Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 6/5/2002 2:37:33 PM EDT
I wonder what the quality of the M16 family produced by FN for our Government is like compared to Armalite, Bushmaster and Colt...?

Link Posted: 6/5/2002 2:40:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/5/2002 2:40:58 PM EDT by O_L_Y_H_A_T_E_R]
The colt rep for the Southwest US told us the the MARINE CORPS was rejecting FN's 16's because of Inconcitancies in production.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 6:54:41 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 7:13:12 PM EDT
I know its a silly point, but what the heck is that crap that FN marks their '16s with. Colt has the pony and actual stamped markings, while the FN's are like stippled with a bunch of dots or something. Doesn't affect anything, but just makes it seem like another tool and not a friggin' rifle. Oh well.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 7:38:46 PM EDT
I worked with a former armorer who was in the marines, He had NOTHING GOOD to say about FN M-16's!
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 7:45:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Troy:
Despite what you may have heard from a Colt rep (surely an unbiased source... ), FN has had the M16 contract for over a decade, and has supplied other weapons for longer than that, and is in no danger of losing it. In fact, they "won" the M4 contract, but Colt's patents ensured that only Colt could actually be awarded the contract as a sole-source.

If it wasn't for Colt's patents on the M4, they'd be out of business.

-Troy




Actually Troy, I believe that they "won" the contract by being the low bidder, not because they had the best quality. Its all about the benjamins.

ps- thanks for the help IDing the M4 a few weeks ago....
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 7:46:08 PM EDT
FN typically makes fine firearms, so I'd be shocked to hear that their government contract rifles were of poor quality. Although Colt USE TO make a fine rifle, their quality has went into the toilet these last few years, allowing companies like FN and Bushmaster to get large portions of their business. I wouldn't believe the Colt rep, as they're simply trying to stay afloat financially. The competition against their AR-15s and 1911s is fierce, so much of their market share has dried up from where it was previously. Why do you think Kimber, Springfield and Bushmaster are doing so well???
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 7:52:48 PM EDT
Also remember when a foriegn entity wins a contract to make weapons for the US they usually subcontract out to some low end U.S. facility to actually produce the weapons .
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 8:33:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mortech:
Also remember when a foriegn entity wins a contract to make weapons for the US they usually subcontract out to some low end U.S. facility to actually produce the weapons .



IIRC, FN built a factory here in the US to supply the US military contract weapons.....


Scott

Link Posted: 6/5/2002 10:20:19 PM EDT
We had the Colt M-16A2 when I was in the Marine Corps (87-90), mine was pretty good. I am on the Air Force/Security Forces side now and we (my unit) have had the FN M-16A2's for about seven years now. I have had the same rifle for the last seven years and have not had one single malfunction with it the entire time. I've put several thousand rounds of ammo, to include hundreds of blank rounds through her. My USMC Colt wouldnt shoot blanks for anything, and she would start to get fussy when dirty but only had a few malfunctions. I like both rifles but I like the FN better. Better fit and finish with the FN and slightly better performance overall than the Colts. I would trust my life to either one of these rifles though. It's all about proper cleaning and maintenance!! Our unit has had good luck with all of our FN M-16's,just my .02 cents!
Top Top