Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > M1A/M14
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-06-2018, 09:43 AM
ordmm ordmm is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGaskill View Post
M14's are not easy to build. OEMs had many problems for many years using traditional manufacturing techniques. TRW built a new factory using state of the art machinery for a pile of money. Today's makers have a fraction of the TRW budget.
Pretty much sums it up. People forget that the U.S. Gov't got out of the large scale small arms manufacturing business 50 years ago. Lots of drama and politics just like we are seeing now. Other gov'ts are the same for the most part.

Too much trouble. Easier to contract it out and let the supplier have MOST of the headaches.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-06-2018, 11:04 AM
mac1911 mac1911 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,723
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ordmm View Post
Pretty much sums it up. People forget that the U.S. Gov't got out of the large scale small arms manufacturing business 50 years ago. Lots of drama and politics just like we are seeing now. Other gov'ts are the same for the most part.

Too much trouble. Easier to contract it out and let the supplier have MOST of the headaches.
Im going to guess the actual manufacturing of the parts was not a big head ache vs the pay roll and pensions health care they would have to cover.

Like i said i must be machine shop stupid.
I see on TV the short version.
computer draw up , laser scans program and machine spits it out.
I only now one machinist and he makes where valve bodies. They do a lot of laser scanning and then the machine cranks them out.
Only experience i have is a short stint on a summer class at the votech on a mill and a 3 day course on lathe for unemployment job training.

But like i said i seen my old dead machinist pump out parts on bridgeport that was as old as him with out much effort. Drilled and tapped a few receivers no one else would touch because the metal was to hard.
His answer to that was either they did not know how or did not have the right tools.

So going forward i called the owner of my lost machine shop. They moved to texas. He said his dad was a master and could make anything especially if you had prints/plans. The son told me that he is no where near as good as his dad was. He did tell me though if i came up with a casting for a M1 and tbe heat treat info he would try and finish it out.
He laughed and said , be kind of tough for you to pick up coffee and lunch and drop it off.
That was his dads basic charge for small easy items.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-06-2018, 12:37 PM
ordmm ordmm is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mac1911 View Post
But like i said i seen my old dead machinist pump out parts on bridgeport that was as old as him with out much effort. Drilled and tapped a few receivers no one else would touch because the metal was to hard.
His answer to that was either they did not know how or did not have the right tools.
Yup. Them old guys sure could show the young'uns how it's done, that's for sure. Must have been spinning all those X-Y-Z axis cranks that done 'em in.

What's a Bridgeport?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-08-2018, 01:56 AM
GGaskill GGaskill is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Central Arizona
Posts: 2,668
Default

Like i said i must be machine shop stupid.
I see on TV the short version.
computer draw up , laser scans program and machine spits it out.



Parts made that way are designed to be made that way. M1 and M14 receivers had something over a hundred machines involved in their manufacture. Each machine did one specific operation. This can only be justified when you plan to make five million pieces.
__________________
Only hits count.

"The trouble with most people is that they think with their hopes or fears or wishes rather than with their minds."--Will Durant
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-08-2018, 08:17 AM
mac1911 mac1911 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,723
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGaskill View Post
Like i said i must be machine shop stupid.
I see on TV the short version.
computer draw up , laser scans program and machine spits it out.



Parts made that way are designed to be made that way. M1 and M14 receivers had something over a hundred machines involved in their manufacture. Each machine did one specific operation. This can only be justified when you plan to make five million pieces.
I get that but today I'm sure there is a machine that could do all most all of it. Also correct is if you need to make millions it's probably best to have many small operations going on assembly line fashion.
Like it was said it's a matter of time and money.

I give high credits to DIP for wanting to put out the best receiver but it seems like he's been at that a long time. Sometimes the market just wants something that will work as intended.

I,also think naming manufactures and their found and true faults is fine by me.

If I ever win the power ball I always said I would buy a machine shop and play around.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-08-2018, 08:51 AM
Jakeroub Jakeroub is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Mass
Posts: 511
Default

On Monday I visited a machine shop that I buy parts from for work. They'd just gotten in a new horizontal machining center. One part I was shown could be machined with two setups as opposed to the seven that were required on a more traditional CNC machine. Not only does it save time/money but accuracy is increased by removing the problems that can arise from taking a part in and out of a vise.

This comes at a cost however. I believe he said the machine cost around $300k, and that's without tooling, installation costs (riggers, electrician), CAM software, skilled programmer/operator, etc. The proprietary soft jaws for the tombstone are $1200 (unique set required for each setup), if I recall correctly. A second tombstone (so it can be setup while a part is running) was in well into the 5 figures.

Last edited by Jakeroub; 08-08-2018 at 11:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-08-2018, 10:46 AM
ordmm ordmm is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakeroub View Post
On Monday I visited a machine shop that I buy parts from for work. They'd just gotten in a new horizontal machining center. One part I was shown could be machined with two setups as opposed to the seven that were required on a more traditional CNC machine. Not only does it same time/money but accuracy is increased by removing the problems that can arise from taking a part in and out of a vise.

This comes at a cost however. I believe he said the machine cost around $300k, and that's without tooling, installation costs, CAM software, skilled programmer/operator, etc. The proprietary soft jaws for the tombstone are $1200 (required for each setup), if I recall correctly. A second tombstone (so it can be setup while a part is running) was in well into the 5 figures.
Yeah, "the tooling". Have heard that often time the tooling equals the cost of the machine in some cases. (M1 buttplates and what they would cost if the progressive die set was done the same as in WW2---$$$$KACHING$$$$)

If it can be done without creating a partisan s*** storm am sure "M14" or maybe someone else could give a pretty accurate accounting of costs.

Last I checked an industry standard CAD-CAM program was around $25K. and that only gets you to making nice renderings of something that was originally presented on paper in 2 dimensions for the most part.

Obviously would be relevant to the OP topic and give everyone some kind of reference for the $$$$$ investment vs. the $$$$ payback. Might even result in a better understanding of why things are the way they are......

I bring this up because in many discussions perceived cost vs. actual cost when other facts come into play often times skew some attitudes. (most common thing is the CMP gets their rifles for free urban legend).

That's it.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-08-2018, 11:59 AM
M14 M14 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: south mississippi
Posts: 807
Default

That's exactly right ordmm. You too Jake, except 5 figures is putting it mildly and is a much more conservative estimate. I have been at it a long time Mac, and will be at it much longer too.

Here's the thing guys, Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Steve Jobs....all crashed on their initial outings, like many others. I don't want to crash like that so I hold back until I am ready.

When the Gunworks team first met, Gary asked me what it would cost when we were all sitting at the conference table. You could have heard a pin drop. I told him it would be 500K minimum, done right, and may eclipse 750K.

For instance, the fixture (tombstone) they went with cost 18K. One hunk of metal ! Not counting the accessories. The laptop from Mastercam with the model and tool paths was another 18K, plus all training classes for Charlie to get up to speed, super expensive. But all the CAM software and CAD/CAM guys ($65 to $100 each per Hr.) that tell you it looks good on paper with all the tool paths.....are not the ones that are actually in the shop running the mills.

Someone has to be paid to correct problems. That guy was Charlie. Not only a class act machine operator at the top of his game, but a phenomenal programmer to boot, that could rewrite the tool paths as needed to get what we wanted in a finished product.

Instead of springing for the 5 axis machine that I recommended initially, Gary chose to go with a 3 axis and a turntable for the fourth axis. This decision would be the undoing of Gunworks. I had it figured to produce one receiver every 50 minutes on the 5 axis. It took Gunworks 11.5 hrs. per receiver with a 3 axis.

Charlie was constantly at his desk, furiously working on the tool paths and trying to get the time for production down. Had he been left alone by Gary to finish it all, and Gary would have purchased the add-on chain selector for tools that I told him to in the beginning, we could have gotten it to roughly one receiver a day or more. That would have kept Gunworks alive and still producing today.

So I understand what this other manufacturer is going through, and I have never said anything bad about them or their operation, or their products, other than I wanted them to take responsibility for mistakes and not let the burden fall on others, like it did on me.

I support their efforts and hope they get straightened out QC wise, but none of anything else that is going on, or will go on, will correct what was done to me when they let the blame for the barrel problems fall on me. I still haven't received an apology, from them or the mods at the other forum, even though they know they banned me for all the wrong reasons, and it has been proven that the fault on the numerous barrels was a manufacturing defect.

I want this producer to survive and flourish and I will support them as well. I will need parts for my receivers if I ever get them finished. But I need all of my vendors to take responsibility for their actions, that's all. I do. I don't think it's too much to ask for others to do the same. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think Jon would agree. No harm, no foul, just man up and let's all move forward together with our passion for the M14. There are lots of youngsters out there that need exposure and guidance from us to see and enjoy the beauty of our chosen rifle. Let's set a good example.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-08-2018, 07:16 PM
mac1911 mac1911 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,723
Default

[QUOTE=ordmm;1743045]Yeah, "the tooling". Have heard that often time the tooling equals the cost of the machine in some cases. (M1 buttplates and what they would cost if the progressive die set was done the same as in WW2---$$$$KACHING$$$$)

If it can be done without creating a partisan s*** storm am sure "M14" or maybe someone else could give a pretty accurate accounting of costs.

Last I checked an industry standard CAD-CAM program was around $25K. and that only gets you to making nice renderings of something that was originally presented on paper in 2 dimensions for the most part.

Obviously would be relevant to the OP topic and give everyone some kind of reference for the $$$$$ investment vs. the $$$$ payback. Might even result in a better understanding of why things are the way they are......

I bring this up because in many discussions perceived cost vs. actual cost when other facts come into play often times skew some attitudes. (most common thing is the CMP gets their rifles for free urban legend).

That's it.[/QUOTE

The rifles are free, they just pay shipping and other cost
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-09-2018, 01:48 PM
Smal Smal is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Cocoa,Florida
Posts: 1,117
Default

And in this world of capitalism and big business, unfortunately, the Big Dogs with the money eat the little dogs without it so little dogs need to work extra hard to protect their business and the original ideas that it produces,if not soon the big dogs will all have full tummies, most big dogs do not have a lot of integrity when it comes to making money but they sure do have an appetite for it, Protect your small business and as they used to say loose lips sink ships when it comes to your companies new project ideas share them with no one but who needs to know. And keep that circle small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZvenoMan View Post
There is a big difference between having an idea to make something (left hand zzzz firearm) and conducting engineering and design towards the idea.
Many rifles are offered in left handed versions, and many lefties have the idea or suggestion to make their preferred type as a left handed version.
What are the odds that SAI, Bula, and others have all had requests to make LH versions.
Stag Arms made LH ARs, now others do. How long until CAI makes LH AKs? LH CETMEs?

Separately, there are colleagues and there is business. Sharing plans with business colleages is historically risky. Like it or donít; itís the world of capitalism.

Looking forward to the demented legal lesson about to come :-)
Jh
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac1911 View Post
I can see getting people lined up but other than hard cash i cant see how its hard to get the equipment.
Maybe im just machine shop stupid but it seems like they got most of the production figured out 50 plus years ago.

That said good luck and hope to see some products soon.
I wonder if buying out one of the companies who already attempted to produce there own receivers machinery would be the way to go on something like that or maybe even there business that went under and changing the issues you need to in that business that a lot of the groundwork was already done would be a faster more efficient way to get in to production and build a receiver the way you want to and keep that company good ideas they had and trash the bad ones, What do you think? In the long haul, id think it would save money on start-up costs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ordmm View Post
Pretty much sums it up. People forget that the U.S. Gov't got out of the large scale small arms manufacturing business 50 years ago. Lots of drama and politics just like we are seeing now. Other gov'ts are the same for the most part.

Too much trouble. Easier to contract it out and let the supplier have MOST of the headaches.
Exactly what they're doing down here at the Kennedy Space Center instead of the govt building and running the space program they have turned it over to small private enterprise and its working much better

Last edited by Big_Red; 08-12-2018 at 11:46 PM. Reason: Merge consecutive posts again
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:51 PM.