Colt no longer producing ARs for civilians.

[Dean C.]

[video=youtube_share;Qt3DCqdnn8w]https://youtu.be/Qt3DCqdnn8w[/video]










Very good video on this exact topic, the presenter is what I would consider a subject matter expert on Colt (seriously he is such a fan boy he got a job there). My major take always from the video for those that don’t want to watch it

1) Colt refuses to update their AR’s if its good enough for the government its good enough for us lowly citizens

2) Many other manufacturers put out a much better product for the same price or cheaper

3) Colt refuses to listen to the market, no one really wants their 1911’s and revolvers those sales will not keep them afloat

4) The idiot generals ran it into the ground relying solely on .Gov contracts and basically laying off their entire R&D department since they were able to charge .Gov $1200 for each M4 and now FN makes and sells them for half the price because originally Colt got a Sole Source Contract for the M4 (Kirk get your cannon)

 

[churchmouse]

[video=youtube_share;Qt3DCqdnn8w]https://youtu.be/Qt3DCqdnn8w[/video]










Very good video on this exact topic, the presenter is what I would consider a subject matter expert on Colt (seriously he is such a fan boy he got a job there). My major take always from the video for those that don’t want to watch it

1) Colt refuses to update their AR’s if its good enough for the government its good enough for us lowly citizens

2) Many other manufacturers put out a much better product for the same price or cheaper

3) Colt refuses to listen to the market, no one really wants their 1911’s and revolvers those sales will not keep them afloat

4) The idiot generals ran it into the ground relying solely on .Gov contracts and basically laying off their entire R&D department since they were able to charge .Gov $1200 for each M4 and now FN makes and sells them for half the price because originally Colt got a Sole Source Contract for the M4 (Kirk get your cannon)

Thanks. I did not really want to watch the video.

 

[Dean C.]

Thanks. I did not really want to watch the video.

Its a good source of information but the guy who runs Small Arms Solutions is extremely dry in his presentations as well as long winded, thus the 40 minute video. One other interesting thing I learned from it was the Colt Stocking Dealer thing probably hurt Colt a lot too. Gun shops had to stock at least (10?) Colt guns in order to even be able to get Colt products , distributors were cut off. ?It explained why I never really see Colts in gun shops

 

[Kirk Freeman]

(Kirk get your cannon)

Standing by!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Its a good source of information but the guy who runs Small Arms Solutions is extremely dry in his presentations as well as long winded, thus the 40 minute video. One other interesting thing I learned from it was the Colt Stocking Dealer thing probably hurt Colt a lot too. Gun shops had to stock at least (10?) Colt guns in order to even be able to get Colt products , distributors were cut off. ?It explained why I never really see Colts in gun shops

Meh, that's Chris;s style.

What you'd rather have 40 minutes of Kirk rolling on the floor, frothing about the D ring cookie-pushing Generals that run Colt?

 

[AjKilgore]

Standing by!

Always wanted to shoot one of these lol

 

[drillsgt]

Its a good source of information but the guy who runs Small Arms Solutions is extremely dry in his presentations as well as long winded, thus the 40 minute video. One other interesting thing I learned from it was the Colt Stocking Dealer thing probably hurt Colt a lot too. Gun shops had to stock at least (10?) Colt guns in order to even be able to get Colt products , distributors were cut off. ?It explained why I never really see Colts in gun shops

A lot of the video was accurate but the part with the gun store guy was nonsense. Requiring 10 guns be purchased to be dealer direct is actually a pretty low threshold just because this guy was a step above a basement dealer and couldn't handle it isn't really a dig on Colt (and Colts were still available at distributors). When I was at a shop Kimber and at the time HK/Benelli were two of my accounts and the standard was much greater than 10 guns, even more so being direct with Browning and Remington.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

A lot of the video was accurate but the part with the gun store guy was nonsense. Requiring 10 guns be purchased to be dealer direct is actually a pretty low threshold just because this guy was a step above a basement dealer and couldn't handle it isn't really a dig on Colt (and Colts were still available at distributors). When I was at a shop Kimber and at the time HK/Benelli were two of my accounts and the standard was much greater than 10 guns, even more so being direct with Browning and Remington.

I remember sometime back in the early 70's I was at one of my local gun shops when the proprietor told me that in order to get one Python from Colt he also had to take ten Detective Specials.

Back when I got into Cowboy Action Shooting I wondered why Colt chose to continue to overprice their Single Action Army rather than making them competitive with the Italian clones.

Around 2000 or so I had a buddy who bought a SAA from the Colt Custom Shop, which by that time was the only source for them. It was a POS with terrible fit and finish. He sent it back to be fixed. It was returned to him in the same condition. He was irritated as hell and wanted to unload it.

He went to a gun show where there was a rep for American Western Firearms. He wanted that Colt simply because it WAS a Colt and apparently cared nothing for its condition. He traded my buddy THREE new AWA single actions, each one different, for that Colt. The AWA's were beautiful and well-made pieces.

 

[sheepdog697]

I have to say for what colt was offering in the price range they were competing, i was never interested. I dont think its an anti 2A thing, i really think its a business move.

 

[drillsgt]

I have to say for what colt was offering in the price range they were competing, i was never interested. I dont think its an anti 2A thing, i really think its a business move.

I agree I just saw an ad for Ruger AR556's that come with Mlok full length handguards for 499.00 vs. a Colt that's still old school M4 style for 800-1000.

 

[Tombs]

I agree I just saw an ad for Ruger AR556's that come with Mlok full length handguards for 499.00 vs. a Colt that's still old school M4 style for 800-1000.

One of those firearms is made to quality standards, the other is made for the least possible amount of money. I bet you can't guess which.

 

[bgcatty]

Obviously the idiots running this company have learned nothing from the past history of the company. Idiots who do not research and review pertinent history are doomed to repeat their history. Peace. Out.

 

[Tombs]

Obviously the idiots running this company have learned nothing from the past history of the company. Idiots who do not research and review pertinent history are doomed to repeat their history. Peace. Out.

Stopping civilian production for 60 days to fulfill military contracts makes someone an idiot?

 

[churchmouse]

Stopping civilian production for 60 days to fulfill military contracts makes someone an idiot?

No.

 

[drillsgt]

One of those firearms is made to quality standards, the other is made for the least possible amount of money. I bet you can't guess which.

Or they are both pretty comparable and one company just overprices it's product? I've owned at least three Colt AR's they are good rifles and have a great finish but they are nothing really special. The AR is not a very complex machine, it doesn't take much to make one that works.

 

[Tombs]

Or they are both pretty comparable and one company just overprices it's product? I've owned at least three Colt AR's they are good rifles and have a great finish but they are nothing really special. The AR is not a very complex machine, it doesn't take much to make one that works.

Yeah, it's relatively cheap and easy to make one that works.

To make one that survives combat conditions, neglect, and lasts a long time, some other things are required and they do make a large difference in the end price. I would highly doubt colt has a bigger margin on their rifles than ruger does.

To the average person who only really needs a hobby rifle, I'm sure about anything on the market will work for them. For someone who wants a firearm you can bet your life on, that will last you a lifetime, those rifles just don't stack up. And since we're sitting in a golden age for AR pricing, the price difference between a hobby gun and life-and-liberty tier rifle is so small it honestly makes the former kind of a waste. I'll trust the specifications that were figured out through 50+ years of trial and error, and the manufacturer who most closely adheres to them over a manufacturer who cuts as many corners as possible to be able to inflate their margins.

Unless you know the history of almost every small part and detail in the rifles, and why things are the way they are today, the difference in quality might not be obvious to you. If you do your research on it, you'll certainly have an eye opening experience.

 

[drillsgt]

Yeah, it's relatively cheap and easy to make one that works.

To make one that survives combat conditions, neglect, and lasts a long time, some other things are required and they do make a large difference in the end price. I would highly doubt colt has a bigger margin on their rifles than ruger does.

To the average person who only really needs a hobby rifle, I'm sure about anything on the market will work for them. For someone who wants a firearm you can bet your life on, that will last you a lifetime, those rifles just don't stack up. And since we're sitting in a golden age for AR pricing, the price difference between a hobby gun and life-and-liberty tier rifle is so small it honestly makes the former kind of a waste. I'll trust the specifications that were figured out through 50+ years of trial and error, and the manufacturer who most closely adheres to them over a manufacturer who cuts as many corners as possible to be able to inflate their margins.

Unless you know the history of almost every small part and detail in the rifles, and why things are the way they are today, the difference in quality might not be obvious to you. If you do your research on it, you'll certainly have an eye opening experience.

What are all these extra little details that make the Colt the end all be all for warfare vs. a company that sells a lower priced AR? How do you know mfg's with lower priced rifles aren't adhering to the specs learned over the 'last 50 years'. If price is any indication than nobody should ever buy a Colt to begin with, we should all at a minimum buy LWRC's since they are 2-3x the price they must be that much better. Don't get me wrong i've owned and am a big fan of Colts and like them but most people looking for an AR aren't going to war and wouldn't be able to take it if they were. In reality most purchasing an AR are just shooting it recreationally so price matters, the more sophisticated they get they may start to look at a higher end brand. In the end whether Colt is better or not they didn't do a very good job of convincing consumers of that plus their rifles don't reflect what consumers want. Current trends are not in line with a short carbine forend with front sight post anymore. They did have the OEM model but even that was pushing 800.00. If you look at a company like FN they did respond to current market trends with a number of rifles beyond just a spec M4.

 

[Tombs]

What are all these extra little details that make the Colt the end all be all for warfare vs. a company that sells a lower priced AR? How do you know mfg's with lower priced rifles aren't adhering to the specs learned over the 'last 50 years'. If price is any indication than nobody should ever buy a Colt to begin with, we should all at a minimum buy LWRC's since they are 2-3x the price they must be that much better. Don't get me wrong i've owned and am a big fan of Colts and like them but most people looking for an AR aren't going to war and wouldn't be able to take it if they were. In reality most purchasing an AR are just shooting it recreationally so price matters, the more sophisticated they get they may start to look at a higher end brand. In the end whether Colt is better or not they didn't do a very good job of convincing consumers of that plus their rifles don't reflect what consumers want. Current trends are not in line with a short carbine forend with front sight post anymore. They did have the OEM model but even that was pushing 800.00. If you look at a company like FN they did respond to current market trends with a number of rifles beyond just a spec M4.

Colt did respond to current market trends with the 6940.

And yeah, most people don't care about how well made or durable their rifle is, so they don't need a rifle built to correct specs, all they care about is the price. That's fine, but it's not "just as good as."

 

[Sigblitz]

Yeah, it's relatively cheap and easy to make one that works.

To make one that survives combat conditions, neglect, and lasts a long time, some other things are required and they do make a large difference in the end price. I would highly doubt colt has a bigger margin on their rifles than ruger does.

To the average person who only really needs a hobby rifle, I'm sure about anything on the market will work for them. For someone who wants a firearm you can bet your life on, that will last you a lifetime, those rifles just don't stack up. And since we're sitting in a golden age for AR pricing, the price difference between a hobby gun and life-and-liberty tier rifle is so small it honestly makes the former kind of a waste. I'll trust the specifications that were figured out through 50+ years of trial and error, and the manufacturer who most closely adheres to them over a manufacturer who cuts as many corners as possible to be able to inflate their margins.

Unless you know the history of almost every small part and detail in the rifles, and why things are the way they are today, the difference in quality might not be obvious to you. If you do your research on it, you'll certainly have an eye opening experience.

I agree. Flamesuit on.

And really, the FN stuff has been having issues.

 

[drillsgt]

Colt did respond to current market trends with the 6940.

And yeah, most people don't care about how well made or durable their rifle is, so they don't need a rifle built to correct specs, all they care about is the price. That's fine, but it's not "just as good as."

The 6940's a perfect example of Colt being too little and way too late. Short picatinny handguards, that might have been market trends ten years ago maybe. The monolithic upper was an interesting albeit limiting feature though.