Has the modern arms industry become anti-innovation?

>>33074982
Glocks marketing campaign and proliferation killed innovation.

Smokeless powder technology has pretty much matured at this point.

what areas are there to Innovate? its mostly structural engineering traditionally metal weapons into polymer designs for ease of manufacturing and weight.

The technology has plateaued.

It was anti-innovation... until Trump won.

Now, cheap copycats will DIE and innovation will return as a major market factor.

Who needs shitty AR-15s or boring striker fired pistols anymore

>>33075006

Maybe electronics incorporated into firearms? Things like electronic primers, triggers, adjustable RoF in full auto, round counters, scopes that tell you where to aim after factoring wind, humidity, drop, etc.

>>33075043

No.

Electronics are immensely unreliable and high maintenance. What would the benefit of electronic fire control be other than to make things unreliable and have the state be able to remotely deactivate your weapons lol

>>33075043
technologically advanced scopes are a thing, but electronics unfortunately have a too high failure rate.

>>33075025

>Until Trump won

Exactly what incentive would arms companies have to innovate under Trump, instead of just doing things the same way and kissing Trump's butt to ensure they succeeded?

>>33075066

What kind of dipshit wouldn't keep mechanical guns around as backup? I'm not suggesting complete replacement, I'm suggesting they're used in a supplementary capacity by sporters and hobbiests.

>>33075127
lol.
You sound like a cunt.

>>33075127

Besides, I'm sure they're not as horrifically unreliable as people say. In fact this is a field that has barely even been tested on a practical level.

>>33075137

cool

>>33075082
i assume because trump won't try to ban any new civilian feature.

but the primary market for manufacturers are military/PCMs so idk.

>>33075082
3 words: IMPARTIAL MARKET FORCES.

2 words: SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

Without Herr Clinton to gin up panic and demand... suddenly there is no longer a huge pressure to buy an AR-15.

All the copy cats and shit tier AR companies will die... and good riddance! Olympic Arms just bit the bullet!

2017 SHOT show was boring because no one spent a cent on R&D... instead decided to "me-too" on ARs and glock clones.

The Hudson H9... which was frankly, disappointing to say the least, got so much press because it was the only thing remotely innovative.

>>33075066
Lock time. 100% adjustable trigger with no mechanical tradeoff for lightening the trigger.

Electric primers wouldn't need to be shipped as HAZMAT.

>remotely deactivate your weapons

I'm pretty sure uncle sam can't remotely turn off my flashlight.

And don't even give me that spiel about "muh batteries" unless you also avoid any and all red dot sights and only shoot with irons.

>>33075193
Supply and Demand is 3 words, how stupid are you?

>>33074982
Yes.

Anything other than an AR or Glawk costs far too much to be viable, which sucks because at this point both ARs and striker fired polymer pistols are fucking boring.

>>33075203

This, I haven't really ever heard of an actual argument against their development that wasn't memes and shitposting.

>>33075212

Man, it's moments like these I thank God 4chan is an anonymous board and I am not a Trip fag, hahahaha

File: gun-info.jpg (33KB, 765x433px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 765x433px

>>33075203

I guess you can take this genius idea and start a new company like Tracking Point hahahaha

>>33074982
I imagine that it's more of the fact that people know what works and what doesn't and because of that, people usually don't want to stray out of their comfort zone when it comes to buying/making innovative firearms.

>>33075212

> Until Trump won

pretty fucking stupid, i'd say

>>33075025

hey dipshit, 8 years of reagan, 4 years of bush sr, and 8 years of bush jr weren't enough to kill 'copycats', you dumb mother fucker

>>33074982
>i want my G11 - the post
not that i don't want it either

File: heresy.jpg (49KB, 436x601px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 436x601px

>>33075297

>>33075193

You're assuming gun owners actually want innovation.

How do we know gun owners won't just opt for the familiar and avoid the experimental? The loosening of gun restrictions may result in LESS innovation, if consumers just buy the shit they know.

>>33075460

Seriously, in order for there to be innovation, there has to be DEMAND for it.

>>33075408
Yep

>>33075203
>unless you also avoid any and all red dot sights and only shoot with irons.
well to add to that theres ACOGs and shit

It went from "make the best gun" to "make the cheapest gun".
Where's my modernized P7?

>>33075490
If /k/ is to be believed the gun market wants the opposite of innovation, they hate anything they see as tacticool or tryhard.

>>33075804

It really ticks me off how anti-innovation /k/ seems to be.

"Let's make 10,000 design-ripoffs of the 1911, the Glock, the AR, and the AK."

None of you want to make your own unique gun designs, instead of coasting endlessly?

>>33075066
I'm sure someone at GM said the same thing back in 1964 about cars. But look at them now.