Colt to Suspend Civilian sells of AR's

[lsllc]

What is your position at Colt?

Obviously, I’m not the one pretending to know the inter-workings of Colt. I have, however, read Colt’s statement and take them at their word instead of pretending to know what’s on their books and trying to be a tough-guy on the internet who thinks I should dictate what they do without all the information.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sig1473]

Some dingleberry on another site I frequent has a 6920 MagPul edition that he wants $1800 for.

[Mr McSimon]

Some dingleberry on another site I frequent has a 6920 MagPul edition that he wants $1800 for.

Maybe this time next year.

[jsbhike]

Obviously, I’m not the one pretending to know the inter-workings of Colt. I have, however, read Colt’s statement and take them at their word instead of pretending to know what’s on their books and trying to be a tough-guy on the internet who thinks I should dictate what they do without all the information.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obviously no one can foresee the future, but it is usually a good idea to look at past activities as a decent indicator of how things will turn out.

By "Colt's statement" do you mean this?

https://www.colt.com/news/2630

I noticed this snippet in that statement.

"Colt has been a stout supporter of the Second Amendment for over 180 years,"

Inside that 180 years we got to see stopping the sales of AR15, bringing it back a couple of years later sans telestock/bayonet lug plus sear block, and Match Targets after September 2004? Might as well add in their foray in to smart guns and the front screw take down deal going back to the 1960's.

So we know "180 years" has no basis in fact and it can't even be "180 months" due to their continuing to sell Match Targets (by choice, not statute) after the ban ended in September 2004.

[Uni-Vibe]

Obviously no one can foresee the future, but it is usually a good idea to look at past activities as a decent indicator of how things will turn out.

By "Colt's statement" do you mean this?

https://www.colt.com/news/2630

I noticed this snippet in that statement.

"Colt has been a stout supporter of the Second Amendment for over 180 years,"

Inside that 180 years we got to see stopping the sales of AR15, bringing it back a couple of years later sans telestock/bayonet lug plus sear block, and Match Targets after September 2004? Might as well add in their foray in to smart guns and the front screw take down deal going back to the 1960's.

So we know "180 years" has no basis in fact and it can't even be "180 months" due to their continuing to sell Match Targets (by choice, not statute) after the ban ended in September 2004.

High Power shooter I know says a crowned barrel is inherently more accurate than one with a flash hider.

[jsbhike]

High Power shooter I know says a crowned barrel is inherently more accurate than one with a flash hider.

All well and good, but they weren't giving peons the option of crowned or A2 compensator, A2 butt or tele stock, or lug/no lug.

[lsllc]

And during that time Colt has an anti-gun liberal as CEO. Who’s their CEO now? What’s his background?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[26 Inf]

And during that time Colt has an anti-gun liberal as CEO. Who’s their CEO now? What’s his background?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hopefully in making money, you know by developing market data and acting on it, by taking contracts that give you more certainty in a market that, many agree, is saturated, or rapidly reaching the saturation point.

And maybe, just maybe, looking for Colt to be in business ten years down the road, rather than riding the AR pony until it drops and you have to literally stop the machines with unfinished product on the line.

Personally, not an enemy, nor or a fan boiy. I think it is going to be hard for Colt to prosper. There is a finite number of 'but, but they are the only ones who have the TDP' folks around. Most of them probably already own what they need. When you get beyond that, as I've said before, there isn't much to differentiate them from other makers.

As far as their 1911's go, personally, I have fondled several pistols recently that put the Colt's to shame. I shot bullseye with Gold Cups and with a Kimber Classic Gold Match - the front sight stayed on my Kimber. Colt DA revolvers have always been 'meh' unless you like triggers that get heavier, and heavier, and heavier, through the DA pull.

These are the reasons I think Colt is going to have a rough go. Hopefully they will succeed, I hate to see anyone lose their job due to factories closing.

The M1 Garand, for example, was more complicated to manufacture than an AR. Yet, when WWII began, Springfield Armory, which at it's peak was making 600 rifles a day, could not meet demand. Winchester was added as a manufacturer. together Springfield and Winchester supplied the troops during WWII. During the Korean War, International Harvester and H&R, along with Springfield Armory, made almost 2,000,000 more M1's. The M1's follow-on rifle, the M-14, was, again, more complicated to manufacture then the AR. They were manufactured by Springfield Armory, H&R, O-M (Winchester) and TRW (the ones I carried were TRW's).

Point being, these are mechanical devices, any competent manufacturer can make them. One of Colt's problems seems to have been resting on their laurels as their patents expired.

[jsbhike]

And during that time Colt has an anti-gun liberal as CEO. Who’s their CEO now? What’s his background?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dennis R. Veilleux has been president since 2013.

According to the press release he issued, Colt's position on the 2nd Amendment is the same position Colt has held for 180 years which includes the 5 decades and 7 different Colt presidents preceding him since the AR 15 has been around.

[Firefly]

Hopefully in making money, you know by developing market data and acting on it, by taking contracts that give you more certainty in a market that, many agree, is saturated, or rapidly reaching the saturation point.

And maybe, just maybe, looking for Colt to be in business ten years down the road, rather than riding the AR pony until it drops and you have to literally stop the machines with unfinished product on the line.

Personally, not an enemy, nor or a fan boiy. I think it is going to be hard for Colt to prosper. There is a finite number of 'but, but they are the only ones who have the TDP' folks around. Most of them probably already own what they need. When you get beyond that, as I've said before, there isn't much to differentiate them from other makers.

As far as their 1911's go, personally, I have fondled several pistols recently that put the Colt's to shame. I shot bullseye with Gold Cups and with a Kimber Classic Gold Match - the front sight stayed on my Kimber. Colt DA revolvers have always been 'meh' unless you like triggers that get heavier, and heavier, and heavier, through the DA pull.

These are the reasons I think Colt is going to have a rough go. Hopefully they will succeed, I hate to see anyone lose their job due to factories closing.

The M1 Garand, for example, was more complicated to manufacture than an AR. Yet, when WWII began, Springfield Armory, which at it's peak was making 600 rifles a day, could not meet demand. Winchester was added as a manufacturer. together Springfield and Winchester supplied the troops during WWII. During the Korean War, International Harvester and H&R, along with Springfield Armory, made almost 2,000,000 more M1's. The M1's follow-on rifle, the M-14, was, again, more complicated to manufacture then the AR. They were manufactured by Springfield Armory, H&R, O-M (Winchester) and TRW (the ones I carried were TRW's).

Point being, these are mechanical devices, any competent manufacturer can make them. One of Colt's problems seems to have been resting on their laurels as their patents expired.

Lots of unvarnished truth here.

I like my Kimber and dislike Series 80.
I have a Python for no good reason.