Colt is ending production of AR-15s
Source: American Military News
In a decision criticized by some gunowners and attributed to mismanagement, Colt said it simply isnt selling enough of the rifles in the civilian marketplace to continue devoting the resources into it.
Colt President and CEO, Dennis Veilleux, released a statement on Thursday saying, The fact of the matter is that over the last few years, the market for modern sporting rifles has experienced significant excess manufacturing capacity. Given this level of manufacturing capacity, we believe there is adequate supply for modern sporting rifles for the foreseeable future.
Veilleux added that Colt is seeing high demand in its military and law enforcement sales.
Read more: https://americanmilitarynews.com/2019/09/colt-is-ending-production-of-ar-15s/
I'm sure the Chinese will start manufacturing knock-offs...
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)Hekate
(90,704 posts)...in the civilian population. Some "sport."
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)pecosbob
(7,541 posts)would be dwarfed by the massive liability freight train headed right at us as soon as Dems regain control of the levers of government.
FBaggins
(26,743 posts)I think that's their point.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)"The fact of the matter is that over the last few years, the market for modern sporting rifles has experienced significant excess manufacturing capacity. Given this level of manufacturing capacity, we believe there is adequate supply for modern sporting rifles for the foreseeable future."
https://www.colt.com/news/2630
Sorry didn't see it quoted in the OP..my bad
Bidenator
(11 posts)the market is flooded...
Sugarcoated
(7,724 posts)Tide is turning
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)It is strictly a bottom line thing, but still a few less of them is helpful.
nilram
(2,888 posts)And they can replace it with something similar or something more profitable and/or more destructive.
BumRushDaShow
(129,053 posts)There will surely be a run on them now.
RKP5637
(67,109 posts)They said Obama was going to end assault rifles, (he said no such thing), and sales skyrocketed.
This is just a sales promotion to get their gun sales, which have died off since Trump was elected, back up and going again.
A gun nut friend of mine says their weapon sales are falling off because other companies offer a far more superior product.......AK-47?
keithbvadu2
(36,816 posts)Another marketing version of 'the new Coke"?
RKP5637
(67,109 posts)NickB79
(19,246 posts)AR's are cheap to make, so dozens of other companies have been making lots of inexpensive ones. At the same time, Colt's quality wasn't matching the top-end match-grade guns from custom shops.
They got stuck in the middle, neither the cheapest or the best.
BumRushDaShow
(129,053 posts)it seems many who buy them do so "for show" and for fire arms stash bragging rights. So having a "name brand" to post a selfie with on Instagram or Twitter would be da bomb!!11!!!1
Botany
(70,508 posts)... so they will lead to death.
Kaleva
(36,307 posts)Interestingly, the U.S Army may be abandoning the 5.56mm (.223) as it's considered by many to be not powerful enough.
"Army Eyeing 6.5mm for Its Future Battle Rifle
The U.S. Armys chief of staff recently made a bold promise that future soldiers will be armed with weapons capable of delivering far greater lethality than any existing small arms. "
https://www.military.com/kitup/2017/10/lethality.html
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)How he shot a 300lb hog with a 223 from an AR. He said it vaporized 3/4 of the pig and the resulting destruction made him give up hunting on the spot.
Botany
(70,508 posts)... it is made to tumble on impact in order to cause as much trauma as possible. It should be used by law enforcement and the military the idea that it is sold to the general public is stupid.
Btw I have hunted for years but after Sandy Hook my interest has dropped.
NickB79
(19,246 posts)When you go over 3000 feet per second, physics gets crazy.
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)"With less kick"- less kick than what? A comparative statement is meaningless when made about a single item.
"made to tumble on impact"- false, that is the physics of any high velocity FMJ round. The bullet center of gravity is towards the rear so when it hits a soft medium, such as living tissue, the front slows faster than the rear causing spin; much like a car with a rear mounted engine tends to spin easier. There is nothing magical about the bullet or cartridge.
Hunters, as you should know, use soft point or other designs to increase the chance of a bullet travelling straight when it hits a game animal. These types are prohibited for military use by treaty.
Note- this is an extremely simplified explanation of terminal ballistics, there are many other factors involved so it is impossible to predict if any one bullet will tumble when it hits
I use 223 in a bolt action rifle for varmint hunting. I find it quite effective on prairie dogs at 300-500 yards. Would it make a huge difference if I used .222, a popular round in Europe I have heard?
I do hunt game at times but am not a great example of a successful hunter. Often when I have the chance to shoot I decide the day is too nice to interrupt and take a picture instead. Recently my daughter and I spent are usual day in the woods on youth hunting weekend. Also as usual we failed to see a single squirrel but found it to be a rewarding experience.
jmowreader
(50,559 posts)Colt, who makes the highest quality guns, hasn't been competitive in the AR-15 market for years.
If you go to the Colt website, you learn that they were selling their AR-15 for $1099.
If you go to Cabela's website, you learn that sub-$550 AR-15s are a dime a dozen, and the manufacturers of those guns are still turning a profit.
No one is going to pay a 100-percent premium to have "Colt" written on the side of their commodity gun.
IronLionZion
(45,447 posts)jmowreader
(50,559 posts)A lot of people who aren't going to commit a mass shooting have these guns, and they're not paying double what one's worth either.
yaesu
(8,020 posts)SCVDem
(5,103 posts)That Colt has finished the design of a high energy, next gen rifle.
Ammo? We don't need no stinkin' ammo!
The ultimate plug and play!
world wide wally
(21,744 posts)MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Many owners buy the parts and build a custom version for less money. The only part that is legally considered a firearm is the lower receiver, which must be purchased from an FFL dealer. The other parts can be made, distributed and sold by anyone. The patents expired a long time ago.
safeinOhio
(32,685 posts)single action six shooters.
spin
(17,493 posts)safeinOhio
(32,685 posts)have handle many Civil War weapons.
keithbvadu2
(36,816 posts)The weapon of choice for shooting school children.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,009 posts)Some other company will take up the slack.
samir.g
(835 posts)the Canadian market.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Priced themselves out of their own market.
apnu
(8,756 posts)There's already untold thousands sold and stockpiled by gun nuts. Everybody who wants one has one. Its like Thompsons and shotguns and Browning machine guns after WWI -- vets got to come home with their arms. That's why the 20s and 30s was a wash with gun violence.
Marengo
(3,477 posts)Even the prototypes were ready for testing in Europe. The vast majority of Thompson SMGs in civilian hands were legally purchased on the open market prior to the NFA of 34. Despite its notoriety, there were very few Thompsons in circulation. No, vets did not get to come home with their arms. Demobilized soldiers returned their issued personal arms prior to discharge. Those that did were foreign trophies, the vast majority being bolt action rifles and various handguns. Of course some issued arms were effectively stolen, and a few of that number were machine guns and the like, but never many.
melm00se
(4,993 posts)situation as the Thompson prototype wasn't until 1919 and didn't enter production until 1921.
krispos42
(49,445 posts)The original War on Drugs. Motivation and tools are two different things.
krispos42
(49,445 posts)They were the original contractor to make the full-auto version, the M-16, for the Pentagon a half-century ago. They had the knowledge, they had the tools, they had the brand name and the logo...
...and they basically sat on their hands the last couple of decades letting other companies make AR-15s for the booming civilian market. So, those other companies now make much better quality AR-15s at reasonable prices due to the intense competition between them. And they've expanded the basic design to other cartridges; I just read that Winchester Ammunition has introduced a new straight-walled cartridge called the .350 Legend that's intended for state that have requirements for strait-walled cartridges in their hunting regs. It's like a 9mm .30-30.
James48
(4,436 posts)Like many others, I had a Colt AR-15A2 made in the late 1980s. Nice to take to the range on a Saturday, and reminiscent of my Army days.
My Army issued M-16A1 was made by General Motors.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,479 posts)Colt awarded $42 million for M4, M4A1 carbines for U.S., allies
Famed U.S. gun maker Colt has received a $41,9 million foreign military sales contract for M4 series 5.56 mm carbines, according to a recent U.S. Department of Defense news release.
The U.S. Department of Defense has contracted Colts Manufacturing Co. LLC to supply M4 and M4A1 carbines to Afghanistan, Bahrain, Djibouti, Federated States of Micronesia, Hungary, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Macedonia, Marshall Islands, Palau, St. Vincent and Grenadines, and Tunisia.
Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 18, 2024.
I can (A) build and tool a second production line for these orders or (B) retool an existing line that makes a product for which the sales price isn't competitive making the market rather small.
This isn't rocket surgery.