New M4 contract

[68WJ]

After much talk from Freedom Group/et al about wanting to be a player in the military arms field, it looks like they might have made that step.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gears...carbines-with-..

Good for Remington. Good for our troops? What implications for the civilian market?

[constructor]

After much talk from Freedom Group/et al about wanting to be a player in the military arms field, it looks like they might have made that step.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gears...carbines-with-..

Good for Remington. Good for our troops? What implications for the civilian market?

Interesting. I hope they use 4150 in their barrels and stop using MIM parts for the troops sake.
DPMS builds a lot of rifles, a lot of civilian grade rifles but they have no problem at all selling these lesser grade rifles to govt agencies who put their lives on the line.
Time will tell if Remington/DPMS/Bushmaster can get the quality up to the standards that the mil requires and lets hope they do before the rifles are issued and the troops are the ones that have to figure out they can't withstand heavy use.

[Dude-Sweet]

Is it true that part of Colt's M4 contract states that they get paid hundreds of dollars when the .mil buys other brands of m4's? I thought I read that it was like Colt gets 400$ for every non-Colt upper/rifle the .mil buys.... Or am I just smokin crack again?

[ArtFWTx]

Interesting. I hope they use 4150 in their barrels and stop using MIM parts for the troops sake.DPMS builds a lot of rifles, a lot of civilian grade rifles but they have no problem at all selling these lesser grade rifles to govt agencies who put their lives on the line.Time will tell if Remington/DPMS/Bushmaster can get the quality up to the standards that the mil requires and lets hope they do before the rifles are issues and the troops are the ones that have to figure out they can't withstand heavy use.

What is sad is many do not know what goes into the real govt contracts. They naively assume all brands and models are similar. Sure any brand can have a parts failure. Some brands are known for quality and reliability. Others are known as hobby guns. So now a hobby gun manufacturer has a shot at the show. I hope they are serious about quality to go with their profits.

[346CI]

I hope their QC goes up.

[DWaveman]

What is sad is many do not know what goes into the real govt contracts. They naively assume all brands and models are similar. Sure any brand can have a parts failure. Some brands are known for quality and reliability. Others are known as hobby guns. So now a hobby gun manufacturer has a shot at the show. I hope they are serious about quality to go with their profits.

I seem to remember Bushmaster being vendor to the military. The rifle has been around for 40 years and the government has bought quite a few. Hard for me to believe all parties don't know what they are doing. I guess we'll see. I don't understand why some of you guys are so down on Remington. I thought they were the company that developed, listed with SAMMI, and first offered the 6.8? Who do you know that would of if they hadn't? I don't see them as a competitive threat to any of the sponsers of this forum. Just asking?

[68WJ]

I seem to remember Bushmaster being vendor to the military. The rifle has been around for 40 years and the government has bought quite a few. Hard for me to believe all parties don't know what they are doing. I guess we'll see. I don't understand why some of you guys are so down on Remington. I thought they were the company that developed, listed with SAMMI, and first offered the 6.8? Who do you know that would of if they hadn't? I don't see them as a competitive threat to any of the sponsers of this forum. Just asking?

I saw a pneumatic M16 trainer that was a Bushmaster, but that is all that I know of. As for Remington's role in the 6.8 development, that is a whole
'nuther thread (well, several threads gone by).

[HillbillyStyle]

Wish they were 6.8's they were buying :-)

[ArtFWTx]

I seem to remember Bushmaster being vendor to the military. The rifle has been around for 40 years and the government has bought quite a few. Hard for me to believe all parties don't know what they are doing. I guess we'll see. I don't understand why some of you guys are so down on Remington. I thought they were the company that developed, listed with SAMMI, and first offered the 6.8? Who do you know that would of if they hadn't? I don't see them as a competitive threat to any of the sponsers of this forum. Just asking?

Bushmaster had pentagon foreign sales like to Georgia who then surrendered their M4s to Russia in a brief 5 day war. Some LE depts bought BM ARs. No a actual US MIL that I can recall. Fast forward and Freedom's lay off dept closed the BM plant and laid everyone off. Today's BM is literally just a label. So the experienced people you refer to now work for Wyndham Weaponry in the former BM plant. Wyndham Weaponry by the way told me at the NRA show that 6.8a are planned for reintroduction in the future. I'm happy that an American company is making M4s though. I'm sure Freedom Grp can make nice M4s but the QC must be there.

[dark1]

In Iraq I saw Bush masters and Stags being used by the lower end contractors doing the towers and chow halls on VBC like DEHes Ugandans.