AR Sponsor
MIL-SPEC, MIL-STD, TDP and More, Explained: Colt, KFC, and the Fried Chicken Theory of the AR15 (Page 2 of 3)
|
Augee, I don't find any of yours, mine or a few other's recent comments as hostile or entirely off subject to your OP.
We are merely speaking about the "original recipe," and some of the "other recipes" now available...and how they differ, if at all, from said "original recipe." As far as the TDP, here's my stance on that: If in some way, none or all of the TDP has in any way been leaked to some other sources over the past 50 plus years (big long shot there), it's 2014 now. Several different AR manufacturers have big pockets. Big pockets pay for machines and technology. Machines and technology can create an entire 3D image from a Colt receiver (or anything else for that matter), inside and out, and create an in depth and detailed graph of the tolerances and dimensions to the T. There, that said manufacturer now has the TDP. |
"They are not men, they are weapons."
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
| Augee, I won't requote or further indulge our point of contention per the spirit of your thread. I do appreciate the work you put into this and think it will be very helpful to beginners who get overwhelmed in the marketing and gun shop BS that is so intertwined with the AR15. Thanks. |
|
I'll second that Augee did a great job, and put a lot of time and effort into this.
I have great respect for Augee and his knowledge. I just think that even when he truly tries to be unbiased, I still pick up a bit of underlying bias in most of his well thought and written topics. And honestly, I'm not gonna fault that, as I'm guilty of the exact same thing at times as well. |
"They are not men, they are weapons."
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
|
Originally Posted By Augee:
Ryan, bud, you're killing me here - Please point out anywhere where I've implied that the original recipe is the best recipe and could not be "exceeded." Even my last post never said the original recipe was the best - I said what I meant, I meant what I said - "you don't know what you don't know." I've never seen the TDP. You've never seen the TDP. Neither you nor I have any idea what is or is not in the TDP, or what part of it is or is not still secret - the PMag example was just one in which everyone more or less thought "their recipe was okay" and it didn't turn out to be fully the case - because as the case with many things, you don't know that something's wrong until it bites you in the ass. I've qualified in the original post - the existence of "better" than original recipe - I've even acknowledged the existence of "gourmet," must you insist on getting the last word and last shot to "knock Colt fanboys down a peg?" How's about this - I'd like, as much as possible, to preserve the neutrality of this thread, I don't want it to turn into either a Colt bashing or Colt cheerleading thread. So, since I'm not a mod, I'll make a deal with you - First, I'd ask that others refrain from chiming in with their two cents about Colt worse/Colt better - we've already got plenty of those threads. My watch says 4:43 - I'll be back here in an hour to delete my post responding to ArchInfidel. In exchange, I'd ask that you too go ahead and delete your last two posts, too. I'm going to get rid of mine regardless. Meanwhile, in exchange for keeping the Colt bashing/Colt loving out of this thread - replace one of your posts with the passages where you think that my original posts display what you believe to be unfair bias, and I'll try to go back and edit them to be as fanboy/hater neutral as possible. How does that sound? ~Augee Originally Posted By Augee:
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
The point is that this "secret recipe" is far from entirely a secret to everyone. Even a guy with history nostalgia of the platform has gotta know with certainty that's the case, and that today's "best" offerings in the platform not only meet, but also exceed the "original recipe." On a related note to the original recipe as a company...unions, just like liberal politicians - destroying this country a little bit more each day from within. No one should be supporting that. Ryan, bud, you're killing me here - Please point out anywhere where I've implied that the original recipe is the best recipe and could not be "exceeded." Even my last post never said the original recipe was the best - I said what I meant, I meant what I said - "you don't know what you don't know." I've never seen the TDP. You've never seen the TDP. Neither you nor I have any idea what is or is not in the TDP, or what part of it is or is not still secret - the PMag example was just one in which everyone more or less thought "their recipe was okay" and it didn't turn out to be fully the case - because as the case with many things, you don't know that something's wrong until it bites you in the ass. I've qualified in the original post - the existence of "better" than original recipe - I've even acknowledged the existence of "gourmet," must you insist on getting the last word and last shot to "knock Colt fanboys down a peg?" How's about this - I'd like, as much as possible, to preserve the neutrality of this thread, I don't want it to turn into either a Colt bashing or Colt cheerleading thread. So, since I'm not a mod, I'll make a deal with you - First, I'd ask that others refrain from chiming in with their two cents about Colt worse/Colt better - we've already got plenty of those threads. My watch says 4:43 - I'll be back here in an hour to delete my post responding to ArchInfidel. In exchange, I'd ask that you too go ahead and delete your last two posts, too. I'm going to get rid of mine regardless. Meanwhile, in exchange for keeping the Colt bashing/Colt loving out of this thread - replace one of your posts with the passages where you think that my original posts display what you believe to be unfair bias, and I'll try to go back and edit them to be as fanboy/hater neutral as possible. How does that sound? ~Augee Thanks for the very fine post Augee. It's well done and I know it took quite a bit of time. 
I also appreciate your comments I've put in blue above - too much Colt bashing in this technical forum. |
" Never confuse movement with action." Ernest Hemingway
Protect our 2nd Amendment Rights -- Join the NRA
Protect our 2nd Amendment Rights -- Join the NRA
Official NorCal G.I. Joe nickname : Misfire
Joined:
Jun 2009
Posts:
7231
EE: 100% (158)
NC, USA
|
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
Augee, I don't find any of yours, mine or a few other's recent comments as hostile or entirely off subject to your OP. We are merely speaking about the "original recipe," and some of the "other recipes" now available...and how they differ, if at all, from said "original recipe." As far as the TDP, here's my stance on that: If in some way, none or all of the TDP has in any way been leaked to some other sources over the past 50 plus years (big long shot there), it's 2014 now. Several different AR manufacturers have big pockets. Big pockets pay for machines and technology. Machines and technology can create an entire 3D image from a Colt receiver (or anything else for that matter), inside and out, and create an in depth and detailed graph of the tolerances and dimensions to the T. There, that said manufacturer now has the TDP. It's not really that cut and dry. If it were, the Chinese wouldn't have so many problems cloning every other product in the world. |
Listening to GD talk about violence is a lot like listening to fifth graders talk about sex.--tommytrauma
|
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
Augee, I don't find any of yours, mine or a few other's recent comments as hostile or entirely off subject to your OP. We are merely speaking about the "original recipe," and some of the "other recipes" now available...and how they differ, if at all, from said "original recipe." As far as the TDP, here's my stance on that: If in some way, none or all of the TDP has in any way been leaked to some other sources over the past 50 plus years (big long shot there), it's 2014 now. Several different AR manufacturers have big pockets. Big pockets pay for machines and technology. Machines and technology can create an entire 3D image from a Colt receiver (or anything else for that matter), inside and out, and create an in depth and detailed graph of the tolerances and dimensions to the T. There, that said manufacturer now has the TDP. Little late - but here goes... Fair enough, I've edited my PMag posts a little to be a little bit more neutral and more about the information - but I'll engage with this. In the particular case of the PMags - the issue was not dimensions, per se - but tolerances. You can scan a Colt receiver and figure out exactly what that particular receiver measures - and try to stay close to those measurements, however, you still don't have the manufacturing tolerances, you only have a sample size of one - it could be in the middle of the tolerance, or it could be on the extreme end either way. The best you can do at that point is to "scan" as many samples as you possibly can in the hopes that they'll be "all over the board" in terms of acceptable tolerances - and that by taking the average, you can not only hit on the exact specification for a measurement and the range of acceptable variation. However, what you can never be certain of in that scenario, is not only what the "acceptable" range is, but what the exact baseline spec is. Now, I'm not saying that a good engineer/machinist can't take a pretty damn good guess at it, and possibly even end up spot on - but then again - if your "baseline" spec is say +.01" off, and the acceptable tolerance rate you've guessed at is +/- .0005", but the actual tolerance range is +/- .001" - when your "tolerance stacked part" is already +.01" off baseline - and then at the upper range of the tolerance at +.0005" - your part is now + .0015 off actual baseline and now "out of spec" even though your tolerances are in fact tighter than they're supposed to be, meaning you're machining with more not less precision. Unfortunately, as with the Gen. 1 PMags - it's difficult to predict where those dimensions are going to be until you actually run into the problem. Likely MagPul figured like you did - "how hard can it be to cut a mag well the right size?" and then it ended up being an issue, albeit a minor one. Where this rears its ugly head is when parts are contracted for by the government who then provides the relevant drawings and TDP parts to the contracted manufacturer who then makes their parts to work with the actual TDP spec, stacking their tolerances within the TDP's tolerances to be compatible. Now, I'm not 100% sure how the release of these parts of the TDP works - but my understanding is that it's pretty strict - as in, needs to be kept under lock and key, all copies made have to be documented - and subsequently either returned or destroyed when the contract is concluded - and the information cannot be shared with anyone outside a small group of people who are designated to have access to it. One of the big reasons that Colt got such a "sweet deal" on sole-sourcing the M4 in the 1997 M4 Addendum is because NSWC-Crane accidentally released the whole TDP to several contractors bidding on accessory systems for the SOPMOD program - after an "oh shit" moment - they were able to recover every single one from every single contractor - except FNMI who said that they could not guarantee that no copies had been made that were unaccounted for. So - maybe the whole thing is out there - and some FNMI employee is making beaucoup bucks on a Chinese DVD-style bootleg M4 TDP. Or, maybe FNMI was doing their due diligence because they didn't want to lose their chance of ever getting a contract again due to the appearance of impropriety but simply could not in good faith swear that no one had ever been near a photocopier while they had the thing. So, instead, Colt got the M4 Addendum, and sole-source for the next fifteen years. That being said - I'd be more than willing to bet if there was even the barest suspicion on Colt's part that FNMI was using an ill-begotten TDP improperly, they'd've sued the shit out of them long ago. Anyways - the point is accessory and/or parts manufacturers that provide to the government do so under the assumption that every single rifle that their product is going to get used on will be used on a rifle fitting the exact specs and tolerances on the relevant portions of the TDP they received temporarily to develop the part. Where the trouble could potentially come is when this newest whizz-bang gadget that none of us has even imagined yet appears on the commercial market - it might use a critical dimension that has so far been "missed" by the commercial reverse engineering sector, and suddenly - there's a number of people whose rifles it just doesn't fit because they're ever so slightly out of spec on a critical dimension. And while it's not a direct example of the above - for a recent illustration of how this could become important is the B5 SOPMOD debacle when Crane provided the wrong dimensions to B5 for the stock (apparently Crane doesn't have the best luck with the TDP...) leading to a huge number of them being DRMOed and sold on the commercial market to unsuspecting buyers. What was the result? Some stocks wouldn't fit at all, some had to be hammered on, some went on, but were extremely tight which tickled a lot of folks, and some just went on with no problem. And these are all on receiver extension purported to be "milspec dimension." How could that be true? Too much tolerance stacking in one direction or another and slightly off baseline can have wide and highly unpredictable results depending on exactly where that dimension is and how critical it is. For some people, in some cases - that's too much anxiety. It's bad enough that some people have to worry about whether any given part already on the market will interchange properly much less future parts that haven't even been imagined yet. Of course, commercially developed and marketed parts are an even bigger minefield - at a certain point a company making accessories without the relevant TDP portions has to now not only reverse engineer Colt's TDP, but the technical data of as wide a range of other manufacturers as they can - some of whom might have vastly different specs or tolerances - just ask BAD-ASS about selector area width for the selector core. BAD can't really say - well, these selectors are for BCM or better spec lowers - it's a crap shoot, on you, if you want to try to put one in your DPMS, it may or may not fit. (random companies just thrown in for effect - not to be interpreted as a judgment of those brands). As I've said, I don't exclusively stick to one brand of parts - for anything. I have personally my own "short list" of "acceptable" parts by part and brand that I like to use - some of which might surprise you - for the purposes of this thread, I'll keep those to myself for now - but yes, KFC Original Recipe happens to be an entry for each of those categories across the board. ~Augee |
|
Originally Posted By Augee:
Little late - but here goes... Fair enough, I've edited my PMag posts a little to be a little bit more neutral and more about the information - but I'll engage with this. In the particular case of the PMags - the issue was not dimensions, per se - but tolerances. You can scan a Colt receiver and figure out exactly what that particular receiver measures - and try to stay close to those measurements, however, you still don't have the manufacturing tolerances, you only have a sample size of one - it could be in the middle of the tolerance, or it could be on the extreme end either way. The best you can do at that point is to "scan" as many samples as you possibly can in the hopes that they'll be "all over the board" in terms of acceptable tolerances - and that by taking the average, you can not only hit on the exact specification for a measurement and the range of acceptable variation. However, what you can never be certain of in that scenario, is not only what the "acceptable" range is, but what the exact baseline spec is. Now, I'm not saying that a good engineer/machinist can't take a pretty damn good guess at it, and possibly even end up spot on - but then again - if your "baseline" spec is say +.01" off, and the acceptable tolerance rate you've guessed at is +/- .0005", but the actual tolerance range is +/- .001" - when your "tolerance stacked part" is already +.01" off baseline - and then at the upper range of the tolerance at +.0005" - your part is now + .0015 off actual baseline and now "out of spec" even though your tolerances are in fact tighter than they're supposed to be, meaning you're machining with more not less precision. Unfortunately, as with the Gen. 1 PMags - it's difficult to predict where those dimensions are going to be until you actually run into the problem. Likely MagPul figured like you did - "how hard can it be to cut a mag well the right size?" and then it ended up being an issue, albeit a minor one. Where this rears its ugly head is when parts are contracted for by the government who then provides the relevant drawings and TDP parts to the contracted manufacturer who then makes their parts to work with the actual TDP spec, stacking their tolerances within the TDP's tolerances to be compatible. Now, I'm not 100% sure how the release of these parts of the TDP works - but my understanding is that it's pretty strict - as in, needs to be kept under lock and key, all copies made have to be documented - and subsequently either returned or destroyed when the contract is concluded - and the information cannot be shared with anyone outside a small group of people who are designated to have access to it. One of the big reasons that Colt got such a "sweet deal" on sole-sourcing the M4 in the 1997 M4 Addendum is because NSWC-Crane accidentally released the whole TDP to several contractors bidding on accessory systems for the SOPMOD program - after an "oh shit" moment - they were able to recover every single one from every single contractor - except FNMI who said that they could not guarantee that no copies had been made that were unaccounted for. So - maybe the whole thing is out there - and some FNMI employee is making beaucoup bucks on a Chinese DVD-style bootleg M4 TDP. Or, maybe FNMI was doing their due diligence because they didn't want to lose their chance of ever getting a contract again due to the appearance of impropriety but simply could not in good faith swear that no one had ever been near a photocopier while they had the thing. So, instead, Colt got the M4 Addendum, and sole-source for the next fifteen years. That being said - I'd be more than willing to bet if there was even the barest suspicion on Colt's part that FNMI was using an ill-begotten TDP improperly, they'd've sued the shit out of them long ago. Anyways - the point is accessory and/or parts manufacturers that provide to the government do so under the assumption that every single rifle that their product is going to get used on will be used on a rifle fitting the exact specs and tolerances on the relevant portions of the TDP they received temporarily to develop the part. Where the trouble could potentially come is when this newest whizz-bang gadget that none of us has even imagined yet appears on the commercial market - it might use a critical dimension that has so far been "missed" by the commercial reverse engineering sector, and suddenly - there's a number of people whose rifles it just doesn't fit because they're ever so slightly out of spec on a critical dimension. And while it's not a direct example of the above - for a recent illustration of how this could become important is the B5 SOPMOD debacle when Crane provided the wrong dimensions to B5 for the stock (apparently Crane doesn't have the best luck with the TDP...) leading to a huge number of them being DRMOed and sold on the commercial market to unsuspecting buyers. What was the result? Some stocks wouldn't fit at all, some had to be hammered on, some went on, but were extremely tight which tickled a lot of folks, and some just went on with no problem. And these are all on receiver extension purported to be "milspec dimension." How could that be true? Too much tolerance stacking in one direction or another and slightly off baseline can have wide and highly unpredictable results depending on exactly where that dimension is and how critical it is. For some people, in some cases - that's too much anxiety. It's bad enough that some people have to worry about whether any given part already on the market will interchange properly much less future parts that haven't even been imagined yet. Of course, commercially developed and marketed parts are an even bigger minefield - at a certain point a company making accessories without the relevant TDP portions has to now not only reverse engineer Colt's TDP, but the technical data of as wide a range of other manufacturers as they can - some of whom might have vastly different specs or tolerances - just ask BAD-ASS about selector area width for the selector core. BAD can't really say - well, these selectors are for BCM or better spec lowers - it's a crap shoot, on you, if you want to try to put one in your DPMS, it may or may not fit. (random companies just thrown in for effect - not to be interpreted as a judgment of those brands). As I've said, I don't exclusively stick to one brand of parts - for anything. I have personally my own "short list" of "acceptable" parts by part and brand that I like to use - some of which might surprise you - for the purposes of this thread, I'll keep those to myself for now - but yes, KFC Original Recipe happens to be an entry for each of those categories across the board. ~Augee Originally Posted By Augee:
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
Augee, I don't find any of yours, mine or a few other's recent comments as hostile or entirely off subject to your OP. We are merely speaking about the "original recipe," and some of the "other recipes" now available...and how they differ, if at all, from said "original recipe." As far as the TDP, here's my stance on that: If in some way, none or all of the TDP has in any way been leaked to some other sources over the past 50 plus years (big long shot there), it's 2014 now. Several different AR manufacturers have big pockets. Big pockets pay for machines and technology. Machines and technology can create an entire 3D image from a Colt receiver (or anything else for that matter), inside and out, and create an in depth and detailed graph of the tolerances and dimensions to the T. There, that said manufacturer now has the TDP. Little late - but here goes... Fair enough, I've edited my PMag posts a little to be a little bit more neutral and more about the information - but I'll engage with this. In the particular case of the PMags - the issue was not dimensions, per se - but tolerances. You can scan a Colt receiver and figure out exactly what that particular receiver measures - and try to stay close to those measurements, however, you still don't have the manufacturing tolerances, you only have a sample size of one - it could be in the middle of the tolerance, or it could be on the extreme end either way. The best you can do at that point is to "scan" as many samples as you possibly can in the hopes that they'll be "all over the board" in terms of acceptable tolerances - and that by taking the average, you can not only hit on the exact specification for a measurement and the range of acceptable variation. However, what you can never be certain of in that scenario, is not only what the "acceptable" range is, but what the exact baseline spec is. Now, I'm not saying that a good engineer/machinist can't take a pretty damn good guess at it, and possibly even end up spot on - but then again - if your "baseline" spec is say +.01" off, and the acceptable tolerance rate you've guessed at is +/- .0005", but the actual tolerance range is +/- .001" - when your "tolerance stacked part" is already +.01" off baseline - and then at the upper range of the tolerance at +.0005" - your part is now + .0015 off actual baseline and now "out of spec" even though your tolerances are in fact tighter than they're supposed to be, meaning you're machining with more not less precision. Unfortunately, as with the Gen. 1 PMags - it's difficult to predict where those dimensions are going to be until you actually run into the problem. Likely MagPul figured like you did - "how hard can it be to cut a mag well the right size?" and then it ended up being an issue, albeit a minor one. Where this rears its ugly head is when parts are contracted for by the government who then provides the relevant drawings and TDP parts to the contracted manufacturer who then makes their parts to work with the actual TDP spec, stacking their tolerances within the TDP's tolerances to be compatible. Now, I'm not 100% sure how the release of these parts of the TDP works - but my understanding is that it's pretty strict - as in, needs to be kept under lock and key, all copies made have to be documented - and subsequently either returned or destroyed when the contract is concluded - and the information cannot be shared with anyone outside a small group of people who are designated to have access to it. One of the big reasons that Colt got such a "sweet deal" on sole-sourcing the M4 in the 1997 M4 Addendum is because NSWC-Crane accidentally released the whole TDP to several contractors bidding on accessory systems for the SOPMOD program - after an "oh shit" moment - they were able to recover every single one from every single contractor - except FNMI who said that they could not guarantee that no copies had been made that were unaccounted for. So - maybe the whole thing is out there - and some FNMI employee is making beaucoup bucks on a Chinese DVD-style bootleg M4 TDP. Or, maybe FNMI was doing their due diligence because they didn't want to lose their chance of ever getting a contract again due to the appearance of impropriety but simply could not in good faith swear that no one had ever been near a photocopier while they had the thing. So, instead, Colt got the M4 Addendum, and sole-source for the next fifteen years. That being said - I'd be more than willing to bet if there was even the barest suspicion on Colt's part that FNMI was using an ill-begotten TDP improperly, they'd've sued the shit out of them long ago. Anyways - the point is accessory and/or parts manufacturers that provide to the government do so under the assumption that every single rifle that their product is going to get used on will be used on a rifle fitting the exact specs and tolerances on the relevant portions of the TDP they received temporarily to develop the part. Where the trouble could potentially come is when this newest whizz-bang gadget that none of us has even imagined yet appears on the commercial market - it might use a critical dimension that has so far been "missed" by the commercial reverse engineering sector, and suddenly - there's a number of people whose rifles it just doesn't fit because they're ever so slightly out of spec on a critical dimension. And while it's not a direct example of the above - for a recent illustration of how this could become important is the B5 SOPMOD debacle when Crane provided the wrong dimensions to B5 for the stock (apparently Crane doesn't have the best luck with the TDP...) leading to a huge number of them being DRMOed and sold on the commercial market to unsuspecting buyers. What was the result? Some stocks wouldn't fit at all, some had to be hammered on, some went on, but were extremely tight which tickled a lot of folks, and some just went on with no problem. And these are all on receiver extension purported to be "milspec dimension." How could that be true? Too much tolerance stacking in one direction or another and slightly off baseline can have wide and highly unpredictable results depending on exactly where that dimension is and how critical it is. For some people, in some cases - that's too much anxiety. It's bad enough that some people have to worry about whether any given part already on the market will interchange properly much less future parts that haven't even been imagined yet. Of course, commercially developed and marketed parts are an even bigger minefield - at a certain point a company making accessories without the relevant TDP portions has to now not only reverse engineer Colt's TDP, but the technical data of as wide a range of other manufacturers as they can - some of whom might have vastly different specs or tolerances - just ask BAD-ASS about selector area width for the selector core. BAD can't really say - well, these selectors are for BCM or better spec lowers - it's a crap shoot, on you, if you want to try to put one in your DPMS, it may or may not fit. (random companies just thrown in for effect - not to be interpreted as a judgment of those brands). As I've said, I don't exclusively stick to one brand of parts - for anything. I have personally my own "short list" of "acceptable" parts by part and brand that I like to use - some of which might surprise you - for the purposes of this thread, I'll keep those to myself for now - but yes, KFC Original Recipe happens to be an entry for each of those categories across the board. ~Augee I think a lot of this also applies to the 1911 market too. While no TDP, there are a wide variety of tolerances between manufacturers. I discovered this while owning the same aftermarket parts for two different 1911's. The parts that worked with very little to no fitting were on my Colt, while things were a lot different on my old RIA. |
|
You sir are a gentleman and a scholar. When's the "Complete Works of Augee" going to be put in a book form?
I'm not entirely sure that all the TDP copies were returned. But that's for email. |
Please, call me Joe
There is definitely something perverse about two men who carry guns 24/7 being so happy that others are giving theirs up. -happycynic
Jack Ryan 2016
There is definitely something perverse about two men who carry guns 24/7 being so happy that others are giving theirs up. -happycynic
Jack Ryan 2016
|
Good post, I'm just not sure how many will be able to make the correlations between the analog and the target.
As your theory implies (IMHO) there is a lot of blending of facts/figures and opinions... and outright bullshit that goes on in the AR industry. (ETA: I view even the players that try to be forthcoming about their specific 'recipe' or their 'caterers' with suspicion and their products just as 'tainted' as the others just to be safe. If that makes any sense.) The biggest fault I can find with your theory really is the use of fried chicken as the analog. When I first read the title of the thread I swore it would be about the folklore surrounding the DRASEN/NESARD/SENDRA/ MAPARTS/MODEL1 clan. 
|
|
Originally Posted By SHIPSNIPE1:
Good post, I'm just not sure how many will be able to make the correlations between the analog and the target. As your theory implies (IMHO) there is a lot of blending of facts/figures and opinions... and outright bullshit that goes on in the AR industry. (ETA: I view even the players that try to be forthcoming about their specific 'recipe' or their 'caterers' with suspicion and their products just as 'tainted' as the others just to be safe. If that makes any sense.) The biggest fault I can find with your theory really is the use of fried chicken as the analog. When I first read the title of the thread I swore it would be about the folklore surrounding the DRASEN/NESARD/SENDRA/ MAPARTS/MODEL1 clan. That was my assertion as well, which was promptly removed as "off topic." |
|
This is arfcom's IQ test. Needs a tack, and a test should be required after a year as a member in order to continue posting on arfcom. If you can't learn by analogy, you can't learn. |
Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
General education should not be mere training of the hands to work, but training of the mind to properly reason. http://www.welltrainedmind.com/classed.php
General education should not be mere training of the hands to work, but training of the mind to properly reason. http://www.welltrainedmind.com/classed.php
|
Fun post and very informative....especially the AR history portion.
A little too "Dude, just get a Colt" and anti-PSA type vendors for me. To stay with your analogy, I think it's really more like the other people trying to copy KFC fried chicken used mass spectrometers to analyze exactly what's in the original recipe so they had the opportunity to copy it exactly. Let's face it, you can take a Colt and, with a little analysis, determine exactly what metals are in each part. You can measure and reverse engineer exactly the dimensions, etc. It's not like there's any secret ingredients in there. Also, when you went into the PSA the message was basically: "You don't know what's in a PSA and they're cheap, so stay away". Honestly, you don't know what's in a Colt....it's the original brand, it costs more, so it must be good, right? They may have taken steps to reduce the cost/increase their profits...we don't know. Finally, regarding build it yourself vs buy (or, more to your message..."buy a Colt"), there are people who are very adept at cooking. Maybe even have formal training and years of experience with cooking, they've just never cooked chicken (engineers like me, for example). Maybe they really enjoy cooking. They may also be very particular about what goes in their food or have allergies. They are interested in cooking their own for their first exposure to Fried Chicken. Most people here have at least tried fried chicken, they just may have not purchased their own (they've fired AR's, seen them in stores, just don't own one). The recipes are out there, the ingredients are out there, it's a simple recipe. For build it or buy it the first time, the right answer isn't "don't make your own fried chicken, buy some first to see what it's all about", it's "what's your cooking experience? Do you like to cook? Are you good at it? Have you eaten but not purchased fried chicken? Are you particular about what goes into your fried chicken such that the already cooked stuff doesn't meet your interests or taste?". Only then can you advise them on whether to cook their own or get the KFC. Also keep in mind that, there are ways to partially cook your own. You can buy pre-mixed batter with all the spices and everything pre-measured and ready to use. All you need to do is dip the chicken and throw it in the fryer...you can even fry it on your stovetop. (complete uppers). You don't have to start with basic ingredients and a a live chicken. This way you can control what oil it's cooked in, which pieces you want (maybe you don't like dark meat), etc. without jumping into fried chicken from scratch. Anyway, fun read, but a little too much opinion in the 2nd half. |
|
Laughing all the way through it, Augee.
The "original recipe" would also have call-outs about how the chicken Is cooked (what type of fryer, acceptable oil, and the only allowable cooking temperature), the specific golden brown pantone of the chicken's crust, the packaging and labeling of the chicken, the care and maintenance of the chickens prior to being fried, the diversity of the restaurant staff, etc... . Steve/RRA |
|
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
Yeah. A lot of the initial comments...which were relevant to the OP, were for some reason removed. 
Basically, if you posted anything but high praise on the first page, it was removed... That's pretty much what I gathered by the "Off-Topic Comment Removed" tags... I enjoyed the post, and the time and effort Augee, I really do! But there was more than a hint of bias in both the tone and setting of the OP. |
|
Don't know Augee, only read a few of his posts. I am not a Colt fanboy, I don't own a Colt, I have never owned a Colt. I don't hate Colt either. What blows me away is the amount of contention from the "haters". The only AR's I own are the ones I have assembled. No where in the post did I get a sense of OP saying own a Colt its best, regardless of any prior posts he may have posted on the subject. He says this of PSA " truth is probably somewhere in between. " That doesn't seem to be partial, egregious, or untrue to me. Dude put some time and energy into this. It is thought provoking and informative. It blows me away that people can't go start their own fast food thread as opposed to come in here and crap on his work? I just don't see the whole Colt fanboy projection in this post. This coming from a guy who would more likely stand with anti fanboy crowd. Looks pretty spot on to me and challenges people to think for their ownselves. I see the people coming in here and crapping on his thread with hate as those who lack the energy to post their own rebuttal thread and lack information to spin it in their favor. Maybe just say thanks or maybe don't say anything(in here), just a suggestion, but we all like different things. |
The righteous man walks in his integrity; His children are blessed after him.
| Thanks Augee, you're probably one of the greatest contributors to the tech section, which most confuse with the "justify my purchase" section by recommending/defending their purchase and attacking what they didn't purchase. it gets tiresome wading through all the emotional BS to try to actually learn anything new around here. this thread is a perfect example, lots of info to learn from, read it and move the fuck on. spouting off ain't gonna make your rifle any better or any worse. |
|
Lug and GMan, what am I missing here? Are you two reading the same comments I am?
I haven't seen anyone spout off or bash anything about the OP. I have seen people tell Augee great work, and then offer constructive opinions slightly differing from his analogies. You two are like the mod who removed several comments from the first page. You're both acting as if the only comments acceptable in this thread need to be high praise and cheer for the OP. Basically, you want us all to thank Augee, kiss his ass, and move on. Offering any form of a constructive differing opinion to his analogies is for some reason frowned upon in this particular thread. That's frankly a bullshit attitude. You want to say this is a tech thread, well if someone wants to give opinions in a tech thread, then they should expect other opinions offered as well. Keep kissing Augee's ass all you want, but don't act like people telling him good job, but offering slightly differing thoughts, views and opinions to his own are being out of line... Those suggesting that are actually the ones being out of line. |
"They are not men, they are weapons."
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
|
Originally Posted By Lug1:
Don't know Augee, only read a few of his posts. I am not a Colt fanboy, I don't own a Colt, I have never owned a Colt. I don't hate Colt either. What blows me away is the amount of contention from the "haters". The only AR's I own are the ones I have assembled. No where in the post did I get a sense of OP saying own a Colt its best, regardless of any prior posts he may have posted on the subject. He says this of PSA " truth is probably somewhere in between. "That doesn't seem to be partial, egregious, or untrue to me. Dude put some time and energy into this. It is thought provoking and informative. It blows me away that people can't go start their own fast food thread as opposed to come in here and crap on his work? I just don't see the whole Colt fanboy projection in this post. This coming from a guy who would more likely stand with anti fanboy crowd. Looks pretty spot on to me and challenges people to think for their ownselves. I see the people coming in here and crapping on his thread with hate as those who lack the energy to post their own rebuttal thread and lack information to spin it in their favor. Maybe just say thanks or maybe don't say anything(in here), just a suggestion, but we all like different things. Originally Posted By Lug1:
Don't know Augee, only read a few of his posts. I am not a Colt fanboy, I don't own a Colt, I have never owned a Colt. I don't hate Colt either. What blows me away is the amount of contention from the "haters". The only AR's I own are the ones I have assembled. No where in the post did I get a sense of OP saying own a Colt its best, regardless of any prior posts he may have posted on the subject. He says this of PSA " truth is probably somewhere in between. "That doesn't seem to be partial, egregious, or untrue to me. Dude put some time and energy into this. It is thought provoking and informative. It blows me away that people can't go start their own fast food thread as opposed to come in here and crap on his work? I just don't see the whole Colt fanboy projection in this post. This coming from a guy who would more likely stand with anti fanboy crowd. Looks pretty spot on to me and challenges people to think for their ownselves. I see the people coming in here and crapping on his thread with hate as those who lack the energy to post their own rebuttal thread and lack information to spin it in their favor. Maybe just say thanks or maybe don't say anything(in here), just a suggestion, but we all like different things. Well, there's these two quotes in the section on advice to newbies on what you should say: Well, I've heard these restaurants here are pretty good - I've been to these, and of course there's always KFC - where at least you know what you're going to get and that it'll be pretty damned good. That says clearly that Colt is "pretty damned good". No room for equivocation there. Listen, dude, you may eventually settle into exactly the piece of fried chicken that you like best - but for now, for your first piece - just go to KFC, order Original Recipe, and enjoy. Later on, when you have a basis for comparison, you can start hitting up other chicken joints and figure out which one tugs at your heart strings, but right now - KFC is the best advice if you want to get good chicken that you're going to enjoy. Sure, there might be better chicken joints - but there are also worse ones - and there's a lot more of them around than the other kind! This, simply translated, is "First AR? Just go buy a Colt until you figure things out". |
|
Originally Posted By Hwk-I-St8:
Fun post and very informative....especially the AR history portion. A little too "Dude, just get a Colt" and anti-PSA type vendors for me. To stay with your analogy, I think it's really more like the other people trying to copy KFC fried chicken used mass spectrometers to analyze exactly what's in the original recipe so they had the opportunity to copy it exactly. Let's face it, you can take a Colt and, with a little analysis, determine exactly what metals are in each part. You can measure and reverse engineer exactly the dimensions, etc. It's not like there's any secret ingredients in there. Also, when you went into the PSA the message was basically: "You don't know what's in a PSA and they're cheap, so stay away". Honestly, you don't know what's in a Colt....it's the original brand, it costs more, so it must be good, right? They may have taken steps to reduce the cost/increase their profits...we don't know. Finally, regarding build it yourself vs buy (or, more to your message..."buy a Colt"), there are people who are very adept at cooking. Maybe even have formal training and years of experience with cooking, they've just never cooked chicken (engineers like me, for example). Maybe they really enjoy cooking. They may also be very particular about what goes in their food or have allergies. They are interested in cooking their own for their first exposure to Fried Chicken. Most people here have at least tried fried chicken, they just may have not purchased their own (they've fired AR's, seen them in stores, just don't own one). The recipes are out there, the ingredients are out there, it's a simple recipe. For build it or buy it the first time, the right answer isn't "don't make your own fried chicken, buy some first to see what it's all about", it's "what's your cooking experience? Do you like to cook? Are you good at it? Have you eaten but not purchased fried chicken? Are you particular about what goes into your fried chicken such that the already cooked stuff doesn't meet your interests or taste?". Only then can you advise them on whether to cook their own or get the KFC. Also keep in mind that, there are ways to partially cook your own. You can buy pre-mixed batter with all the spices and everything pre-measured and ready to use. All you need to do is dip the chicken and throw it in the fryer...you can even fry it on your stovetop. (complete uppers). You don't have to start with basic ingredients and a a live chicken. This way you can control what oil it's cooked in, which pieces you want (maybe you don't like dark meat), etc. without jumping into fried chicken from scratch. Anyway, fun read, but a little too much opinion in the 2nd half. Some good points that I'll reply to: After reading some of the responses, it occurs to me that perhaps not everyone has quite the same fried chicken situation as I do - probably shoulda thought about that earlier, but that's neither here nor there - I see you're IA... can you even get real fried chicken there?  (I'm kidding... no, but seriously, can you? )
There's a couple reasons that I used KFC as the analog for Colt, some of them practical - they have an acknowledged "secret recipe" that everyone knows about (which, by the way, if you google it - as others have pointed out about the TDP, it's not really that much of a secret) that they call "Original Recipe," - plus everyone is more or less familiar with KFC. That being said, where I am in South Carolina - NO ONE thinks that KFC makes the best fried chicken, I don't think that KFC makes the best fried chicken, and there are people around here who would slap you silly if you tried to imply that KFC makes the best fried chicken. There are also people that I know that absolutely think KFC SUCKS and would not DEIGN to eat KFC fried chicken. So that's where I'm coming from, so anyone that thinks that by using KFC as the analog for Colt, I'm implying that either Colt or KFC is the best of its type clearly does not understand fried chicken in South Carolina. That also speaks directly to you detection of bias about PSA - it's also fairly well acknowledged that the best fried chicken tends to come from, frankly, dingy little local shops where, the proprietors are, no offense meant, but of a somewhat lower economic bracket, and have been making fried chicken using their own family recipes for generations - these are the places that make the best fried chicken that you can buy. A lot of times, if you look at the shop, you're frankly not even confident that all the health codes are being followed, and they take cash only, and their menu boards are those "moveable type" peg boards that you stick the letters in to spell whatever you want that ruffian kids rearrange regularly to say "TITS AND ASS," and the food is way cheaper than at any corporate place. So, by pointing these things out about PSA, I'm not at all suggesting that PSA sucks - I was trying to point out certain realities about cost versus quality and what we know and don't know about how PSA gets their stuff, and what goes into it. Just like if you asked me, point blank would you be confident that (name of restaurant omitted to not slander any actual place) would pass a health inspection? I'd say... uhm... let me get back to you on that... On the other hand, if you asked me how the fried chicken was at that place, I'd say, I've eaten there, and damn, their fried chicken is great, and it's cheap - highly recommended. As you've mentioned - some people are not all like that - they'll hear my recommendation that I've eaten there and the food's good, but they don't know me, they don't know what I consider good, first of all, and they don't know what threshold of "acceptable" is to me. They know I didn't get food poisoning and die, at least (the rifle didn't blow up in my face) - but beyond that, they don't really know. Among that group of people, there is going to be a portion of people who say I'm not going to even bother, maybe it's the best fried chicken in the world, but if you can't promise me they're up to code, I aint going. That's fine, that's their decision - you're as honest as you can be with both the goods and the bads, they can make their decision. Honestly, as far as I can tell, most people here are PSA fans - and I own some PSA parts and pieces as well, they like me, are local to the area, and I bet they understand fried chicken, 
My post in that sense was explaining to people who didn't quite understand what and where some people's anxiety about PSA comes from - the moral of most of the post being, as I've repeated, "you don't know what you don't know." My post about TDP and tolerances versus spec and accessories, etc. from earlier, I think should cover your "mass spectrometer" concerns - it's a possibility - it may never be an issue, some people don't want to deal with the uncertainty when they can have a "sure thing." "Build versus Buy": I probably phrased the subtitle incorrectly - I wrote this document over the period of a couple days and then didn't put in chapter headings until I realized no one would read it unless I made it a little easier to navigate and broke it up a little. I'll probably go back and change the heading in a little bit here. If you go back to what I actually wrote and "sample question" that was asked - the heading was more about what advice to give a complete beginner who asked the classic beginner question we've all seen: "Which AR should I buy?" or "Should I buy brand X or brand Y." My first suggestion was the two best ways to answer might be, "well I've heard A,B, and C are good, I've tried (own) B, C, and Z, so they're all good - maybe look at Z as well? I really like them." ...or, some people might say "just go to KFC, we all know what we're getting there" (I'll point you back to my assessment of where KFC fits on a spectrum earlier) The responses I ridiculed, getting away from the analogy for a bit, were the: "Fuck X,Y, AND KFC, buy a KAC/Noveske/LaRue." ...or "just build your own." Let's think a little bit about our beginner poster in question here, this is their Post: 1, and they've said they want to buy, say, a Bushmaster and S&W, probably the two that are on their LGS's shelf and/or at Walmart. It seems relatively clear that they have a certain budget, and not only that, they want easily available - what they don't need to be told is that they won't be cool enough unless they get a top line model with a fancy name, or a thousand links to a hundred different vendors, the reputations of which they don't know, the parts they're not familiar with, and using methods they're not aware of. This is the reason for so many questions like "do I need to use a different buffer in a fixed/collapsible stock?" and "is it time to replace my firing pin spring?" and "dammit - I just broke off my trigger guard ear - why did no one tell me?!?!" These are the people, who avowedly have no prior knowledge, have expressed an interest in buying, likely local, who just want some simple advice, not to have go through hours, if not days and months of research on each individual part, the reputations of vendors, etc. What happens when that guy then decides to order from Model1 and gets his credit card information stolen, and orders something from Botach because Google shopper told him they had the best price, and now he can maybe hope that his part will make a nice Christmas present? For your other concerns - hey, you're right, and it's a totally different situation - when someone comes and asks: "Hey, I'm a pretty good cook, but I've never made fried chicken, any pointers/recommendations for me?" ...or "hey, I really want to try some fried chicken, but I have a food allergy, and none of the places that sell chicken around me that I can actually eat seem appetizing - can ya help me out?" ...or "I've eaten fried chicken a couple times before," or "I was in the Army, and I've eaten KFC/Wendy's before, but I'm now interested in buying/making my own fried chicken - doesn't have to be exactly like KFC or Wendy's, I just want it to be good." ...or finally, "hey, I'm no expert chef, but I know my way around the kitchen, and I want to make my own fried chicken, because I think it'd really enhance my enjoyment of fried chicken if I knew how to actually make it - can you recommend me a good pre mixed batter?" Those are all different situations requiring different responses, and by and large we do okay with those so I didn't see the need to comment on those - the questions I was talking about are from the, literally "I have seen an AR at Walmart and got to fingerfuck one a little bit, and this guy next to me at the range let me shoot a couple of rounds and the news said I won't be able to buy one anymore once the apocalypse comes - what should I get?" ...that get responded to with "Noveske or don't bother" or "build one yourself," which I don't think are very helpful - which, if you hadn't noticed, was happening so much that we just got an AR Basics forum to help somewhat insulate the true beginners from some of the useless, unhelpful responses here. Hope this clarifies some things for you! ~Augee |
|
Originally Posted By jmreagan:
That's pretty much what I gathered by the "Off-Topic Comment Removed" tags... I enjoyed the post, and the time and effort Augee, I really do! But there was more than a hint of bias in both the tone and setting of the OP. Originally Posted By jmreagan:
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
Yeah. A lot of the initial comments...which were relevant to the OP, were for some reason removed.
Basically, if you posted anything but high praise on the first page, it was removed... That's pretty much what I gathered by the "Off-Topic Comment Removed" tags... I enjoyed the post, and the time and effort Augee, I really do! But there was more than a hint of bias in both the tone and setting of the OP. I don't have any control over anything the Mods do, and I haven't requested any edits - I never even saw what some of the deleted comments said, so that's a separate matter, I can't very well say whether I'd even've thought they justified removal, but the Mods make that call, either way. However - those who are detecting bias towards KFC/Colt - please read my above post to Hwk-I-St8, which I will probably add to the OP (about fried chicken joints around me compared to KFC) and take it from there as I follow up: a) personal opinion - on actual fried chicken - yes, I think KFC is pretty damn good, it hits the spot, but I in no way think it's the best fried chicken out there - it's just that if someone who had never eaten fried chicken before who lived in a place where I wasn't familiar with the chicken joints asked me, because he heard I freaking love fried chicken - I might just go ahead and tell them - go to a KFC, I mean, it's pretty damned good, it might not be the best - but since you don't even know if you like fired chicken... (non-analogy - resale value can kick in here) b) Obviously, I have personal opinions - I tried to keep the tone neutral, though, as I acknowledged, I failed to consider what others' experience of fried chicken really is - and perhaps there, the analogy was not as universal as I'd first thought. I wrote the OP over a period of a couple of days while writing term papers, adding a little bit more to "the Fried Chicken Theory of the AR15" was my little break/reward for finishing a good paragraph or finishing off a source, so I am more than willing to acknowledge that it may not be 100% perfect or even consistent from top to bottom, I may have flubbed some stuff and let my opinions shine through when I had not intended them to. So, to that, I offer this: For those that detect bias, beyond what I've explained about whether or not KFC is the best chicken - please feel free, by post, e-mail, or IM the parts that you believe to be inappropriately biased and if you like, offer recommendations for how it might be changed to BOTH accurately convey the information, and strip out ANY bias. Understand, however, that there are certain things I wrote a certain way for a certain reason - I will not change things for people who are butt-hurt about the truth - if you suggest changes, I may want to discuss it, and explain my rationale for certain ways of putting things, I am not being defensive, but will change only where the information is inaccurate, or presented in a biased way, not because you disagree with it. The idea was to create a relatively enjoyable to read document that adequately explained some concepts and their relative importance to the AR platform and the AR market - and as such, is intended as a vehicle for information and entertainment, not as a soap box for my own personal views - so once again, I'm more than willing to change where things are too biased or inaccurate. Insofar as the tone, however, which is harder to point out exactly where the bias is - once again, I would submit that I think some of that feeling of a "tone" of bias comes from a fundamental misunderstanding between people who really actually think that KFC is the best fried chicken because they live somewhere that fried chicken is not a staple food deeply rooted culturally and socially - and those, like South Carolinians, who will recognize my actual tone, which is to heap a little bit of scorn on those who go nuts about whether this fast-food fried chicken is better than that fast-food fried chicken, when everyone damn well knows ALL fast food fried chicken is shit anyways (or - getting outside the analogy a little bit - build exactly what you want with the parts that you want - once you know enough to know exactly how you like it). ~Augee |
|
Augee - thanks for the reply. It sounds like I read more into your post than you intended. I did enjoy the read and found it informative.
I'm guessing my noob experience here was different from many in that I am an experienced in guns, had fired AR's, but only casually and knew very little about them. I came in pretty certain that I wanted to build my first time around and my builds since then (Del-ton kit, Stag upper on my own lower concoction, total ground up 7.62x39 build from lowest level parts and a PSA Dissy upper I'll be completing tonight) have been very educational, fun, and successful. I did spend a lot of time initially making sure I knew what I was doing and learning about the typical pitfalls. That was much more fun than going out and buying Colt, Spikes, or Stag complete rifles. You'll probably notice that I selected a couple quotes from you section in response to someone else's post. I'd be curious to hear what you think of that. It's clear you put a lot of time into the initial posts and they're very well done. It's just my nature to read critically and post my thoughts....it's one of the things I have to do daily at work. Oh, and there really isn't much fried chicken of interest here that I've had (KFC here sucks big time in these parts). I do, however, make killer BBQ (pulled pork, ribs and brisket cooked low and slow on my smoker) and I'm one of the few in these parts who prefers Carolina style vinegar based BBQ sauces. Sweet Sauce 'o Mine is my all time favorite on a pulled pork sandwich (topped with 'slaw of course). Cheers |
|
Couple edits made to the OP(s):
Disclaimer about fried chicken in South Carolina added. Removed whole "build versus buy" subtitle, instead changed heading to "Giving Advice to a Total Beginner" - "what brand should I buy for my first AR?" (parts in red have been added) Also changed the possible responses to: Things you might say to such a person:
Well, I've heard these restaurants here are pretty good - I've been to these, and of course there's always KFC - where at least you know what you're going to get and that it'll be good, and it's generally considered the baseline for fried chicken. Or, possibly, if you're giving a very conservative response: You may eventually settle into exactly the piece of fried chicken that you like best - but for now, for your first piece - just go to KFC, order Original Recipe, and enjoy. Later on, when you have a basis for comparison, you can start hitting up other chicken joints and figure out which one tugs at your heart strings, but right now - if you go to KFC you'll get good chicken that you're probably going to enjoy. Sure, there might be better chicken joints - but there are also worse ones - and there's a lot more of them around than the other kind. ~Augee |
|
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21: Lug and GMan, what am I missing here? Are you two reading the same comments I am? I haven't seen anyone spout off or bash anything about the OP. I have seen people tell Augee great work, and then offer constructive opinions slightly differing from his analogies. You two are like the mod who removed several comments from the first page. You're both acting as if the only comments acceptable in this thread need to be high praise and cheer for the OP. Basically, you want us all to thank Augee, kiss his ass, and move on. Offering any form of a constructive differing opinion to his analogies is for some reason frowned upon in this particular thread. That's frankly a bullshit attitude. You want to say this is a tech thread, well if someone wants to give opinions in a tech thread, then they should expect other opinions offered as well. Keep kissing Augee's ass all you want, but don't act like people telling him good job, but offering slightly differing thoughts, views and opinions to his own are being out of line... Those suggesting that are actually the ones being out of line. So rather than come in here and accuse Colt bias like you have done, go make a creative thread of you own. Counter this thread in your thread to make all your Colt counter points. Interject anti Colt sentiment all you want, and try to keep it historically accurate also. I am not saying you don't have any right to come in here and crap on this thread. I am saying it's really bad form to do so, after obvious work and research went into the thread, and there is nothing particularly untrue about it. I am saying it is possible to direct your opinions in a way that doesn't slap a guy in the face that did something to try to better the place. It is real easy to come in and critique somebody elses hard work while sitting on your hands and not throwing up any of your own hard work or labor as an alternate solution to that which you disagree with. Bottom line, yea a Colt is a decent first rifle, but if you remotely care about other stuff and do your research you find other brands that are suitable too. It is possible to exceed milspec in my opinion. Does everybody need to? If so is it across the board or in areas like accuracy, or round count, or aesthetics? Anyway you look at it, rather than kiss Augee's butt, I simply challenge you personally to take all your "constructive criticism" and turn it into a counter thread that again is historically accurate. All this, since you appear to be overly concerned about the "bias" promoted in a pretty thoughtful essay. No anger, no butt kissing, no harm intended. Just trying to interject a little good taste. Something I am not normally known for.
|
The righteous man walks in his integrity; His children are blessed after him.
|
Originally Posted By Lug1: Originally Posted By Lug1: I am not saying you don't have any right to come in here and crap on this thread. I am saying it's really bad form to do so, Once again, have you read the previous comments in here, and did you actually read my response to your previous comment? Who the hell has come in here and "crapped on this thread?" No one. Period. People have solely offered their opinions on the subject at hand. Nothing at all wrong with that. What aren't you getting here? People offer opinions in next to every damn thread in these entire forums. So it's fine to offer opinions in other threads, but not this one? If anyone is being biased here, it's you. And from reading most of what you have to say on the subject, I don't in any way understand why. People are having constructive conversations here. That's what these forums are about. This thread is no different than any other around here. Or is it?
since you appear to be overly concerned about the "bias" promoted in a pretty thoughtful essay. I have to again say that you have not read what I have said in here clearly at all. I said I had no problem with the underlying bias that I detected in some of Augee's OP. Wanna go back and read my comments, you'll find that to be true. And who says I'm the one who is "overly concerned about "bias"?" Augee himself has continued to edit his OP to have some segments not come off as bias...and he continues to make note of him doing so. Give it a break. Let people continue to converse in a civil manner as they have been for the entire duration of this thread. |
"They are not men, they are weapons."
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
|
Originally Posted By Finslayer83:
Chick Fil A = Noveske ? WINNER WINNER; CHICKEN DINNER. 
(see what I did there?)
Nice write-up, Augee. 
|
Tennessee Squire / Maker's Mark Ambassador
RIP SGT. Robert "Bobby" Wagner - 8/1/2004, Mosul Iraq.
"I really think people are trying to out-stupid each other." - D233
RIP SGT. Robert "Bobby" Wagner - 8/1/2004, Mosul Iraq.
"I really think people are trying to out-stupid each other." - D233
|
AR-Ryan21: Read all your post(most before the edits), passive aggressive comments with a smiley face emoticon are not always considered civil. Either way didn't figure you would accept the challenge. Carry on, no hard feelings here. |
The righteous man walks in his integrity; His children are blessed after him.
|
My edits have been spelling corrections...not changing anything I've said or the tone...
And your challenge is not realistic. You want me to write about the history of the AR platform, well Augee covered that. I, nor anyone else, have knocked his knowledge and detail of the history of the platform. Some of us simply have differing opinions as to the current market of the platform. If you want me to write a contrast comparison of Noveske ARs in the 60s compared to Colt ARs in the 60s, then you're asking me to pull gold out of a leprechaun's ass. |
"They are not men, they are weapons."
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
Thank you for spending the time to type this analogy out. I think that it will help quite a few folks (myself included) further their understanding of the history, the market, the players, the rules, and the spices of the AR15 world. 
And my issue of what I am doing for lunch tomorrow is solved... 
|
I like pants with pockets.
|
Augee, great insight as always! how about an analogy based on the PC industry in the late 1990s / early 2000s. Or perhaps you were too young to remember... Colt = IBM, BCM = Gateway, Apple = H&K, etc, etc. Of course, there were the build your own PC guys.
Ok, I'm no Augee, but maybe I'm on to something (or maybe not)
|
|
Originally Posted By AR-Ryan21:
My edits have been spelling corrections...not changing anything I've said or the tone... And your challenge is not realistic. You want me to write about the history of the AR platform, well Augee covered that. I, nor anyone else, have knocked his knowledge and detail of the history of the platform. Some of us simply have differing opinions as to the current market of the platform. If you want me to write a contrast comparison of Noveske ARs in the 60s compared to Colt ARs in the 60s, then you're asking me to pull gold out of a leprechaun's ass. Well, you know what people say about opinions, don't you? As to the question of bias.... I find Augee's thumbnail history and analysis pretty spot on. He didn't equate Colt with Chick-Fil-A or some "premium" chain. He equated it with KFC. KFC isn't the best or the worst, the most or least expensive. KFC is pretty consistent, though. It was also the first major chicken chain. The applicability of the analogy to Colt seems obvious enough and not biased. As I was reading through Augee's post and saw names getting named, I knew some feathers would get ruffled. However, his reasoning is sound and the use of names serves to further inform the reader. There may be some things said that some folks don't want to hear, but they seem reasonably accurate as is publicly known. Augee's posts seldom disappoint. I'm glad to see that this thread will not drop off to the archives. |
|
Augee's OP consists of some opinions as well...so your point?
The bias that some of you have reeks in here. Post anything but high praise in here, and get your response removed. Post an opinion that differs from the OP's opinion, and get flack for it. What makes this thread different than any other around here? Someone please elaborate. Are healthy constructive conversations no longer welcome around here, or does that new rule just pertain to threads where Augee is the OP? Please enlighten me on the new rules around here. |
"They are not men, they are weapons."
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
It's not me, it's the BRD talking.
MIL-SPEC, MIL-STD, TDP and More, Explained: Colt, KFC, and the Fried Chicken Theory of the AR15 (Page 2 of 3)
AR Sponsor