I really don't see how this benefits anybody.

We have several new guns coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why?

I don't see LE departments lined up to buy these new guns.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers.

Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody.

Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody.

Because "experienced" civilian shooters don't get shot at while using/abusing their carbines.   They put 8 bazillion rounds downrange in shooting ranges, they don't fire 1 critical shot in the middle of a firefight with  1/2 pound of mud crammed into the weapon after rolling it in sand and soaking it in saltwater.

Quoted: Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody. Because "experienced" civilian shooters don't get shot at while using/abusing their carbines.   They put 8 bazillion rounds downrange in shooting ranges, they don't fire 1 critical shot in the middle of a firefight with  1/2 pound of mud crammed into the weapon after rolling it in sand and soaking it in saltwater.

LE guns sit in a patrol car trunk.

Membership has its privileges.

Pissing and moaning aside, a product is more likely to sell if it has the LE/Mil stamp of approval on it.
The consumer eats that kind of advertising up.

Quoted: Membership has its privileges. Pissing and moaning aside, a product is more likely to sell if it has the LE/Mil stamp of approval on it. The consumer eats that kind of advertising up.

The people that eat that advertising up aren't the same people that go out and buy this stuff right away.

The advanced user and collector buys this stuff first.  They don't care about MIL/LE use.

well said

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody. Because "experienced" civilian shooters don't get shot at while using/abusing their carbines.   They put 8 bazillion rounds downrange in shooting ranges, they don't fire 1 critical shot in the middle of a firefight with  1/2 pound of mud crammed into the weapon after rolling it in sand and soaking it in saltwater. LE guns sit in a patrol car trunk.

I meant .mil more, though please don't let that get in the way of starting a good "us versus them" rant.  There really aren't enough of those.

As long as I only have to fax a copy of my creds to get in, as these guns will likely have been available to the public for years before my agency adopts them.

Quoted: Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody. Because "experienced" civilian shooters don't get shot at while using/abusing their carbines.   They put 8 bazillion rounds downrange in shooting ranges, they don't fire 1 critical shot in the middle of a firefight with  1/2 pound of mud crammed into the weapon after rolling it in sand and soaking it in saltwater.

I think I would rather have civilians put 8 bazillion rounds down range to identify any problems before I had to carry it on patrol in some shithole in the sand or God forbid I got in a firefight with an unproven weapon.  Like the early M-16.

A gun sold is a gun sold.. who's more likely to make you money? A hard-fought military contract where you're up against entrenched heavy hitters with lobbyists, or fifty thousand drooling civis with credit card in hand?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody. Because "experienced" civilian shooters don't get shot at while using/abusing their carbines.   They put 8 bazillion rounds downrange in shooting ranges, they don't fire 1 critical shot in the middle of a firefight with  1/2 pound of mud crammed into the weapon after rolling it in sand and soaking it in saltwater. I think I would rather have civilians put 8 bazillion rounds down range to identify any problems before I had to carry it on patrol in some shithole in the sand or God forbid I got in a firefight with an unproven weapon.  Like the early M-16.

 

Oddly enough that wasn't the early M-16s fault now was it?  Would civilian ammunition manufacturers have knowingly produced bad ammunition to sell to civilians? Nope, so no amount of R&D in the civilian world would have found the problem that the military ran into.

Why not write Bushmaster a letter instead of complaining about the man on the internet?

Hell- the AR15.com mantra is "buy both".  Why not just "do both" and release to Mil/LE and the civies at the same time?  

Unless the LE/MIL groups have already ordered the rest of us will likely get ours first anyway. The purchase process for each of those is slow enough that unless they have currently placed orders for a large batch its not an issue. Now if they have already ordered them then its first come first serve and they had their orders in first. I guess I don't see Magpul/Bushmaster producing 5000 ACRs and then holding them for 3 months to see if they get any LE/MIL orders before they sell to us. With the SCAR I would presume that the .mil contract would take precidence.

Quoted: The advanced user and collector buys this stuff first.  They don't care about MIL/LE use.

Who are "advanced users and collectors"?

It's apparently not collectors of military-type firearms, since the "advanced user and collector", according to you, doesn't care about military use.

So who is it?

Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the Masada/ACR was going to be released to the civilian market first, and to LE/MIL down the road.

Quoted: A gun sold is a gun sold.. who's more likely to make you money? A hard-fought military contract where you're up against entrenched heavy hitters with lobbyists, or fifty thousand drooling civis with credit card in hand?

The Masada doesn't have any military contracts.

Quoted: Why not write Bushmaster a letter instead of complaining about the man on the internet?

Because I want to see how many other people agree with my position because I know some do.

Quoted: Unless the LE/MIL groups have already ordered the rest of us will likely get ours first anyway. The purchase process for each of those is slow enough that unless they have currently placed orders for a large batch its not an issue. Now if they have already ordered them then its first come first serve and they had their orders in first. I guess I don't see Magpul/Bushmaster producing 5000 ACRs and then holding them for 3 months to see if they get any LE/MIL orders before they sell to us. With the SCAR I would presume that the .mil contract would take precidence.

I agree that the SCAR has a military contract and that would be first.

Quoted: It's apparently not collectors of military-type firearms, since the "advanced user and collector", according to you, doesn't care about military use. So who is it?

Huh?

Many of you guys are missing my point.

The LE market is not that big for this type of firearm.  Many departments don't have AR-15s.  In Lincoln, NE which is a town of about 225,000 people, the police department has 8 AR15s amongst the entire department.  

They have 3 DPMS
The other four rifles are surplus Air Force uppers that were given to the department for free and built on Bushmaster lowers.
The final rifle is a M16A1 that they confiscated from a guy and now is on a Form 10.  

Over half their "arsenal" was free.

The Nebraska State Patrol used Mini GBs for years.

An LE rifle rides around in a patrol car trunk and has to hold up to a mediocre amount of rounds.  A firearm in use by an LE agency is not a measure of its "goodness"

I hate to say this, but I actually agree with scotty ryan.  Never have before and likely won't again.

It's scary how little some cops know about guns and black rifles.  Most ARs don't have to do too much if they are patrol rifles.

Unless production capacity is really, really limited I don't see the reasons.

Unless it's an emergency kind of deal I'd rather see everything released at once to all interested parties.

Quoted: Quoted: Unless the LE/MIL groups have already ordered the rest of us will likely get ours first anyway. The purchase process for each of those is slow enough that unless they have currently placed orders for a large batch its not an issue. Now if they have already ordered them then its first come first serve and they had their orders in first. I guess I don't see Magpul/Bushmaster producing 5000 ACRs and then holding them for 3 months to see if they get any LE/MIL orders before they sell to us. With the SCAR I would presume that the .mil contract would take precidence. I agree that the SCAR has a military contract and that would be first.

see, this is why i don't think you're campaigning for shooters, and you're just cop bashing.  You seem to think that the .mil having a first-run contract is ok here, but in your OP you stated that you have a problem with the .mil/LEO having first-run contracts.  All your other post have been bashing LEOs using carbines w/ nothing said about the military.

Just come right out and say it, you dont think it's fair LEOs get first runs, and you're just throwing another anti-cop hissy.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unless the LE/MIL groups have already ordered the rest of us will likely get ours first anyway. The purchase process for each of those is slow enough that unless they have currently placed orders for a large batch its not an issue. Now if they have already ordered them then its first come first serve and they had their orders in first. I guess I don't see Magpul/Bushmaster producing 5000 ACRs and then holding them for 3 months to see if they get any LE/MIL orders before they sell to us. With the SCAR I would presume that the .mil contract would take precidence. I agree that the SCAR has a military contract and that would be first. see, this is why i don't think you're campaigning for shooters, and you're just cop bashing.  You seem to think that the .mil having a first-run contract is ok here, but in your OP you stated that you have a problem with the .mil/LEO having first-run contracts.  All your other post have been bashing LEOs using carbines w/ nothing said about the military. Just come right out and say it, you dont think it's fair LEOs get first runs, and you're just throwing another anti-cop hissy.

No I don't think they should get first runs and this has nothing to do with bashing the police.

I have never been in any cop bashing thread on this entire website.

Quoted: Not everyone, see red. Bushmaster ACR info and Magpul comments. The technical specifications and details contained here are subject to change.  We do not anticipate any major deviation from the following information, but will update this auto-reply as more information becomes available. Magpul-Bushmaster License Agreement Several days prior to SHOT Show 2008, Magpul Industries Corp. and Bushmaster Firearms International (BFI) announced an exclusive license agreement for the production and sales of Magpul's prototype Masada rifle.  The production weapon to be produced and sold by BFI is called the ACR, or Adaptive Combat Rifle.  Magpul will be manufacturing all polymer ACR components (including, but not limited to the lower receiver, stock, and handguards), and we will maintain a close working relationship with BFI for all future development of the ACR platform. To read the official Bushmaster press release, please visit http://bushmaster.com/press_release_013108.asp. ACR Availability and Pricing The ACR will be available for civilian and law enforcement in the 2nd quarter of 2008, and available for military in the 3rd quarter of 2008.  MSRP is targeted at approximately $1500.  Final pricing will be released by Bushmaster in the coming weeks/months.  All sales will be handled by Bushmaster and their distribution network. Technical Specifications and Information BARREL:  Choice of 12.5", 14.5", 16", or 18" barrel (1:7 twist) STOCK:  Choice of folding/collapsable stock with adjustable cheek piece, fixed stock with adjustable cheek piece, or PRS (Precision Rifle Stock) adjustable for cheek piece height and length of pull. COLORS:  Polymer ACR components (stock, lower receiver, and handguards) will be available in black, flat dark earth, foliage green, and OD green. CALIBER:  The first caliber to be released will be 5.56 NATO/.223 Remington.  Other AR calibers may be offered in the future as complete rifles and/or conversion kits, but no timeline has been established for their release. OTHER INFORMATION: • Short-stroke gas piston operation • Tool-less adjustable 4-position gas system • Pinned and clamped gas block • Uses free-floated AR15/M16 barrels • Ambidextrous controls • Grip storage (accepts MIAD grip cores) • M16-style break-open receiver using captured push pins • Impact modified polymer lower receiver, handguards, and stock • Monolithic 7000-series upper receiver and rail with flip-up front sight • Integral forward and rear quick disconnect sling mounts • Accepts USGI and PMAG magazines • Drop-in modular trigger group (accepts AR-15 stock trigger parts).  Full-auto ACR uses proprietary auto sear. • AR-style rotating bolt with spring loaded firing pin and safety block • Tool-less quick change barrel (additional barrels available from Bushmaster) • Hardened steel bolt carrier group bearing rails (steel to steel interface) • Available in safe / semi-auto or safe / semi / full-auto trigger groups • 700-750 rounds per minute full auto rate of fire • Barrel life consistent with Bushmaster AR barrels • Optional aluminum Picatinny tri-rail handguard Multimedia: Milspec Monkey YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoa-rJkHReM Future Weapons Segment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJhPMIVgF6c Bushmaster press release: http://bushmaster.com/press_release_013108.asp Contact Information: For more information regarding the Bushmaster ACR, please contact Bushmaster Firearms International at 1-800-998-7928, or visit www.bushmaster.com.

Ok, I'll accept this point and retract my statement about the Masada but in this video it sounded like it was for MIL/LE first

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7DX-wmbJcY

SCAR is by contract. There wouldn't be a SCAR if there wasn't the military request for it.  They HAVE to by signed contract deliver so many units by a certain date so hence Military take priority.  LEO departments have also signed contracts that have to be filled and they don't want to risk not filling their contract obligations.

The SCAR is in pretty high demand we're talking about thousands of rifles already sold by contract.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody. Because "experienced" civilian shooters don't get shot at while using/abusing their carbines.   They put 8 bazillion rounds downrange in shooting ranges, they don't fire 1 critical shot in the middle of a firefight with  1/2 pound of mud crammed into the weapon after rolling it in sand and soaking it in saltwater. I think I would rather have civilians put 8 bazillion rounds down range to identify any problems before I had to carry it on patrol in some shithole in the sand or God forbid I got in a firefight with an unproven weapon.  Like the early M-16.

i'm glad i'm not the only one that saw how ass-backwards that argument was.

Quoted: SCAR is by contract. There wouldn't be a SCAR if there wasn't the military request for it.  They HAVE to by signed contract deliver so many units by a certain date so hence Military take priority.  LEO departments have also signed contracts that have to be filled and they don't want to risk not filling their contract obligations. The SCAR is in pretty high demand we're talking about thousands of rifles already sold by contract.

I completely understand that and you are still missing my point.

This is just doesn't apply to the SCAR.  It applies to every new firearm that is released.  The KRISS SMG is the same way and has absolutely no following.

Quoted: I completely understand that and you are still missing my point. This is just doesn't apply to the SCAR.  It applies to every new firearm that is released.  The KRISS SMG is the same way and has absolutely no following.

Scott, when you have a product that you are still working on you do your best to get as many people to commit to buying it as you can before you produce it.  Larger groups can purchase more units and that means more money committed to your product.  

If you have a contract you have to fill it before you can start trying to fill other demands.  Contract obligations have to met or you risk breach of contract and loose money as well as harm your reputation.  

Every company whether Microsoft or Colt are going to seek large contracts and fill those contracts first.

Quoted: Quoted: I completely understand that and you are still missing my point. This is just doesn't apply to the SCAR.  It applies to every new firearm that is released.  The KRISS SMG is the same way and has absolutely no following. Scott, when you have a product that you are still working on you do your best to get as many people to commit to buying it as you can before you produce it.  Larger groups can purchase more units and that means more money committed to your product.   If you have a contract you have to fill it before you can start trying to fill other demands.  Contract obligations have to met or you risk breach of contract and loose money as well as harm your reputation.   Every company whether Microsoft or Colt are going to seek large contracts and fill those contracts first.

I understand that.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unless the LE/MIL groups have already ordered the rest of us will likely get ours first anyway. The purchase process for each of those is slow enough that unless they have currently placed orders for a large batch its not an issue. Now if they have already ordered them then its first come first serve and they had their orders in first. I guess I don't see Magpul/Bushmaster producing 5000 ACRs and then holding them for 3 months to see if they get any LE/MIL orders before they sell to us. With the SCAR I would presume that the .mil contract would take precidence. I agree that the SCAR has a military contract and that would be first. see, this is why i don't think you're campaigning for shooters, and you're just cop bashing.  You seem to think that the .mil having a first-run contract is ok here, but in your OP you stated that you have a problem with the .mil/LEO having first-run contracts.  All your other post have been bashing LEOs using carbines w/ nothing said about the military. Just come right out and say it, you dont think it's fair LEOs get first runs, and you're just throwing another anti-cop hissy. No I don't think they should get first runs and this has nothing to do with bashing the police. I have never been in any cop bashing thread on this entire website.

then what's the problem?  Bushmaster/Magpul are putting this thing together as fast as possible and the military has no interest in it.  As far as the SCAR goes, well the military contract was the whole reason for creating the weapon, so of course they get dibs.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unless the LE/MIL groups have already ordered the rest of us will likely get ours first anyway. The purchase process for each of those is slow enough that unless they have currently placed orders for a large batch its not an issue. Now if they have already ordered them then its first come first serve and they had their orders in first. I guess I don't see Magpul/Bushmaster producing 5000 ACRs and then holding them for 3 months to see if they get any LE/MIL orders before they sell to us. With the SCAR I would presume that the .mil contract would take precidence. I agree that the SCAR has a military contract and that would be first. see, this is why i don't think you're campaigning for shooters, and you're just cop bashing.  You seem to think that the .mil having a first-run contract is ok here, but in your OP you stated that you have a problem with the .mil/LEO having first-run contracts.  All your other post have been bashing LEOs using carbines w/ nothing said about the military. Just come right out and say it, you dont think it's fair LEOs get first runs, and you're just throwing another anti-cop hissy. No I don't think they should get first runs and this has nothing to do with bashing the police. I have never been in any cop bashing thread on this entire website. then what's the problem?  Bushmaster/Magpul are putting this thing together as fast as possible and the military has no interest in it.  As far as the SCAR goes, well the military contract was the whole reason for creating the weapon, so of course they get dibs.

I'm talking about the the whole industry in general.

Robinson didnt play that game. It was LEO and Civi ready at the same time. No arming of JBT's first

Quoted: This is just doesn't apply to the SCAR.  It applies to every new firearm that is released.  The KRISS SMG is the same way and has absolutely no following.

The KRISS SMG isn't the best example to use.  I'm not disagreeing with your original post; I'm just pointing out that new select-fire firearms released after 1986 will only see adoption in LE/MIL.  New MG sales will always have LE/MIL priority first and then semi versions for civilians second (if at all).  Get rid of pesky USC 922(o) and maybe they'll release FA/semi design firearms simultaneously for all.  The fastest release of semi version after the select-fire that I know of is the B&T TP9.  Maybe a few months separated both versions' releases.

Quoted: Robinson didnt play that game. It was LEO and Civi ready at the same time. No arming of JBT's first

My point exactly

Quoted: Quoted: This is just doesn't apply to the SCAR.  It applies to every new firearm that is released.  The KRISS SMG is the same way and has absolutely no following. The KRISS SMG isn't the best example to use.  I'm not disagreeing with your original post; I'm just pointing out that new select-fire firearms released after 1986 will only see adoption in LE/MIL.  New MG sales will always have LE/MIL priority first and then semi versions for civilians second (if at all).  Get rid of pesky USC 922(o) and maybe they'll release FA/semi design firearms simultaneously for all.  The fastest release of semi version after the select-fire that I know of is the B&T TP9.  Maybe a few months separated both versions' releases.

negative, that weapon was designed and in production SEVERAL years before B&T bought the rights, it was originally built by Steyr, in Select-fire, then they came out with a semi version, then several years later it came to the US market specificalyl to be marketed for civvis.  Thats not fast work.

I guess I don't see the original premise as an actual common situation. I haven't been paying attention to the ACR/Masada release (when it comes out then its here and I'll pay attention) so I though maybe that was what the plan was for it. Frankly, I can't think of a firearm that was introduced to the LE market first before the general public, baring legal issues or prior contracts. Sure there are firearms that come about because of a LE/MIL contract so of course they get them first.

I guess I don't pay that much attention to it anyway, I wait to buy until I know it works well anyways.

Business is business.

You target the deepest pockets first.  That's the one who gets the taxes.  The taxpayer himself is lower in that order usually.  There's several reasons for this.

A contract means you have a certain number sold.  A contract for 1,000 XL8 rifles means I will be able to run a production line and make a profit.  That means any one's and two's I sell to individual people, who have no obligation to buy any to begin with, is gravy.

Selling to a military IS big advertising.  It's not so much the Joe on the street, though that happens, but other agencies, other countries, etc.  Look at the Beretta M9.  There was a line of agencies and even civillians ready to buy that after it was adopted that wouldn't have otherwise considered it.  The Hummer is a prime example of selling the people something they don't need, but will buy because it's "GI" ish.

Military contracts also pay for development.  You can pour all your working capital into a gun design, and never come close to being as harshly tested as a real troop test.  Most of the contracts that require development also include funds to the contractor to develop the system and get rid of flaws.  So it makes sense to get an Army contract first.  The Army helps you pay to develop it, and tests it for you in ways you might not be able to.  Look at how much development was done by Colt before any sales (i.e. none to the original AR-15) and how much was done after sales to the US military.  Gun companies operate on too thin a margin to invest that kind of capital into R&D.  

Not selling to civillians first protects your design.  A design flaw found by the Army that can be corrected is less likely to pass into history than one found by the 8 million civillians.  The Army is set-up to find the flaws and make the corrections and move on.  They expect that, and it's no big deal.  Civillians will dog your product out on the internet and sue your ass off.  Which is better to deal with when you're trying to develop a design?

The biggest stumbling block though IMO is the gun laws.  Since a post-86 design is not a transferrable, no 'normal' civillians can buy a design without it being redesigned.  So why not sell the design first, then spend the money to redeisgn it later.  Again, it's about the money.  Even with the redesign to civillian model, it won't reach everyone.  So you either write them off, or redesign yet again for the markets with various bans, etc.  Again, all that takes money.  Many think it's cheap, but it's still money off the bottom line, and really, it's not that cheap.

So you have two markets.  

One market will take your design, find what's wrong with it for you, sometimes pay you to fix it, and sign a contract to buy dozens, hundreds, thousands or more.  Give you connections to other markets.  Allow you the funds to pay for production and later development into other models.  This market has funds and can ge as much as it needs.

An the civillian market, where you need to redesign your design and get ATF approval using your own money before you can sell any.  Pay for your own development, like Arctic tests, jungle tests, surf-zone tests, desert tests, etc. and fixing bugs you find.  Out of all customers sell one, and rarely two or more to each, all of which are potential lawsuits for the bugs you didn't find.  In order to reach those customers you have to pay out of your own pocket to make special versions for them.  This market has limited funds and often will choose to buy groceries over a gun.

That doesn't cover the fact that a new gunlaw might come by an completely eliminate the civillian market to begin with at any time.  Whereas the agency/mil is virtually immune to those changes.

When you look at it from a business point of view, I'd be hittng the agency/military market first as well.  That's where the money is.  Any market that costs you money to get into (and that's the civillian market) isn't the one to go after first.  Any market that can dissapear overnight at the signing of a bill isn't the one to go after first.  

Quoted: Business is business. You target the deepest pockets first.  That's the one who gets the taxes.  The taxpayer himself is lower in that order usually.  There's several reasons for this.

LE pockets aren't that deep.  Just like I said before.  I don't see many LE agencies clamoring for $1500+ assault rifles.

A contract means you have a certain number sold.  A contract for 1,000 XL8 rifles means I will be able to run a production line and make a profit.  That means any one's and two's I sell to individual people, who have no obligation to buy any to begin with, is gravy.

The profit margin is usually the same on a 1000 unit sale as a 2 unit sale.

Selling to a military IS big advertising.

I agree

Military contracts also pay for development.  You can pour all your working capital into a gun design, and never come close to being as harshly tested as a real troop test.  Most of the contracts that require development also include funds to the contractor to develop the system and get rid of flaws.  So it makes sense to get an Army contract first.  The Army helps you pay to develop it, and tests it for you in ways you might not be able to.  Look at how much development was done by Colt before any sales (i.e. none to the original AR-15) and how much was done after sales to the US military.  Gun companies operate on too thin a margin to invest that kind of capital into R&D.

I would agree but the chance of having a weapon adopted by the military is slim.  This needs to be considered when factoring in the development.  Expecting the military to pay for it and it will never get off the ground because most new guns are never adopted.

Not selling to civillians first protects your design.  A design flaw found by the Army that can be corrected is less likely to pass into history than one found by the 8 million civillians.  The Army is set-up to find the flaws and make the corrections and move on.  They expect that, and it's no big deal.  Civillians will dog your product out on the internet and sue your ass off.  Which is better to deal with when you're trying to develop a design?

Thats only if it is adopted.

The biggest stumbling block though IMO is the gun laws.  Since a post-86 design is not a transferrable, no 'normal' civillians can buy a design without it being redesigned.  So why not sell the design first, then spend the money to redeisgn it later.  Again, it's about the money.  Even with the redesign to civillian model, it won't reach everyone.  So you either write them off, or redesign yet again for the markets with various bans, etc.  Again, all that takes money.  Many think it's cheap, but it's still money off the bottom line, and really, it's not that cheap.

I would agree but going from select fire to semi only is not that much of a redesign.

One market will take your design, find what's wrong with it for you, sometimes pay you to fix it, and sign a contract to buy dozens, hundreds, thousands or more.  Give you connections to other markets.  Allow you the funds to pay for production and later development into other models.  This market has funds and can ge as much as it needs.

Thats only if it gets adopted.  Colt spent millions of their own money getting the AR-15 developed to where it could be considered for a military weapon.

An the civillian market, where you need to redesign your design and get ATF approval using your own money before you can sell any.  Pay for your own development, like Arctic tests, jungle tests, surf-zone tests, desert tests, etc. and fixing bugs you find.  Out of all customers sell one, and rarely two or more to each, all of which are potential lawsuits for the bugs you didn't find.  In order to reach those customers you have to pay out of your own pocket to make special versions for them.  This market has limited funds and often will choose to buy groceries over a gun. That doesn't cover the fact that a new gunlaw might come by an completely eliminate the civillian market to begin with at any time.  Whereas the agency/mil is virtually immune to those changes.

I would agree but going from select fire to semi only is not that much of a redesign.

When you look at it from a business point of view, I'd be hittng the agency/military market first as well.  That's where the money is.  Any market that costs you money to get into (and that's the civillian market) isn't the one to go after first.  Any market that can dissapear overnight at the signing of a bill isn't the one to go after first.

When you look at it from a busines point of view the gun companies need the civilian market to stay in business. They need to have a fall back on in case their weapon doesn't get adopted.  They have to sell to civilians to get their development costs back.

Hoping for a military contract is almost unrealistic because so few weapons make it that far.  Planning your business and R&D around a military contract that doesn't exist yet is bad.

Quoted: Quoted: This is just doesn't apply to the SCAR.  It applies to every new firearm that is released.  The KRISS SMG is the same way and has absolutely no following. The KRISS SMG isn't the best example to use.  I'm not disagreeing with your original post; I'm just pointing out that new select-fire firearms released after 1986 will only see adoption in LE/MIL.  New MG sales will always have LE/MIL priority first and then semi versions for civilians second (if at all).  Get rid of pesky USC 922(o) and maybe they'll release FA/semi design firearms simultaneously for all.  The fastest release of semi version after the select-fire that I know of is the B&T TP9.  Maybe a few months separated both versions' releases.

I would agree but some companies have taken years in between the select fire and semi only variant.

They weren't making select fires in that time.  There was a discrete pause in releases.

Quoted: I guess I don't see the original premise as an actual common situation. I haven't been paying attention to the ACR/Masada release (when it comes out then its here and I'll pay attention) so I though maybe that was what the plan was for it. Frankly, I can't think of a firearm that was introduced to the LE market first before the general public, baring legal issues or prior contracts. Sure there are firearms that come about because of a LE/MIL contract so of course they get them first. I guess I don't pay that much attention to it anyway, I wait to buy until I know it works well anyways.

The MK5 was also going to be this way.  I don't see MIL/LE lining up for a UMP/MP5 hybrid.

Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody.

The Masada is coming out for both.

The SCAR has military orders to be filled first. And I'd rather guys getting shot at had the guns they want before I do.

Quoted: Quoted: I really don't see how this benefits anybody. We have the SCAR and Masada coming out.  Every new gun that gets released always has MIL/LEO first.  Why? I don't see LE departments lined up to buy the SCAR or Masada.  Most can't even afford AR-15s for their officers. Why not let it out to everyone at once?  Some experienced civilian shooters can work out the kinks and this would only go to improve the product for everybody. The Masada is coming out for both. The SCAR has military orders to be filled first. And I'd rather guys getting shot at had the guns they want before I do.

Read the thread.

Quoted: negative, that weapon was designed and in production SEVERAL years before B&T bought the rights, it was originally built by Steyr, in Select-fire, then they came out with a semi version, then several years later it came to the US market specificalyl to be marketed for civvis.  Thats not fast work.

My point is made only for the involvement that B&T has with their improved design, not Steyr's original.  B&T didn't make straight copies of Steyr's design.  They changed the receiver to accept a folding stock, then designed both the select-fire and semi-auto models.  The TP9 is not an exact copy of the SPP.  Trust me, the trigger is much better on the TP9.

Also, semi-auto models based on select-fire designs typically are delayed due to BATF's insistence that the semi-auto models not be easily modified to select-fire.  Vltor's PKM receiver is an example.  FA post-dealer samples are readily available from them but the semi's didn't arrive until Marcolmar came out with their BATF-approved design.

Quoted: Membership has its privileges. Pissing and moaning aside, a product is more likely to sell if it has the LE/Mil stamp of approval on it. The consumer eats that kind of advertising up.

Don't kid yourself: "LE" has nil to do w/ product credibility in the black rifle market.  It's milspec that makes the difference.  What is going going on is a slight bit of preference & a little bit of income via parts & training services associated w/ LE department allocation - that's it.  Dollars to donuts, from a market share standpoint, the commercial retail revenues from commercial sales of the FN SCAR, for example, will trump LE purchase revenues.  It's not even a contest.