[]; (function() { var gads = document.createElement('script'); gads.async = true; gads.type = 'text/javascript'; var useSSL = 'https:' == document.location.protocol; gads.src = (useSSL ? 'https:' : 'http:') + '//www.googletagservices.com/tag/js/gpt.js'; var node = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; node.parentNode.insertBefore(gads, node); })(); Glock Talk - View Single Post - What makes a quality rifle?
View Single Post
Old 08-20-2011, 11:21   #17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,019
Originally Posted by Novocaine View Post
About time somebody put milspec in a proper perspective.

I will disagree with this part though:
Not being bound by a milspec can be a blessing. Milspec materials, finishes and processes are hardly state of the art these days. A company can build a rifle superior to anything .gov issues precisely because it doesn’t have to follow “milpsec”. Noveske rifles are a good example of that. The only advantage “milpsec” gives is that once the rifle is accepted by the government you know exactly what you’re getting and what to expect.

Definitions of what is the best for a military or civilian (even SD-oriented) shooter do differ. For example precision becomes more and weight becomes less of an issue for a civilian. A civilian will more willingly accept the increased cost and doesn’t care about sustained fire capability. So in fact a company aimed to build an ideal AR for civilian will have to deviate from milspec.
I do note that there are companies who surpass milspec materials and perhaps build or testing standards which is a very good thing and I agree with your sentiments. However the part that you quote I am referencing companies who build to a lower quality of parts, build and testing standards. Sorry if that was not clear in my post.

Originally Posted by vafish View Post
Not always,

Sometime they are just written so a govt program manager can get a contract in the right congressman district so his program will get funded.

Reember colt has had a sole source contract for the m4. It was not competitively bid or proven to be better then anything.

I'd love to type more but I'm on my phone on a bus to my job where my office window overlooks the pentagon.

And I'm chuckling at the folks who use all the mil spec terms to try and justify there purchases.
While I don't necessarily disagree with how contracts may be won or lost, a consumer using some type of standard in which to judge potential quality of their purchase is not a bad thing either.

Also even though Colt holds the TDP, FN also produces certain weapons in this platform as a part of the gov contract. So there is another company and other vendors profiting from the gov contract.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
surf is offline   Reply With Quote