User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:08:22 AM EDT
[#1]
JLM, maybe there is a reason your question wasn't answered. Maybe they forgot. But let's get an official response from LMT. So far, isn't the official LMT answer (that has been related by third persons) that "OUR barrels are MP tested and milspec." What if the current crop of barrels aren't LMT's? If reminds me of the Revenge of the Pink Panther when Clouseau asked the innkeeper, "Does your dog bite?", whereupon the innkeeper said "no my dog does not bite." When Clouseau tried to pet the dog it bit him. The innkeeper then explained, "that is not my dog." The question I pose to LMT is this: Are all barrels that you USE to build uppers MP tested and milspec? Obviously they are NOT milspec because the milspec requires an MP mark. But if they use aftermarket, non-MP barrels, then we should be told as much, along with WHO MAKES THEIR AFTERMARKET barrels, given all the milspec, commando hype. Their uppers are not worth the $485 minimum MRP if they are not using milspec parts, which they arent. And their uppers are certainly not worth it if they aren't MP tested like Bushmaster and Colt. I feel pretty sure that Bushmaster and Colt would not mark barrels MP if they weren't, unless you guys know otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:19:00 AM EDT
[#2]
The official position at this point is that they are MP tested. To the best of my knowledge they have never made the statement that they are 'milspec' in the sense of meeting the above quoted specifications, or in any other sense that I'm aware of. If they are marking the barrels, and then selling them to .gov/.mil, it would stand to reason that they wouldn't use the MP unless it meets the official specs. If they are NOT selling to .mil, then the meaning of the MP marking in my mind becomes a little more nebulous. As I said it could mean they use a process that is LESS stringent, or even MORE stringent. We just don't know. If it really bugs you, just buy a 6920 upper and be done with it. Or at a minimum a Colt BCG, that's properly marked. I think its worth saying as well, that just because Bushmaster stamps MP, you can't necessarily infer that THEIR inspection process meets .mil requirements either, since to the best of my knowledge they aren't selling barrels to the .mil. In point of fact they are claiming they are using some other process that is actually 'better' than mag particle, but wouldn't say what it is. Heh, fun isn't it? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:21:59 AM EDT
[#3]
I believe that Mr. Lewis isn't answering your e-mails because he is most likely a little busy. I also know for a fact that LMT BCG are MP tested, but not marked. Why don't they mark them? Good question. So it is not unreasonable to assume that their barrels are MP tested and not marked as well.... C4 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:26:30 AM EDT
[#4]
I do know otherwise. Bushmaster has admitted, in their forum on this board, that they only test a representative sample (does this mean one of every 10? of every 100? 1000? They didn't say) and then mark every barrel in that batch. Personally I'd rather have it tested and not marked than marked & not tested. YMMV. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:29:18 AM EDT
[#5]
 It is fun. I already have a Colt 6920. I bought the LMT hoping it would be all that was hyped. Someone needs to specifically ask, and get an email or post from LMT that YES, the 14.5 barrels marked "5.56 NATO 1/7 CB" are LMT manufactured barrels and are MP tested to milspec, though not milspec because we don't mark them MP". As much money as we spend on their stuff, they can at least give us an official answer in print. If they don't, you can assuredly assume the worst. RRA uses Wilson barrels and they say so. If LMT uses Wilson barrels that are NOT MP tested, and NOT milspec, they need to tell their dealers who can then post this information with the ad. Grant, are the barrels on your LMT uppers (14.5 specifically) marked MP? Are they LMT barrels and MP tested? As an LMT dealer, they should answer you quickly and you can post their response in this thread?
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:30:27 AM EDT
[#6]
norman, I think some addressed that issue. I believe the poster works for General Dynamics, who also does MP testing on aircraft parts. The use a statistical sampling method. My understanding is this is how it works: you test 10 percent of a batch of parts (or 5 or 20 or whatever you decide is adequate) and if ONE out of the 10 fails the test, then the ENTIRE batch of 100 is then tested due to that one failure. If it works for parts on jet fighters, it should be okay for guns. I think this is a common industry wide practice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:35:08 AM EDT
[#7]
What's funny is I got bashed all about the Springfield Armory forum for daring to say that my low left shooting SA was defective, and given the number of low left problems, there must be something wrong at SA. Even though I've been shooting .45's for over 20 years, and am good at it, and don't trigger jerk, that is what I was accused of and told not to raise the issue. Well, low and behold SA admitted the defect, repaired it, and admitted it was a problem. So now we know. LMT should let us know re the barrels. I will be thrilled if they come back and say they roll their own, and MP test them to milspec, or better. If not, that needs to be in the ads, with the hype, so we as their customers can make informed purchases. Anybody want to bet that LMT is using aftermarket non MP barrels to make money on the civvy market?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:35:56 AM EDT
[#8]
You don't think civvies are getting barrels out of the failed batches do you? Maybe I'll ship this upper back to LMT with a letter outlining all this and see what they do.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:42:41 AM EDT
[#9]
Well, on the bolts at least they are consistent. That makes sense.
What makes NO sense, is the inconsistent marking of the barrels. I'm not prepared to assume anything in this area, at this point in time, due to the lack of consistency in marking.
No way to know at this point, that would be speculation at best. I kinda doubt they'd do that, due to liability concerns. After all, this is the age of people like John Edwards who would like to sue gun dealers out of buisiness, by legisilating thru the courts. It could be they just ran short on barrels and had go out to a sub. That's speculation on my part thou. Actually, when you think about it logically: if they proof load tested a barrel, and then sold it without a stamp on it because it failed the test, they could really be in for a lot of trouble from a legal standpoint. I just don't see that being a possibility. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:48:35 AM EDT
[#10]
Yep, let a barrel let go and subpoena discover that they had a test in place, used parts unsuitable for gubment contract, which took out some civilian's cornea with barrel shrapnel. I doubt anyone would be that shortsighted. BTW, not to defend product liability suits, but aren't you a little comforted by the fact that manufacturers of firearms and automobiles have such concerns? We definitely need to hear from LMT as to where these barrels come from and what the deal is with the lack of MP mark. There is an honest explanation and we deserve it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:51:35 AM EDT
[#11]
No argument on either point. The other thing is too: there are people that seek out Colt parts specifically because of their quality and the markings. So, from a marketing standpoint I think it would be advantageous to LMT to mark their parts, especially since their stuff is cheaper than Colt. Maybe they'll give me a job in their PR/Marketing Dept? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:54:25 AM EDT
[#12]
Yep, hell, isn't the barrel THE most important thing about the upper? I'm with you JLM and awaiting the official LMT response. Norman, do you care or does WOW WOW WOW meant that it doesn't matter to you ?
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 10:02:56 AM EDT
[#13]
AND the Bolt itself. There is a thread over at TF from a couple noted gunsmiths describing bolts cracking at the cam pins on BM and I believe DPMS bolts, as well as BM's improperly staked key's. Luckily these were observed in classes and didn't get anyone killed. I'll see if I can find that. Good info there. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 10:14:49 AM EDT
[#14]
airbiscuit,
Read Pat and Ned's posts on page 1, and Tweaks on Page 2. In fact read the whole thing, but those ones stand out in my mind: http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=56;t=000497;p=1 I test my RGA'd upper using Tweaks 120 round rapid fire test and it didn't choke, so I called it good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 11:33:21 AM EDT
[#15]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 1:25:47 PM EDT
[#16]
Nice thread JLM. Here are some interesting quotes:
Note: I'm betting LMT does NOT MPI their barrels due to net margins. This may be why they are not MP marked. Heck, if I went to that expense, I'd mark them. LMT should respond. Their uppers SHOULD NOT be advertised in conjunction with USGI if they are NOT MILSPEC. IMHO, one is doing better with at least a BFI barrel (that is MPI) than a mystery LMT barrel that is NOT milspec and apparently NOT MPI. I think MPI is IMPORTANT especially if I am paying a premium. But maybe it isn't important to some. However, my LMT upper is the only upper I have that sports a NON MPI barrel. "-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Only Colt magnafluxes/magnetic particle tests every single barrel and bolt during production. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Add proof load firing to that as that is the "P" in "MP" stamped on the barrel. It's expensive, time consuming, and dangerous but it gets done. I know for certain that Colt proofs their bolts and barrels per the spec, they keep the paperwork on file. With BFI you have to take their word on it. The rest of the makers, hehe, well I know that one of them MagnaFluxes one or two barrels from each run after they're rifled, one good outcome of their exploding M14 barrel fiasco." And significantly (can we get THE answer LMT?)"" posted 10-06-2004 23:15 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pat, Beren, I asked LMT whether they do indeed MPI their bolts, and their answer was no, as it would drive up costs. To be clear thou, my question to them was about their standard bolts. Do they MPI the enhanced? Maybe, I don't know." www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=81;t=000151#000024 Gentlemen, this is not a hard or unwarranted question. It is either yes or no re the bolts and barrels. If LMT employees don't know, how should we feel? Grant, let us know ("There was a mis communication between Karl and Chip (from what I am told)....") : See this thread: ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=204120 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 2:06:50 PM EDT
[#17]
ASR: It would seem that their are some for LMT, and some not so. Could you maybe add a poll to this thread. So we could get a clear look at the numbers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 2:10:27 PM EDT
[#18]
I'd simply like to know whether they MPI their bolts, bc's, and barrels as they've told their dealers, but told others to the contrary. Seems like even Grant was told two different things by two different LMT reps. Do the "pro's use" non milspec and non-MPI? I doubt it. I wouldn't if I can get MPI and I'm not a pro. That's how they advertise their stuff, along with "USGI". No poll is going to tell us whether or not this is true. Only LMT can explain all of this. A popularity contest (i.e., the current hype or spin) is not going to divulge the truth, which is only about three yes or no answers:
For the civilian market, 1) Do you MPI (per milspec or higher) your bolts? 2) Do you MPI (per milspec or higher) your barrels? 3) Are your barrels without MP marking MP tested per milspec? If the LMT BCG is NOT MPI, then why is it over twice the cost of an RRA BCG?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 3:35:42 PM EDT
[#19]
On page 2 of the Tactial Forums thread you referenced Pat Rogers had this to say regarding the LMT bolts... "OK, Karl say emphatically that they ARE MP inspected. He stated from a manufacturing, business and liability standpoint it is the only way to do it." |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 3:42:18 PM EDT
[#20]
That's cool, but what about this on the other forum (from a post dated 10-06-04):
"I asked LMT whether they do indeed MPI their bolts, and their answer was no, as it would drive up costs. To be clear thou, my question to them was about their standard bolts. Do they MPI the enhanced? Maybe, I don't know." This isn't a tough question. Just page the bolt foreman and ask to be sure. The former response, purportedly from LMT, makes a lot of sense and gives a reason. Why would someone from LMT say that if they did in fact MPI them? I think we should be told about the barrels too. Grant should be able to get LMT to email him a direct response that can be publicly posted as opposed to hearsay accounts. No biggie, I don't think RRA does theirs, but their BCG's are about $100, compared to $220 for an LMT. It's obvious that RRA and Bushmaster ought to think about using M4 extensions and ramps!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 6:25:39 PM EDT
[#21]
Minor thread hijack to follow. Please accept my apology in advance
 Did I read this correctly?
They admitted to testing only a representative sample yet they put proof marks on every unit? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 6:47:19 PM EDT
[#22]
I think that thread is archived now, but IIRC that is indeed what they said. They use statistical sampling, and if the sample passess then they mark them all yes. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 7:02:24 PM EDT
[#23]
Is that all the milspec requires?
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 8:50:27 PM EDT
[#24]
I'm personally rather angry about the whole thing....after dropping $485 for my lmt upper this has actually made me rather unhappy with the whole purchase, especially after I had a phantom perm. attached already before I received it and knew about this MP debate. I bought this rifle to shoot and was planning on keeping my 6920 as a safe queen but now I won't be suprised if I sell the LMT. The finish on it is awesome but this kinda bothers me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:04:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Don't be angry. Even if neither the bolt or barrel are MPI then no biggie, they just aren't USGI / milspec. They will function. If yours looks awesome, great. Mine looks OK to pretty good, obviously thanks to my dealer who I can tell cherry picked this one compared to the two other LMT's I've examined. Lot's of USGI milspec commando hype has caused people to jump at these things at MRP. IMHO, without MPI and the hype these things oughta be around $385, not $485. My RRA uppers are obviously and visibly nicer, and cheaper, but are not M4 cut.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 9:36:38 PM EDT
[#26]
Let's not jum to conclusions over internet hearsay just yet. Let's get someone like Wes or Grant or bigbore to get a straight , complete, and clear answer from LMT before we start knocking at their front gates with pitchforks and torches. I have quite a few LMT products and they have all funtioned flawlessly so far. I want to hear it from the horse's mouth before I make any judgements as to their inpection practices. So, are any of the dealers listening and getting on the horn with their LMT representatives to get a real answer yet? Grant, Wes, anybody? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2004 10:30:19 PM EDT
[#27]
Just to clarify I'm not really mad at LMT, just mad at myself that I didn't research the issue better and make sure to purchase an upper with the barrel marked MP......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 2:17:34 AM EDT
[#28]
Me too bro. But then again the purchase was based upon the hype and hearsay statements that LMT barrels were MPI. They may be (I doubt it now), but we should know that soon, along with who made the barrels. If they aren't, just be glad you didn't pay double for a BCG. After reviewing the ads I now note that no one advertises LMT uppers and bolts as milspec, only that the barrels are milspec 1/7 twist, milspec 4150. and milspec chromed. But if it ain't MPI and MP marked, it ain't milspec..........whereas C MP and B MP obviously are. That's why my RRA uppers wear Bushmaster barrels. Either most of us have been riding the LMT wave thinking we were getting a USGI milspec upper based upon bad info or everything is MPI milspec, but not marked (so not really milspec), and LMT employees and dealers are confused about that issue.. In any event, we will know the answer soon so that as consumers we can make informed (truly informed) purchases. If we hear nothing, then that's an answer too
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 2:24:16 AM EDT
[#29]
No. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 2:27:19 AM EDT
[#30]
I do wish you'd quit saying that. More than one person has told you that every barrel is not tested, in fact a very few are, and there is no way to tell if you even have one of the few. Chances are your actual barrel has never been tested. Incidentally, there was also information in the thread I referenced that the barrels weren't even, or soon won't be, MP tested but are infact tested by some other (Bushmaster claimed) "better" technique. Just so you know what you really own, since I know how upset you'd be if a company "lied" to you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 2:30:24 AM EDT
[#31]
That's how I remember it too. They do statistical sampling, and are using something 'better' than MPI but wouldn't say what it is. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 2:36:55 AM EDT
[#32]
Norman, it isn't about lying. It's about paying almost 50% more (or 100% more if the BCG's are just like RRA's) based upon faulty hype. I've had great luck with BM and RRA. I note that BM answers questions about their products, to include a very forthright response re canted FSB's. Regrettably, nobody started asking the hard questions before I bought my upper. Probably for fear of upsetting the choir. I note that LMT has had about a month to respond to the bolt / barrel MPI issue and has either not done so, or done so in a contradictory fashion. No biggie, probably just too busy to spend much time on this. But we should know. Do you want straight answers Norman? Does milspec and MPI mean anything to you in a purchase of an expensive upper? This thread will either confirm that LMT uppers, barrels, and bolts are milspec (but maybe not marked so not truly milspec) or they are not. Either way, as LMT owners we will be reaffirmed or more knowledgable when making another purchase. Don't fight it Norman, the truth is good even if it isn't what you want to hear
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 3:50:58 AM EDT
[#33]
I am not sure why you think LMT BCG's are double the price of the RRA BCG. The standard LMT BCG sells for around $125. The LMT enhanced bolt and standard carrier sells for around $220. You say that LMT has had a month to respond to some question someone posted on internet chat forum somewhere. Do you think they read these threads??? As MSTN posted, KAC just bought 500 10.5 uppers. Do you think that KAC would buy those if they thought they were junk??? I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you may never get an answer to your questions. LMT has bigger fish to fry and civy sales might not even register on LMT radar... C4 |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 4:14:43 AM EDT
[#34]
"I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you may never get an answer to your questions. LMT has bigger fish to fry and civy sales might not even register on LMT radar..."
C4 Grant, I appreciate that, but I wish you or LMT would try answering MY question. This is truly a shame if true. LMT will take our money but not respond to simple valid product inquiry? I find that hard to believe. A responsible person at LMT can't take 5 minutes out of his schedule to answer three easy yes or no questions? Heck, I've personally spoken with SA VP's on the phone, who called ME (not that I'm important, but SA recognizes that I am a customer). If LMT deems its civilian customers as such an insignificant nuisance as to ignore very valid questions, then I'll guarantee that because I don't "register on LMT's radar" neither will a penny from me ever again register on the radar at their bank. SA, Bushmaster, and RRA answer my questions and appreciate my business and they will continue to get it. This is America and consumers have choices. Hopefully, LMT will respond and you are incorrect in your very dim view of their lack of concern for us, their customers. After hearing that, I don't know whether to be angry or sick to my stomach knowing I have LMT products. Quoted: I am not sure why you think LMT BCG's are double the price of the RRA BCG. The standard LMT BCG sells for around $125. The LMT enhanced bolt and standard carrier sells for around $220. You say that LMT has had a month to respond to some question someone posted on internet chat forum somewhere. Do you think they read these threads??? As MSTN posted, KAC just bought 500 10.5 uppers. Do you think that KAC would buy those if they thought they were junk??? I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you may never get an answer to your questions. LMT has bigger fish to fry and civy sales might not even register on LMT radar... C4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 4:23:58 AM EDT
[#35]
I never said that they don't care about civy customers (look at how good their customer service is when a mistake has been made). The difference is that RRA and BM have company guys that watch these boards (and even sponsor them). There business comes mostly from the civy world. LMT business comes from the DOD world... C4 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 4:27:40 AM EDT
[#36]
Well, are their "enhanced" bolts MPI? Are us insignificant civvies paying for and getting "what the pro's use" or non milspec non MPI knockoffs? Does DOD require milspec? Are we getting the same thing LMT sells to the "DOD world"? Does LMT have company guys that will respond to you officially, as a dealer? They've previously responded, though contradictorily. They can take the time to receive and repair, but not officially answer three simple questions? Hey, maybe I'm too curious about the products I buy, but I think I'm not alone on this one. This ain't heavy lifting but the deafening silence and contradictions make it so.
P.S.- This is nothing against you Grant. You're a good ole boy and a highly regarded dealer. I don't think you think these questions are illegitimate or nitpicking either. I and others want to know about products we are spending hundreds, and perhaps thousands, upon.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 5:02:23 AM EDT
[#37]
Your comments about LMT products being a knock offs and that customers are not getting what they paid for a somewhat strange to me. BM M4 uppers (without BCG and CH) go for around $400 and LMT M4 uppers go for around $450. So we are talking about a $50-$60 price difference here. The LMT uppers give you M4 feed ramps, 1/7 twist barrels and T-markings. To me, there is no price difference at all. So I guess my point is if LMT barrels are not MP tested it really isn't a big deal as you are basically getting the same thing as a BM (if you figure in the cost of the M4 cuts, 1/7 twist and T-markings).... C4 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 5:29:15 AM EDT
[#38]
I asked whether the "pros" use the same stuff we are getting (i.e., apparently non-milspec uppers). If we are getting different barrels we are getting knockoffs. I can have put together an RRA upper with T numbers, B MP barrel, ready to go, for under $375, today. I guess the question is whether the extra $100+ bucks for non MP barrel and M4 ramps is worth it to the individual buyer. I've found the RRA uppers to be much nicer than LMTs. YMMV. I never missed M4 ramps, so it doesn't matter to me. Since the regular LMT bolt is apparently not MPI, then is the enhanced? The problem I think is many of us bought LMT uppers with the understanding that what we were buying was no different than what is supplied DOD. That's the mystique, the premium. If DOD doesn't require LMT to adhere to milspec, the ads and mystique are true. If not, we are getting something "similar to what the pros use" but not DOD / milspec.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 5:40:27 AM EDT
[#39]
I think you would be surprised at what the "pros use." A lot of the AUTHENTIC SPR's used all kinds of parts that did NOT come from Colt or FN (both known to have DOD contracts). I know that MSTN sells a lot of LMT's to "Proffesional" shooters and I do as well. I have also been selling 10.5" uppers to a certain State Dept. agency. I would consider them Proffesional to say the least and have never had them ask if the barrel and or bolt is MP marked (don't care). For the record, Mr. Lewis said that their standard bolt/carrier groups are MP tested. So at $128 they are a BARGIN! C4 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 5:42:31 AM EDT
[#40]
I have to agree with you on that comment as well. There is no real price difference between BM and LMT considering the extra features LMT offers. In fact the extra features of the LMT are a great bargain for only $50 more than a BM upper. However, even if LMT doesn't want to answer the questions asked from individual civilian customers, surely they would answer the questions if asked by a vendor. After all, the volume done by their vendors would certainly justify answering some simple questrions with some simple answers. I know it's not Gov't contract numbers, but the questions aren't too complicated either. Can't one of the many industry partners on this site who deal with LMT just ask the questions and see what comes of it? The answers won't stop me from buying and using LMT, but I'd at least like to know what the straight facts are. I still buy BM evn though I know they don't MP test every barrel (and may or may not test their barrels using some uper secret method) or MP test their bolts at all, but at least I know what the facts are and what to expect from the products. I don't want to go by internet hearsay when I make a purchase. I want to go by the facts that come straight from the source. So please, for the love of God, somebody with any kind of inside contact with LMT please ask the simple questions of what kind, how, and how many from each batch is tested as far as bolts and barrels are concerned. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 5:45:35 AM EDT
[#41]
+1 Maybe Dave Lutz from KAC would know? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 6:46:49 AM EDT
[#42]
According to LMT the barrels that they are using are MP tested as the company they buy them from MP test's everyone of them(part of the DOD contract they build them for). LMT is going to start making their own barrels and WILL be MP testing them as well (already have the machine for it). I asked as to why some of the barrels are not marked and some are not. They didn't know why some were not marked, but the company that makes the barrels is required by contract to test each and everyone of them (not batches of them).....
C4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 6:51:07 AM EDT
[#43]
Who is the company they buy barrels from?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 6:54:20 AM EDT
[#44]
They did not say and I did not ask as I figured it was none of my business and most likely proprietary information... C4 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 7:18:29 AM EDT
[#45]
Well, that's indeed good that they are ALL tested. +1 However, since each and everyone of them are tested, the ones that pass should all be marked. One would think that a DOD contract would follow MIL-C-71186 (AR), and its a requirement for marking. Hard to say without knowing the terms of the contract really. Maybe the contract doesn't require the MIL-C be followed. You should ask them to ask their SUB, why they aren't all marked. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 7:19:23 AM EDT
[#46]
I dont understand why its proprietary information. Who GM or Ford buys their parts from that are not produced inhouse is NOT proprietary information nor is it in any other business I can think of. We even know the exact graphics cards and updates on computer brands and electronics, as well as who makes those crappy rotors that Corvettes use made in South America. Why would a barrel be any diffferent? Many makers either make their own or tell you who made the barrel blanks. Of course when people do that they are usually proud of the relationship with that manufacturer.
Are LMT barrels cut, contoured, threaded and headspaced by LMT? Are the complete barrel assemblies sent to LMT which they attach to uppers? Are they going to just make barrels from blanks supplied by others in the near future or the barrel blanks themselves also? Why do manufacturers fear educated customers? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 7:22:45 AM EDT
[#47]
It is my understanding that LMT is going to start making their own barrels and no longer buy from the other company. So asking them to ask their supplier is a no go I think... C4 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 7:31:44 AM EDT
[#48]
The comment about where they buy their barrels being proprietary is just my opinion (not their's). I am having barrels made for me that will most likely be better and more accurate than anything anyone has seen yet. I took a lot of feedback from the SF community and proprietary info from people that know FAR more than I do about accurate barrels and combined it. I consider who I am having build these barrels to be a proprietary to me as I don't want other dealers knowing where and by whom I am having them done! C4 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 7:32:43 AM EDT
[#49]
For me, the answer does matter. When I learned that Bushmaster's MP markings were essentially fake, I made a mental note to not buy Bushmaster barrels or bolts. After all, some people already consider Bushmaster products overpriced, so what's the point of paying a premium when there is a multitude of non-MP-inspected options to choose from? For the record, I personally feel that Bushmaster sells good products at fair retail prices. I don't buy into the whole, "It's cheaper but looks just as good or better!" thing. *cough*RRA-advocates
 .When I purchased my LMT upper, I assumed nothing was MP tested. If it turns out the parts are, great. LMT uppers are already a tremendous value. When you consider that a LMT upper + LaRue 7.0 + LaRue BUIS costs about the same as a plain LE6920 upper, if LMT does indeed perform global MP inspection, then it greatly diminishes my incentive to purchase Colt products. If not, then it doesn't change the fact that it is still a great product. However, I only have so much money, and eventually I will have to decide whether or not to make the jump to the only known first tier AR manufacturer. Edited to add: Shucks! I'm too late. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2004 7:44:04 AM EDT
[#50]
Well, I don't know what to make of that. Unless they are allready in the process of making their own barrels, or have a huge stockpile of barrels from the sub laying around, they must still have some type of buisiness relationship with the sub, and could ask them. I wouldn't think they would sever their buisiness relationship with the sub, until such time as their barrel production is up and running. Unless, they don't want to sell any rifles in the meantime. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
