Why no love for restricted states?

[ivan_drago]

The handgun market is super competitive. The US is clearly the largest market in the world. Yet, nearly half the people in this country live in magazine restricted states. Why then so few manufacturers offer 10 rd versions of their products? I understand supply chains, wanting to have less product versions, etc. But why walk away from huge markets? You can buy pretty much any Glock in WA with a 10 rd magazine, but not every Sig, Springfield, S&W to name some larger ones. @Sporting Systems, what do the factory reps say about this?

Read More

 

[Koda]

Yet, nearly half the people in this country live in magazine restricted states. Why then so few manufacturers offer 10 rd versions of their products?

Doesnt look like that many states have bans, and Id also guess that half of those that do are "may issue" where nobody can get a carry permit anyways.

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/magazine-limits-what-are-they-and-which-states-have-them/

 

[Stomper]

You can buy pretty much any Glock in WA with a 10 rd magazine, but not Sig, Springfield, S&W to name some larger ones.

I fail to see the problem…

 

[Certaindeaf]

The handgun market is super competitive. The US is clearly the largest market in the world. Yet, nearly half the people in this country live in magazine restricted states. Why then so few manufacturers offer 10 rd versions of their products? I understand supply chains, wanting to have less product versions, etc. But why walk away from huge markets? You can buy pretty much any Glock in WA with a 10 rd magazine, but not every Sig, Springfield, S&W to name some larger ones. @Sporting Systems, what do the factory reps say about this?

As elon said, f em.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Because they're doing just fine without having to deal with restrictions in constitution hating states. Can'ts blame em for not kowtowing to their enemies.

 

[pizzamike]

They don't need them. More SKUs, more overhead, more headache, not worth the minimal return.

 

[bradsteen]

It's more complicated than that. First, making a 10rd mag adds steps and cost to the manufacturing process. Manufacturers mass-produce, so there would need to be a high likelihood of return on investment to tool up and make a line dedicated to producing that product. It also requires space to build the line, store the product and parts that go into it, cost to train employees on the new process, creation of new branding, product photos, packaging, parts, etc... long story short, it's really expensive.

Then there's quality control to factor in, both functionally and for liability purposes. Functionally the 10rd mag is a change to product design, so they would need to ensure that change doesn't negatively impact function of the pistol or rifle it goes to. You'd be surprised how putting a simple divot in a magazine to restrict capacity can cause the body to flex and result in in feeding issues.

That and if they create a 10rd mag that someone can "too easily" modify to go back to standard capacity, they would undoubtedly be sued to hell and back by ban state AGs eager to slam a gun company. Oh, and don't forget that gun laws state by state can change at a moment's notice (Illinois and their 48hr AWB being a great example of this), so maybe today it's 10rds, but tomorrow (after you've expended all that cash to set up production of 10rd mags) one state changes it to 7rds. Now you lose a market segment of everyone in that state, and the only way to reopen it is to do it all over again with a new production line for that one state (not gonna happen, way to expensive).

Now, there are some companies who specialize in taking factory mags and limiting them one by one. Doing this voids the manufacturer's warranty as it physically and permanently changes the product. Manufacturers could also take this approach themselves, but then open themselves up to returns and lawsuits if/when those modified mags prove to be less reliable.

All of this trouble to service an unknown population of gun-owners in ban states? It's not surprising that a lot of manufacturers say "no thanks". Overall the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

 

[ivan_drago]

Doesnt look like that many states have bans, and Id also guess that half of those that do are "may issue" where nobody can get a carry permit anyways.
View attachment 1841637

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/magazine-limits-what-are-they-and-which-states-have-them/

Oregon has fallen, OK, managing to delay it in court for now, but one ruling away from disaster. Virginia passed a ban through their legislature, hopefully their gov will veto (reducing from 20 to 10). New Mexico tried. Maine is probably trying. So is Michigan.
By a very rough count we have over 120 million people in the states on this map. OK, not half the country, but nearly 1/3.
Good for Glock, I guess

 

[CamoDeafie]

Look at Hi Point. They ship with either 9 or 10 rd mags for all their models.. and they're not even "50-State Legal" for either their pistols (melting point thing in Illinois also not on "approved lists" in MA and CA), or their carbines (for having certain AWB features, )

Edit. Just saying. Companies see that, and go "well. If these States are gonna bend over backwards to keep our products out, may as well as save money and not bother making low-cap mags"

 

[Certaindeaf]

Yet not only no restriction on ten million illegal border crossers in the last few years but they are being paid to sell death on every street corner.

 

[ivan_drago]

It's more complicated than that. First, making a 10rd mag adds steps and cost to the manufacturing process. Manufacturers mass-produce, so there would need to be a high likelihood of return on investment to tool up and make a line dedicated to producing that product. It also requires space to build the line, store the product and parts that go into it, cost to train employees on the new process, creation of new branding, product photos, packaging, parts, etc... long story short, it's really expensive.

Then there's quality control to factor in, both functionally and for liability purposes. Functionally the 10rd mag is a change to product design, so they would need to ensure that change doesn't negatively impact function of the pistol or rifle it goes to. You'd be surprised how putting a simple divot in a magazine to restrict capacity can cause the body to flex and result in in feeding issues.

That and if they create a 10rd mag that someone can "too easily" modify to go back to standard capacity, they would undoubtedly be sued to hell and back by ban state AGs eager to slam a gun company. Oh, and don't forget that gun laws state by state can change at a moment's notice (Illinois and their 48hr AWB being a great example of this), so maybe today it's 10rds, but tomorrow (after you've expended all that cash to set up production of 10rd mags) one state changes it to 7rds. Now you lose a market segment of everyone in that state, and the only way to reopen it is to do it all over again with a new production line for that one state (not gonna happen, way to expensive).

Now, there are some companies who specialize in taking factory mags and limiting them one by one. Doing this voids the manufacturer's warranty as it physically and permanently changes the product. Manufacturers could also take this approach themselves, but then open themselves up to returns and lawsuits if/when those modified mags prove to be less reliable.

All of this trouble to service an unknown population of gun-owners in ban states? It's not surprising that a lot of manufacturers say "no thanks". Overall the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

You sound like you have some background in product management . And your points are valid, yes. But the companies still manage to crank out variations of guns with different sights, safety/no safety, coatings, barrels, optics/no optics, etc. So some complexity is there already. Mags are usually produced by a third party supplier (Meggar, for example), so the engineering costs can be absorbed in part by them. Yes, converting mags that were originally designed for more rounds can lead to problems, but we see lots of good 10 round mags from Sig, CZ, Glock, so this is not insurmountable. One idea: for fewer SKUs, offer a base package with no magazines and include coupons for your state's magazines to be drop shipped directly to the customer. They do it with various red dot plates now. Retail shops probably won't like it, but they can stock the necessary magazines and sell them with the guns they order. And while we are it, let's push for more interchangeable magazines, yes?

 

[Tlock]

You sound like you have some background in product management . And your points are valid, yes. But the companies still manage to crank out variations of guns with different sights, safety/no safety, coatings, barrels, optics/no optics, etc. So some complexity is there already. Mags are usually produced by a third party supplier (Meggar, for example), so the engineering costs can be absorbed in part by them. Yes, converting mags that were originally designed for more rounds can lead to problems, but we see lots of good 10 round mags from Sig, CZ, Glock, so this is not insurmountable. One idea: for fewer SKUs, offer a base package with no magazines and include coupons for your state's magazines to be drop shipped directly to the customer. They do it with various red dot plates now. Retail shops probably won't like it, but they can stock the necessary magazines and sell them with the guns they order. And while we are it, let's push for more interchangeable magazines, yes?

I will not comply!

 

[ivan_drago]

I will not comply!

I understand the sentiment. I can assume you already have a good collection and have a way of getting things done. I do encourage all of us to think how to turn more people into owners and to make sure the manufacturers are healthy and profitable to innovate and resist these vile laws in the courtroom.

 

[Diamondback]

Because dealing with Ban States and the idiots running them sucks diarrhea-soaked sweaty balls.

 

[ivan_drago]

Because dealing with Ban States and the idiots running them sucks diarrhea-soaked sweaty balls.

Yes, that could be one explanation. Their management and marketing people assume that the passage of magazine bans means there is less of a market in those states. But let's look at Springfield, for example. They know the issue very well and give you the state compliance selector right on their website. And have lots of models that are available in low capacity. But not the super popular 10 mm XDM Elite, for example, those have been out for a number of years now. The XDM Elite Compact is offered in an 11 round version. That's neither here nor there. One less round wouldn't derail their market country wide. So, I don't think all of it are emotional decisions to penalize the restrictive states. There could be some inertia and blunders on the part of the companies as well?

 

[Koda]

Oregon has fallen, OK, managing to delay it in court for now, but one ruling away from disaster. Virginia passed a ban through their legislature, hopefully their gov will veto (reducing from 20 to 10). New Mexico tried. Maine is probably trying. So is Michigan.
By a very rough count we have over 120 million people in the states on this map. OK, not half the country, but nearly 1/3.
Good for Glock, I guess

Its highly likely more states will try to pass or pass capacity laws, perhaps when enough do the market for more brands of low cap mags will be enough to justify engineering costs. Seems like it would take more demand than the current situation. Keep in mind most gun buyers already own guns with standard mags so thats probably part of this too. The only people screwed right now are new gun buyers in mag ban states and I suspect most just end up picking a different gun.

 

[Diamondback]

It's less emotional than survival... when I know that a state AG jacks himself off three times a day fantasizing about bankrupting my company you bet I'm gonna minimize my exposure and business in that state.

 

[ivan_drago]

It's less emotional than survival... when I know that a state AG jacks himself off three times a day fantasizing about bankrupting my company you bet I'm gonna minimize my exposure and business in that state.

I do have to question the claim about AG's virility . But he may have other creative ways of indulging himself.

 

[Diamondback]

I do have to question the claim about AG's virility . But he may have other creative ways of indulging himself.

That would be a possible explanation for his rage toward everyone else, overcompensating for Downstairs Deficiencies. Sorta like the guy who buys an F-450, puts exhaust amplifiers on it, grafts on a bed that makes it longer than some semis and has it jacked sky high trying to compensate for lack of endowment in other areas...

 

[Certaindeaf]

Yes, that could be one explanation. Their management and marketing people assume that the passage of magazine bans means there is less of a market in those states. But let's look at Springfield, for example. They know the issue very well and give you the state compliance selector right on their website. And have lots of models that are available in low capacity. But not the super popular 10 mm XDM Elite, for example, those have been out for a number of years now. The XDM Elite Compact is offered in an 11 round version. That's neither here nor there. One less round wouldn't derail their market country wide. So, I don't think all of it are emotional decisions to penalize the restrictive states. There could be some inertia and blunders on the part of the companies as well?

How do you vote?