TargetTalk

Hi folks,

I'l start by saying don't beat me up over this, but as a European i have always wondered why the USA has not produced a match air rifle or .22 small bore rifle at least as good as the Germans and Austrians have?

The USA is the largest [small] arms producer in the world with many different companies using high tech production methods. Surely one of these manufacturers could if they wanted to do just this.

If the Japs put their mind to it they could beat the Germans like they have with their cars, which makes me wonder why have the Germans such a monopoly? Is it all about sales and money?

Peepsight.

Just my 2 cents. Please nobody flame me over these views. But I live out in the country in the US and out here most people have a fair amount of land or at least know someone who does.

Many of these people are avid hunters or enjoy the other shooting sports more, specifically with bigger caliber guns. When I go to our local gun store, the air guns are located with other things that are more in the toy section of the store. When you are ready to buy a "real" gun, then they want to talk to you more! : (

Also, guns are easier to own in the US, I have several pistols and rifles in various calibers in addition to my air guns. And I have the land to shoot any caliber I want or to hunt if I want. But I still prefer air guns! : )

But let me tell you friend, where I live, my love for air guns makes me a real rarity! Most people, sadly consider air guns just toys.

Hopefully that will change. Daisy has done a great job, and now Air Force air guns is attempting to bring to market a 3P air rifle that shows some promise.


John

Hi jlochey

Your take on this was interesting and having been a couple of times to the US i can see your point.

After the first world war, Germany was forbidden under the Versailles treaty to manufacture fire arms. So the cunning Germans started making air rifles [not applicable under the treaty] and set up clubs all over Germany to train people to shoot. Secretly, they were makng fire arms as well but this was kept under cover from Britain and France. The same goes for aircraft, as they were also forbidden to produce powered aircraft, so they as the Germans do produced gliders and set up clubs all over Germany to train the masses to fly. Secretly they were developing powered aircraft but under cover.

This probably explains why Germany today leads the world in air guns and gliders.

Daisy are doing a good job and their latest airguns are slowly getting competative.

Not many people know this but the UK are one of the biggest producers of quality air rifles and were also the inventors and pioneers of the stored compressed air system [as we know it now] now adopted by all the German makers.

Only Air Arms in Britain makes a 10m match air rifle which is pretty good but is over shadowed by all the German makes.

We all know that shooting in the states is a way of life for many and i guess hunting is No 1.

Here in the UK we have pretty strict laws, but air gun shooting both target and hunting including field target is very popular. Small bore rifle shooting is also popular along with clay shooting and full bore rifle.
Only pistol shooting is banned [at the moment] but that may change due to Olympic pressure.

Its attitude i guess by all concerned, we take 10m air rifle as seriously as small bore rifle and any other Olympic target shooting.
A $2000 air rifle is not a toy.
Peepsight

peepsight wrote: Its attitude i guess by all concerned, we take 10m air rifle as seriously as small bore rifle and any other Olympic target shooting.
A $2000 air rifle is not a toy.
Peepsight

While you are absolutely right, I have hinted in other responses here the reasons why air rifle and smallbore (particularly the ISSF varieties) are not taken seriously by the majority of the American shooting public.

In essence it boils down to the fact that in the USA, one needs no justification in order to buy and own firearms.

In the overwhelming majority of states purchasing a gun from a licensed dealer involves filling out a background check form. The dealer phones the National Instant Check System (run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation) with your answers to the form's questions and your name and they get the OK (or not) for you to buy the gun based on criminal records in minutes. If you buy from a private individual the transaction is I hand you the money and you give me the gun. Perfectly legal.

Only in a handful of states are there any sort of licensing and registration schemes. And even at that they are not as onerous as those in most of Europe.

So basically we do not need to be hunters or targer shooters to prove to some police official why we need the gun we want. When you take away the need to be affiliated with a formal target sport as a precondition of firearm ownership, such sports take a back seat in the minds of most.

Technologically, there is no reason why some company in the US cannot engineer and manufacture anything to rival what the Germans make. The business case is almost impossible to make, though.

Hi jose

Thanks for the information regarding your countries gun 'culture' if that's the right word. I was aware of most of it but your explanation as to why no US manufacturer has produced a match air rifle to at least match the Germans is much clearer. Its a tiny market and i guess development costs and predicted sales would not make good business sense.

We have the technology here to do it but no body with the exception of Air Arms has tried because the returns are so small for the R+D costs.

Peepsight

I have asked the same question at many of the Industry Trade Shows called the Shot Show in Las Vegas and the answer boils down to money. The US manufactures view the market here as to small to warrant building and manufacturing these rifles. I find the explanation kind of odd considering they all come out every year with all these new odd ball caliber guns and most of them will probably die out within a few years. We have so many different calibers that there is no way our small store can stock all the different calibers.

I have even asked the European manufactures why they don't build some of there rifles here in the states. The typical answer I get is that they don't think Americans are capable of building quality products, which I kind of find ironic considering the rejection rates coming out of there factories.

Guest1 wrote: The typical answer I get is that they don't think Americans are capable of building quality products,.

The people who have told you that are insufferable, ignorant and prejudiced morons.

Honda would not export Accords made in Marysville, Ohio to Japan if their quality was not up to their standards.

I would also like to remind those Europeans you spoke to that German cars hardly EVER top the quality surveys in the US as the Japanese own that distinction, and that most European carmakers (Fiat, Lancia, Renault, Peugeot, Alfa Romeo, Citroen, Rover) were laughed out of this market due to their pathetic quality a long time ago and none has yet to return. Currently VW sits consistenly near the bottom of quality rankings in the USA, easily bested by most Korean cars and anything Land Rover is still an unreliable albatross.

peepsight wrote:Hi jose

Thanks for the information regarding your countries gun 'culture' if that's the right word.

It's more than our culture. The ownership of arms is such a universal, inalienable right that this country's Founders thought was so important that a formal reminder of it had to be written in our Constitution.

US workers are expensive.

If there was a quantity of rifles to be made, be sure that a US company would offshore it.

I've got to credit Daisy and Air Force in keeping production of the sporter rifles here in the US, and the prices reasonable ... loss leaders I think

I'm afraid a precision gun "Made in the USA" would probably run about $4K

jhmartin wrote:US workers are expensive.

That depends on the product being discussed. US workers are cheaper than most in Europe and certainly cheaper than those in Germany.

The $/Euro rate makes American made products very competitive in Europe.

You're right .... depends on the skill sets required and the area produced ... wages in SoCal are much higher than Rogers, AK

I see that Air Force has a name for their new 3-P Sporter .... "Edge"
It will be very interesting to see how that pans out, and how well it shoots. maybe that could be the start of something.....

I question whether the development and manufacture of a match rifle that's "at least as good" as the current German and Austrian offerings is achievable ultimately by "high tech production methods". By this description, I'm assuming your mean high-precision computer based machining and fabrication, precision metallurgy, engineered materials et al. These technologies could certainly contribute the the production of such a rifle, but I suspect that the distinguishing factors relate to those skills and processes that are applied to building the rifles.

Something to consider is that precision arms manufacturers such as Anschutz or Feinwerkbau have been refining their manufacturing techniques for a long while. They've had the opportunity to develop processes that ensure a very high degree of consistency in the quality of their products. It's this sort of knowledge that's difficult to replicate.

So while I'm sure that an American arms manufacturer could design and develop a match 22 or air rifle that rivals the best of those currently available, producing a substantial volume of these rifles could be a challenge.

Hi all

Just to say, i have opened up a can of worms here and the topic is proving interesting.

Jusy to please my American Cousins, a few years ago it was a Remmington .22 target rifle that won the British championships at Bisley!!!!

While not a 10M rifle, there is one "match" rifle made (and designed) in the US that wins many Field Target competitions. It is the USFT designed by Larry Durham and built by Tim MacMurray. While designed to shoot at 10 to 55 yards, I suspect that if they had the inclination, they could make a 10M rifle.

Best,

Joe

It really comes down to two things..ROI and publicity.

To get a real return on the investment required a sizable number of rifles needs to be produced and sold...just to negate the initial investment.

In order to facilitate such quantities, you need some sort of publicity in order to break the trend of going w/ the "establishment" such as Anschutz, Walther or FWB. What big name shooter is going to put it (reputation and/or World Cup/Olympic medal) on the line to use a new rifle? They only way that would happen is with...you guessed it...another big chunk of change in their pocket and more cost to the upstart company.

I'm not saying that it cannot be done...it certainly can be accomplished. But the up front costs would be staggering. IF this would happen, I think that it would be more of a pride thing with a dose of "made in the USA" thrown in for good measure.

Winchester could pretty much sweep the US market if they would bring back the 52 in an updated ergonomic stock...but as we know that will never happen.

dlb wrote:
Anschutz or Feinwerkbau have been refining their manufacturing techniques for a long while. They've had the opportunity to develop processes that ensure a very high degree of consistency in the quality of their products. It's this sort of knowledge that's difficult to replicate..

Nope. It isn't.

The secrets of designing products for manufacturability and then producing parts with an etremely high degree of precision and repeatability are not secrets.

I suspect the majority of the effort would have to be done in the basic R&D to develop a system that would shoot a pellet to the same POI time after time after time. Regulating the air pressure and flow to achieve this is where the secret lies. Finding that answer is a design problem, not a manufacturing one.

1813benny wrote:Winchester could pretty much sweep the US market if they would bring back the 52 in an updated ergonomic stock....

Agreed. And the US has plenty of talented stockmakers and sightmakers like Alex Sitman and Al and Dan Warner that we don't need to copy anything much from anyone else.

Nope. It isn't.

The secrets of designing products for manufacturability and then producing parts with an etremely high degree of precision and repeatability are not secrets.

I didn't claim that these manufacturers rely on 'secrets'. They don't have to. But they have developed specific processes for workflow and specialized training that improve the consistency and quality of their products. While there are methods for analyzing the factors of production that can enable you to develop these techniques, there is no general technique available that enables you to forego this discovery process. This is why manufacturing contexts are not fully substitutable.

Just to be clear, I'm referring to production in volume, not a shop that puts out 100 rifles a year.

Hi all

I started this discussion which has proved interesting.

If some company in the US decided to make a high end mach air rifle i suspect it would not be from one of the big gun makers. It would i guess come from a couple of shooters who also were expert engineers and machine shop nuts.

This is how most of the current British air rifle manufacturers got started.
With the exception of Webley and BSA [ although they have downsized considerably over the years] most British air rifle makers are small engineering companies manned by shooting enthusiasts with expert working knowledge of air rifle design and production. They also listen to the shooters as feed back from the front line is an important element in their business.

Small is good, as mass volume production is not necessary considering the size of the market. Many of the British makers are so small that the rifle is bespoke [hand made and assembled] for the customer who may have to wait some time.

dlb wrote:

Nope. It isn't.

The secrets of designing products for manufacturability and then producing parts with an etremely high degree of precision and repeatability are not secrets.

I didn't claim that these manufacturers rely on 'secrets'. They don't have to. But they have developed specific processes for workflow and specialized training that improve the consistency and quality of their products. While there are methods for analyzing the factors of production that can enable you to develop these techniques, there is no general technique available that enables you to forego this discovery process. This is why manufacturing contexts are not fully substitutable.

Just to be clear, I'm referring to production in volume, not a shop that puts out 100 rifles a year.

Of course there is a discovery process in everything.

My 15 years of experience in engineering manufacturing setups is that MOST of that discovery process will happen in the design phase. The more involved manufacturing specialists like industrial and mfg engineers, toolmakers, and assemblers are in the design process, the easier it will be to set up a mass production process that will provide the quality and volume desired.

Making parts is making parts. Some machinery can be purchased outright, some has to be bought and modified, and some may have to be designed from the ground up and be proprietary.