|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/
Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/
M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141
Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com
This thread has entered the realm of the absurd when Colt's quality control comes into question.
Either coax this thread into something worthwhile or it ends up on the ash heap of history.
My understanding of what Ken does is refined touch labor. Remember, the M-4/M-16 series is a mass-produced item that is set up to minimize touch labor as much as possible.
He examines, guages, measures, hones and adjusts for optimal performance based on his lifetime of experience.
You are paying for the knowledge and the valuable time of a master.
And to underscore what Jay said about impuning the quality of Colt.
That was some absurd mental gymnastics and made a mockery of Occam's Razor.
Last edited by Heavy Metal; 08-28-10 at 22:09.
My brother saw Deliverance and bought a Bow. I saw Deliverance and bought an AR-15.
I certainly wasn't impugning Colt quality. I just wish they made CHF middies.
Colt would do a lot of things differently if the TDP were easier to change. But it's not, so they don't.
I don't see how you take 1 + 2 and wind up with the answer being "ostrich".
SAW will tell you that the reason they don't do their package on guns other than Colt because those that are not required to build to a standard rarely do (to paraphrase Pat Rogers too).
If there is any reason that Colt doesn't adopt SAW's work it's between SAW and Colt. I would theorize on the side of what was posted above re: Saleen and the Mustang, but also that Colt is building what their #1 customer asks for. They stick a 1.5" longer barrel in it for the commercial market but otherwise they're selling us the guns they are making for someone else. If their #1 customer doesn't ask for the changes that SAW makes then Colt isn't going to adopt them.
To think that the existence of the SAW reliability package somehow means that there is something "wrong" with the 6920 that isn't "wrong" with other makes is absurd. To think that the fact that Colt doesn't incorporate SAW's upgrades in every production gun somehow makes the reliability package anything less is equally so.
I'm not questioning the reliability of Colt guns, as you and a few others are alleging. If anybody thinks I am, then they need to reread my posts where I specifically stated that, in my mind, Colts are good-to-go. Period.
So why does he refuse to do work on DDs and BCMs?SAW will tell you that the reason they don't do their package on guns other than Colt because those that are not required to build to a standard rarely do (to paraphrase Pat Rogers too).
I think the Saleen analogy is non-nonsensical. Saleen doesn't modify existing parts and simply call it G2G... they swap out all kinds of components and do modifications that end up totaling to nearly 1/3 of the price of the stock car. It's a very bad analogy. If Ken were swapping out the Colt's parts with a Noveske barrel, LMT enhanced bolt, SS buffer spring, VLTOR stock, and a Troy folding rear sight, the Saleen analogy would be valid.If there is any reason that Colt doesn't adopt SAW's work it's between SAW and Colt. I would theorize on the side of what was posted above re: Saleen and the Mustang, but also that Colt is building what their #1 customer asks for. They stick a 1.5" longer barrel in it for the commercial market but otherwise they're selling us the guns they are making for someone else. If their #1 customer doesn't ask for the changes that SAW makes then Colt isn't going to adopt them.
At no point in time did I say anything to that effect.To think that the existence of the SAW reliability package somehow means that there is something "wrong" with the 6920 that isn't "wrong" with other makes is absurd.
Now, to sum it all up, are you all saying that the "reliability package" is completely unnecessary? Because so far that's what I've gotten out of this thread.To think that the fact that Colt doesn't incorporate SAW's upgrades in every production gun somehow makes the reliability package anything less is equally so.
In aircraft maintenance (my specialty) we have something called CPI - "continual process improvement." The concept behind it is that there are almost always better ways to do things. Ken obviously has a similar mindset. The first and easiest route to finding processes to improve is to look for trends, ie, things like components that fail before they should or are regularly found to function in a less than optimal manner. From his experience, Ken obviously believes there are 11-13 minor things with Colt carbines that are not performing optimally and that he believes require modification to ensure maximum reliability. The only way he could know this is if he identified some kind of trend here and there and applied a CPI mentality.
In my questions I am doing nothing more than applying basic CPI practices. Fortunately, people who have this mentality usually prevail over others, or else we'd never have upgraded our C-130s or fixed the problems that existed with the early M-16s, among thousands of other things.
What is the point of your posts and questions? What you appear to be doing is exactly as I said:
- Assuming that because there is an improvement available to the stock gun that the stock gun must somehow be lacking.
- Assuming that because SAW refuses to work on non-Colt firearms that only the Colt must be lacking.
- Assuming that because Colt doesn't incorporate these changes into production that the improvements must be unnecessary or worthless.
You are wrong on all counts.
Are these three points not the points you're making? Because that's how your posts are coming across, and from the other replies I'm not the only one that is reading your posts this way. What you are doing is casting aspersions on both Colt and SAW.
The sad thing is that none of this has much of anything to do with the product(s) being discussed in the thread. If you have questions about SAW, the reliability package, etc. you should start another thread on the topic so we can leave this thread as the product announcement and discussion of the product that it should be.
This is a warning. Keep this on target. If anyone wants to nit pick Ken Elmore's work or why he does/ doesn't do something contact him or the shop directly.
The next one who starts going off the deep end is going to get nuked.
Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/
Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/
M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141
Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com
Consider my questioning ceased.
I'm going to buy one of Ken Elmore's carbines and see what it is that he does. From there I will determine if there is anything significant enough that improvements would be needed, and thus appease my curiosity.
Bookmarks