Page 38 of 42 FirstFirst ... 283637383940 ... LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 416

Thread: Status of NEW Comparison Chart of Commercial M4-pattern carbines

  1. #371
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE FL
    Posts
    14,148
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I will most likely reserve rows for "non participators" and simply leave them blank at such time as I publish.

    While I do not like that Oly has refused, at least they had the decency to reply. I have heard over the years that many of the makers want to "set the record straight", yet here they have the chance and they do not respond.

    Maybe goose them on their arfcom industry pages?

  2. #372
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    I may not have goosed them, but a few may feel a little bit of discomfort.

    ETA: All 4 threads have just been deleted.
    Last edited by orionz06; 06-02-11 at 17:40.

  3. #373
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,253
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    The empty columns will call them out just the same. As long as there is something there that informs the person reading the chart that certain manufacturers would not (for whatever reason) provide any information tells the reader all they need to know.
    Steve

  4. #374
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    45
    Feedback Score
    0
    Thanks Rob for all the work you have put into this. It will really come in handy for my next build.

    You've got to hand it to the manufacturers that reply even though they probably know the outlook isn't so good for them. Hopefully that will encourage them to raise their quality standards.

    Not sure this point has been made but the price difference between a questionable manufacturer and some top-tier manufacturers is really not that great. I wish I had done my homework on my first build.
    Walther PK380 First Edition
    Glock 32 (.357 Sig) w/ LW 9mm Conv.

  5. #375
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE FL
    Posts
    14,148
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    I may not have goosed them, but a few may feel a little bit of discomfort.

    ETA: All 4 threads have just been deleted.
    The question then becomes, is it an angry little penguin that deleted them, or each of the manufacturers. I bet I know the answer...

  6. #376
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Nah, back up and running. I mistakenly linked my thread to a hostile site.

  7. #377
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    146
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    Nah, back up and running. I mistakenly linked my thread to a hostile site.
    Wow, look at 'em squirm! Good job keeping it civil and on-topic. I'll be impressed if those threads don't get locked, deleted, or go quite sideways.

    I love how the chart is bashed as "subjective" and "that guy's opinion" when "that guy" is soliciting the data directly from the manufacturers.

    Why do I need "mil-spec" when I can have something that doesn't meet that standard for the same money?

  8. #378
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    I don't wish for them to squirm, I just want an answer. The chart is a good tool to decide what you want/need. It clashes with the mindset of some, but if Joe Schmoe doesn't need a 14.5" midlength with a pinned Battle Comp and only needs a used Olympic to shoot 20 rounds a year, go for it. That being said, I am 100% honest when I ask them and suggest that it would be a great tool for the user to decide what they want and need. This assumes they can read...

  9. #379
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    146
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    I don't wish for them to squirm, I just want an answer. The chart is a good tool to decide what you want/need. It clashes with the mindset of some, but if Joe Schmoe doesn't need a 14.5" midlength with a pinned Battle Comp and only needs a used Olympic to shoot 20 rounds a year, go for it. That being said, I am 100% honest when I ask them and suggest that it would be a great tool for the user to decide what they want and need. This assumes they can read...
    To be clear, I don't wish for them to squirm either and would really like some answers. An interesting effect of today's information technology is that the big players no longer can count on dominating the message. In our case, some manufacturers seem very uncomfortable that there is a credible alternative to their spin and loctite.

    I thought RRAs complaint that the previous chart represented only one of their models was an interesting one. The information will obviously be limited if they don't provide it.

    Thinking of Stag's new "Plus" offering, it would be an interesting and pragmatic development if more of the lower tier manufacturers started offering a few mostly-TDP-compliant models for those buyers who seek such specs, while continuing to offer hobbyist guns for those buyers who decide that it meets their needs. Doing so could conceivably satisfy both serious users and the "good enough" crowd and broaden a company's market share.

    However, the value of a resource like the chart would be diminished if a company provided specs for only some kind of premium flagship model, creating the impression that their entire product line also had the right boxes checked.

    But it's not like the chart can include each manufacturer's entire product line anyway. It would be an even more amazing resource if it did, but my hearsay understanding is that Rob actually has employment, family, perhaps even friends (!!!), and other aspects of a life outside of this project.
    Last edited by tradja; 06-03-11 at 13:38.

  10. #380
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,253
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Interestingly enough, a gentleman from RRA has provided an e-mail contact for Rob.

    stevem at rockriverarms.com

    On the other hand, in the Armalite thread there are some who seem to think that Rob intentionally misrepresents Armalite on the chart to make them look bad. Or at least that's the impression I get from some of the posts in that thread.

    Edited to remove live e-mail address.
    Last edited by SteveL; 06-03-11 at 18:40.
    Steve

Page 38 of 42 FirstFirst ... 283637383940 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •