Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 11/6/2002 8:59:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/6/2002 3:22:13 PM EDT by GI-J]
This is a serious question to pose. Are AR-15 manufacturers better off with the current assault weapons ban in place? [u]Reasons they may prefer AWB:[/u] - [b]Maybe[/b] AWB makes the AR a more notorious firearm, thus increasing its demand. - [b]Maybe[/b] AWB allows them to produce preban configurations that they can sell for greater profit margins - [b]Maybe[/b] After having invested in tooling for postban AR's, this equipment would be worthless after a potential AWB sunset. (though these costs are forgone in an accounting sense) [u]Reasons they may NOT prefer AWB:[/u] - [b]Maybe[/b] AWB may make for inefficiencies in production due to different parts that would otherwise be universal. (ie. bayo lugs on gas blocks) - [b]Maybe[/b] Legal consequences (in a time of crazy reckless lawsuits) that go along with selling preban parts to unknown buyers. Hey, just ideas open for discussion, add to the list if you have any ideas! J Edited to add the bold [b]Maybe[/b]'s in order to be more PC.
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 1:03:40 PM EDT
Next time I speak to one I may ask them
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 1:13:33 PM EDT
That's an excellent question. This may sound crazy, but it's sadly true: A few years back (a decade?) there were rules put into place which standardized certain aspects of toilets. That is why toilets never flush crap down like they used to--there are requirements regarding the amount of water that can be used. My house has pre-ban toilets with high water flow. I have heard of people taking their pre-ban toilets with them when they move! There is a pre-ban toilet black market in some parts...but I digress. My point is, a few years back people were fed up with this and almost managed to get the toilet requirements repealed, but the toilet manufacturers lobbied against them and prevented it. The manufacturers like having national standards. It makes production more uniform, and it allows manufacturers to blame the government when they have to deal with upset customers. I don't think that AR15 manufacturers are in the same position because there haven't been stringent requirements set on them regarding building process. But it's still an interesting thing to think about, especially because I got to talk about pre-ban toilets...even if the analogy was rather weak.
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 1:15:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/6/2002 1:17:20 PM EDT by USNJoe]
Reasons they may prefer AWB: - AWB makes the AR a more notorious firearm, thus increasing its demand. Nope. People will want an AR15, they will buy it if it is legal. - AWB allows them to produce preban configurations that they can sell for greater profit margins Nope. Look at the prices of preban/postban stuff. It's the same price or perhaps a few dollars more. To manufacture a preban or postban AR15 barrel from a blank requires the same amount of work with the exception of threading the end of the barrel. As far as the front sight post goes most of the postban ones are preban ones than have had their bayonet lug cut off. - After having invested in tooling for postban AR's, this equipment would be worthless after a potential AWB sunset. (though these costs are forgone in an accounting sense) See above Reasons they may NOT prefer AWB: - AWB may make for inefficiencies in production due to different parts that would otherwise be universal. (ie. bayo lugs on gas blocks) See above - Legal consequences that go along with selling preban parts to unknown buyers. ??? What the fuck, there is no liscense required to buy preban parts, except the lower (of course). Smells like a troll to me [x]
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 1:19:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GI-J: - AWB makes the AR a more notorious firearm, thus increasing its demand. - AWB allows them to produce preban configurations that they can sell for greater profit margins - After having invested in tooling for postban AR's, this equipment would be worthless after a potential AWB sunset. (though these costs are forgone in an accounting sense)
View Quote
Increased notoriety for higher sales? Maybe, but I've never seen any figures suggesting the AWB has helped their sales. More money for post-ban configurations? I don't think so. Last I checked the Rock River Arms site, the prices for a pre-ban config upper and a post-ban config upper were identical. Invested in tooling for post-bans? What tooling? Most manufacturers make pre- and post-ban configurations, and the main difference is the threaded barrel. What additional or different tooling is required?
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 1:38:04 PM EDT
People who manufacturer ARs do so primarily because they love firearms. Secondarily, they make a profit. Most if not all AR manufacturers are freedom loving people trying to make the best product for consumers and make a profit. I'm sure they don't support the AWB. Why don't you go ask them on the Industry board? Make sure you are wearing your flame proof suit. [flame]
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 1:48:17 PM EDT
Someone on another thread suggested that the AWB was partly responsible for the wide array of AR configs. and accessories available today. If this is true, then it won't go away just because flash hiders are allowed again. I would still be interested in some post-ban configs. Most companies would appreciate not having to hassle with the legal implications that the AWB poses.
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 3:16:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/6/2002 3:24:10 PM EDT by GI-J]
Disclaimer: I don't necessarily think these reasons are legitimate, that is why I have used the word [u]may[/u] here. I just wonder what AR manufacturers honest to god opinion would be on AWB. It is hard to believe they would like it, but as a graduating business student who likes to think of odd-ball stuff like this, I think that is a reasonable question to consider. Just Discussion, No Accusations!
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 3:29:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GI-J: Disclaimer: I don't necessarily think these reasons are legitimate, that is why I have used the word [u]may[/u] here. I just wonder what AR manufacturers honest to god opinion would be on AWB. It is hard to believe they would like it, but as a graduating business student who likes to think of odd-ball stuff like this, I think that is a reasonable question to consider. Just Discussion, No Accusations!
View Quote
Go ask them: [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/board.html?b=2[/url]
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 3:30:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/6/2002 3:44:07 PM EDT by Benjamin0001]
Reasons they may prefer AWB: - Maybe AWB makes the AR a more notorious firearm, thus increasing its demand. - Maybe AWB allows them to produce preban configurations that they can sell for greater profit margins - Maybe After having invested in tooling for postban AR's, this equipment would be worthless after a potential AWB sunset. (though these costs are forgone in an accounting sense) Reasons they may NOT prefer AWB: - Maybe AWB may make for inefficiencies in production due to different parts that would otherwise be universal. (ie. bayo lugs on gas blocks) - Maybe Legal consequences (in a time of crazy reckless lawsuits) that go along with selling preban parts to unknown buyers. Hey, just ideas open for discussion, add to the list if you have any ideas! J
View Quote
No the problem is not manufacturing. They are made exactly the same but the end process is just 1 step shorter (no flash suppressor) and one step longer (mill bayo lug that is the only difference between making a pre-ban and a post ban rifle. So really they save time and money both as it takes longer to thread a barrel for a Flash Suppressor then it would to mill the bayo lug off of the front sight. Also a saw would be cheaper then an index and Outside threader. Also they have been able to expand their product lines because of the AWB. Non-telescoping stocks, and muzzle breaks. And that I think back the price has not changed really. In the 1987 American Rifleman (May or June) I believe the price of a preban Colt AR-15 Sporter II HBar was $759.00 the Bushmaster XM15A2 sells for around $750.00-$800.00 here in the midwest. So if you take into account 1987 dollars to 2002 dollars the price has either stayed the same or dropped slighly, relative to inflation and buying value of the dollar. However if you look at rifles which are PreBan some of the better examples top $3000.00 for the Colt 6520 Gov. Carbine
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 3:52:35 PM EDT
The AR-15 manufacturers want a fierce assault weapon ban [b]debate[/b]. The effect will be tons of free advertising each night on the television news and in news magazines thus generating fear the product won't be available in the future. They'll have to work overtime to get enough product to market. Either way, ban or no ban, the manufacturers stand to gain when the AW ban reauthorization legislation is introduced.
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 3:56:19 PM EDT
As a Licensed Mfg (FFL type 7) who has focused mainly on AR type firearms I will say that I will be soooo glad if and when the AWB goes away. [b]REASONS:[/b][list=a] [*] Flashhider vrs Brake B$ - and having to do "permanently attached" requires additional work (upping costs and reducing profit margin...) plus it requires stocking more inventory as you can not reconfigure existing stock as needed.[/*] [*] HiCap and LEO mags - More B$ - I hate having to keep track of LEO stuff if it is not NFA. Again it comes back to having to stock more to provide for all customers needs.[/*] [*] Barrels - there are more versions of barrels available today than even before, because of all the crap required to get a "pre-ban effect" on a post-ban gun. K*I*S*S![/*] [*] AR Pistols - back again![/*] [*] NFA options - We will be able to configure some sweet SBR's the way customers want, AND we will be able to mount suppressors to any weapon. This opens the door to a limited market because people won't buy a suppressor if they can't legally use it on a "post-ban" gun.[/*][/list] If the ban is gone I expect to see "fixed Tele-stocks" to disappear from the market overnite, they may even become "rare". (Praise Be!) As Mfg & dealers we will still be offering flattop Bull barrel configs as this is a market segment that was neglected prior to the ban.
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 3:58:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: ...However if you look at rifles which are PreBan some of the better examples top $3000.00 for the Colt 6520 Gov. Carbine...
View Quote
Keep in mind that the manufacturer has already sold that rifle, in '94 dollars yet. They aren't making any more money off that sale. The dealer or individual selling it second hand is the one profiting from your willingness to pay more for a used rifle than you would for a new rifle, just because the preban can hang a bayonet off the front. What is the difference between a postban legal muzzle break and a military issue flash suppressor, besides $200.00 to $3000.00?
Link Posted: 11/6/2002 4:05:53 PM EDT
Huh? Do you know how many more AR-10s Armalite could sell if they could sell 20 rnd mags for them? along with the whole headaach of conversions ext? SR-25s and others who would be able to make hi-caps for guns that wernt popular or out before the bans.... An AR-180 with a bayonet lug and Flash hider? 20 rnd mags for a Vepr 308?
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 7:59:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/7/2002 8:06:00 AM EDT by PitViper]
Originally Posted By GunnyG: [ What is the difference between a postban legal muzzle break and a military issue flash suppressor, besides $200.00 to $3000.00?
View Quote
You stand between me, firing a PreBan with a Flash Supressor and my friend firing a PostBan with that damned Armalite brake or a Y comp and I think you'd [s]see[/s] hear a world of difference.[:D] IMNSHO, anybody that pays $3000.00 for any preban semi auto AR (that doesn't have a ton of high-zoot stuff with names like Knight's or ARMS or Trijicon etc... hanging on it) has taken serious leave of their senses. Pit Eddited kauze I kaint spell
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 1:59:07 PM EDT
BTT - Because this was just warming up when the site went down...
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 2:14:00 PM EDT
One major unplanned consequence of the ban was that you can't put a supressor on a post-ban rifle since the ATF considers a supressor also a flash hider. Personally I would love to have a gemtek supressor for my AR. When the ban expires, manufacturers are going to have even more choices than they have today. Say "Hello" to AR pistols again! The biggest increase in AR demand corresponds with news of the ARs. The more debate about the ban, the more demand for the AR. 2004 could be Y2K all over again for AR demand.
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 2:31:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By PitViper:
Originally Posted By GunnyG: [ What is the difference between a postban legal muzzle break and a military issue flash suppressor, besides $200.00 to $3000.00?
View Quote
You stand between me, firing a PreBan with a Flash Supressor and my friend firing a PostBan with that damned Armalite brake or a Y comp and I think you'd [s]see[/s] hear a world of difference.[:D]...
View Quote
But isn't that the "Cool Factor" that the salesman who sold me my AR-10A4 carbine was talking about? [0:)] Actually, I like seeing the dust rise a foot off the firing line while I'm in in the prone position! It might suck to be to the left or right of me; I call that the "Intimidation Factor"![}:D] I do think that the Armalite muzzle brake design does its job well enough. I have had occasion to let my fellow Marines shoot my AR-10 along side their issue M-16s. They were pleasantly surprised that the AR-10 managed the recoil so well. Some were seasoned hunters too, used to the recoil from their deer rifles. But, of course, I'm jealous of your PreBan, because I still want a collapsible stock![:E] Semper Fi Dave
Top Top