Armory Sponsor
Posted: 10/4/2009 4:03:20 PM EDT
|
I just bought a S&W AR-22 with the quad railed front handguard. (Not by choice, it's what the shop buys.)
The only other .22 I can compare it to is my GSG-5L carbine, my others are set up for bulls-eye shooting. Given the super nice workmanship AND engineering on the S&W AR, I'm thinking this thing might be the one to compete with the GSG on sales. This is only the Carbine, NOT the P/PK handguns, AK or anything else! With the design, the AR-22 uses an AR-15 trigger group. (The Colt/Walther version doesn't.) This allows shooters to move to a lighter or even a two-stage trigger if they choose. Personally, I leave virtually all of my .22 rifles' triggers alone but I wanted to throw that out. On the flip side, the GSG has its issues with the bolt screws, double tapping & an optic mount that isn't the best design in the world. On the plus side, they look like a MP5 & are a blast to shoot. Many (including me) have made their reliability issues go away with a screw replacement set and some old fashioned break in. So, with everyone looking into their crystal ball, make your predictions. Keep in mind that we're not predicting what an arfcomer will do, but what will sell overall at gun shows & gun shops with Bubba & Billy-Bob buying them. This is by no means a slam or plug for one rifle or another, simply wondering what the rimfire crowd thinks.............? |
|
I really like the gsg-5. Cool look, nice feel, fun to shoot. But the AR22 from Smith is a better made firearm for long term use.
There is a place for both of them. Hard to say one firearm is clearly "better" than another. Its all in what you want it for. I love my 33 year old Ruger 10/22. My goal is to use it for over 50 years. It will make that with no problem and without any parts failure during that time. The GSG-5 its a hoot to shoot but it make that claim. |
|
Not sure.
Both are "cool" looking with the GSG getting the edge. If we go with just your group of potential buyers, not many will know about the issues with the GSG or the early praise the Smith is getting. I'm in the market for one, I have done all the research on both of these guns and many more and I still don't know which one I want! 
|
|
I have a M261 .22 conversion kit for my Colt and I can use it in all of my other ARs. Also have owned a Ciener. Both shot fine and were under $200. A dedicated rifle or upper is the price of a new firearm.
While I think the S&W is very well made, they drift off of the straight military look of an AR for me. If the barrel was military, then I would like them better. Internally they are very nice. But looks still matter as I already have several actual ARs. Also, for $500, I can invest another $200 and build another AR. There is only a $200 gap between the S&W, the UMAREX, a dedicated upper, and the real rifle. If it is training I want, I can get it with the conversion kits. The GSG on the other hand has a $2000 gap between the semi-auto big brother and it. That is quite a leap. For $450, I can get a rifle that looks like the more expensive one and still serves as a great trainer or proficiency shooter for me. If the GSG looked like an AR when it first came out, I do not believe it would have caught like wildfire. And I do think that because the GSG caught like wildfire, the big AR companies are trying to find a niche in that market. I do not believe they will catch up with it, especially since there are several different routes to an AR .22. There is only one inexpensive route to an MP5 .22. Steve |
|
Quoted:
While I think the S&W is very well made, they drift off of the straight military look of an AR for me. If the barrel was military, then I would like them better. Internally they are very nice. I have heard (but not confirmed) that the AR-22 bbl is NM spec'd. Also, the internal trigger is the same as the AR-15, i.e. they swap out. I do know that with only iron sights, my 50 year old eyes were making some AMAZING shots at the first trip to the range with it. We all know how well the irons work on the GSG (which is why I have a red dot on mine). I voted for the S&W AR to eventually hammer the GSG in sales, FWIW. While I will always continue to shoot both & expose both to newbie shooters, *I* feel the AR-22 is 2-3 times the gun for the same amount (or a good bit less these days) of $$$. Some might mention the S&W is made in the USA & the GSG is German. Some might make an issue of this when they buy, IF they have to buy only one of them. Some won't care either way. Regardless of whom wins the sales number battle/war, is there any doubt that the old bolt action .22's of yore will be on the endangered species list down the road? After all, is a 18-19 year old kid gonna buy a .22 look-alike of a machine gun or is he gonna buy a pedestrian bolt action Marlin/CZ/Savage? One could probably add in the Ruger 10/22 & the Marlin semi's too, IMO. While the latter two may not dip in sales % as much as the bolt actions, I believe they too will lose a large market share of the casual .22 rifle shooter. Someone can feel free to change my mind. 
|
|
Quoted:
Glad the Smith seems to be way better than the Colt. Not even close, IMO. The S&W is a quality piece throughout & the Colt looks like someone drew it up in 30 days or less. To be fair, Colt doesn't make the gun themselves. No sir, they only stamp their little pony on it to try to take your $$$$$............ |
Armory Sponsor