Armory Sponsor
Posted: 4/14/2017 8:47:53 AM EDT
| How was/is the quality of Coonan receivers? |
|
It has been a few years since I have purchased a new production receiver from Coonan inc. The most recent was well made. Coonan customer service has gone south and I will not do business with them again.
They are quite clear on their website regarding current receiver quality. If your parts don't fit, they don't give a damn. |
|
Is that what happened? I was away from falfiles for a bit and saw the don't bother feelings. DSA had that problem. I think they,DSA , was
God awful slow fixing some Bad receivers but they eventually did fix them from what I read. My Coonan was a bit too tight in the magwell but it works. |
|
DSA's CS has been tops for me. No big issues- just a locking shoulder dogleg hole that was a hair too small- and they took care of it lickety split with no trouble. I was considering buying a Coonan a while back, but their "tough shit, fuck you" approach to QC problems is a great reason to stay away.
Most of the issues seemed to be with their British-cut receivers. The metric models appear to be fine with an occasional defective ejector block. |
|
Coonans have always been a bit out of spec, but not in a way as to affect function (the most obvious one was purely cosmetic, i.e. the gap between the bolt carrier and the receiver, due to the different way they machined that area compared to OEM receivers). From what I understand, more recently, as in the last year or two, their QC has gone downhill at least as badly as DSA with their in-house cast and forged receivers, and that has been combined with a refusal to make anything right for any defect; basically, no customer service once the sale has been made and the receiver delivered.
Sadly, there are no longer any manufacturers offering new FAL receivers for sale in the U.S. that are of high quality and fully in-spec. LMT could do it, but they would need legitimate blueprints and cannot legally use what DSA provided to them when they were contracting LMT to make them (Steyr blueprints which utilize the specs provided by FN; DSA bought them from Steyr); at least that's what they told someone who inquired about having some made. |
|
Quoted:
Coonans have always been a bit out of spec, but not in a way as to affect function (the most obvious one was purely cosmetic, i.e. the gap between the bolt carrier and the receiver, due to the different way they machined that area compared to OEM receivers). From what I understand, more recently, as in the last year or two, their QC has gone downhill at least as badly as DSA with their in-house cast and forged receivers, and that has been combined with a refusal to make anything right for any defect; basically, no customer service once the sale has been made and the receiver delivered. Sadly, there are no longer any manufacturers offering new FAL receivers for sale in the U.S. that are of high quality and fully in-spec. LMT could do it, but they would need legitimate blueprints and cannot legally use what DSA provided to them when they were contracting LMT to make them (Steyr blueprints which utilize the specs provided by FN; DSA bought them from Steyr); at least that's what they told someone who inquired about having some made. 
|
|
If it's for the parts kit you brought over, an IMBEL is the best option, anyways.
There are unused DSA R1s from when they still sold good quality forged receivers that pop up for sale from time to time if you need one for a project. I'd like to do a nice Rhodie R1 build myself. An older Coonan R1 might work as well. |
|
Quoted:
If it's for the parts kit you brought over, an IMBEL is the best option, anyways. There are unused DSA R1s from when they still sold good quality forged receivers that pop up for sale from time to time if you need one for a project. I'd like to do a nice Rhodie R1 build myself. An older Coonan R1 might work as well. |
|
Quoted:
I'll stay away from this batch, then. I had heard that the Imbel was the best option for my parts kit on the Files. Why is that? Quoted:
Quoted:
If it's for the parts kit you brought over, an IMBEL is the best option, anyways. There are unused DSA R1s from when they still sold good quality forged receivers that pop up for sale from time to time if you need one for a project. I'd like to do a nice Rhodie R1 build myself. An older Coonan R1 might work as well. Best quality receivers are the LMT-made DSAs and imports like the IMBELs, FMAPs, and the occasional FN (I've seen a couple sold separately on the FAL Files). I think the old ABNI-marked Entreprise Arms ones are up there as well. Older Coonans were acceptable, but not the best. |
|
Quoted:
IIRC, you have a Zimbabwe-contract IMBEL kit. It would match up with that rather nicely and you'd have a high quality receiver, too. Did you not get in on Terry's receiver group buy? Best quality receivers are the LMT-made DSAs and imports like the IMBELs, FMAPs, and the occasional FN (I've seen a couple sold separately on the FAL Files). I think the old ABNI-marked Entreprise Arms ones are up there as well. Older Coonans were acceptable, but not the best. I'm not sure about the kit. It has ZA prefixes but there was a touch of Rhodesian paint inside the hand guards. |
|
Quoted:
I have one of the Imbels from the group buy, so I was just going to use it, but then when I saw the forged receivers for sale, I was going to buy one to use as one of the 922(r) parts and keep the Imbel for another build. With questionable build quality, I'll just stay away, though and build this using the receiver I have. I'm not sure about the kit. It has ZA prefixes but there was a touch of Rhodesian paint inside the hand guards. Quoted:
Quoted:
IIRC, you have a Zimbabwe-contract IMBEL kit. It would match up with that rather nicely and you'd have a high quality receiver, too. Did you not get in on Terry's receiver group buy? Best quality receivers are the LMT-made DSAs and imports like the IMBELs, FMAPs, and the occasional FN (I've seen a couple sold separately on the FAL Files). I think the old ABNI-marked Entreprise Arms ones are up there as well. Older Coonans were acceptable, but not the best. I'm not sure about the kit. It has ZA prefixes but there was a touch of Rhodesian paint inside the hand guards. |
|
Quoted:
I got a coonan R1 receiver about 3 months ago from the most recent batch and it has been excellent. I heard some of the complaints from about a year ago, but it seems like the problems have been worked out. |
Armory Sponsor