Who all here is...

[RAVAGE88]

Hey Mike, Just surprised that you are going in a different direction with something totally new. initially I thought the new BR SS would be an adaptation of the current Vudoo model. will foot print be the same as the Vudoo? as you know actions being equal, it will come down to the barrel and chamber

Lee

If by adaptation you mean same footprint, then yes, it's an adaptation. But the bolt assembly (bolt body, bolt nose and complete fire control) is completely different, as are certain features in the receiver. We certainly agree on the level of magic that happens in the chamber and barrel and a lot of effort has been invested in these areas as well, which has been the case for anything from Vudoo. I'm not sure I understand why you'd be surprised as I've not given any level of detail during development that would indicate a firm, fixed direction.

With that, it goes without say that our model is to ship complete rifles that perform the same, rifle after rifle. What it took to get to a place where an engineered assembly can offer this level of consistency hasn't been easy. So, we don't share information such as chamber specs, barrel technology, etc., that coincides with what is a purely functional assembly. Obviously, this approach has been successful enough for others to "mimic" what we've done, but models are obviously different. I see there has been some discussion about this recently and with what can be perceived as some level of disdain, so I wanted to take the opportunity to clear up the difference in business models, not that the differences aren't obvious to most.

Thanks Lee,
MB

 

[gkgeiger]

MB,
Do you have any idea when you will ready to accept orders?
Gene

 

[RAVAGE88]

MB,
Do you have any idea when you will ready to accept orders?
Gene

We're not accepting orders yet but we're maintaining a running list of those interested in placing an order. When we flip the switch, we call everyone on the list and let them know it's available for order. If you'd like to be on it, just call the shop and speak to Greg, Jill or Lisa.

MB

 

[Dryfly24]

If by adaptation you mean same footprint, then yes, it's an adaptation. But the bolt assembly (bolt body, bolt nose and complete fire control) is completely different, as are certain features in the receiver. We certainly agree on the level of magic that happens in the chamber and barrel and a lot of effort has been invested in these areas as well, which has been the case of anything from Vudoo. I'm not sure I understand why you'd be surprised as I've not given any level of detail during development that would indicate a firm, fixed direction.

With that, it goes without say that our model is to ship complete rifles that perform the same, rifle after rifle. What it took to get to a place where an engineered assembly can offer this level of consistency hasn't been easy. So, we don't share information such as chamber specs, barrel technology, etc., that coincides with what is a purely functional assembly. Obviously, this approach has been successful enough for others to "mimic" what we've done, but models are obviously different. I see there has been some discussion about this recently and with what can be perceived as some level of disdain, so I wanted to take the opportunity to clear up the difference in business models, not that the differences aren't obvious to most.

Thanks Lee,
MB

Mike,

For the record, I think I know which thread you’re referring to and I agree 100% with you’re saying about not sharing your hard earned findings. I don’t see how or why it would even be relevant to anyone trying to decide what action or complete rifle to buy. These are proprietary technical details. Whether or not a manufacturer chooses to share them is up to them.

Personally, all I worry about as the consumer are the actual results/performance. Keep hammering you do good work...

 

[RAVAGE88]

Mike,

For the record, I think I know which thread you’re referring to and I agree 100% with you’re saying about not sharing your hard earned findings. I don’t see how or why it would even be relevant to anyone trying to decide what action or complete rifle to buy. These are proprietary technical details. Whether or not a manufacturer chooses to share them is up to them.

Personally, all I worry about as the consumer are the actual results/performance. Keep hammering you do good work...

Thanks DF, it's in multiple places and I agree 100% with what you're saying.

MB

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

If by adaptation you mean same footprint, then yes, it's an adaptation. But the bolt assembly (bolt body, bolt nose and complete fire control) is completely different, as are certain features in the receiver. We certainly agree on the level of magic that happens in the chamber and barrel and a lot of effort has been invested in these areas as well, which has been the case of anything from Vudoo. I'm not sure I understand why you'd be surprised as I've not given any level of detail during development that would indicate a firm, fixed direction.

With that, it goes without say that our model is to ship complete rifles that perform the same, rifle after rifle. What it took to get to a place where an engineered assembly can offer this level of consistency hasn't been easy. So, we don't share information such as chamber specs, barrel technology, etc., that coincides with what is a purely functional assembly. Obviously, this approach has been successful enough for others to "mimic" what we've done, but models are obviously different. I see there has been some discussion about this recently and with what can be perceived as some level of disdain, so I wanted to take the opportunity to clear up the difference in business models, not that the differences aren't obvious to most.

Thanks Lee,
MB

Mike, When word first came out on the idea of a BR model, initially the thought was of taking the current action and making it suitable for BR was this not the case?
all I am saying is that, yes I am surprised as this is a completely different from the initial thinking.
unless I am mistaken.
as far as mimic others, just out of curiosity why go to a 3-lug? Even Jerry Stiller the maker of the Trident said once his own 3-lug was done because of request from shooters and didn't feel it made a difference.
his 2-lug 2500X is just as good if not better.
I just think you have a proven design, so ask why go in a different direction?

as far as business models, I know it is all about marketing, me personally I don't care for any kind of veils
put it out there and run it and let buyers decide, what happens at the range is what this is all about.

Lee

 

[RAVAGE88]

Mike, When word first came out on the idea of a BR model, initially the thought was of taking the current action and making it suitable for BR was this not the case?
all I am saying is that, yes I am surprised as this is a completely different from the initial thinking.
unless I am mistaken.
as far as mimic others, just out of curiosity why go to a 3-lug? Even Jerry Stiller the maker of the Trident said once his own 3-lug was done because of request from shooters and didn't feel it made a difference.
his 2-lug 2500X is just as good if not better.
I just think you have a proven design, so ask why go in a different direction?

as far as business models, I know it is all about marketing, me personally I don't care for any kind of veils
put it out there and run it and let buyers decide, what happens at the range is what this is all about.

Lee

Ok, I'm guess I'm not seeing how what you're saying hasn't been done. What do you know of the initial thinking? Just asking, because again, there was no "thinking" advertised as it pertains to a definite direction of what the BR action would be.

The three lug is a big part of our direction but I won't be providing any detail here (or anywhere for some time to come) on what that direction is. I know Jerry and others have done three lug actions and I appreciate and agree with their perspectives. I also appreciate your vote of confidence in what we've been doing along our two lug actions. I know we've spoken about shooting together in Vegas and that hasn't happened yet, for a whole host of reasons, but there would be a lot to come from sitting down together and going through details on the range that are hard to build context around on the internet.

I get what you're saying about veils and there's TONS that I share as it relates to what directly benefits the community. 99% of the community doesn't ask about the details that some squawk about me not providing because it has no direct correlation to their interests. I use my lab as a place to continue to serve this community by offering what advances the shooting interests and challenges others. Based on my soapbox about Ripoff and Duplicate vs real Research and Development, I choose to not share what I've worked hard to offer the community. The ones squawking about the "veil" are the ones that haven't actually developed anything related to why they're squawking, so likely don't completely understand the value of what it takes to do it. On the other hand, I spend an inordinate amount of time of the phone with the curious types talking deeply technical because the conversations have value....I learn something everytime this happens.

Thanks Lee,
MB

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Ok, I'm guess I'm not seeing how what you're saying hasn't been done. What do you know of the initial thinking? Just asking, because again, there was no "thinking" advertised as it pertains to a definite direction of what the BR action would be.

The three lug is a big part of our direction but I won't be providing any detail here (or anywhere for some time to come) on what that direction is. I know Jerry and others have done three lug actions and I appreciate and agree with their perspectives. I also appreciate your vote of confidence in what we've been doing along our two lug actions. I know we've spoken about shooting together in Vegas and that hasn't happened yet, for a whole host of reasons, but there would be a lot to come from sitting down together and going through details on the range that are hard to build context around on the internet.

I get what you're saying about veils and there's TONS that I share as it relates to what directly benefits the community. 99% of the community doesn't ask about the details that some squawk about me not providing because it has no direct correlation to their interests. I use my lab as a place to continue to serve this community by offering what advances the shooting interests and challenges others. Based on my soapbox about Ripoff and Duplicate vs real Research and Development, I choose to not share what I've worked hard to offer the community. The ones squawking about the "veil" are the ones that haven't actually developed anything related to why they're squawking, so likely don't completely understand the value of what it takes to do it. On the other hand, I spend an inordinate amount of time of the phone with the curious types talking deeply technical because the conversations have value....I learn something everytime this happens.

Thanks Lee,
MB

Hey Mike, Like I said perhaps it was my mistake and from what you are saying and it looks to be, my perception of on what the BR model would be based on.
my assumption was taking the current model and adapting it for BR and that was my mistake as I said.

Look forward on how this develops and perhaps meeting and shooting together one day.

Lee

 

[RAVAGE88]

Hey Mike, Like I said perhaps it was my mistake and from what you are saying and it looks to be, my perception of on what the BR model would be based on.
my assumption was taking the current model and adapting it for BR and that was my mistake as I said.

Look forward on how this develops and perhaps meeting and shooting together one day.

Lee

Sounds good Lee, more info will be available very soon. I've been dropping small teasers in the form of singular components because I'm just kinda mischievous that way .

MB