I wish them the best. They are entering the market at a bad time, but if they get their shit together and start making weapons IAW the TDP, they may just stand a chance.
Printable View
I wish them the best. They are entering the market at a bad time, but if they get their shit together and start making weapons IAW the TDP, they may just stand a chance.
Good to hear, hope they shoot for high quality. I have two BM's that I got in the late 90's. I'd had no trouble with them, though over the past couple years have gradually upgraded them to the point where there's not much original BM left other than what's stamped on the side of the reciever. Now they're outfitted with full BCM uppers and the lower parts have been swapped with BCM also. Both are running wonderfully.
If they hold true to statements like this below, then they have a prayer and a good chance of success. They apparently will be offering many new lines as well.. For their sake and there employees sake i hope they do and produce a good quality AR. I own a BM from 2003 and it meet most of the spec standards from M4 feed ramps to MP tested barrel etc. Commercial stock and buffer tube but that doesn't change or effect the AR's performance in any way. Most of the gun has now been swapped out with new parts now, but it had only had about 3500 + rds through it with minimal wear and tear showing. Compared to the C7 and C8 I got my hands on it seemed very well made at the time. The last Colt armorer(8 Months Ago) that looked at my rifle clearly stated it was very close to military grade minus the commercial stock buffer tube and semi-auto only lower. But all those parts have been swapped out as i mentioned before. I took it too the range recently and it fired like a dream, but I have Gieselle trigger, Spikes Nickel Boron coated BCG and Larue buffer spring in their to name a few changes and it fired like a dream. Of course all the magpul goodness is on there to with KAC ras as well, Trijicon TA with Larue mount etc.
{The team at Windham Weaponry is committed to building the highest quality AR platform firearms, and to providing the absolute best customer service and support that you expect and deserve. Our firearms meet or exceed the most current industry standards.
Windham Weaponry's attention to detail is second to none with our use of the highest quality barrel steel, castings and forgings; extensive quality control program; and our highly experienced employees. Rather than cut corners to save money, we work to improve our rifles to meet or exceed your expectations.}
Also just meeting that charts requirements doesn't mean you have a quality rifle, remember the type of steel that is used is also very key as well. Any company can stamp whatever on the rifle MPI/MP tested etc without actually doing any of it or meeting the standard. Most Shooters don't shoot their rifles enough to ever reach failure points.
Allow me to address a little "dezinformatsiya".
Bushmaster barrels and bolts are not individually HP/MPI tested. Even though all barrels are stamped B MP. It is well known that at best they batch test.
Any "Colt Armorer" who looked at your Bushy and made a statement like that is an idiot (yes I said it) and needs to have his head examined. You cannot simply look at an AR and say it is "milspec". You have to know what materials were used, what testing was done, etc...
Last time I checked a fairly new model Bushamster carbine they were still doing a crappy stake job on the bolt carrier and they were still not staking their castle nuts. This is the simplest of tasks. So without that being done, there is no way it can be compared to "milspec".
We won't even talk about their buffers......
Here is a simple task- look at the chart. Use the Colt 6920 or M4 and look at all the different specs and then compare it to your or any other Bushamster. Then come back and tell us that it's almost "milspec".
My BM was not a new model, If i remember correctly I purchased it around late 2003 early 2004, gas key were clearly staked "decently"many of these things you can see by eye. It had all the markings like MP tested barrel etc, does it mean it actually was or was just batch tested? Good question...Secondly the buffer stock etc were taken of years ago now, I showed him that from what i have in my spare parts bin, which any one can tell was commercial.
Judging by eye it was assembled well, I have seen many Bushmasters since then that do not meet up to my own, hence where i think there quality seriously dropped off, not that they were consistent in there hay day either. I only bought 1 BM and 2 Colt at the time that were put together by monkeys. As for type of steel used or many other things that would determine where it was really at? Yeah your right...The upper receiver of my Bushmaster appeared to be at MILspec standard say for a few exceptions/ mentioned by him...The lower seems well made as well.
Too add he is not the only certified armorer that has looked at my rifle.
For a semi-auto rifle.... is any one going to see the difference, I seriously doubt it..
Your experience is based off a couple. Mine is based off of over 500. Yours might be staked, but I can tell you and so can other members here that they are not consistent. Neither the torque value nor the staking itself.
Your barrel markings mean absolutely nothing. Every BM barrel has B MP on it. They did it as a marketing ploy to compete with Colt. All Colt's are marked CMP and they are all tested.
Bushmaster publicly stated years ago in a magazine article that they only batch test. Was yours in that batch? Good quesstion. Your bolt is most certainly not marked and again only batch tested.
FYI- all 500 of the ones I had under my supservision were made in early 2004 and were put into use in Iraq in the summer time.
The Bushamsters I have seen prior to that also do not have a good reputation either. I am glad you enjoy your BM, but I am not giving them a cookie because they look good. I want them to function and they won't survive any serious hard use.
Attachment 9098
Attachment 9099
I agree with Iraqgunz. I was susceptible to the marketing hype/b.s. until I read up many of the threads on this site and many civilians and LE professionals I've seen have also fallen to the marketing nonsense. The only folks I've personally seen who seemed to know better were folks who frequent this site and/or attend great classes such as Mr. Vickers teaches. If you don't know any better and a manufacturer tells you it's just like mil-spec, you won't know unless you compare it to the real deal. I think WW/Rehashed Bushie will sell plenty of rifles to folks who don't know better.
I sent this email to Windham Weaponry 5 days ago. I am still waiting for a response. I believe that my thoughts capture those that others have had throughout the years.
Greetings,
Recently there has been discussion on the internet concerning Windham Weaponry opening it's doors again to sell M4 style weapons. I have some questions and observations that I would like to pose and express. For the record I am a Colt certified armorer among other things having been through the course 3 times. I have 25 years of experience with the M16 family of weapons beginning with the M16A1 that I was issued at age 17. I am currently in Iraq where I am a contracted armorer working for a private military company. I have almost 5 years of time in the Middle East and Afghanistan theater of operations. I have 9 years of military experience in two different branches of the military and almost 6 years as a private contractor in various capacities.
I am also intimately familiar with Bushmaster carbines as I worked on two different contracts that used them overseas. I was in charge of the armory and I had 500 of them under my supervision. They were select fire and semi auto only models.
A team of the finest firearms people in the USA has been re-assembled to bring to market the highest quality AR type rifle possible. These good Maine folks - all former employees of Bushmaster Firearms - offer many years of experience in the industry and all look forward to working with you, to serving your needs, and to building a great rifle.
My first question is in regards to the company statement. I have a problem with this. Bushmaster was not known for a great quality AR. In fact, the Bushmaster carbines I dealt with were vastly inferior to the Colt M4 carbine. Here are just some of the issues as I can recall them.
1. Batch testing of barrels and bolts instead of individual HP/MPI testing. Some people will say that it doesn't make a difference However, I have seen at least 3 broken Bushmaster bolts. One of them happened to my team leader in Iraq during a fire fight with some insurgents.
2. Improper staking of the bolt carrier key. I have seen numerous carrier keys come loose. These were in factory Bushmaster carbines that had not been issued and therefore were not messed with. The torque value was highly questionable and the actual stakings were not very good at all.
3. 1/9 twist barrels. I cannot understand for the life of me why 1/9 is still around in 2011. It is well known and documented that 1/7 twist barrels will reliably and accurately stabilize 55gr. up to 77gr. ammunition. I have personally shot 2 MOA groups with 55gr. from several 1/7 twist barreled SBR's. The same cannot be said of 1/9 barrels and in fact it is hot or miss as to whether you can shoot above a 69gr. bullet.
4. Failure to stake the castle nut. Again, this is a simple task and I cannot understand what is gained by not doing it. I can tell you what happens when it isn't done. The nut will eventually work loose and cause a malfunction. It would also be much more prudent to simply make the receiver extension to the milsec diameter instead of the commercial size.
5. Using 2 different types of bolt carrier groups. The semi auto Bushmasters that we had all had semi-auto bolt carrier groups. I have to ask, why? Colt civilian SP/AR6920's all have full auto carriers, as do Daniel Defense, LMT, Noveske, Bravo Company and I am sure others as well. The weapon was designed to function with it. So why not include it across the board as standard? There are no LEGAL implications for using it all. This has been clearly clarified by the BATFE.
6. Use of powdered tungsten weights in the buffer. Again, this makes no sense.
7. Oversized gas ports in barrels. Oversized ports cause additional wear and tear on the weapon and serves no purpose. In addition .223 barrel extensions are silly. Why not simply make the barrel extension 5.56 so that the end user can safely use either .223 or 5.56 ammunition.
8. Use of the non- "F" marked front sight base. Why dare to be different? Why not make the removable carry handle to one standard.
These are most of my observations as I can recall them. If Windham Weaponry wants to be successful don't set yourself up for failure from the beginning. Make a good solid weapon that any civilian would want to pick up or that any law enforcement officer, contractor or security officer would not hesitate to use if necessary. Don't cut corners and fail to do simple things like torque the bolt carrier key screws to the correct specification. Use Grade 8 fasteners like the other companies. Stake the castle nut and use a military diameter receiver extension. With our current economic situation peeple are going to be looking a lot harder at their purchases (hopefully) and they need a reason to select your products over some of the aforementioned companies. With the current price schemes I have seen from them you are going to be fighting an uphill battle.
Kind Regards,
--
Gunz-
I hope you aren't anticipating a response... I certainly wouldn't.