buddy_fuentes Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 "I remember reading an article where gary smith stated he would not sell mag bodies because he did not want shooters risking a federal felony to compete in a GAME. it cost him a ton of money, but I respect him for standing on his principles." I guess car manufacturers need to stop selling cars...someone may drive drunk and kill someone. My son bought a Custom Super, during the ban, only to find that he could not get magazines. A call to Caspian was no help. Yep, kinda like selling a big engine sports car with only one cylinder working. Buddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipscbob Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 "I remember reading an article where gary smith stated he would not sell mag bodies because he did not want shooters risking a federal felony to compete in a GAME. it cost him a ton of money, but I respect him for standing on his principles."I guess car manufacturers need to stop selling cars...someone may drive drunk and kill someone. My son bought a Custom Super, during the ban, only to find that he could not get magazines. A call to Caspian was no help. Yep, kinda like selling a big engine sports car with only one cylinder working. Buddy I prefer the hi cap Caspian frame to the STI but gave up on them a long time ago due to a similar experience as Buddy with magazine availability. Go to the hassle and expense of welding up 170s!@? why bother when the other guy has them available off the shelf? It's simple. no support, no sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 You need a gun "manufacturer" to use the frames, sell complete guns and they would make sure there would be magazines...no magazines...no gun sales. I have heard from a very reliable source that a "known" gunsmith will be offering for sale a complete Caspian Limited gun. An official announcement should be forthcoming prior to the Shot Show. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Fred Craig building guns again? He was Mr. Caspian (at least it seemed like it)! I hope they consider a contingency program. I can tell you, the only reason I have STI frames is because of it. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Fred Craig building guns again? He was Mr. Caspian (at least it seemed like it)!I hope they consider a contingency program. I can tell you, the only reason I have STI frames is because of it. Rich Not Fred Craig, but another well known. I agree on the contingency program, I wish more of our sponsors would do one Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Alan, I'm with you. It's why the cars in NASCAR have all them stickers on there. Not primary sponsors, but contingency ones. Doesn't have to be on the level of STI, but I think even a discount would be nice. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seth Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 (edited) I can only imagine that contingency programs are NEARLY useless for a manufacturer. There's precious little media coverage or attendance. The only advantage for a company would be to give a little lovin' back to people that are ALREADY using their product. Having worked in offroad motorsports as a manufacturer for 7 years, I assure you that contingency programs and 'sponsorships' are typically VERY one sided. The manufacturer pays and pays and is lucky to see any press. Our sponsored competitors would receive thousands in product and moneys... and we'd see little back, even when we sponsored winners. Seth Edited January 7, 2008 by Sethmark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWLAZS Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Hey Alan is it Matt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Hey Alan is it Matt? Nope, this gunsmith has been building guns for about 25 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 I can only imagine that contingency programs are NEARLY useless for a manufacturer. There's precious little media coverage or attendance. The only advantage for a company would be to give a little lovin' back to people that are ALREADY using their product. Having worked in offroad motorsports as a manufacturer for 7 years, I assure you that contingency programs and 'sponsorships' are typically VERY one sided. The manufacturer pays and pays and is lucky to see any press. Our sponsored competitors would receive thousands in product and moneys... and we'd see little back, even when we sponsored winners. Seth I disagree. There are hundreds of shooters that choose STI over SV, simply becuase of the contingency program. The product at the frame level is nearly identical in contstruction, materials and cost, yet STI dominates the numbers. I know a lot of people that base that decision solely on the contingency program. Additionally STI requires that you wear their logo at the match, additional advertising. Would I spend an extra 2-300 to buy a gun with a contingency? Nope. Would I choose one similar product over another because of it, you bet. Caspian's two biggest issues were magazines and lack of complete guns from the factory. How many shooters started in Limited with an Edge as their first "race gun". Factory availability of a completed firearm is important. The second is the magazines. The magazine ban hurt Caspian big. STI and SV took a big chance by selling "replacement parts". It was obviously an end run around the law. Many IPSC shooters committed felonies to stay in the game. STI and SV had very little choice in the matter though because they didn't have any other products. It was either sell tubes or fold. Caspian on the other hand has lots of customers other than IPSC shooters. Mainly firearms manufacturers that use their parts in their complete guns. Caspian didn't need to push the law to make it through a crappy 10 year period. I'm not going to fault them for it and I do a lot of business with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rishii Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Ok Alan can I guess too? EGW, thats the only company that make aftermarket parts for the caspians, plus I hear George Smith is kinda fond of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWLAZS Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Ok Alancan I guess too? EGW, thats the only company that make aftermarket parts for the caspians, plus I hear George Smith is kinda fond of them That was my second guess. Matt was first because Caspian has a few of his guns on display. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Ok Alancan I guess too? EGW, thats the only company that make aftermarket parts for the caspians, plus I hear George Smith is kinda fond of them That was my second guess. Matt was first because Caspian has a few of his guns on display. Good tries, but nope. trying to think up a hint guys.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWLAZS Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Ok Alancan I guess too? EGW, thats the only company that make aftermarket parts for the caspians, plus I hear George Smith is kinda fond of them That was my second guess. Matt was first because Caspian has a few of his guns on display. Good tries, but nope. trying to think up a hint guys.... Is he building guns now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Ok Alancan I guess too? EGW, thats the only company that make aftermarket parts for the caspians, plus I hear George Smith is kinda fond of them That was my second guess. Matt was first because Caspian has a few of his guns on display. Good tries, but nope. trying to think up a hint guys.... Is he building guns now? As in building guns for specifically for use in USPSA competition, no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Wonder Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 (edited) Two things stick in regards to negative issues with Caspian: 1. Everyone remembers their 1st generation hi-cap frames cracking on a regular basis (fixed with generation 2) 2. Caspian refused to sell hi-cap replacement bodies during the 1994CB era. Gary's reasons are his own, but I'm sure had something to do with folks illegally building new hi-cap mags and potentially putting Caspian in a legal dilemma. We all know that no felonies were committed with hi-cap tubes from STI and SVI during the CB. Edited January 7, 2008 by Singlestack Wonder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vrmn1 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 I now have a brand new 40 cal Caspian hi cap mag. The new design with the extended base pad that holds 18. I wish I had a gun to shoot it in because it seems VERY WELL MADE. I primarily shot revolver and when I shoot limited I have a Glock. If I were a serious limited shooter I would be working on building a gun for this mag. I think these mags are readily available now, I won this one in the December "win a book" trivia contest. Now I have to find someon to give it to or I will be tempted to build a gun for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjanglin Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Sucks: Any gunsmith can get Hi-Cap stuff to build a forty,or any other caliber. doesnt need to be a special gunsmith if he or she is good ,its a snap. Jim Sailors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 I can only imagine that contingency programs are NEARLY useless for a manufacturer. There's precious little media coverage or attendance. The only advantage for a company would be to give a little lovin' back to people that are ALREADY using their product. Having worked in offroad motorsports as a manufacturer for 7 years, I assure you that contingency programs and 'sponsorships' are typically VERY one sided. The manufacturer pays and pays and is lucky to see any press. Our sponsored competitors would receive thousands in product and moneys... and we'd see little back, even when we sponsored winners. Seth I disagree. There are hundreds of shooters that choose STI over SV, simply becuase of the contingency program. The product at the frame level is nearly identical in contstruction, materials and cost, yet STI dominates the numbers. I know a lot of people that base that decision solely on the contingency program. Additionally STI requires that you wear their logo at the match, additional advertising. Would I spend an extra 2-300 to buy a gun with a contingency? Nope. Would I choose one similar product over another because of it, you bet. I once talked to Dave Skinner at a match about the STI contingency program and he said "look around and see all the STI shirts? A year ago (before contingency), there weren't a quarter as many". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Front Man Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Two things stick in regards to negative issues with Caspian:1. Everyone remembers their 1st generation hi-cap frames cracking on a regular basis (fixed with generation 2) 2. Caspian refused to sell hi-cap replacement bodies during the 1994CB era. Gary's reasons are his own, but I'm sure had something to do with folks illegally building new hi-cap mags and potentially putting Caspian in a legal dilemma. We all know that no felonies were committed with hi-cap tubes from STI and SVI during the CB. And Gary took care of those cracked frames just like a Dillon warranty. FM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rishii Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Alan did hell freeze over, building guns for 25 years, not building ipsc guns currently sounds like bill wilson getting back into the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rishii Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Two things stick in regards to negative issues with Caspian:1. Everyone remembers their 1st generation hi-cap frames cracking on a regular basis (fixed with generation 2) 2. Caspian refused to sell hi-cap replacement bodies during the 1994CB era. Gary's reasons are his own, but I'm sure had something to do with folks illegally building new hi-cap mags and potentially putting Caspian in a legal dilemma. We all know that no felonies were committed with hi-cap tubes from STI and SVI during the CB. And Gary took care of those cracked frames just like a Dillon warranty. FM remember the para aluminum frames that were justly famous for cracking, I wonder how many of those were taken care of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Alandid hell freeze over, building guns for 25 years, not building ipsc guns currently sounds like bill wilson getting back into the game Bill Wilson.... NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Not intended as criticism, but information. There is a long history of gun companies engaging in voluntary bans of items that are perfectly legal to sell, for example: - Prior to the 1994 ban, it was Gary's position that Caspian would not make 170mm mags since their existence might be used as justification/motivation for a ban. - Glock, prior to the 1994 ban, had strict LEO only limitations on sales of their 33 round 9mm magazines (intended for the full auto Model 18, but also suitable for their 9mm guns), and sold them only on a "direct ship to government" basis. There was no law requiring them to impose this limit. - Ruger has a long history of restricting sales of their large Mini-14 magazines and, to the best of my knowledge, will not sell a > 10 round Mini 14 magazine to civilians to this day. In fact, Ruger asked for a complete and total ban on the civilian possession of high capacity magazines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 How about Glock's stance on the 3.5 pound connector. Call Glock and try to get one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now