Colt just filed Bankruptcy

[Tom Servo]

Why cant they make revolvers again?

It's a sad story. Colt revolvers required extensive hand-fitting. They suspended production in the late 1990's. Legend has it the equipment was stored in a parking lot, and later damaged by the elements. Many of the engineers who were responsible for the hands-on production have since retired or passed away. They can't just throw a switch and start churning out Pythons. Even the supply of parts on the secondary market is drying up.

That leaves them with two options:

• Make them like they used to. That means buying new machinery and training new smiths. If they're to be up to the old standards of fit and finish, they'll be >$2,000 guns. People won't buy them.
• Do like S&W and adopt modern CNC machinery and practices. They'll still be over $1,000. People will gripe that they're not as nice as the old guns and won't buy them.

Honestly, Colt has been riding their own coattails for so long, I don't think they really have a way to stay relevant in the market.

 

[Skans]

I think Colt could easily start turning out Pythons that look nice, but wouldn't have the same slick action as the originals. If they could do it at a price point near $1,200 they would still sell and Colt could make a few bucks. Purists would hate them; but newbies might buy them if they look pretty.

The standard AR is done, Colt should drop that like a hot potato. They couldn't keep up and the ones they were making when they owned the market were too "politically correct". Now, any one can make an AR, even bubba gunsmith.

The bottom line is, however, that if Colt is going to stay relevant as a manufacturer of firearms, it will need to come up with new designs that are actually "winners". The Colt American 2000 was a loser. I think that was their last attempt at a new design. Was there anything since then that I'm missing?

I think if I were Colt, I'd be spending some serious resources in trying to recruit top engineers from Tanfoglio, CZ, and Sig. Then, design something "dazzling" and bring it to market under the Colt name. IMHO, if Colt can't win over the civilian market, it has no business even trying to compete for military contracts. It's either that, or sell out to a company like Taurus like others have done.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

There are so many striker fired guns - it's hard to imagine a world beating and dazzling new handgun.

How many Glock clones with minor tweaks does the world need?

Unless they have real raygun in the works - time to just go the way of Edsel.

 

[Skans]

How many Glock clones with minor tweaks does the world need?

Glen, I agree with you - no more Glock-a-likes, please!. I'm also tired of mediocre 1911's. If you eliminated 1911's and glock-a-likes that would probably be well over 1/2 of the pistols being made.

However, people are still coming up with some pretty inventive firearms, or slick versions based on other designs. My only point is that Colt needs to be in that game, otherwise it really has nothing to offer other than gold-embellished commemorative pieces with a pony stamp.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Honestly, Colt has been riding their own coattails for so long, I don't think they really have a way to stay relevant in the market.

I love my Colts and wouldn't give them up for anything, but the above is so true.....

I'd like to see somebody like Ruger take an interest in them. Or another old firearm maker.

 

[Tom Servo]

The Colt American 2000 was a loser. I think that was their last attempt at a new design.

A few years ago, I got one of those at (what I thought) was a spectacular price. Fired once, box and all.

Not only has it failed to appreciate in value, I couldn't sell that thing to save my life. At least it's an odd piece of history. Like the Pinto.

It was designed by committee, and it was meant to ape another maker's successful design. It didn't even do that well. Their only other noteworthy attempt was the Double Eagle, which was nothing new, either. Both guns had serious issues. Neither lasted long on the market.

Frankly, the buying public doesn't trust innovation if it comes from Colt. The company has been playing it safe for decades. A few SKUs of the 1911? Sure. Minor variations on the LE6920? It sells. That's pretty much what Colt is now: an over-the-hill dinosaur act that makes ends meet by playing its greatest hits.

I'd be hard pressed to sell a company like that to investors.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

You have no idea if Belgium has a lower labor cost environment to even make that statement.

How do you know what I know?

http://www.bls.gov/fls/country/belgium.htm

Roughly half (or a bit less) of what Colt workers are being paid.

U.S. Bureau of Labor data says that the labor cost index for South Carolina is 30 percent lower than for Connecticut. Factor in that Colt workers are unionized and paid better than the average bear in Connecticut, and the difference becomes greater.

 

[DPris]

I took an armorer's course on the 2000 in '93.
Put on by Colt.

They bought the design from Reed Knight, and if they'd left it alone and/or gone about it right, it coulda worked.

They tweaked it.
They lost it.
Denis

 

[Don P]

Just my opinion, the strike that took place in 1985 and lasted roughly 5 years was the crippling blow along with the decision to drop the public consumer market and go to the LE and Military market.
In todays climate I hate to see any gun maker in the area of possibly going under but Colt has over time shot themselves in the foot multiple times

 

[tirod]

IIRC the Berry Amendment prevents FN from using Belgian workers and facilities to make M4's. By law under the contracts they must be built in factories on American soil.

It was passed in 1941 and still has strategic value today. We don't want our guns, bullets, or gasoline on the wrong side of a 1,500 mile ocean.

Goes to Aimpoints and Eotechs under contract are built here - but - those for the civilian market can be made in China. (And they are, in the same plant, along with half a dozen less expensive brands.)

Same for our combat uniforms. In point of fact, there's a controversy about the running shoe in the clothing bag for initial enlistees and how it's taking to long to approve a US maker. Said maker has a production line ready to go for the last 6 months. US citizens aren't getting paid until it's approved.

As for FN - overruns on parts show up at their allied outlet, which is also located in the Palmetto State. Hint. And FN is now selling M4geries, which previously weren't available. Just like Colt.

FN isn't being gutted by an off shore holding company and looted for cash. This is what happens when we let foreign owners buy American property. And it's precisely why so many foreign companies did establish a footprint here - to comply with the Berry Amendment. FN, HK, Beretta, SIG, and others are US made for a reason.

Remington and Colt don't have it any worse - they just need to make better decisions. And as far as Colt management goes, their actions have resulted in a deterioration in our ability to defend our nation. It's the kind of thing that future scenarios see as world wide warfare - without combat.

Same as hacking the OPM.

It's not all about guns. It's about defeating us before we even get to identify who to shoot. That's future warfare and it will never be discussed in gun forums.

 

[shootniron]

I hope they close the doors and sell off the equipment to a salvage yard...sick of seeing threads bemoaning the past, present and future fortunes of Colt's...and the reasons for them.