franklin Armory was practically portraying the Reformation and it's Nerf bullets as the next great leap in kinetic energy projectile technology.
Something about the Shockwave did seem to rankle Ian (The milder mannered, long haired guy) in particular though. As I recall comments made by Karl (Who is usually the bigger jackass of the two) later that even he was caught off guard by the way the normally laid back Ian went after the Mossberg rep.
To be fair to the companies though, I suppose it's probably a smart move to at least try and portray these products as having some kind of purpose beyond "Get bent, NFA" because while there's nothing illegal about that, it is in their best interests to maintain good relations with the ATF.
The reason why these guns are portrayed as legitimate self defense firearms is to get the leftist political machine off their back for exploiting a loophole in the law.
Everyone knows the shockwave isn’t an ideal defensive weapon. Every the Mossberg rep knows it. These two fools are too stupid to clue in on this. Like I said, cant read in between the lines.
Furthermore....
What happens when somebody makes a working and pratical sabot flechette firing gun similar to the reformation? Then what? That is the whole point of that thing. These two idiots missed that point.
I also take objection to the fact they act like dickheads at an industry show. Their industry credentials are dubious. Most of the guns they feature on YouTube they don’t own, they are loaned. This is a huge pet peave of mine when one of these YouTube “experts” comes along to tell some multimillionaire in the gun industry how shit is done.
This is a huge pet peave of mine when one of these YouTube “experts” comes along to tell some multimillionaire in the gun industry how shit is done.
The other side of that is (if my understanding is correct at least) is that things like the Shockwave and the SB Tactical brace were not the ideas of multimillionaires in the gun industry. For certain, the established industry had decades to come up with the idea, but were more concerned catering to their minority customer (1/4 to 1/3 of sales at any given time) which is also trying to delete the largest part of their customer base.
The reason why these guns are portrayed as legitimate self defense firearms is to get the leftist political machine off their back for exploiting a loophole in the law.
Everyone knows the shockwave isn’t an ideal defensive weapon. Every the Mossberg rep knows it. These two fools are too stupid to clue in on this. Like I said, cant read in between the lines.
Furthermore....
What happens when somebody makes a working and pratical sabot flechette firing gun similar to the reformation? Then what? That is the whole point of that thing. These two idiots missed that point.
I also take objection to the fact they act like dickheads at an industry show. Their industry credentials are dubious. Most of the guns they feature on YouTube they don’t own, they are loaned. This is a huge pet peave of mine when one of these YouTube “experts” comes along to tell some multimillionaire in the gun industry how shit is done.
1. I don't think saying a gun is designed to kill bad guys is an effective way to get banners off their back.
2. The guys at InRange absolutely know why these guns are being made, they are just calling out manufacturers on their BS.
The NFA sucks, but so does the reformation, the shockwave, the tac14, etc.
Did you even watch the reformation video? That rep was a joke. Uh uh uh, tanks. yeah, tanks do this, so it makes sense. Because tanks. Abrams. Tanks.
Ian even asks why it's better than a brace. Spoiler, it aint.
MountainRaven
01-26-19, 23:31
Mossberg was so unconvinced about the merits of the Shockwave as the ultimate defensive weapon that they didn't get Clint Smith to demonstrate its usefulness as a defensive arm.
Oh wait.
:rolleyes:
ETA: It's 2019 and people are still buying Taurus Judges because that little 410 shotgun shell they wouldn't shoot a one pound bird with is a rill man-stoppah. A significant portion of the gun-buying public isn't smart enough to, "read between the lines," when it comes to buying a KSG or a Judge or a Shockwave, never mind when a company legitimately pushes for their latest and greatest FU-NFA toy as being the ultimate defensive arm - as Mossberg did with the Shockwave.
Hell, if Mossberg had started with the pistol-braced Shockwave, nobody would have batted an eye at it. (Except the guys who still insist that pistol braces are for mom's basement dwelling neckbeards, but they were never going to be convinced, anyway.)
I think the companies involved might have been better served by just saying, "We did it because we could, because this is America, and why the hell not?" Instead of saying (as they have), "These are the most innovative tactical dynamic kinetic energy delivery systems since the invention of the fin-stabilized discarding-sabot. IT'S NERF OR NOTHING."
I came across “in range” a few months ago on YouTube. I have a hard time getting through most of their videos. They seem like arogant dorks from the high school AV club.
This Ian character is especially off putting. He has a very obvious condescending tone and is clearly trying to make this guy look foolish.
The first video I ever saw with this guy was a Forgotten Weapons with Larry Vickers. I had never seen him before but my first thought was that Larry looked uncomfortable with him and kind of wanted to give him a wedgie.
Leadslinger585
01-27-19, 13:33
I came across “in range” a few months ago on YouTube. I have a hard time getting through most of their videos. They seem like arogant dorks from the high school AV club.
This Ian character is especially off putting. He has a very obvious condescending tone and is clearly trying to make this guy look foolish.
The first video I ever saw with this guy was a Forgotten Weapons with Larry Vickers. I had never seen him before but my first thought was that Larry looked uncomfortable with him and kind of wanted to give him a wedgie.
Agree with everything above 100%. Also to include the M1 Carbine Hackathorn video.
But you know something? Ian knows his stuff and despite not personally liking the guy, he's worth listening to/learning from.
Franklin Armory makes toys. Toys like bumpstocks bring a lot of negative attention our way. I like "braces" and they have actual, practical use but if companies keep promoting toys, braces will go away too. In Range and Forgotten Weapons have a wealth of knowledge, produce good content, and rightfully call out derp, which is about 50% of the crap marketed at SHOT show.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
I don't particularly give a rip how these guys come off on their U-Tube channel. They are using their time to promote firearms in a positive manner, which is good for all of us. Not only do you learn a bit about this history of firearms, you learn a bit about history in general.
Yet another example of people in this community eating their own. #doomed You don't see the idiots on the left acting like some of ya'll.
Lighten - the - frick -up Francine's.
ETA: I really wish there were like buttons on posts. Would save me some typing sometimes.
1. I don't think saying a gun is designed to kill bad guys is an effective way to get banners off their back.
2. The guys at InRange absolutely know why these guns are being made, they are just calling out manufacturers on their BS.
The NFA sucks, but so does the reformation, the shockwave, the tac14, etc.
Did you even watch the reformation video? That rep was a joke. Uh uh uh, tanks. yeah, tanks do this, so it makes sense. Because tanks. Abrams. Tanks.
Ian even asks why it's better than a brace. Spoiler, it aint.
Yes I did watch the video. Yes it uses similar technology as a smooth bore tank gun.
Yes their recording of a conversation with the lens closed on their camera is unethical.
A practical workable flechette firing gun would be much more usesful than a brace.
A pistol brace can be taken away just like a bumpstock with a decree that they are illegal.
Nocalsocal
01-27-19, 15:03
Inrange and Forgotten Weapons come off a little different. In general I enjoy their YouTube content. Socially I probably couldn't be around them for more than 15 minutes. However they seem to be vetted in regards to their knowledge of firearms development and history of use. So when Larry Vickers collaborates with Ian, I can see why.
My feeling is that Franklin Armory is pushing the envelope of the 2nd amendment. Seeing how far they can develop a popular product (ARs) without violating ATF regulations.
Recording the conversation without the reps knowledge is a little shady, if true.
But banning them only makes the company look shadier. So asking questions, condescending or otherwise, is a threat to their company? Can't the product speak for itself? Who says we have to be polite when it comes to spending our hard earned money? I'm glad they asked the questions they did because the majority of gun owners don't even know where to begin with in regards to SBRs and NFA laws.
To me it seems that there is a certain market Franklin Armory is after ie. the 80% lower crowd. Franklin Armory seems right up their alley. Can you imagine it? An 80% lower with the smooth bore, shorty upper? Their heads would explode LOL!
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
But banning them only makes the company look shadier. So asking questions, condescending or otherwise, is a threat to their company? Can't the product speak for itself? Who says we have to be polite when it comes to spending our hard earned money?
The issue is them asking questions to a company employee, trying to get him to say something that can be later taken out of context; and be used to portray the company in a negative light or be used against the company in legal proceedings.
Not denying access to some youtube people will not damage the company.
This industry attracts an unusually high number of ah... let's call it egos. Some here don't know that and are looking to apply logic to this situation.
titsonritz
01-28-19, 16:48
I came across “in range” a few months ago on YouTube. I have a hard time getting through most of their videos. They seem like arogant dorks from the high school AV club.
This Ian character is especially off putting. He has a very obvious condescending tone and is clearly trying to make this guy look foolish.
The first video I ever saw with this guy was a Forgotten Weapons with Larry Vickers. I had never seen him before but my first thought was that Larry looked uncomfortable with him and kind of wanted to give him a wedgie.
He was comfortable enough to have him work on the Vickers Guide: Kalashnikov book.
I've never actually found Ian to come off as condescending personally. he's always seemed kinda soft spoken and easygoing. Karl is the one who can come across as kinda cringey and abrasive usually, but he's apparently some kind of infosec hacker geek by trade so I guess it kinda fits. He's seems to be a pretty legit skilled shooter though.
I came across “in range” a few months ago on YouTube. I have a hard time getting through most of their videos. They seem like arogant dorks from the high school AV club.
This Ian character is especially off putting. He has a very obvious condescending tone and is clearly trying to make this guy look foolish.
The first video I ever saw with this guy was a Forgotten Weapons with Larry Vickers. I had never seen him before but my first thought was that Larry looked uncomfortable with him and kind of wanted to give him a wedgie.
QFT
If I wanted to watch arrogant Village People wannabes discuss guns, well, I'd listen/view these guys. But since I don't.......
MountainRaven
01-28-19, 20:32
He was comfortable enough to have him work on the Vickers Guide: Kalashnikov book.
IIRC, Ian McCollum also helped on the WWII German Guns book. And I believe there are plans for him to work on Kalash 2 and other Vickers Guide books.
The photographer for the Vickers Guide books - James Rupley - also did the photography on McCollum's forthcoming book on French rifles: Chassepot to FAMAS: French Military Rifles, 1866-2016, IIRC.
titsonritz
01-28-19, 20:45
IIRC, Ian McCollum also helped on the WWII German Guns book. And I believe there are plans for him to work on Kalash 2 and other Vickers Guide books.
The photographer for the Vickers Guide books - James Rupley - also did the photography on McCollum's forthcoming book on French rifles: Chassepot to FAMAS: French Military Rifles, 1866-2016, IIRC.
I believe you are correct on that.
A practical workable flechette firing gun would be much more usesful than a brace.
A pistol brace can be taken away just like a bumpstock with a decree that they are illegal.
How would it be more useful?
How would be be any more resistant to being made illegal?
A flechette that worked "could" bring something new to the table and open up a door for new designs versus everything being somewhat stagnant now using cartridges that have been around 100+ years.
Ammo that stabilizes itself in a smooth bore would allow for standard buttstocks which are a bit handier than pistol braces.
WickedWillis
01-29-19, 15:27
I completely disagree with InRange's methods at these events.
They did the same bullshit at the Mossberg booth about the shockwave in 2018.
They ask gotcha questions which put the vendor's item in a negative light.
They are like little kids that keep asking "why?" Why? WHY????!!!!
If someone doesn't get the concept behind the Reformation, that person is retarded.
This is exactly why I stopped caring about anything they do anymore. I even unsubscribed from their youtube pages. He was absolutely arrogant and rude with the Mossberg interview, and he had a few others from SHOT last year as well that just kind of sucked.
Ian's ego has gotten insane as his channel has grown in popularity, he acts like every single thing he covers in the interviews, he knows more, or better than the manufacturer.
Franklin Armory is the synthetic Marijuana of the gun industry. It's just *one* molecule off, but basically the same thing, only not as effective. Not really groundbreaking innovation just clever workarounds of silly laws.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
This is exactly why I stopped caring about anything they do anymore. I even unsubscribed from their youtube pages. He was absolutely arrogant and rude with the Mossberg interview, and he had a few others from SHOT last year as well that just kind of sucked.
Ian's ego has gotten insane as his channel has grown in popularity, he acts like every single thing he covers in the interviews, he knows more, or better than the manufacturer.
My experience was similar. If I recall correctly I watched a video or two, subscribed, and then unsubscribed about an hour later after watching a few more. The douchiness is almost nauseating at times....I don’t care how knowledgeable they are on things.
I’d have a hard time acting cordial if I was a rep at SHOT and he started an interview with that smug attitude. If he wasn’t into guns I’d peg him as a huge liberal.
I wouldn't say silly, more like insidious.
And I still say the more people that buy and enjoy this stuff the better.
I haven't seen FA's CA compliant manually cycled AR pistol at my kommifornistan public ranges. Even in the land of fin grips and pinned buttstocks, this AR pistol is just too silly of a novelty item.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190130/4f43f68c4c75095eba94bc44b7e32ca3.jpg
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
QFT
If I wanted to watch arrogant Village People wannabes discuss guns, well, I'd listen/view these guys. But since I don't.......
Agree, completely.
I haven't seen FA's CA compliant manually cycled AR pistol at my kommifornistan public ranges. Even in the land of fin grips and pinned buttstocks, this AR pistol is just too silly of a novelty item.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
That is because it isn't ATF approved yet.
.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190130/4f43f68c4c75095eba94bc44b7e32ca3.jpg
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Get ****ing real.
Are you even up to speed on this? The idea for it came from foreign gun laws. It was intended for foreign sales in countries were semi auto is illegal. They will sell plenty of them.
MountainRaven
01-30-19, 13:24
Get ****ing real.
Are you even up to speed on this? The idea for it came from foreign gun laws. It was intended for foreign sales in countries were semi auto is illegal. They will sell plenty of them.
What country bans semi-automatic firearms but allows centerfire smooth-bore semi-automatic firearms?
I'm sure this will be a big seller with the wealthy Shockwave/Judge/Hi-Point owner demographic. If the ammo ever gets cheap enough.
This is funny because I’m watching a Forgotten Weapons video on YT right now. I’m still subscribed and obviously still watch FW and InRange videos. While they are quirky and odd, I like their videos. They are usually informative or entertaining.
What country bans semi-automatic firearms but allows centerfire smooth-bore semi-automatic firearms?
I'm sure this will be a big seller with the wealthy Shockwave/Judge/Hi-Point owner demographic. If the ammo ever gets cheap enough.
You need to go back up and re-read.
My post was in response to the Providence, not Reformation.
Well since everyone else has an opinion...
The InRange guys can definitely be a bit douchey. I did enjoy the Larry Vikers/Kalashnikov video very much though.
The Franklin Armory stuff is silly for sure. But I'd rather bash (and try to abolish) the ATF instead of American firearm manufacturers.
Don Quijote
02-04-19, 10:43
What country bans semi-automatic firearms but allows centerfire smooth-bore semi-automatic firearms?
The United Kingdom
ALL centerfire semi automatic rifles are banned there, but semi automatic shotguns (smoothbores) are still available to licensed individuals.
I personally don't care about ANY of this drama but I figured you would be interested in an answer to your question.
MountainRaven
02-04-19, 19:57
The United Kingdom
ALL centerfire semi automatic rifles are banned there, but semi automatic shotguns (smoothbores) are still available to licensed individuals.
I personally don't care about ANY of this drama but I figured you would be interested in an answer to your question.
I have to admit to not being entirely up on gun laws in the UK, but I do not believe that the Reformation would be legal there.
First, UK laws define a shotgun as possessing a barrel longer than 24 inches (which the Reformation does not possess) and second because said shotguns cannot have a detachable magazine and may have a fixed magazine that holds no more than two rounds. Thirdly, while a shotgun certificate is sufficient to purchase shotshells, slugs and other single-projectile ammunition requires a more difficult to acquire certificate - a much more difficult to acquire certificate.
I know there are plenty of rimfires and over/under, side-by-side, mag-fed shotguns with fixed two-round magazines in circulation in the UK, anything more... "advanced" is practically impossible to acquire, due to the difficulty in acquiring the necessary permit(s).
Don Quijote
02-05-19, 03:56
I have to admit to not being entirely up on gun laws in the UK, but I do not believe that the Reformation would be legal there.
First, UK laws define a shotgun as possessing a barrel longer than 24 inches (which the Reformation does not possess) and second because said shotguns cannot have a detachable magazine and may have a fixed magazine that holds no more than two rounds. Thirdly, while a shotgun certificate is sufficient to purchase shotshells, slugs and other single-projectile ammunition requires a more difficult to acquire certificate - a much more difficult to acquire certificate.
I know there are plenty of rimfires and over/under, side-by-side, mag-fed shotguns with fixed two-round magazines in circulation in the UK, anything more... "advanced" is practically impossible to acquire, due to the difficulty in acquiring the necessary permit(s).
While you're correct in that this "thing" would not fly under a SGC in the UK, it will fall under the class of firearms accessible under a firearms certificate. There are more than enough people in the UK with FACs to kinda disprove your point that getting one is "practically impossible"
Anyway, I don't GAF that much
I enjoy most of the videos done by InRange and Forgotten Weapons. I don't always agree with their positions. The pistol grip only "shotguns" are an example. If you take the position that they are ideal, then no, they are a failure. They are a niche weapon for limited space, close distances. Many years ago I was shooting at a two gun match, handgun and shotgun. One guy had a pistol grip only, regular 18" barrel. Let's just say my thoughts weren't very complimentary, but he surprised me. He held it out away from his face so he didn't eat it, he sighted down the barrel, not hip shooting. He wasn't quite as fast as most with a conventional shotgun with a buttstock, but he did ok and much better than I anticipated. A couple of years ago, I watched Clint Smith's video and he did an excellent job of demonstrating how it could be used. When Ian and Karl did their video, my recollection was that they either deliberately, or through ignorance, did most things wrong with the Shockwave. The main error, in my opinion, was continuously comparing it to a conventionally stocked shotgun. No one, not even those who like the little things, think they are as useful as a full size shotty. But a full size won't fit in a tight storage area, or a duffel bag, etc. Think niche, not general purpose. Anyway, there are other things I disagree with, but in the main, I think they are good. Their match videos are good reviews on what worked well and what didn't. And there is always something that could have been done better. I'll have to watch the Franklin Armory video again, but I generally shared their opinion. If the gun was designed and built to be used in places where a conventional rifle cannot, then that should have been stated from the beginning. I have friends who are bashing the new G43x and G48. They are too big for pocket guns, bigger than the Sig P365, the G48 is a deficient G19, etc. While I don't have a use for either one (at this time), they do make a lot of sense for states and countries where there is a 10rd mag limit. They are much more comfortable to shoot than the stubby G26 (at least for me), and the thinner size does conceal better than a G19. I understand someone not wanting to carry a G19 sized for a 15rd mag when they are limited to 10. Shrink the gun and make it more efficient. Anyway, I usually disagree with Ian and Karl when they don't recognize the niche aspect for a particular gun.
SeriousStudent
02-06-19, 20:39
I enjoy most of the videos done by InRange and Forgotten Weapons. I don't always agree with their positions. The pistol grip only "shotguns" are an example. If you take the position that they are ideal, then no, they are a failure. They are a niche weapon for limited space, close distances. Many years ago I was shooting at a two gun match, handgun and shotgun. One guy had a pistol grip only, regular 18" barrel. Let's just say my thoughts weren't very complimentary, but he surprised me. He held it out away from his face so he didn't eat it, he sighted down the barrel, not hip shooting. He wasn't quite as fast as most with a conventional shotgun with a buttstock, but he did ok and much better than I anticipated. A couple of years ago, I watched Clint Smith's video and he did an excellent job of demonstrating how it could be used. When Ian and Karl did their video, my recollection was that they either deliberately, or through ignorance, did most things wrong with the Shockwave. The main error, in my opinion, was continuously comparing it to a conventionally stocked shotgun. No one, not even those who like the little things, think they are as useful as a full size shotty. But a full size won't fit in a tight storage area, or a duffel bag, etc. Think niche, not general purpose. Anyway, there are other things I disagree with, but in the main, I think they are good. Their match videos are good reviews on what worked well and what didn't. And there is always something that could have been done better. I'll have to watch the Franklin Armory video again, but I generally shared their opinion. If the gun was designed and built to be used in places where a conventional rifle cannot, then that should have been stated from the beginning. I have friends who are bashing the new G43x and G48. They are too big for pocket guns, bigger than the Sig P365, the G48 is a deficient G19, etc. While I don't have a use for either one (at this time), they do make a lot of sense for states and countries where there is a 10rd mag limit. They are much more comfortable to shoot than the stubby G26 (at least for me), and the thinner size does conceal better than a G19. I understand someone not wanting to carry a G19 sized for a 15rd mag when they are limited to 10. Shrink the gun and make it more efficient. Anyway, I usually disagree with Ian and Karl when they don't recognize the niche aspect for a particular gun.
You and I have a mutual friend that is very, very skilled with a Witness Protection shotgun.
I think the genesis of that shotgun video was the Mossberg rep describing the Shockwave as an ideal home defense weapon, along with repeating tired old fallacies like "you don't have to aim" with a shotgun.
If I remember the InRange pistol grip shotgun video correctly, they stated that a stockless shotgun isn't useless, but is best suited for someone with real expertise in it's use, and that for most people a stocked shotgun is going to be vastly superior to a stockless one in pretty much any scenario.
The video conclusions start at 32:06
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tYjThckYqBQ
Also noteworthy is that Karl says right in the video that Ian was too hard on the Mossberg lady...
I think the genesis of that shotgun video was the Mossberg rep describing the Shockwave as an ideal home defense weapon, along with repeating tired old fallacies like "you don't have to aim" with a shotgun.
That is called marketing bullshit.
Everyone knows its bullshit including the Mossberg lady.
What did you expect her to say?
"We came out with this product to skirt the NFA and sell short shotguns to people"
How do you think that is going to be twisted when the liberal media gets ahold of a soundbite like that? And runs a 60 Minutes episode about how Mossberg is selling "sawed off shotguns" and "exploiting a loophole in the law."
That is called marketing bullshit.
Everyone knows its bullshit including the Mossberg lady.
What did you expect her to say?
"We came out with this product to skirt the NFA and sell short shotguns to people"
How do you think that is going to be twisted when the liberal media gets ahold of a soundbite like that? And runs a 60 Minutes episode about how Mossberg is selling "sawed off shotguns" and "exploiting a loophole in the law."
I get it. I know they have to be careful how they market stuff.
I think most firearms savvy people know what the Shockwave is and is not suited for.
Part of my frustration, not with Mossberg, or Franklin Armory, but just in general...is I'm tired of playing semantics and word games ("modern sporting rifle" etc..) when it comes to guns.
The NFA is stupid and should be circumvented at every opportunity, just on principle. But yeah, I know in the current climate, a company that wants to stay in business or avoid a PR nightmare has to handle things differently.
I think InRange may have been looking at the Shockwave from the perspective of "what about the uninformed consumers who take Mossberg at their word and buy the Shockwave as their ultimate HD weapon?"
An interviewer can be polite and still add counter comments later. They don’t have to be in your face with the firearms rep. As gun enthusiasts we should model professionalism, and be courteous to one another. God knows there are plenty of antis willing to be rude and sarcastic toward us. I think it would be irresponsible for an “analyst” to simple accept the marketing line. But Ian could have politely probed in the interview, let her say her piece and then later in the vid add his own observations and advice.
I think it would be irresponsible for an “analyst” to simple accept the marketing line.
If this was a review of an automobile, refrigerator, or some other consumer crap, that would be fine.
A firearm is a politically charged item. The analyst needs to know why it is being marketed a certain way.
WickedWillis
02-07-19, 11:07
An interviewer can be polite and still add counter comments later. They don’t have to be in your face with the firearms rep. As gun enthusiasts we should model professionalism, and be courteous to one another. God knows there are plenty of antis willing to be rude and sarcastic toward us. I think it would be irresponsible for an “analyst” to simple accept the marketing line. But Ian could have politely probed in the interview, let her say her piece and then later in the vid add his own observations and advice.
Completely agree.
MountainRaven
02-07-19, 12:29
That is called marketing bullshit.
Everyone knows its bullshit including the Mossberg lady.
What did you expect her to say?
"We came out with this product to skirt the NFA and sell short shotguns to people"
How do you think that is going to be twisted when the liberal media gets ahold of a soundbite like that? And runs a 60 Minutes episode about how Mossberg is selling "sawed off shotguns" and "exploiting a loophole in the law."
LOL.
Like they have with bump stocks?
Nobody in the industry making bump stocks ever said that they were for simulating full-auto fire, but that's what the media has run with. Believe it or not, the media and gun grabbers don't need any help from the gun industry thinking up reasons for why the gun industry is amoral, immoral, and should be lobbied out of existence.
If this was a review of an automobile, refrigerator, or some other consumer crap, that would be fine.
A firearm is a politically charged item. The analyst needs to know why it is being marketed a certain way.
No, you're right. There's absolutely no need to combat the vast amounts of horseshit information in the firearms industry. I'm sure Taurus's marketing of the Judge has totally resulted in it being banned and nobody has ever been harmed by thinking that their Taurus Judge was, as they were told by the Taurus ad material and the morons behind the sales counter, basically a 12-gauge they could fit in their pocket.
:rolleyes:
I get it. I know they have to be careful how they market stuff.
I think most firearms savvy people know what the Shockwave is and is not suited for.
Part of my frustration, not with Mossberg, or Franklin Armory, but just in general...is I'm tired of playing semantics and word games ("modern sporting rifle" etc..) when it comes to guns.
The NFA is stupid and should be circumvented at every opportunity, just on principle. But yeah, I know in the current climate, a company that wants to stay in business or avoid a PR nightmare has to handle things differently.
I think InRange may have been looking at the Shockwave from the perspective of "what about the uninformed consumers who take Mossberg at their word and buy the Shockwave as their ultimate HD weapon?"
I think that may be close to it based on a recent Forgotten Weapons. Ian mentioned being rude to a rep from a company offering a new belt fed upper. he stated the rib grabbed him while he was walking along and he figured it would be not so hot like most other belt-fed uppers, but upon further review he found it to be something new and interesting.
I still don't think they really gave the Shockwave a fair Shake by using the standard 18.5 in with standard pistol grip and while not using it in a confined space.
LOL.
Like they have with bump stocks?
Nobody in the industry making bump stocks ever said that they were for simulating full-auto fire, but that's what the media has run with. Believe it or not, the media and gun grabbers don't need any help from the gun industry thinking up reasons for why the gun industry is amoral, immoral, and should be lobbied out of existence.
A mainstream firearms manufacturer did not invent and sell bumpstocks.
No, you're right. There's absolutely no need to combat the vast amounts of horseshit information in the firearms industry. I'm sure Taurus's marketing of the Judge has totally resulted in it being banned and nobody has ever been harmed by thinking that their Taurus Judge was, as they were told by the Taurus ad material and the morons behind the sales counter, basically a 12-gauge they could fit in their pocket.
The Taurus Judge does not skirt the edge of the NFA.
Did Mossberg really come up with the Shockwave idea? I am thinking that was someone else's idea and they got Mossberg to run off a batch of 14" birds head 500s or 590s a few years ahead of the "Shockwave" by name.
MountainRaven
02-08-19, 23:22
The Taurus Judge does not skirt the edge of the NFA.
Neither do bumpstocks or pistol braces.
MorphCross
02-08-19, 23:35
Neither do bumpstocks or pistol braces.
We know that and recognize it but the GDP (generally dumb public) do not.
Part of the reason firearm education should be an annual public school course that would require parents to sign an opt out like sex ed if they protest.
Started a thread on the Reformation review done by MAC sans the Shotshow part.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?213410-MAC-on-the-Reformation&p=2708269#post2708269
Franklin Armory is the synthetic Marijuana of the gun industry. It's just *one* molecule off, but basically the same thing, only not as effective. Not really groundbreaking innovation just clever workarounds of silly laws.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Necessity is the mother of all invention.
I have no interest in their stuff, but I love that they are bringing stuff to the table.
As for the OP, I personally think putting someone on the spot at a trade show is in poor taste. Bring someone in for an interview with clean intentions. Trade shows are for displaying what you have, the market is to determine validity, not the vendor. Let it play out and see if its practical. I felt like the dude was in an audit - I'd probably keep them out myself.
MountainRaven
02-22-19, 21:31
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5pE0ZdQ8GY
So it turns out that IRTV didn't put a cap on the camera during filming at the Franklin Armory booth last year, but Karl had put down the camera while still holding the mic up.
(Yes, the video is an hour long, but they open with talking about Franklin Armory and SHOT this year, so if you want to watch just that, you can just watch that and turn it off when they move on.)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.