|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 3, 2012, 08:25 AM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 13, 2011
Location: Carolina
Posts: 3,415
|
M4 Contract Protest Update...
http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gears...icit-new-bids/
Quote:
__________________
Mrgunsngear Youtube Channel |
|
October 3, 2012, 03:27 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 8, 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,925
|
So, the government found a better deal, the old supplier complained and the government caved?
Great.... |
October 3, 2012, 04:00 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
I love Colt's products, but their fleecing of the American public over the past five decades with regards to M16/M4 contracts (not the weapon itself) borders on the criminal.
Just saying. |
October 3, 2012, 04:17 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 20, 2009
Posts: 215
|
Thanks for the update. I'm following the "process" with great interest; Navy vet and have been paying taxes since 1970 & and will probably be payin as long as I live! I'm hopin to see the AR market continue to flood and prices drop; I'm on the verge of buying an entry level to do battle with my AK74 clone, at the range.
|
October 3, 2012, 04:20 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 595
|
The Colt manufacturers are just as bad as their fanboys. As soon as someone says they're going with a different brand the kicking and screaming begins
|
October 3, 2012, 04:42 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,315
|
Just so we are clear, when I carried a 16 in RVN, I did carry a Harrington and Richardson . Colt still grabs me though. I've been getting jacked for AR snobbery since 1985, when someone screwed up and asked me what I preferred. I really don't see a pinch of snuff difference between the milspecs.
However I do own an SP1 and an SP2. |
October 3, 2012, 04:48 PM | #7 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 720
|
Quote:
Frankly I dont see that huge of an issue with going back through the process, because I am sure that the company who has the rights to a design will seek to be paid for the use of those rights if another company underbids their cost. Doesnt matter if its Colt, Remington, or the New Age Widget Company. Edit to add: Just in case others are curious, the royalty is 5%, see source below. Link: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...etition-06942/ Quote:
Last edited by Fishing_Cabin; October 3, 2012 at 05:48 PM. |
||
October 3, 2012, 11:34 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
|
|
October 6, 2012, 05:00 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Location: to close to other houses
Posts: 1,176
|
And our government started caring about that when?
|
October 6, 2012, 06:17 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2002
Posts: 589
|
Remingtom may build an m4 as good as Colt. But Colt has it down. I like to see our troops get the best. With Colt I believe they do.
|
October 6, 2012, 07:18 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 755
|
I am glad to hear about Remington's contracts. I hope they hold them to it. I have no problem with FN, Remington, Sabre Defense, Colt, HK, or any other company that makes them for the government. As long as they are built to spec, competition is a great thing. It is where improvements and innovations spawn from. I have no doubt that Remington will do a great job.
__________________
" The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government...." - Thomas Jefferson |
October 7, 2012, 03:51 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 3, 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,244
|
FALshootist:
Quote:
__________________
"A man can be destroyed but not defeated". Ernest Hemingway Protect our 2nd Amendment Rights -- Join the NRA |
|
October 8, 2012, 07:26 AM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2012
Posts: 1,078
|
It needs to be a fair contest.
Underbidding a contract by "forgetting" royalties, isn't a fair contest. There are a lot of shennanigan that often go on behind the scenes in all of these deals. I don't blame Colt for protesting. If you lost a contract because someone underbid you by say 3% and the contract was awarded by not taking into account the 5% paid to you for the design is not a fair contest. That deal isn't actually mathematically cheaper. Nor is submitting a bid based on modifying the delivery requirements, which is one of the things I suspect may be part of the argument. Remington is saying it isn't fair because now Colt "knows their bidding strategy". When I used to take bids from suppliers for equipment, if a company bid a job to a modified specification and it was acceptable, I gave all companies an opportunity to bid to that modified specification. Otherwise, they were told to bid to the specifications.
__________________
I am no longer participating in gun forums. Good luck. |
October 8, 2012, 10:15 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2008
Posts: 726
|
Yeah... that would have been part of the cost proposal; Remington technically could have been disqualified.
Personally, I hope some others are invited to the table for the recompete as Colt has been gouging the DoD for years. Ideally FN would be my choice as their quality control seems to more consistent than Colt's.
__________________
SailSkiDrive Hk USP 45 Expert, USP 40, USP 9, SIG P226, S&W M&P9, Hk 4, Makarov, Desert Eagle 40, Beretta FS92 Centurion, Kimber TLEII 1911A1, Glock 22, SIG P225, 1943 Rem Rand 1911A1, S&W mod 64, Walther PPQ, SIG P229, Browning BDA 45 (SIG P220), Hk45, SIG P230 |
October 8, 2012, 11:31 AM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
Quote:
I'm a contractor and there are a few other things to consider . If the contract was awarded with out the royalties included in the contract. They would still have to be paid . The taxpayers would most likely get the bill for that aswell . I think this will really hurt Remington now as well . Now that everybody knows what and how much they bid the contract for . They will in essence now be bidding against themselves . Im sure someone will come in at there original bid price but that will include the royalties . Thats what I'd do . Maybe even a little less then that just to get the huge contract . I then would make that up somewhere else down the line . I'm sure there will be some sort of change order for a screw , pin , detent and thats where you make up the differance .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
|
October 8, 2012, 11:55 AM | #16 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 720
|
Quote:
FN, has tried to make unsolicited bids in the past, and has even gone to court over it, but lost. Quote:
With the mishandlings in the past with the M4, the only way to get past them and move forward is to finally make sure this and any other bid process honest and fair. For those who feel that going forward with an unfair bid process (according to the original posted article) is the right thing to do, care to explain why? |
|||
October 8, 2012, 12:41 PM | #17 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
Please correct me if I'm wrong
This is what makes the hole thing unfair Quote:
Quote:
Sounds like a great way to corrupt the hole bidding process to force a redue .Because they can blame it on a giant entity like the army .No one can be held responsible so we just put the hole thing out to bid again . Not sure thats fair either . I geuss in a democracy it really is the only fair way to do move forward . I sure would like to know who leaked this info cus Im sure its comon knowledge that is not OK to do so . Did someone leak it on purpose cus they did not like the outcome or was it just an woopsie . .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . Last edited by Metal god; October 8, 2012 at 12:54 PM. |
||
October 8, 2012, 12:49 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 13, 2011
Location: Carolina
Posts: 3,415
|
Nope, you're correct. I used to go to the FN plant frequently for work and I asked them about the bidding process and they mentioned exactly what you just did.
__________________
Mrgunsngear Youtube Channel |
October 8, 2012, 12:50 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 21, 2007
Posts: 637
|
Sorry but Freedom Group can suck it....
They just gobble up big name companies (Remington, Marlin, Bushmaster etc..) for their "name" then cut corners in QC and production without lowering the price on the product. They are the walmart of firearms companies and I have no sympathy for them. |
February 26, 2013, 12:53 AM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 720
|
Follow up.
Just thought some here would like to know... FN wins the contract. http://kitup.military.com/2013/02/ar...ntract-fn.html Quote:
|
|
March 2, 2013, 01:44 AM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
as much as I did not like how this all went down . I think FN will make a better firearm then Remington .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
March 4, 2013, 02:34 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 1,742
|
I thought the Army already had a high frequency of jams with the AR and that's why they were looking at piston drive. Low Bid isn't always best. Remingotn has had issues keeping up Marling quality. I gotta wonder how well they will fill a government contract?
|
March 4, 2013, 01:27 PM | #23 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 13, 2011
Location: Carolina
Posts: 3,415
|
Quote:
__________________
Mrgunsngear Youtube Channel |
|
March 4, 2013, 02:38 PM | #24 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 7,839
|
Quote:
L Quote:
do I think they can make the same quality M16s as Colt? probably not for the price they are giving but from what I saw on active duty, there was nothing special about the colts we were carrying, if money was no object I think a Seekins Precision, Larue, or other top tier company would be a perfect combat rifle but money is tight and unless the military is willing to give pay cuts to it's fighting men and women(which would undoubtedly cause security problems) they will have to continue to try and find better deals on their weapons.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar. I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin |
||
March 4, 2013, 03:17 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 18, 1999
Location: Nogales, AZ USA
Posts: 4,000
|
Quote:
I understand that it is not intended to be issued to all Marines, but that could be the beginning of a significant change.
__________________
God gave you a soul. Your parents, a body. Your country, a rifle. Keep all of them clean. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|