This question is inspired more by silencers than rifles. It's relevant in the rifle context as well though, and I figured more folks would reply in the rifle forum.

In recent years I have learned that things like silencers and infrared aiming lasers that are purchased by the government can't be sold commercially for any less than the government pays for them. This has prompted a curiosity as to why the government seems to overpay for this stuff.

This new outlook has served to highlight an apparent contradiction to previous ideas held about the government purchase process. I was always under the impression that the opposite is true of rifles. It seemed, to me, that the government pays significantly less for a rifle, than the same rifle goes for on the commercial side.

So, why does the government pay so much for accessories, but so little for rifles? I think this is perhaps a recent phenomenon. Maybe the industry realized they can upcharge the hell out of the man for certain things, and the price is no different for us because they wouldn't sell any commercially if it were higher.

Silencers like the Surefire SOCOM and HUXWRX Flow 556K are examples of federally-purchased silencers. They are some of the most expensive commercially-available silencers, at about $1,200 without a muzzle device included. They are disproportionately expensive, when compared to their commercial competition. It is theorized that these silencers wouldn't be so expensive if they were not subject to the price basement dictated by the federal purchase price.

I guess the short version is, why is the pricing structure seemingly backwards, when compared to traditional thought on the government purchase of things like rifles?

Much like the old stories of $600 toilet seats, sometimes the .gov has a very specific set of specifications or high demands for a product, and the requisite R&D to get those specs costs a fair amount, and that is rolled into the unit cost.
Back in 2007, before I deployed to Afghanistan my unit got new M4’s direct from colt for issue. If I recall correctly, the per unit cost ran about $850, which would be pretty close to open market cost at the time.

I see. I guess I have been under the wrong impression, concerning rifle costs.

The R&D cost makes sense. Apparently that never goes away. The Surefire SOCOM silencers are pretty long in the tooth now, and they're still as spendy as ever. You'd think there'd come a point when the price is adjusted; why wouldn't the government build that into the contract?

When I retired, the govt cost of an M4 was $450. The price is low due to the number of carbines the .gov orders. We(the USCG) wasn’t issuing each carbine with lasers and lights etc.so I can’t speak to the costs of those items

quote:

When I retired, the govt cost of an M4 was $450

That is more in line with what I would have guessed.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
When I retired, the govt cost of an M4 was $450. The price is low due to the number of carbines the .gov orders. We(the USCG) wasn’t issuing each carbine with lasers and lights etc.so I can’t speak to the costs of those items

Did you pull that number from the property book or another source?

Gov costs are rarely just the item itself. Normally includes other stuff as a “system” like spares, longer warranty coverage etc. unit cost is therefore not apples to apples with commercial stuff

There are a million ways that the government can buy stuff. And there are an equally large numbers of rules for each method and type of contract. It is not a principle that commercial pricing and a given contract pricing are related.The government can and does often buy COTS (commercial off the shelf) which means its just the commercial price and terms. Individual contracts will have terms and conditions that are far different than commercial sales and the price has to be adjusted for that (up or down). There is simply no direct or understandable relationship between the two prices. You have to look at the contracting vehicle, its terms, its volumes, the IP, the risk allocation, etc. etc. etc.

Is there such a thing as "can't be sold commercially for less than uncle Sam pays", in the context of a contract item like the Surefire SOCOM silencer?

You can find anything in a government contract. And terms like if "if you sell the item to another entity for less than you are selling it to us under substantially the same volumes, terms and conditions then we get the lower price" are certainly in some contracts. To answer your question of how a specific item is bought and the terms of that contract you have to know the specifics.

Here's a surefire award for SOCOM :
"Surefire LLC, Fountain Valley, California, is being awarded a $10,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for production of muzzle brakes, sound suppressors, and blank firing adapters. Work will be performed in Fountain Valley, California, and is expected to be completed by September 2022. Fiscal 2017 working capital funding in the amount of $122,745 will be obligated at time of award and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1) only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division, Crane, Indiana, is the contracting activity (N00164-17-D-JN45)."

You can probably FOIA (may not work due to customer) the contract but this one will not have a commercial price restriction.

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
When I retired, the govt cost of an M4 was $450. The price is low due to the number of carbines the .gov orders. We(the USCG) wasn’t issuing each carbine with lasers and lights etc.so I can’t speak to the costs of those items

Did you pull that number from the property book or another source?

There’s an annual form called the R865-it shows the weapons that SARF (navy Small Arms Repair Facility)thinks your unit has and you have to do a verification and provide 1149s showing if it was transfered to another unit. The weapons are listed by NSN, description and individual cost.

The R865 also had the aimpoint sight that was on the MK58 system (25mm gun) bc they are serialized, and when our new shotguns (14”) came with a trijicon reflex sight, those were on the list too. (Imagine removing every sight in the armory to verify the SN, then having to resight them)

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
When I retired, the govt cost of an M4 was $450. The price is low due to the number of carbines the .gov orders. We(the USCG) wasn’t issuing each carbine with lasers and lights etc.so I can’t speak to the costs of those items

Did you pull that number from the property book or another source?

There’s an annual form called the R865-it shows the weapons that SARF (navy Small Arms Repair Facility)thinks your unit has and you have to do a verification and provide 1149s showing if it was transfered to another unit. The weapons are listed by NSN, description and individual cost.

The R865 also had the aimpoint sight that was on the MK58 system (25mm gun) bc they are serialized, and when our new shotguns (14”) came with a trijicon reflex sight, those were on the list too. (Imagine removing every sight in the armory to verify the SN, then having to resight them)

In the Army, we have the Unit Hand Receipt. It shows the replacement cost of the piece of equipment. I've noticed that some of the numbers for some weapons are a little low. Unless we really were buying M9s for under $200.

We have to do 10 percent inventory every month, plus a monthly Sensitive Item Inventory, plus a barrel count every time the Arms room is opened/closed. Inventorying the Arms Room can be a major pain and some units have gone as far as racking guns in serial number order. Thank fully we I'm not tracking that we have any optic that cannot be inventoried on the weapon. That has to suck to pull every optic IOT inventory them. Do you issue and qual the weapon to individuals or do you mechanically zero them and store them in a locker?

We had to do Daily counts of weapons, verify which were signed out and report that to the CO daily-along with temps of the magazines. Ashore or aboard ship. “Sir, all weapons present and accounted for, temps have been completed and entered into the ships log.” Kinda thing.

Once a month an officer and the GM had to go thru the R865 inventory and sign the log stating they were all accounted for. The XO or CO were supposed to see the logs w/e they wanted.(I always had the weapon Officer initial the log weekly-so he was up to date to what we were doing-or behind on)

Then the annual R865 verification with the actual Weapons officer and the gunners mate in charge.

Any time a weapon went out or was received for permanent transfer, a copy of the 1149 or 1348 was forwarded to the CO for his info.

Weapons were very rarely misplaced, but I personally dropped a 1911 over the side and spent 4 hours in the mud at the gangway to find it. I did. I also dropped a radio that was encrypted and it was in 2000 fathoms of sea-so there was no recovery. That was a fiasco.

/drift

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:

Weapons were very rarely misplaced, but I personally dropped a 1911 over the side and spent 4 hours in the mud at the gangway to find it. I did. I also dropped a radio that was encrypted and it was in 2000 fathoms of sea-so there was no recovery. That was a fiasco.

/drift

That sounds like it sucked.

I recall the M16A2 being about $550 at one point, hard to believe the price would have gone down a decade or two later.