[DavidE]

Is it just me, but, with .45 Autos in very high demand, and guns moving all over the place, how is Colt not doing something big? I mean, ads, new 1911s, heck tacticalize a bit or re-release some classic models, do some fanfare?

It seems insane they aren't taking advantage of this period. Heck, they should be able to sell anything if they can get back to high prodution, as long as it is decent quality and goes bang.

Heck they also make AR-15s, I was wondering if they could get their AR-15s and AR-18s back into more of the consumer's eye with some kind of ad push? If they need to add production, maybe they could produce out of Japan with extra rifles? The Japanese could use business too so it would be win win for a joint venture.

Just brainstorming here. It seems a primo time for Colt to start making some noise again.

 

[TommyGunn]

Well, hopefully they might .... but they might also charge too much for them......

 

[threefeathers]

They are making huge profits on EBR's.

 

[spwenger]

Not That I'm Qualified for the Job...

...but I think a business professor in an American university could probably do a year's worth of courses on how not to run a business using case studies from the various incarnations of Colt.

 

[dfariswheel]

Colt is well on it's way in a major comeback.
In the early 2000's, the company was bought and was in bad shape after all the years of corporation mis-management.
When you're teetering on the sharp edge of bankruptcy, have antiquated machinery, and have lost most of your best production people, you can't just start making things like you'd want.

They've been slowly and carefully upgrading the equipment and not taking chances with loosing money with dumb moves.
Colt is selling everything they can produce, and production is ramping up.

According to Brent Turchi, Colt will make something just under THREE times the number of 1911 series pistols this year that they made last year.
The AR market is booming, and Colt is carefully introducing new models that they're sure are going to sell.
The company leadership has and is continuing to discuss introducing double action revolvers again, and it seems to be a matter of WHEN and WHAT.

All the bad decisions and bad business moves were done by the previous Colt ownership, NOT the current owners and managers.
Too many people are thinking Colt is still back in the 90's and have ignored that things have changed.

Just in the last year Colt has introduced several new models of the 1911 series, the Colt New Frontier, the New Agent, a new double action 1911 type auto, the Mustang .380, the new 1911 Rail Gun, and several new AR type rifles including the new LE901 .308 AR type rifle.

 

[Charlie Petty]

I agree that Colt is making a comeback, but also their history is a great case study in how not to run a company.

Last year I tested three new Colts: two pistols and a rifle and all were completely reliable. The only surprise was that the vaunted Gold Cup didn't shoot any better than a basic Kimber or Springfield.

It also looks like they are holding the line on prices although I guess we'll always pay a little more for the name.

In the recent past a writer couldn't get the time of day from them but now they're calling us and you can again see the name in gunzines.

I will be surprised if they go back to double-action revolvers because S&W and Ruger really have that market cornered. If they tried to resurrect a DA revolver the old design would probably cost a fortune to make. I'm fairly sure they could design something new and sell some based on the name alone but I wonder if the revolver market is big enough to support a new entry.

 

[Skeptic49]

Last year I checked out a Colt 1911 variant, the trigger pull was not great more like a DA S&W, a 1911 with a GREAT trigger pull was the Sig!
Geoff
Who finds that interesting, I wish I could pull triggers on all the pistols at the local Gun Shop with my gauge, but I have noticed inconsistency in the readings. I suspect I need practice.

 

[spwenger]

I will be surprised if they go back to double-action revolvers because S&W and Ruger really have that market cornered. If they tried to resurrect a DA revolver the old design would probably cost a fortune to make. I'm fairly sure they could design something new and sell some based on the name alone but I wonder if the revolver market is big enough to support a new entry.

If Colt wanted to, could they cost-effectively produce their later coil-spring DA revolvers (e.g., DS-VI, Magnum Carry, Boa, Anaconda, etc.)?

As I recall, an early criticism of the coil-spring models involved the use of sintered parts but the related MIM process seems to have been perfected, at least by whoever now does it for S&W.

 

[Charlie Petty]

I don't know who does S&W's MIM parts right now and suspect they have more than one vendor. I do know that the first rear adjustable sights on revolvers after they began to routinely drill and tap for scope bases were made by Remington.

There are several MIM companies both on and off shore that do work on a contract basis for whomever wants their services.

I don't understand why so many people think MIM parts are automatically bad. I've been to two MIM plants and am impressed with the process. If the sprue remnant is polished off a metallurgist would probably need a microscope to tell the difference.

Kimber has a sparkling plant in NJ and does all their own

 

[dfariswheel]

My best guess on a new Colt DA revolver is that it'll be something very close to the Magnum Carry.
The market for CCW revolvers is booming, and a small frame Colt would be a good seller if they can keep the price within reason.

The Magnum Carry was basically a miniature King Cobra, and the design used mostly sintered steel or MIM internal parts.

The Colt history of bad decisions is really a history of what happens to a good company under the management of a disinterested, even hostile corporation.
Colt Firearms started this huge corporation and wound up as a tiny little piece that the corporation found embarrassing.

Every year or so they got a new company president sent down from corporate, and many of them knew nothing about guns and some were suspected of being actually somewhat anti-gun.
All they wanted to do is make a splash to impress the upper management so they could get the big promotion back to corporate and shake the grubby gun industry off the soles of their shoes.

Each new president ordered models discontinued, new models introduced, and the discontinued models re-introduced in a bewildering mess that left distributors, dealers, and buyers not knowing what was going to be available or not.
Then they spent stupid amounts of money on projects that anyone with sense knew was going to be a non-starter.
Just before the sale they were spending large amounts of money on an over and under shotgun they were going to import from Italy.
This with the company in trouble, the O&U market saturated and controlled by Browning and others, and which would have had very limited sales.

The current management is concentrating on models that will sell in quantity, and are carefully NOT making dumb business decisions.
It's rather disheartening to see Colt coming on strong, but still hearing people talk about Colt as though it's 1985 and some corporate Master of Business from the Warton School of Business is still fumbling the company around.

 

[spwenger]

The Magnum Carry was basically a miniature King Cobra, and the design used mostly sintered steel or MIM internal parts.

Gee, I thought of it more as a Magnum version of the DS II or SF VI - the other SF-frame guns.

 

[stand watie]

To ALL,

As for me, I wish that Colt would make .38SPL Diamondbacks again, so that I can buy a pair, to replace the ones that were stolen.
The "old school" DS & the Cobras would sell well, too, imVho.
(The last NICE 2 Cobras that I saw at the BIG SA show sold in the 1st 15 minutes of Saturday morning, for 600.oo each & NOT a bit of bargaining, either.)

yours, sw

 

[DavidE]

To ALL,

As for me, I wish that Colt would make .38SPL Diamondbacks again, so that I can buy a pair, to replace the ones that were stolen.
The "old school" DS & the Cobras would sell well, too, imVho.
(The last NICE 2 Cobras that I saw at the BIG SA show sold in the 1st 15 minutes of Saturday morning, for 600.oo each & NOT a bit of bargaining, either.)

yours, sw

The Diamondback today could be a real winner. The frame is just a real nice size for a lot of hands. A "carry melt" Diamondback could be interesting.

A while back I thought a "Diamondback Discreet" carry version could be a neat pistol. Maybe have a 3 1/2 in. barrel, carry melt the edges and corners of the frame a bit, etc.

The other versions, too.

 

[spwenger]

Wasn't There Also...

...a coil-spring (SF-frame) version of the Police Positive Special? That gun, particularly with a three-inch barrel, might make a more practical carry gun than a Diamondback.

(Just this reporter's opinion...)

 

[bearcat6]

Pythons anyone?

 

[spwenger]

I Thought...

Pythons anyone?

...that we were speculating on what revolvers Colt could produce cost-effectively enough to make the effort financially attractive.

Perhaps someone such as Charlie can offer a realistic estimate of what a newly produced Python would have to sell for today.

My guess would be over two grand, with a rather limited market. Just my personal opinion but, if Colt were looking to re-enter the market for self-defense revolvers, the I-frame Python is rather large for that role.

I can't recall if I ever had the chance to dry-fire one of the SF-frame (same size as the D frame but with a coil-spring action) revolvers but I have made an observation about the V-spring, D-frame guns: Older women with poor hand strength sometimes find that the better leverage at the start of trigger stroke makes them easier to fire than a S&W revolver. If the coil-spring actions retain the better leverage (which I understand that S&W sacrificed when the went to the short-action triggers), that would be a potential market.

 

[dfariswheel]

Gee, I thought of it more as a Magnum version of the DS II or SF VI - the other SF-frame guns.

It was.
The generic design of the three "SF" framed guns was based on the Mark III-King Cobra series.

Probably to prevent having to do a major change in the grip frame area of the "SF" models, Colt elected to use the old "D" frame "Vee" mainspring.
However, unlike the "D" models, in the "SF" guns the lower leg of the Vee spring just rested on the frame. It didn't power the trigger, just the hammer.

The "S"F guns may have had the lightest double action trigger pull of any small revolver ever made.
The early guns had such light triggers that some people had trigger reset problems. Colt offered to replace the trigger return spring with a heavier spring if they had problems.
These "SF" models were great for women or people with hand problems due to the very light trigger pull in double action.

You very likely will never see another double action revolver of Python quality.
Like most gun companies today, Colt has to be a high volume producer of firearms priced to the majority of the market.
Asking Colt to build a Python to the old standards would be like asking Ford to produce a Rolls Royce.
You can build a Rolls Royce, but not in a company set up for higher volume production.

In order to do it, Colt would probably have to split off a special Custom Shop unit dedicated just to that. The price for space, set up, tooling, hiring and training personnel, and ramping up production quality would be very high.
In order to recover that expense and make the gun profitable, the cost per gun would be very high.

This would be a limited production, limited sales model most people would not be willing to buy and I doubt you'd sell enough to make it profitable or worth while to the company.

Small, semi-custom operations like that just don't fare well in companies that have to be dedicating their money and efforts to higher production models.
As example, Korth is a semi-custom operation and a stand-alone.
In their best year they never made more than 100 guns, and they survive like all specialty small companies do, by offering something to the tiny handful of people with the money to afford it and willing to spend a small fortune to get it.

 

[bearcat6]

My guess would be over two grand, with a rather limited market. Just my personal opinion but, if Colt were looking to re-enter the market for self-defense revolvers, the I-frame Python is rather large for that role.

I knew it wasn't practical but I can dream can't I?

 

[Diamondback]

Personally, I'd think if Colt were REALLY serious about being in the market and competitive, they'd open shop in a Right-to-Work state and ditch those bloodsucking UAW parasites... who, oh by the way, their leaders have started trying to act as Obuttmunch's propagandists re the "Nobody wants to take YOUR gun" line of bullcrap.

Could keep some "premium price" for brand-name, charge less and STILL be more profitable....

 

[Charlie Petty]

Hasn't there been a report that Colt bought property in Florida?