Originally Posted By WSAR15:
I find it strange that one company would introduce a product, remove it from the market and then have a second company re-introduce it?
What was wrong with the first run? If there were a problem, why was it not corrected? The BM product was very short lived, to say the least.
Sounds like a lot of liabilty problems/concerns or worse?
By the way, I think RR makes good 223 products.
Any further thoughts?
Pure speculation based on zero facts.
BM put out a rifle - the BM.308 - in a config (chrome moly, not chrome lined, non FF barrel) and with a price almost guaranteed NOT TO SELL IN QUANTITY. Maybe not too strange for a new product not thoroughly tested prior to release and probably a pretty good move by BM. (Yes, I can understand why BM.308 purchasers would not be happy but they were relatively few.)
What I did find strange is there was no 'better' BM .308 effort by BM. No effort to correct the bolt problem, no effort to mass produce and thus lower the price, no effort to add chrome lined or SS barrels or to FF the barrel to hold the price but give customers more value for the dollars.
WHY ?? My GUESS is that BM had thought it likely the AWB would be renewed. With the AWB renewed any rifle using an existing, plentiful and relatively inexpensive high-cap mag would be highly desireable. (Obviously here I refer to the FAL mag.) Since the AWB did sunset, that means any manufacturer can now build any high-cap mag they choose so the BM .308 with the FAL mags almost instantly became less important upon expiration of the AWB.
Maybe BM never owned the BM .308 patents and simply deceided not to further fund a product where the design was not owned ?? After all, BM can later come with a completely BM design and with BM high cap mags. (Mags no longer being the tail that wags the dog with sunsetting of the AWB.)
As I said at the beginning, pure speculation on my part,