Lol, yep I can see that happening.
Try the foam they sell for that tube. I think you get better, confident cheek weld that doesn't make your jaw / teeth rattle & chatter so much..Is my only suggestion ;-/
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Spike's
BCM
Other
Lol, yep I can see that happening.
Try the foam they sell for that tube. I think you get better, confident cheek weld that doesn't make your jaw / teeth rattle & chatter so much..Is my only suggestion ;-/
Last edited by VooDoo6Actual; 05-01-10 at 00:43.
So you're one of those "fit and finish" guys... OK. How many Spike's lowers have you handled, though? If you handled the cheaper Spike's ones, you should know that they have explicitly stated they sell them that cheap *because* of the blemishes. The two I purchased from them were perfect, and every single one they had mounted on their rifles in their shop was the same way.
Oh, and I'd have no problem saying, "Spike's gets there lowers from the same company as Hesse" if that was a statement of fact. But the fact here is that they get *some* their lowers from the same company as Noveske, and sell off the blemished ones for a lower price.
Really? I don't see where I've said or implied that once in this thread. Funny, considering I've stated (in this thread even) where I was considering a Spikes for a "beater" gun, where I wouldn't care about banging it up or wearing it out. Now, maybe it offends you that I wouldn't care about dinging up or breaking your (obviously) favorite AR brand, but I could care less and that still leaves you having to explain where I said I cared about "fit and finish."
Of course, you'll probably try to point out that Noveske is known for rejecting blemished receivers. Newsflash: stating that Noveske rejects blemished receivers doesn't mean that I'm a fit and finish guy, it just means I'm familiar with Noveske. That's the second time you've claimed (in a span of less than three posts) that something was said that wasn't said or done that actually wasn't done. Not surprising considering, really.
But I will call you out on this:
As was well stated in this thread, there were hundreds of lower receivers in Spike's shop, including a tens upon tens of them that were mated to upper receivers. You just claimed that "every one of them" was, quote, "perfect." Sorry, but unless you can get a Spikes rep to post proof that you indeed handled every single complete rifle in their shop, broke down the rifles, and did a white glove inspection on the lowers, you're lying. I don't care if you're making an educated guess or not - it's still an assumption that you're trying to throw around as fact.every single one they had mounted on their rifles in their shop was the same way
Sure, they may make a great product and they may have great service, but you claiming that every mounted receiver was perfect? That is just more proof you're trying to validate an AR brand for a personal agenda, just as you've done since this thread started.
Last edited by Skyyr; 05-01-10 at 11:27.
Hmmm, really? Let's see here... here's what you said:
So, what you're saying here, with YOUR agenda, is that because Noveske supposedly rejects more blemished lowers than Spike's, the Spike's lowers are somehow inferior, regardless of where they came from.
If you don't care about fit or finish, why would it matter if you beat the crap out of your Noveske? Why would you spend extra money just for a beater gun?Funny, considering I've stated (in this thread even) where I was considering a Spikes for a "beater" gun, where I wouldn't care about banging it up or wearing it out. Now, maybe it offends you that I wouldn't care about dinging up or breaking your (obviously) favorite AR brand, but I could care less and that still leaves you having to explain where I said I cared about "fit and finish."
OH, and since you're putting words into people's mouths, I should point out that Spike's is NOT my favorite brand. I have two favorite brands: DD and BCM. I'm sure I would love Noveske's and Knight's, too, but they're out of my price range at the moment.
So you're speaking for Noveske then?Of course, you'll probably try to point out that Noveske is known for rejecting blemished receivers. Newsflash: stating that Noveske rejects blemished receivers doesn't mean that I'm a fit and finish guy, it just means I'm familiar with Noveske. That's the second time you've claimed (in a span of less than three posts) that something was said that wasn't said or done that actually wasn't done. Not surprising considering, really.
Nowhere did I say that I saw hundreds of receivers... I don't know where you got that from. I bet Rob did, so ask him. All I saw were a few that they were selling to customers and a few that were on rifles that were on the racks (maybe 20 total)... some of them were awaiting test firing, so they might get some blemishes from that. The two lower receivers that I bought are just as good looking as a brand new Noveske... about as perfect as you get when it comes to lower receivers. But I don't really care, because I'm going to beat the crap out of them. However, you seem to put a very high premium on it, as evidenced by the fact of how eager you are to dispute with me about this.As was well stated in this thread, there were hundreds of lower receivers in Spike's shop, including a tens upon tens of them that were mated to upper receivers. You just claimed that "every one of them" was, quote, "perfect." Sorry, but unless you can get a Spikes rep to post proof that you indeed handled every single complete rifle in their shop, broke down the rifles, and did a white glove inspection on the lowers, you're lying. I don't care if you're making an educated guess or not - it's still an assumption that you're trying to throw around as fact.
You are really, really emotional about this. I can imagine your face getting red just reading this.
If the standard set by Noveske, then pretty much every one met his standard. The ones they sell for cheap are the blemished ones they rejected, just like what Noveske does. But that doesn't make them a Noveske.Sure, they may make a great product and they may have great service, but you claiming that every mounted receiver was perfect? That just proves you're nothing but a fanboy trying to validate an AR brand, just as you've done since this thread started.
Now, on the other hand, many of the upper receivers had some blemishes on them.
Seems on all the boards Spikes is kinda like "Baloon Boy's dad". Whether you like them or not, they still get maximum attention.![]()
Independent Field Testing/R & D
Better to die for something than live for nothing
Seems this thread was out of hand, but now it has taken a turn for the worse. I doubt many will argue that Spikes is not good. I doubt Spikes would say they are equal to Noveske. And I doubt many argue that the manufacturer of the lower is of utmost importance. What the hell are you guys arguing about anyways?
Geez guys! I'm obviously new here, but it's always sad to see good threads devolve into this sort of mess. Why does a discussion of Product A always turn into a pissing match vs. Product B/C/D?
I've got a Spikes 16" middy coming in whenever they ship it out, so I'll post pics as soon as I can and my amateur assessment.
Bookmarks