Detonics...really?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Alamo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Oct 4, 2010
    8,317
    113
    Texas
    The article correctly notes that a lot depends on how the RFP is written. If the Army is simply looking for new design, separate from the manufacturing capability, then maybe. But I really don't see the Army wanting to spend the kind of time an energy to do that for a handgun. A death ray gun or something really advanced, sure, but not a handgun. Were I them (the Army), I want to test something that I know the company can build, and for a handgun, build a lot of them to spec.

    As also noted in the article, putting in a bid with test articles is expensive. At various points in the competition, the SSA and the Contracting officer are required to make a Competitive Range decision, which means assessing which of the competitors have a realistic chance of being selected. The ones that aren't going to cut it are told they're out so that they won't keep wasting money chasing something unobtainable. The government has been sued before by companies that felt they were strung along pouring money into competition that the government already knew they wouldn't win. (Of course the government has been sued for kicking companies out of competitions that the companies felt they could win, so the Competitive Range decision can be tricky). If the RFP requires manufacture of 400K guns in five years starting 90 days after contract award, then Detonics better have one helluva manufacturing capability lined up and locked in.
     

    WebSnyper

    Time to make the chimichangas
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Jul 3, 2010
    15,725
    113
    127.0.0.1
    The best-case scenario is one in which the military is willing to go with an intellectual property route, where it could license the Detonics design and then find its own builders.

    It's been done before, as I don't believe Colt was manufacturing all the guns for the government that were built based on their patents.
     

    Alamo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Oct 4, 2010
    8,317
    113
    Texas
    It's been done before, as I don't believe Colt was manufacturing all the guns for the government that were built based on their patents.


    Absolutely true (and the Colt M-16 was originally designed by Stoner and Armalite, of course). The government has often licensed a design from one major builder and had others build it as well, but (as in Colt's case), generally the original builder has sufficient manufacturing capacity to build all or a significant portion of the original contract. They then can transfer a Technical Data Package, based on their own experience and written to government specs, to the other licensed builder(s).

    Dectonics is five guys. That's a whole different deal. Not impossible, but transferring the design to a (different) production company, making the design producible, tooling up and producing units that come close to meeting the performance of the prototypes is not without technical, legal, and financial risk, as compared to a company that already manufactures a lot of pistols and has design and manufacturing in house.
     

    Beowulf

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Mar 21, 2012
    2,880
    83
    Brownsburg
    If by some chance they win, the licensing would be worth a fortune

    even if they don't win, it's great marketing

    That might be all they are really looking for. The civilian market can be even more lucrative than the military one, assuming you get enough hype going about your product, so everyone wants one.
     

    Thor

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jan 18, 2014
    10,729
    113
    Could be anywhere
    I guess if you don't submit a bid you can't win? :dunno:

    If it gets through the testing I don't see how it could be much worse than the current issue weapon.
     

    Clay

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 98.8%
    81   1   0
    Aug 28, 2008
    9,648
    48
    Vigo Co
    Detonics probably doesn't need to be in stores to sell, they typically seem to sell direct. Their following is small but very loyal.
     

    1911 DeadHead

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Dec 5, 2011
    420
    16
    NWI/ Crown Point
    Sorry for bringing up an old thread but I haven't seen any updates.

    Detonics Defense has partnered with STI on this project a few months ago. Just the other day McCain bashed the project as a waste of time if they were not going to decide on caliber first and foremost.

    I talked to a nice gentleman from Detonics a couple days ago and all he could say is that they are really excited about it and that new models in production could be available by the end of January which I believe is the cut off date for manufacturers to submit their product. What was also mentioned is since their production rate will be increased with the help of STI the price tag will drop. Just my bit of info. Can't wait.
     
    Top Bottom