What’s with the .gov fetish

[TurboTrout]

Lots of folks seem impressed if .gov buys it
Many of the buyers don’t shoot
Many of the end users didn’t shoot before signing up

Why do so many care what the army etc uses? How has what seems like a particleboard standard turned to a gold standard?

Seeing I don’t forget my rifle behind a HMMWV and run it over 3 times, or try to dig a hole in sand with it, stir beans with it, etc wouldn’t a better standard for those with a higher IQ be what the NRL, 3gun, etc winners use?

 

[sleeplz]

Peice of history or something; everyone has their thing.

 

[Lowlight]

Ya,

Legacy, they can always say, "But the military, government, used it" ... and you can look it up.

 

[Docsherm]

Lots of folks seem impressed if .gov buys it
Many of the buyers don’t shoot
Many of the end users didn’t shoot before signing up

Why do so many care what the army etc uses? How has what seems like a particleboard standard turned to a gold standard?

Seeing I don’t forget my rifle behind a HMMWV and run it over 3 times, or try to dig a hole in sand with it, stir beans with it, etc wouldn’t a better standard for those with a higher IQ be what the NRL, 3gun, etc winners use?

Mostly because people don't know anything and try to justify their actions.

 

[theLBC]

for me, it was a unicorn type gun (since 2010) since it wasn't sold to civilians.
buying it was a knee jerk reaction when one (of 200) became available.
opened a whole huge can of worms i had no real intention of even cracking.
and yes, i do everything possible to justify it


not that .gov always chooses the "best" option, but at least you can probably be assured it will withstand a decent amount if use/abuse.
i suppose you could also just ask the guys at places like battlefield vegas to get the same sort of real world reliability feedback.
in fact, you can ask them about their scars.

 

[_Windrider_]

I mean the MRAD is a pretty damn good rifle.

 

[TurboTrout]

Peice of history or something; everyone has their thing.

Right

For what folks pay for a CMP non numbers matching 1911 I could get a staccato, but hey some folks are into feet and used underwear, to each their own

 

[Blutroop]

Some guys are poor and have already spent so much time using said platform that they install a ambi selector on the thing since they are left eye dominant just to never use it because they are so ingrained with muscle memory that they forget it’s there.
Army gear is great at setting a bare minimum no thrills standard.
If it’s all you can afford you can have confidence it will do the job.

 

[Matches Malone]

Lots of folks seem impressed if .gov buys it
Many of the buyers don’t shoot
Many of the end users didn’t shoot before signing up

Why do so many care what the army etc uses? How has what seems like a particleboard standard turned to a gold standard?

Seeing I don’t forget my rifle behind a HMMWV and run it over 3 times, or try to dig a hole in sand with it, stir beans with it, etc wouldn’t a better standard for those with a higher IQ be what the NRL, 3gun, etc winners use?

It’s a depends on what we are talking about type thing. If we are comparing my civilian AR to the military m4...my rifles are better.

If we are comparing things like my peltors to some walkers or a eagle industries plate carrier to a condor tactical plate carrier...then there are some minimal standards the military made that exceed random bullshit China gear.

 

[AccuSol-ERN]

.gov envy is for 308 shooters....ha........sorry 7.62x51 sniper weapon system........weenies.

 

[Ledzep]

I don't know... They're kinda cool.

 

[JeffLebowski]

Mil guys...

 

[alfmoonspace]

Depends right? Some systems are vexed to work in harsh conditions. Toyota’s of the gun world. That has to count for something.

 

[308pirate]

peltors

LOL

 

[Matches Malone]

^known troll who’s opinions are of no help or value to a conversation

What? are you bootytickled buddy?

 

[alfmoonspace]

Combat boots to Walmart. It’s a must.

 

[TurboTrout]

I’m a MSA kinda guy, but I do love me some 308

Still rest of it, like KAC vs JP?

 

[ma smith]

There's something to be said about millions of iterations of actual use. Also, certain groups actualy do alot of testing or write specs in a useful way. Beyond this, you can't really generalize since each contract has its own dyamics.

AI has examples of winners (AW) and losers (ASR) to these trials. The AW was never going to come to market a civilian market weapon, certainly not in "arctic warefare" configuration. But by being tested and forced thu military trials, and later proven in service, the weapons earned reputation for being bulletproof.

On the other hand, the ASR system required numberous modifications from the pre-existing market solution (AX platform). Not only did the trials point out flaws in AX platform (grip, butstock, forend, etc), it took until about ten years (a couple days ago) for those modifications to come to market and "evolve" the AX (now AT-X has ASR grip and butstock and a comp trigger pack, etc).

So the regular civilian market did not bring about these changes for 10 years, but the military process did. Other features like th 2014 quick change barrel action were born out of Military demanding certain features (not civillian gunsmiths demanding quick change barrels LOL). Then you had AXMC/ASR multicaliber actions also brough to market later, but that R&D was done for military spec trials.

SImilarly, the USMC original sniper rifles were MODIFIED civilian rem700s, the modifications being conceived and executed by special order (the story was told recently by the kid of the guy that did the work).

Another example is the Mk12 program, this was a SOCOM/SEALs whatever project at a time that civilian sales were banned IIRC. So this development was never going to happen outside of the military (since was illegal/full auto) and within the miliatary even outside of Crane/ SOCOM etc. Big army would never develop the SPR concept, nor the civilain market, but as we see today, the SPR concept is one of the most mainstream/civilian market sucessses (free floating handguard, medium weight accurized barrels, good triggers, etc)...and also presaged the DMR rifles later adopted more broadly (even if/although in larger frames/etc)

Point being that the military market and the civilian market don't equilibriate in the same place. Sometimes one market will bring better/different to market. And some times the reverse is true. People don't "festish" the military stuff accross the board, IMHO, but they certain are wise to look to different markets when the primary market isn't providing what is desired.

 

[GUNNER10]

Generally speaking, the military does have its fair share questionable selections, but I think that for the most part,weapons that were adopted by the military are going to have some level of testing and evaluation and considering the amount of bargain basement stuff out the I don't think that buying something with a mil pedigree is a bad thing. Can one find a better option on than say a M4 or M17/18, absolutely.

While I really think that the colt 6940 is an awesome carbine, I would be willing to pay the premium for a SR15
While I think that that a glock is a better pistol than the P320 at the moment, I picked up a M18 because i like the concept of the trigger module being the serialized portion of the gun. I think that could be a fun little pistol down the road.

 

[CrabsandFootball]

There are very few instutions who can afford to properly vet a weapon system.

Ma smith hit the nail on the head its not all or nothing, its different shades of grey and requires nuance.

At the end of the day critical componets and systems are either proven or they arent.

Bad gov purchaes are due to bad procurement and requirements doccumentation. If its done correctly from the start its hard to end up with a bad product. The DOD gets supplied with what it asks for. Ask for shit you will get shit. Kevin Owens talks about this specific to the old PSR and now ASR contracts. They fucked up and learned from their mistakes.

Vetting is a process and reconizing the difference is apparently to difficult for some.

Understanding the history of the firearm market and industry is critical to understanding firearms and how and why we are here. Half do not have the mental capacity to even understand it if they wanted to. Some of those are posting here.

This is a fantastic example that helps us understand just one platform and how we got to present day. They have no idea who helped develop what.


You want to be knowledgable about firearms? Start reading our history and listening to those who lived it.

 

[UpSideDown]

Depends right? Some systems are vexed to work in harsh conditions. Toyota’s of the gun world. That has to count for something.

I’ll take a Hilux-mounted DShK technical. The Toyota’s of the gun world are fucking awesome.

 

[Matches Malone]

I’ll take a Hilux-mounted DShK technical. The Toyota’s of the gun world are fucking awesome.

The Mexican cartels are using 3rd gen Tacoma’s...does that count?

 

[M8541Reaper]

The Mexican cartels are using 3rd gen Tacoma’s...does that count?

All the ones stolen from AZ and NM
Then you have all of the Hilux trucks stolen in Europe and shipped to the ME and Africa
#TheRealToyotasOfWar

 

[wadebrown]

Bad gov purchaes are due to bad procurement and requirements doccumentation. If its done correctly from the start its hard to end up with a bad product. The DOD gets supplied with what it asks for. Ask for shit you will get shit. Kevin Owens talks about this specific to the old PSR and now ASR contracts. They fucked up and learned from their mistakes.

I spent a while working as a systems engineer for three different companies ranging from small to the largest and found that the requirements for some programs do not start out from scratch. Many times an engineer will look around the documentation library for the program that is closest to the "new" one and start with the requirements for the legacy program. The statement is always made that the requirements will be scrubbed and all of the requirements that don't apply will be purged and then the lacking requirements will be added. Requirements are always added but it is hard to remove requirements, in the word processor world global searc and replace make it very easy to replace all occurrences of program XYZ with XZZ and it makes it look like the systems engineer is working their tails to produce a document 200's of pages in length in less than a month.

I was a lead on a new development program funded by the customer and the lead systems engineer, who had no experience with anything close to the program, sent me the requirements docs very quickly. Earlier I had made it known I had a pet peeve re: taking legacy docs and just editing them. I was not at the same location as the systems engineer so I told him to reserve a conference room for two days next week as I would fly in and he and I would go through the requirements line by line and he would tell me why they were actually required for the system. I show up assuming we would be hashing out the requirements and I found the systems engineer found a different program to work on and was told by his manager (think homeroom teacher) that I was not respectful to him when I asked for him to go through the doc in that fashion. I mentioned that the guy was supposed to be a professional as such he was responsible for any work product that he claimed as his own.

I was pissed because I was away from my home office, and home, and the ass did nt even have the courtesy to say the meeting was off until I showed up at his site. I went through the requirements line by line and pared the document back to 50% of the original. Granted I had extensive experience with systems very similar to the new one. Plus decisions are easier to make when you are sitting at a desk on your own than in a conference room.

Requirements docs are similar to software for office applications everyone wants a "one size fits all" approach. Think about how few features of our word processor most of use yet they are there as someone may use them, leading to bloatware and the $700 hammer.

Just my two cents,
wadde

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Half of the times its the government making specs that really serve no purpose other than to drive cost up.

Its much more efficient to say make me a product that does XYZ and let the contractor come up with an optimal solution than say for example, build me a gun with a 24" barrel but it needs to have a reflex suppressor and a fixed adjustable stock. Oh it also needs to be compatible with these pouches we have sitting in a warehouse since VN war and you need use this material and it needs to also use this shitty scope we bought a bunch of last decade.

Like anything there are good and bad contracting and program officers. Most dont know shit about the industry they purchase for unless they are really specialized. Most times program people in weapons are just officers doing a rotation. So the people writing the requirements generally are not weapons experts and they don't understand the commercial market. Add in corruption, graft and nice post .mil jobs and the results are predictable.

With all that being said, there is atleast a baseline for performance for .mil weapon systems. They will still have to meet the requirements and pass acceptance testing before the contractor gets paid or they get fielded ( unless its a RFI or urgent needs procurement) There is always room for improvement however this misconception that some commercial unproven product is as good as a tested product is silly. Until they are proven you cannot trust them. Doeant mean they cant be proven they just havent and until they are you are rolling the dice on a piece of lifesaving gear.

 

[Docsherm]

Another factor that most people do not understand is that the product the the GOV gets may be completely different then tbe product sold on the CIV market, buy the exact same name.

A great example is the Rock River Arms ARs that the DEA were using in Afghanistan with thier Narco teams. Those guns were great..... and totally different then the productthat RRA sold on the open market.

There are many examples of this out there.

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Right

For what folks pay for a CMP non numbers matching 1911 I could get a staccato, but hey some folks are into feet and used underwear, to each their own

A brand new Honda civic is faster, more reliable and gets better gas millage than a 1969 Shelby Mustang in mint condition.

So the civic is obviously worth more right?

 

[sleeplz]

A brand new Honda civic is faster, more reliable and gets better gas millage than a 1969 Shelby Mustang in mint condition.

So the civic is obviously worth more right?

Your doing comparisons wrong. He has two equally priced guns. You have cars of different cost.

 

[theLBC]

 

[ma smith]

Glock "even when the parts break, it continues to shoot" lmao

 

[UpSideDown]

I’m not watching it, but usually when someone says ‘it still functioned even when it was broken’ talking about a pistol, they’re talking about the extractor. Because it’s true, generally a blowback or short recoil handgun will run with the extractor completely removed. It being a Glock has nothing to do with it.

 

[ma smith]

I’m not watching it, but usually when someone says ‘it still functioned even when it was broken’ talking about a pistol, they’re talking about the extractor. Because it’s true, generally a blowback or short recoil handgun will run with the extractor completely removed. It being a Glock has nothing to do with it.

Go to 9:45 and actually listen to WTF is said abot the system...

 

[UpSideDown]

Go to 9:45 and actually listen to WTF is said abot the system...

Thanks, there was no way I was sitting through more than five seconds of this at random. That's cool.

 

[theLBC]

Thanks, there was no way I was sitting through more than five seconds of this at random. That's cool.

he's talking about the trigger return spring or trigger bar on a g17.

 

[CrabsandFootball]

They shoot one type of ammo, do their own maintance and shoot in the same enviroment. Its a good data point but its a small portion of what it takes to vet a gun or system.

 

[theLBC]

They shoot one type of ammo, do their own maintance and shoot in the same enviroment. Its a good data point but its a small portion of what it takes to vet a gun or system.

true, and i doubt they are using +P+ or hot ammo so if (for example) they have to replace parts on an MP5 every two weeks, i would have those parts if i owned that gun.

 

[ma smith]

IMHO the sheer number of cycles these systems are going thru is the interesting part.

 

[UpSideDown]

Putting 200,000+ rounds through a SCAR 16 is crazy. Putting 200,000+ rounds through anything on only a few barrels is unfathomable.

 

[Dildobaggins]

Lots of folks seem impressed if .gov buys it
Many of the buyers don’t shoot
Many of the end users didn’t shoot before signing up

Why do so many care what the army etc uses? How has what seems like a particleboard standard turned to a gold standard?

Seeing I don’t forget my rifle behind a HMMWV and run it over 3 times, or try to dig a hole in sand with it, stir beans with it, etc wouldn’t a better standard for those with a higher IQ be what the NRL, 3gun, etc winners use?

I just read about 10 articles on governemnt profile barrels, and why they made them. Then they realized the reason they made them to solve the problem they had, was not the actual problem. Not to get political but, That sums up pretty much everything the governemnt does.

 

[acudaowner]

While I cannot own history nor visit the past . I can own a small piece of that history in the form of firearms of that era either the exact one that was used at that particular time in history or one just like it from that exact time period . More than just the link to the military part of it , I love old guns . I will never know what it was like to ride the open range or drive a herd to a market in a dust ridden part of the country or know what its like to fight for the rights we take for granted now a days , again I can own a piece of that history in the form of old guns , To me that's my reason for wanting those guns well that an over active imagination and more hours watching old tv shows than one human should have ever watched , besides them being fun to own and operate who don't like hearing about good old tail attached to a gun or the people who used those items in those days . While a lot to most of the old stories are faded the guns they used are still around and can be purchased .

 

[CrabsandFootball]

true, and i doubt they are using +P+ or hot ammo so if (for example) they have to replace parts on an MP5 every two weeks, i would have those parts if i owned that gun.

Exactly. Nato power handgun ammo is +p.

M885a1 is super high pressure curve and would rattle lessor guns apart, if the feedramps dont get gouged first.

 

[CrabsandFootball]

While I cannot own history nor visit the past . I can own a small piece of that history in the form of firearms of that era either the exact one that was used at that particular time in history or one just like it from that exact time period . More than just the link to the military part of it , I love old guns . I will never know what it was like to ride the open range or drive a herd to a market in a dust ridden part of the country or know what its like to fight for the rights we take for granted now a days , again I can own a piece of that history in the form of old guns , To me that's my reason for wanting those guns well that an over active imagination and more hours watching old tv shows than one human should have ever watched , besides them being fun to own and operate who don't like hearing about good old tail attached to a gun or the people who used those items in those days . While a lot to most of the old stories are faded the guns they used are still around and can be purchased .

This history behind these guns is as interesting as the guns themselves. I have enough ARs to outfit a rifle platoon but still have that itch.

Need to find a m16a1 barrel to finish colt parts kit m16a1.

Need to build out a clone of the m16a2 I carried in Iraq.

Then I am building this bad bitch that have lusted for a long time, ops inc can and all. Gary Gordon clone.

 

[DairyDictator]

There's something to be said about the testing that goes on in order to choose a certain system for service.

It also depends on what you mean by "mil-spec." Do you mean a brand new M4 that meets all the standards? If so, you've probably got a barebones reliable rifle. If you mean the dirty whore in the armory made 20 years ago that has seen multiple barrels, buffer springs, bolts, and about 50k rounds, that fucker probably rattles worse than your first car. Hence all the hatred for the Beretta M92's. New productions are pretty nice, old poorly maintained m92's are just jamtastic.

 

[TurboTrout]

Exactly. Nato power handgun ammo is +p.

M885a1 is super high pressure curve and would rattle lessor guns apart, if the feedramps dont get gouged first.

Ahh the feed ramp thing

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Ahh the feed ramp thing

Ignorance is bliss

M855A1 5.56mm NATO Penetrator Ammo Feed Ramp Issues: Real, Hype or just Overblown?

By Jeff Gurwitch April 22, 2018 M855A1 ammunition has been in use overseas since at least 2011, and has been in widespread service at most U.S. Army bases since 2014. I myself first saw it in 2012 in Afghanistan. Now, when M855A1 first came out, like many others, I heard the stories that due to...

www.defensereview.com

 

[TurboTrout]

Ignorance is bliss

M855A1 5.56mm NATO Penetrator Ammo Feed Ramp Issues: Real, Hype or just Overblown?

By Jeff Gurwitch April 22, 2018 M855A1 ammunition has been in use overseas since at least 2011, and has been in widespread service at most U.S. Army bases since 2014. I myself first saw it in 2012 in Afghanistan. Now, when M855A1 first came out, like many others, I heard the stories that due to...

www.defensereview.com

I’ve read that, it seems to agree, it was based off one set of some random dues photos, and not commonly seen elsewhere

If there is a more scientifically done, or real definitive look into it I’d love to see that.

I don’t shoot really any 556 or 762 A1, but I’d like a real answer on if it would chew up my nice equipment.

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Newer mags have been designed to help aleviate some feed ramp angle issues but the test is based on widespread reports of guns getting shot out fast when they went to a1. Its a real issue.

 

[roostercogburn98]

I like the .mil owned stuff

 

[UpSideDown]

I’ve read that, it seems to agree, it was based off one set of some random dues photos, and not commonly seen elsewhere

If there is a more scientifically done, or real definitive look into it I’d love to see that.

I don’t shoot really any 556 or 762 A1, but I’d like a real answer on if it would chew up my nice equipment.

I don't believe you can legally get 855a1 anyways.

 

[RUTGERS95]

for me, it was a unicorn type gun (since 2010) since it wasn't sold to civilians.
buying it was a knee jerk reaction when one (of 200) became available.
opened a whole huge can of worms i had no real intention of even cracking.
and yes, i do everything possible to justify it


not that .gov always chooses the "best" option, but at least you can probably be assured it will withstand a decent amount if use/abuse.
i suppose you could also just ask the guys at places like battlefield vegas to get the same sort of real world reliability feedback.
in fact, you can ask them about their scars.

ar15.com has a thread on usage at Hendersons and it's a great thread

guess which bolts last the longest?