Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page AR-15 » AR Discussions
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Site Notices
Posted: 3/30/2005 1:34:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:18:21 PM EDT
[#1]
maybe it is a version of the now-popular Samson FF offering?

does that read that the govt is buying FF products from all of them (or did I miss something?)

sounds like Daniel Defense, KAC and ARMS all got some biz.

there will be some great looking M4/M16's and variants in our boys hands.

Awesome!!

Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:26:22 PM EDT
[#2]
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:29:07 PM EDT
[#3]

Quoted:
maybe it is a version of the now-popular Samson FF offering?





Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:36:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:40:27 PM EDT
[#5]
A.R.M.S. and not LaRue Tactical.......

C4iGrant is not going to like this.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:40:29 PM EDT
[#6]
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 2:46:42 PM EDT
[#7]
...mumm...


/S2
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 4:16:00 PM EDT
[#8]
Any of us that attended this years shot show experienced the closed mouthed response to questions regarding the candidate systems submitted to the government.

Neither ARMS, KAC or DD would answer any questions about their respective submissions. The government has obviously picked the three systems they liked the most after all kinds of military testing and I'm sure we will know what the systems are when the government and the manufacturers allow them to be released.

It seems none of the aftermarket systems we see pushed on these boards all of the time was selected....I'm definitely going to wait and see what these systems are before buying anything new.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 5:08:24 PM EDT
[#9]

Quoted:
It seems none of the aftermarket systems we see pushed on these boards all of the time was selected....I'm definitely going to wait and see what these systems are before buying anything new.



I'm just thinking out loud here but governments requirements are not generally the same as ours.

In this case, it looks like one of their requirements is the the rail be installable\removable without removing the FSB and it would also need to be able to accept an M203. A rail like the LaRue will not work for their needs.  I've been seeing rumors for a while now that DD had designed a 2-piece FF rail. My bet is that this is the rail the government is buying from them.

The government also needs to consider a companies manufacturing ability to deliver a large orders in a short time frame (without sacrificing quality). I don't know for a sure but I get the impression the LaRue is not that big and probably couldn't crank out the kind of numbers the government needs?
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 6:58:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 7:02:05 PM EDT
[#11]
How can this be? ARMS is "last week's gear", the cool kids don't run it anymore.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 7:06:44 PM EDT
[#12]
The military is heavilt invested in M203's to fit the RAS and standard M4 handgaurds.  LMT sells them with a three lever QD, so an MRP with that setup would be about perfect, but the Army can't afford it.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 7:15:07 PM EDT
[#13]

Quoted:
How can this be?



Because ARMS has a new model....
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 7:15:25 PM EDT
[#14]

Rail Interface Systems II (RIS II)
 

Ray
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 7:20:22 PM EDT
[#15]
$179.45 each? Can I get in on that group buy?

They are gonna shell out all this cash and then trash them in a few years when the SCAR comes online.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 8:09:02 PM EDT
[#16]
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 8:16:46 PM EDT
[#17]

Quoted:
maybe it is a version of the now-popular Samson FF offering?





I would like to know the true story if Sampson ripped of Troy. if they did, then I would never consider their product. On the other hand, perhaps they didn't. I just don't know.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 8:16:50 PM EDT
[#18]

Quoted:
How can this be? ARMS is "last week's gear", the cool kids don't run it anymore.



LOL
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 8:59:44 PM EDT
[#19]
A thread was already posted about this and it goes equally to ARMS, KAC and Daniel Defense.
Link Posted: 3/30/2005 9:35:18 PM EDT
[#20]
Link Posted: 3/31/2005 6:44:14 PM EDT
[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
maybe it is a version of the now-popular Samson FF offering?





I would like to know the true story if Sampson ripped of Troy. if they did, then I would never consider their product. On the other hand, perhaps they didn't. I just don't know.



Considering it is Samsom who has the license agreement with ARMS for the design of the lower rail and was first to the patent office with the complete design of the MRF system, hmm......makes you wonder who stole what?  
Link Posted: 3/31/2005 6:48:49 PM EDT
[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
$179.45 each? Can I get in on that group buy?




I am sure if we got 92,877 people to chip in, we could do it...



The truth of the matter is that with those kind of numbers the tooling is long since paid for and they COULD sell to us for the same price and make money. Greed is a serious motivator though, don't expect it.
Link Posted: 3/31/2005 7:32:39 PM EDT
[#23]

Quoted:
C4iGrant is not going to like this.


Link Posted: 3/31/2005 8:24:49 PM EDT
[#24]

Quoted:
maybe it is a version of the now-popular Samson FF offering?




It isn't...


Quoted:

I would like to know the true story if Sampson ripped of Troy. if they did, then I would never consider their product. On the other hand, perhaps they didn't. I just don't know.



Very few in fact do "know" three sides to every story et al...


Quoted:

Considering it is Samsom who has the license agreement with ARMS for the design of the lower rail and was first to the patent office with the complete design of the MRF system, hmm......makes you wonder who stole what?  



While I reserve my own personal judgement for the outcome of the dealings, and I don't discourage anyone from feeling free to postulate here in an open forum, the fact of the matter is quite simply Samson v. Troy has absolutely nothing to do with the thread at hand, or the rail system in question.


/S2
Link Posted: 3/31/2005 8:30:56 PM EDT
[#25]
Link Posted: 3/31/2005 8:59:56 PM EDT
[#26]
So, is it one design all three makers will produce, a single hybridized version having features of all three, or three seperate desogns that will be built?
Link Posted: 3/31/2005 9:02:37 PM EDT
[#27]

Quoted:
In this case, it looks like one of their requirements is the the rail be installable\removable without removing the FSB and it would also need to be able to accept an M203.



That was not a requirement.
I should not type as I am not certain, but I beleive both the DD & KAC submissions require removing the front site and use a new barrel nut. If the award for KAC is the URX II that is. DD stated here about this time last year that they were using a new barrel nut. If I remember correctly, it is a FF tube with a removable bottom.
I am really talking out of my ass and will stop now.
Apoligies in advance if I am disseminating misinformation.
Thanks.....Chad
Page AR-15 » AR Discussions
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top