10-25-2014, 03:09 AM
bwaites Wrote:Its entirely possible that I will have to agree to disagree with you on this. I'm all for ingenuity, but hope it doesn't hurt rather than help!
We agree on one thing. A Grendel in the GII would be far more expensive then what I propose here.
You like having multiple brands of magazines to choose from. Fair enough then this platform wouldn't be for you. I for one like to have a stack of fully functional magazines. If they all come from one company like magpul then I'm fine with that.
aclark Wrote:I don't see how this is worth anything but trivial fun. If you are creating a whole new receiver set, then you are losing the whole point of the Grendel....a high performance round that fits in a standard AR-15. Others have chimed in with more in depth reasons why its not needed, but I like to keep it simple. I don't see any reason what so ever why this would be beneficial to us as Grendel owners. There is enough confusion with chamberings that a new receiver set isn't needed.
I'm sorry, but this entire argument is utterly ridiculous. It's like saying new rails released into the market is a bad thing for the AR15, it makes things to confusing to the consumer. It's like saying having different action lengths in your savage or 700 is a bad thing for those platforms, it makes them to confusing.
They're merely more options for the consumer, which has always been a good thing when done as an innovation derived from a demand, not a CYO exercise.
Bottom line is the Consumer is going to pick the components that best meet their needs.
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither." Benjamin Franklin