Quoted: Bushy could sell all the guns the Military needs if they spent the money on lobyist like Colt.

What would they sell them?  A knock off of someone else's rifle or what?  What are you talking about?

Quoted: Wanna take a shot at Bushy's try for a .308, then why don't you take your shot with that stupid fucking Colt 2000 pistol, LOL.

Good comeback.  The stab at the BAR-10 was in response to this comment:

Quoted: When champions on their laurels rest, soon discover to their sorrow, theirs is the crown of yesterday, someone else will wear that crown tomorrow.  Lawyers have nothing to do with the quality of an AR.

This comment is baseless, and well deserved a "shot".  It implies that Colt's success is due to lawyers, not their R&D.  Like Bushmaster has developed anything worthy of comment.  Can you name one Bushmaster engineer, his patent, and when it was approved by RIA, put into mass production and currently used in millions and millions of rifles World wide?

Quoted: You can buy a Colt alright, I'm not saying that at all, But, and this is a big BUT, if you are serious about buying a 1911 for whatever, then Colt is a bit of a joke, Kimber and Springfield has won a lot of contracts for state agencies for their work and they sell the hell out of thier 1911's while Colt has sat on their lobyi$t's hands living off thier military rifle sales.

The last big M1911A1 contract was cancelled back in 1945.  That war is over, and the days of selling millions of M1911A1s is in the past.

Quoted: There actually used to be a debate as to Colt vs S&W as to who made the best wheel gun, now Tarus & S&W? S&W has some pretty slick extremely light weight J Frames and what about thier 1911's?

Wheel gun?  Oh brother, stick a fork in it, there are no longer big contracts on wheel guns, this ain't 1970 you know.

Quoted: Colt sat on their asses when Para Ordanace came out with their wide body frames, now there is STI et al and Colt is selling a very very modest amount, it is sad to me, Colt WAS the 1911.

Yeah, back in the days of the first half of the twentieth century when there were million gun contracts.

Quoted: Colt WAS the AR15

I take it you mean civie sale, there is a war going on you know, and Colt's gets to work when there is.

Quoted: Colt WAS the SSA

Was that not patented in 1873?

Quoted: Colt WAS the best revolver (Python)

About the same time Chevy made the 57 Chevy.  Those nostalgic days are over, and can not be brought back.

Quoted: Colt HAS abondoned their civy market.

Do you have any idea what M4/A1 production has ramped up to since 9/11?

What kind of impact will this have on Colt customers?  What kind of impact will this have on Bushmaster customers?  Will Bushmasters start producing true mil spec rifles?

Sorry if this was already covered in this thread, but I really don't care enough to read through the previous 6 pages.

Quoted: Bushmaster has produced exactly 65 guns that met the minimum requirements. that met the minimum requirements. Bullshit on that. I do not believe or for a minute, or think, that the 65 or what the fuck ever it is, were any different from the Bushy's I have. Bushy could sell all the guns the Military needs if they spent the money on lobyist like Colt. Wanna take a shot at Bushy's try for a .308, then why don't you take your shot with that stupid fucking Colt 2000 pistol, LOL. Blackwater is in a shit hole shooting for their lives, LIVES, not for qualifications. I have both, Bushy and Colt so all this Ford/Chevy shit gets a bit silly. Buy what you want, shot what you have.

I agree with your BS call.  Even if only 65 were sold to the US government, that does not necessarily mean that is the total number that met at least the minimum requirements, it means that Bushmaster produced AT LEAST that number which met the requirements.  That is a totally different statement, and as you would probably agree, it is highly likely the number is significantly larger as I find it hard to believe, as you hint, that Bushmaster built the contract rifles significantly different than their regular production.

Also people should note that for the purposes of evidence in court relevant to this case that Bushmaster only had to produce ONE verifiable contract in order to prove Colt's false advertising claims FALSE, which they clearly were.  Bushmaster could very likely have had and fulfilled other contracts which aren't listed in the court document or that are mentioned in sections which are redacted, as I see nowhere in the document that Bushmaster was required by discovery to produce any other documentation.  Note that pretty much all of the sales and production figures for both companies are redacted in the released version of the document -- chances are that if Bushmaster had other contracts they might well have chosen not to disclose the terms or numbers to the public, and it is possible that Colt may well have even requested the redactions.

Yes, but there is a slight difference in colas.  I prefer a little more than pepsi.  The generics definitely taste different.  There are probably some people who don't pay much attention but when you drink at least 2 12 packs a week plus breaks and lunch between my wife and I you learn the slight differences.  Some people wine taste I guess I cola taste.  Sorry for the detour.

Quoted: Quoted: It's official, Bushmaster had a goverment contract!!! So bushmaster does in fact make mil spec quality weapons without the use of the much talked about Colt  TDP When will the kool aid drinkers gather for mass suicide? How will they go on with life knowing this Some people take this stuff way too seriously. Like it really matters to any consumer what Bushmaster or Colt call their products Coke & Pepsi are just colored sugar-water...that's all. The concept that one tastes "better" than another is programming. People get VERY emotional about branding. And I'm very glad they do, because branding puts groceries in my icebox. (and pays for all my wonderful toys)

Quoted: Try this on for size, a long time ago someone on the old mailing list ran a search through the .gov contractors and found that BFI was listed as supplier for a couple of items including: Bushmaster: 1.  Cheekpiece, Telestock 2.  Barrel, 16 inch, Commando Assy. Includes handguards, shields, gas tube, delta ring 3.  Rifle, 5.56 XM15E2S specs: 16 inch full floating barrel, flat top, military upper and lower assembly, safe/semi/full auto trigger group, GG-F-FLIP foresite on barrel, collapsible telestock, titanium firing pin Maybe those are the 65 guns?

That is interesting, but I can come up with an NSN for the Ruger 77.  I would be impressed if the milspec number could be found for:

Military Specification Rifle, 5.56mm: XM15E2S

Quoted: I agree with your BS call.  Even if only 65 were sold to the US government, that does not necessarily mean that is the total number that met at least the minimum requirements, it means that Bushmaster produced AT LEAST that number which met the requirements.

Met what requirements?  What is the milspec number for the Rifle, XM15E2S?  Colt's M4 is made to meet the requirments of:

MIL-C-70599A (AR)

I always find it odd that a few individuals get all fired up over the idea that Bushmaster sold a few M4's to the military. What difference does it make? Does the thought of Bushmaster having the “All-Powerful" TDP really make that much of a difference to you?

Quoted: Quoted: Bushy could sell all the guns the Military needs if they spent the money on lobyist like Colt. What would they sell them?  A knock off of someone else's rifle or what?  What are you talking about?

So is FN selling the government a "knock off of someone else's rifle"?  If so, it sort of proves that Colt is quite replaceable.  There is little or no reason to believe that if the government wanted to they couldn't give the contract to one of several other companies if Colt doesn't win it on $.  All the talk of QC and TDP's doesn't mean other companies can't come up with their own.  Colt's patent on the M4 handguard heat shield expires in three weeks.  Its likely that any other relevant patents Colt may have had have expired already or will soon as well.  Everything else about the M4 can or has already been reverse engineered, even by people never privy to the TDP.

Quoted: This comment is baseless, and well deserved a "shot".  It implies that Colt's success is due to lawyers, not their R&D.  Like Bushmaster has developed anything worthy of comment.  Can you name one Bushmaster engineer, his patent, and when it was approved by RIA, put into mass production and currently used in millions and millions of rifles World wide?

Colt's success at what?  Being in financial trouble?  They've clearly lost ground in virtually every market they are involved in.  AR's?  Lost part of their military contracts to FN.  Lost the civilian and a big portion of the LE market to Bushmaster, etc.  1911's?  Slaughtered by Kimber, ParaOrdinance, Springfield, etc., --  embarrasing given Colt and 1911 used to be synomamous.   Wheelguns? Pretty much gave up the market to Smith & Wesson, Ruger and Taurus.

And what has Colt done lately?  Their product lines in general are getting smaller, not larger, especially if you eliminate models that are just a minor variation on another.  Bushmaster may not be the best example of innovation in the firearms industry, but then again neither is Colt in the last 20 or 30 years.  Some of their "innovations" like non-standard pin sizes, sear blocks, plastic buffers, plastic mainspring housings and Series-80 firing pin blocks are things I would just as soon do without.

Quoted: Quoted: You can buy a Colt alright, I'm not saying that at all, But, and this is a big BUT, if you are serious about buying a 1911 for whatever, then Colt is a bit of a joke, Kimber and Springfield has won a lot of contracts for state agencies for their work and they sell the hell out of thier 1911's while Colt has sat on their lobyi$t's hands living off thier military rifle sales. The last big M1911A1 contract was cancelled back in 1945.  That war is over, and the days of selling millions of M1911A1s is in the past.

Tell that to Kimber, ParaOrdinace and Springfield.  Whether the number is milions, or to the government or not, there is obviously as large, thriving and profitable market for 1911s as there ever has been.  You can credit 10 years of >10 cap magazine ban for re-invigorating the large caliber markets but even since the ban has sunset it shows little signs of fading.  Civilian sales are likely more profitable than government bidded contracts.  And in the LE world, the 1911 is actually making a comeback.

Quoted: Quoted: There actually used to be a debate as to Colt vs S&W as to who made the best wheel gun, now Tarus & S&W? S&W has some pretty slick extremely light weight J Frames and what about thier 1911's? Wheel gun?  Oh brother, stick a fork in it, there are no longer big contracts on wheel guns, this ain't 1970 you know.

Lack of contracts don't mean lack of a market.  Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Taurus, etc, are all doing a thriving business in wheelguns and are introducing new revolver models all the time while Colt has discontinued virtually their entire line.  The myopic "contracts" only thinking is why Colt as a whole is losing.  They need to think outside the box, as the civilian firearm markets are much larger than military ones.

Quoted: Quoted: Colt sat on their asses when Para Ordanace came out with their wide body frames, now there is STI et al and Colt is selling a very very modest amount, it is sad to me, Colt WAS the 1911. Yeah, back in the days of the first half of the twentieth century when there were million gun contracts. Quoted: Colt WAS the AR15 I take it you mean civie sale, there is a war going on you know, and Colt's gets to work when there is.

The current war won't last forever, one way or another it will be over (hopefully we will win it of course).  What is Colt going to do when that happens -- not if, but when.

Quoted: Quoted: Colt WAS the SSA Was that not patented in 1873?

Yes, and Uberti, Ruger, etc. are still making a nice profitable business building them, which Colt has apparently forgotten.

Quoted: Quoted: Colt WAS the best revolver (Python) About the same time Chevy made the 57 Chevy.  Those nostalgic days are over, and can not be brought back. Quoted: Colt HAS abondoned their civy market. Do you have any idea what M4/A1 production has ramped up to since 9/11?

Given that the US has less than two million soldiers in all branches of the military, and a sizeable existing inventory of rifles, I can't imagine it is anywhere near as big as you would have us believe.  Is Colt winning a lot of big and lucrative foreign contracts?  Hard to believe that if they were the Kool-Aid drinkers around here wouldn't be crowing about it.

Quoted: Quoted: Bushy could sell all the guns the Military needs if they spent the money on lobyist like Colt. What would they sell them?  A knock off of someone else's rifle or what?  What are you talking about? Quoted: Wanna take a shot at Bushy's try for a .308, then why don't you take your shot with that stupid fucking Colt 2000 pistol, LOL. Good comeback.  The stab at the BAR-10 was in response to this comment: Quoted: When champions on their laurels rest, soon discover to their sorrow, theirs is the crown of yesterday, someone else will wear that crown tomorrow.  Lawyers have nothing to do with the quality of an AR. This comment is baseless, and well deserved a "shot".  It implies that Colt's success is due to lawyers, not their R&D.  Like Bushmaster has developed anything worthy of comment.  Can you name one Bushmaster engineer, his patent, and when it was approved by RIA, put into mass production and currently used in millions and millions of rifles World wide? Quoted: You can buy a Colt alright, I'm not saying that at all, But, and this is a big BUT, if you are serious about buying a 1911 for whatever, then Colt is a bit of a joke, Kimber and Springfield has won a lot of contracts for state agencies for their work and they sell the hell out of thier 1911's while Colt has sat on their lobyi$t's hands living off thier military rifle sales. The last big M1911A1 contract was cancelled back in 1945.  That war is over, and the days of selling millions of M1911A1s is in the past. Quoted: There actually used to be a debate as to Colt vs S&W as to who made the best wheel gun, now Tarus & S&W? S&W has some pretty slick extremely light weight J Frames and what about thier 1911's? Wheel gun?  Oh brother, stick a fork in it, there are no longer big contracts on wheel guns, this ain't 1970 you know. Quoted: Colt sat on their asses when Para Ordanace came out with their wide body frames, now there is STI et al and Colt is selling a very very modest amount, it is sad to me, Colt WAS the 1911. Yeah, back in the days of the first half of the twentieth century when there were million gun contracts. Quoted: Colt WAS the AR15 I take it you mean civie sale, there is a war going on you know, and Colt's gets to work when there is. Quoted: Colt WAS the SSA Was that not patented in 1873? Quoted: Colt WAS the best revolver (Python) About the same time Chevy made the 57 Chevy.  Those nostalgic days are over, and can not be brought back. Quoted: Colt HAS abondoned their civy market. Do you have any idea what M4/A1 production has ramped up to since 9/11?

Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them?
Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see.

Quoted: I always find it odd that a few individuals get all fired up over the idea that Bushmaster sold a few M4's to the military. What difference does it make? Does the thought of Bushmaster having the “All-Powerful" TDP really make that much of a difference to you?

No, the false idea that they did get is bothersome.

Quoted: Quoted: I agree with your BS call.  Even if only 65 were sold to the US government, that does not necessarily mean that is the total number that met at least the minimum requirements, it means that Bushmaster produced AT LEAST that number which met the requirements.   Met what requirements?  What is the milspec number for the Rifle, XM15E2S?  Colt's M4 is made to meet the requirments of: MIL-C-70599A (AR)

Whatever the requirements for their contract, which were redacted in the document were.  Doesn't matter in terms of the court case.  Colt alleged that Bushmaster's claims of having sold rifles to the US government were false advertising, and Bushmaster provided evidence that was false.

Quoted: Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them? Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see.

I agree...  I am (obviously) not a Kool-Aid drinker...  but I don't want Colt to go out of business either...  nor am I a huge fan of Bushmaster or anything (have nothing against them either mind you)...  I wish that Colt management would wake up and figure out there is no reason they can't compete in both the civilian market and the military market.  That there is no reason they can't compete with Kimber, Springfield, etc. in the 1911 market and S&W and Ruger in the revolver market.  They know how, the people running the company just refuse to do it.  All they would need to do is drop the bogus Civilian/LEO-Military distinction on ARs and market the rifles to the people that they want.  Maybe try to be at least a little price competitive  but that is less important than dropping stupid mis-features like sear blocks, non-standard pin sizes, putting on flash hiders and bayonet lugs and shipping >10 round mags.  They already make all those products, so its not like they would have to do anything different other than marketing.  As for the 1911, all they need to do is drop the cheezy plastic mainspring housing and return to the original 1911 trigger design, and try to be at least a little price competitive with Kimber and Springfield for comparable models.  And for their revolvers...  all they need to do is start making them again.  Given the reaction on the used market to one when they come up, they would sell, and they wouldn't have to do too much to be price competitive with Smith & Wesson, although Ruger and Taurus would be a big challenge for them.

I just wish someone would save Colt and fire their boneheaded management.

Quoted: Quoted: I always find it odd that a few individuals get all fired up over the idea that Bushmaster sold a few M4's to the military. What difference does it make? Does the thought of Bushmaster having the “All-Powerful" TDP really make that much of a difference to you? No, the false idea that they did get is bothersome.

Why?

It seems to be a fairly well documented fact.

Hell, if Tweak gives them this much credit it has to be true. He would not be cutting Bushmaster any slack if this information were in serious doubt. I mean in reality what does it really mean? It's only a few hundred carbines at the most. This tiny amount of Bushmaster supplied M4’s bothers you this much? My God, this should not ruin a Colt fans lunch.

Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see.

Thanks Lyrch

We MUST remember that the civy market does most of the development for the military. Where the F do you think all the free float hand gaurds came from, how about red dot fucking scopes, if you want to just sit around watching the military, move to England.

I live in the free state of Louisiana. We can own guns. I own guns. I am not the military. I could give a shit about military contracts. I care about what I can buy. I wave my flag. I do not wave the flag of those that do not support me. Does Colt support you?

BTW, remember, I own Colt products, they are curios and keepsakes.

Bill

Jesus....just as I expected.

Colt fans are getting their panties all in a wad.

Way to go BM!

M4 is way to generic to be a trademark.  In fact, I would bet that if BM (or any other AR company) tried to kill the AR-15 trademark, they would win, seeing as how that term is even more generic than M4 is.

Fianlly Colt can get off their grandstand.  But I can understand them fighting tooth and nail to keep it.  They think it separates them....

I'm glad bushy won that one.  I hate it when those in the industry try to cannibalize each other.  Like when Brownell's sued midwayusa, but I don't recall the outcome of that one.

Ok I haven't read through all 7 pages (just the first one a little) but I did read the article. So does this mean that we'll start seeing "M4" marked lowers popping up? So saying a gun is an M4A3/A4 doesn't neccessarily mean you're talking about a miltary rifle? It'd be pretty cool to get a lower marked M4A3 (or A4) or M4A2.

Quoted: So does this mean that we'll start seeing "M4" marked lowers popping up?

I would think so.

It's only a matter of time.

Quoted: So is FN selling the government a "knock off of someone else's rifle"?  If so, it sort of proves that Colt is quite replaceable.  There is little or no reason to believe that if the government wanted to they couldn't give the contract to one of several other companies if Colt doesn't win it on $.

No the FN M16A2/A4 are not knock offs, they are contracted to make a product according the TDP that the US Government purchased from Colt's.  But Colt's is the sole contractor for the M4.

Quoted: All the talk of QC and TDP's doesn't mean other companies can't come up with their own.

Big deal, it is Colt's TDP that the Government is using.

Quoted: Colt's patent on the M4 handguard heat shield expires in three weeks.  Its likely that any other relevant patents Colt may have had have expired already or will soon as well.  Everything else about the M4 can or has already been reverse engineered, even by people never privy to the TDP.

Great.

Afraid I did not read all your post about wheel guns, and other 19th century innovations, sorry don't see the future in that stuff.

Quoted: Given that the US has less than two million soldiers in all branches of the military, and a sizeable existing inventory of rifles, I can't imagine it is anywhere near as big as you would have us believe.  Is Colt winning a lot of big and lucrative foreign contracts?  Hard to believe that if they were the Kool-Aid drinkers around here wouldn't be crowing about it.

Colt's just did up a contract with Turkey, and it includes selling production rights to the M4.

Quoted: Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them? Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see.

Colt's has survived wars ending before, what would be different about this war ending then past wars?

Quoted: Great. Afraid I did not read all your post about wheel guns, and other 19th century innovations, sorry don't see the future in that stuff.

Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.  I'm an auto fan personally, but I'd bet that unless the pinko anti-gunners get their way and ban all handguns that there will be a thriving business in selling revolvers when both you and I are long dust in the grave.

Quoted: Why? It seems to be a fairly well documented fact. Hell, if Tweak gives them this much credit it has to be true. He would not be cutting Bushmaster any slack if this information were in serious doubt. I mean in reality what does it really mean? It's only a few hundred carbines at the most. This tiny amount of Bushmaster supplied M4’s bothers you this much? My God, this should not ruin a Colt fans lunch.

Did you read tweak's last post?

Quoted: Quoted: Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them? Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see. Colt's has survived wars ending before, what would be different about this war ending then past wars?

They (Colt), had a civilian marketing branch to fall back on when the rest of these wars ended. Now they do not, plain and simple.  Its called all of your eggs in one basket.

Quoted: Colt's has survived wars ending before, what would be different about this war ending then past wars?

At the end of previous wars they had viable civilian product lines, which they have since inexplicably walked away from.  They've ticked off most of their dealer network (almost none of the LGS near here carry, let alone stock anything made by Colt anymore) and lost most of their civilian customer base to competitors.  Their Holley carburator division even, has lost most of its business to competitors like Edelbrock, Weber (Carter) and Demon.  It is not hard to envision Colt going back into bankruptcy when their few remaining military contracts dry up.  I'd hate to see that happen, but if it does I hope that pro 2nd amendment owners and management take over like happened with Smith & Wesson.

Quoted: Quoted: Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them? Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see. I agree...  I am (obviously) not a Kool-Aid drinker...  but I don't want Colt to go out of business either...  nor am I a huge fan of Bushmaster or anything (have nothing against them either mind you)...  I wish that Colt management would wake up and figure out there is no reason they can't compete in both the civilian market and the military market.  That there is no reason they can't compete with Kimber, Springfield, etc. in the 1911 market and S&W and Ruger in the revolver market.  They know how, the people running the company just refuse to do it.  All they would need to do is drop the bogus Civilian/LEO-Military distinction on ARs and market the rifles to the people that they want.  Maybe try to be at least a little price competitive  but that is less important than dropping stupid mis-features like sear blocks, non-standard pin sizes, putting on flash hiders and bayonet lugs and shipping >10 round mags.  They already make all those products, so its not like they would have to do anything different other than marketing.  As for the 1911, all they need to do is drop the cheezy plastic mainspring housing and return to the original 1911 trigger design, and try to be at least a little price competitive with Kimber and Springfield for comparable models.  And for their revolvers...  all they need to do is start making them again.  Given the reaction on the used market to one when they come up, they would sell, and they wouldn't have to do too much to be price competitive with Smith & Wesson, although Ruger and Taurus would be a big challenge for them. I just wish someone would save Colt and fire their boneheaded management.

Considering their longevity I do not share your concern about the dodo and all that.  Sounds like a bunch of wild speculation regarding the sky is falling and such.

Quoted: Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.  I'm an auto fan personally, but I'd bet that unless the pinko anti-gunners get their way and ban all handguns that there will be a thriving business in selling revolvers when both you and I are long dust in the grave.

My crystal ball disagrees with yours.  But if yours is correct about market forces shifting from military to making wheel guns am sure Colt's will be right there as they have been for well over 100 years.

oh.....but they have ..................................................Turkey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



YMMV
Bill

How many lobists did that costs?
If they put half their concerns in the American public as they do with their lobists they would be a better company and this discussion would not be here.

Quoted: Quoted: Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them? Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see. Colt's has survived wars ending before, what would be different about this war ending then past wars?

How about the FN ARMR(?) and the HK416/417?

These are the true threats to Colts future with the U.S. military. Unfortunately Colt seems to be interested more in Bushmaster's use of the name "M4" and a second heat shield in a set of hand guards. Colt had better start coming up with something new and innovative to impress the U.S. military or the future could be bleak. Contracts with third world countries like Turkey are not going to replace losing the U.S. military. Losing this lawsuit should be their wake up call that lawsuits against their competitors are not the answer, at least not anymore.

These are the true threats to Colts future with the U.S. military. Unfortunately Colt seems to be interested more in Bushmaster's use of the name "M4" and a second heat shield in a set of hand guards. Colt had better start coming up with something new and innovative to impress the U.S. military or the future could be bleak.

I am pretty sure truer words have been spoken, but I have had too much red wine to look them up.

I confess to all spelling errors in advance, even those that are not mine.

Bill

Quoted: Quoted: Why? It seems to be a fairly well documented fact. Hell, if Tweak gives them this much credit it has to be true. He would not be cutting Bushmaster any slack if this information were in serious doubt. I mean in reality what does it really mean? It's only a few hundred carbines at the most. This tiny amount of Bushmaster supplied M4’s bothers you this much? My God, this should not ruin a Colt fans lunch. Did you read tweak's last post?

This one?

Quoted: Try this on for size, a long time ago someone on the old mailing list ran a search through the .gov contractors and found that BFI was listed as supplier for a couple of items including: Colt M16A2 M16A3 M16A4 FN M16A2 Bushmaster: 1. Cheekpiece, Telestock 2. Barrel, 16 inch, Commando Assy. Includes handguards, shields, gas tube, delta ring 3. Rifle, 5.56 XM15E2S specs: 16 inch full floating barrel, flat top, military upper and lower assembly, safe/semi/full auto trigger group, GG-F-FLIP foresite on barrel, collapsible telestock, titanium firing pin Armalite and Olympic Arms Both have CAGE numbers, both inactive DPMS, Rock River Arms and ASA do not have a CAGE number and are not listed in the NSN supply system. Maybe those are the 65 guns?.

ha, fucking ha.  

to colt.

Colt needs to get their head out of their backside for customer service.  

Colt needs to get their head out of their backside for customer service.

and that is THE problem as Colt only sees the military as their customers, we mean nothing.
Colt and their part owner, the State of Conn. don't believe in the civilain ownership of these evil firearms they sell but can not make in Conn. Does anybody but me see any BS in all of this???

Bill

Quoted: How about the FN ARMR(?) and the HK416/417? These are the true threats to Colts future with the U.S. military. Unfortunately Colt seems to be interested more in Bushmaster's use of the name "M4" and a second heat shield in a set of hand guards. Colt had better start coming up with something new and innovative to impress the U.S. military or the future could be bleak. Contracts with third world countries like Turkey are not going to replace losing the U.S. military. Losing this lawsuit should be their wake up call that lawsuits against their competitors are not the answer, at least not anymore.

In regards to the FN SCAR, you hit it right on the head.  That is a most serious threat to Colt's.

Colt's does have things up thier sleave that we know about, like the M5, and that fancy pants lubricating coating, but I don't see those saving them from FN.

Put, do we know what else they got cooking?

Quoted: oh.....but they have ..................................................Turkey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YMMV Bill How many lobists did that costs? If they put half their concerns in the American public as they do with their lobists they would be a better company and this discussion would not be here.

What is up with this lobbyist thing?  Can you name one Colt's lobbyist?

Quoted: This one?

Nope, this one:

Quoted: OK, now I'm getting confused, I wasn't looking at the dates, yeah I can see the break in logic there.

You see, Bushmaster could not have gotten the M4 TDP in 1990 because there was no such thing as a M4 TDP until 1996.  And for more new flashes, Mattel never made the M16, the P in MP means Proofed, and Vulcan does not supply the "Special Forces".

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I always find it odd that a few individuals get all fired up over the idea that Bushmaster sold a few M4's to the military. What difference does it make? Does the thought of Bushmaster having the “All-Powerful" TDP really make that much of a difference to you? No, the false idea that they did get is bothersome. Why? It seems to be a fairly well documented fact. Hell, if Tweak gives them this much credit it has to be true. He would not be cutting Bushmaster any slack if this information were in serious doubt. I mean in reality what does it really mean? It's only a few hundred carbines at the most. This tiny amount of Bushmaster supplied M4’s bothers you this much? My God, this should not ruin a Colt fans lunch.

+1

Bushmaster supplied 60+ rifles to military. This is fact immortalized in the transcript of court proceedings. There is nothing to debate. No amount of whining about TDP's or mil spec numbers is going to change this much solidified fact.  

Not misinformation, not a rumor. It's a fact, bitches. Now stop your freaking rants and move on.

Bushmaster had a military contract. Bushmaster supplied Mil spec weapons. Because by definition it the military uses something it suddenly has a military specification. Say it ten times over and over and it will get easier for you to say, just swallow your kool aid first

Freaking get over it...

Quoted: Quoted: How about the FN ARMR(?) and the HK416/417? These are the true threats to Colts future with the U.S. military. Unfortunately Colt seems to be interested more in Bushmaster's use of the name "M4" and a second heat shield in a set of hand guards. Colt had better start coming up with something new and innovative to impress the U.S. military or the future could be bleak. Contracts with third world countries like Turkey are not going to replace losing the U.S. military. Losing this lawsuit should be their wake up call that lawsuits against their competitors are not the answer, at least not anymore. In regards to the FN SCAR, you hit it right on the head.  That is a most serious threat to Colt's. Colt's does have things up thier sleave that we know about, like the M5, and that fancy pants lubricating coating, but I don't see those saving them from FN. Put, do we know what else they got cooking?

I think both the FN and the HK are serious threats. The HK416 has already replaced at least a certian portion of the shorty AR's and M4's in a few Tier 1 military & LEO units. That should scare the hell out of Colt.  I also do not see "Dry" coatings as having any impact. Did Colt even submit the M5 to the SCAR competition? If they did it apparently did not fair well and that’s bad news for Colt.

The article clearly states that Bushmaster supplied 65 rifles under the designation of "XM15ES2 M4". It could be a prototype designation, or it could be coincidence.

The term "M4" dates back to a few years prior to Bushmaster's contract, meaning the M4 designation could have been experimental, but Bushy provided these facts just to prove that they supplied a military request using the term "M4" before it was an official designation. I have heard from multiple sources that the idea of the M4 frst started back in the late eighties, meaning that it could very well have been on both early Bushmaster prototypes as well as Colt.

Also, Bushmaster could have supplied more rifles aside from the M4's, but we will never know as those facts were irrelevant to this particualr case, so there was no logical point in bringing them up, unless they infringed Colt's trademark rights.

I have no dog in this fight, but I would appreciate if we could keep this civil. This is not a discussion about what brand is better, it is a discussion about the out come of a lawsuit pertaining to the two companies. (I think both of them are great brands myself.)

Quoted: Quoted: Your comments show that you really need to look at the civilian firearm market, the market that Colt gave up on long before 9/11. These are all very lucrative markets, if they weren't would everyone an dhis brother be making items and weapons for them? Colt makes a damned good product, but they exist now only because of government contracts, Which will dry up, and then we will see Colt go the way of the dodo. Which will be a sad day, but unless the management of Colt realizes that they can do more than make M4's and very high dollar custom shop weapons, it will be a day we will see. Colt's has survived wars ending before, what would be different about this war ending then past wars?

Has everyone forgotten that Colt had to file for Chapter 11 in 1992 (a few years after it lost the M-16 contract and the State bought a share fo teh company)?  It's not like Colt hasn't been in bankruptcy before.  Maybe if when it goes belly up again, Eagle Arms can buy it cheap and run it right.

Quoted: Quoted: This one? Nope, this one: Quoted: OK, now I'm getting confused, I wasn't looking at the dates, yeah I can see the break in logic there. You see, Bushmaster could not have gotten the M4 TDP in 1990 because there was no such thing as a M4 TDP until 1996.  And for more new flashes, Mattel never made the M16, the P in MP means Proofed, and Vulcan does not supply the "Special Forces".

I think this is splitting hairs. It's common knowledge that at least one Tier 1 military unit had M4's long before 1996. Since information about such units is not posted on the web this might explain the missing information that has led to the confusion. No question that M4's were in service long before the official TDP existed. I also think it's safe to assume if the government could not buy M4's fast enough to use Colt, the M4's purchased were not going to some field bakery battalion. Just my two cents, take it for what’s it's worth.

Quoted: How about the FN ARMR(?) and the HK416/417? These are the true threats to Colts future with the U.S. military. Unfortunately Colt seems to be interested more in Bushmaster's use of the name "M4" and a second heat shield in a set of hand guards. Colt had better start coming up with something new and innovative to impress the U.S. military or the future could be bleak. Contracts with third world countries like Turkey are not going to replace losing the U.S. military. Losing this lawsuit should be their wake up call that lawsuits against their competitors are not the answer, at least not anymore.

The other big threat to Colt is the year 2011.  That's when the M4 Addendum expires.  The military doesn't buy from Colt because Colt is the best, they buy from Colt because that's what they agreed to to settle a lawsuit.  Once that's done, anyone can compete for the M4 business.

Quoted: Bushmaster had a military contract. Bushmaster supplied Mil spec weapons. Because by definition it the military uses something it suddenly has a military specification. Say it ten times over and over and it will get easier for you to say, just swallow your kool aid first Freaking get over it...

What milspec?

Quoted: The other big threat to Colt is the year 2011.  That's when the M4 Addendum expires.  The military doesn't buy from Colt because Colt is the best, they buy from Colt because that's what they agreed to to settle a lawsuit.  Once that's done, anyone can compete for the M4 business.

I don't think the details of the M4 addendum are public.  But could well be that the US Government will have to pay royalties after 2011?

Quoted: Has everyone forgotten that Colt had to file for Chapter 11 in 1992 (a few years after it lost the M-16 contract and the State bought a share fo teh company)?  It's not like Colt hasn't been in bankruptcy before.  Maybe if when it goes belly up again, Eagle Arms can buy it cheap and run it right.

Now I am all for that, Mark Westrom is the man in my book!

Quoted: I think both the FN and the HK are serious threats. The HK416 has already replaced at least a certian portion of the shorty AR's and M4's in a few Tier 1 military & LEO units. That should scare the hell out of Colt.  I also do not see "Dry" coatings as having any impact. Did Colt even submit the M5 to the SCAR competition? If they did it apparently did not fair well and that’s bad news for Colt.

416 sales are small potatoes, don't see how that could be construed as a threat.  Just don't follow along with that one.

Don't know if the M5 was there for the SCAR trials.  Do know that no AR could meet the requirements, in that one of them was that the rifle could be shot with a bore obstruction without blowing into itty bitty pieces, something an AR can't do.

Quoted: I think this is splitting hairs. It's common knowledge that at least one Tier 1 military unit had M4's long before 1996. Since information about such units is not posted on the web this might explain the missing information that has led to the confusion. No question that M4's were in service long before the official TDP existed. I also think it's safe to assume if the government could not buy M4's fast enough to use Colt, the M4's purchased were not going to some field bakery battalion. Just my two cents, take it for what’s it's worth.

The argument I had was with the idea that Bushmaster had the M4 TDP before it existed.  Guess you can call that splitting hairs, but I call it impossible.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: This one? Nope, this one: Quoted: OK, now I'm getting confused, I wasn't looking at the dates, yeah I can see the break in logic there. You see, Bushmaster could not have gotten the M4 TDP in 1990 because there was no such thing as a M4 TDP until 1996.  And for more new flashes, Mattel never made the M16, the P in MP means Proofed, and Vulcan does not supply the "Special Forces". I think this is splitting hairs. It's common knowledge that at least one Tier 1 military unit had M4's long before 1996. Since information about such units is not posted on the web this might explain the missing information that has led to the confusion. No question that M4's were in service long before the official TDP existed. I also think it's safe to assume if the government could not buy M4's fast enough to use Colt, the M4's purchased were not going to some field bakery battalion. Just my two cents, take it for what’s it's worth.

It seems sort of strange that the government could contract in 1990 with Bushmaster for "sixty-five carbines 'having all the physical and technical characteristics of the M4 carbine'" if there were no specs for the M4 carbine at the time.  But that's the government for you.

Quoted: Quoted: The other big threat to Colt is the year 2011.  That's when the M4 Addendum expires.  The military doesn't buy from Colt because Colt is the best, they buy from Colt because that's what they agreed to to settle a lawsuit.  Once that's done, anyone can compete for the M4 business. I don't think the details of the M4 addendum are public.  But could well be that the US Government will have to pay royalties after 2011?

You are correct on both counts.  It's super secret, but generally reported that Colt's exclusive contract expires in 2011 although Colt would still get royalties until 2050.

Quoted: Quoted: Has everyone forgotten that Colt had to file for Chapter 11 in 1992 (a few years after it lost the M-16 contract and the State bought a share fo teh company)?  It's not like Colt hasn't been in bankruptcy before.  Maybe if when it goes belly up again, Eagle Arms can buy it cheap and run it right. Now I am all for that, Mark Westrom is the man in my book!

I've seen and talked to Mark and his wife Judy the last three times I went to the Tulsa show.  He IS an extraordinarily nice guy, and he runs a good company.  What is amazing, though, is that his wife is a trained machinist and does the CNC programming and tool purchasing.  I usually end up talking to her longer about machine shop stuff than I do talking to Mark about guns.

Quoted: Quoted: I think this is splitting hairs. It's common knowledge that at least one Tier 1 military unit had M4's long before 1996. Since information about such units is not posted on the web this might explain the missing information that has led to the confusion. No question that M4's were in service long before the official TDP existed. I also think it's safe to assume if the government could not buy M4's fast enough to use Colt, the M4's purchased were not going to some field bakery battalion. Just my two cents, take it for what’s it's worth. The argument I had was with the idea that Bushmaster had the M4 TDP before it existed.  Guess you can call that splitting hairs, but I call it impossible.

I'm saying it's possible that Bushmaster had the "Official M4 specifications" before their was a TDP in order to fill this government order. If M4's existed before the official TDP (Which we know they did, it just wasn't common knowledge), why couldn't Bushmaster have been given the specifications before it existed also?

I know this sounds confusing; maybe I need to word this better.

Great conversation by the way, I’m enjoying it. I don't really get into these TDP semantics threads very often, but I find this very interesting.

What is up with this lobbyist thing? Can you name one Colt's lobbyist?

Ekie

No I can't name a single person worth note at Colt at all. I do own a small business and I have figured a little about how the Govt works and to operated at that level some things are obvious. I would think that if a company like Colt needed (and it does) to keep the contract that they have not lost to FN etc, they had better have someone dinning the powers that be so they are "top of mind."

What do you think?

It is really just where you play the game. Bushy plays the civy game it appears to me. They pamper us and palce ads for our money. We buy their guns and so on. In the end it is a coke/pepsi thingie. It is just we get more passonite about our firearms than our sodapop.

Bill
Remember, I have both, coke and pepsi