even with a restricted AR, home built, with an amalgamation of all top tier components, issues can be had
I've been wondering the same thing... I'm guessing a good number don't get built at all. Some will be hacked beyond recognition. A few might work. Fewer still will work well.
I'm yet to put my money down on one. I might time will tell.
Also why you see guys with horrible groups and unreliable guns at the range quite often.
Going to be an interesting day to see if this brand new, moms basement company can even produce a standard AR15 upper/lower (proprietary parts aside to make it NR) that will even mate up with other standard AR parts, compatibility by brand, actual quality of the receivers, the mystery trigger pack and how that will work with parts X/Y/Z from manufacturers of other components A/B/C etc etc
I'm not about to start dropping thousands of dollars on AR's/Ar parts to strip down just yet before these things are even in the block state on the machining bench.
Lets just say I'm not holding my breath. I want it to succeed. The idea is rock solid.
I'm inclined to believe these comments sum up quite well, the most intelligent thoughts overall in this thread, about concept of the product.
Will be interesting to see the backlash to the manufacturer as failures are found. Even moreso, how these failures will be assessed and attributed. A thou here, and a thou there, can quickly gain a detrimental cumulative effect. Which seems to guarantee a good community bashing of manufacturer.
Something I have not found yet, on this site, is specs. Mlspec and commercial spec, really seem to be just random terms people throw out here to try and sound like they know something.
Two pictures of BCG, and the comments come back - that one good, the other bad. Really, people? A twelve year old can likely spot the bad one, by obvious visible surface finish roughness. But what makes the shiny one good? Being shiny? NO. Being in spec, is good. Meaning I.D. of "x" +/- allowable variance of "y", with surface finish "f" and Rockwell hardness "z".
But you don't get that here. You get things like "change out your gas rings" and "get a new BCG. Not a hint of "measure your I.D., you can lap that out to max. "###". Just open your wallet to the next manufacturer with a shiny thing, and carry on.....
I rebuild old Harleys. I use specs to gain success. I also make every effort to use OEM parts in the motor and tranny, to ensure better odds of success. And every component is meticulously measured, prior to assembly. I can find specs on forums, and OEM manuals, and real, reliable information on parts interchangeability. Aftermarket is a crap shoot, for these from the 60s, unless you want
bolt on shiny things that may or may not work, or last long. If you do not know what you are doing, and the weak points at the time of manufacture, you can successfully destroy what could have been a rebuildable machine. Harleys are also man lego, but you can f them up quite easily, as well. (Can you see a rough parallel, here?)
The closest thing I can find to a spec anywhere in this forum is in reloading, or relating to headspace (by reading the numbers on pics of go/no-go gauges)
So I predict, for the new year, many marginal, and some failed builds, from builders building to "milspec" without
really knowing what that means in relation to component interactions, with subsequent backlash to the manufacturer for their inability to produce a product reliable and "in spec".
Kudos to these manufacturers, taking a leap into a lion's den. I truly wish them the seemingly impossible success.
I said it very early on when I joined this forum (and got shot down heavily) but still can't help but think that this is just the Home Shopping Network for firearms. Built that way by the users and the mods. Only when the users realize this, and demand and share more real information, other than where to purchase the shiny thing on their rifle in the thread post, and the top sticky in each sub-forum is filled with detailed relevant specs, do products like this stand a real chance of Canadian commercial success.
Look for example at the SKS trigger group that showed up recently. Is it ugly? Well, it certainly isn't shiny. More than what it is (as a component) is evidence that someone has studied to a level of understanding, the interaction of individual parts of an assembly to the point of being able to make changes, which address some aspects of the original design. Not a final "for production and sale" piece, the users bares himself here (where constructive criticism could lead to a more refined and desirable consumer product) to take a bulk of bubba comments, mixed with a small spatter of positives, rather than any recognition of the understanding it takes to do a modification, even at that level.
The collective of this forum seems to be settled on easy to buy, lego difficulty install level, shiny things.
Best of luck to MCD, and their retailers, in this venture.
