Windham Weaponry Factory Tour

Printable View

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

November 29th, 2012, 09:08 AM
Thunder71

Quote:

Originally Posted by atctimmy

Yes they do! Distinguished zombies will only allow you to shoot them in the head with a Colt!!

Or a Ruger 10/22... the ultimate zombie rifle.
November 29th, 2012, 10:46 AM
atctimmy

I said distinguished zombies. Distinguished, as in high class.
November 29th, 2012, 11:11 AM
munch520

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKM

If somebody want to save a few hundred dollars on a rifle that doesn't have specs that they don't care about, then, why would anybody care? If you're using your rifle for SERIOUS work and want to have the specs and superior crafstmenship, then by all means, spend more money. But for somebody who wants to just shoot their AR on the weekends, and want to save a couple hundred bucks, what's the problem?

I have nothing against cheaper rifles and nothing against more expensive rifles. They're priced accordingly for a reason. People will buy what they want and can afford.

To clarify, there is no elaborate conspiracy among guys that buy spec guns to control others' free will. I could care less what people buy with their money. I care about how my money's spent...and it ends there. Doesn't mean I don't chortle to myself when I see some $2,000 abortion at the range tripping over itself every fifth round.

Problems arise, and guys get butthurt, when phrases like "just as good as.." are used. "As good as.." being subjective, most (for good reason) default to the TDP to compare "good" vs "bad" as the metrics are laid out therein. Someone wants to use some crappy gun as a $1k hole-puncher, fine by me. But don't stand there and give me some "just as good" speech to try and justify your purchase. The specs in the TDP doesn't serve to make anything look cool, they're there to ensure proper weapon function.

As the genesis of the weapon is rooted in military, I consider it a gun that life will be staked on, again no matter my occupation. If one desires just a range toy (no training, no defense, no duty) then any 22 long rifle would fit that bill, with a cheaper up front cost and a cheaper ammo cost.

Should be noted that there are also many that will concede that milspec/TDP is NOT the end-all-be-all. LMT-E extractor, KAC e3 bolt, VLTOR A5, etc. are not in the TDP, yet can be great improvements when added to Colt's basic carbine.
November 29th, 2012, 12:27 PM
whoppo

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding how folks can get so worked up about this.
WW makes a good weapon at a price that's within many budgets and offers a "better than some" fit and finish for that reasonable price.
I've held and shot WW's and have nothing but good things to say about them... I don't own one today, but being a Mainer I feel compelled to buy one if for no other reason than to support the "home team". Are there better AR's out there? of course there are and no matter what you lay your hands on, there will always be something better (or at least the perception of same). Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Toyota, etc... take your pick... buy what you can afford that suits your needs and spend more time enjoying your selection and less time criticizing the choices of others. Same with guns.

When I wanted to buy an off-the-shelf AR, I had no problems grabbing an M&P-15 and I'll almost certainly grab a WW (as stated earlier).
For best-of-breed builds, behold the beauty of the AR platform... interchangable parts! Grab a VLTOR upper, a Noveske barrel, BCM, JPE, etc., etc.- If there's anything "sub-standard" in the mix you'll have only yourself to blame, but wait! you can change it! (either to improve functionality or to impress your friends).

Spend your energy enjoying your choices and lighten up on criticizing the choices of others.

..just sayin'
November 29th, 2012, 02:16 PM
munch520

Windham Weaponry Factory Tour

I missed the part where I criticized others?

Again, everyone can do what they want and it's all good! But there IS an established guideline by which AR15s are measured. I guess there's just a divide between guys who value those metrics and those who don't.
November 29th, 2012, 08:00 PM
RKM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munch520

I missed the part where I criticized others?

Again, everyone can do what they want and it's all good! But there IS an established guideline by which AR15s are measured. I guess there's just a divide between guys who value those metrics and those who don't.

I agree with you completely. Some people don't care about those things because they just want a cool toy. And what's wrong with that? I'm sure you'll agree.... nothing. But there is a big group of people out there who "look down" on people, so to speak, who have lower quality rifles. I see this on the internet a lot. My post was not directed at anybody specific. Just in general what I see. How dare somebody say they think a "lower quality" brand is a good rifle.
November 29th, 2012, 08:40 PM
QKShooter

"MIL-SPEC" pretty much means nothing more than a Marketing Ploy with regard to firearm quality these days.

Do you know why they call Army Mil-Spec toilet paper John Wayne Paper? Because it doesn't take any crap off of anybody.

Dry yourself off with an Army Mil-Spec Towel. - Good luck doing that.

I could really get into a Mil-Spec debate but, I'm not sure that I feel like it.

Often "Mil-Spec." = Lowest Govt. Contract Bidder.

Do you really want an AR made to original Mil-Spec standards when (for example) the Military actually specified the bolt "specs" in 1950 with slightly upgraded specs in 1960 :confused: - or would you rather have a commercially manufactured bolt using modern materials/metallurgy and manufacturing techniques that make it better and stronger & with tighter tolerances than what was originally Mil-Spec but, just is not advertized as Mil-Spec.

And (almost hate to mention it) but, pretty much all of the uppers and lowers all originate from the same few casting houses no matter who is assembling what brand of AR.
November 29th, 2012, 11:51 PM
Gaius

I wasn't going to get into this "love fest" but here are my simple thoughts. I have a WW MPC. I have about 1000 rounds out of it. It goes bang every time. Its accuracy at 100 yards is about as good as my RRA National Match with equivalent ammo. Fit and finish are great. I am a 60 something year old guy. I do not expect to be called up to fight in the desert or in Afghanistan. I probably won't be rolling around in the mud or swamps with this thing either. (Although I'm not sure sure that it would not do just fine.) It does what I bought it to do and does it well. For all you special operators out there, maybe your requirements are different. Good for you. As for me, I am just happy. Sorry if that bothers anyone.
November 30th, 2012, 12:28 AM
Tubby45

Quote:

Originally Posted by QKShooter

And (almost hate to mention it) but, pretty much all of the uppers and lowers all originate from the same few casting houses no matter who is assembling what brand of AR.

It's not the casting that matters, it's what happens to that casting that separates quality from junk. The rollmark on the lower doesn't matter if it's in spec to the blueprint.
November 30th, 2012, 08:58 AM
munch520

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKM

I agree with you completely. Some people don't care about those things because they just want a cool toy. And what's wrong with that? I'm sure you'll agree.... nothing. But there is a big group of people out there who "look down" on people, so to speak, who have lower quality rifles. I see this on the internet a lot. My post was not directed at anybody specific. Just in general what I see. How dare somebody say they think a "lower quality" brand is a good rifle.

OK good - cause I was trying to be nice :wink: I'm only human, but do my best not to judge!

Quote:

Originally Posted by QKShooter

"MIL-SPEC" pretty much means nothing more than a Marketing Ploy with regard to firearm quality these days.

Do you know why they call Army Mil-Spec toilet paper John Wayne Paper? Because it doesn't take any crap off of anybody.

Dry yourself off with an Army Mil-Spec Towel. - Good luck doing that.

I could really get into a Mil-Spec debate but, I'm not sure that I feel like it.

Often "Mil-Spec." = Lowest Govt. Contract Bidder.

Do you really want an AR made to original Mil-Spec standards when (for example) the Military actually specified the bolt "specs" in 1950 with slightly upgraded specs in 1960 :confused: - or would you rather have a commercially manufactured bolt using modern materials/metallurgy and manufacturing techniques that make it better and stronger & with tighter tolerances than what was originally Mil-Spec but, just is not advertized as Mil-Spec.

And (almost hate to mention it) but, pretty much all of the uppers and lowers all originate from the same few casting houses no matter who is assembling what brand of AR.

Agreed - on some fronts. Since we are talking weapons and not asswipe I'll reiterate...that it's a good basis for comparison in this instance (AR15s). I think all would agree, there's some dumb stuff out there from military on this topic...like staggering bolt rings to ensure function.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tubby45

It's not the casting that matters, it's what happens to that casting that separates quality from junk. The rollmark on the lower doesn't matter if it's in spec to the blueprint.

Yeah
November 30th, 2012, 10:26 AM
atctimmy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaius

I wasn't going to get into this "love fest" but here are my simple thoughts. I have a WW MPC. I have about 1000 rounds out of it. It goes bang every time. Its accuracy at 100 yards is about as good as my RRA National Match with equivalent ammo. Fit and finish are great. I am a 60 something year old guy. I do not expect to be called up to fight in the desert or in Afghanistan. I probably won't be rolling around in the mud or swamps with this thing either. (Although I'm not sure sure that it would not do just fine.) It does what I bought it to do and does it well. For all you special operators out there, maybe your requirements are different. Good for you. As for me, I am just happy. Sorry if that bothers anyone.

I think what bothers me is when people over pay for a lesser specced rifle. I want people to get all they can for their dollar.

I bought my M&P 15 for $599 (after a $100 rebate from the factory). It wasn't the sport model either, it was the standard M&P with all the bells. Does it bother me that my M&P isn't up to the TDP? Heck no! At the price I paid I feel like I stole it. What would bother me is if I paid $1100 for it and it wasn't up to spec. Then I'd feel like I got taken.

So, if you got a good deal on your WW then good on you. I think a WW would be a great rifle for most people especially at a price point of around $700. The problem many posters here have is when folks pay a higher price for a lower specced AR.

I just want folks to know that they can get into a PSA around $750 or a BCM at around $1000. At those prices a WW at $850 doesn't look so spiffy anymore. To me, and to many posters in this thread, it's really all about getting the most gun for your hard earned money. It's about informing people that, in many cases, you can get more gun for the same money.
November 30th, 2012, 12:19 PM
Gaius

Quote:

Originally Posted by atctimmy

I think what bothers me is when people over pay for a lesser specced rifle. I want people to get all they can for their dollar.

I bought my M&P 15 for $599 (after a $100 rebate from the factory). It wasn't the sport model either, it was the standard M&P with all the bells. Does it bother me that my M&P isn't up to the TDP? Heck no! At the price I paid I feel like I stole it. What would bother me is if I paid $1100 for it and it wasn't up to spec. Then I'd feel like I got taken.

So, if you got a good deal on your WW then good on you. I think a WW would be a great rifle for most people especially at a price point of around $700. The problem many posters here have is when folks pay a higher price for a lower specced AR.

I just want folks to know that they can get into a PSA around $750 or a BCM at around $1000. At those prices a WW at $850 doesn't look so spiffy anymore. To me, and to many posters in this thread, it's really all about getting the most gun for your hard earned money. It's about informing people that, in many cases, you can get more gun for the same money.

Now this is an argument that I can understand. (Actually in my case, I got a very good price on the rifle and a few extras to boot.)
November 30th, 2012, 01:00 PM
MilitaryArms

Quote:

Originally Posted by atctimmy

I just want folks to know that they can get into a PSA around $750 or a BCM at around $1000. At those prices a WW at $850 doesn't look so spiffy anymore. To me, and to many posters in this thread, it's really all about getting the most gun for your hard earned money. It's about informing people that, in many cases, you can get more gun for the same money.

Tubby45 tells us the forms are awash with quality issues on PSA rifles with regards to the fitment of front handguard retainers.

The claims that one brand is over priced garbage while other brands are wonders of fitment and quality in the same price point never seem to end. The fact is, those of us who own WW rifles know one thing to be true -- they're quality built rifles that perform quite well. All the speculation as to their poor quality and lack of craftsmanship are just that, speculation. I've yet to meet a WW rifle owner who had anything negative to say about their firearm.
November 30th, 2012, 01:05 PM
atctimmy

Quote:

Originally Posted by MilitaryArms

Tubby45 tells us the forms are awash with quality issues on PSA rifles with regards to the fitment of front handguard retainers.

The claims that one brand is over priced garbage while other brands are wonders of fitment and quality in the same price point never seem to end. The fact is, those of us who own WW rifles know one thing to be true -- they're quality built rifles that perform quite well. All the speculation as to their poor quality and lack of craftsmanship are just that, speculation. I've yet to meet a WW rifle owner who had anything negative to say about their firearm.

I have not heard of problems with PSA. Also, I have no problems with WW rifles. I would be happy to own one as long as I felt the price was right.
November 30th, 2012, 03:01 PM
munch520

Quote:

Originally Posted by atctimmy

I think what bothers me is when people over pay for a lesser specced rifle. I want people to get all they can for their dollar.

I bought my M&P 15 for $599 (after a $100 rebate from the factory). It wasn't the sport model either, it was the standard M&P with all the bells. Does it bother me that my M&P isn't up to the TDP? Heck no! At the price I paid I feel like I stole it. What would bother me is if I paid $1100 for it and it wasn't up to spec. Then I'd feel like I got taken.

So, if you got a good deal on your WW then good on you. I think a WW would be a great rifle for most people especially at a price point of around $700. The problem many posters here have is when folks pay a higher price for a lower specced AR.

I just want folks to know that they can get into a PSA around $750 or a BCM at around $1000. At those prices a WW at $850 doesn't look so spiffy anymore. To me, and to many posters in this thread, it's really all about getting the most gun for your hard earned money. It's about informing people that, in many cases, you can get more gun for the same money.

Man that is well said! That's where I'm coming from too. I'm not a brand snob (I've got tons of BCM, Colt, PSA stuff), I guess my 'passion' is trying to help guys to a great return on their investment. Whether it's with the actual carbine, or accessories purchased after the fact.

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page