Australian International Arms M10 B1 Sport rifle
- Thread starter V1
- Start date
- Status
Steve - in your search for AIA, why not contact the Australian High Commission in Ottawa. Their commercial attache must be able to supply you with the information you are seeking.
Given the current gun control system in Australia, a domestic manufacturer must be very well documented.
Given the current gun control system in Australia, a domestic manufacturer must be very well documented.
Last edited:
I have but they respond only by letter. It's such a simple question but oh so hard to get an answer.
I have also written the BATF, 2 government offices in Oz and a couple of businesses in the US. My wife reminded me about liability issues in case of injury or death using one of these. It really shouldn't be that hard to find out company information.
I have also written the BATF, 2 government offices in Oz and a couple of businesses in the US. My wife reminded me about liability issues in case of injury or death using one of these. It really shouldn't be that hard to find out company information.
So, what so fundamental between Norc M15 and "Vietnamese-Australian" M10?
Just curious. I just want more info, same as you guys. Only kinda gave up looking for now.
Note FOUR holes in first series in the report, and five in others? First shot was made with a string attached to the trigger
Just curious. I just want more info, same as you guys. Only kinda gave up looking for now.
Note FOUR holes in first series in the report, and five in others? First shot was made with a string attached to the trigger
Last edited:
Norinco M15?
Generally the manufacturer of new products has product liability arrangements in place. A purchaser has every reason to expect that the product will perform as expected. However, when, let's say, military surplus rifles, are being sold, there is often a proviso that the item is being sold as is, where is, the seller makes no warranty, and it is up to the purchaser to determine whether the product is suitable for his intended purpose. Often the only warranty is that the seller will take the item back if it is not as described. If an individual is selling a Carcano, he may truthfully say, "I fired it, and it shot fine", but he basically has no control over how the rifle was made, maintained, etc.
Generally the manufacturer of new products has product liability arrangements in place. A purchaser has every reason to expect that the product will perform as expected. However, when, let's say, military surplus rifles, are being sold, there is often a proviso that the item is being sold as is, where is, the seller makes no warranty, and it is up to the purchaser to determine whether the product is suitable for his intended purpose. Often the only warranty is that the seller will take the item back if it is not as described. If an individual is selling a Carcano, he may truthfully say, "I fired it, and it shot fine", but he basically has no control over how the rifle was made, maintained, etc.
M14, of course, sorry for typo. That's clear difference for "true" milsurplus, thanks.
But, again, what makes M10 different from M14s (aka M305) made by Norinco?
How much control does the seller of M14s have over manufacturing process, qa, etc. on the factory owned and operated by the govenment of China?
But, again, what makes M10 different from M14s (aka M305) made by Norinco?
How much control does the seller of M14s have over manufacturing process, qa, etc. on the factory owned and operated by the govenment of China?
There have been two importers of Norinco m-14s. One offered no warranty, expressed or implied. The other offers a specific warranty. There is a specific warranty from the distributor relating to the AIA rifles. The manufacturer of the M-14 rifles is Norinco. Norinco's track record is well known; you buy Norinco, you know what to expect. Anyone who has done any research knows that a Norinco M-14 may or may not have: its barrel indexed properly; a back sight that may shift; loose headspace; and it will have a stock made of rather soft wood. The concensus is that even if there are warts, a M-14 is an excellent buy @$399. There is a question about where the AIA rifles are actually being manufactured. That is, where steel is being processed into finished parts and assembled. Where the forged/or cast blank is finished into a receiver. Where the barrels are being made, or where they were made. This has been discussed in depth elsewhere.
Well my point is: Other than fact that Norc is around for quite a while, and AIA products are new to Canada, I see no difference between buying one or another. A mystery with unknown place they are actually manufactured does not count to me. I have no idea where and how my M14s was built. My (*conditional and limited*) trust to Norinco based just on my personal experience and experience of fellow C-G-Nutz only, not on general trust in Chinese gunmakers.
It's little annoying though that sellers (I can't believe they don't know, how did they import these guns then?) don't answer direct questions. Strange. Why hide it?
It's little annoying though that sellers (I can't believe they don't know, how did they import these guns then?) don't answer direct questions. Strange. Why hide it?
Last edited:
Steve said:
Australian International Arms makes these rifles in Australia. Same sort of thing as the civilian company Springfield Armory's M1/M1A rifles being made in the U.S.A.: components may be subcontracted however the rifles are made in the stated country of origin.
Let me make this perfectly crystal clear: these rifles are made IN A-U-S-T-R-A-L-I-A. Land of the kangaroos and the late Steve Irwin. They are marked 'made in Australia' on the receivers: international law prohibits manufacturing a firearm in one country and marking it as made in another country.
We sell these rifles. We've met and consulted extensively with the owners of Australian International Arms. The receivers are marked in accordance with International law. This is first hand knowledge and has nothing to do with
dancingbanana: "I once heard that ...")Steve said:
Good question. Refer to your authorized AIarms dealer or distributor for warranty service and replacement parts. This includes (but is not limited to) us. John Hipwell can also assist in this department.
Steve said:
At this time there is no official U.S. distributor. This may change in future: that's all that can be said at present. Suffice to say there is NOTHING barring these rifles from entering the United States.
Steve said:
Talk to us or feel free to contact John Hipwell. Just because AIA do not have a web page in Australia does not mean we are being in any way secretive about our products.
Hope this helps,
- Peter
Last edited:
No, they are not marked "made in Australia". All mine says is "Australian International Arms, Brisbane, Aus." on the side. Without the "Made in" it's not quite the same, is it?
Of course it also says "Imported by Sabre Defense, Nashville TN" on the other side, so the markings aren't necessarily accurate either.
Given the research I've done, I have no doubt these are manufactured in Viet Nam. And I don't care that they are.
Well Peter, I appreciate the reply.
As a couple of other posters have indicated, not all the rifles are marked as you said. These must have been the ones originally destined for the US but the permit expired.
My Australian friends are a little concerned with the "Made in Australia" statement as well. They tell me that apart from ADI Lithgow, no other manufacturing facility exists. I have asked a friend to swing by the Queen St address and have a look.
They have emailed suggesting that AIA is playing on words - the semantics game. They have said that "Assembled in Oz" is likely more correct. They have likely rented a warehouse and are performling a final assembly there. No layman on either side of the Pacific can understand why they might be doing this (if this is indeed the case). How hard is it to admit that the parts come from Vietnam and the rifles are put together in Oz? It must be the stigma of the word - Vietnam. Unfortunately, I am forced to agree. I will continue to investigate this until everything comes out.
WRT liability issues, let me be more direct. If a receiver blows up in someone's face, who takes responsiblity? Marstar - the importer and distributor? Wolverine? AIA? Who does the injured party (or their estate) contact? It's not simply a matter of busted sights or cracked forestocks that concerns a lot of us. Accidents can happen. They can be the user's fault or a defective product. Again, no one knows what to do.
This next bit is part of almost all of the email traffic sent to my site; a concern that's been expressed by Canadians, Americans and Australians. The owners - Peter and Evan Ham - do not seem to be very good at running their business. They have allowed two American distributors to fall through their fingers. They fouled up. Will they do so with Marstar? They do not seem to understand a customer's right to know what they're buying, from whom they're buying and other details like where the plant is located, contact persons, phone numbers, regular mail or email. I agree. This lack of information has really seemed to rile people up.
Free counsel - take it in the spirit that it is given. Should you wish to sell to the US, be aware that AIA is NOT good with PR nor are they open and above board in their dealings with customers. (Why else would this discussion be going on?) At first, I had to deal with the ASIC (Australian Securities and Investments Commission) because no one would talk with me directly. You may have noticed you get a lot of answering machines and few real people. That's what frustrated Tristar and SDI both.
Americans are suspicious and rightly so. Some were badly burned with warranty issues when Tristar first got the rifles down south. They are not shy to spread the bad word. Tristar made attempts to rectify shortcomings but could not because of a lack of good communication from AIA. Their reaction to the whole situation and the reason why they dropped AIA - "Delivery issues, and inability to work with the supplier. Long periods of no contact at all, and actually un-cooperative." The reaction to AIA and their rifles by Australian shooters is mixed too.
A person who was speaking for the owners told me last night that repair/warranty issues had to be dealt with by the distributor. It wasn't AIA's problem. When the warranty issues start, I sincerely hope that they are merely sights or broken trigger guards. Based on customers reactions in Oz, AIA wasn't any help. In the end, the customer wants it fixed. They remember the name - AIA or Marstar or Rebel Gun Works - in a less than favourable light if things are not made right.
People internationally are surprised with the lack of information. Virtually every email I've received has said that they are the only firearms company that is so secretive. (their words, not mine - but I agree) Why can't they be like Remington, Winchester and the rest? What could I say? They brought up a valid point. The Hams may not be trying to hide anything but that's not the impression they've left with people the past four or five years.
Good luck. I suspect you'll need it.
As a couple of other posters have indicated, not all the rifles are marked as you said. These must have been the ones originally destined for the US but the permit expired.
My Australian friends are a little concerned with the "Made in Australia" statement as well. They tell me that apart from ADI Lithgow, no other manufacturing facility exists. I have asked a friend to swing by the Queen St address and have a look.
They have emailed suggesting that AIA is playing on words - the semantics game. They have said that "Assembled in Oz" is likely more correct. They have likely rented a warehouse and are performling a final assembly there. No layman on either side of the Pacific can understand why they might be doing this (if this is indeed the case). How hard is it to admit that the parts come from Vietnam and the rifles are put together in Oz? It must be the stigma of the word - Vietnam. Unfortunately, I am forced to agree. I will continue to investigate this until everything comes out.
WRT liability issues, let me be more direct. If a receiver blows up in someone's face, who takes responsiblity? Marstar - the importer and distributor? Wolverine? AIA? Who does the injured party (or their estate) contact? It's not simply a matter of busted sights or cracked forestocks that concerns a lot of us. Accidents can happen. They can be the user's fault or a defective product. Again, no one knows what to do.
This next bit is part of almost all of the email traffic sent to my site; a concern that's been expressed by Canadians, Americans and Australians. The owners - Peter and Evan Ham - do not seem to be very good at running their business. They have allowed two American distributors to fall through their fingers. They fouled up. Will they do so with Marstar? They do not seem to understand a customer's right to know what they're buying, from whom they're buying and other details like where the plant is located, contact persons, phone numbers, regular mail or email. I agree. This lack of information has really seemed to rile people up.
Free counsel - take it in the spirit that it is given. Should you wish to sell to the US, be aware that AIA is NOT good with PR nor are they open and above board in their dealings with customers. (Why else would this discussion be going on?) At first, I had to deal with the ASIC (Australian Securities and Investments Commission) because no one would talk with me directly. You may have noticed you get a lot of answering machines and few real people. That's what frustrated Tristar and SDI both.
Americans are suspicious and rightly so. Some were badly burned with warranty issues when Tristar first got the rifles down south. They are not shy to spread the bad word. Tristar made attempts to rectify shortcomings but could not because of a lack of good communication from AIA. Their reaction to the whole situation and the reason why they dropped AIA - "Delivery issues, and inability to work with the supplier. Long periods of no contact at all, and actually un-cooperative." The reaction to AIA and their rifles by Australian shooters is mixed too.
A person who was speaking for the owners told me last night that repair/warranty issues had to be dealt with by the distributor. It wasn't AIA's problem. When the warranty issues start, I sincerely hope that they are merely sights or broken trigger guards. Based on customers reactions in Oz, AIA wasn't any help. In the end, the customer wants it fixed. They remember the name - AIA or Marstar or Rebel Gun Works - in a less than favourable light if things are not made right.
People internationally are surprised with the lack of information. Virtually every email I've received has said that they are the only firearms company that is so secretive. (their words, not mine - but I agree) Why can't they be like Remington, Winchester and the rest? What could I say? They brought up a valid point. The Hams may not be trying to hide anything but that's not the impression they've left with people the past four or five years.
Good luck. I suspect you'll need it.
Forty4Forty
Regular
- Location
- Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Here is what I know. In 1999 I saw the prototypes of these rifles at Lawrence Ordinance Arms, and was lead to believe they were made in Australia, in Lithgow (any 303 collector knows that place). During the same visit I visited the museum at the Lithgow factory, a great one. It has taken them a long time to come to market with the .308 one, it was discussed at the time, which is the one I have always wanted. FYI still sells in AUZ, for AU $ 1050.00 (CAD $ 874.00) excluding the extras Marstar is throwing in. I do agree it takes Marstar forever these days to process and order, oh well patience is a virtue.
Perhaps a real .303 is cheaper, $400.00+ for a good like new one, but as a collector rather beat a new non original, noting some mention of .303 been rebored (aaaah messing up an original) to .308. well Enfield did not even get that right, the only really successful one was the Ishapore 2A, the DCRA target version, the rifle was not considered strong enough for .308, the Indians used different metal, and that is way I assume the AIA M10 is heaver for the higher .308 pressures. .02c
Australian International Arms
Current exporter located in Brisbane, Australia. Australian International Arms works in cooperation with ADI Limited Lithgow, formerly Small Arms Factory, known for its SMLE No. I MKIII and L1A1 rifles.
https://store.bluebookinc.com/download/Category.aspx?product=GUN&id=121
ADI Limited
http://www.adi-limited.com/2-01-010-010-000.html
Perhaps a real .303 is cheaper, $400.00+ for a good like new one, but as a collector rather beat a new non original, noting some mention of .303 been rebored (aaaah messing up an original) to .308. well Enfield did not even get that right, the only really successful one was the Ishapore 2A, the DCRA target version, the rifle was not considered strong enough for .308, the Indians used different metal, and that is way I assume the AIA M10 is heaver for the higher .308 pressures. .02c
Australian International Arms
Current exporter located in Brisbane, Australia. Australian International Arms works in cooperation with ADI Limited Lithgow, formerly Small Arms Factory, known for its SMLE No. I MKIII and L1A1 rifles.
https://store.bluebookinc.com/download/Category.aspx?product=GUN&id=121
ADI Limited
http://www.adi-limited.com/2-01-010-010-000.html
Last edited:
Even if you were sucessful in a judgement suing a 3rd party from another country, there is no provisions to actually make them pay damages.
That said, you only need to be found 1% responsible and you could have to pay the entire claim.....so in this case the importer/distributor would take the fall.
- Status
