This isn't meant for anyone specifically. But a fellow gunner posted that he could not forgive S&W for getting into bed with Heir Klinton. So this got me thinking that maybe we should put it all on the table. Now the S&W thing is about the whole smart gun idea. But S&W was owned by a British company at the time. And now it's owned by a firm in Arizona. But I think that the agreement between S&W and our government is still binding. But do not be so quick to condemn S&W because many gun manufactures got into bed with the antigunners. In the 90's it was with Klinton and in late 1989 it was Bush, Sr.

You will be surprised at who all joined in. So if you are going to be mad at one then you need to be mad at all of them or none of them. Not everyone knew about this agreement... http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/papabill.html

Now it just wasn't the gun manufactures who helped the gun ban. Believe it or not it was the big stocking dealers who helped also. The gun ban didn't just attack certain firearms but also gun dealers. The BATF just made the rules to being a gun dealer more strict. So the big time stocking dealers got rid of the little guys. I remember that Ruger changed the policy that a distributor could only sell Ruger's to stocking dealers. Man I could go on and on.

But the thing I'm trying to say is don't be quick to judge one manufacture over another.

I have a hard time forgiving also. I use to be a dealer.

I'll forgive S&W when they remove the stupid lock. And why did they go to a frame mounted firing pin? It's not as safe as what they had before...I'm surprised the lawyers let them do it.

Tad

Interesting! Now, some of what I am going to say will PO some people......what's new!
Having been in sales and marketing for the gun companies all my life, I feel I can give some realistcs thoughts.
(1) The major gun companies supported the 1968 fireams act.
Reason.....simple, shut down the military surplus (Mausers, etc) so they could pick up the business! Even Bill Ruger!
(2) The overall dollar gun and ammo $ volume is shrinking! Each company is trying the old "If there is no demand, create one".....New products that really don't improve much of anything!
(3) The shooter says they want something, but if the cost is much higher they will not buy it.....example the Winchester Super X with all steel and the new Mod 12's.....too heavy they said even after the same people said they wanted all steel!
(4) and on and on!
The gun and ammo business is a business! They either make money or fold!
The Smith & Wesson fiasco was about the same as when the Cubans (Bangor-Punta) and the Italians (Fiocchi) fell out and Smith & Wesson Ammo company hit the dirt (I was there!).
It's like saying Winchester is closed (dead). The Winchester
name is owned by Olin....It was the failing USRAC that was sold out. They had warehouses full of stuff that would not sell......so they created a demand by saying there would be no more Winchester.....don't bet on it!
Now, what is there to forgive them for?......trying to stay in business during a very trying time? Mistakes were made....didn't someone vote the Clitons in? Boycott a company....really? That's about like cutting your nose of to spite youe face!
What we are seeing is a re-adjustment of the gun and ammo maket. Fat is being pealed off! You can bet on one thing.....if it will sell, they will make it! It is all a matter of potential sales! What will end up will be healthy!....James

I guess I should have explained myself better, I don't forgive S&W, mainly because when I sent in a model 59 for refinishing, it came back with a 10 round Mag when I sent it in with 2 Hi cap Mags. told that my firearm wouldn't function with the Mags I sent in, and that they only had 10 round Mags. It took almost a year getting back my old mags. This was not the British company either.

Lee L.

I guess I should have explained myself better, I don't forgive S&W, mainly because when I sent in a model 59 for refinishing, it came back with a 10 round Mag when I sent it in with 2 Hi cap Mags. told that my firearm wouldn't function with the Mags I sent in, and that they only had 10 round Mags. It took almost a year getting back my old mags. This was not the British company either.

Lee L.


Forgiving them is one thing...buying their products is another. Bear certain compaines no ill will but i will not suport ANY COMPANY that holds views in oppposition to myown. At peace with the freedom to express opinions or agendas other than myown, but asking me to suport them is a little too much.

That goes for dishwashing detergent, fast food, firearms, or what have you.

I agree that politicians have the right to express views 180degrees away from what I belive in... but you should vote for them?

I guess I should have explained myself better, I don't forgive S&W, mainly because when I sent in a model 59 for refinishing, it came back with a 10 round Mag when I sent it in with 2 Hi cap Mags. told that my firearm wouldn't function with the Mags I sent in, and that they only had 10 round Mags. It took almost a year getting back my old mags. This was not the British company either.

Lee L.

I can't blame you for that. I wouldn't forgive them either. But remember the gun ban was still on the books when that happened. I don't agree with the way the law was written but I'm assuming that there was a law against them shipping out high capacity magazines. But on the other hand high capacity mags were going for a good hunk of change back then. But S&W wasn't the only one's to do that.

It's like saying Winchester is closed (dead). The Winchester
name is owned by Olin....It was the failing USRAC that was sold out. They had warehouses full of stuff that would not sell......so they created a demand by saying there would be no more Winchester.....don't bet on it!



James I always like your posts but I don't know about this as I'd love to get my hands on a M70 Supergrade in 270 Win but any distributer or gun shop I call said they can't get them so what is the point of "creating demand" where they are telling us there is no product for that demand?

M1 & All.......There was some good items up there that went fast, such as what you speak of. Most of what was dead sales has been dumped south of the border. FN did not what all that slow standing inventory. I'm sorry you don't agree, but let me point out a fact........if the USRAC product line sold that will, why did they go bust? Yes, they had ongoing labor problems, but that had nothing to do with ground zero sales.
This decline started a long time ago!......and was steady! Remington killed their pump shotguns and Marlin hurt their lever guns. Rossi helped in a small way! That did not leave much.
However, Winchester is not dead! Remeber that Olin owns all the goodies.....Mod 86, Mod 92, Mod 70, etc, etc, The name will just moved to a quality maker! When and where, I don't know?
But, I think there will be some hurt that rushed in and bought the slow moving stuff. Their commemoratives (taking in consideration the defalted dollar) are worth now no more than when they were bought.
Sure, dealers saw a good thing with the "demand"and jumped on it for quick dollars, but how many of these dealers were pushing Winchester brand before the closure? There is little, if any, brand loyalty on the distribution levels today!
All in All.....Things will be better after the smoke clears! This is nothing new to me......just another re-adjustment on the overall shrinking market!.......James C.

I can't blame you for that. I wouldn't forgive them either. But remember the gun ban was still on the books when that happened. I don't agree with the way the law was written but I'm assuming that there was a law against them shipping out high capacity magazines. But on the other hand high capacity mags were going for a good hunk of change back then. But S&W wasn't the only one's to do that.

Mags were mine, they were sent in for refinish, and they were working perfectly with the firearm. Firearm was for duty use, and I had to purchase new mags to replace them for work, at those high prices. Since it was for police duty, they had no reason not to return them. There was no ban for Police officers during the ban.

Lee L.

Will agree with James Gates - don't worry about Winchester coming back. USRAC has another year or two holding the Winchester trademark, then Olin will negotiate with another manufacture to produce their versions of the line.

Was upset with S&W when they sold out to the Klintons and Mass. politicians. Once they were bought by the Scottsdale, Az. group, renounced the previous agreements and began trying to instill some quality in the line of firearms once more, forgave them and encourage folks to support them.

ALL the major firearms manufactures either openly or covertly supported the 1968 GCA and the Klinton AWB programs, to dry the market up of cheap imports and give them market position. Shame on them! Sure wanted OUR support when the anti's were lawsuiting them and wanted Congress to pass the manufacturing protection bill.

I'm just glad we still have a fairly good selection of firearms to choose from and hope the manufacters don't consolidate the way the powder ones are presently doing.

I guess I should just hold out and wait for a Supergrade after that. I see they're starting around $1200 or so on Gunbroker.

Internet gun forums are full of "wanna-be keyboard corporate executives" convinced they know how to run gun companies better than the next guy. Life is too short to be worrying about how to run somebody elses business.

If a gun company sends it's product line into the dumper, so be it, I could care less how they operate. Brand loyality only goes so far, my dollars will go for quality. If they make something that's worse than what's previously made....I'll buy the older item or get it from another source. There is very little new that's offered in firearms that hasn't already been made....and made with better quality.

Rembrandt -

Your post comes dangerously close to our definition of "flamming" fellow members.

Would you care to clarify your statement?

With respect to Winchester, there is always Kimber and Dakota to fill the gap until Olin & USRAC get it figured out. With pre-'64's - and some recent manufactur mod 70's - exceeding current new Kimber prices in some cases, they seem a good substitute.....well, at least until increased demand drives their prices up too.

I have noticed in Shotgun news that there a far fewer military Mauser ads and at quite higher prices than just a few years ago. It puts a damper on the do-it-yourself home gunsmith, at least if you're just looking at end prices.

In regards to the original posting at the gun zone, when you start calling names, it removes all validity from your arguement... as far as blaming a firearm manufacturer, when was the last time Ruger, S&W, USRAC/Winchester went to the polls? They don't... the people vote the officials to office, who make the laws... getting mad at the manufacturers is not the answer at all...

With respect to Winchester, there is always Kimber and Dakota to fill the gap until Olin & USRAC get it figured out. With pre-'64's - and some recent manufactur mod 70's - exceeding current new Kimber prices in some cases, they seem a good substitute.....well, at least until increased demand drives their prices up too.



Shawn you and I think a lot alike sometimes. I was just looking at the Kimber 8400 instead of a supergrade.

Now, friends, the gun and ammo co's are tied to traditional hunting/shooting.......an that can be an emotional subject. Times have changed on the attitudes of the public about hunting and so have the attitudes at the gun and ammo co's!
I worked for them for over 40 years and saw it first hand.
What the general shooter/hunter does not know/understand is the gun and ammo makers have financed the levels of disribution for 75 years.....manufacturer to distributor to dealer to the customer. This in the form of "dating:......meaning stock up now and pay 2% Oct 10th, net Oct 30th......with a certain early money discount per month back to April. Each level was allowed credit, based on how solid they were. As pricing went up, allowable credit did not. All of this put a severe strain on all levels. It was only when the gun and ammo makers had large orders in house, could they borrow money against them for raw materials to build against orders.
When a company went public with stockholders, profits were looked at very close.......if a item slowed down in sales it would be dropped........no matter what it was. So went the olders WW guns! Remington has stayed afloat with their Express line of guns, no matter what the elitist might think of them.
As I have said before, we are in the middle of a re-adjustment in the over all gun-ammo-hunting-shooting game. There have been mistakes made in the past based on the pressure of the times.
The poster that said we are "arm-chair execs" might want to discuss his statement with me and compare backgrounds ........James

Never claimed I could run a firearms manufacturing company, but if one company doesn"t make what I want, I go to one that does.

Lee L.

This is not completely on topic but my 2 cent observation.

Looking in my gun safe, (Need a second one soon) only a single weapon in there cost me more than $600.00. Further inspection and additional retrospect supplies me with these additional observations and musings. Only one weapon has a "foreign" company name. That would be my Model 21 Glock. Paid 300.00 for it the first year it was out. Funny thing is while none are high dollar I sure have gotten a load of good use and memories out of them. They have introduced more than a handful of people to the shooting and hunting sports. I have never worried about them being scratched and I could stay completely focused on the "subject" shooter and ensure safety and accuracy where always their foremost thought. The mfg.s represented are Colt, Marlin, Winchester, Ruger, Browning, and Remington. Revolvers, Semi-auto (pistols,shotguns & rifles) , pumps (shotguns & rifles), levers, pretty much the gamut. All have been provided by companies that have given me what I wanted at that time. I am only one purchaser, but these items have influenced many. There is only two majors not mentioned. Dan Wesson-have not found one that I had the money for at the same time, S&W- Maybe in the near future.

This is an emotional issue for a lot of people and I think that that is a part of the problem. The manufacturers are not looking at things from an emotional perspective. Not unless you count the love of the almighty dollar. The 1968 Gun Control Act and the AWB were supported as previously stated, either openly or covertly by US manufacturers because they helped them take and maintain more market share and thus more of the money in the market. Of course they wanted our support against the lawsuits because they know that more voices is better than just a handful screaming for help. Every move they have made has been to protect their bottom line. They say that they are our friends as long as we keep buying new guns from them/giving them money.
Just remember, it's not personal, it's business.

We do not have to support manufacturers, distributors, or businesses that we disagree with. I strongly believe in free and fair trade. Right now with the short-sightedness of most investors and the focus on the short term, the focus is not so much on offering what the customer wants but on what will make the stock holder the best return. On that line, it is usually the end consumer who suffers because cost savings measures may not be in their best interest. (remember Winchester in '64?)

In the end, it may come down to buying from small family owned firearm maufacturers who don't answer to a board of directors and shareholders. People who listen and understand because they have been there in the field and not sitting the whole time in some MBA classes. The hard part with this is that usually these people can't compete for price with the big manufacturers so many of us are stopped by the high cost. I can not say that the smaller maker's work is not worth it, but it does price many right out of their market and back into the market of the big companies. A lot of us find ourselves caught between a rock and a hard place.

I guess this is why I don't think of it as needing to forgive the manufacturers. Understanding them and their motives and then not forgetting their actions is more important to me.

Shawn you and I think a lot alike sometimes. I was just looking at the Kimber 8400 instead of a supergrade.

Better get one while you can!
;)

I've always admired the Kimbers for their nice walnut and sleek lines. They don't look quite as "rugged" as the mod 70, but I don't think rifles get treated as ruggedly as they used to, unless you're one to roll horses or 4-wheelers regularly.

Of the schemes I've heard so far, a S&W deal sounds the best. I wouldn't hold the coerced Clinton deal against them if they made it work supplying us with mod 70's again.