Originally Posted by
Byron
I never really understood that sentiment when it comes to a piece like this. I'm not trying to pick on you, it's just that your quote perfectly sums up my confusion.
In my mind, the primary value of a tool is that it functions. If a tool does not work, or does not work reliably, it has little to no value. So far, the people who are speaking out about the great value of these guns (including those links to other forums), are mostly speaking of their aesthetic value.
By my count, we have two posters so far with trigger time on one of these guns (unless I mistakenly glazed over others). One had 1,000 rounds without problems before passing the gun off. One, who purchased his more recently, discovered major malfunctions (of a dangerous nature) in the FCG when he was just into his first magazine.
A tiny sample size for this particular gun, sure, but doesn't exactly fill me with confidence or speak out about their value. Is CMMG claiming to have test fired these weapons before sending them to customers? You'd think that if they were actually testing them, they'd notice SpacemanSpiff's weapon was doubling.
So in my mind, a carbine that works but costs more still "beats the price" of a carbine that costs less but doesn't work. I really don't care if a gun is covered in dings: they will get there eventually. I'd rather have a scratched up, dented, ugly carbine that costs more but functions perfectly than a cheaper, prettier carbine that may or may not function.