I've know lots folks that love their Colt rifles. I get it, and those here make good points in favor of Colt carbines. When it has come time for me to purchase a rifle in the past , other manufactures (BCM, Sionics) brought more to the table for my needs/desires. I was seriously excited about Colt's retro line until I saw that they were asking for them. For the price of a Colt M16A1 retro (a gun not even made by Colt) I was able to build a Brownells 601 clone, including having some work done by John Thomas and purchase a Troy GAU5/A/A.
Ruger has decided they didn't hate consumers after all and repented of and pretty much repudiated their Founders position by producing AR's, High Capacity 10/22 magazines etc....As a result of that- and actually making things people want to buy, they have done very well in the last few years.
The truth can only offend those who live a lie.
Colt is Colt. Generally 'meh' from a business sense from a civie perspective, because they are geared towards .MIL / .FMS contracts.
Plus they are up in the anti-2A N.E., I don't ever see them doing more than walking the tightrope between a hardline pro-2A stance and yet leaving enough ambiguity to not have protests at their doors.
Want a Colt? Buy a Colt.
Don't because you feel bad or sympathize with a disgruntled employee? Then Don't.
Watched the video.
I chuckled when he pointed out Colt's letter hanging their commercial sales future on the 1911 and revolvers. If that's really their plan... good luck.
Sure the AR market is saturated, so is the entire firearms market. Palmetto sells cheap ARs, they sell lots of cheap guns. A quick look at Palmetto today shows eight different manufacture's plastic 9mm handguns ranging in price from $289 to $169. Is Gaston bailing on commercial sales because of all the plastic striker-fired handguns that have flooded the market? Could Colt compete in this commercial market?
Said in the video that Colt hasn't been an innovator in recent years compared to their competitors and has high production costs. Not an ideal combination.
Mentioned that the taxpayer is paying FN half the price per rifle that Colt was charging. What's not to like about that?
Last edited by ChattanoogaPhil; 09-23-19 at 15:00.
I disagree with this statement. When a contractor working for AT&T comes to your home to do work, and you are not happy with the work, its AT&Ts reputation on the line, not the contractor. That gun is as much a Colt as any Colt. In fact if anything it is better. Not sure why you folks feel like the gun has to be assembled under the roof of a certain building in Hartford to qualify as a Colt. I understand a lot of people are disappointed they couldn't afford or wasn't willing to spend the money on it and thus have to react accordingly. Chris Bartocci is in the same sour grapes camp. I get it.
Bookmarks