User Panel
The rumor says Bushmaster decided to go with metal, Magpul hasn't had any say in the ACR in a couple years. Thats coming straight from your ass. Magpul has stated in this very thread that they have been involved in every design change of the ACR. |
|
Quoted:
The rumor says Bushmaster decided to go with metal, Magpul hasn't had any say in the ACR in a couple years. You Sir once again continue to defecate from your oral cavity via your fingertips in this forum. No say huh? Really? We have continued to have a direct relationship with BM and Rem on the ACR project. Enough is enough SOC. With every post you make you confuse people more. Just for clarification, the ACR will have a injected molded lower receiver. The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The following was posted in the BM section today; Quoted:
Speaking of updates. I called Bushmaster today. Here is what I am told: 1) The rifle will be ready by mid 2010 for civilians. 2) They can't tell me will it use AR15 barrels or will it use propriatory barrel. 3) They "replaced all the plastic parts with real metal", as a result,the price will be.... $2400 for basic model. For money like this, I am buying, MSAR E4 and two conversion kits. 4) I dunno were they smoking crack when they told me that, or did they think to make a joke and see how quick it will end up on the internet. But thats what I was told today. That puts the rifle above SCAR and HK416 in price. WAAAYY too rich for my blood. I think that for modular rifle I will purchase an MSAR E4 or whatever else comes out. For 2400 dead presidents, the rifle should also already come with M203 underbarrel grenade launcher Just passing it along..... Yeah, Magpul who specializes in polymers (which they've been using to hype the rifle for two years) suddenly scrap the polymer in favor of "real metal" without telling anyone (and all the recent pictures are of a polymer rifle). Umm...no. FYI..... there were pictures floating around of a couple ACR's withe aluminum lowers that accepted AR15 style grips. The grip area was designed/machined to allow use of standard grips, or any other sort of standard AR15 grip out there. I saw the pictures, so it's not internet rumor. Maybe the Remington one will have an aluminum lower and the Bushmaster will be polymer. Seems plausible to me. I'd prefer to have one that says Remington on the side... wether it has an aluminum lower or not. -ZA |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The rumor says Bushmaster decided to go with metal, Magpul hasn't had any say in the ACR in a couple years. You Sir once again continue to defecate from your oral cavity via your fingertips in this forum. No say huh? Really? We have continued to have a direct relationship with BM and Rem on the ACR project. Enough is enough SOC. With every post you make you confuse people more. Just for clarification, the ACR will have a injected molded lower receiver. The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. LOLZ.... Drake beat me to it! I'm cool with a polymer lower. I just want an FDE Remington ACR..... I'm sitting on the cash, as I'm done buying rifles of any sort until the ACR is released! I want to SBR mine the day I buy it. -ZA |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The rumor says Bushmaster decided to go with metal, Magpul hasn't had any say in the ACR in a couple years. You Sir once again continue to defecate from your oral cavity via your fingertips in this forum. No say huh? Really? We have continued to have a direct relationship with BM and Rem on the ACR project. Enough is enough SOC. With every post you make you confuse people more. Just for clarification, the ACR will have a injected molded lower receiver. The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. We all know SOC is just here to confuse and to start drama! Anyway you can confirm if we will know details at shot? Or is shot going to be rather "tight lipped" as well? thanks again for the great gear! |
|
I'm holding out for a massoud to see if i can get it in 6.5 creedmoor I'm hopeing it will come out late 2010 pretty pretty please with scope on top
Well that and i don't have an acr fund yet |
|
Quoted:
FYI..... there were pictures floating around of a couple ACR's withe aluminum lowers that accepted AR15 style grips. The grip area was designed/machined to allow use of standard grips, or any other sort of standard AR15 grip out there. I saw the pictures, so it's not internet rumor. Maybe the Remington one will have an aluminum lower and the Bushmaster will be polymer. Seems plausible to me. I'd prefer to have one that says Remington on the side... wether it has an aluminum lower or not. -ZA Yeah, I've seen the pictures and heard that they were going to make an available metal lower as well but I was saying they weren't going to scrap the polymer lower they've been showing for so long. Quoted:
You Sir once again continue to defecate from your oral cavity via your fingertips in this forum. No say huh? Really? We have continued to have a direct relationship with BM and Rem on the ACR project. Enough is enough SOC. With every post you make you confuse people more. Just for clarification, the ACR will have a injected molded lower receiver. The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. Thanks for clearing that up, can't wait for it! |
|
Quoted:
I'm holding out for a massoud to see if i can get it in 6.5 creedmoor I'm hopeing it will come out late 2010 pretty pretty please with scope on top Well that and i don't have an acr fund yet If I knew when they were releasing the Massoud and it was soon enough I'd hold out, as it is you may be waiting quite a while. |
|
Quoted:
How hard would it be to mold a pistol grip stud here instead of a one size fits all MOE style grip? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/Mohitojj/Grip.jpg That's the one thing that boggles my mind. Swap stocks, handguards, even lowers, calibers, barrels, and trigger groups. But your stuck with a one size fits all pistol grip. Then add insult to injury by offering a lower that features a grip stud and say, it "is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum." There is going to be a big hole in the market to fill. Considering your extensive experience in firearms design, your vast knowledge in synthetics engineering, and your long track record in producing successful lines of quality and reliable firearms, I'd figured that you could have come to this conclusion yourself. Or perhaps you are keeping it to yourself so as to not leak trade secrets. Regardless, here goes, SOC: Phenolic to phenolic connections such as you suggest, whether reinforced with glass or carbon fiber or not, create weak points that, given any impact caused during combat, could not only break the connection, but could also cause greater damage to areas surrounding the connection rendering the weapon useless to the user. If you like the idea, then by all means, let's drop your ass in a hazardous shooting situation and break the grip off of your ACR and see how much you like it. |
|
Quoted:
Christmas is a special time of year. In keeping with the spirit of the season, and carrying on the intent of the "Awesome Desktop Wallpaper" thread, here's my submission: http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u127/akguynumber12/Desktops/SOC-Response.gif Of course, mine is spread over a 27-inch monitor, but I think you get the idea. Thanks, Drake, for a very merry Magpul Christmas. |
|
Good pic of the new Bushmaster ACR on aacblog.com
Not sure if I'm allowed to post it but... Edit: sp |
|
Quoted:
Good pic of the new Bushmaster ACR on aacblog.com Not sure if I'm allow to post it but... Hot link? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
How hard would it be to mold a pistol grip stud here instead of a one size fits all MOE style grip? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/Mohitojj/Grip.jpg That's the one thing that boggles my mind. Swap stocks, handguards, even lowers, calibers, barrels, and trigger groups. But your stuck with a one size fits all pistol grip. Then add insult to injury by offering a lower that features a grip stud and say, it "is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum." There is going to be a big hole in the market to fill. Considering your extensive experience in firearms design, your vast knowledge in synthetics engineering, and your long track record in producing successful lines of quality and reliable firearms, I'd figured that you could have come to this conclusion yourself. Or perhaps you are keeping it to yourself so as to not leak trade secrets. Regardless, here goes, SOC: Phenolic to phenolic connections such as you suggest, whether reinforced with glass or carbon fiber or not, create weak points that, given any impact caused during combat, could not only break the connection, but could also cause greater damage to areas surrounding the connection rendering the weapon useless to the user. If you like the idea, then by all means, let's drop your ass in a hazardous shooting situation and break the grip off of your ACR and see how much you like it. Your correct, I am indeed keeping it to myself as a trade secret. At least tell I have a patent. In the end you'll be able to grip the barrel like a baseball bat and swing the rifle pistol grip first into whatever you want. It will probably break the MIAD along where it is cut for grip inserts but it won't break at the the receiver or the mounting point. If lowers were molded to be ready for installation of the mounting point the molds would be simpler as all you need to mold in place of the trigger guard and the pistol grip would be a rectangular hole that extends into the FCG aria. |
|
full auto ACR in the last portion of this video from the FB3G 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rluxRbnHDgI |
|
HOT DAMN!!!!!
A REAL Bushmaster ACR!!! In BLACK!!! aacblogdotcom to see it. WOW!!! -ZA |
|
Quoted:
The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. That's fairly, if not mostly retarded. That's like saying, "We're testing the good stuff, and when it comes out, it's only for Military/LE/SF." When the hell did Magpul/Bushmaster/Remington become Heckler and Koch lite? You guys are starting to smell more and more like sellouts... (think Ruger just before the AWB in 1993) What's wrong with just making them *ALL* top of the line and marketing the heck out of it? |
|
I called yesterday about the possibility of getting a stripped plastic lower once the ACR is available.
I was told similar to what a couple other guys have been told about replacing plastic parts with metal and that I would have to buy a complete rifle. Least a metal lower would solve the "Phenolic to phenolic connections" problem without a dbout. Quoted:
Quoted:
Speaking of updates. I called Bushmaster today. Here is what I am told: 1) The rifle will be ready by mid 2010 for civilians. 2) They can't tell me will it use AR15 barrels or will it use propriatory barrel. 3) They "replaced all the plastic parts with real metal", as a result,the price will be.... $2400 for basic model. For money like this, I am buying, MSAR E4 and two conversion kits. 4) I dunno were they smoking crack when they told me that, or did they think to make a joke and see how quick it will end up on the internet. But thats what I was told today. That puts the rifle above SCAR and HK416 in price. WAAAYY too rich for my blood. I think that for modular rifle I will purchase an MSAR E4 or whatever else comes out. For 2400 dead presidents, the rifle should also already come with M203 underbarrel grenade launcher For what its worth thats the same thing as I was told by Bushmaster customer service twice by two different people, first time when I placed an order, and then again a week later when I called back with a question about the order.. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. That's fairly, if not mostly retarded. That's like saying, "We're testing the good stuff, and when it comes out, it's only for Military/LE/SF." When the hell did Magpul/Bushmaster/Remington become Heckler and Koch lite? You guys are starting to smell more and more like sellouts... (think Ruger just before the AWB in 1993) What's wrong with just making them *ALL* top of the line and marketing the heck out of it? You are assuming that a metal lower is somehow better than a polymer lower. Why? If someone requests a specific design feature then why is it a problem for them to develop it for that group? Is that selling out? Maybe you shouldn't put words into Magpul's mouth and make asinine assumptions and analogies. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. That's fairly, if not mostly retarded. That's like saying, "We're testing the good stuff, and when it comes out, it's only for Military/LE/SF." When the hell did Magpul/Bushmaster/Remington become Heckler and Koch lite? You guys are starting to smell more and more like sellouts... (think Ruger just before the AWB in 1993) What's wrong with just making them *ALL* top of the line and marketing the heck out of it? All reasonable-guess type speculation, but: 1. The metal receiver will be more expensive, by virtue of being more expensive to manufacture. That means a higher price on the final product, and that translates into fewer sales down the road, possibly at a lower profit margin to boot. 2. If the metal receiver is figured out for whatever contract they're looking at, it seems likely that it will also wind up available for purchase to the general public. Unless the terms of the contract specify otherwise, might as well sell overruns, and, if there's demand, additional units to the civvie market. About the only way I see this not happening is if the lower is specifically to allow the use of NFA/Class 3 AR-15 FCGs. IIRC, Magpul et al have gone to some effort to make that impossible with the standard ACR, so it might run afoul of ATF whims. 'Course, that could mean a civvie-market-specific metal lower, so who knows? 3. Because it's still 'in the testing phase', that will be somewhere in the future. Because it is in testing now, it's probably the near-ish future. If you can break the standard receiver inside the timeframe under normal use, you may have an excellent future ahead of you as a tester, though. 4. Because the upper receiver of the ACR seems to be the serialized part, you should be able to purchase spare or replacement lowers through the mail. If the rifle takes off, I expect that there will be some options available. 5. Whether the metal lower is 'better' than the polymer one is likely to be a matter of opinion. It will heavier, for instance. It will be more durable, but the lower receiver probably isn't subjected to a lot of force in the first place. Maybe we could chill out a little? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The metal receiver is in the testing phase and is intended for specific end users that I will not disclose in a public forum. That's fairly, if not mostly retarded. That's like saying, "We're testing the good stuff, and when it comes out, it's only for Military/LE/SF." When the hell did Magpul/Bushmaster/Remington become Heckler and Koch lite? You guys are starting to smell more and more like sellouts... (think Ruger just before the AWB in 1993) What's wrong with just making them *ALL* top of the line and marketing the heck out of it? You are assuming that a metal lower is somehow better than a polymer lower. Why? If someone requests a specific design feature then why is it a problem for them to develop it for that group? Is that selling out? Maybe you shouldn't put words into Magpul's mouth and make asinine assumptions and analogies. this |
|
Quoted:
All reasonable-guess type speculation, but: 1. The metal receiver will be more expensive, by virtue of being more expensive to manufacture. That means a higher price on the final product, and that translates into fewer sales down the road, possibly at a lower profit margin to boot. I agree that it might be more expensive, but does anyone know what the price on the final product will be? I've heard anywhere from $1400 (Original Magpul) to $2400 (Here on this site, but don't remember exactly where) and exactly how much more an aluminum receiver would make that go up. Ar receivers are selling at the cheapest price I've ever seen. Granted a large part of that could be because of the market conditions and ridiculous amounts of competition, but how much does it really cost to machine bar stock into a forged receiver? I don't think it'd be that much more than it does to create a polymer lower. 3. Because it's still 'in the testing phase', that will be somewhere in the future. Because it is in testing now, it's probably the near-ish future. If you can break the standard receiver inside the timeframe under normal use, you may have an excellent future ahead of you as a tester, though. I'm not taking offense at them making one in the future for the entire market, I'm taking offense at his saying that it is intended for special people, i.e. SF/LE/.mil. I just like metal better than plastic. It's got that "Strong" quality that appeals to me. 4. Because the upper receiver of the ACR seems to be the serialized part, you should be able to purchase spare or replacement lowers through the mail. If the rifle takes off, I expect that there will be some options available. I guess that is really up to the marketing department at Magpul/Remington/Bushmaster, and depends quite heavily on end unit price as to how popular it might or might not be. I can get my hands on a SCAR for a little more than $2000 dollars and an AR for right around $1100, with accessories to make it an equal to or superior than that SCAR. FN could have made an absolute killing on the SCAR. Instead it's all but flopped. If the Masada is released for less, the SCAR will be a complete disaster as the Masada/ACR represents not only a technological step up, but still fills roughly the same gun style (Polymer rifle) for less. Maybe we could chill out a little? Unfortunately my level of heat or chill is impossible to convey through writing. I'm not all that hot, and in fact am quite chilled because I have the sneaking suspicion that they'll, stupidly, price the end unit price higher than they originally said, and higher than most people's pocketbooks can withstand. I'm not really all that enthusiastic about it because I'm sure they're going to overprice it. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised, though I'm sure the end price will surprise me the other way all the more. |
|
I'd much rather have the poly lower than a metal one.
Lighter, keeps the cost of the rifle lower, and pretty much just as strong. Magpul doesn't use cheap parts or materials. I believe Magpul has our best interests at heart and is trying to keep the rifle around 1400 dollars, + - 200. |
|
Quoted:
Unfortunately my level of heat or chill is impossible to convey through writing. I'm not all that hot, and in fact am quite chilled because I have the sneaking suspicion that they'll, stupidly, price the end unit price higher than they originally said, and higher than most people's pocketbooks can withstand. I'm not really all that enthusiastic about it because I'm sure they're going to overprice it. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised, though I'm sure the end price will surprise me the other way all the more. Okay, so you're not getting worked into a lather, but you're sure everybody involved is doing it wrong. I appreciate the correction. |
|
Quoted:
I'd much rather have the poly lower than a metal one. Lighter, keeps the cost of the rifle lower, and pretty much just as strong. Magpul doesn't use cheap parts or materials. I believe Magpul has our best interests at heart and is trying to keep the rifle around 1400 dollars, + - 200. From your keyboard to ...Bushmaster's/Magpul's ears. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
All reasonable-guess type speculation, but: 1. The metal receiver will be more expensive, by virtue of being more expensive to manufacture. That means a higher price on the final product, and that translates into fewer sales down the road, possibly at a lower profit margin to boot. I agree that it might be more expensive, but does anyone know what the price on the final product will be? I've heard anywhere from $1400 (Original Magpul) to $2400 (Here on this site, but don't remember exactly where) and exactly how much more an aluminum receiver would make that go up. Ar receivers are selling at the cheapest price I've ever seen. Granted a large part of that could be because of the market conditions and ridiculous amounts of competition, but how much does it really cost to machine bar stock into a forged receiver? I don't think it'd be that much more than it does to create a polymer lower. AR receivers are cheap partly because the machinery to mass produce them has been paid for a long time ago and many time over, along with the other reasons you list. Polymer typically is cheaper to use than metal in the abstract. Saying that a metal lower should not cost much more does not make it true. 3. Because it's still 'in the testing phase', that will be somewhere in the future. Because it is in testing now, it's probably the near-ish future. If you can break the standard receiver inside the timeframe under normal use, you may have an excellent future ahead of you as a tester, though. I'm not taking offense at them making one in the future for the entire market, I'm taking offense at his saying that it is intended for special people, i.e. SF/LE/.mil. I just like metal better than plastic. It's got that "Strong" quality that appeals to me. You are putting words into Magpul's mouth. They have started that it was created at the request of another end user, not necessarily because it is somehow superior to a polymer lower. That does not mean that it is solely intended for that end user, or only going to be sold to them. You might like a metal lower, but that is a preference that can only be taken into consideration if you can generate enough sales to justify the development of it. I hate to break it to you but many of the products we put on our ARs, AKs, FALs, etc. were made because someone other than the civilian market requested it. 4. Because the upper receiver of the ACR seems to be the serialized part, you should be able to purchase spare or replacement lowers through the mail. If the rifle takes off, I expect that there will be some options available. I guess that is really up to the marketing department at Magpul/Remington/Bushmaster, and depends quite heavily on end unit price as to how popular it might or might not be. I can get my hands on a SCAR for a little more than $2000 dollars and an AR for right around $1100, with accessories to make it an equal to or superior than that SCAR. FN could have made an absolute killing on the SCAR. Instead it's all but flopped. If the Masada is released for less, the SCAR will be a complete disaster as the Masada/ACR represents not only a technological step up, but still fills roughly the same gun style (Polymer rifle) for less. How has the SCAR flopped? Do you see many SCARs sitting on the shelves? Do you expect the SCAR and the ACR to outsell the AR? If so, then your expectations are way off. Maybe we could chill out a little? Unfortunately my level of heat or chill is impossible to convey through writing. I'm not all that hot, and in fact am quite chilled because I have the sneaking suspicion that they'll, stupidly, price the end unit price higher than they originally said, and higher than most people's pocketbooks can withstand. I'm not really all that enthusiastic about it because I'm sure they're going to overprice it. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised, though I'm sure the end price will surprise me the other way all the more. |
|
I don't see the whole "aluminum lower for certain people" like some of you whiners. He's not saying it's a restricted item like the Ruger Mini-14 folding stock.
If you have the cash to put up to pay magpul to develop a specific part for an expiremental rifle I'm sure they'll take your cash. But, until then this "cool guy group" sounds like they paid to have a part developed and right now the aluminum lower was designed and built for a specific customer and they might be under contract by the group to keep that product for their use only. Someone will make an aluminum lower, I'll guarantee it. But if you want the product to stay within the original price range, it's going to be the basic model, like it or not. The least expensive stock, forgrip, and lower all made out of plastic will keep the base price reasonable. I'm sure that you'll be able to get a nice stock, an aluminum lower, and a highspeed metal railed handguard, but THATS what will drive up production costs. Some of you guys want this project to fail. I'll be honest, wether or not you have any desire to own this weapon, I can't for the life of me understand why you'd want this project to fail. Especially to the point of spreading unsubstantiated rumors. (SOC). I have nothing personally invested in this project, but stupid annoys me. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unfortunately my level of heat or chill is impossible to convey through writing. I'm not all that hot, and in fact am quite chilled because I have the sneaking suspicion that they'll, stupidly, price the end unit price higher than they originally said, and higher than most people's pocketbooks can withstand. I'm not really all that enthusiastic about it because I'm sure they're going to overprice it. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised, though I'm sure the end price will surprise me the other way all the more. Okay, so you're not getting worked into a lather, but you're sure everybody involved is doing it wrong. I appreciate the correction. No, I'm simply rarely surprised at the shit people pull these days when they think they can make a buck. As it was intended, two years ago, the rifle was going to be a rifle for the little guy, priced right. It's what got people so excited. I just don't see that happening anymore. How has the SCAR flopped? Do you see many SCARs sitting on the shelves? Do you expect the SCAR and the ACR to outsell the AR? If so, then your expectations are way off.
Absolutely I see them rotting on the shelves. That or dealers aren't buying them because they don't sell. I'm not going to buy something that I've got no chance of selling or that's going to sit and collect dust while people buy everything around it. Too bad too because it's a fairly nifty rifle, they just think it's worth more than it really is. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unfortunately my level of heat or chill is impossible to convey through writing. I'm not all that hot, and in fact am quite chilled because I have the sneaking suspicion that they'll, stupidly, price the end unit price higher than they originally said, and higher than most people's pocketbooks can withstand. I'm not really all that enthusiastic about it because I'm sure they're going to overprice it. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised, though I'm sure the end price will surprise me the other way all the more. Okay, so you're not getting worked into a lather, but you're sure everybody involved is doing it wrong. I appreciate the correction. No, I'm simply rarely surprised at the shit people pull these days when they think they can make a buck. As it was intended, two years ago, the rifle was going to be a rifle for the little guy, priced right. It's what got people so excited. I just don't see that happening anymore. How has the SCAR flopped? Do you see many SCARs sitting on the shelves? Do you expect the SCAR and the ACR to outsell the AR? If so, then your expectations are way off.
Absolutely I see them rotting on the shelves. That or dealers aren't buying them because they don't sell. I'm not going to buy something that I've got no chance of selling or that's going to sit and collect dust while people buy everything around it. Too bad too because it's a fairly nifty rifle, they just think it's worth more than it really is. +1 I was at one of my local fav. gunstores and thay have had a SCAR on the shelf for a LONG time. They haven't sold the thing and every time I go in there i look at the price tags and it's gone down sine they first got it! I guess it will sell eventually,-but not to me. I wouldn't pay more than $1550 for it. That's about half of what they want for it. -ZA |
|
I'm hoping for an after-market product that will make the charging-handle non-reciprocating. I know it's a little early but that will make the rifle definitely more attractive to me.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
WTF? The guys at Milipol are claiming the ACR now has a reciprocating charging handle? A guy on MP.net was told by the Remington guys that they couldn't get the gun to run right with a non-reciprocating charging handle. Hopefully this is BS (sounds like it). I just got back from attending Milipol this weekend. The rifle on display had the non reciprocating charging handle and there are NO plans for a reciprocating version. The rifle on display was an older version because it was the serial number available when the original export paperwork was submitted. |
|
Quoted:
I'm hoping for an after-market product that will make the charging-handle non-reciprocating. I know it's a little early but that will make the rifle definitely more attractive to me. There will be no after market product to do that. It is non-reciprocating already! Maybe you are talking about the SCAR because it has a reciprocating charging handle. The ACR was rumored to but that rumor was put to rest... in this thread if you care to look back a couple pages. |
|
I'm pretty shocked at the level of Magpul bashing here. I'd say it's pretty obvious they're gonna come out with it. DrDrake has said as much. I don't think if you set aside money for this rifle that you're going to be disappointed and have to go spend it on something else. I know I'm putting the money aside for one. Even though I might have to wait to pick it up till after I get back from deployment.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unfortunately my level of heat or chill is impossible to convey through writing. I'm not all that hot, and in fact am quite chilled because I have the sneaking suspicion that they'll, stupidly, price the end unit price higher than they originally said, and higher than most people's pocketbooks can withstand. I'm not really all that enthusiastic about it because I'm sure they're going to overprice it. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised, though I'm sure the end price will surprise me the other way all the more. Okay, so you're not getting worked into a lather, but you're sure everybody involved is doing it wrong. I appreciate the correction. No, I'm simply rarely surprised at the shit people pull these days when they think they can make a buck. As it was intended, two years ago, the rifle was going to be a rifle for the little guy, priced right. It's what got people so excited. I just don't see that happening anymore. How has the SCAR flopped? Do you see many SCARs sitting on the shelves? Do you expect the SCAR and the ACR to outsell the AR? If so, then your expectations are way off.
Absolutely I see them rotting on the shelves. That or dealers aren't buying them because they don't sell. I'm not going to buy something that I've got no chance of selling or that's going to sit and collect dust while people buy everything around it. Too bad too because it's a fairly nifty rifle, they just think it's worth more than it really is. Is this another one of those things that Magpul said two (three?) years ago when it was just them, before Bushmaster (later Remington) got involved? Basically in the same league as most of the statements that were made back then (No longer applicable)? I keep seeing this ~$1500 price point thrown around but I don't know where it came from. Personally, I find the alleged $2400 MSRP annoying and I'm sure it's because of the ridiculous pricing of the SCAR that they think they can get away with it, but at this point, it seems like all the rifles coming out recently end up selling for several hundreds less than what their MSRP is. Is it overcompensating by the manufacturer? Or maybe it’s the free market working? Probably both. Either way, I’ve got money set aside for the ACR; I’m just waiting on real details from whoever ends up selling it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm hoping for an after-market product that will make the charging-handle non-reciprocating. I know it's a little early but that will make the rifle definitely more attractive to me. There will be no after market product to do that. It is non-reciprocating already! Maybe you are talking about the SCAR because it has a reciprocating charging handle. The ACR was rumored to but that rumor was put to rest... in this thread if you care to look back a couple pages. I do believe this is a case of someone not doing their research properly, or believing unsubstantiated rumors. Rich has come on here himself and said that the charging handle is, and always was, non-reciprocating. The supposed change was a rumor started on another website, and it appears to have been spread to the masses. |
|
Will the Massoud take sr25 trigger groups or something else?
|
|
Quoted:
Will the Massoud take sr25 trigger groups or something else? Dont know this is the ACR thread |
|
Quoted:
Will the Massoud take sr25 trigger groups or something else? This is a tough one to answer considering very few people have actually seen or handled one, much less dissected one. |
|
Quoted:
No, I'm simply rarely surprised at the shit people pull these days when they think they can make a buck. As it was intended, two years ago, the rifle was going to be a rifle for the little guy, priced right. It's what got people so excited. I just don't see that happening anymore. (I'm not sure it's entirely fair to hold either Bushmaster or Remington to statements made by Magpul prior to any agreement between Magpul and Bushmaster, either, but I do understand the frustration.) While I think the rifle's likely to come in higher than the original claims of $1500 (it's been two or three years, and the dollar has weakened a fair bit over that time frame), I don't think I'd get too attached to the $2400 MSRP. Not to say that won't happen (FIIK, man), but we already have DrDrake saying, above, that the rifle will have a plastic lower receiver. If Bushmaster's customer service or sales jockeys say it'll have a metal lower and be $2400, well, if they're wrong on the first point, I expect they might be wrong on the second. (I'm also not sure why one of Bushmaster's phone reps is giving out information that ought to be kept under their hat until at least next month––might be that the company isn't that worried about it, but it makes me doubt how closely that information mirrors reality.) I can't see getting worked up about it at all. Until somebody at Magpul, Bushmaster or Remington steps in and says "the rifle will be thus-and-so, and will be priced at mumbledy dollars", it's all so much hot air. Of course, once that happens, it's pitchforks and torches time! Have some eggnog, listen to some treacly Christmas music, and don't worry about it. In the meantime, I'm going to try to remember this. |
|
This thread is funny... Arguing about stuff that know one except Drake knows about. I think it is great when a manufacturer makes two versions of something and says that one will be military only and that is what everyone wants. Doesn't matter what it is. It could be just a different pictogram. That would be a great marketing ploy to sell the really expensive metal lowers.
And my dealer has a SCAR sitting on his shelf for quite some time now. I have seen a bunch of MSAR STG's come and go since that SCAR came in. Jeremy |
|
Quoted:
This thread is funny... Arguing about stuff that know one except Drake knows about. I think it is great when a manufacturer makes two versions of something and says that one will be military only and that is what everyone wants. Doesn't matter what it is. It could be just a different pictogram. That would be a great marketing ploy to sell the really expensive metal lowers. And my dealer has a SCAR sitting on his shelf for quite some time now. I have seen a bunch of MSAR STG's come and go since that SCAR came in. Jeremy I can agree with that. I used my ACR money to buy a MSAR and Aimpoint H-1. I hope to have enough saved up to have my ACR fund back up by September or so. I am not as up-in-arms about the release date just yet. I will be estatic if they release it around SHOT, but, really anytime next year will be good. They are still doing well to get this done in the time they have. How long was the SCAR being designed, after all? |
|
Quoted:
This thread is funny... Arguing about stuff that know one except Drake knows about. I think it is great when a manufacturer makes two versions of something and says that one will be military only and that is what everyone wants. Doesn't matter what it is. It could be just a different pictogram. That would be a great marketing ploy to sell the really expensive metal lowers. And my dealer has a SCAR sitting on his shelf for quite some time now. I have seen a bunch of MSAR STG's come and go since that SCAR came in. Jeremy What price is the SCAR? IM me the shop's addy. Thanks |
|
Quoted:
This thread is funny... Arguing about stuff that know one except Drake knows about. I think it is great when a manufacturer makes two versions of something and says that one will be military only and that is what everyone wants. Doesn't matter what it is. It could be just a different pictogram. That would be a great marketing ploy to sell the really expensive metal lowers. And my dealer has a SCAR sitting on his shelf for quite some time now. I have seen a bunch of MSAR STG's come and go since that SCAR came in. Jeremy I am sure that it was an agreement between Bushmaster and Remington. Think about it. They are still two different companies. If I was one of the Bushmaster execs I wouldn't want Remington selling the rifle I thought I had a monopoly on. even though it would drive the overall profit of the conglomerate, any sale of a Remington ACR to a non mil/leo would be taking money out of my pocket. I am sure the reason they are having Remington going for the Mil contract rather than Bushmaster directly fighting for it is due to a few reasons. Remington has experience with receiving government contracts in the past. They know how to “play the game” so to speak. How to lobby and get the right people on the bus. Also they have a history of producing a battle proven platform adopted by the .mil. Also Remington has the manufacturing capacity to ramp up quickly and to offer additional perks like a cold hammer forged barrel. Like it or not from a business standpoint it makes sense. I am sure that whatever agreement between the two companies took place Bushmaster was 100% against Remington offering it to civilians because that is what they know. They have been doing it for a long time and do not want to be competing with each other. On that note, I look forward to purchasing an ACR. I think that it will be worth the wait, and I 100% understand why Bush/Rem/Magpul are being tight lipped about everything. The rifle will be ready when it is ready. They have put a ton of effort into getting it right the first time. They are going to make sure they take care of their customers. I will purchase multiple ACRS in my lifetime as long as it meets the expectations given. Everyone relax! They are coming, I am sure we will have more info at SHOT. Chill out about the metal lower, I am sure that eventually we will see one! That is why this rifle is so cool. It will give other manufacturers the opportunity to push boundaries! ON THAT NOTE! THANKS MAGPUL! |
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.