Remington kills off DPMS and Bushmaster?

[Tokarev]

It appears the rumors from SHOT are correct and that Remington has stopped making products under the Remington and DPMS lines.

Going to the BM or DPMS home pages links back to the Remington home page. At the bottom of the Remington page the only brands listed are Remington, Marlin, Dakota Arms, Barnes and AAC.

And then there's this:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgzhJAwPZ04

[Alpha Sierra]

Not a huge surprise...

Maybe KRG will negotiate back the rights to the ACR and re-release it as the Masada.

[Darth_Uno]

Yeah, people are freaking out about it elsewhere. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s business. When GM shut down Pontiac, Saturn and Oldsmobile there wasn’t less cars after that.

[Tokarev]

Yeah, people are freaking out about it elsewhere. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s business. When GM shut down Pontiac, Saturn and Oldsmobile there wasn’t less cars after that.Nah. No conspiracy. DPMS brand was the "poor man's rifle" for years but there are a ton of budget ARs on the market now.

The only thing I thought was cool from DPMS is the redesign of the 308 AR. But the GII format hasn't really caught on.

Anyway maybe Windham Weapons can get the Bushmaster name back?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Rosco Benson]

Anyway maybe Windham Weapons can get the Bushmaster name back?



Why would anyone WANT it?


Rosco

[jellydonut]

Freedom Group has made a lot of dumb decisions over the years, but really, who is going to miss these two? It's a bigger mystery why they were kept around as long as they were. They were past their use-by date the moment the AR market exploded after the sunset in 2004.

[Grey]

Not a huge surprise...

Maybe KRG will negotiate back the rights to the ACR and re-release it as the Masada.

Doubtful, but maybe, the "Massoud" (Fox 42) is awesome :D.

[Tokarev]

Doubtful, but maybe, the "Massoud" (Fox 42) is awesome :D.The ACR was really the only reason to keep BM around.

I assume Magpul still owes the design but will they bother licensing it to someone else? Probably the smart thing to do is actually produce it under the Magpul label.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Grey]

The ACR was really the only reason to keep BM around.

I assume Magpul still owes the design but will they bother licensing it to someone else? Probably the smart thing to do is actually produce it under the Magpul label.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk100% agree but the ship may have sailed with the ACR. If anyone has a chance of reviving the model its Magpul.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

100% agree but the ship may have sailed with the ACR. If anyone has a chance of reviving the model its Magpul.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using TapatalkThere are a number of reasons the ACR failed. Remember the "Hitler finds out about the ACR" video?

https://youtu.be/BB0Pu-rvFjs

Pretty much still true ten years later.


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Alpha Sierra]

I assume Magpul still owes the design

That's a questionable assumption. It's just as likely they sold the rights to Remington/Bushmaster, in which case they have no claim on them any more.

[Alpha Sierra]

the "Massoud" (Fox 42) is awesome :D.

Don't see that for sale anywhere: https://kineticresearchgroup.com/product-category/riflesandtriggers/

[RevolverRob]

There are a number of reasons the ACR failed. Remember the "Hitler finds out about the ACR" video?

https://youtu.be/BB0Pu-rvFjs

Pretty much still true ten years later.


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

“It might as well have been made by H&K.” Got me.

Especially since you can get an MR556 for less than an ACR.

-

Adios Bushmaster, Adios DPMS, can we also say Adios to Remington’s mediocre line of AR15s?

Let’s get back where we need to be. Remington making good variants of the 700 and the 870. And then we’ll figure out the other pieces as they fall into place.

[Tokarev]

Let’s get back where we need to be. Remington making good variants of the 700 and the 870. And then we’ll figure out the other pieces as they fall into place.

Plenty of good options in the bolt gun market although not as many nowadys for the pump 12g.

Maybe Remington itself is circling the drain?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Shoresy]

Remington making good variants of the 700 and the 870. And then we’ll figure out the other pieces as they fall into place.

That idea won't get serious consideration until Cerberus/Freedom/Remington Outdoor finally hits a bankruptcy they can't recover from (at which point it will be too late). They're in this to cash in on the brand name for all its worth with as little additional investment as possible.

[Grey]

Don't see that for sale anywhere: https://kineticresearchgroup.com/product-category/riflesandtriggers/Its only out for beta testing right now.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[RevolverRob]

Plenty of good options in the bolt gun market

That's actually my point, The Remington 700 was the bolt gun of choice for decades, it practically created the market or served as the basis for it.

Remington should work to recapture the top spot in that market.

[Alpha Sierra]

Its only out for beta testing right now.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

It's only been four years since the prototypes were shown at SHOT.......

[Tokarev]

That's actually my point, The Remington 700 was the bolt gun of choice for decades, it practically created the market or served as the basis for it.

Remington should work to recapture the top spot in that market.Not meaning to argue with you but I don't know what else Remington could do.

They already make the 700 in a bunch of varieties to include actions for custom gunsmiths. I think they've probably squeezed about all the blood out of the 700.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Alpha Sierra]

Not meaning to argue with you but I don't know what else Remington could do.

They could start by machining and assembling the actions with much more precision and repeatability.

They could follow up with models aimed at growing markets such as precision rifle sports. Their PCR needs serious revamping.

They could add features such as nut-headspaced user-replaceable barrels.

They could stop the race to the bottom with ever cheaper versions of the 700.

They could start installing triggers that break crisply at a reasonable weight.

IMO, Remington is even more clueless and rudderless than Colt which is saying something.

[Grey]

It's only been four years since the prototypes were shown at SHOT.......

Shit gets done when it gets done.

[Alpha Sierra]

Shit gets done when it gets done.

Whatever. No one even remembers what it was until this thread came up.

Good luck in the marketplace.

[Grey]

Whatever. No one even remembers what it was until this thread came up.

Good luck in the marketplace.

Yeah, maybe you should get outside and get some sun. I have no idea what you even mean "good luck in the marketplace." Sorry shit doesn't fly out of a company as fast as you'd like, go fucking build your own company then.

For the record, I have no affiliation with KRG.

[rob_s]

Didn't DPMS have some sort of ultra-light 308 AR that people were getting excited about?

[RevolverRob]

Not meaning to argue with you but I don't know what else Remington could do.

They already make the 700 in a bunch of varieties to include actions for custom gunsmiths. I think they've probably squeezed about all the blood out of the 700.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Actually, it's not about making more varieties, it's about making better quality guns and eliminating the 7,000 variants of the 700 that they make. Paring production down and focusing on quality.

It's also about eliminating the garbage from the production lines.

I dunno exactly what Remington's biggest sellers are, but I'd guess they are the 700, the 597, and the 870. Slimming those lines to a few variants and focusing on production quality improvements would go a long way to insuring against future market disruptions.

But, eh, no one ever really listens to the actual economic advice and instead they tend to keep expanding their lines and bloating them up until they become unwieldy and untenable.

[Tokarev]

Actually, it's not about making more varieties, it's about making better quality guns and eliminating the 7,000 variants of the 700 that they make. Paring production down and focusing on quality.

It's also about eliminating the garbage from the production lines.

I dunno exactly what Remington's biggest sellers are, but I'd guess they are the 700, the 597, and the 870. Slimming those lines to a few variants and focusing on production quality improvements would go a long way to insuring against future market disruptions.

But, eh, no one ever really listens to the actual economic advice and instead they tend to keep expanding their lines and bloating them up until they become unwieldy and untenable.What would the end result look like? 700 ADLs in 30-06, 6.5 Creedmoor and 223 Remington stuck in a cheaply stained birch stock? A couple magnum offering in the BDL line?

The only bolt guns selling nowadays are either cheap stuff like the Ruger American and Savage 110 or the fancier chassis target rifles.

Nobody wants a new version of Grandpa's old deer rifle or fowling piece.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[RevolverRob]

What would the end result look like? 700 ADLs in 30-06, 6.5 Creedmoor and 223 Remington stuck in a cheaply stained birch stock? A couple magnum offering in the BDL line?

The only bolt guns selling nowadays are either cheap stuff like the Ruger American and Savage 110 or the fancier chassis target rifles.

Nobody wants a new version of Grandpa's old deer rifle or fowling piece.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I think it would look like:

700 SPS offered in short, long, and magnum actions - in either a light or medium contour barrel - in all the usual calibers

Precision Rifle Series capable 700 in .308 and 6.5 CM

Limited runs of walnut stocked guns in various calibers, much like the way Winchester is doing lever actions and Ruger does No. 1s.

Every gun should be at least 1-MOA accurate at 100, the PRS gun should be 1/4-MOA at 100.

____

Shotguns:

870 Express in 3" in 12 and 20-gauge basically like they are now, but ideally with improved extractors. Offered in 14" Tac-14 variant, 18.5" defensive variant, 26-28" hunting barrel, 24" slug barrel. Offer a 3.5" Magnum turkey gun. All with laminate or synthetic stocks and a parkerized or better yet cerakote finish. While I'd love to see a DLC-type finish - I'd settle for just a finish that is more durable than the Remington parkerization which is pretty thin.

870 Police/Wingmaster - all steel, barstock components, walnut stocks, 18.5" Police variant that is DLC coated, high polished blue 28" gun, and hell, have some fun and offer a 32" high-rib trap version.

__

If they want to do semi-autos in there too, that'd be cool, but I'd say do it after they have rectified the issues with the 700 and 870 lines to get them to be the finest guns out there for the money. Remington has always built working class guns, but I shouldn't buy an 870 and need to send it to Vang Comp for an $850 tuneup before it really works worth a damn. Neither should I have to re-bed, re-stock, or re-barrel my 700 to get it to shoot MOA or sub-MOA. I can buy a Benelli Nova that runs and a Tikka T3 that shoots sub-MOA for nigh the same money. I'd rather buy the Remington if possible, but it currently isn't.

[Tokarev]

I don't think it is about making quality products although that should be a given. It is more about staying relevant. If Remington wants to stay a household brand there needs to be some innovation there and not focus all their efforts on 19th Century products. They also should have dumped the DMPS and Bushmaster names ten years ago and rolled everything under one brand. As it was they kept all the "good stuff" as Remington products and churned out "junk" under the D and BM lines. The ACR is a prime example. Nobody wanted that gun as a BM product and not at the price. Take the same gun made on the same tooling and brand it with Remington and it probably would have sold. Would it have set the market on fire? Probably not but it likely would have done better as a Remington product rather than a BM.

With that said, I suppose the case can be made that all these companies should quit trying to be the sole provider of firearms to the American public and focus on what they're known for. Remington should make nothing other than 700s, 870s and 11-87s or 1100s and not worry about anything else. Ruger should make 10-22s and LCPs and the MK line of rimfire pistols and leave the 1911s to Colt. S&W should focus on wheel guns and wheel guns only.

[jlw]

The very first AR15 I owned was DPMS' version of the Dissapator. I got it in the immediate wake of the 2008 election when the firearms market was in a panic. An inside connection got me a hookup. I sold it during the next market panic for double what I paid for it and used the money to buy a Colt 6920 when the market settled.

My first patrol rifle was an agency Bushmaster bought off of state contract.

I can't recall the last time I have actually seen either brand in a store or in the wild.

[Alpha Sierra]

Remington should make nothing other than 700s, 870s and 11-87s or 1100s and not worry about anything else. Ruger should make 10-22s and LCPs and the MK line of rimfire pistols and leave the 1911s to Colt. S&W should focus on wheel guns and wheel guns only.

LOL………...that's how business die.

In one breath you say it's about staying relevant, right after that you say these companies should stick to certain products no matter what changes happen in the marketplace.

So in your opinion, Ruger should have completely ignored the hot market trend towards precision rifles and not innovated with the RPR. Or S&W should have abandoned polymer service handgun development with the Sigma, instead of doubling down and producing the wildly successful M&P series.

So glad they didn't "stay in their lanes"

[Tokarev]

LOL………...that's how business die.

In one breath you say it's about staying relevant, right after that you say these companies should stick to certain products no matter what changes happen in the marketplace.

So glad Ruger and S&W aren't coming to you for product strategy advice.Yep.

That's why I said, "I suppose."

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

It is more about staying relevant.

Relevance isn't a topic in board rooms. It's all about squeezing every last centavo out of the brand, relevance and quality be damned.

[Tokarev]

Relevance isn't a topic in board rooms. It's all about squeezing every last centavo out of the brand, relevance and quality be damned.Then goodbye Remington.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[lwt16]

We have a Remington plant here in my town. Horror stories a plenty from workers and former workers from that place.

I know one of their former armed guards who eventually got fed up with the place and their policies and left to work on the local .gov facility in the same role. A highlight of his war stories from the place is that they ISSUE 9mm rounds to their armed guards. FMJ loads and, according to him, prohibit guards from carrying HP rounds on site.

My agency also bought a ton of Bushmasters from them for duty rifles and admin made a big deal about them being marked "Made in Huntsville" as a mark of quality. There were severe issues with said rifles when two range instructors took them to a moderate to high round count class and they crapped out in the 200-300 round mark. Apparently they went down hard and the department was hush hush about it and replaced them all with Rugers.

Soon, the Rugers started having gas block issues and they were all pulled from the field. Department went back to the local Bushmasters and put those out in the field yet again. Somehow during all this rifle swapping, I flew under the radar and retained possession of my department Colt from the dreaded AWB 90s era which has the "Le/Gov stamp" on the receiver.

Then there are the employee thefts of firearms that Remington can't seem to get a grasp on. I get shrinkage and employee theft but there for a while, it seemed like we were getting local BOLOs weekly about pistols being stolen by workers.

Recently there was a news story about Remington having to pay the state back monies for not coming through on hiring a certain number of employees. Not sure what ever happened with that.

https://www.al.com/news/2019/03/remington-loses-3-million-in-alabama-incentives.html

So their troubles run deep and wide, apparently. I have been happy with the Tac 14 hardwood I purchased a couple of years ago but that was for giggles/range fun. For LE/defense use, I use other brands.

Regards.

[Horseman]

Lee wrote:

I can't recall the last time I have actually seen either brand in a store or in the wild.

Unfortunately, I've seen a few Remington-era DPMS rifles at a local agency. They had un-staked bolt carrier keys and castle nuts and at least two instances of clamp-on gas blocks coming right off during range training. Kind of like stuff I saw from pre-Remington DPMS rifles.

I'm not going to miss this brand.

A friend of mine would sometimes purchase odd bits and pieces from DPMS, but he said the letters actually stood for Don't Purchase Major Sub-assemblies.

[Borderland]

They could start by machining and assembling the actions with much more precision and repeatability.

They could follow up with models aimed at growing markets such as precision rifle sports. Their PCR needs serious revamping.

They could add features such as nut-headspaced user-replaceable barrels.

They could stop the race to the bottom with ever cheaper versions of the 700.

They could start installing triggers that break crisply at a reasonable weight.

IMO, Remington is even more clueless and rudderless than Colt which is saying something.

I'm not sure Colt is clueless and rudderless, just owned by a hedge fund. The marketing strategy would be different than say a family owned business or a company listed as a common stock. Colt has been trading on their name, and military contracts for a very long time. Colt only exists for a profitable return for a few shareholders and fund managers. It's a limited liability corp.

Freedom group, which is listed on the NASDQ, has a vested interest in producing good products. It was managed by a hedge fund a few years ago so yeah, they got raped, but things are changing. Firearms and ammo is a tough business these days and capital is in short supply. Dropping a line that has no future like low end AR's was probably a wise move. Since its inception, FG has done quite well. Their stock is up over 50% in just 2 years.

I was in the market for a precision rifle a few years ago and considered a 700 action but passed. I'm not sure where they are now but things change. It couldn't have gone downhill because they bottomed out with Cerberus.

[Lester Polfus]

Nobody wants a new version of Grandpa's old deer rifle or fowling piece.


Well, if you DO want an old deer rifle or fowling piece, pretty much any pawn shop or LGS you walk into is liable to have a used Rem 700 or 870. All of Remington's other market forces aside, at some point you've built so many guns, you're competing with the used inventory you built 30 years ago as much as your current competitors.

If a plain jane bolt or pump gun is considered a down market choice, your down market consumer is going to be ok with buying used.

One of the fundamental problems with the gun industry is they sell products that essentially don't ever get worn out. And while modern rifles and cartridges are "better," you can walk into an LGS, buy a Rem 700 built before you were born, and getcher deer just as well as if you buy the latest greatist.

So if you want to keep selling guns to what is essentially a finite market, you have to convince people what they already own is inadequate, and offer them something new and novel. Remington hasn't been very good at this. When they've tried, like with that funky pistol they released a few years back, it's been a disaster.

[Tokarev]

Didn't DPMS have some sort of ultra-light 308 AR that people were getting excited about?

Yeah. It is their Gen2 format. Pretty neat actually. This should have been the new industry standard.

The DPMS GII website still works, surprisingly:

http://www.dpms-gii.com/full.html

[HCM]

Yeah. It is their Gen2 format. Pretty neat actually. This should have been the new industry standard.

The DPMS GII website still works, surprisingly:

http://www.dpms-gii.com/full.html

Curious bout this as there is a former DPMS employee over on ARFCOM saying Remington is dropping all civilian sales of MSRs not just these two brands. Apparently they dumped their entire stock of BM and DPMS parts at CDNN for liquidation.

[Tokarev]

Curious bout this as there is a former DPMS employee over on ARFCOM saying Remington is dropping all civilian sales of MSRs not just these two brands. Apparently they dumped their entire stock of BM and DPMS parts at CDNN for liquidation.It is probably an oversight. I'm sure Remington will kill the GII website as soon as they realize it is still active.

Rumor is most of the available ACR parts went to the crusher.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[RevolverRob]

Well, if you DO want an old deer rifle or fowling piece, pretty much any pawn shop or LGS you walk into is liable to have a used Rem 700 or 870. All of Remington's other market forces aside, at some point you've built so many guns, you're competing with the used inventory you built 30 years ago as much as your current competitors.

If a plain jane bolt or pump gun is considered a down market choice, your down market consumer is going to be ok with buying used.

One of the fundamental problems with the gun industry is they sell products that essentially don't ever get worn out. And while modern rifles and cartridges are "better," you can walk into an LGS, buy a Rem 700 built before you were born, and getcher deer just as well as if you buy the latest greatist.

So if you want to keep selling guns to what is essentially a finite market, you have to convince people what they already own is inadequate, and offer them something new and novel. Remington hasn't been very good at this. When they've tried, like with that funky pistol they released a few years back, it's been a disaster.

While it is true that you can go buy something used, I've sold enough new guns to know - people will absolutely buy new over used, for no other reason than it is new.

Financially, it makes zero sense to buy anything new, except maybe underwear. Cars? Used is a better value, depreciation has hit, but you still get plenty of return on investment. Guns? Absolutely used are better values. Look at the number of high-fashion resale shops out there selling second-hand clothes. BUT still people will buy new. Convenience and being the only person to own something are intrinsic to our consumer culture. I've seen people be offered a refurbished iPhone vs. a new one - identical models and features - where the refurb is literally 1/3rd the cost of the new one and then they buy the new one. "Well, the used one has scratches on the back cover of it and I don't want scratches." - Never mind they are going to cover up the scratches with a case.

So, even if you're competing with your own previous production you can still sell new guns.

Then you add in that even though used guns are out there, they actually are often harder to come by. It may not seem like it, but you and I are the type to go peruse the stock at the local gun stores and pawn shops. Perhaps we have make an afternoon of it with a buddy, circle around town hitting the five or six places and the good hole-in-the-wall that has the odd N-Frame or custom 1911 in it. In my experience, most consumers aren't really into that. They go buy what they want/need at the nearest place and as long as it isn't outrageously expensive, they'll buy it where it is more convenient.

Finally, there is a real problem - where companies like Remington once made better guns than they do today. You know that, I know that, consumers know that, gunshops know that. More than once I've seen a 40-year old .30-06 ADL sit next to a brand new .30-06 SPS and the SPS is half the price. Consumers buy the cheaper gun.

[CCT125US]

...... at some point you've built so many guns, you're competing with the used inventory you built 30 years ago as much as your current competitors.


Very true.

I know we can be a peculiar bunch around here, having a pair and a spare. Focusing on one gun, gaining proficiency, sticking with it for years. I don't think that path is commonplace. How common is it to have multiple copies of the same rifle, maybe same type, but a duplicate?

Now, convincing folks that they need a 700 and an 870, how about starting there. I don't own either, why not?

Now, on to HK, I have one or two. Why, because they work for me, I have a long history with them. I will not wear out what I have in many lifetimes, and will likely buy more. Why would I continue to purchase a product that I will not wear out, have no need for, is higher priced, and has spotty availability? First hand experience, and reputation.

You don't get that loyalty from me by putting out shit products.

[Hambo]

Now, convincing folks that they need a 700 and an 870, how about starting there. I don't own either, why not?

Because Remington (and others) are on the monkey see-monkey do business plan, hence every company makes the same guns (AR, 1911, etc). They used to try to convince you that they made better guns than Winchester, now they just hope their AR is closer to the end of the rack so you pick it.

[Seven_Sicks_Two]

Actually, it's not about making more varieties, it's about making better quality guns and eliminating the 7,000 variants of the 700 that they make. Paring production down and focusing on quality.

It's also about eliminating the garbage from the production lines.

I dunno exactly what Remington's biggest sellers are, but I'd guess they are the 700, the 597, and the 870. Slimming those lines to a few variants and focusing on production quality improvements would go a long way to insuring against future market disruptions.

But, eh, no one ever really listens to the actual economic advice and instead they tend to keep expanding their lines and bloating them up until they become unwieldy and untenable.

I spent some time as both an inside and outside rep in the firearms business... every region is a little different, but the Marlin lever-gun and 870 lines seemed to do pretty well in my area. The 700s were slow, as were 597s. Ammo sold well, but it was commodity type stuff like Core-Lokt, promo shotshells, and 9mm ball. BM/DPMS only really sold to dealers when there was sharp pricing or incentives. They couldn't compete on price in a market dominated by guns like the S&W Sport 2 and most of the line was priced comparable to guns that had higher perceived quality or more features.

[OlongJohnson]

FWIW, my Marlin 1894 is a 1997 gun, and it's pretty dang ugly on the inside. I'm convinced that a lever gun I want will probably be priced like a Winchester or Chiappa.