WHAAAT!?! Colt is no longer?
- Thread starter Sir William
- Start date
Anybody here buy a car the first year it was produced?
I did, and had nothing but trouble.
One problem with the M-16 is that it is constantly compared to the M-14 during the Vietnam era...a brand new weapon system compared to one which had undergone 20+ years of development.
Larry
I did, and had nothing but trouble.
One problem with the M-16 is that it is constantly compared to the M-14 during the Vietnam era...a brand new weapon system compared to one which had undergone 20+ years of development.
Larry
PsychoSword
Moderator
How did a typical "Colt is going out of business" thread turn into an M16 vs. AK47 debate? ROFLMAO 
Ol' Thunder said:
If you live in a dream world the general purpose rifle will be perfect. I live in the real world and the M14 is a piss poor excuse for a general purpose rifle in this day and age.
Sammunition.44mag said:
I hardly see it as fuzzy logic. When a bunch of DC pencil pushers are the cause of such a feature.
Besides the military M16 haters who has ever used the foward assist on a AR type rifle?
Not really in the mood to argue or anything, but I finished up 19 years in the Army as of February, 2000. Not a big deal really, but it gave me experiance
with the M16A1, 1911, M3 "Grease gun," the M16A2 and the M9.
M16A1 - Crap. Ours were the left overs from VN.
M1911 - It worked, was accurate enough for its purpose and was reasonably
reliable.
M16A2 - We had great luck with them provided people didn't over oil them.
We used them numerous times under fire, and on patrol. Most
problems were commonly related to a magazine issue, or operator
error.
M9 - The Army got ripped off on that one.
A bit more on the 2 cents, I worked as a training NCO at Holder Complex during the transition from the 1911 to the M9. I had that post for about 2 years, and trained new tankers in the 1911, and the M9 both. By and far the soldiers "liked" the spiffy new M9, but shot better with the 1911. Also, it was my observation that the 1911 really wasn't that inaccurate or unreliable, even with its advanced age. My theory is that most the troops only get to actually fire the weapon once a year if they are lucky, thats not quite often enough to make the 1911 be the babe it is.
Last note on the M16 issue is the M14. I had the oportunity to work with some SK troops who were issued the M14, I.E. I trained with one for awhile.
Its got a place sure, can't beat its ability to reach out and touch someone.
Having said that, I wouldn't want it for an issue weapon to the masses. It sucks in Full auto, is heavy and generaly too bulky to be handled well in close areas.
Now I don't claim to be a pro or anything here, just an ex-ground pounder so take my opinion for the good natured way its offered.
Now on the Colt Situation I don't have a lot to say. I own a Colt Combat Commander, and used to own a 4" Python. In my eyes, Colt screwed up by playing prima-donna with the Python, SAA, 1911's and the Anaconda. Name only goes so far, quality and price stay no matter what. People treat their guns like their cars. If your first was a Chevy and you had pretty good luck with it, your a Chevy man from then on. You might drool over that purty Python, but your old S&W ya got for $200 bucks never let you down so your next Wheelgun's most likely going to be a S&W.
Look at a Python. Sure, its "Purty." Look at its price sticker, what a rip for "purty." What a fine 6 gun? Get your self a used but in good condition
S&W 66 and send it in to the S&W Performance center for a Master Combat Action job, $200 in stainless. What you get back is roughly $200 bucks cheaper than the python and better.
with the M16A1, 1911, M3 "Grease gun," the M16A2 and the M9.
M16A1 - Crap. Ours were the left overs from VN.
M1911 - It worked, was accurate enough for its purpose and was reasonably
reliable.
M16A2 - We had great luck with them provided people didn't over oil them.
We used them numerous times under fire, and on patrol. Most
problems were commonly related to a magazine issue, or operator
error.
M9 - The Army got ripped off on that one.
A bit more on the 2 cents, I worked as a training NCO at Holder Complex during the transition from the 1911 to the M9. I had that post for about 2 years, and trained new tankers in the 1911, and the M9 both. By and far the soldiers "liked" the spiffy new M9, but shot better with the 1911. Also, it was my observation that the 1911 really wasn't that inaccurate or unreliable, even with its advanced age. My theory is that most the troops only get to actually fire the weapon once a year if they are lucky, thats not quite often enough to make the 1911 be the babe it is.
Last note on the M16 issue is the M14. I had the oportunity to work with some SK troops who were issued the M14, I.E. I trained with one for awhile.
Its got a place sure, can't beat its ability to reach out and touch someone.
Having said that, I wouldn't want it for an issue weapon to the masses. It sucks in Full auto, is heavy and generaly too bulky to be handled well in close areas.
Now I don't claim to be a pro or anything here, just an ex-ground pounder so take my opinion for the good natured way its offered.
Now on the Colt Situation I don't have a lot to say. I own a Colt Combat Commander, and used to own a 4" Python. In my eyes, Colt screwed up by playing prima-donna with the Python, SAA, 1911's and the Anaconda. Name only goes so far, quality and price stay no matter what. People treat their guns like their cars. If your first was a Chevy and you had pretty good luck with it, your a Chevy man from then on. You might drool over that purty Python, but your old S&W ya got for $200 bucks never let you down so your next Wheelgun's most likely going to be a S&W.
Look at a Python. Sure, its "Purty." Look at its price sticker, what a rip for "purty." What a fine 6 gun? Get your self a used but in good condition
S&W 66 and send it in to the S&W Performance center for a Master Combat Action job, $200 in stainless. What you get back is roughly $200 bucks cheaper than the python and better.
I have heard nothing my self but
In the past gun makers of all brands have stopped making guns for a time, it has to do with supply and demand, and lets face it the demand for wheels guns is down, way down.
Manufacture costs are much higher for wheels guns and hollowood just doesnt like them.
My guess is that if they are they will return to making them if the demand returnes or the supply get low.
I would be very sad to end the production of one of the finest 357 wheel guns ever made.
In the past gun makers of all brands have stopped making guns for a time, it has to do with supply and demand, and lets face it the demand for wheels guns is down, way down.
Manufacture costs are much higher for wheels guns and hollowood just doesnt like them.
My guess is that if they are they will return to making them if the demand returnes or the supply get low.
I would be very sad to end the production of one of the finest 357 wheel guns ever made.
Aug
HAHAHAHA!
I see you have visited Ft. Knox a time or two. Can't speak for the present but
in 1989 we had a kid from New York get half his platoon sprayed by a skunk
outside of Dixie Barracks. After the First Gulf war they cut Knox down to almost nothing, but with the reliance on Armor in Iraq I'm hoping its a busy place again. I liked Knox.
HAHAHAHA!
I see you have visited Ft. Knox a time or two. Can't speak for the present but
in 1989 we had a kid from New York get half his platoon sprayed by a skunk
outside of Dixie Barracks. After the First Gulf war they cut Knox down to almost nothing, but with the reliance on Armor in Iraq I'm hoping its a busy place again. I liked Knox.
After owning many Colts.. Their new (same old guns) are way over priced.
I had 2 pythons, one Anaconda, and several 1911's in 45cal and 10mm that were used in IPSC matches. For what Colt is asking for their same-old guns from yester-years is ridiculous. Colt has had "One foot in the grave and the other on a wet bare of soap" for over ten years. Colt needs to keep its tried and true guns of yesteryear but also come out with something new and industry leading. If they dont... "its time for Colt to take one last walk in the woods"
I had 2 pythons, one Anaconda, and several 1911's in 45cal and 10mm that were used in IPSC matches. For what Colt is asking for their same-old guns from yester-years is ridiculous. Colt has had "One foot in the grave and the other on a wet bare of soap" for over ten years. Colt needs to keep its tried and true guns of yesteryear but also come out with something new and industry leading. If they dont... "its time for Colt to take one last walk in the woods"
Rumors are true, at least for the Python Elite...
Rumors are true at least for the Python Elite. I went to my local Colt dealer. He guestimated about $1005 after taxes and bg check. He called Colt to get some information, and they said Pythons weren't in production for 2005. Guess they have too many military orders now that their contract exists...
Rumors are true at least for the Python Elite. I went to my local Colt dealer. He guestimated about $1005 after taxes and bg check. He called Colt to get some information, and they said Pythons weren't in production for 2005. Guess they have too many military orders now that their contract exists...
Rumor Central has it that the tooling for the Python & Anaconda lines is worn slap out, and that profits on these low-volume flagships just didn't warrant replacing the machinery by such a financially-strapped company.
Colt is going to be a long time recovering from the disasters of the '90s (Double Eagle & AA2000 flops, and the Kahr lawsuit among other things.)
Colt is going to be a long time recovering from the disasters of the '90s (Double Eagle & AA2000 flops, and the Kahr lawsuit among other things.)
44mag@ucnsb.net
New member
Gotta jump in here on the M16 vs M14 conversation that is going on sidebar to the actual thread. I only served my 6 that the Ranger option required, so maybe I am not as knowledgeable as the old timers in our group. But I can tell you that I handled a wider range of rifles than your average grunt. We can discuss all day long the designs of each gun and what works best, but I think the fact that the 6.8 SPC is being considered for a new caliber should speak volumes to one downfall of the M16, it’s caliber. The Army and the Marines both have found out that the 5.56 is not doing the job. Enemy soldiers at times have to be shot numerous times to drop them. Ever wonder why the Marines requested their M16A2’s back over the M4’s they were issued going into IRAQ. They wanted the velocity back, hoping for better results. The 6.8 SPC is akin to the 7.62x39mm of our Russian Comrades, HMMMM. I am not an M16 hater by any means, but it is far from the ideal battle rifle. Given the chance on more than once occasion, I have taken the M14 into the field, as did many Seals and Rangers in both Iraqi wars. Let’s talk about Full Auto a minute, since when is that even a modern requirement in a battle rifle? Well all know the M16A2 is 3 round burst. Rangers are taught ammunition discipline anyways; I don’t remember ever using 3 round burst, or full auto on any battle rifle that I used. In today’s world we have a civilian M14 design that would be a great all around battle rifle in my honest opinion. See the link below.
http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-rifles-socom.shtml
In the end, I would like to point out that the M4 is produced for the Military by more companies than COLT. The M16 will be going the way of the M1 Garand as soon Congress gets off their butt and buys the HK SL8, unfortunately another 5.56 battle rifle. Anyways, good luck and have fun.
.44mag
P.S. no insult meant to the "legs" in the thread.
http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-rifles-socom.shtml
In the end, I would like to point out that the M4 is produced for the Military by more companies than COLT. The M16 will be going the way of the M1 Garand as soon Congress gets off their butt and buys the HK SL8, unfortunately another 5.56 battle rifle. Anyways, good luck and have fun.
.44mag
P.S. no insult meant to the "legs" in the thread.
WillBrayjr
Moderator
I can understand why Colt is dropping the Python and Anaconda. No one in their right mind is going to shell $1500.00 on guns that aren't no where near worth that much. The Ruger GP-100 with a good trigger job will easily shoot with the Python at $900.00 less, same with the Super RedHawk! Please note that the prices are estimated.
Colt is screwy in the head. First they made high quality firearms that were reasonably priced. Then they stopped producing firearms for civilians in the late 90s. They started offering firearms to civilians again but with outrageous prices. Now they're dropping firearms because they either wan't too much for them or because they don't think civilians should own them. Ruger should have bought Colt out!
Colt is screwy in the head. First they made high quality firearms that were reasonably priced. Then they stopped producing firearms for civilians in the late 90s. They started offering firearms to civilians again but with outrageous prices. Now they're dropping firearms because they either wan't too much for them or because they don't think civilians should own them. Ruger should have bought Colt out!
WillBrayjr
Moderator
It's true! Ruger the chance to buy Winchester and Remington as well but prefered to carry on solo.
How this M-14 vs M-16 debate came to be, in the "Handguns:Revolver" forum,
beats me, but since it's here, I'll put in my 2 cents.
I made two trips to Viet Nam, as a Marine grunt. During my first tour I carried
an M-16. I never considered it a POS, but I didn't care for it, either. From
what I saw, as long as you made an effort to clean it regularly, it would shoot
when you pulled the trigger. My problem with it was, dammit, it's a .22!
On my second tour, I quickly swapped my M-16 for an M-79 grenade launcher.
It came with a .45 pistol, for "close" work. It also came with a big, heavy
bag of ammo. But I didn't care, I didn't trust the M-16.
...A question for Ol' Thunder... You said you were at An Hoa, were you there
when sappers got through the west wire and threw satchel charges in the
jet-fuel dump? I think it was Feb., '69. What a Fireball!
Walter
beats me, but since it's here, I'll put in my 2 cents.
I made two trips to Viet Nam, as a Marine grunt. During my first tour I carried
an M-16. I never considered it a POS, but I didn't care for it, either. From
what I saw, as long as you made an effort to clean it regularly, it would shoot
when you pulled the trigger. My problem with it was, dammit, it's a .22!
On my second tour, I quickly swapped my M-16 for an M-79 grenade launcher.
It came with a .45 pistol, for "close" work. It also came with a big, heavy
bag of ammo. But I didn't care, I didn't trust the M-16.
...A question for Ol' Thunder... You said you were at An Hoa, were you there
when sappers got through the west wire and threw satchel charges in the
jet-fuel dump? I think it was Feb., '69. What a Fireball!
Walter