Posted: 8/13/2006 6:29:42 AM EDT
|
I read the article written by Christopher Bartocci in Small Arms Review on Colts submissions to the SCAR trials. This article is a first of two, and covers two of the 3 guns Colt entered. They reportedly finished 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in the competition. I cannot help but think Colt screwed the pooch in this deal by showing a lack of ingenuity. For example, the new piston design (which was apparently a clear desire of SOCOM) that Colt has, was not even included in one of the entries (Type A). Second, I think Colts decision to use the ARMS #58 SIR was disappointing since it is a bulky and dated design, rather than getting solidly behind their new monolithic upper. Maybe the intent was to subtly enhance the proven M4, and take advantage of the parts commonality in place. If so, they underestimated or misread the goals of the solicitation. I don't know, I just expected a bit more innovation. Anyone else? |
Colt submitted monolithic uppers, a piston, etc. The idea was to submit multiple options, and let the end user decide which variation was the best, rather then Colt taking a guess on which one SOCOM would like better. What surprises me is how well AR-15 entries did, considering they don't meet the stated requirements. |