View Full Version : Maybe Bushmaster is listening
So i visited my local Sportsmans earlier today and i asked what's new and the counter guys said they just received some of the Ilion NY Bushmasters (ARA sn# prefix) and i opened the couple up and to my amazement the gas key was properly staked and they had the black extractor inserts installed. Maybe after years they are finally listening to the shooting masses and are trying to improve their product.
TonyTacoma
08-04-11, 15:48
So i visited my local Sportsmans earlier today and i asked what's new and the counter guys said they just received some of the Ilion NY Bushmasters (ARA sn# prefix) and i opened the couple up and to my amazement the gas key was properly staked and they had the black extractor inserts installed. Maybe after years they are finally listening to the shooting masses and are trying to improve their product.
Check the gp
They are going to need to do ALOT more than that. If someone gets their hands on one or has any information about their updated specs, please post it.
As a side note, I am stil waiting for a response from Windham Weaponry.............
Maybe after years they are finally listening to the shooting masses
What are you talking about?! Bushmaster has always been listening to the shooting masses ... just the misinformed masses. But seriously, that would be cool if they produced a top-notch product. Was the bolt MPI'd/HPT'd?
Eurodriver
08-04-11, 19:01
An extractor spring or gas key staking does not a milspec rifle make.
Barrel steel, 5.56 chamber, HP/MPI testing, twist rate, FA Bolt carriers are all equally important.
My M-4 Bushy has keep'd up with all other big name brand M-4s and ARs in class no ftf no fte and it eats what ever I feed it and I bought it in 2004 after the sunset .All I did was stacked the gas key's and added a BCM extr. O-ring kit and I do not know how many rounds I have in it now and I will stacke my life on it when I need it :neo: :dance3: :jester:
If Bushmaster is making good on a poor product, then good for them. A day late and a dollar short, the informed consumer will decide.
My M-4 Bushy has keep'd up with all other big name brand M-4s and ARs in class no ftf no fte and it eats what ever I feed it and I bought it in 2004 after the sunset .All I did was stacked the gas key's and added a BCM extr. O-ring kit and I do not know how many rounds I have in it now and I will stacke my life on it when I need it :neo: :dance3: :jester:
I just hope you don't have to stake your life on your spell check
Considering the fact that a new Colt 6920 costs within $100 of what a similar Bushy goes for they'd better be making a LOT more changes/upgrades than that.
Considering the fact that a new Colt 6920 costs within $100 of what a similar Bushy goes for they'd better be making a LOT more changes/upgrades than that.
Very solid point.
TonyTacoma
08-04-11, 22:59
This thread is begging for a lock
wolf_walker
08-04-11, 23:11
Not that it's a defense of lesser outfits, but I imagine it costs Colt a hell of a lot less to make a rifle than it does a lot of people. You wouldn't think bushmaster would be one of them long as they have been doing it one way or another, but still. Good to be king I guess.
I personally enjoy seeing a company trying to better themselves and trying to improve the product. I also noticed that the three NY bushy's all had MP stamped on the barrel. Also according to bushmaster's catalog they are all hammer forged from the highest grade of 4150 steel. So i think it's a a start. I'm not saying they are now a top tier by any means but they might move up a couple spots form where they were.
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-05-11, 00:08
Tx,
When have been through this before when you tried to blow smoke up our ass by claiming that BM made M4's for the military.
THEY DO! For the Georgian Army (http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/5837.html) !
Has anyone ever figured out the cost difference of a non-spec vs spec rifle? It can't be too much if a Colt and Bushy are that close in price.
Was the bolt MPI'd/HPT'd?
I did not see it stamped on the bolt anywhere so i cannot say one way or another. But the barrels were stamped MP.
Tx,
When have been through this before when you tried to blow smoke up our ass by claiming that BM made M4's for the military. In addition to that per your own post many months ago- I have had it for 4yrs and have put a lot of rounds though it with no trouble like 1,000 rds
1000 rounds in 4 years is nothing. Myself and many others shoot that in one month. Some even more in carbine course.
You are extolling the virtues of "one BM" and we are talking about the thousands of them that have been in circulation. So please keep the sillyness out of this and stay with the facts.
My M-4 Bushy has keep'd up with all other big name brand M-4s and ARs in class no ftf no fte and it eats what ever I feed it and I bought it in 2004 after the sunset .All I did was stacked the gas key's and added a BCM extr. O-ring kit and I do not know how many rounds I have in it now and I will stacke my life on it when I need it :neo: :dance3: :jester:
My M-4 Bushy has keep'd up with all other big name brand M-4s and ARs in class no ftf no fte and it eats what ever I feed it and I bought it in 2004 after the sunset .All I did was stacked the gas key's and added a BCM extr. O-ring kit and I do not know how many rounds I have in it now and I will stacke my life on it when I need it :neo: :dance3: :jester:
Class? What class was this?
And, I guess this needs to be repeated. For something to be statistically significant, you need to have an adequate sample size. The problem with personal anecdotes is that frequently, one is dealing with a sample size of exactly one.
No one here (at least most) are saying that 100% of Bushmasters are going to fall apart after a few rounds. What the detractors with an actual basis for their position are factoring in are trends and numerous examples encountered in stores, classes, ranges, LE departments, etc.
This is a weather vs. climate issue.
turdbocharged
08-05-11, 09:05
From my experience, and that of my wife who's taken college courses on statistics, it's mostly BS anyways. Regardless of the subject matter it's too easy for the testers to effect the outcome of their stats. Too easy to make it say whatever you want it to say. That's why I never believe any stats regarding anything ever. LOL kinda cynical I know.
Half the time I think nobody even does true statistical sampling anymore, I feel that half the news reports just google their results and copy and paste them for the masses.
I don't care anymore who buys what really. It's all what ya like, and I prefer my Colt.
There's lairs, damn liars (politicians) ,and statisticians.
THEY DO! For the Georgian Army (http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/5837.html) !
Has anyone ever figured out the cost difference of a non-spec vs spec rifle? It can't be too much if a Colt and Bushy are that close in price.
Wait!!!! Georgia has an Army?!?!? :D
Do they plan on invading Florida, Alabama, South Carolina or Tennessee?
...
...
Has anyone ever figured out the cost difference of a non-spec vs spec rifle? It can't be too much if a Colt and Bushy are that close in price.
===========================================
It's kind of hard to come up with a price but the best reference is the $100 that Stag Arms is charging for their Plus Package Upgrade (http://www.stagarms.com/information.php?info_id=13).
So, whether this is an accurate price assumption or not, I haven't seen a better "reference" for the cost difference of low-tier versus mil-spec grade any place else. Does anyone?
So, adding $100 to upgrade a discounted Stag or a Bushmaster would put their price almost identical to a discounted Colt 6920 ... now the question is, which would you rather have?
I know my answer... but I've never been a jaga person.
But maybe it's just me...
.
I have had it for 4yrs and have put a lot of rounds though it with no trouble like 1,000 rds
Note, also, that in that quote, Mr. Grebner is saying 4 years, and in the above, he's saying since 2004.
Being bad with numbers just sorta happens with some folks. Peachy, no real drama.
Making stuff up, however, is a decision not unlike the decision to have a child; the results are that you have to take care of it if you want it to continue to survive. If one can't even remember their own BS, they should either get better about keeping track of their previously-uttered BS for the sake of continuity....or just stop.
Is "Windham" what the former, original owner of Bushmaster is calling the new company he's trying to start up in the original factory in Maine?
outrider627
08-05-11, 12:17
Is "Windham" what the former, original owner of Bushmaster is calling the new company he's trying to start up in the original factory in Maine?
Yep. Bushmaster 2.0 with a new name. They already got a website up and running. Windham is ready to start pumping out those HBAR carbines that everyone seems to want these days.
polydeuces
08-05-11, 12:45
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=85750
;)
If true of very encouraging sign. I've never been a huge fan of colt myself due to their practices in the civilian market in the 90s.
Personal matters aside the more people match the high quality specs the better Off we are as consumers.
Also as they said in the 80s "trust but verify"
It would be nice to see that. I will never buy another bm or any other manufacture for that matter. I would rather just build them with the parts that I want in it. With that said I have one bm that I have put about 6000 rounds with little to no problems (mag failure but that's not on the rifle) of course the only thing that's bm on my rifle is the barrel and receivers
Tx,
When have been through this before when you tried to blow smoke up our ass by claiming that BM made M4's for the military. In addition to that per your own post many months ago- I have had it for 4yrs and have put a lot of rounds though it with no trouble like 1,000 rds
1000 rounds in 4 years is nothing. Myself and many others shoot that in one month. Some even more in carbine course.
You are extolling the virtues of "one BM" and we are talking about the thousands of them that have been in circulation. So please keep the sillyness out of this and stay with the facts.
No I said they made some M-16s for the military during Desert storm apparently you where to young to now this back in the 90's and when I bought my bushy I did put 1,000 rnds through it. Now I have been in classes where we go through ammo like crazy . OH yes my spell check does not work :neo:
No I said they made some M-16s for the military during Desert storm apparently you where to young to now this back in the 90's and when I bought my bushy I did put 1,000 rnds through it. Now I have been in classes where we go through ammo like crazy . OH yes my spell check does not work :neo:
Care to share a link to the contract? After all Government contracts are public record.
Also it is generally poor form to throw around insults, especially at one of the more respected and experience members of this board.
polydeuces
08-05-11, 22:21
My M-4 Bushy has keep'd up with all other big name brand M-4s and ARs in class no ftf no fte and it eats what ever I feed it and I bought it in 2004 after the sunset .All I did was stacked the gas key's and added a BCM extr. O-ring kit and I do not know how many rounds I have in it now and I will stacke my life on it when I need it :neo: :dance3: :jester:
Just for dat this treat should be lokked.
Befor it gats reelly bad
:p;):D:o:):(:confused::jester::bad::sad::ph34r:
wolf_walker
08-06-11, 00:19
I second that, and don't think for a moment that they would not start those practices again. Only up until this past year with the SP6920 have they started to show any respect to the civilian market again. All the "LE or Military use only" jargon carved on the side of the rifles up until then was just another show of political correctness.
Agree, very much.
DeltaSierra
08-06-11, 01:18
First off, I am waiting impatiently for the link to the information on the contract that Scrubmaster had with the US Military...
Second, I have yet to see what the problem is with Colt stamping their rifles with the "LE and Gov't use only"... Who cares what the lower receiver has stamped on it? A civilian can still buy one, so what is the big deal? As long as they produce a quality weapon, I couldn't care less what the company chooses to stamp on the weapon...
Suwannee Tim
08-06-11, 07:02
........and to my amazement the gas key was properly staked.....
I have examined dozens of Bushmasters and every one had a properly staked gas key. You think Bushmaster never staked a gas key? The Bushmaster haters might have you believe this but Bushmaster corrected that problem some time ago. By the way, Bushmaster is gone. These Ilion "Bushmasters" are essentially Remingtons. The folks who did the stupid stuff at Bushmaster are not at Ilion, they are in Windham starting a new company.
Suwannee Tim
08-06-11, 07:09
Not that it's a defense of lesser outfits, but I imagine it costs Colt a hell of a lot less to make a rifle than it does a lot of people. You wouldn't think bushmaster would be one of them long as they have been doing it one way or another, but still. Good to be king I guess.
I am guessing that Colt is unionized, I'd be very surprised to find they are not and I know they operate in a high cost region, Connecticut, their cost may be higher than others.
wolf_walker
08-06-11, 07:27
I am guessing that Colt is unionized, I'd be very surprised to find they are not and I know they operate in a high cost region, Connecticut, their cost may be higher than others.
Union thing didn't occur to me, that's a wrench in the works no doubt. Hmm...
I know what you said. FYI- I was in the Army during that time frame 09/86-09/91 and then 3 years IRR.
The BM/Military bullshit story is just that. I am 99.9% certain that no Bushmaster rifle. carbine has ever been deployed or actively used by the U.S military.
You remind me alot of someone named sandman571 or something like that who attempted to convince people that U.S Army Rangers and Special Forces were using Bushmaster. It's a load of crap and didn't happen.
When you Ass-u-me you make an ass of you, not me.
No I said they made some M-16s for the military during Desert storm apparently you where to young to now this back in the 90's and when I bought my bushy I did put 1,000 rnds through it. Now I have been in classes where we go through ammo like crazy . OH yes my spell check does not work :neo:
wolf_walker
08-06-11, 08:31
Second, I have yet to see what the problem is with Colt stamping their rifles with the "LE and Gov't use only"... Who cares what the lower receiver has stamped on it? A civilian can still buy one, so what is the big deal? As long as they produce a quality weapon, I couldn't care less what the company chooses to stamp on the weapon...
I'm not so annoyed about that as I am the physical differences they made along the way. I've been told the ATF was in-house and all that. With the LE markings, it reads just like "civilians may not own this" to me. And that annoys me more than a goofy logo.
Considering the fact that a new Colt 6920 costs within $100 of what a similar Bushy goes for they'd better be making a LOT more changes/upgrades than that.
Yup. I own a BM and it's been reliable and trouble free, but had I known then what I know now (thanx in large part to M4C and other sources) I would not have purchased the BM. It's also not been a "hard use" gun, so issues may show themselves at higher rnd counts.
n = 1 observation/experience there
Not the worst M4 out there to be sure from what I understand, but for the $$$, or a tad more, would not be my choice now.
Oh well...:cool:
Care to share a link to the contract? After all Government contracts are public record.
Also it is generally poor form to throw around insults, especially at one of the more respected and experience members of this board.
X2. I've been working on gov't guns for a lot of years and all of the M16s I've seen were: Colt, FN and one H&R (it should have been in a museum)...
Just FYI - the "simulated" guns in the EST2000 are Bushmasters.
So there. Bushmaster can make a fine "simulated" rifle.
As far as Bushmaters fixing the staking "years ago", as late as 2009, I've seen contractor Bushmasters coming with unstaked keys from the factory.
bakercountyboy
08-06-11, 10:13
I seen a youtube vid not too long ago. Where a guy had sent his ACR in to BM because he was having some malfunctions. When he spoke to the "gunsmith" at BM they told him they polished his feed ramp and that HE SHOULD NOT BE USING 5.56 AMMO IN THE ACR!!! that the acr was not designed for 5.56? but the gun even says 5.56 on it. after i seen that vid i knew i would never buy a BM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAqTpz_B_Ew
Thanks for that info. You are correct about the stakings. I saw a BM just a few months back at a local store that still did not have staked castle nut. I wasn't able to look at the BCG.
In any case the staking are the least of the shortcomings.
Just FYI - the "simulated" guns in the EST2000 are Bushmasters.
So there. Bushmaster can make a fine "simulated" rifle.
As far as Bushmaters fixing the staking "years ago", as late as 2009, I've seen contractor Bushmasters coming with unstaked keys from the factory.
SpaceWrangler
08-06-11, 13:08
I have examined dozens of Bushmasters and every one had a properly staked gas key. You think Bushmaster never staked a gas key? The Bushmaster haters might have you believe this but Bushmaster corrected that problem some time ago.
Uh... no. I was in Clyde Armory a couple days ago and looked specifically at the staking on several Bushmasters in the store. The Gas Key staking looked like it had been done with a small screwdriver, and the Castle Nuts weren't staked at all.
What worries me ... if they're cutting corners on things that can so easily be corrected (such as staking), what else are they cutting corners on that a buyer can't see and easily repair?
It's just not worth it. You can't make something good out of a piece of cheese. Buy a good rifle.
Considering the fact that a new Colt 6920 costs within $100 of what a similar Bushy goes for they'd better be making a LOT more changes/upgrades than that.
just kinda confused on this cause the cheapest i could fine a LE6920 was $1199 while the similar bushy was $899. Maybe my math is wrong but to me thats a little more the $100
just kinda confused on this cause the cheapest i could fine a LE6920 was $1199 while the similar bushy was $899. Maybe my math is wrong but to me thats a little more the $100
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=84821&highlight=sp6920
See post # 10 from Grant, I'm not sure if this is still good but it's worth checking with him.
It's for the SP6920 but I believe it's exactly the same except for the rollmarks.
I have examined dozens of Bushmasters and every one had a properly staked gas key.
Can you post photos? It's possible that one member's definition of "properly" is different than others, but photos would take care of that.
Like others posting in the thread, I've had a number of new-production BMs in my hands. Little seems to have changed from Windham.
Yep. Bushmaster 2.0 with a new name. They already got a website up and running. Windham is ready to start pumping out those HBAR carbines that everyone seems to want these days.
A couple of news clips on the new windham arms....:(
Looks like they will not be test firing their guns:
http://www.pressherald.com/news/New-rifle-company-takes-over-Bushmaster-plant.html
"Neighbors of the Windham Weaponry, who went to the town to complain about excessive noise emanating from the test-firing range in the Grondin pit behind Bushmaster, will be happy to hear that the new company has no intention of testing weapons in Windham. Faraday said, "We have no intention to use the test range. We will not be doing that."
http://www.pressherald.com/news/New-rifle-company-takes-over-Bushmaster-plant.html
As for BM my guess is they will just continue to follow the same guide lines that they have always followed. Why change? There are many, many gun consumers that never look at a site like M4C or ARFCOM for info. They will just go with what they see in their favorite gun rag or on what the guy behind the count has to say.
.
GrandPooba
08-06-11, 15:41
I have a bushmaster bought in December of 2010. BCG was not completely staked. One screw had a good, deep stake. The other was barely touched. Also, the castle nut was not staked. I fixed both myself with a center punch. I also upgraded the bolt to a BCM and added an H buffer. The original bolt came with a non-mil spec extractor spring.
I guess I lucked out with the chamber. I know a lot of them are inconsistent. I have now put down around 4000 rounds of 5.56mm NATO with no issues with extraction/overpressure.
I have examined dozens of Bushmasters and every one had a properly staked gas key. You think Bushmaster never staked a gas key? The Bushmaster haters might have you believe this but Bushmaster corrected that problem some time ago.
I bought a new BM in approx July '06. It's BCG was not properly staked. I called BM to ask about this condition and I was told "it is either staked or not", they offered to stake it if I sent it back. Rather than risk another 'attempt' at staking by BM, I staked it myself. (BTW, the RE nut was not staked at all).
They also, at that time, said they were using some type of a pneumatic jig set up that staked all four positions at the same time. There was obvious evidence of this attempted staking but it was completely ineffective. This was my experience from 5 years ago, take it FWIW, but I will not give them another chance. Ever.
A close friend bought another BM from me that is probably 2-4 years older than the one I described here, next time I get the chance I will review it's BCG to check it's staking.
First off, I am waiting impatiently for the link to the information on the contract that Scrubmaster had with the US Military...
Second, I have yet to see what the problem is with Colt stamping their rifles with the "LE and Gov't use only"... Who cares what the lower receiver has stamped on it? A civilian can still buy one, so what is the big deal? As long as they produce a quality weapon, I couldn't care less what the company chooses to stamp on the weapon...
http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm
FWIW
SpaceWrangler
08-06-11, 18:34
http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm
FWIW
Internet stories and heresay, but not definitive proof. The photos are not of US DoD-issued military Bushmasters, but of a rifle "similar to a GI Bushmaster". Except the barrel is 1/9, making it not mil-spec and therefore not a GI issue item.
Fail.
With a little time, anybody can find an internet article to back up any claim they please. A comfy chair, high-speed internet, and Google do not an expert make.
Cold hard facts, please, not Googled internet rumors.
This proves what? This is your proof?
vvvvvvvvvvv
:haha:
"Like" the M16A2 M4 carbine used in Desert Storm????
WTF is that weak shit?
And WTF is an "M16A2 M4 Carbine???
Also "All Bushmaster E2S are the same as ITS Full Auto carbines.
Not milspec; Bushmasters own, completely proprietary and shittily made full auto carbines. I've carried one of those Bushmaster POS full auto carbines and had it fail on me, in a firefight.
Might wanna work on a) Your choice of really shitty tinfoil hat wearing magazines and b) Your logic chain.
http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab274/tx318/005-1.jpghttp://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab274/tx318/004-3.jpghttp://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab274/tx318/006-3.jpg:haha:
Just out of curiosity why do you have an old magazine from 1994?
I'm pretty sure that issue of "Survival" isn't going to be collectable anytime soon.
Don't trust what you read in a magazine add.
False claims are all over the place. Hydroxycut will make you thin and if you rub this jelly on your dick it will get bigger. Oh yea, and the Taurus Judge is the bs SD handgun ever made.
DeltaSierra
08-06-11, 21:17
http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm
FWIW
That is far from what I would consider to be proof, but what would I know...
Bushmaster weapons have NEVER been carried by the US Armed Forces. While various LE agencies have carried Bushmaster, that is in no way to be confused with a weapon having been issued to any branch of the military...
What's next, citations from the Weekly World News?
Those few-dozen were bid-samples for the solicitation; they didn't pass testing, else those numbers would be in, oh, say, the tens of thousands.
The Bear's bodyguards were private contractors, so they used whatever weapons their company bought.
You've got dudes involved with the procurement of the gov't's weapons and equipment telling you that BM's never produced for the gov't. Figure it out, and stop trying to justify your emotional, unsupportable desire for BM to enjoy status it has never had.
Make a Freedom of Information Act request, instead of pulling articles found next to ones about Bat Boy all grown up and how far along he is working on his Rhodes scholarship.
That is far from what I would consider to be proof, but what would I know...
Bushmaster weapons have NEVER been carried by the US Armed Forces. While various LE agencies have carried Bushmaster, that is in no way to be confused with a weapon having been issued to any branch of the military...
http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=3476
Is this real or not?
If it is not....I am sorry for posting.
But...the BM is FAR from a POS.
Looks like all those that have tried to prove you wrong have: .... FAILED, BIG TIME ....
Thanks for the link. Waiting to see how this official info get's discredited or disappears.
It is what it is.
If it is not correct,please correct it.
DeltaSierra
08-06-11, 22:20
http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=3476
Is this real or not?
If it is not....I am sorry for posting.
A contract is great, but that doesn't mean anything, until you can show proof that these weapons were issued to troops, you have not disproved what I said.
Note: I have just spent a good chunk of time researching this, and aside from that one link, I can find NO evidence of these weapons being issued, or in fact, any evidence that that contract was ever filled.
I intend to get to the bottom of this once and for all, and will try to contact DoD on Monday....
If I have to use a FOIA request, I am going to get to the bottom of this issue, so that I don't have to listen to the nonsense....
This has turned into something it should not have.
It doesn't change the fact,BM was awarded a contract.
Yeah, and none of the objects of that contract were put in the hands of US personnel, which would not have been allowed due to the specifications required for that to happen.
Mil-spec need not be met for the stuff we hand out to the booger-eaters.
Damn, I was worried for a moment, there! Thank god for the FBO.gov access....
So this means nothing?
http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=3476
QuietShootr
08-06-11, 22:34
Holy shit!
For the record: No, man, you ain't wrong, THAT'S a valid source.
I'd be interested in seeing if the contract was executed and the weapons fielded after the contract was awarded, but that sure as blazes changes things.
If they were fielded, it's sure as hell gonna get hard to talk with both of my feet jammed in my mouth.
EDIT: They went to Iraq and Georgia. The country, not the state. Whew!!
Yup, those are the Georgian BMs that the Russians burned in that famous picture. No US soldier carried the weapons from that P.O.
http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=3476
Is this real or not?
If it is not....I am sorry for posting.
Looks like all those that have tried to prove you wrong have: .... FAILED, BIG TIME ....
Thanks for the link. Waiting to see how this official info get's discredited or disappears.
Please don't label me as a bushmaster "fanboy"I HAVE defended them.I do not live in a hostile environment.My BM has served me well.It will NOT shoot steel case ammo.You know what that tells me?Don't try to shoot steel case ammo.I have a 6920 and I make no illusions that it is the tougher gun.
Are you guys ****ing dense or something. The govt bought them, then supplied them to third shit hole countries. If you love your BM so much go fondle them and make yourselves feel justified. BTW, there is an older thread somewhere here that has a shit truck load of pics of the Russians destroying very large piles of BMs they captured from the Georgians.
BM is what it is, period. They are not first rate firearms, no matter how well you love them. Check out the knowledge threads. This is not to say they will blow up in your face, or that people cannot be served by them. They are more failure and breakage prone than the better made carbines. This not my opinion, it has been well proven by many well recognized trainers.
I think this has been explained, if you fail to get it that's on you. I think you would fit in better on TOS. I see this thread getting locked very soon.
Dude...get laid man.
Are there better fire arms than BM? Sure.
Please don't wreck your night because a BM served someone well.
Let it go...It seems there are as many BM haters as there are BM lovers.If a BM works for some,let it go.
I thought this was M4carbine.net, a straight shooter.WAS BM AWARDED A MILITARY CONTRACT OR NOT?
Yes or no and be done with it.
Why is this thread still breathing?
Put in a fresh manpon and take it to PM.
QuietShootr
08-06-11, 23:00
http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm
FWIW
That article is full of herp and derp.
Please don't skirt around the truth because when you do...You sound like Obama.
QuietShootr
08-06-11, 23:04
Looks like all those that have tried to prove you wrong have: .... FAILED, BIG TIME ....
Thanks for the link. Waiting to see how this official info get's discredited or disappears.
If you search, you will find that ARDEC has bought a shitload of Ruger pistols too.
They aren't for US use, you pinheads.
jklaughrey
08-06-11, 23:05
Looks like all those that have tried to prove you wrong have: .... FAILED, BIG TIME ....
Thanks for the link. Waiting to see how this official info get's discredited or disappears.
Seems like you are just baiting for a fight, but let us be real here. Do you have explicit data where that procurement went or in what capacity it was used. Could have been training rifles for Nat'l Guard units and never even been used in a combat environment. No fail here, but a little objectivity would go a long way from all.
What ****ing difference does it make? If the gov't did contract with shrubmaster it wasn't for our soldiers. At any rate it doesn't change the fact that BM is a documented minimalist know for using incorrect materials and taking unacceptable shortcuts.
DID the US contract BM?
They aren't for US use, you pinheads.
LOL, I love it.
If you search, you will find that ARDEC has bought a shitload of Ruger pistols too.
They aren't for US use, you pinheads.
I think (correct me if I am wrong) He was talking about BM not EVER being adopted by the US military.
Did BM have a contract or not?
http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=3476
Is this real or not?
If it is not....I am sorry for posting.
Holy shit!
For the record: No, man, you ain't wrong, THAT'S a valid source.
I'd be interested in seeing if the contract was executed and the weapons fielded after the contract was awarded, but that sure as blazes changes things.
If they were fielded, it's sure as hell gonna get hard to talk with both of my feet jammed in my mouth.
EDIT: They went to Iraq and Georgia. The country, not the state. Whew!!
QuietShootr
08-06-11, 23:11
I think (correct me if I am wrong) He was talking about BM not EVER being adopted by the US military.
Did BM have a contract or not?
NO. ARDEC is the agency that buys guns that we give to other places. That's why they buy so much weird shit.
Holy shit!
For the record: No, man, you ain't wrong, THAT'S a valid source.
I'd be interested in seeing if the contract was executed and the weapons fielded after the contract was awarded, but that sure as blazes changes things.
If they were fielded, it's sure as hell gonna get hard to talk with both of my feet jammed in my mouth.
I wonder how many of these were supplied to Georgia, Iraq, Afgan etc etc.
Damn, now BM is a tier 1 manufacter I guess I'll have to sell my Colt and BCMs and replace them with first rate BMs.:alcoholic::no::haha:
It doesn't change the fact,BM was awarded a contract.
MountainRaven
08-06-11, 23:15
:rolleyes:
Look. THIS is how this shit works: http://www.stoppingpower.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7536 any time we buy guns for some piss-ant turd world military, ARDEC lets the contract. They bought a shitload of Arsenal AKs for the Iraqis too.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/318510_RUGER_gets_Army_contract_for_handguns_.html
Am I alone in finding it unusual that we buy second-rate AR-15s for our allies but spring for the good stuff when we're buying them AKs?
QuietShootr
08-06-11, 23:20
It doesn't change the fact,BM was awarded a contract.
:rolleyes:
Look. THIS is how this shit works: http://www.stoppingpower.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7536 any time we buy guns for some piss-ant turd world military, ARDEC lets the contract. They bought a shitload of Arsenal AKs for the Iraqis too.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/318510_RUGER_gets_Army_contract_for_handguns_.html
Indulge me...Was BM awarded a military contract or not?
Yes or no?
Bottom line....and I walk away.
The truth always rises to the top.
I've seen 30 Bushmaster's in country. They were given to my unit from our JTF HQ to outfit the ANA we were training. Our armorer checked them out. No, they did not have properly staked gas keys and he had to do all of them himself.
Sure, they had a contract, but as mentioned earlier, so do Ruger and plenty of other oddball companies.
DeltaSierra
08-06-11, 23:24
Mods, have we had enough yet? Anyone?
It occurs to me that the issue has been sufficiently beat to death, and it has been successfully shown that no Shrubmaster weapons were ever issued to any US troops....
Now I think it is time for this "dead horse beating" thread to get locked....
I've seen 30 Bushmaster's in country. They were given to my unit from our JTF HQ to outfit the ANA we were training. Our armorer checked them out. No, they did not have properly staked gas keys and he had to do all of them himself.
Sure, they had a contract, but as mentioned earlier, so do Ruger and plenty of other oddball companies.
My posts keep going way back in the thread...
Which is more durable...a M9 or a Glock 17
Subjective or truth?
QuietShootr
08-06-11, 23:27
Indulge me...Was BM awarded a military contract or not?
Yes or no?
Bottom line....and I walk away.
Was BM purchased for the US military? No. Did the US Government buy some BMs on contract for somebody, yes. That is in no way comparable to buying them for US forces.
So GLOCKS suck now too?:confused:
It doesn't change the fact,BM was awarded a contract.
Are you guys ****ing dense or something. The govt bought them, then supplied them to third shit hole countries. If you love your BM so much go fondle them and make yourselves feel justified. BTW, there is an older thread somewhere here that has a shit truck load of pics of the Russians destroying very large piles of BMs they captured from the Georgians.
BM is what it is, period. They are not first rate firearms, no matter how well you love them. Check out the knowledge threads. This is not to say they will blow up in your face, or that people cannot be served by them. They are more failure and breakage prone than the better made carbines. This not my opinion, it has been well proven by many well recognized trainers.
I think this has been explained, if you fail to get it that's on you. I think you would fit in better on TOS. I see this thread getting locked very soon.
http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=3476
So this means NOTHING.
I need my facts straight.
Indulge me...Was BM awarded a military contract or not?
Yes or no?
Bottom line....and I walk away.
Like QuietShootr said, not for the US Military. Bushmaster DOES NOT meet US Milspec, period. Again.
SWATcop556
08-06-11, 23:58
No this thread is done now before someone gets thumped.
Whiskey
Tango
Foxtrot
Here is some Bushmaster love for ya:D
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=10841&highlight=georgia
https://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-18134.html
feel free to search more for yourself.
Why is this thread still breathing?
Put in a fresh manpon and take it to PM.
How did this end up on the 4th page...what the ****.
The truth always rises to the top.
DID the US contract BM?
For and on behalf of the Georgian military, same as Glocks for Iraq (and probably Arsenal AKs and possibly even BMs as well). Again, BM does not meet US Milspecs and is not in US service. My knephew just returned from A-stan, he trained with and was issued Colts and FNs, never effin BMs.
We would all most likely be suprised if we knew what all our govt has supplied and to whom.
Mods, have we had enough yet? Anyone?
Alright BM's are a pos...all I want to know is....did BM get a contract or not?
Do glocks suck too?
WOW
Alright BM's are a pos...all I want to know is....did BM get a contract or not?
Do glocks suck too?
WOW
Glocks have been sucking somewhat as of late, check out our hangun forums, you'll see. In fact do a lot of searching, you'd be suprised what you would learn. Speaking of which, stop posting for a while and check out the links provided, you'll see where all the "contracted" BMs went. There is a lot of information here to educate yourself with on many different levels. Search and ye shall find.
Glocks have been sucking somewhat as of late, check out our hangun forums, you'll see. In fact do a lot of searching, you'd be suprised what you would learn. Speaking of which, stop posting for a while and check out the links provided, you'll see where all the "contracted" BMs went. There is a lot of information here to educate yourself with on many different levels. Search and ye shall find.
1911 guy?I would put a Glock against any handgun.....but I digress...bottom line...was BM awarded a contract or not....answer and let this thread die.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.