In y'all's opinion, is this the real one or a knock-off?

MFT Mission Stock Buttstock Tactical Rife Battlelink Adjustable Black Mil-Spec | eBay

__________________
S&W M&P 15 Sport II

Knock off. Even says "Brand: Generic"

Even the dimensions are a little off

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

$15 fake and you can see they played with name omissions on both the company and product.

I stay away from these type of misleading fakes stealing the OEM brand.

Here is the authentic stock:


Here is the one from ebay:


Notice on the side near the front that the ebay version is missing the company logo. No, this seller isn't even trying to represent it as authentic. He's using the name, but that's all.

Anytime you see a new product being sold for 75% less than what they normally sell for, they're fake. Sometimes the fake ones are decent, but mostly they're just junk. In this case, it will just put you $15 further from the one you really want.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

In this last "election cycle" I spent quite a bit of time and money "researching" "low end" AR solutions. I have found every "junk" stock to function properly and work according to manufacturer intent. The lightweight ones are wiggly, well because they are lightweight. Rubber cheekpiece heavier, more solid. Add rubber buttpad, heavier still. I don't know how well one would stand up to buttstroking a half dozen "enemy" but then again they'd drown before getting to me in this swamp. A $400 "junk" AR with subject stock type, 100% reliable (at least for the several hundred rounds through it so far). Joe

__________________
Wisdom chases me; I'm faster

Mine has the MFT logo like pictured above on one side and on the other it has a BMSMIL stamped into the side.

__________________
M&P15 sport II, Retired Army

Possibly a knockoff -- but, dang, the name sure is impressive!

__________________
Pisgah

I'm not so sure regarding this... what does the real deal do that this knockoff doesn't deliver? Perhaps the polymer is stronger on the real item, but can't say either way based on the info I have here.

Maybe this stock is OK and maybe it isn't. It's a $15 gamble. Gun enthusiasts are the best group of people I know. They are also the cheapest group I've ever dealt with.

I just deleted 4 paragraphs because it's going to fall on deaf ears. Suffice it to say: When the elation of low price wears off, the pain of low quality remains.

And just how much stuff is in that "rabbit hole" box cyphertext?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

But that's just it... how do you know that this is "low quality" from just an ebay ad? Is it not possible that the real Minimalist stock is not over priced to begin with?

Based on the info provided, all that can be said with 100% accuracy is that the one on ebay is not the one marketed by MFT. Unless someone on here has purchased the ebay one, no one can really speak to the quality of it.

With optics, I get it... with pieces of plastic... not as sure that the higher priced stock does anything better than the knock off, but again, I have not handled the knock off. So like you said, $15 gamble. Do you feel lucky, punk?

Manufacturers are in the business of making money. Some, will overprice their stuff, but they generally don't stay in business long. If MFT could make a profit by selling their stocks at $15 instead of $60 don't you think they would?

No, just the price is enough for me to steer clear. However, why don't you buy one and let us know how it goes?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

With so many manufacturers out in the market these days it is very hard to determine what level of quality any given part has been built to achieve. I do not believe price is a good measure of the quality level but more often indicates how much the consumer is willing to pay. The current low prices of AR parts were much higher just before the elections and I don't think the quality changed. Manufacture cheaper and sell higher is always the motive for any business . Just my thoughts that if the price difference is enough I might try the cheap version and make my own decisions as to its quality for my use . I always figured if came to real need for butt strokes I was already in too deep.

__________________
Hue 68 noli me tangere

No, not if people were buying them at $60... If you are buying at $60, why would I sell at $15? But price is not necessarily an indicator of quality. Look at the price difference between AR makes... If you pay 40% more for brand A over a M&P 15 Sport, are you getting a rifle that is 40% better? Not necessarily!

Because I am not interested in owning one, either the MFT or the knock off. I didn't ask about it. And $60 is overpriced for MFT, when Cabela's has them for $44. Another place on the web has them for $35...

I should have left the 4 paragraphs...

A new Krieghoff shotgun will cost at least $11K. Will it shoot better than a $350 Remington 870? Well, that's a matter of opinion. An Ed Brown 1911 will cost at least $2,500, but an RIA 1911 can be had for $500. Is the Brown that much better? Obviously to some it is.

Is $60 overpriced or is the $15 one just a pile? I don't know and I don't need to spend $15 to find out; I don't need one. These are just my thoughts on the whole subject. I feel that a company that can produce this at that price is cutting corners or has slaves working for it. In either case, I wouldn't buy the knock off.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

In your examples above, there is a difference in materials and workmanship that are easily seen... This stock thing is more like name brand cereal vs. store brand.

*Genuine Applause*

Any material good or service will sell at a price the market will bear. Capitalism at work. Prior to the advent of the internet, the strategy of price segmentation by region broke down the market into smaller pockets of pricing. Interestingly enough, Amazon has gained such a dominant market share that Amazon will price segement the market for the same item being sold to different zip codes.

Back to the topic at hand. That stock is a reproduction of a genuine stock. The quality and durability of the reproduction is unknown.

The power of Branding is impressive isn't it. Take two of the exact same item in construction and quality with the only difference being in Brand names, and you'll get a price differential between the two that is supported only by perceived quality, not actual quality. It's the Jedi-mind trick of Marketing.

Herein lies the pitfall of purchasing an item from the internet. You are not able to inspect the item for yourself in the real world. You have to rely upon the assumptions that the descriptions are correct, the pictures are correct, the customer feedback is correct, the policies, diligence, and reputation of the website operator.

Buying any item sight unseen from an internet retailer demands that the consumer leverage all of their critical thinking abilities. The OP did this by asking the forum for help. That's a good thing. Now he (or she) is developing the critical thinking abilities on how to spot reproductions from genuine, increasing his (or her) ability to determine and assess credibility.

This is true in general or else the adage "If the price is too good to be true, then it probably is" wouldn't exist. We're wired to attain what we need at the lowest cost, whatever that may be. It's such a strong instinct that it can temporarily override an individual's critical thinking abilities.

__________________
-John

I bought a $26 (delivered) knockoff of the Radian Raptor ($90+) ambidextrous charging handle, because it got good reviews for it's intended purpose. I use it to charge a new round, but I don't beat on it like an operator on steroids. It has worked very well for me.

__________________
NRA R.S.O. & Life Member

I've put together quite a few AR-15 platform rifles, everything from top end stuff with $200 muzzle breaks to low end entry level, where the owner bought airsoft components to try out the feel. There is a big variation in the quality of "like looking" parts. I guess it comes down to how you will be using the weapon. I bet the stock in question would hold up to an occasional range visit, but probably not too well smashing in a door or a skull. I'd personally go for the brand name part, but for some the $15 knock off would be more than fine.

I doubt that there are very many folks on here using their Sport 2 to smash in doors or skulls. And if they are, they probably shouldn't be using a minimalist type stock, name brand or otherwise!

All depends on what you want out of your gun and how you use it. For many people the $15 stock is fine if they don't do anything except bench shoot.

I've spent enough money on cheap knockoffs to know to just buy what the proper accessory the first time because otherwise it's just money wasted.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I'm not being critical or judgmental at all, just trying to learn.
That said, what does a $90+ or for that matter a $26 charging handle do
that the stock one on my M&P AR 15 OR doesn't do?

__________________
CSM, U S Army(Ret) 1963-1990

This is one of the most lame comparison video's I have ever seen, but it has a few comments from folks who actually got the plain knock off one off Ebay, who seem happy with it etc..
Even the guy who made the vid saying he was a bit unhappy to end up with a knock off, comments a few times saying it seems to function fine etc and he is now using the knock off on another AR etc..

Anyway, When I stumbled upon a link to the video, I was hoping it was going to put it through the wringer to test its strength etc and perhaps see some live fire action, but after seeing how bad the dude who made the video had the shakes, I concluded Mt Everest would not even be a sufficient back stop so... LOL..

There is a comment from a guy who wrote..
"" I'm 200 lbs and I've hung mine over a tree limb and put my weight on it, and I've put it against concrete with my weight and it doesn't bend"..

MISSION FIRST TACTICAL MINIMALIST STOCK REAL VS FAKE - YouTube

REM 3200, I've installed a few high end charging handles on some of the builds I've done. Some are ambidextrous , some are larger to work around scopes or red dots. Some are just made to withstand a heck of a lot more brutal punishment than they ever should be put through. I've put a few of those units in, they were superior to the mil-spec, but not something I would go out of my way and spend the high dollars on. Now if I was a lefty or trying to avoid interference with a scope or sight, that might be a different story.

For some of us this is just another hobby, I change or upgrade for want more than need.

Nothing wrong with most of the stock parts.

__________________
M&P15 sport II, Retired Army

Well, after some research and debating, I decided that, since my Sport 2 sits in the safe 90% of the time, I would go with the knockoff on eBay. I figure, worst case scenario, I put the original stock back on and I am out $15. Best case scenario, I have a decent looking stock that works for my use (occasional range time and unlikely SHTF scenario).

__________________
S&W M&P 15 Sport II

12:31 to say it wobbles a bit and the fake logos aren't as deep. Could cut 12min from the vid and still be too long.

I don't know about all the agonizing over comparisons. My approach is far simpler. I just don't do business with fakes who try to fool their customers.

I hear that.. LOL!

I fast Forwarded through it pretty much, then just went to the comments to find someone ELSE who actually got a knock off (unmarked like the one mentioned by the OP)..

Yeah, but notice the ad never says "Mission First Tactical". He dances around the name, but never lists is specifically. It's no doubt a knockoff.

And yes, it might be a decent stock for the price, but remember MFT actually had to do all the engineering, developing, advertising etc to get their stock to market, but all the knockoff company had to do was copy MFT. This debate goes on all the time, do you support the real company that spent all the time and effort to actually make the product the first time or do you support a copy cat. I know my answer.

__________________
Still carrying my S&W 642

Yeah, but we can dream, can't we?

But in all fairness.. by that logic, we'd all be shooting/owning Colt AR-15's not S&W sports..

Armalite actually...

LOL, you beat me to it !

Correct.. But In 1959, ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 to Colt due to financial difficulties..

At any rate, my point stands.. ALL other AR 15's are copies of an original design (with some variations depending on model, maker etc..)..

In short.. to say not to buy a knock off (Copy) of a stock, yet own a S&W sport, is a bit of a contradiction..

Pro2nd- You're exactly right but some folks won't stand for it if you confront them with logic.

Well, if you want to get serious, unless it was made by Colt, it's not an AR-15. Colt owns the trade mark "AR-15". So, every other rifle that looks like an AR-15, but was not made by Colt, really is a modern sporting rifle and not an AR-15.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Interesting posts and opinions on replacement knock off parts. Sort of like generic vs name brand meds debate. Hope we get data after some use of the stock.

__________________
Hue 68 noli me tangere

Totally different if you ask me. The knockoff MFT stock is really sort of "implying" that it is a MFT stock and trying to trick buyers into thinking they are getting a MFT stock at a great price. Sort of bait and switch.

With the AR15 it was a weapon platform that others used to produce their own itterations of the same type of weapon, it's not a "knockoff" per se being sold as a Colt or Armalite. Different situation.

Now if S&W made a rifle and punched a knockoff pony rollmark on it and sold it as a Colt Style or something similar (not that would ever happen, but you get my drift) then that would be similar.

__________________
Still carrying my S&W 642

So had the makers of the copy cat stock simply left out the "MFT". and put their own name on it.
that would have been okay then?..

Or perhaps if they had said "similar in design to a MFT"?..

either way, this still takes us back to ALL AR's except Armalite/Colt..

I agree with the seller trying to portray it as the actual MFT as being in the wrong, but just saying..

......which got me to thinking that in early parts of the last century if there would have been any sort of trademark laws there would be a LOT of manufacturers making magazine fed, single stack,single action,.45's today instead of 1911's

__________________
witty signature goes here

Well, I received the stock and placed it on my AR. I have not had the chance to shoot with it yet, but, so far, I am digging it. It is not 100% solid on the buffer tube, but it does not wiggle near as much as the original stock that was on it. From what I understand, the actual MFT stock has zero wiggle.

I like the way it feels and shoulders. I did notice that comfortably acquiring the sights with this stock does not require me to extend it fully, but I had to with the original... It does not feel flimsy or cheap by any means.

I have no experience with any other stock except the one that came on the AR, but I cannot see how this knockoff would be considered cheap.

It looks great, feels great, and I hope to get it to the range sometime soon and see how it feel while shooting. I would say it was $15 well spent...

__________________
S&W M&P 15 Sport II