Buy Canadian AR

misanthropist said:
My $325 nork 1911s outperformed my colts out of the box in most cases...total expense: $325. The colts were a little over three times that much.

Domestic does not necessarily mean better quality!
Click to expand...

Im sorry for getting off track here that's great that your happy with you norc and I know Gunnar goes through all the 1911 he sells so they run with no issues and the customers are happy with them.

I talking about getting a Canadian company Building AR's and parts is it worth while or is everyone going to run to the cheapest game in town. At least with the parts that come out of the US the end product is assembled here even if the lower is the only part built in Canada. Don't forget Canada is a very small market even for the US manufactures so allot of them will not get the permits to export their products to Canada anymore.
 
Well, clearly it is worthwhile as some people are doing it, and the importation of the Norincos doesn't seem to affect them at all.

Why not call up ATR and ask if, since the advent of the Norinco M4, a bunch of people have called him and cancelled their orders for his lower? Why not call Dlask and ask if people are cancelling orders now that the Norinco exists?

I predict: 0 cancellations doe to norinco.

If Rolls Royce was a Canadian product, would the importation of Toyotas ruin their market? Only if RR had been the only game in town. And, if Toyota built a BETTER vehicle than Rolls, for cheaper, shouldn't Canadians have access to that? Or should they keep on spending on the Rolls, even if it's no better? If it's better, will everyone pitch it for a worse car?

If the Americans won't send us their gear any more, we need MORE manufacturers, not LESS. If there are local manufacturers of ARs (and there are one or two) they should EITHER be building a much nicer product than the Nork, which I believe they are, and it won't be a problem, or they should get the hell out of the market and find something they can do better. I'm not paying a bunch of people to stand around and build crap just because they were born north of the 49th parallel.
 
misanthropist said:
Well, clearly it is worthwhile as some people are doing it, and the importation of the Norincos doesn't seem to affect them at all.

Why not call up ATR and ask if, since the advent of the Norinco M4, a bunch of people have called him and cancelled their orders for his lower? Why not call Dlask and ask if people are cancelling orders now that the Norinco exists?

I predict: 0 cancellations doe to norinco.

If Rolls Royce was a Canadian product, would the importation of Toyotas ruin their market? Only if RR had been the only game in town. And, if Toyota built a BETTER vehicle than Rolls, for cheaper, shouldn't Canadians have access to that? Or should they keep on spending on the Rolls, even if it's no better? If it's better, will everyone pitch it for a worse car?

If the Americans won't send us their gear any more, we need MORE manufacturers, not LESS. If there are local manufacturers of ARs (and there are one or two) they should EITHER be building a much nicer product than the Nork, which I believe they are, and it won't be a problem, or they should get the hell out of the market and find something they can do better. I'm not paying a bunch of people to stand around and build crap just because they were born north of the 49th parallel.
Click to expand...

Sorry guy I don't know were your going with this Toyota,Nissan and Honda have factory in Canada that employ and pay Canadian wages and benefits and they make a very good product. Norinco is owned by the Chines government and does not have to meet any North American standers IOS ratings labour and environmental laws.
Using the automotive industry is a another issue and a bad example the big three are in trouble right now and unless they change there ways they will go under. At least Toyota,Nissan and Honda are making there product in Canada and making good quality products as well.
 
Okay, let me say the same thing without brand names to distract you...

Imagine you are used to buying Widget X. It performs some role in your life...say it ties your shoes. It works well and is made of billet stainless and you show it off to all your friends who want the same widget. In any case that's the only company that makes them, so it's that or nothing.

Now a chinese company starts making Widget Y. It is made of stamped steel and costs 1/3 the price. It also ties your shoes, but it's not a status symbol like widget X. Is the company that makes widget X screwed?

Only if the stamped steel widget Y performs better than the fancy Widget X. If Widget X is a better product, looks nicer, and is a status symbol, people who can affort Widget X will keep on buying it. People who don't care will buy Widget Y. A small number of people will stop buying Widget X...but most of the people who buy Widget Y will just be people who previously would not have bought a Widget. A number of people will also be exposed to the Widget, and think about upgrading to Widget X after a while.



If Widget X is not as good as Widget Y then Widget X company should get out of the market and find something they can do better than Widget Y company. Consumers should not support an inferior product just because the people making it were born somewhere.

If Widget X is way better than Widget Y the market for Widget Y will continue to exist, and may benefit from increased exposure.



Do you get it now? I am not talking about the automotive industry, I am talking about economics.
 
misanthropist said:
Okay, let me say the same thing without brand names to distract you...

Imagine you are used to buying Widget X. It performs some role in your life...say it ties your shoes. It works well and is made of billet stainless and you show it off to all your friends who want the same widget. In any case that's the only company that makes them, so it's that or nothing.

Now a chinese company starts making Widget Y. It is made of stamped steel and costs 1/3 the price. It also ties your shoes, but it's not a status symbol like widget X. Is the company that makes widget X screwed?

Only if the stamped steel widget Y performs better than the fancy Widget X. If Widget X is a better product, looks nicer, and is a status symbol, people who can affort Widget X will keep on buying it. People who don't care will buy Widget Y. A small number of people will stop buying Widget X...but most of the people who buy Widget Y will just be people who previously would not have bought a Widget. A number of people will also be exposed to the Widget, and think about upgrading to Widget X after a while.



If Widget X is not as good as Widget Y then Widget X company should get out of the market and find something they can do better than Widget Y company. Consumers should not support an inferior product just because the people making it were born somewhere.

If Widget X is way better than Widget Y the market for Widget Y will continue to exist, and may benefit from increased exposure.



Do you get it now? I am not talking about the automotive industry, I am talking about economics.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand but if you don't have a job anymore because all the widget Y puts the widget X out off business on the lower cost of labor and not having to contend with environmental and labor laws. Eventually no one will be able to even afford widget Y.

What it sound like is that people in Canada don't care about keeping or creating job's in this country and are happy buying cheap stuff from outside the country.
 
I think having a truck load of Norinco M4 come in the Canadian market is a Win-Win situation.

- We win because the lower price point means more people buying AR.
- We win because the added shooter will increase the demand for accessories.
- We win because many of the 1st time AR buyer will probably want to upagrade to another gun... and they might just buy Canadian the next time.
 
sillymike said:
I think having a truck load of Norinco M4 come in the Canadian market is a Win-Win situation.

- We win because the lower price point means more people buying AR.
- We win because the added shooter will increase the demand for accessories.
- We win because many of the 1st time AR buyer will probably want to upagrade to another gun... and they might just buy Canadian the next time.
Click to expand...

yes but the lower quality may also turn people off of these types of firearms as well and we may lose them from shooting sports.

From reading the threads on the reviews on these rifles I'm not impressed, painted part instead anodized poor accuracy I think $999. is too much maybe $500. would be more reasonable. That does not mean I would even buy one for $500. I remember CQ311(I think that's what they were called) going for around $500. years ago and I wouldn't buy one then.

But I would still like to see us support Canadian manufacturing.
 
PeterPan said:
Marlink, I agree with you.
We get so excited about Norincos and other product having good gun maker in Canada. Funny thin, my buddies from Europe almost got 4 Dlasks, but they run into problems with importer and had to cancel the order.
Click to expand...
Your buddies in Europe don't have access to American-made ARs. Otherwise, they wouldn't be buying Dlasks.

If a Canadian company makes a quality product at a reasonable price, I would buy it - because it's a quality product at a reasonable price. But I wouldn't buy something simply because it says "made in Canada" on it. Buying domestic for the sake of supporting local manufacturers encourages mediocrity because the said manufacturers don't have to fight as hard for the customer's money as they otherwise would. The Big Three are a perfect example of this problem.
 
capp325 said:
Your buddies in Europe don't have access to American-made ARs. Otherwise, they wouldn't be buying Dlasks.

If a Canadian company makes a quality product at a reasonable price, I would buy it - because it's a quality product at a reasonable price. But I wouldn't buy something simply because it says "made in Canada" on it. Buying domestic for the sake of supporting local manufacturers encourages mediocrity because the said manufacturers don't have to fight as hard for the customer's money as they otherwise would. The Big Three are a perfect example of this problem.
Click to expand...

now this is not a form for bashing Dlask, I have bought his product with no issues. that's not saying that there is none but then Colt has issues to and people pay big money for the name.
If we ask for it to be made here and get some one to start producing these good quality products here will you buy them.
Or will you run off and buy the cheaper one to save a buck?
Because the norc will always be cheaper no matter where the price of our product get down to. They will always try to break into our markets with cheaper lower quality stuff.
 
marlink said:
now this is not a form for bashing Dlask, I have bought his product with no issues. that's not saying that there is none but then Colt has issues to and people pay big money for the name.
If we ask for it to be made here and get some one to start producing these good quality products here will you buy them.
Or will you run off and buy the cheaper one to save a buck?
Because the norc will always be cheaper no matter where the price of our product get down to. They will always try to break into our markets with cheaper lower quality stuff.
Click to expand...
No one said anything about Norinco. I wouldn't buy a Norinco unless it was the only gun available in Canada for reasons that are only in part related to the quality of their products. But Norinco is not the only imported AR in case you did not know.

I would choose an American or European AR over a Canadian one if it offered better quality at a similar price or a cheaper price paired with similar quality - and vice versa. The bottom line is I would buy whichever product is better. What a crazy concept, huh?
 
marlink said:
yes but the lower quality may also turn people off of these types of firearms as well and we may lose them from shooting sports.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. Invariably by the time a shooter realizes they have a lemon they have tried other shooter's iron and have a hankering for something different.

From reading the threads on the reviews on these rifles I'm not impressed, painted part instead anodized poor accuracy I think $999. is too much maybe $500. would be more reasonable. That does not mean I would even buy one for $500. I remember CQ311(I think that's what they were called) going for around $500. years ago and I wouldn't buy one then.
Click to expand...

So, they're not top notch gear. I don't think anyone said that they were the equivalent of something out of Les Baer or another top flight shop. What guys have been saying, over and over and over, is that cheap rifles and pistols get people started in our sport. Sure, they're not the best piece of equipment out there, but they get bums in seats, or shooters to the line. No one is going to go out and buy an M4gery thinking it is a Stag, but they may decide they want a better rifle, and the Norc goes to another noob to get them hooked on shooting. How is this a bad thing for us as a community? I just bought a Black Special and I don't own a Norc M4. That doesn't mean everyone has $3K to drop on a black gopher whacker. In fact, if that was all we could have, yes, we'd have better quality gear, but there would be less people shooting. While personally I don't want a Norc M4 (or any restricted rifle) I think they serve a purpose that is not inherently evil.

But I would still like to see us support Canadian manufacturing.
Click to expand...

No argument here.
 
marlink said:
Yes I understand but if you don't have a job anymore because all the widget Y puts the widget X out off business on the lower cost of labor and not having to contend with environmental and labor laws. Eventually no one will be able to even afford widget Y.

What it sound like is that people in Canada don't care about keeping or creating job's in this country and are happy buying cheap stuff from outside the country.
Click to expand...

If that is the case it means you worked for a company that could not build better stuff than the Chinese, in which case damn right you should be out of a job...as I said I'm not paying people to build garbage just because they were born north of an imaginary line on the globe.

If a manufacturing company is threatened, they ought to be looking at what they can do that the Chinese can't. If they insist on producing stuff other people can do just as well, but cheaper, they aren't getting my money.
 
misanthropist said:
If that is the case it means you worked for a company that could not build better stuff than the Chinese, in which case damn right you should be out of a job...as I said I'm not paying people to build garbage just because they were born north of an imaginary line on the globe.

If a manufacturing company is threatened, they ought to be looking at what they can do that the Chinese can't. If they insist on producing stuff other people can do just as well, but cheaper, they aren't getting my money.
Click to expand...
your saying that Canadians build inferior products as compared to whats produced in China?
Remember the Avro Arrow and many other aircraft built in Canada and then sold off or simply gotten rid of.

Answer me this do you think China could produce their products cheaper and with better quality if they would manufacture their products with the same strict environmental guide lines and labor laws as in Canada.
And that means paying a worker enough to buy a house car ect.
 
No, I am saying if a company CAN'T build superior products I'm not subsidizing their crappy work.

Think of Arc'teryx...I own a bunch of Arc'teryx gear. Why? Because it is the best, and that's a type of gear where having the best is worth it to me. My simple gore-tex shell cost nearly as much as these ARs. Could I have gotten a cheaper one? Obviously. I didn't because I wanted Arc'teryx.

Arc'teryx is not threatened by chinese companies that make cheap gear, because they are on the cutting edge of technology and technique for making their gear. Nobody makes better stuff, so their position in the market is safe.

If they get to a point where they can't make things better than the chinese, I'll stop buying their stuff. I'm not subsidizing a bunch of workers with my wages to ensure that they can buy a house while making garbage. They will have to stay competitive...obviously they can't compete with cost or scale, so they will have to compete with quality, just like Arc'teryx does. I don't buy it because it's built here, I buy it because it's the best and that's what I want.

And hell no the chinese couldn't compete if they had to pay big money for labour etc...that's why we export labour jobs to them. If Canadian manufacturing is dependent on goodwill and subsidies to survive, it's doomed anyway so there is no point propping it up. If it isn't, then there is no need to worry and this thread is pointless.
 
misanthropist said:
No, I am saying if a company CAN'T build superior products I'm not subsidizing their crappy work.

Think of Arc'teryx...I own a bunch of Arc'teryx gear. Why? Because it is the best, and that's a type of gear where having the best is worth it to me. My simple gore-tex shell cost nearly as much as these ARs. Could I have gotten a cheaper one? Obviously. I didn't because I wanted Arc'teryx.

Arc'teryx is not threatened by chinese companies that make cheap gear, because they are on the cutting edge of technology and technique for making their gear. Nobody makes better stuff, so their position in the market is safe.

If they get to a point where they can't make things better than the chinese, I'll stop buying their stuff. I'm not subsidizing a bunch of workers with my wages to ensure that they can buy a house while making garbage. They will have to stay competitive...obviously they can't compete with cost or scale, so they will have to compete with quality, just like Arc'teryx does. I don't buy it because it's built here, I buy it because it's the best and that's what I want.

And hell no the chinese couldn't compete if they had to pay big money for labour etc...that's why we export labour jobs to them. If Canadian manufacturing is dependent on goodwill and subsidies to survive, it's doomed anyway so there is no point propping it up. If it isn't, then there is no need to worry and this thread is pointless.
Click to expand...

Who's crappy work are we talking about? and how are you subsidizing them if you don't own their products anyway or don't intend to buy the from what you heard from someone.
All I want to see is these product built in Canada and I'm back to AR type rifles and Canadian manufacturer grow that's the point of this thread.
 
Okay, I think I am about at the giving up explaining this point...I am just wondering now if English is your first language? I think there is a communication problem here.

This is the last time I will try to explain this, so here goes:

If a HYPOTHETICAL company cannot build a substantially better product than Norinco, but they have to charge me more in order to pay their employees, then they would be asking me to IN EFFECT subsidize their payroll.

I would not be buying from them BECAUSE I refuse to subsidize non-competitive companies.

If a HYPOTHETICAL company is incapable of staying out in front of chinese manufacturing, THEN THAT HYPOTHETICAL COMPANY is building the wrong product, and they should switch to building something they can make money on.

If that HYPOTHETICAL COMPANY refuses to make high-end stuff because they would rather make entry level gear, FINE. BUT I AM NOT PAYING THEM TO DO IT SO I WILL NOT BUY THEIR STUFF.

I am not posting in this thread any more! But please if your first language is not English do not automatically assume that what I am saying is wrong; it may be that you are missing part of the content of my posts without realizing it.

If English is your first language...well, I'm out of ideas.
 
Hmmm, maybe I was wrong about this being another Mall Ninja type thread.

Three things are obviously missing here.

1. Reading comprehension.

2. An unbroken record. Or a live horse.

3. Understanding an analogy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom