T1 Aimpoint looks like a dinosaur compared to the Holosun $199 micro red dot.

[JMP]

Next thing you know, you will be telling us the only difference between a PA and an aimpoint is the labor costs.

In fairness, he's correct to a degree; however, he seems to be looking manufacturing labor rate. The other significant cost of labor is that real optics require good engineers. Engineers are not cheap. Engineering and high precision manufacturing is very expensive. The truth is that a lot of the best stuff is designed under government contracts because the development costs are so high. It's actually nice to have nations' tax dollars to subsidize the gear. Inevitably, some Chinese factories can copy the real stuff to try to replicate designs. For small timers using cheap third world labor, they simply will not come up with anything of real technological innovation. When you demand such high precision, you can't really fabricate a product and get lucky. Free lunches are never free.

[sunborder]

In fairness, he's correct to a degree; however, he seems to be looking manufacturing labor rate. The other significant cost of labor is that real optics require good engineers. Engineers are not cheap. Engineering and high precision manufacturing is very expensive. The truth is that a lot of the best stuff is designed under government contracts because the development costs are so high. It's actually nice to have nations' tax dollars to subsidize the gear. Inevitably, some Chinese factories can copy the real stuff to try to replicate designs. For small timers using cheap third world labor, they simply will not come up with anything of real technological innovation. When you demand such high precision, you can't really fabricate a product and get lucky. Free lunches are never free.

And I almost hate to say it, but I am in almost complete agreement with you here. I almost added some commentary on the engineering side, but didn't want to clutter up the conversation. The Chinese engineers are getting better, and the value to cost ratio is getting higher, BUT, they aren't really there yet for top tier stuff. Take a look at their most recent "stealth" fighters, that can't fly in a straight line without losing altitude...and then look at what happens to them when you actually mount ordinance on them. The flight profile of a rock.

If you took the aimpoint design, and manufactured it in a place with cheaper production labor (but employed a high-quality QC dept), ditched the marketing budget, and made a few other business (not manufacturing) efficiency changes, you could get the cost of an aimpoint down quite a bit. They would sell more, too, at least initially. The problem, though, from their point of view, is that it wouldn't really net them the same profit, since all of those costs they are saving aren't going to get offset by additional revenue/profit. If anything, the luxury brand effect comes into play (lower the cost of expensive champagne, and people will buy LESS of it), plus you lose brand recognition when you don't fuel your marketing budget. Aimpoint prices their gear the way they do because it maximizes their profit and meets their other goals (keeping their countrymen employed).

HK's marketing budget is almost certainly proportionally much larger than other comparable gun manufacturers. You pay for that when you buy their products.

Holosun has taken a different (low-cost) track in trying to market its products (social media, creating a sense of ownership with beta testers [I mean, early customers], partnerships with vendors like PA, etc...). That helps lower the cost of their products. It's not all of the difference. It probably isn't even accounting for half of the price difference. It IS probably a bigger difference than most folks here appreciate. Then you factor in unfavorable exchange rates, labor costs, cost of design (which holosun is cutting by their rapid development and feedback from customers rather than using traditional engineering/design cycles), and a bunch of other smaller issues, you end up with a cheaper optic. I don't think anyone except the OP here is claiming that these optics are even in the same quality tier. I'm just suggesting that just because the sight costs 1/3 as much, doesn't mean that they cut 2/3 off the manufacturing quality and design process. There are other ways to get efficiencies.

As for technological innovation, I wouldn't say it's impossible, I just think it's unlikely that the innovation would be in the area of basic science or new technologies. Innovation, CAN, however come out of combinations of existing technologies or designs that haven't been put together, or that haven't been applied in a certain way before.

[five.five-six]

Part of it IS quality, but not as much as you might think. Marketing budgets and cost of labor are huge costs of production. A lot of HK's early weapons were cheap stamped guns like the G3...which were much more expensive than the CETME, which is basically the same gun. Labor costs in Spain were way lower than Germany... That's a true apples-to-apples comparison.

Wow... G3 is just a cheep stamped gun. I read it on the internet, it must be true.

Have you ever physically inspected, fired or even touched any of the G3 family of weapons? They are some of the finest weapons ever made.

"Cheaply stamped" It's amazing what you can read on the internet

[five.five-six]

If you want multiple reticles get that NCStar red dot. It's got 4. Aimpoint has nothing on that.

Not to mention you can get the NCStar in red or green. Where is your god now Aimpoint?

[five.five-six]

In fairness, he's correct to a degree; however, he seems to be looking manufacturing labor rate. The other significant cost of labor is that real optics require good engineers. Engineers are not cheap. Engineering and high precision manufacturing is very expensive. The truth is that a lot of the best stuff is designed under government contracts because the development costs are so high. It's actually nice to have nations' tax dollars to subsidize the gear. Inevitably, some Chinese factories can copy the real stuff to try to replicate designs. For small timers using cheap third world labor, they simply will not come up with anything of real technological innovation. When you demand such high precision, you can't really fabricate a product and get lucky. Free lunches are never free.

If you boil it down all the way, all materials prices are set by the cost of the labor to procure them with the exception of the De Beers model.

[jonzer77]

I'm comparing their USP compact v7 in .40s&w, which I did NOT like, to say, a S&W M&P. That's about a 30% savings.

Or, if you like, the MR556a1 ($2,700) to the Ruger SR-556 at half the cost. If you want an apples to apples (ruger isn't a piston gun), then the LMT CQBPS16 is roughly 2/3 the cost of the HK. ($1,800 vs $2,700).

Part of it IS quality, but not as much as you might think. Marketing budgets and cost of labor are huge costs of production. A lot of HK's early weapons were cheap stamped guns like the G3...which were much more expensive than the CETME, which is basically the same gun. Labor costs in Spain were way lower than Germany... That's a true apples-to-apples comparison.

What about the PPQ in .40S&W? It's made in Germany and it's only about $30 more then the M&P. That would be apple to apples.

[sunborder]

What about the PPQ in .40S&W? It's made in Germany and it's only about $30 more then the M&P. That would be apple to apples.

A good point. I would be willing to bet a large sum of money, however, than HK's marketing department dwarf's Walther's. Still wouldn't make up for the discrepancy. Interesting.

[sunborder]

Wow... G3 is just a cheep stamped gun. I read it on the internet, it must be true.

Have you ever physically inspected, fired or even touched any of the G3 family of weapons? They are some of the finest weapons ever made.

"Cheaply stamped" It's amazing what you can read on the internet

I never said they were bad weapons. The AK-47 is a fine weapon, but it is also "cheaply stamped," as is the Uzi, and any other number of fine guns. I'm referring to the cost of manufacturing, not the suitability of the end product for its intended use. A milled receiver is generally more expensive to produce than a stamped one, for example.

As for the G3, no, I don't generally get to play with full-auto toys, and HK hasn't been very friendly about releasing civilian variants of their weapons for the public to purchase. I HAVE seen what it does to brass, where it's controls are located, and the price tag. By the way, the word "just" was not in my original post. You are inserting a tone that wasn't in the original. I wasn't trash talking the G3. I was saying that an almost identical rifle (made by practically the same design team), manufactured in a different country, was much cheaper, and that the manufacturing costs vs "retail" prices were more on par for weapons that had forged/milled receivers, which are more expensive to produce (though not necessarily better performers...).

[five.five-six]

as is the Uzi, and any other number of fine guns.

Have you ever even seen a gun in real life or do you just play with them on COD? A UZI us a fine gun? If that's a fine gun, just what would you consider a POS?

UZI and a G family platform aren't even in the same hemisphere of quality.

Perhaps you should just stop posting while you are behind.

[JMP]

Perhaps you should just stop posting while you are behind.

Why? If we are grading on effort and creativity, his posts are of superlative quality.

[five.five-six]

As for the G3, no, I don't generally get to play with full-auto toys, and HK hasn't been very friendly about releasing civilian variants of their weapons for the public to purchase. I HAVE seen what it does to brass, where it's controls are located, and the price tag. By the way, the word "just" was not in my original post. You are inserting a tone that wasn't in the original. I wasn't trash talking the G3. I was saying that an almost identical rifle (made by practically the same design team), manufactured in a different country, was much cheaper, and that the manufacturing costs vs "retail" prices were more on par for weapons that had forged/milled receivers, which are more expensive to produce (though not necessarily better performers...).

Perhaps I am being a little rough, I deal withe these guns all the time and I can tell you from years of experience that there is a huge difference in quality between H&K and any of the knockoffs.

[JMP]

Perhaps I am being a little rough, I deal withe these guns all the time and I can tell you from years of experience that there is a huge difference in quality between H&K and any of the knockoffs.

Do they jam on COD? As I indicated in several posts, their products are exceptional (as have others)...have been for quite a while, and I have never played COD, so I am way behind the curve. I do know that some of my guns are good because folks at the range have recognized them from COD, and told me they are awesome guns. So, heck, I let them shoot them in real life for them to assess them for me.

[five.five-six]

Do they jam on COD? As I indicated in several posts, their products are exceptional (as have others)...have been for quite a while, and I have never played COD, so I am way behind the curve. I do know that some of my guns are good because folks at the range have recognized them from COD, and told me they are awesome guns. So, heck, I let them shoot them in real life for them to assess them for me.

I must confess, I am talking out of my ars about COD. My experience with COD is limited to internet MEMEs and Youtube clips.

[sunborder]

OK, now that you are all getting silly,

1. The CETME predates the G3, it isn't a "knockoff." If anything, the G3 is a slightly updated version of the CETME.
2. The original Uzi (not talking about the micro/mini/etc... with their jam-o-matic rates of fire) was a revolutionary weapon in its time. Aside from some problems with dirt/dust (hello? open bolt anyone?), it was considered reliable enough to be the most produced/sold SMG for about 3 decades worldwide, including the US Secret Service. It must be a complete POS like the AK, since so many were made.

(What exactly about the Uzi makes you say it is a POS? Are we talking about one of those Rhodesian-manufactured ones, or IMI?)

3. If HK guns are so reliable, then why was my HK USP compact jamming with multiple brands of factory ammo out of the box? It wasn't me limp-wristing either, since one of the instructors at the range I frequented in those days was getting stovepipes and what about the frequent copper jacket gouges/scratches from the feed ramp? Had lots of fun getting that POS broken in. I'm not slamming all HK's. I suspect I had an unusual lemon, but I just don't choose to partake of the HK fandom.

I couldn't tell you much about COD either, I don't own a game console manufactured in the last 10 years.

You know what? I'm done with this thread, since we've moved so far past holosun, that it's not really worth it anymore. It's become more about ad-hominem attacks, and less about the actual points that were being made re: manufacturing costs and optics. It's a pitty, since if you guys had stayed a little more on topic, you probably would have had a lot to contribute. Say what you like at this point, but I am done with this thread.

[KING_PALM]

Comparing HK to Ruger is hilarious.

Bill ruger also hated gun owners.. I mean if you buy into HK then i think its funny too.