Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Member |
Exactly. --------------------------------------------- "AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald | |||
|
Sigforum K9 handler |
People will keep pounding out hate on the internet. SIG will just keep winning contracts. People will keep pounding out hate on the internet. I guess this cycle continues in a society that has way more keystrokes than it does actual rounds down range and experience. JSOC is pretty good at what it does, so I'll leave it to them to know what works and what they need for their needs. JSOC is not the big army. | |||
|
| Green grass and high tides  |
And mine does. I do not want my fighting force using something made by a communist country who represents everything we stand against, supposedly. Old school I know. Low quality and made in china is not a perception, but a reality. Simple fact. Sorry if you feel offended about my comment. If you read it carefully you may conclude you are the one making the assumption. And if on all the firearms you own you do not have one made in the prc you definitely would be in the minority. And that would be a good thing in my book.This message has been edited. Last edited by: old rugged cross, "Practice like you want to play in the game" | |||
|
| Administrator |
ORC, I didn't say anything about foreign fighting forces, you brought that into this thread. That was your assumption that I somehow need to be set straight about what "made in China" means. I've also interviewed numerous engineers and executive officers in firearms optics manufacturers. Schott makes quality glass. There is a Schott glass factory in Zhejiang, PRC: https://www.schott.com/english...ess.html?NID=com5363 Simple fact. If you can't accept that quality glass can come out of China then that's fine. But keep your insults off this board. Also, it doesn't matter one single iota that you think you don't have something stamped "made from China." For all you know, your top-shelf Leupold optic that is stamped "Beaverton Oregon" incorporates glass produced in Zhejiang. You'd never know it, because optical manufacturers don't care about the national origin of the glass, they just care that it's up to spec. If they can save time or money having it shipped from China rather than the Czech Republic, that is what they are going to do, with or without your permission. And if you are concerned about the Chinese potentially being able to build quality optics equivalent to what our guys have, the very fact that there is a Schott factory in China means they have the same capabilities as any other similarly spec'd Schott factory around the world. You don't want the Chinese to have quality glass making capability? Your unsubstantiated opinions aside, it's too late, they already do. If you really feared the Chinese, you'd respect what they're capable of and plan for it. Back to the topic at hand: I'm glad to see SIG win the optics contract. When Ron Cohen talked to us about a total systems package, optics was definitely in his vision. There is no reason why SIG should not attempt to compete for a slice of the military pie, especially considering how big SIG actually is. Just because their low-end consumer-grade electro-optics are made in China does not mean their high-end optics are unreliable. If anything, the drivers and innovation that make their submissions gov't-issue-worthy will be integrated into consumer-level products. This ultimately benefits the consumer. | |||
|
| Member |
Exeter brought the hatred upon themself. It was earned and there are plenty of people out there who are once bitten, twice shy. I truly hope our war fighters are getting good kit. The quality, capability, and durability will be known soon enough. --------------------------------------------- "AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald | |||
|
| Administrator |
Both true. Ron Cohen actually acknowledged that the really low end "SIG-Tac" stuff was a mistake, which is why he killed the line. He also acknowledged that the damage was done. Gun owners have long memories, but once the mistake is made, a manufacturer only has three options: 1) keep making the same mistake, 2) acknowledge the mistake and reform; 3) go out of business. 1) and 3) weren't options for SIG, so here we are... | |||
|
| Sigforum K9 handler |
So, what manufacturer do you go with? If you are intellectually honest, there are no clean players that haven't been "once bitten, twice shy" by virtually every manufacturer out there. Either that, or you haven't been in the industry, or you have way more key strokes complaining about guns than you actually do shooting them. No one is clean in this industry. Pick one. I'll tell you how they fucked over their customers, ignored known issues, blamed known issues on their customers, covered up serious safety issues, some have made anti-gun statements, their shareholders sold out the Second Amendment, etc. If you have been around the industry for more than 10 minutes, you know this to be true as well. No one is clean. And that is why I really don't get anyone who "HATES" a gun company for the reasons you state. Makes no sense to me. The haters continue, SIG continues to win contracts. I know this leads to the bleeding of the eyes for many who hate SIG, but it is true and not going to stop any time soon. SIG is not perfect by any means. They have their faults. But, I at least see them trying. | |||
|
| Member |
I truly hope Exeter has righted the ship. I’m admittedly still pissed at what they did with the 556 and overall cheapening of the SIG name. But I don’t want Exeter to fail, I want to see them make high quality products and succeed. --------------------------------------------- "AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald | |||
|
| Member |
SigSauer USA, like no manufacturer in recent history embraced a Walmart type mentality that values quantity over quality. It was under Cohen’s leadership and seemingly done to cut costs and boost profit. At the expense of quality. This is fact. Others have had issues, namely Colt and S&W, but not to the level of Exeter’s not too distant example. For all their F ups, Colt 69xx line of ARs have typically remained high quality where it’s important - function and adherence to the TDP. Now their handguns are a different story, but they seem to have corrected most of their mistakes. They did engage in some Exeter-level fucactery with the whole Colt competition and expanse line, but unlike Exeter the cheapening did not find its way into other products. S&W, I don’t really follow other than peripherally, because they don’t make items that interest me. I have a few of their wheelguns that I keep for sentimental reasons. What do I buy and shoot? Swiss SIG 55x rifles, German SigSauer handguns, Steyr AUG, FN SCAR, KAC, LMT, Colt (69xx rifles), HK roller delays and pistols, S&B, Nightforce, Aimpoint, B&T, Geissele to name a few. CZ seems to be doing a whole lot right of late, I will likely own a Bren2 and a p07. I’ve been into shooting and collecting for close to 30 years, very seriously so for the last 20 years, during which time I have always focused on modern military firearms, transferable machineguns, SBRs, and suppressors. I have been collecting and shooting the Swiss SIG 550 series for the last 18 years. I shoot a good amount; more than many, less than some. Up until about 4 months ago, I was shooting around 1,000 rounds per month. Work has been in the way of that of late. I’m no neophyte, nor am I a keyboard warrior. --------------------------------------------- "AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald | |||
|
| Administrator |
I'm going to split a hair here, because I don't know specifically what you are referring to with regard to "what they did with the 556." It could end up that I either agree with you or disagree depending on which aspect of the 556 we are talking about. As far as "Why didn't SIG just clone the 55X series here in the US?" i.e. why did we get the "fishgill abomination?" The answer to that is that SAN SWISS would not give SIG (USA) the specs to build the rifle because, at least according to SIG USA's engineers, SAN SWISS did not trust SIG USA to make the rifles correctly. So SIG had to reverse engineer the rifles. While doing so, they made a marketing decision to make them compatible with AR mags, and a few other changes. I don't have a problem with that: they saw a way to make money and jumped at it. There was never going to be a SAN SWISS officially endorsed 55X gun "just one that was made in the United States." The early execution of the 556 was lacking and I don't think anyone would argue that. With regard to cancelling the 556 line, I would have liked to see the 551A1 continue, but to be honest, that doesn't mean a whole lot because I'm not someone would buy enough to keep the line open. With regard to the 556xi--it was a good rifle, but sometimes even a good end isn't enough to keep the evolutionary line open. The 516 was always going to sell more copies than the XI, so why throw production and money after a product that's going to make you less money (I don't know for sure, but I suspect, due to its proprietary nature, that the XI was probably more expensive to produce than a 516 anyways). The apparent end of the 55X series is a result of global standardization. If you want to really go at it, you could ask HK the same question. Why not make a better G36, or update the HK33, instead of selling out to the AR crowd by making the 416?
Not sure what you mean by this. I don't think SIG-Tac and the early 556 screw ups were related. The 556 was certainly not the result of a conscious decision to apply the failures of the SIG-Tac line to a brand new rifle-product. | |||
|
| Sigforum K9 handler |
You seem to have a selective memory, and it is likely driving your idea that it is ok to hate SIG because in your mind, they committed offenses that no other have committed. Let's take Colt for instance, since you seem to be fond of their record. They completely ignored the drop safety issues with the Double Eagle line of pistols. They had no passive means by which to fix it, so they ignored it and continued to market it to LE. Then there was the MASSIVE QC issues with the All American 2000. What was Colt's response? Yeah, they ignored it and blamed it on the shooter problems. And it wasn't just a few guns, it was all of them. Fail to feed, fail to eject, you name it. Go further back and the shitted out Pythons and Diamondbacks with faulty lock up. Junk Walmart line stuff you say? Oh yeah, Colt's cheap holster line was AWESOME. Uncle Mike's could have learned something. That's not enough? Well, what about the AWESOME Colt branded line of ammo that the QC is so horrible that no one really wants to buy what's left. Sprinkle in various LE 6920/6940 QC issues over the years, and I believe you have yourself the trifecta of junk if you want to bitch. But, as I said, all companies, no matter how high you hold regard of them......has the same story. And that is all off of the top of my head, with no thought or research. To me, Colt is 20 times worse than SIG because AT LEAST SIG tried to stay active in the civilian market. Colt had a fuck you attitude with the civilian market. Well, except the times they were going bankrupt (reorganization) and needed the cash. I also remember trying to purchase 6920's back in the 90s for an agency, and the crap customer service they had then. We eventually went with Rock River. FN? Ask anyone in SOCOM how much a dog the SCAR is. The guy that ran the SCAR program inside of NSW hates them. Poor quality control, a lot of breakage, FN having a shit attitude with customer service. The reason that the Light never caught on had little to do with it duplicated the current roles of the M4, it was because of breakage and a shit attitude on the part of FN USA. They over promised, and under produced. And on and on. No one is immune, and if you think that they are, you have really selective memories, or you just did not know. LDD brought up the fabled HK 416. The gun that killed Bin Laden. You know what version they are on with it? 9. That's right. The ninth variation of the 416, and few parts are the same as the first version. (Hell, I suppose we're lucky because the USP has NO PARTS that will fit the original line of pistols as it ALL has been redesigned). Do we hear people pissing and moaning about HK using the consumers as beta testers? No, because unless you have been to their armorers school, or spend any time around the 416 sales staff, you wouldn't know. The early 416 was plagued with small parts breakage. What did HK do? They did product upgrades quietly, and ignored the rumors that circulated around the net, barracks, and squad room. No one is immune. | |||
|
LIBERTATEM DEFENDIMUS |
That doesn’t square with their reputation by people like Battlefield Las Vegas who have stated that SCARs are some of the most durable and longest lasting firearms in their inventory. Nor does it follow the feedback from a lot of SCAR owners in the US. To compare SIG’s recent reputation to the likes of HK, Steyr & FN is almost laughable. | |||
|
| Member |
I completely agree re: Colt in the late 80s early 90s with their pistols, F you attitude toward civilians, and failed ancillary products. There was also the idiocy of the large front takedown pin of the SP1 and SP2 and the stupid steel autosear block of the blue label guns. QC issues of the 6920 and 6940? Details on that please. If you mean cosmetic “fit and finish” issues, I will just agree to disagree. I’ve been buying 6920s, 6933s, and 694x variants since the sunset of the 94 ban in ‘04 and have actively followed them since the late 90s. FN - the end product of the SCAR is good. Great in some respects, not great in others. Certainly needing of a product improvement update, which would be about the 11th revision. But the update IMO really relates to some user interface nuances. The products adopted by SOCOM and released to the commercial market have had very few issues, the most notable being the 17s bolt recall which was handled very well. They are rifles with very very few post-production issues. As to why the SCAR-L never caught on with SOCOM, there is much much more to the story than is fit to share publicly. HK 416 had some issues. Post-production issues were quite few. I followed the development of the 416 closely, have friends who use/used it at work, and one of my business partners is a true expert on the development of the 416. I’m well aware of it’s history. Jim Schatz (RIP) was also publicly forthcoming with the issues that cropped up in the 416 both in development and post production. No manufacturer is perfect, far from it. I’m not making excuses for other manufacturers nor do I believe they are immune from issues. That others have had issues in the past does not excuse Exeter’s more recent pitfalls. Nor does it excuse the Walmartization of SigSauer USA. I genuinely want Exeter to make quality firearms and other accessories that meet the needs of mil, LE, and civilian shooters and to thrive. If their recently adopted items prove to get the job done and are durable, great. As I said previously, we shall see. --------------------------------------------- "AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald | |||
|
| Member |
I agree on all points re: the 556 and 55x. Exeter just did a very poor job on its execution. And the 55x is a legacy rifle, in the same category as the FNC, hk93, and others. It’s not a real contender in the mil/LE realm in its current form. It’s expensive to manufacturer. It’s less flexible with regard to accessories and ergonomics than Stoner based rifles (to include the mcx) or newer generation rifles like the SCAR, Bren, etc. I wish Exeter had simply imported Swiss 550, 551, and 553 in the same way FN and Arsenal were doing. My comment re: cheapening the brand is aimed at the sig-tac optics, QC/QA issues in various firearms most notably the 556 series and some pistols, and the absolutely silly “special edition” pistol models. --------------------------------------------- "AND YEA THOUGH THE HINDUS SPEAK OF KARMA, I IMPLORE YOU...GIVE HER A BREAK, LORD". - Clark W. Griswald | |||
|
The guy behind the guy |
My take on the current Sig brand: They have the best R&D team in firearms. They come up with awesome ideas. For example, the simple level line on the scope body and having the torque spec written right on the mount. That's simple but great stuff. The 365 is an awesome idea, so is the 320. I haven't seen a Sig rifle that I didn't like and have a great feature set. They simply make the coolest stuff imo. I think they execute their ideas to an average level and then charge a premium price for them. Anyone who shot Sigs in the "To Hell and Back" days can visually see where they cheapened up the classic Sig line, but still charge a premium price. Is MIM just fine? I don't know, I don't care, I avoid those arguments as I frankly don't know enough about metallurgy to know. But, I do know that I don't expect to see cheap parts on a premium priced guns even if those cheap parts work just fine and will never fail. MIM, plastic guide rods...these types of moves were things that stepped Sig down a notch in many of our minds. A basic 226 is $700, yet a basic 92 is $500. Why is that? They've both stepped back the quality they once had, but Sig is still charging $700? With mim and plastic? Nah. The Sig Tac line was pure garbage and has already been addressed. That still hangs in my mind to be honest. Then we have the "tac-ops" and the "emperor scorpion" and all these other stupid ass names with stupid ass colors. The Legion with their whole "warrior lifestyle" bullshit was laughable. For me, it's not that I hate Sig, it's just that I can't take them seriously. They do some insanely cheap and cheesy shit, but want me to think they're serious and quality. I'm sorry, but if you want to be serious and supply jsoc, I can't take you seriously with with a "nightmare fastback" in your lineup and a cheap ass reddot. I'd love to see their designs executed by someone I respected. I would love whoever comes up with these cheesy ass names to be locked in a closet. I'd love to see them stop trying to rip me off on old designs, or at least deliver me top materials and hold the high price (actually I'd prefer that). I really like the Legion 229. That undercut trigger guard is fantastic! But when I looked at one a while back and saw the "challenge coin" in the box, I literally laughed and got my senses about me. It was a close call, lol, phew! So, is this scope any good? Maybe, I'm sure they're capable of designing a good scope. I really like the feature set on it. Even if it's proven in the field, will I buy one? Nope. I just can't bring myself to put anything with "Sig Sauer" plastered on it on my rifle. I see the Sig name and I instantly think Emperor Fastback Scorpion Superfly Mega Awesome TacOps Ninja! It's just associated with childish shit in my head. | |||
|
| Member |
A little over a year ago I was looking at LPV scopes -- primarily for an SBR, but also for a 16" carbine. Sig's Tango 1-6x was definitely one of my options. On the positive side its glass was really clear, it seemed bright in low light, the turrets and zoom felt solid, and the overall fit & finish was great. On the down side, I really do not like their MOA-based reticle. Whoever designed it doesn't understand holding for windage and elevation. There are no values listed on the subtentions, and it would be easy to get lost in value used for a given subtention. I just checked Sig's website and saw that the MOA reticle remains the same. I'm not a fan of pre-determined ballistics in a reticle, therefore the horsehoe and the 3-gun reticles are out for me, too. If Sig offered my preferred style of reticle -- think Nightforce MOAR -- then I probably would own a Sig Tango right now. I hope Sig's scopes work well for our troops. | |||
|
| Banned |
To take a pause for the cause; Does it mean the Optics like the Romeo 4 and Romeo 6 are garbage because they are made in China.?? | |||
|
| Member |
Tango 6 is made in Japan. Tango 4 is garbage. | |||
|
| Member |
This seems to be the modus operandi of most American gunmakers these days. It's like they are all borrowing from the same playbook: 1) Take a respected brand name; 2) Drive up profit margins by cutting costs to the absolute minimum; 3) Reduce quality control or eliminate it altogether to lower costs; 4) Hope that the average Joe consumer won't notice that you are selling him crap; 5) If the customer complaints that his gun is jamming, tell him that it's because he didn't do proper break-in or because he is using cheap ammo or because he is limp writing or because his d!ck is too small...; 6) Figure that 9 out of 10 customers will just live with an inferior product and not bother getting it fixed; also figure that it's much cheaper to deal with occasional warranty claims then to build products that don't require warranty service in the first place; 7) Profit (in the short tun); 8) Declare bankruptcy (in the long run). | |||
|
| We gonna get some oojima in this house!  |
The 4S seems pretty good. ----------------------------------------------------------- TCB all the time... | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024