You didn't see the new solicitation requirements. The last one on the list:Quote:
Originally Posted by justin_247
"Must look fabulous!!"
You didn't see the new solicitation requirements. The last one on the list:Quote:
Originally Posted by justin_247
"Must look fabulous!!"
Welcome to the internet, where the hivemind will tell you what to believe for the week but it's constantly changing. I ignore most of that stuff. If it's not a fact then it's not worth getting riled up about.Quote:
Originally Posted by justin_247
I don't think the BCM and COLT scenarios contradict. There was a guy worried about cosmetics, so the suggestion was NOT to order a BCM online, but rather to go to a gun store and pick out a pretty gun. The message only changed because the guy's requirements weren't quality related, but rather display case/coffee table admireability. Silly as hell... but the guys recommended based on his wants.
I've personally never seen a BCM or COLT that looked anything short of excellent.
I'm not sure what the DD issue is. I'm guessing the Anodize miss-match between the mounting ring and the rest of the hand guard. ??
I bought a 6920 maybe two years ago online. When I picked it up there were multiple dings in the finish on the upper and lower that appear to have been touched up with something, I'm assuming it's Aluma-black. There are also grind marks on the selector stop under the anodizing. But, it's a Colt. I've never bought a Colt for the "fit and finish" only the quality of the parts so it doesn't bother me. That being said, my 6920-R was perfect, as was the 6960 upper I bought from Brownells to go on the 6920-R lower after I sold the factory upper.Quote:
Originally Posted by markm
Quote:
Originally Posted by markm
The goldfinger treatment isn’t the main issue, though I confess I don’t see much need to it in any form of combat environment. How can we say that black isn’t Tactical enough, then go with a bling machine?
I understand the anodizing issues, but I’m not sure why we have gone from dark brown, to king Midas.
The actual issue to me is that it looks like the rail simply had the sides partially chopped off. For a “new product”, that leaves a lot to be desired. Functional improvements in the rail to increase strength, rigidity, ease of installation or similar areas are things I would expect to see. I am a large fan of the RIS II rail, but it appears the military has moved on. I would have expected DD to come up with something entirely different in an effort to appeal to the HSLD client base.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justin_247
The above post I just made should help explain a bit ...
Looks like it's missing some perfectly good rails.Quote:
Originally Posted by markm