AR Sponsor
Posted: 8/4/2005 2:07:43 PM EDT
|
could someone direct me to any threads on " bushmaster did / did not build M4's for uncle sam back during the GW1 era." thanks !!!! |
|
Can't help with threads on the subject. I did find this statement on a website, "With a large demand for M16A2s and M4s both from the US forces and allied forces, the Dept. of Defence approved a contract to buy M4 carbines from Bushmaster Firearms of Maine. Bushmaster supplied 4,000 M4 carbines to the US Army, these were deployed by the 82nd Airborne Division during Desert Shield and Desert Storm, reportedly being used by Gen. Schwarzkopf's bodyguards at one point." This was from http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm |
|
this one has been tough to completely document , although s.o.f.'s " fighting firearms" did a bushie review back in the fall of '91, and it featured a quick look at a "maine M4". too bad the one broadside photo of the weapon showed the right side, where no markings were visible. it's my understanding that the prototype for the M4, regardless of who made it, was the colt model 727.....as featured in the closing pages of TBR vol. 1. i can remember ordering stripped lowers from bushmaster in the late '88 / early '89 time frame and getting some really rough E.A. castings; their A2 lower forging was apparently not up yet. interesting as the M4 review in the article showed a weapon with an A1 lower with the FCG markings applied to the right side. again if my memory serves me right, the first stripped A2 lowers i got from windham were late spring- early summer of '90. there's always been a question in the back of my mind....if perhaps the lowers for the M4 order may have been supplied to BFI by uncle sammy, and they recycled them to produce their 1989 M4 run. not likely perhaps, but was it even possible ???? one thing is for sure, it was right after this time that bushie took off like a rocket , and has hardly slowed down since...and rightly so !!! |
|
Never seen any gov't procurement documentation for anything but small parts from Bushmaster, and I did search Gov't procurement records going back 25 years. I'll believe Bushmaster provided rifles for the military when I see the procurement documents, not before. There are just entirely too many falsehoods circulating about firearms manufacturers in general to take anecdotal information like this very seriously. If we are not careful next we'll be believing that an AK47 chambered in 7.62x39mm can in fact fire 7.62x51mm cartridges, like those the gun shop counter warriors would have us believe.  And BTW SOF is hardly a credible source on what equipment Uncle Sugar is using. |
They are hooked up to air to make them cycle and simulate recoil. Thats the only time I've seen a USGI bushmaster M16. |
General Curtis Lemay ordered 20,000 M16/AR15 rifles outside the DOD's purchasing and procurement rules so clearly not every weapon on the battlefield is the result of a contract. Likewise, from time to time our goverment will buy products outside of conventiional purchasing channels (over the counter) from the likes of LMT, Bushmaster...etc etc. This is one of the reasons there will always be sporadic reports of unofficial weapons floating around in theater, but with no paper trail |
These were still documented, nevertheless. Bushmasters going to war are not. Without the hard evidence, the information is about as good as the National Enquirer. Although I think there is some truth to that story about the Alligator Boy.  
|
|
|
Several of our own (respected) members have seen the occasional BM rifle in the hands of a deployed serviceman (all Army IIRC). The actual amount of rifles purchased may be smaller than 4,000, but even that is a drop in the bucket compared to the entire number of rifles in service just by the Army alone. But, what's the big deal anyway? Everyone knows that those rifles were a one-time, off-the-shelf buy during the Desert Shield build-up when Colt couldn't supply the volume of new rifles that were suddenly ordered during those months (who could blame them, when their orders probably increased by a factor of 20 in a month or two). It's not like anyone is suggesting that BM ever had a "traditional" contract to supply rifles on a regular basis. And the other side of the coin is this: Bushmaster has supplied the vast majority of rifles to the Personal Security Contractors that are currently in Iraq & Afghanistan. Those PSCs are nearly all former military, with a high percentage of "advanced" infantry training, and they have certainly seen their share of gun battles. There have been no complains about their rifles beyond normal wear & tear, and I think we all know that conditions in Iraq especially are about as difficult as it gets. So, it would seem that, military contract or no, that Bushmaster rifles are up to the rigours of "real war." -Troy |
Well seems like CrufflerJohn might have been suggesting exactly that by posting this:
Not arguing that they have not made it over there in some roundabout way, not saying they were bad rifles, or that Private contractors don't use them. Just saying have never seen any evidence of contract procurement by the U.S. gov't as some seem to imply is the case. Be happy to look at anything anyone has to offer along these lines. I really did look hard. Found Contracts for GM, Balimoy, Colt, FN and others to make M16/M4s over the years. Found nothing for Bushmaster. Worthy of note is the claim on Bushmasters website that they sell "products" to the US Military. This is consistent with the contracts for small parts I found from wading though gov't procurement and contract listings. At no time does Bushmaster claim to sell or have sold Firearms to the US Military. Agreed, no big deal. I'm just saying I have seen no evidence BM never got a contract to provide rifles, and more importantly that they were never privy to the TDP. |
These are modified lowers, IIRC, cannot be made to function as an actual firearm. |
AR Sponsor