BYF42,

I know how you feel. My stomache sunk when I heard the news. I do have on hold a Safari in a 375 and a 416. I will buy them this week. That makes me feel a little better anyway. I am thinking about getting another 94. Mostly since I only have one in 30-30. Maybe they will go to SC but its still a shame.

Well, I've got two Model 70's a 300 and a 375 H&H, and even before this news, they weren't for sale at any price. Glad to have them along with the 73,86,94,95 and HiWall. BUT somebody out there set me straight. Didn't Browning and USRAC merge about 3 or 4 years ago? I thought for all intents and purposes they were the same company, albeit some differences in product lines.

I think that is the tip of the iceburg as far as hunting and guns go.The average hunter is around 37.He usually has so many guns that he can hardly justify another gun .We have become a small minority in society as hunters.We are reaching closer to 10% of the population..There are alot more guns than hunters.We buy guns on inmplses sometimes like this thing with Winchester closing.I have not bought a Winchester in almost 10 years but this week before I heard this I was already buying a 405 Winchester in 1895 and a 25-35 model 94.I had planned to already buy them.All the wsms and wssm didnt get enough people to buy Winchester guns to save them.I for one see each and every one of us as the care takers of our hunting future.I vowed to take at least 20 kids hunting that have never hunted.I have taken 15 so far and 14 are still hunting.The other one works to jobs but still wants to hunt.If every hunter got 20 new hunters into hunting I do not think Winchester,Remington and many others would close.There is also another danger.Thats is that alot of guns such as the model 70 made in The USA might become a Russian made or China made product.Winchers has relied on the two models the 94 and model 70 to carry its ship.I have been a Ruger man myself and Weatherby but I have bought some Winchesters and Remingtons but they were older better models that I wanted not the newest wsms.I think Winchester has gone down in quality except for its higher models.They had made some cheaper than dirt model 70s for the bigger chain stores and cheaper model 94s.I love the super grade model 70s and there have been some nice model 94s but the cheaper ones probally outnunbered the nicer ones probally 50 to one.I worked in a large chain sporting good chain just to learn more about the gun business.I learned that the Remingtons were pushed in this chain of stores.It did not matter what else they carried but Remingtons out sold the other guns about about 20 to one.I tried to show how much better a Ruger 77 was to a Remington 700 adl or their wonderful 710 piece of pressed plastic.They told me if they sold a truck load of model 700 adls of the even crappier 710 they got cheaper prices from Remington.I hardly had anyone even look at Winchesters.They carried the cheap Black Shadow model 70.It was usually rusted in the gun rack because it rusted so easy.This chain of stores never carried the Super Grade Model 70 which is a fine rifle.The model 94 win in the ranger was very cheaply made also.I never sold a Winchester rifle but I did change alot of peoples minds and sold every Ruger rifle that they had.I sold people guns that I knew would last.The store knew if they sold them a piece of junk gun and junky scope they would be back for a better one.Its a double sale trick they are famous for.They did the same thing on their boats putting too small of a motor on them that was a hunk of junk.If you walk into Walmart and look at their guns that they carry they are also usually the cheapest gun that the gun company could make.They tried to turn made in the USA on a gun turn into a usa stamp on a gun that looked like either reused plastic with crappy bluing.The wood stocked guns look like pallet wood.I wish Winchester was not going under but its looks like they are gone.We hunters need to realize its not how many trophies on the wall that you have when you die that will be rembered.Its all the kids that you took hunting rembering all the times that you took them hunting that matters in the end.None of us will leave this earth with any of our guns but leaving new future hunters as seed will insure that hunters are able to hunt into the future.If not then will will see an end to hunting as we know it in less than 50 years.This is just the start to the end I dont want to be around when it happens.

It truly is a sad day to see Americas Fiream manufacture going away. I am a Ruger man myself, but I was interested in a couple of their nw products. I am sure that the name and the products they made will be back, but who knows where they will be from...

I like that guy at HS precision.He makes nice actions.People here on AR will make you a nice stock.Problem solved.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I like that guy at HS precision.He makes nice actions.People here on AR will make you a nice stock.Problem solved.

Thats not the point... As I see it at least.

Ask yourself what is Winchester today? FUCK ALL.So many years gone buy and the rifle has not improved.

Blame Brady, Feinstein ??????? I doubt they had a major impact. They just don't have the same interests we do.

Blame Sony, Nokia, Dell, Microsoft, Apple, etc. Do you imagine Teddy Roosevelt could spend his days as a youth at the mall, slouched in front of a TV, playing video games, surfing the net, plugged into an Ipod?

It's a shame, but that's life. We develop every bit of available land we can get our hands on and call it progress. We can't even keep wild game wild. We have to try to raise "wild" game behind a fence so we can make a buck off of it. If you want to find someone to bitch at go bitch at the man in the mirror; he hasn't done enough to make a difference.

I tried for years to make a hunter out of my son. He doesn't have the interest; too much competition for his time, interest, money. My guns, my trophies, my love of hunting will disappear along with me.

The hard reality of the United States is that we are no longer a country that can compete in the manufacturing industry. Winchester is facing the same problems that Auto, Paper, and steel makers have faced for the last 10 years. Labor in the US is very expensive and most companies are shifting their plants off shore. If I had to guess, the Winchester name will not go away. I would even go out on a limb and say that if production goes overseas the product quality may even improve. Hate to see this happen but I think it is reality!

ROSCOE makes some very valid points. In addition, the changing demographics of this country is having an affect. Also, kids growing up playing with electronic toys/games/computers instead of playing outside; they just aren't "into" the great outdoors.

BTW: If you want some insight as to what is happening with manufacturing in the U.S., then I highly recommend watching Frontline's "Is Wal-Mart Good for America"?




The DVD is available here.

Frontline's web site: "Is Wal-Mart Good for America?"
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/

And no, I'm not trying to specifically bash Wal-Mart. But the Wal-Mart situation epitomizes the changes that are and have been occurring to the manufacturing base in the U.S.

My two cents.

-Bob F.

I'm thinking that it is the big corporate re-structure. Olin ownes the Winchester name at least for another year. Olin is heading into the chemical manufacturing phase of its history. Olin has been into many things including the space industry and is getting out of everything that doesn't pretain to chemicals. Olin sold it's space program to a company named Areojet and in turn Areojet has sold Olin a portion of it's company which just happens to be a chemical company named Arch chemicals. I just don't think Olin wants anything more to do with the manufacturing of firearms. They will still produce gunpowder (which is good) but not firearms. Olin is doing other things that seem strange to me. One of the transactions with Arch Chemicals is the aquisition of some contaminated land in the state of California. Olin is cleaning up this land and selling it off to developers to build on while in turn Olin is leasing back land to operate on. Don't really understand this but I'm working on it. I'm just hoping that the great Winchester name and guns don't go away. The merger with Browning has me a little confused also. I think that Browning wants the Winchester line but the Winchester line of shotguns can't hold a key to the Browning shotgun line so that part of Winchester is in trouble. I think that the Winchester line of rifles sells enough to make Browning interested to keep the Winchester rifles but does the shotgun thing off-set the rifle thing? Still working on that one too. I'm thinking only time will tell. I think I'll buy another Winchester rifle just for the heck of it.

quote:

fuck! sorry, but fuck! what a croc of bullshit! sara brady, feinstein, and all those other assholes that made this happen with their goddamn bullshit can go to hell! fuckin assholes motherfuckers!!!!!!!!

Aww...c'mon byf42.
We are all adults here.
How do ya really feel?

I think the demise of Winchester has more to do with an embarassment of riches, rather than something more sinister.

I can walk out right now, and buy a serviceable (new) hunting rifle, with scope, for about what 2 weeks of groceries cost for a family of 4.
And, I can choose from several manufacturers when I do decide to buy that inexpensive rifle.

For most of America, the day is gone when we can walk or hike out our back door, and shoot a deer or bear.
It costs money to be on a hunting lease (and in the Northeast, often a good sum of money)...and we have to take the time and expense to get there.

Hunting is becoming more and more a sport of either the leisure class (who have money and time to pursue it) OR of a dedicated middle-class who believe passionately in the sport.

I think it is a bit analagous to the Airline industry, in that there are so many companies supplying relatively inexpensive products that something has to give, and some companies will go under.

I think the high-end firearms market is thriving (for the most part), and will continue to do so for the near term.

I think Winchester will likely re-invent themselves for a smaller, more niche-like market.

Garrett

One thought occured to me last night is that marketing may have played a large role in Winchesters downfall. The Browning name is consistantly seen in most sporting goods retailers much more than Winchester. Remington is more common still, go into a retail store and you will see large numbers of Remington 870's and various rifles. Did Remington just push out the competition or did Winchester have problems with delivery and other business related issues with there customers? In the midwest I very seldom ever see Winchesters on the shelf. I don't believe price was the issue in most cases, nor quality. Winchester, until recently is not been known for innovation in cartridges unlike Remington who created a market for their super magnums and varmint cartridges. Availability is such a key factor in todays market, we are a "got to have it now" world, instant gratifacation is more important (the reason video games are more popular than hunting imo). I hope none of the other gunmakers follow suit with closing down or relocating. All we can do is continue to purchase from and support these companies whenever possible.

Although the demand for firearms had declined over the past several years, there is still a lot of money spent on them every year. What hurt Winchester is that they are still making their product's on equipment that is 50+ years old. This equipment is no longer efficient and limits their ability to be profitible. When you look at companies like CZ, the majority of their equipment is State-of-the-art computer driven equipment. This equipment is capable of producing gun at a fraction of the cost of the older labor intensive equipment that Winchester uses. CZ continues to grow its business at the expense of Winchester. If winchester were to upgrade their equipment to be more efficent, the cost of these upgrades would take years to recover. That is why I doubt any investor will bail them out at this point. Now a company like CZ could buy the rights to produce Winchester products, make them on the same equipment that they already own, and be profitible. That is what I expect to happen. It may not be CZ but I bet it will be an overseas company that is already in the firearms business.

Yeah, it could be part of a comprehensive restructuring, but the announcement that they're gutting their product line doesn't sound like it to me.

Sad as it is, it's about time anyway. Their management has certainly been inept in recent years. They rolled the dice on the idiotic WSM gimmick (I smell a McKinsey consultant there) and lost. The writing was on the wall long before that, though. Despite the reintroduction of the CRF 70, and state of the art, high tech machinery, today's unionized Winchester workforce wasn't able to produce a product of the same quality that their fathers and grandfathers produced at Winchester in the 1950's, and that says it all.

A well designed $1,500 rifle that shoots accurately and functions reliably right out of the box is always preferable to a $750 rifle that must have the stock rebedded, trigger replaced, feed rails and magazine box re-worked, etc., before it is usable. Winchester (and most other American firearms manufacturers) doesn't understand that because they've always believed the fiction that they're enslaved to a price point. The idiots still think they made the right decision in 1964, and the same mentality survives today.
-------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

It will be interesting to see what will happen as this process plays out. I have seen many similar situations over the past dozen years, however, it is difficult to understand how ownership and management could have allowed the situation to get this far down the road without developing a viable alternative...possibly that is already in play...or Olin has a better deal in the works..

I have seen many manufacturers in the US face difficult times. Those that work through their difficulties find new ways to compete and new markets, however, more and more small and midsized US producers (those unable or unwilling to change) become part of history. Competitive pressures will only increase for manufacturers in this country brought on by free trade policies...not fair trade policies...I wonder how all this will play out in the near future and how society adjust to the realities.

Hard for GM and Ford to compete with Chinese labor at $3.50/hour...but it is more than just hourly rates..the costs of producing in the US includes significant overhead ie Federal, State, and Local Gov't, health care, pensions, enviornmental impacts, etc...all part of the American way of life and overhead...compare that to China....Ultimately, more and better technology will come out of China (and other low cost producers)...many innovations and technological improvements come out of production...good low cost producers eventually develop into much more...

But we do have the Worlds largest market place! Walmart did figure that out many years ago....

Sad to say but it's true I talked to a friend who is a writer for some gun rags and he had a meeting in reno with some of the winchester reps, they told him they are discontinuing the model 70 model 94 and the 1300, due to a diminishing market, declining sales, rising labor material and manufacturing costs.

His advice to me was "if you want a new model 70 go buy it now as of march there won't be anymore".

.

Alf has it right with both of his posts (as usual I seem to agree with him).

Loosing any gun manufacturer is something that the shooting fraternatity cannot afford. He is also correct regarding the importance of cheap labour vs quality...

A sad development indeed.

John

quote:

Originally posted by jjs:
It will be interesting to see what will happen as this process plays out. I have seen many similar situations over the past dozen years, however, it is difficult to understand how ownership and management could have allowed the situation to get this far down the road without developing a viable alternative...possibly that is already in play...or Olin has a better deal in the works..

I have seen many manufacturers in the US face difficult times. Those that work through their difficulties find new ways to compete and new markets, however, more and more small and midsized US producers (those unable or unwilling to change) become part of history. Competitive pressures will only increase for manufacturers in this country brought on by free trade policies...not fair trade policies...I wonder how all this will play out in the near future and how society adjust to the realities.

Hard for GM and Ford to compete with Chinese labor at $3.50/hour...but it is more than just hourly rates..the costs of producing in the US includes significant overhead ie Federal, State, and Local Gov't, health care, pensions, enviornmental impacts, etc...all part of the American way of life and overhead...compare that to China....Ultimately, more and better technology will come out of China (and other low cost producers)...many innovations and technological improvements come out of production...good low cost producers eventually develop into much more...

But we do have the Worlds largest market place! Walmart did figure that out many years ago....

Sad to see, but the reality is that the Japanese make better cars than our US counterparts. I own 4 cars - two US made and two Jap made. Guess which ones I spend the most on maintenance? Guess which have high miles and run great?

Guns are a bit the same way.

The funny thing about Japanese vehicles is that they are also made in U.S. now and still have the quality reputation. Could it have more to do with MANAGEMENT than marketing. Same people same country different management concept.

http://www.deming.org/


Deming's 14 points

by Phil Cohen

W Edwards Deming was an American statistician who was credited with the rise of Japan as a manufacturing nation, and with the invention of Total Quality Management (TQM). Deming went to Japan just after the War to help set up a census of the Japanese population. While he was there, he taught 'statistical process control' to Japanese engineers - a set of techniques which allowed them to manufacture high-quality goods without expensive machinery. In 1960 he was awarded a medal by the Japanese Emperor for his services to that country's industry.

Deming returned to the US and spent some years in obscurity before the publication of his book "Out of the crisis" in 1982. In this book, Deming set out 14 points which, if applied to US manufacturing industry, would he believed, save the US from industrial doom at the hands of the Japanese.

Although Deming does not use the term Total Quality Management in his book, it is credited with launching the movement. Most of the central ideas of TQM are contained in "Out of the crisis".

The 14 points seem at first sight to be a rag-bag of radical ideas, but the key to understanding a number of them lies in Deming's thoughts about variation. Variation was seen by Deming as the disease that threatened US manufacturing. The more variation - in the length of parts supposed to be uniform, in delivery times, in prices, in work practices - the more waste, he reasoned.

From this premise, he set out his 14 points for management, which we have paraphrased here:

1."Create constancy of purpose towards improvement".
Replace short-term reaction with long-term planning.

2."Adopt the new philosophy".
The implication is that management should actually adopt his philosophy, rather than merely expect the workforce to do so.

3."Cease dependence on inspection".
If variation is reduced, there is no need to inspect manufactured items for defects, because there won't be any.

4."Move towards a single supplier for any one item."
Multiple suppliers mean variation between feedstocks.

5."Improve constantly and forever".
Constantly strive to reduce variation.

6."Institute training on the job".
If people are inadequately trained, they will not all work the same way, and this will introduce variation.

7."Institute leadership".
Deming makes a distinction between leadership and mere supervision. The latter is quota- and target-based.

8."Drive out fear".
Deming sees management by fear as counter-productive in the long term, because it prevents workers from acting in the organisation's best interests.

9."Break down barriers between departments".
Another idea central to TQM is the concept of the 'internal customer', that each department serves not the management, but the other departments that use its outputs.

10."Eliminate slogans".
Another central TQM idea is that it's not people who make most mistakes - it's the process they are working within. Harassing the workforce without improving the processes they use is counter-productive.

11."Eliminate management by objectives".
Deming saw production targets as encouraging the delivery of poor-quality goods.

12."Remove barriers to pride of workmanship".
Many of the other problems outlined reduce worker satisfaction.

13."Institute education and self-improvement".

14."The transformation is everyone's job".


Deming has been criticised for putting forward a set of goals without providing any tools for managers to use to reach those goals (just the problem he identified in point 10). His inevitable response to this question was: "You're the manager, you figure it out."

"Out of the crisis" is over 500 pages long, and it is not possible to do full justice to it in a 600 word article. If the above points interest you, we recommend the book for further information.
http://www.hci.com.au/hcisite2/articles/deming.htm

-----------------------------------------

Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming


The Japanese listened and learned. Many American companies didn't.

-Bob F.

If the M-70 etal are adopted by an offshore, or domestic non-union manufacturer we may well see an improved product for the same price , or less.

It isn't as if the American worker is incapable of producing a quality product, that is clear. The "Japanese" car that is now the largest selling car in the US is made in Kentucky by US workers. Management may well make a difference, but it may also be that labor costs; GM +/-$48 per hour and Toyota only +/-$28 per hour. To get the same quality from GM might make a vehicle cost 60% more than the Toyota - who would buy it?

Colt says that it costs them almost $1,000 to manufacture the Python today. Not very many people will pay $2,000 for a revolver today. So they don't do that anymore.

There just doesn't seem to be sufficient market for the high end US made firearms to support a large full service corporate structure. The mass market can choose the cheaper CZ, Howa, Taurus and Tikka products which do a very fine job, and have quality enough to satisfy them.

I hope we haven't seen the end of the M-70, it chould come back in a better form. If it does I think it will remain a favorite.

Meantime it will be interesting to see if the Remington-Zastava rifles pick up the M-70's market share!

Les

Roscoe:

I'll be 76 this April so I have been looking at American guns for quite a long time. ( My first was a Savage Model 3, bolt action, 22 single shot, when I was 8) At first I thought that it was labor costs (Those damned American workers who wanted to be paid enough to support a family and a decent standard of living. The nerve of them!) I'm afraid that it is simply that we hunters and shooters are a shrinking minority in the US. Winchester, years ago, disappeared for me as a magic name when the corporations manipulated a bit and we now had "USRA". This latest move isn't surprising - just sad. (The funny thing is that with the exception of a Mod.70 in 220 Swift when I was young, I never was much of a fan of Winchesters (The Savage 99 in 250/3000 was far superior to the Win.94 -IMHO) Nonetheless, like many others, I mourn the passing of a name that was a part of our heritage as a country.

Gerry,
I agree the demand is not what it once was. This without a doubt has hurt all firearm manufacturers. There is however still a large number of guns sold each year. New international companies like CZ, Howa, and Pedesoli are entering the US market at the same time. Look at the market as an apple pie. Winchester at one time had over half. Now the pie is getting smaller and there are more people taking a slice. Operating a business is never easy. Very seldom will a company remain on top for multiple generations. Successful companies set the trends for others to follow. The days of sitting on a nest egg and expecting to stay successful are gone. That is where winchester fell short. I honestly believe the model 70, 94 and several other flag ship items will be back in some form, and could be of better quality. I also hate to see a gun company or any other manufacturer based in the US go away. I also Know that People in the US are very creative and always seem to find a way to adapt and move forward.

Interesting news article - looks like the union contract will prevent these guns from being made elsewhere.


01/19/2006
USRAC working to sell gun plant, save city jobs
Steve Higgins , Register Business Editor

NEW HAVEN — Following up on a promise to seek a buyer for the Winchester plant at Science Park, U.S. Repeating Arms Co. officials hoped to meet with representatives from another gun manufacturing company Wednesday afternoon.
However, company officials would not confirm the meeting took place.

Advertisement

On Tuesday, Belgium-based Herstal Group said it will close the plant at 344 Winchester Ave. March 31, citing global competition and a drop in demand. A total of 186 workers will lose their jobs.

"We are moving very aggressively to try to sell the business and to preserve these jobs," said USRAC facilities director Paul DeMennato Wednesday. He declined to name the potential buyer.

The city of New Haven is working with USRAC to try and locate a buyer.

DeMennato said if the plant closes down, it will mark the end of Winchester’s most well-known and historic sporting firearms — the Model 70 bolt action centerfire rifle, the Model 94 lever action centerfire rifle (known as "The Gun that Won the West") and the Model 1300 pump-action shotgun.

Herstal Group has no plans to make the New Haven-made models anywhere else, said DeMennato. Under the facility’s union contract, none of the products manufactured at the New Haven plant may be relocated before March 2008, anyway, he said.

Scott Grange, a spokesman for Herstal divisions Browning and Winchester Firearms, both located in Morgan, Utah, confirmed that Herstal has no plans to build the New Haven models anywhere else.

Winchester Firearms will continue to produce some other Winchester lines at plants in Portugal and Japan, he said. The Portugal plant produces a limited number of semi-automatic shotguns and semi-automatic rifles, and the Japan plant makes a limited number of fully functioning replicas of older Winchester models.

DeMenatto said if no buyers are found and the plant closes, the 186 workers will receive severance pay based on years of service, ranging from 430 hours’ pay for workers with more than 25 years to 270 hours’ pay for workers with 5 to 10 years.

The Rapid Response Team of the state Department of Labor contacted the company Wednesday and offered to meet with employees to tell them about resources available through the state — from unemployment insurance payments to workshops on interviewing and resume writing skills.

"Some have been working at the company for a long time. They don’t have a resume, they haven’t gone on interviews recently and they are really out of practice," said labor department spokeswoman Nancy Steffens. "We are trying to give them work force tools to give them a competitive edge."

Laid-off workers may meet with career counselors, use the Connecticut Job Bank database and learn about aid such as day care and health insurance for children.