In terms of government procurement I'd suggest "mil-spec" simply means "just good enough"
I've also heard it translated as "built by the lowest bidder"
So with your statement in mind, I wonder how our very high quality Canadian Colt C7/C8 rifles were not underbid by NEA, Motiuk or even Colt USA when applying your logic to Mil-Spec procurements?
Your thinking doesn't really hold true in this comparison does it.
In fact when Colt Canada (Diemaco) decided to procure the USA Colt rifle rights to build our (Canada's) own DND rifles they made over a 160 changes/improvements to the design; which doesn't exactly sound like taking the easy/cheap way out.
In doing so they were able to create some of if not one of the best Mil-Spec rifles designed for any environment our troops might find themselves in.
What Mil-Spec really means is being able to produce the rifle to the exact standards requested of the purchaser while also being able to maintain the correct production numbers and future maintenance needs for said product... and then whatever Company can accomplish these requirements while remaining the lowest bidder may win the contract.
Although as is our case, Canada wanted to be able to maintain their own source of military supply of small arms.
Cheers D


















































