are they still in business???
I think they're focusing on Hummer accessories... they sold their trigger group to TAPCO who now makes it.
Yes, they are pioneering some Hummer vehicle accessories, but they are still in the gun making business. During 1999, they were contracted by the Arsenal USA company to assemble that firms original rifle offerings (the SSR-99, SSR-99P, and K-101). In fact, Gordon Technologies assembled about 150 or so of the 252 total SSR-99 rifles (with the remainder being done by Arsenal USA's own in house staff). Of the total 252 SSR-99's, the 150 or so with Gordon Technologies famous "G" spot stamping on the barrel, are the most sought after specimens. The "G" meaning it's a G-Tech build and has met that companies proof load test.
They were also one of at least four companies to be contracted by the Intrac to build that firms SLR-100 series rifles. The four companies that I know were contracted for this assignment, are as follows:
Blue Ridge Precision
Of all the companies contracted to build these AK variants, the Gordon Technologies are by far the most sought after. While no one company is immune to having dis-pleased customers, Gordon Technologies has one of the best reputations for making things right when things have gone wrong. I have personally dealt with Jerry Gordon more than once, and find him to be a very professional person indeed. He has always managed to find some time to answer my questions, (and I always seem to have a lot of them) :)
When all they were offering him and others, were iffy American made AK fire control groups, he decided to step up to the plate and offer a quality set with his company name behind it. This set is called the Gordon Technologies G-2 set, and is guaranteed for life. The G-2's will still be offered, but now will be called the Tapco G-2 set. Tapco purchased the rights on them, and will continue to have the same foundry make them, (same specs also).
Quality products are all I've seen come from this company, even though I can understand that not everyone will always be pleased. Checking the Gordon Technologies reputation over at the AK-47 dot net boards, will give you an idea of the respect this man and his company have gained. His AK barreling process is second to none in the industry. His customer service goes beyond average, and his products show exceptional workmanship:)
Well, I respectfully disagree with you and think the G-Tech reputation is not what may appear. I have been f=ed over by Jerry and can speak first hand about it.
Didn't Gordon Tech sub out the assembly of the rifles, which of course a lot of out-fits do. The Infamous Informer told me about how he was going to do some AMD-65's for Gordon Tech once. And I guess we know what the Gooch's word is worth.
I remember Gtech posting on .nutz bitching at the Gooch about some amd's.
Of course that was deleted.
While one can make a fire control group using the "milled" from forgings method, the "milled" from barstock method, or one of the casting methods, my preference would be from forgings. This preference is based on everything in the quality control areas being equal amongst them.
The following is just one source of info (Queen City Forging):
"Machined bar and plate may be more susceptible to fatigue and stress corrosion because machining cuts material grain pattern. In most cases, forging yields a grain structure oriented to the part shape, resulting in optimum strength, ductility and resistance to impact and fatigue."
With that being said, and since quality is the ultimate goal, I would take a quality casting or milled from barstock set over a forged set if the quality was better on them.
I do believe that a quality set can be made using any of the three methods mentioned above.
These are some well reputed sets offered today, (and their method of manufacture):
KVAR/Arsenal Inc double hook sets are made by "milling" them out of forgings. They are a good set, but in my opinion, are a bit more roughly machined than the Bulgarian originals. They also offer a single hook set, but the trigger on that set is not milled from forgings, but rather made from a casting process.
Gordon Technologies double hook set are made by using a casting process. The "milling" on these is minimal, only used to remove a little bit of unwanted matal left behind by the casting process.
The Redstar Arms single arm set is made using the "milled" from barstock method, and is designed to be an adjustable set.
Arsenal USA's double hook set is made from the "milled" from barstock method, and is a standard non adjustable set.
As far as the older BRP (Blue Ridge Precision) sets, they were very nicely milled from barstock. In fact, BRP was the company that milled the brakes used on the SSR-99 and K-101.
They did have a flaw with their Fire Control Groups, and that was their heat treating. While others at that time had problems with dimensions, or parts being too soft, BRP gained the reputation of having their sets be too hard (causing breakage in some sets). The weakest link being their disconnector.
There are two companies (that I know of) that mill out AK receivers in this country. One is called Arsenal Inc, the other is called the Firing Line. The Arsenal Inc receivers are "milled" from forgings (just like the Bulgarians do them), and The Firing Line receiver is "milled" from barstock.
So you see, a milled receiver, or fire control set, does not automatically mean that it is milled from barstock, it could mean milled from another method (like forgings).
Does G-Tech sub some work out?..... heck, I don't know, but I guess it's more than possible. Many companies do this, and it would not have been a bad choice for G-Tech to choose Informer for such a duty, when based on Informers early workmanship, but overall, one can see why it would have ended up being a bad decision for them ;)
Yes, not everyone will be happy with any given company or it's products, but one will easily find an overwhelming amount of positive feedback from the many Gordon Technologies customers out there. Many folks at the AK forty seven dot net boards have dealt with G-Tech and Jerry, and the vast majority have positive feelings about them :)
I for one can only say positive things about Jerry Gordon and his company (Gordon Technologies) :)
Here are a few tid-bits that people curious in the Gordon Technologies firm may be interested in knowing about:
***The Gordon Technologies method of Headspacing an AK (as described by Jerry Gordon):
"The headspacing was done on the Gordon Technologies designed barrel press. I was over in Europe in 1998 to see what the Bulgarians used. They use a hydraulic press. I felt there were too many variables in using a hydraulic press and more control could be obtained using another method. The hydraulic press is still used by others today. I felt that method may have been ok for the 1950's, but there were other methods I felt were more appropriate. Prior to my visit to Arsenal in Kazanlak Bulgaria, we produced a handful of rifles using a mix of various methods. Revolution was at our doorstep. We built a number of different presses, but none really did what I felt it needed to do. The operator needed complete control over the press. There's a certain feeling you get when you know it's right. That is what I wanted. We explored every type of process we could think of, including one that had a programmable hydraulic cylinder. None were quite what I was looking for. We went back to the basics. The principle process was to take a round part and put it in a round hole with some resistance in a linear motion as to not bind or score the parts. One part would be stationary and one move in a linear motion to conform with the cylindricity of the stationary part. We tried a number of different methods to press the parts together. We had the motion complete, now for the propulsion. Cylinders were out, which drastically eliminated the most common and most apparently logical solution. The decision was made to try a lead screw. This was absolutely the landmark that changed the way AK47's are headspaced. The unmistakable feel was exactly what I was looking for. With this method we obtained precise control over the process. This was the process we used to assemble rifles for Arsenal USA in the SSR99, SSR99P, and K101 rifles."
(This process was also used on the SLR-100's they assembled for Intrac)
***The Gordon Technologies "G" spot and what it means:
The G stamp located on an SSR-99/K-101 barrel designates the rifle as being a G-Tech build. It will also mean the weapon has passed the G-Tech proof load test. I don't know if Arsenal USA continued the tradition of proof firing the guns after they started their own in house production of the guns, but even if they did, they would not use the "G" spot stamping (that being a Gordon Technologies trademark).
I'm sure most folks here know what "Proof Fired" means, but for those of you that may not know this method of testing, I will gladly explain the basic principle of proof firing a gun.
What it means is that the gun is fired with a "Proof Load" before the company sends the product out onto the market. A "Proof Load" is a hot loaded round, quite a bit beyond normal recomended safety specifications. The gun is checked for proper headspacing before firing this round out of the gun. After the gun is proof load fired, the guns headspacing is rechecked and the action inspected for any damage. In most cases the barreled action will pass the test, earning it a stamp of approval, which would be the "G" spot for a Gordon Technologies built gun. The G-Tech firm uses the capital letter G, which is stamped onto the rear section of the tested barrel (one must remove the lower handguard to expose this "G" spot. This test is made to insure that the gun not only functions, but also is tested to handle handle any load that is loaded within that calibers safety specs (since it was able to handle a much hotter load than safety specifications allow). Many folks assume that all guns get "Proof Tested", but thats not so. Here is a quote from Jimmy Streetman on the subject of the rifles built by G-Tech for them : "The rifles (SSR-99's and K-101's) are partially assembled at his facility (Gordon Technologies) and test fired using proof loads, I wonder how many of the other builders do that."
Many American AK builders, if not most, test their completed guns by only firing standard factory loads, which is much better than not testing the gun at all, but it's still not equal to proof firing a weapon. A company will set its own standards for final testing of it's products. G-Tech just happens to do it in a way that is very well proven and respected. The "G" spot means alot more than some may have thought it would. Many may have thought it was a sexual thing!
While Arsenal USA no longer uses the services of Gordon Technologies, both companies still continue to manufacture AK specimens. Arsenal USA has offered quite a few models since the SSR-99/K-101 project, all of which are now assembled in house.
Gordon Technologies continues to do work for other companies by building AK specimens under contract. They also offer AK's through their own shop.
***Gordon Technologies use of Ohio Ordnance/ITM stamped steel receivers:
Jerry knows the people at Ohio Ordnance, and he recommended them do a complete heat treating, instead of the spot heat treating done on them. Ohio Ordnance declined the advice, and proceeded with the spot heat treating.
Later, when Jerry was contracted by Intrac to build their AMD-65's, the ITM receiver was going to be the foundation of the gun. Jerry did not like the amount of flex these ITM receivers had, so he has every ITM receiver he uses, fully heat treated to his satisfaction before using them in his builds. This was not something mandated by Intrac, but a Gordon Technologies decision. This is just the way they are. Will something slip by them, heck, they would not be human if not, but they are a quality firm for sure :)
While G-Tech is Intracs main builder of the AMD-65, there was atleast one other builder contracted by Intrac to build them. I don't know if the other companies contracted to build them went with the extra heat treating step. Whenever in doubt, look for the "G" spot on the barrel :)
To add to this G-Tech discussion, this may interest folks that want to know more about the G-2 semi auto AK fire control groups that his company designed and offered:
The Gordon Technologies G-2 set (recently obtained by the Tapco firm), are a double hook semi auto AK fire control group designed by Jerry Gordon and his Gordon Technologies staff. G-2 sets are based on the fire control groups found in the Bulgarian milled receiver AK, with a touch of G-Techs own improvements added.
Under contract, and for the G-Tech company, the sets were manufactured by a high grade foundry that has done work for many Government projects, including work for the DOD and NASA. Though Tapco now owns the rights to this set, Tapco has gone on record in saying that the same foundry and methods will continue to be used to manufacture them. They will continue being called G-2, but will now have the Tapco name. In other words, whether Tapco or G-Tech marked, they will be one and the same product, and will continue to have a lifetime guarantee.
While some of these sets have been modified and sold as single arm trigger sets for stamped receivers, they were designed especially as a double hook set for Bulgarian and Bulgarian based milled receivers. Since that is the way they designed them, it is the way I am discussing it here in this thread (as a double hook set).
I recently contacted Jerry Gordon, owner of Gordon Technologies, with questions about his G-2 fire control group design, and more specifically about the investment cast process he chose to manufacture them. Though I know the most important issue is quality, not so much what method is used, (like milling from forgings, milling from barstock, or using a casting method), I still wanted to be reassured that the investment cast process can turn out a high quality AK fire control group.
By contacting Jerry Gordon, I was hoping for his take on this subject. I value his oppinion very much, so I was happy when he responded to my questions. With his permission, here is what he had to say about his G-2 design, and the process he chose to have them manufactured:
We haven't had a problem with even ONE set out there. That translates to NO breakage, NO deformation, NO sudden burst of full auto fire.........., NO complaints. An investment cast product CAN be far superior than a machined part, and this fire control group is a perfect example of the highest and best use for investment casting. Many factors play into it, but these were a few of the KEY reasons we chose investment casting.
1. Very consistent, the molds are cast in wax, coated
in ceramic, fired in an oven to melt the wax out, ceramic mold heated, two steel samples taken and the proper grade steel verified and cast into the mold, and viola, a perfect cast of the part you need to get the job done. With an experienced caster, porosity is not an issue, this caster makes F16 parts and turbines along with many other sophisticated and intricate parts.
2. Machined parts can suffer from STRESS during machining, that CAN become a serious factor with regards to the actual application of these parts. They smack back and forth during operation. Any stress can become a fracture, any fracture can become a failure.
3. There can be manufacturing errors with machined parts, but far fewer with investment cast. Machined parts require compensation during production caused by tool wear and breakage. When a mill wears as it machines the part, dimensions change, and then you lose part QUALITY and CONSISTENCY. There are parts and applications that sometimes serve better in one type of production than another. Analyze the part, investigate methods of production, determine the best method for production for the material and application of the
part, set QC safe guards, PRODUCE SUPERIOR PARTS! There are less headache when a job is done right the first time. It helps when you have a qualified staff on your side and are working with an American based company that is infinitely meticulous to the detail of how things are done. A quick thanks to everyone who played a part in the G2 success, from conception stage to parts in hand.
Jerry @ Gordon Technologies
Thank you Jerry, for your insight on the G-2 Fire Control Group.
Seems like the days of "iffy" quality Fire Control Groups are pretty much behind us now.
We have the adjustable single hook set from Redstar that is milled from barstock steel, the milled from forgings double hook K-VAR set, and the investment cast G-Tech (now Tapco) G-2 sets. These, and others, are doing what many of the early American sets failed to do consistantly :)
I had one of the last SSR-99P's Gtech made. Wish I didn't sell it. Awsome freaking AK. My best friend now owns it so I still get to shoot it, and wonder what I was thinking when I sold it to him.