Originally Posted by
NongShim
Roger, this isn’t a ding against you personally. This post is, however, emblematic of a sentiment that I don’t get, which seems pervasive on the forum.
Firstly, YES, we are a fickle bunch. If Any company is riding a wave top we will say that they have all the solutions to all of our problems. If that company gets surpassed and stops innovating we will forget them quickly. I’ve been guilty of that myself on so many occasions.
Secondly, and this is what I find typified in the post, I see a lot of posts about how something isn’t the standard when in fact it is. The collective internet hive mind of gun folks thinks “mil spec” is super important. Most folks don’t know what that means, but it’s super important to them, so they love to talk about it and they buy things from companies that sell “mil spec” stuff, even if it isn’t. I bet “Colt” and “TDP” have been used 10k times on this forum as a benchmark. For good reason too; Colt builds the standard. For all intents and purposes, one can purchase this standard (within the limits of tyranny) for a paltry sum of around $800. ‘Merica!
Things go off the rails about other stuff that is absolutely standardized, though. Take this atopic of triggers that aren’t GI; there are standards, they just don’t jive with some opinions. I can think of two non Colt/FN/contract vendor GI triggers. They are the Geissele SSF and the KAC two stage. They are officially adopted triggers that are held to a specified standard put forth by the military. Guess what? They are “mil-spec.”
Same goes for .308 gas guns. There are a few officially adopted .308 gas guns. There have been for decades. The main one has gone through a few iterations, just like the M16 FOW. Those iterations were specified and subsequently adopted by the military. Mil-spec. That rifle is of course the SR-25, type classified by a few different monickers. The Mk17 is also a “mil spec” .308 gas gun.
I realize this is slightly off topic, but people keep saying over and over that there isn’t a standard for certain things when there is. Plenty of other items get the same treatment, but I don’t want to totally derail things. The point is that just because the price of admission is cost prohibitive or a given person may like something else better doesn’t mean there isn’t a standard. So while the guy whom called a certain Geissele product “standard” was wrong about the specific product, it is derived from something that actually is.
Flame on haters.
Again, Roger, this isn’t a slight against you, but your post just carried what I thought was a sentiment that needed addressing in general. I see these ideas getting used a lot.
Bookmarks