Quality control out the window?

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

oberkommando

New member
How is it that government contract weapons such as the M14 M16 AND FAL seem to have a zero defect with reguard to surface hardness, reliability, and fit, but all the aftermarket makers are like the stock market, with ups and downs when they make receivers? Can't any use CNC machinery with any competance? Or is it that ONLY Ruger can cast, and ONLY HK can stamp with any quality.

Have seen numerous posts describing the problems with new guns, parts,parts kits, but oem parts and recievers are perfect? specifically DSA, ENTERPRISE ARMS, SMITH ENTERPRISE, IMBEL, CENTURY, OLYMPIC, BUSHMASTER, COLT, SPINGFIELD,AND EVEN THE CHI-COM.

These companies need to look to the after market 1911 companies such as Ed Brown, Les Baer, Kings, Swensen, and others, to see how to make quality parts or recievers. Its hard to believe that only 1911 pistol parts, GERMAN Hk rifles, and a few bolt guns are decent.
 
I've been carrying one of the "new" M16A2's made by FN, and from my experciences along with reports from the CATM folks these weapons are junk. I'd much rather have the "old" M16A1 without the Hi-tech burst feature. I just swaped weapons over to a real old XM177 GAU 5-A/A and it is much better than the A2 even if the finish is all but worn off.
 
I am not making excuses for the industry but can give a few reasons for the decline in some companies. Wages and material costs have passed the price level of most guns so the only way they can stay in business is crank them out faster with less QC If they raise prices they won't sell and they go out of business. A real catch 22. Small companies like ours are able to command a price that allows us to put the quality into our work and make a small profit. That is For the time being. We can't sell to every one due to our prices but there is enough of a market out there who will pay the money for high quality work to keep us in business, When our quality has to suffer is the day we lock our doors.
 
Most government arms were made under detailed specifications that called for rigid quality control and inspection by government inspectors. Endurance tests were run periodically with sample guns. Any defects found had to be corrected at contractor expense.

Today's contracts are often for COTS (commercial off the shelf) products which means that whatever the contractor QC passes, the government accepts, just like buying paper clips. This is, of course, cheaper, but it also means quality can be lower.

In Government production, price is less of an objective than in civilian production where competition drives the cost down so that the best maker has to compete cost-wise with the cheapest maker, with the vast majority of the public looking only at the bottom line, not at quality or durability.
The fact is that civilians seldom fire a gun enough to detect QC failures (how many guns have you fired 5000 rounds?).

The clone makers know that, and count on it. Castings are used instead of forgings. Heat treatment is not done or not done adequately. The materials used are not what they should be, but cost less.

In regard to 1911A1 type handguns, my motto is, "If it doesn't say U.S. Army M1911A1, it's no damn good!"

Jim
 
So jim you are saying a matched Les Baer frame and slide are inferior to an original A1? You might want to let Ed Brown (a pistol smith of the year winner, 1991?) know this, as it was his opinion it was best frame and slide made.

Thanks for reply.

------------------
The beauty of the second Amendment is that it is not needed until they try to take it. T JEFFERSON
 
Oberkommando,

You started the thread asking if quality had gone out the window.

The answer is no, in many cases.

However, quality has a price in the commmercial world, and there has to be sufficient market share willing to pay enough to justify the cost of the quality.

I own 2 of the Baer pistols, and a gaggle of other makes of the 1911 design. The Baer's are extremely good pistols, for their designed purpose. Jim's point, is that a rock stock 1911A1, that met MILSPEC, is also an extremely good pistol. The difference is roughly a thousand dollars. Both will go bang. One will meet a criterion of 1.5" @ 50 yds, while the other is designed to go BANG after mud, snow, sleet, dust, rain, temperature extremes, & etc. Both meet the criteria of quality, just focused at different market niches and at much different prices.

Hope this helps clarify the answers you got to your question.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Since the real issue in this thread is cost of quality control, and it cuts across the spectrum of forums at TFL, I'm going to lock this thread and repost in the General Forum, so that other's may share in the commentary. Please look to that forum for additional postings.

------------------
Mykl
~~~~~
"If you really want to know what's going on;
then, you have to follow the money trail."
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$




[This message has been edited by Mykl (edited October 16, 1999).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top