Why did they do it?
Gun companies hate "gun people". Rightfully so, 99% of you have terrible taste and far more money than sense and are happy to pass over quality firearms in exchange for third world sweatshop imports like Taurus and turkshit. And many people shouldn't own guns at all yet they legally can. So with that in mind, gun companies really have no problem enshittifying things, even if there's no profit made.
>>65647313S&W has been cucked for a while, they're copying Keltec and Taurus>Governor copied Judge>Direct copy of PMR30>Take a Sub2k and fold it sideways, make it heavier>Copy Rugers 5.7, somehow worseThey genuinely need reformed
>>65647479>they're copying Keltec and TaurusThe decline started way back in the 70s when they threw quality control and product development out the window to cut costs, since they believed they had a permanent monopoly on police service handguns.The cops were less than impressed when over a quarter of brand-new S&Ws had to be sent back to the factory for repair work before they'd even been used.Hence S&W sales tanking and virtually every police department in the US switching to other brands, mainly Glocks (a brand S&W's leadership dismissed as uncompetitive, and not a threat to S&W's share of the US handgun market)S&W never recovered from the merciless beatdown they took at the hands Gaston Glock and Bill Ruger in the 80s and 90s.
>>65647479>>Copy Rugers 5.7, somehow worseWhat? The Smith version is superior. It is a different action altogether (gas operated), not a copy. The barrel is threaded from the factory (Ruger doesn't do this, only an accessory kit), does not require an adapter like the Ruger, and is a fixed barrel (not a tilting one). The Smith also packs 2 more rounds in a smaller height (not really a big deal but worth considering). The Smith has an optics cut while the Ruger does not.How is the Smith an inferior copy to the Ruger? I genuinely am wondering why you said this.
>>65647313Tbf, if the hottest loads of .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, .44 Magnum, etc. weren't breaking the guns malfunctioning due to the safety, no one would have cared.
>>65647438>oh no we are being outcompeted by foreign products>quickly, let us enshittify our products and pander to the people that hate our customersThat's just bad buisness. I would understand lobbying for more import restrictions, although that too is a bitch move, but what the fuck are they expecting from making their products worse?
>>65647633>Hey shittify your product and I guarantee a few Leo contracts and mil considerationsCZ did it for Canada and with Springfield with that Illinois debacle
>>65647438I don't think the people with more money than sense are the ones buying Turk copies of handguns. That said I largely think you're right. If Ruger's new lineup involves a break-action revolver then all of the people who've been making threads about break-action revolvers for years will refuse to buy it because it doesn't have tritium sights and cost $3.50 and tuck them in at night.
>>65647313With the bullshit from Ruger recently life is truly suffering for revolverfags
>>65647765They should have seen it coming.there is literally no market for revolvers beyond very select Leo. Especially Ruger who has the rxm now
>>65647794No one gives a shit about Family Value Glock
>>65647816>N-no one cares!They care a lot more than every revolver Ruger has
>>65647313Political points, the same reason H&K puts a Hillary Hole in the magwell. Also because they hate you.
>>65647794The market is me.
>>65647821You say this in every thread. I own a Ruger revolver and know other people who do; I don't know anyone who owns an RXM. Do you own an RXM? What does their Glock clone do that every other Glock clone doesn't?
