Posted: 1/3/2010 10:20:15 PM EDT
|
Asked this in an unrelated topic about rails and didn't get too many responses.
I'm piecing together a long range AR, and I've narrowed down the stock to one of those choices above. Getting closer to the ordering part, and I've yet to come to a decision. So I'll put it to a vote: What chooseth the hive? |
I prefer the UBR at this point. The PRS looks nice, but I ride NTCH, so the cheekpiece is useless for me (too far back). I still get a good cheekweld with the UBR anyhow. I contemplated a PRS for my current SPR/long range build, but think I'll just stick with the A2 for now and save $240. My UBR is staying put, though. It's nice to not only get a good cheekweld w/ a collapsing stock for once, but it also doesn't rip out my facial hair. 
|
| Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? |
|
Quoted:
Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? The UBR is pretty heavy too. Stupid heavy for what it's designed for IMO. But fanboys will love it, and pay the ridiculous price, because it feels neat when you extend and collapse it. |
|
Here's a thought.....since both are about the same price, buy one and try it out, if it's not what you like sell it on the EE and buy the other stock. This way you can test out both stocks. Or you could try a CTR stock with a MagPul check riser, would be a lot cheaper. Never mind. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? The UBR is pretty heavy too. Stupid heavy for what it's designed for IMO. But fanboys will love it, and pay the ridiculous price, because it feels neat when you extend and collapse it. Yeah, a rock solid quick adjustable stock is stupid.... 
I own both the PRS and the UBR. The PRS is nearly useless on the AR platform. Due to the clearance needed for the charging handle, the cheek-piece is too far back to be of any real use. It has very little adjustment range, and really only goes from being A2 in length to even longer. Butthook is too far forward and I found that the bottom of the butt extended too far down to properly run a rear bag. (I fixed this by removing the butthook cover and exposing the rail section.) Also, with it being fully flat it's a lot harder to change elevation with the rear bag. One would be much better suited buying a Sierra Precision adjustable buttplate and an A1 stock. Then adjust for LOP and drop(comb height). Foremost, you should choose your optic and ring combo wisely. That way you can achieve the correct cheekweld without having to resort to an adjustable comb. Don't go for overly huge objectives, and use something like an SPR-S mount which is distinctly lower than most unimounts. I also found that shorter eye relief scopes tend to work better and give more mounting solutions. Leupold tends to have way too long of eye relief. UBR is great. It's more adjustable and has a longer achievable LOP than nearly every other carbine buffer tube adjustable stock out there. Also the comb is fixed in relation to the adjustable portion of the stock. (Better more consistent cheekweld) The mechanism is so solid, that when it's locked up, it feels like a fixed stock. The design is such that no amount of wear will make it loosen up. (Wedge type design.) All my CTR's eventually have loosened up and I bet with the same locking mechanism on the ACS, that will do the same. If one could quickly drop the buttplate on the UBR it would be perfection. As it is, it's just a darn good stock, that's pretty much unparalleled by any other stock. Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. Anyway, here's a pic of one of my setups using the UBR. It works very well. Balance is very good. Weight is a bit much, but it's really handy without the bipod or optic. Also, rear weight has been known to help with rifle control. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? The UBR is pretty heavy too. Stupid heavy for what it's designed for IMO. But fanboys will love it, and pay the ridiculous price, because it feels neat when you extend and collapse it. Yeah, a rock solid quick adjustable stock is stupid....
I own both the PRS and the UBR. The PRS is nearly useless on the AR platform. Due to the clearance needed for the charging handle, the cheek-piece is too far back to be of any real use. It has very little adjustment range, and really only goes from being A2 in length to even longer. Butthook is too far forward and I found that the bottom of the butt extended too far down to properly run a rear bag. (I fixed this by removing the butthook cover and exposing the rail section.) Also, with it being fully flat it's a lot harder to change elevation with the rear bag. One would be much better suited buying a Sierra Precision adjustable buttplate and an A1 stock. Then adjust for LOP and drop(comb height). Foremost, you should choose your optic and ring combo wisely. That way you can achieve the correct cheekweld without having to resort to an adjustable comb. Don't go for overly huge objectives, and use something like an SPR-S mount which is distinctly lower than most unimounts. I also found that shorter eye relief scopes tend to work better and give more mounting solutions. Leupold tends to have way too long of eye relief. UBR is great. It's more adjustable and has a longer achievable LOP than nearly every other carbine buffer tube adjustable stock out there. Also the comb is fixed in relation to the adjustable portion of the stock. (Better more consistent cheekweld) The mechanism is so solid, that when it's locked up, it feels like a fixed stock. The design is such that no amount of wear will make it loosen up. (Wedge type design.) All my CTR's eventually have loosened up and I bet with the same locking mechanism on the ACS, that will do the same. If one could quickly drop the buttplate on the UBR it would be perfection. As it is, it's just a darn good stock, that's pretty much unparalleled by any other stock. Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. Anyway, here's a pic of one of my setups using the UBR. It works very well. Balance is very good. Weight is a bit much, but it's really handy without the bipod or optic. Also, rear weight has been known to help with rifle control. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/salmonaxe/SPR_CLE_ST10_R.jpg Nice that is what I am going for with my next AR except it will be 6.8 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? The UBR is pretty heavy too. Stupid heavy for what it's designed for IMO. But fanboys will love it, and pay the ridiculous price, because it feels neat when you extend and collapse it. Yeah, a rock solid quick adjustable stock is stupid.... Yeah, because the standard M4 stock being used by hundreds of thousands of our soldiers just isn't rock solid or quickly adjustable enough for hardcore badasses like you  Its essential that the siding action be silky smooth before you sweep your living room and make kapew noises with your mouth.
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. 
Yeah, I can't afford them. I must be a $9/hr gun nut 
Or maybe, I believe in practicality as opposed to playing barbie. Or keeping weight to a minimum as opposed to the neato factor. Sorry, I just imagine most guys that think loading down their ARs with the most shit possible is tacticool actually spend most of their day playing video games and watching anime, how close am I? Anyway, here's a pic of one of my setups using the UBR. It works very well. Balance is very good. Weight is a bit much, but it's really handy without the bipod or optic. Also, rear weight has been known to help with rifle control.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/salmonaxe/SPR_CLE_ST10_R.jpg I'm guessing pretty close. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? The UBR is pretty heavy too. Stupid heavy for what it's designed for IMO. But fanboys will love it, and pay the ridiculous price, because it feels neat when you extend and collapse it. Yeah, a rock solid quick adjustable stock is stupid.... I own both the PRS and the UBR. The PRS is nearly useless on the AR platform. Due to the clearance needed for the charging handle, the cheek-piece is too far back to be of any real use. It has very little adjustment range, and really only goes from being A2 in length to even longer. Butthook is too far forward and I found that the bottom of the butt extended too far down to properly run a rear bag. (I fixed this by removing the butthook cover and exposing the rail section.) Also, with it being fully flat it's a lot harder to change elevation with the rear bag. One would be much better suited buying a Sierra Precision adjustable buttplate and an A1 stock. Then adjust for LOP and drop(comb height). Foremost, you should choose your optic and ring combo wisely. That way you can achieve the correct cheekweld without having to resort to an adjustable comb. Don't go for overly huge objectives, and use something like an SPR-S mount which is distinctly lower than most unimounts. I also found that shorter eye relief scopes tend to work better and give more mounting solutions. Leupold tends to have way too long of eye relief. UBR is great. It's more adjustable and has a longer achievable LOP than nearly every other carbine buffer tube adjustable stock out there. Also the comb is fixed in relation to the adjustable portion of the stock. (Better more consistent cheekweld) The mechanism is so solid, that when it's locked up, it feels like a fixed stock. The design is such that no amount of wear will make it loosen up. (Wedge type design.) All my CTR's eventually have loosened up and I bet with the same locking mechanism on the ACS, that will do the same. If one could quickly drop the buttplate on the UBR it would be perfection. As it is, it's just a darn good stock, that's pretty much unparalleled by any other stock. Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. Anyway, here's a pic of one of my setups using the UBR. It works very well. Balance is very good. Weight is a bit much, but it's really handy without the bipod or optic. Also, rear weight has been known to help with rifle control. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/salmonaxe/SPR_CLE_ST10_R.jpg I have never understood why people slide the magpuls so damn far up on the magazine. It remove the entire purpose of the magpul. Or did you just do that on accident? |
|
While I'll freely admit to being an armchair commando compared to the folks who actually use their rifles for a living, I'll add that the weight of the UBR nicely balances out my 16" hbar middy and it's FF rail. While it was a pricey stock, I feel it fills a need for me by not ripping out my facial hair (as previously mentioned), and I get a MUCH more consistent cheekweld when compared to a conventional collapsing stock.
But part of it is the wow factor for me, not gonna lie. I could just as easily shave and be fine. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Something I just thought of - I'm designing this rifle to function not only for stationary long range shooting, but also so that the user can fold the bipod up, QD the scope, and use it in the shorter range. I don't know the weight of the PRS, but it looks massive and massively heavy. Would the size and weight hinder the gun's use in a more traditional defensive role? The UBR is pretty heavy too. Stupid heavy for what it's designed for IMO. But fanboys will love it, and pay the ridiculous price, because it feels neat when you extend and collapse it. Yeah, a rock solid quick adjustable stock is stupid.... Yeah, because the standard M4 stock being used by hundreds of thousands of our soldiers just isn't rock solid or quickly adjustable enough for hardcore badasses like you Its essential that the siding action be silky smooth before you sweep your living room and make kapew noises with your mouth.
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/39/2009/10/500x_brideB102609_jez_512K.flv.jpg Yeah, I can't afford them. I must be a $9/hr gun nut
Or maybe, I believe in practicality as opposed to playing barbie. Or keeping weight to a minimum as opposed to the neato factor. Sorry, I just imagine most guys that think loading down their ARs with the most shit possible is tacticool actually spend most of their day playing video games and watching anime, how close am I? Anyway, here's a pic of one of my setups using the UBR. It works very well. Balance is very good. Weight is a bit much, but it's really handy without the bipod or optic. Also, rear weight has been known to help with rifle control.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/salmonaxe/SPR_CLE_ST10_R.jpg I'm guessing pretty close. Wow. You really like the name calling huh? You must think that makes you cool or something. I went into a detailed post stating exactly what the benefits of this stock are and it has nothing to do with the "sliding action" of the stock. Pulling the "well our military uses this" doesn't prove anything. I'm sure plenty of our military men would like a stock like this especially on a Designated Marksmen or Special Purposes Rifle. Heck as it is, the SPR uses an LMT Sopmod stock, which is supposed to be one of the tightest fitting Carbine stocks out there. I'm no operator type, but I shoot a lot. My focus is on accuracy, but I've also done a lot of run and gun competition. I'm not some bumpfiring idiot that goes shooting once every 6 months. I also have had a few custom bolt actions built up which weigh insanely more that that SPR type build I showed. If you think that the UBR is too heavy to be useful, then maybe you need to work out more? What I do with the majority of my day is work. Like just about any other American that's worth a damn. In my free time, I work on builds, reloading, watch some tv, spend time with my GF and yes if there's something good out I might just play a video game. Of course what I do with my free time has little relevance to the points I was trying to make. You were close though in a way. My job is at a game studio, but instead I build art assets for the environments in games. To the guy about the magpul. That one totally slid up. I initially put them on the 20rd mags so I could keep them from going all the way into a TT single mag pouch. I don't really use those much anymore and I just shove my 20's into my dragbag. I guess trying to shove it into a small pouch on the drag bag has made it pushed flush. It is kinda nice though. It's grippy and I guess could protect your hand during remedial action. Kinda like a lumpy plate. For me, it's not by design, just happened. |
|
Quoted:
Wow. You really like the name calling huh? You must think that makes you cool or something. Projecting are we? Who is the one trying to look cool? Quoted:
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wow. You really like the name calling huh? You must think that makes you cool or something. Projecting are we? Who is the one trying to look cool? Quoted:
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. If you don't want to add anything other than the same tired old negative bullshit that has been posted time and time again about Magpul gear, then why bother looking into this thread? Just curious. |
|
Quoted: Will the UBR help to balance out a gun with a 20" barrel and a set of DD Omega rails? I want to run an adjustable stock on this rifle but I don't want it to feel extremely front heavy. Sorry for the hijack. Yes the UBR will, that was the intention of the heaviness of it. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow. You really like the name calling huh? You must think that makes you cool or something. Projecting are we? Who is the one trying to look cool? Quoted: Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. If you don't want to add anything other than the same tired old negative bullshit that has been posted time and time again about Magpul gear, then why bother looking into this thread? Just curious. Its not just Magpul gear that he does that with..seems like anything expensive and he's in the thread trying to justify not buying it. Some people like to target shoot(or shoot varmints, etc) and the regular m4 stock leaves a bit to be desired when it comes to bench rest shooting or prone. But you probably knew that. I say UBR. |
|
I have a PRS. Frankly, I'm a bit underwhelmed by it. Its a great stock dont get me wrong but I think a simple fixed stock would work just as well. It hs enough adjustability to get you close to where you want to be but I wish it had a bit more.
As for having a dedicated long range setup that is also a defensive rifle, forget about it. Have 2 dedicated setups, 1 long range and 1 close range. It'll work much better. |
|
I've had both on my gun. First the PRS when UBRs were scarce, then sold it and got the UBR.
I really like them both but for different reasons. The PRS with a monopod is awesome for bench shooting, I would hold the pod in my weak hand and squeeze or relax my hand to change the point of aim. Worked pretty good. It was a somewhat cumbersome setup for hunting etc, but not too bad if you've ever carried a Browning BAR hunting rifle or any other large caliber semi-auto. I've killed running coyotes freehand with this stock and hunted a bunch with it, so it's not strictly a bench option. It's just a good looking, well built stock with extra adjustability for a bench shooter. The UBR is like the best of both worlds for me, consistent cheek, but adjustable length. Less overall bulk than the PRS. I like how it can help make running different optics easier. For Aimpoint I like to put my nose right in it with the stock collapsed all the way, for my glass I like it set back a few notches for proper eye-relief. Nice to have that flexibility with the push of a little button. Plus when I hunt with it, it's nice to be able to shrink the overall size of the gun to make getting in and out of rigs easier. I also will strap the rifle to the side of my pack when I'm hiking, so being able to shrink it down to a nice compact rifle is nice. You just have to decide what you are going to be doing with the gun. If you are going to be long range bench shooting only, go PRS, the extra weight and adjust-ability will be an asset. If you think you might want to go out and about with your rifle but still want the consistent cheek weld for your optics, UBR is a great choice. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wow. You really like the name calling huh? You must think that makes you cool or something. Projecting are we? Who is the one trying to look cool? Quoted:
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. In what way am I trying to look cool? The original poster asked about 2 different stocks, and I have experience with both. I saw your post and thought it didn't represent the usability of the stock correctly. I addressed the "points" you made in order to show what I think is the true value of of the stock. At the same time, I called you on your obvious begrudging attitude that has little to do with the actual function of the item in question. If you have real world issue with the function of the stock, by all means share it. Jared, Yes Car buffer and spring required. |
|
Quoted:
If you don't want to add anything other than the same tired old negative bullshit that has been posted time and time again about Magpul gear, then why bother looking into this thread? Just curious. This is ARFCOM, where people freely discuss the pluses and minuses of products so people can make wise purchasing decisions. There are plenty of other fanboy sites out there where only praise is allowed, you might want to head there. And no, I got no beef with Magpul. Hell I own close to 200 PMAGs. |
|
Quoted:
Its not just Magpul gear that he does that with..seems like anything expensive and he's in the thread trying to justify not buying it. 
You mean like the thread where people were saying $8000 digital SLRs were koolaid and I told them they are worth the money if it suits your needs? There are things out there that are priced at a premium due to function, there are things that are priced at a premium due to marketing. Some people can differentiate between the two, some can't. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. In what way am I trying to look cool? The original poster asked about 2 different stocks, and I have experience with both. I saw your post and thought it didn't represent the usability of the stock correctly. I addressed the "points" you made in order to show what I think is the true value of of the stock. At the same time, I called you on your obvious begrudging attitude that has little to do with the actual function of the item in question. If you have real world issue with the function of the stock, by all means share it. Dude, that quote of yours above is about about the douchiest thing I've ever read here. |
|
The PRS just wasn't usable for me. I couldn't get on the sights, even a scope was a bit difficult to use, and it was very heavy. I like my UBR, though. It's got just enough weight to help balance the rifle (stealth uppers are heavy!), looks good, and feels good. Here's a slightly outdated pic of my rifle.  |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Its not just Magpul gear that he does that with..seems like anything expensive and he's in the thread trying to justify not buying it. You mean like the thread where people were saying $8000 digital SLRs were koolaid and I told them they are worth the money if it suits your needs? There are things out there that are priced at a premium due to function, there are things that are priced at a premium due to marketing. Some people can differentiate between the two, some can't. Anyway, still off topic and all, my most expensive combo is probably a 5D MkII with a 300 2.8 IS. At that point, we're talking around $8k with the tripod (Gitzo/Wimberley)
Get the feeling I'm a Canon guy? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its not just Magpul gear that he does that with..seems like anything expensive and he's in the thread trying to justify not buying it.
You mean like the thread where people were saying $8000 digital SLRs were koolaid and I told them they are worth the money if it suits your needs? There are things out there that are priced at a premium due to function, there are things that are priced at a premium due to marketing. Some people can differentiate between the two, some can't. Anyway, still off topic and all, my most expensive combo is probably a 5D MkII with a 300 2.8 IS. At that point, we're talking around $8k with the tripod (Gitzo/Wimberley)
Get the feeling I'm a Canon guy? Yep, I'm a Canon guy too. It depends on when you buy them. I bought my 1DsII for $8000 when it first came out (Nov 04?). Actually $8200 IIRC because I overnighted it. I'm a full frame guy so the 1D wasn't even consideration for me. I think the 1Ds MkIII was about that price when they first came out. Yes, I love the 5DII also. That's my main body. However, I think the 1Ds MkIII still has a place even though it sucks compared to the $2700 5DII in some areas (ISO performance, ergos, etc..). My friends that are PJs in Afgh, Iraq, etc. won't look at anything but 1 series Canons for their main bodies. They really are tanks and when you need the sturdiest camera, they are worth every penny. I believe Nachtwey uses 1DsIIIs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. In what way am I trying to look cool? The original poster asked about 2 different stocks, and I have experience with both. I saw your post and thought it didn't represent the usability of the stock correctly. I addressed the "points" you made in order to show what I think is the true value of of the stock. At the same time, I called you on your obvious begrudging attitude that has little to do with the actual function of the item in question. If you have real world issue with the function of the stock, by all means share it. Dude, that quote of yours above is about about the douchiest thing I've ever read here. Hey, I call them how I see them. It obviously hit a nerve. And from the remarks of other posters, I'm led to believe that you exhibit this behavior quite often. The one thing that bothered me the most is that you stated the stock was over priced. Have you any idea how much it would cost to produce such an item? You realize it was made in the USA? The custom molds, R&D, multiple machined parts and hardware has to be accounted for. Volume of sales will help make up for it, but production time and relative smallness of the market will keep the price at a premium. Shop time is generally $80-90 an hour. I'm sure if magpul broke it down for you, it would become obvious that they aren't selling these stocks at a HUGE profit. Actually I'm betting that they make way more profit on things like PMAGs(LIke the 200 you own.) and Magpuls Since the volume of sales are greater and the overall amount of components are less. The first stock I received was preproduction and it has ALL machined parts. I'm sure I paid cost or even less. Newer version has certain components made from MIM, but not all. Still, there is a lot of work that went into making that stock. Attitudes about products being "overpriced" are one of the biggest reasons America has lost the market on consumer goods. Manufacturing is at an all time low. Skilled machinists and other laborers are out of a job. I used to work as a machinist and I'm glad that I don't have to deal with that. But I know many other machinists who are struggling because of our current situation. My father being one of them. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't hate on things just because you cannot afford them. That is just a knee jerk response and has nothing to do with that actual function of said item. Acting that way just makes you look like a socialist hippie that hates "the rich" for having nicer things then themselves. It's really base and obvious. In what way am I trying to look cool? The original poster asked about 2 different stocks, and I have experience with both. I saw your post and thought it didn't represent the usability of the stock correctly. I addressed the "points" you made in order to show what I think is the true value of of the stock. At the same time, I called you on your obvious begrudging attitude that has little to do with the actual function of the item in question. If you have real world issue with the function of the stock, by all means share it. Dude, that quote of yours above is about about the douchiest thing I've ever read here. Hey, I call them how I see them. It obviously hit a nerve. And from the remarks of other posters, I'm led to believe that you exhibit this behavior quite often. The one thing that bothered me the most is that you stated the stock was over priced. Have you any idea how much it would cost to produce such an item? You realize it was made in the USA? The custom molds, R&D, multiple machined parts and hardware has to be accounted for. Volume of sales will help make up for it, but production time and relative smallness of the market will keep the price at a premium. Shop time is generally $80-90 an hour. I'm sure if magpul broke it down for you, it would become obvious that they aren't selling these stocks at a HUGE profit. Actually I'm betting that they make way more profit on things like PMAGs(LIke the 200 you own.) and Magpuls Since the volume of sales are greater and the overall amount of components are less. The first stock I received was preproduction and it has ALL machined parts. I'm sure I paid cost or even less. Newer version has certain components made from MIM, but not all. Still, there is a lot of work that went into making that stock. Attitudes about products being "overpriced" are one of the biggest reasons America has lost the market on consumer goods. Manufacturing is at an all time low. Skilled machinists and other laborers are out of a job. I used to work as a machinist and I'm glad that I don't have to deal with that. But I know many other machinists who are struggling because of our current situation. My father being one of them. Hmm.... I have a Mechanical Engineering degree, I used to work in one of the largest injection molding facilities in the nation, I also worked as a management consultant where I did product development, developed costing models, marketing strategies, etc... I'm sure I have a better idea than you do 
Like a typical fanboy, you throw around words like R&D, machining, production time, etc... to justify costs and convince yourself you're not being ripped off, and to try to make it sound like you understand the business but you don't understand anything at all. I'm not knocking Magpul. They have created a good product (but too heavy, expensive, and overbuilt for my tastes, and it's not because I can't afford one ), and set it at a price point which will provide for a healthy profit margin because because they know there are tactitools like you who will eat it up and they are right. That's just smart business IMO. So please don't come barking to me with pseudo intellectual jibberish, it only makes you look more foolish than you already do.
|
