Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Rifles and Shotguns > Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles
o

Notices

Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles Dedicated to the Smith & Wesson M&P-15 Rifles


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-01-2017, 09:46 AM
WVSig's Avatar
WVSig WVSig is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 467
Liked 2,047 Times in 648 Posts
Default S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II

Was looking around the other day on Slickguns and saw this rifle. It is the M&P15 with a 1:7 twist M4 profile barrel and carrying handle with A2 sights. MSRP of $1269 selling at $890.

Smith and Wesson M&P15 Black 5.56/.223 16in 30rd 1 in 7" Twist

You compare it to the Sport II which retails $499 these days with and MSRP of $739.

People often discuss in this section why the Sport II costs what it does compared to guns like the Colt 6920. The Sport II is not an apples to apples comparison to the Colt as many have pointed out. The Colt used to come with a carry handle but these days comes with Magpul MBUS sights, which is a cost saving measure. The M&P 1:7 seems like a more direct comparison. For some the carry handle will be a turn off for others is is a bonus.

What I find interesting is the price difference between the Sport II and the 1:7 guns. Is it the barrel profile, twist and the chrome linging which drives up the cost of the 1:7 or is it simply economy of scale that drives the Sport II lower?

I believe that the Sport II was spec'd to meet a price point and that the specs were chosen and refined to maintain that price point while meeting the demands of most recreational and commercial shooters. If they could have used the 1:7s spec and still produced a budget rifle they could sell at a profit they would have done it. IMHO I would speculate that S&W could not leverage enough economy of scale to produce the 1:7 to get to the price point of the Sport II or budget rifle range.

Thoughts?
__________________
Use should dictate gear!

Last edited by WVSig; 03-01-2017 at 05:18 PM. Reason: Changed "cost" to "price" in some places.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-01-2017, 10:49 AM
cyphertext cyphertext is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Wylie, TX
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,075
Liked 3,823 Times in 2,040 Posts
Default

I think the only ones who can answer this is S&W. I've often wondered this as well... when you look at the limited specs, many things appear to be the same, like 4140 barrel steel and receiver alloys. But the devil must be in the details that S&W aren't telling us.

Items like triggers... everyone says "mil-spec" trigger in the Sport, but it isn't. The hammer is MIM, not cast. Mine works fine, but I bet it is cheaper to produce.

Bolts... Back when the Sport first hit the market, we had info from a reliable source that the bolt was produced by Microbest. S&W used the same BCG in the rest of their line as well. With the Sport II, I don't know if that is still true. I would assume that they would use the same, due to economies of scale... but then why have different fire control groups...

With barrels, S&W made most of their rifles with 1:9 twist... I think that if their standard was 1:7, we would see that in the Sport II. Probably not M4 profile, as that is more machining. And I assume that salt nitrate bath is cheaper than chrome lining.

Brings me back to my question on Sport II and Sport II ORC vs. M&P 15 OR. Back in the day, the original Sport and the M&P 15 OR were very close in price. Today, the Sport sells for $525 and the OR still sells for the same price it did many years ago... I want to know what the real differences are that allow the Sport to meet such a lower price point.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #3  
Old 03-01-2017, 11:37 AM
Mark IV's Avatar
Mark IV Mark IV is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 588
Likes: 736
Liked 425 Times in 235 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyphertext View Post
....... But the devil must be in the details that S&W aren't telling us.....
.......I want to know what the real differences are that allow the Sport to meet such a lower price point.


Good post here, I've been wondering the same things. I've had upper-end AR's (Colt, DD,Spikes) and wheeled-n-dealed through a couple Sports (I's and II's) and currently have a Sport II that I'm pleased with.
From what I've read, they cut financial corners on the barrel steel (not a big deal,realistically), and on the furniture (also not an issue for me), and yeah, the melonite/nitride treatment saves them money over chroming the bore (I'd prefer the longevity of chrome, but at this price point, and for my casual uses, this ain't a deal breaker, either).
The MIM fire control group was news to me, but from what I understand about modern MIM, this doesn't seem to be the concern many people make it out to be.
But, (again, as I've read) the upper and lower receivers, and BCG's, are identical to their top-line models, which I was very encouraged by, assuming this is accurate. (does anyone know for sure?)
So to summarize, I'm thinking they put these out cheap via several factors: they already have a large,efficient production operation in place, they use a barrel that's cheaper (inside and out), they use the cheapest plastic furniture available, and MIM instead of forged/machined parts. Also, I suspect the Sports may be something of a "loss leader", something they more-or-less break even on, in order to steal market share from all the smaller competitors.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #4  
Old 03-01-2017, 02:46 PM
Disabled1 Disabled1 is offline
Banned
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: South Of The North Pole
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 491
Liked 710 Times in 424 Posts
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark IV View Post
Good post here, I've been wondering the same things. I've had upper-end AR's (Colt, DD,Spikes) and wheeled-n-dealed through a couple Sports (I's and II's) and currently have a Sport II that I'm pleased with.
From what I've read, they cut financial corners on the barrel steel (not a big deal,realistically), and on the furniture (also not an issue for me), and yeah, the melonite/nitride treatment saves them money over chroming the bore (I'd prefer the longevity of chrome, but at this price point, and for my casual uses, this ain't a deal breaker, either).
The MIM fire control group was news to me, but from what I understand about modern MIM, this doesn't seem to be the concern many people make it out to be.
But, (again, as I've read) the upper and lower receivers, and BCG's, are identical to their top-line models, which I was very encouraged by, assuming this is accurate. (does anyone know for sure?)
So to summarize, I'm thinking they put these out cheap via several factors: they already have a large,efficient production operation in place, they use a barrel that's cheaper (inside and out), they use the cheapest plastic furniture available, and MIM instead of forged/machined parts. Also, I suspect the Sports may be something of a "loss leader", something they more-or-less break even on, in order to steal market share from all the smaller competitors.
I was with you there up until your last sentence. I don't think S&W makes a firearm to break even on, or, to take a loss to get more business in other areas.
I saw that Academy has the OR M&P-15 for $849.99. I would rather have a SAINT, or, a COLT OEM-1 or 2, and still would be paying less than the OR.
Maybe someone can call S&W and ask them what the difference is between the OR & the Sport II. I too am very interested in knowing how they differ from one another.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:32 PM
rockquarry rockquarry is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,552
Likes: 4
Liked 8,885 Times in 4,121 Posts
Default

I'm confident the S&W ARs are good gun, but I've never looked at one.

You might consider just buying a Colt. They remain the standard. If it becomes necessary to sell, a Colt will be easier to sell. Comparatively, a Colt probably retains value better than other such guns.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:35 PM
WVSig's Avatar
WVSig WVSig is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 467
Liked 2,047 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disabled1 View Post
I was with you there up until your last sentence. I don't think S&W makes a firearm to break even on, or, to take a loss to get more business in other areas.
I saw that Academy has the OR M&P-15 for $849.99. I would rather have a SAINT, or, a COLT OEM-1 or 2, and still would be paying less than the OR.
Maybe someone can call S&W and ask them what the difference is between the OR & the Sport II. I too am very interested in knowing how they differ from one another.
Everytime I have asked those type of questions of S&W they claim not to know the answer. If you ask them specifics beyond the published specs they will not say. YMMV but that has been my experience when you ask about production methods, metallurgy etc.
__________________
Use should dictate gear!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:43 PM
cyphertext cyphertext is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Wylie, TX
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,075
Liked 3,823 Times in 2,040 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockquarry View Post
I'm confident the S&W ARs are good gun, but I've never looked at one.

You might consider just buying a Colt. They remain the standard. If it becomes necessary to sell, a Colt will be easier to sell. Comparatively, a Colt probably retains value better than other such guns.
We aren't discussing Colts here... The topic is comparing two S&W rifles...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:45 PM
cyphertext cyphertext is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Wylie, TX
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,075
Liked 3,823 Times in 2,040 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WVSig View Post
Everytime I have asked those type of questions of S&W they claim not to know the answer. If you ask them specifics beyond the published specs they will not say. YMMV but that has been my experience when you ask about production methods, metallurgy etc.
Yep, back in the days of "the chart" (I hear the groans), S&W would reply that the specs were proprietary.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:48 PM
WVSig's Avatar
WVSig WVSig is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 467
Liked 2,047 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyphertext View Post
We aren't discussing Colts here... The topic is comparing two S&W rifles...
I think the cost differences must be in the machining of the barrels and economy of scale. I can't believe that the trigger groups, BCGs, etc.. could be all that different to warrant the almost $400 up charge.

The 1:7 definately has a different lower because it uses a a squared off trigger guard vs the integrated trigger guard on the Sport II.

__________________
Use should dictate gear!

Last edited by WVSig; 03-01-2017 at 03:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-01-2017, 04:26 PM
rockquarry rockquarry is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,552
Likes: 4
Liked 8,885 Times in 4,121 Posts
Default

Just trying to solve an apparent dilemma. Pardon me.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #11  
Old 03-01-2017, 04:37 PM
hdwhit hdwhit is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: North Texas
Posts: 804
Likes: 86
Liked 482 Times in 300 Posts
Default

Quote:
cyphertext wrote:
I want to know what the real differences are that allow the Sport to meet such a lower price point.
Price and Cost are two different things.

Cost is a measure, expressed in monetary terms, of the inputs used in creating a product. There are many types of cost. Direct Costs represent the value of the inputs used to create one particular product. Fully Absorbed Cost represents the value of all inputs (engineering, support staff, advertising, the cost of the factory, etc.) used in the creation of one particular product. I suspect there are as many cost definitions as there are Managerial Accountants to come up with them.

Price, on the other hand, is what someone is willing to pay to own a particular item. The principles of marketing tell us that price is to be set on the basis of "what the market will bear". And we see this in action with this very rifle. The Sport II you say now retails for $499 was flying off the shelves of my LGS six months ago for $649 - and then they raised the price to $679 and still couldn't keep them in stock. The cost of building a Sport II didn't drop by nearly $200 in that time, but what people were willing to pay did.

S&W clearly intends the Sport II to be its "mainstream" product and so it's price hews close to what the most price-sensitive buyers are willing to pay. Adding a chrome barrel doesn't double the cost for S&W to make an AR, but because people perceive a chrome lined barrel to be vastly superior to a melonited barrel, it does nearly double the price because people are willing to pay it.

So, the answer to your question is that just like adding $125 worth of leather upholstery to a car raises its price by $2,000, the market is willing to pay dramatically higher prices for M&P-15 models with comparatively inexpensive additions.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-01-2017, 05:05 PM
WVSig's Avatar
WVSig WVSig is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 467
Liked 2,047 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hdwhit View Post
Price and Cost are two different things.

Cost is a measure, expressed in monetary terms, of the inputs used in creating a product. There are many types of cost. Direct Costs represent the value of the inputs used to create one particular product. Fully Absorbed Cost represents the value of all inputs (engineering, support staff, advertising, the cost of the factory, etc.) used in the creation of one particular product. I suspect there are as many cost definitions as there are Managerial Accountants to come up with them.

Price, on the other hand, is what someone is willing to pay to own a particular item. The principles of marketing tell us that price is to be set on the basis of "what the market will bear". And we see this in action with this very rifle. The Sport II you say now retails for $499 was flying off the shelves of my LGS six months ago for $649 - and then they raised the price to $679 and still couldn't keep them in stock. The cost of building a Sport II didn't drop by nearly $200 in that time, but what people were willing to pay did.

S&W clearly intends the Sport II to be its "mainstream" product and so it's price hews close to what the most price-sensitive buyers are willing to pay. Adding a chrome barrel doesn't double the cost for S&W to make an AR, but because people perceive a chrome lined barrel to be vastly superior to a melonited barrel, it does nearly double the price because people are willing to pay it.

So, the answer to your question is that just like adding $125 worth of leather upholstery to a car raises its price by $2,000, the market is willing to pay dramatically higher prices for M&P-15 models with comparatively inexpensive additions.
Fully understood except that no one buys the S&W 1:7 so the market does not see any additional value in the differences. I have seen a lot of posts here of people with M&P 15Ts, Sport II, Sport Is, Magpul Moes etc.... but never 1:7s.

Also all I can say to some one paying $679 for a Sport II is "There's a sucker born every minute." The Sport II is a good rifle but at $679 that local dealer is taking advantage of the people.

When I am talking about cost I am talking directly about what it "cost" S&W to build the rifle. They will never tell us but we can speculate. They certainly have cut some corners on the Sport II but none that have been problematic for the rifle within its intended use.

Since we do not know and will never been told what it "costs" we end up talking about "price." I believe that price is so dependent on market factors like fear and panic. I also believe that S&W is trying to tier their offers but that the Sport II and the earlier Sports are so solid not many people buying S&W ARs are moving up their food chain.

Most people looking for premium ARs are looking at other brands.
__________________
Use should dictate gear!

Last edited by WVSig; 03-01-2017 at 05:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 03-01-2017, 05:34 PM
cyphertext cyphertext is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Wylie, TX
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,075
Liked 3,823 Times in 2,040 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockquarry View Post
Just trying to solve an apparent dilemma. Pardon me.
I'm not sure how "buy a Colt" answered the question of why there is such a delta in price between two Smith and Wesson models...
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #14  
Old 03-01-2017, 05:38 PM
Pro2nd's Avatar
Pro2nd Pro2nd is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 216
Likes: 379
Liked 163 Times in 90 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WVSig View Post

Also all I can say to some one paying $679 for a Sport II is "There's a sucker born every minute." The Sport II is a good rifle but at $679 that local dealer is taking advantage of the people.

When I am talking about cost I am talking directly about what it "cost" S&W to build the rifle. They will never tell us but we can speculate. They certainly have cut some corners on the Sport II but none that have been problematic for the rifle within its intended use.

Since we do not know and will never been told what it "costs" .
the bold/underline is how I feel about people who drop a stack of cash on a "high end" AR.. to me, its just a waste of money..

I would happily pay that for a S&W sport II.. because I like it.. and as I have mentioned before, I am simply a S&W fan/supporter, plus.. I like to support my local businesses.. even if it cost me a bit more to do so....

and as far as us not knowing "What it cost to produce" that applies to literally everything.. car, refrigerator, you name it..

Last edited by Pro2nd; 03-01-2017 at 05:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-01-2017, 06:15 PM
rockquarry rockquarry is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,552
Likes: 4
Liked 8,885 Times in 4,121 Posts
Default

cyphertext -Again, I apologize. Colt had already been mentioned previously more than once. I thought spades had been broken, so to speak...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-01-2017, 06:44 PM
Pro2nd's Avatar
Pro2nd Pro2nd is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 216
Likes: 379
Liked 163 Times in 90 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockquarry View Post
cyphertext -Again, I apologize. Colt had already been mentioned previously more than once. I thought spades had been broken, so to speak...
Colt had been referenced 5 times prior to you posting..
Three times in the very first opening post in this thread..

But I do understand that the discussion is suppose to be about the Various S&W AR's,,
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-01-2017, 10:05 PM
Disabled1 Disabled1 is offline
Banned
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: South Of The North Pole
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 491
Liked 710 Times in 424 Posts
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockquarry View Post
cyphertext -Again, I apologize. Colt had already been mentioned previously more than once. I thought spades had been broken, so to speak...
RQ, I am not looking to buy a Colt. We are trying to figure out the difference between the M&P OR and the Sport II and why they are so far apart in price, yet, look the same, have the same parts, etc. I merely stated, that for the price of the OR, I would RATHER have a Colt or a SAINT. That's my fault for the thread drift.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-01-2017, 10:13 PM
vonn's Avatar
vonn vonn is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: houston,texas
Posts: 7,198
Likes: 124,841
Liked 23,177 Times in 5,749 Posts
Default

Reading this thread has me thinking on costs of things that most of us as shooters have little ability to check,as in the cost of various materials used in the production of various components. Even slight differences in alloys and machining costs can add up and how tight the parts are held to some ideal tolerance level can also change costs dramatically . If a person thinks in terms of v8 engines you can pick up a factory Mr.Goodwrench type 350 for 1500 or so or build a NASCAR type small block for tens of thousands and when you compare specs they don't look to be much different but the differences in price and performance are great,the devil is in the details.
__________________
Hue 68 noli me tangere
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #19  
Old 03-01-2017, 11:32 PM
cyphertext cyphertext is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Wylie, TX
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,075
Liked 3,823 Times in 2,040 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockquarry View Post
cyphertext -Again, I apologize. Colt had already been mentioned previously more than once. I thought spades had been broken, so to speak...
Actually, it's me guys... I apologize... just being snippy because we have recently been reminded that this is the S&W forum in other posts....
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-02-2017, 12:53 AM
Engine49guy's Avatar
Engine49guy Engine49guy is online now
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 7,770
Likes: 2,468
Liked 8,294 Times in 2,907 Posts
Default

What is puzzling is why in such an AR15 saturated market S&W doesnt offer a 9mm AR15 Carbine, it would be cheaper to build having less moving parts and no gas system so selling them at the $499 M&P Sport 2 pricing would net them more profit, they could even buld it with long stick mags that would also fit their 9mm M&P handgun line.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #21  
Old 03-02-2017, 01:52 AM
Flash_80 Flash_80 is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 335
Likes: 189
Liked 148 Times in 96 Posts
Default

I'd buy it.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #22  
Old 03-02-2017, 04:24 PM
Mark IV's Avatar
Mark IV Mark IV is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 588
Likes: 736
Liked 425 Times in 235 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WVSig View Post
The 1:7 definately has a different lower because it uses a a squared off trigger guard vs the integrated trigger guard on the Sport II.
Yep, fair point, I'd forgotten about the different trigger guard. But, this is supposedly just another mild cost cutting measure, I'd think it highly unlikely that the two lower receivers are any different in quality of material and machining. I would bet that other than the swiveling trigger guard, they are 100% identical.

Last edited by Mark IV; 03-02-2017 at 04:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #23  
Old 03-02-2017, 04:40 PM
cyphertext cyphertext is offline
US Veteran
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Wylie, TX
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,075
Liked 3,823 Times in 2,040 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark IV View Post
Yep, fair point, I'd forgotten about the different trigger guard. But, this is supposedly just another mild cost cutting measure, I'd think it highly unlikely that the two lower receivers are any different in quality of material and machining. I would bet that other than the swiveling trigger guard, they are 100% identical.
Agree... Same alloys used and you can swap Sport uppers and lowers with any other standard upper and lower.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #24  
Old 03-02-2017, 05:55 PM
Mark IV's Avatar
Mark IV Mark IV is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 588
Likes: 736
Liked 425 Times in 235 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disabled1 View Post
I was with you there up until your last sentence. I don't think S&W makes a firearm to break even on, or, to take a loss to get more business in other areas.
Well,naturally, breaking even, or even making a very thin profit, wouldn't have been "Plan A" .
But, I don't believe they ( nor any of us) ever anticipated the market getting flooded to the point that these things would be selling for $499,delivered, either.
We can assume the middle man, who's paying that occasional free shipping, is also making money, so I don't think it's implausible that S&W is barely squeeking by on this particular model.
I mean, think about it, there's only gonna be so much gravy on a sub-$500 AR15 from a quality manufacturer. I'm not saying they necessarilly are selling these at, or close to cost, but they could well be.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #25  
Old 03-03-2017, 04:29 PM
Brian in Oregon Brian in Oregon is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 678
Likes: 102
Liked 913 Times in 293 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engine49guy View Post
What is puzzling is why in such an AR15 saturated market S&W doesnt offer a 9mm AR15 Carbine, it would be cheaper to build having less moving parts and no gas system so selling them at the $499 M&P Sport 2 pricing would net them more profit, they could even buld it with long stick mags that would also fit their 9mm M&P handgun line.
Can you imagine the consternation here if S&W made a 9mm Sport II?

I've wondered why S&W does not make a 9mm and a .40 that takes their own mags. PSA is selling 9mm lowers that take Glock mags like hotcakes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WVSig View Post
....Thoughts?
I believe the Sport II is indeed set for a pricing point that is attractive to several types of buyers.

The phrase "entry level gun" has often been used, and I believe that is accurate, though some have used the term in a derogatory manner, just as some see a "truck gun" as a junker while others see it as a gun ready for service at any time aboard a vehicle which can take the rough storage conditions without worry about the finish, etc. I think the pricing point is attractive to those looking for their first, perhaps only, AR15. They don't care about milspec, especially milspec cosmetics like barrel profile. They are likely to be using less expensive ammunition, like in the 55 gr range, so the twist rate will provide them with better accuracy. They don't care about the lack of a swing down trigger guard, and for gloved use the trigger guard is already larger anyway. They don't know what furniture they want, so the basic will do and it won't be much of a waste to replace it when they do want to upgrade. The sights are rudimentary and at least the rear sight is replaceable. S&W is now offering an even cheaper version of the Sport II with a railed gas block (wish I had held out for it). What they definitely want is a good, reliable AR15 that has a reputable company backing it up. And S&W does with their lifetime warranty. They don't care about 4140 vs 4150 steel (if they even know about this at all), though they might want some sort of bore treatment.

Then you have those who who are not new to the AR15 game who are looking for a particular set of specs to fulfill a particular need at a good price from a reliable manufacturer. Perhaps they do not want an M4 profile barrel, nor 1:7" twist. Perhaps they prefer Melonite over chrome. Maybe they intend to replace the cheap furniture and view it as disposable. Perhaps they like a solid trigger guard area that formerly was only available with a billet lower. (I fall into this group.)

There are also those who have expensive AR15s but saw the Sport II as an affordable way to set up family members with their own AR15s. I've seen a few customers at a couple of local shops doing just that. They are kind of a blend of both groups above.

As for comparing the Sport II to a "milspec" M4, it is indeed apples and oranges.

First, the M4 is simply the latest version of a long line of AR15/M16 milspec versions.

The A1, A2, HBAR, CAR (XM177E2), etc., are all milspec versions too.

So as far as barrel profile and twist go, any of the above profiles and 1:9" twist are just as milspec as an M4 and 1:7" twist. The Sport II does not "fail" in this respect.

The Sport II had an integral trigger guard and is not per the military blueprints. Frankly I think it is superior for strength, but technically it fails milspec.

The bolt carrier is properly staked per milspec. The inside of the bolt carrier is chrome lined. Whether it meets the other bolt and bolt carrier specifications, I do not know. Have not found that information.

The Sport II has a milspec buffer tube, or at least its dimensions meet milspec. Many less expensive AR's are using commercial spec tubes.

Where the Sport II doesn't meet milspec is in the barrel metallurgy. THIS is the important comparison for those who consider meeting milspec to be important. The barrel is 4140, not the specified 4150. I don't see any magnetic particle inspection stamping, etc. It's not chrome lined, but instead has melonite treatment (which I prefer over chrome from an accuracy standpoint). Does this mean it is an inferior barrel? We're getting decent reports of accuracy from owners, so apparently not.

The Sport II also has MIM fire control parts. I don't know if MIM parts are acceptable for milspec nowadays or not. If anyone wants to enlighten us on this aspect, please do. Are MIM parts inferior to billet or forged? So far no complaints from S&W handgun owners, other than traditionalists (like me) and those who view cosmetics as important.

The Sport II does have M4 style feed ramps in the lower receiver and barrel extension, so it is meeting the current milspec.

Over the years there have been some pretty bad non-milspec AR15s made, via reverse engineering, cast receivers, inferior machining, out of spec parts, ****** barrels, etc. The Sport II is definitely not one of these.

And the more basic question is, are milspec specifications really that important for ALL areas of an AR15? There are some outstanding varmint and target barrels that are clearly not milspec, but outperform any milspec barrel. I think each potential buyer needs to decide which specifications are optional and which are mandatory for their purchase.

And finally, since comparing the Sport II to a milspec M4 is apples and oranges, the real comparison should be made to other AR15s from OTHER manufacturers in its market tier class. Compare it to other "entry level" AR15s and see how it holds up. I think that puts more proper perspective on the issue.

Last edited by Brian in Oregon; 03-03-2017 at 04:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #26  
Old 03-03-2017, 06:53 PM
ChattanoogaPhil's Avatar
ChattanoogaPhil ChattanoogaPhil is offline
Member
S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II S&W M&P15 Milspec M4 Clone cost vs Sport II  
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 14,661
Likes: 7,937
Liked 20,623 Times in 5,958 Posts
Default

Who knows...? Could be a combination of all the things already mentioned. Maybe some parts aren't made in-house? Does S&W manufacture the 1-7 and 15 lowers? Notice the M&P 1-7 and 15 appear to be the only models in the lineup that don't have the incorporated trigger guard in the lower.

Maybe part of the price difference is that the 1 in 7 is listed as "Law Enforcment" and marketed to government agencies accordingly with competitors.

Last edited by ChattanoogaPhil; 03-03-2017 at 07:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-03-2017, 07:18 PM
WR Moore WR Moore is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,580
Likes: 1,787
Liked 5,342 Times in 2,685 Posts
Default

Before I retired, my employers had been buying the M&P15s through S&W law enforcement sales reps. They had 1-9 chrome lined barrels and were of excellent quality. Don't recall what we were paying, but much less than for Colts and they ran right with the Colts in an abusive environment.


Now, it could well be that there is a demand for 1-7 barrels in certain circles and that has resulted in a model to satisfy the demand. I'm not real sure why there would be such a demand (other than to satisfy mil-spec wannabees) as most LE work doesn't demand a capability to handle long, heavy match grade bullets. It could well be that some procurement types are simply doing a cut & paste from Colt specs, or fan boys are trying to exclude non-Colt sources by the barrel specs.

If the model doesn't appear on the S&W website, it could be a special request production run and excess to the contract. Assuming the upper is actually by S&W.

BTW, hard chrome barrel lining adds about $40 retail to a barrel price. Depending upon source and quality, the carry handle can add up to $200 retail.

Last edited by WR Moore; 03-03-2017 at 07:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
M&P 15T milspec or commercial? Higherima Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles 14 12-17-2016 08:39 PM
Basement cost vs slab cost MrJT The Lounge 45 01-11-2016 12:28 PM
Replacement of the upper on my M&P 15 Sport - Labor Cost jpromano Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles 31 10-14-2015 11:15 PM
Same Cal. Lower Cost vs. Diff. Cal. Higher Cost Filibogado Reloading 15 09-19-2013 12:39 AM
Model 52-2: What's the Problem and What's It Gonna Cost Cost to Fix this 52-2 Bullseye 2620 Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 6 09-19-2009 06:52 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:23 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)