Is Remington Leaving the MSR Market? DPMS, Bushmaster and TAPCO Sites are Shuttered

Current Remington Homepage.

UPDATE: a dealer friend of ours received an email today from distribution giant RSR Group notifying them of the following:

Remington Outdoor Company informed RSR at the SHOT Show that they will be focusing on their core hunting and shooting brands – AAC, Barnes, Marlin and Remington. Bushmaster, DPMS, StormLake Barrels and Tapco will no longer be produced, with the exception of the Bushmaster BA50.


Has Remington Outdoor Company shuttered the DPMS, Bushmaster and TAPCO brands? The main Remington website no longer lists them as part of the “Remington Outdoor Family of Brands.”

If you go to their specific brand sites, you get…nothing for the most part. No specific models listed, no products, no accessories, no online store to order specific branded items.

Going to redirects you to this.

Current Website for Bushmaster.

Going to redirects you to this.

Current DPMS website.

And going to redirects you to this.

Current TAPCO website.

TTAG spoke to a Remington representative who said the direction on the brands isn’t clear at this point and they were emphasizing sporting-directed firearms from Remington and Marlin at the SHOT Show.

The American Parts Company, commonly known as TAPCO was a long-time major parts supplier and accessories manufacturer. Originally starting as a family run mail order company over 25 years ago outside of Atlanta in Kennesaw, Georgia.

TAPCO was big in the FAL, CETME/G3, AK, and SKS parts markets. They made American made 18 USC 922(r) compliant parts.

For those who don’t know . . .

Title 18, U.S.C., makes it unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of the GCA. Regulations implementing the law in 27 C.F.R. 478.39 provide that a violation of section 922(r) will result if a semiautomatic rifle or shotgun is assembled with more than 10 of the following imported parts:

  1. Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings, or stampings
  2. Barrels
  3. Barrel extensions
  4. Mounting blocks (trunnions)
  5. Muzzle attachments
  6. Bolts
  7. Bolt carriers
  8. Operating rods
  9. Gas pistons
  10. Trigger housings
  11. Triggers
  12. Hammers
  13. Sears
  14. Disconnectors
  15. Buttstocks
  16. Pistol grips
  17. Forearms, handguards
  18. Magazine bodies
  20. Floorplates

TAPCO was the place to get US made parts to make foreign guns legal for importation and more importantly. They made replacement parts for folks who wanted to build their own.

Bushmaster and DPMS were two established names in the AR-15 world. Bushmaster started in Bangor, Maine in 1973. The company went bankrupt and was purchased by Richard Dyke in 1976 and moved to Windham, Maine.

In 2006 it was sold for $70 million to Cerberus Capital Management (the parent owner of Remington). The company became part of what was then called the Freedom Group.

DPMS started when Randy Luth founded Defense Procurement Manufacturing Services (DPMS) in 1985 in Osseo, Minnesota as a precision machine shop for manufacturing M203, M14 and M16 parts for U.S. military contracts.

In the later 1990s, the company employed 30 people selling Colt 1911 and AR-15 parts and accessories and moved the company to Becker, Minnesota. DPMS later began producing AR-15 style rifles. Freedom Group purchased DPMS Panther Arms on December 14, 2007, the same year it purchased Marlin Firearms.

Under Remington’s management. Both Bushmaster and DPMS had their production facilities closed and relocated around 2011. First production moved production to Remington’s Ilion, New York plant and later to their newer facility in Huntsville, Alabama.

Now it appears the Bushmaster and DPMS firearms lines are being retired and closed altogether. As a long-time owner of Bushmaster ARs, it’s a shame.

Bushmaster Rifle

Courtesy Luis Valdes

Bushmaster Rifle

Courtesy Luis Valdes

Bushmaster Rifle

Courtesy Luis Valdes

They’ve served me reliably well for a very long time. Additionally, DPMS was a great parts supplier and made parts for a lot of companies, including some of the higher end ones like Daniel Defense. I personally use a DPMS 11.5″ barrel for my SBR’ed Colt.

Bushmaster Rifle

Courtesy Luis Valdes

But with the likes of Palmetto State Armory and others utterly offering complete AR-15s for under $400 right now there’s likely not much profit in AR platform rifles.

It shouldn’t been seen as a shock, though. Colt has bowed out of the civilian AR market due to lack of sales. There is an overabundance of product and a relative lack of demand since President Trump’s election in 2016.

It appears that the combination of the “Trump Slump” and Remington’s poor management have killed two well-known names in the AR-15 world. Does that include support for the ACR as well? You’d have to think so.


  1. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Wouldn’t be surprised. The grabbers will take this as a “zomg they bent at the knee” moment without even realizing the market is absolutely saturated right now for ARs. It’s hard to sell into a market and make profit with a mixed reputation for quality.

    I bought an upper with 16″ free float rail, BCG/CH for $220 shipped. How do you compete with that? Really hard to do IMO.

    1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

      You’re probably correct, but I still don’t like it. I’m probably just being emotional because I liked both DPMS and Bushmaster.

      1. avatar Art out West says:

        Everyone has gotten into the AR business S&W M&P, Ruger, Mossberg, etc. That has to cut into sales. In addition, PSA is selling tons of ARs and kits. Why buy a Bushmaster or DPMS?

        1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          “Why buy a […] DPMS?”

          For Pete Puma, obviously

        2. avatar Rick James says:

          Because when you can buy a DPMS for $379, I do it.

        3. avatar former water walker says:

          Del-ton has gotten mighty cheap too. I believe they still make parts for other companies. No more Tapco mags?

      2. avatar Waylon says:

        If you liked Bushmaster, the people that made and sold bushmaster became Windham Weaponry.

        1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

          ☝️Good stuff there.

        2. avatar Tracy Taylor says:

          I wanted an M-16 like i had in the Army(colt mfg.of course)it was what i was used to and trained with, used in field , battle , etc. I bought a Windham Weaponry govt model 20″ …. it was a toss up between this model or colt . Price point is why i choose Windham Weaponry. I made the right decision (imo) it is a damn perfect weapon for my needs . Windham Weaponry quality is surperior to most other mfg.

      3. avatar Don from CT says:

        Bushmaster ceased to exist really when they were purchased. They left the Bushmaster factory and all its employees behind.

        The real spiritual successor to Bushmaster lives on in Windham Arms.

        Once founder Richard Dyke’s non-compete ran out, he rehired as many Bushmaster empoyees as he could and started Windham arms up in Windham ME. The same town Bushmaster was in before the purchase.

    2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Agreed. I’ve always liked the appeal of niche AR companies, and would love to have a Daniel Defense. Or two, please. But after building some decent PSAs for under $500 each and testing them in the desert to my satisfaction, it’s hard to justify spending $2000+ and up. Kinda like buying a car…if you’re going to be driving like Mario Andretti every day, then get an Acura. But if you’ll be commuting to work and going to the grocery store, but want the ability to get out of a pinch in an emergency (like if a semi truck is not paying attention and pushing you toward another lane), then a modern Honda will be just fine. I’m not an “operator” who runs missions, but will use my PSAs to train and be ready for that “event” that probably won’t happen. At least, I sure hope we never get to CW2.

      1. avatar Nathan Freeman says:

        Daniel Defense has come under serious scrutiny for making anti 2A statements. Spend your $$$ elsewhere, please. P.S. I’m a GA boy, so it pains me to say it, but screw DD.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Provide a footnote to that redneck. I’m throwing the BS card on your “serious scrutiny”. You getting your intelligence from Bloomberg?

  2. avatar ChoseDeath says:

    Fuck you Remington (insert whomever is actually responsible, because I have no idea). STOP CLOSING ALL THE COMPANIES I LIKE! Para first, now this shit. 🤦‍♂️

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      All the companies that sold to Remington signed their death notes. Remington has been producing poor quality work for a while, so this is inevitable.

      1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        Yeah, the Remington “Bushmaster’ was far inferior to the Windham model…. That’s why Windham started up again under the Windham brand…..

        1. avatar Luis Valdes says:

          Windham Weaponry started because the non-compete contract between Remington and Richard Dyke reached its expiration date.

      2. avatar JP Ruiz says:

        Yup. Mossberg pretty much owns the Shotgun Market now. Fanboys of pre-2008 Remington Shotguns can’t stand that Mossberg Quality and Value has overtaken Remington.

        I have 2 1980s Wingmaster Police Magnums. I won’t sell them and certainly won’t buy any more 870s.

      3. avatar Red says:

        Wrong Jeffery,

        Remington’s 1911 have been excellent firearms, actually punching above their weight class for quality to price.

        The Versa-Max is one of the best semi-auto shotguns out-there, so good in fact that TTAG’s own John Wayne Taylor said this about it “…I’ll put it as simply as I can. If I was to walk out the door right now into an uncertain future, and I could take only one gun, the Remington Versa Max Tactical would be it. I can’t give a gun higher praise than that….”

        In the review of the Remington 700 5-R Stainless Threaded Gen 2 said “… If I was going to go out and buy an all-around bolt action rifle — one I could compete with, target shoot with and even hunt with — this gun would be extremely hard to beat. In fact, this is the gun that made me fall in love with Big Green, again…”

        Other recent reviews say similar things about how much Remington’s quality, on many of their firearms, has either improved or been good to go since the beginning.

        Time to up-date your thinking Jeffery, before you post one of your usual low-information comments.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Red, I think you missed this line from that same 5R article:
          “I got this gun just before I wrote my review of the 700 American Wilderness. While both rifles are Remington 700’s, they couldn’t be farther apart in quality. Everything about the 5-R Stainless was done right: good components, great execution. It left me wondering how these two rifles are made by the same company.”

          Or from the 700 American Wilderness that review refers to:
          “I’d just make sure I was doing my own QC on this one, because Remington’s didn’t make the cut.”

          You might have also missed my article on the Wilson Combat Border Patrol 870, and how much work needed to be done to fix modern 870s, in comparison to the older models, such as the Wingmaster I compared it to.

          Remington HAS gotten better. They are producing better rifles now than they were a few years ago, but not as consistently good as they were 20 years ago. This is even more so for what they did to Marlin. I spoke to Remington reps at length, and the improvements were due to a recognition that QC had slipped, and that quality, not diversity of their lines, needed to be the priority.

        2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:


          I’m not wrong. Remington has made a lot of poor quality shotguns and rifles in the last few years. I’ve personally seen 870’s with chambers that were rough enough they needed to be polished before they would even chamber a 12 guage shell. I remember being able to put a Remington 870 and Mossberg 500 side by side and the action be better on the 870, that hasn’t been my experience of late. It took a few years before they fixed the issues with the Marlin Lever guns. New 700s are not rifles I’m interested in. I’ve shot the first re-release of the R51, that wasn’t a good time, more jams than bangs. I’ve also shot a R1911 that wouldn’t run, and watched the 2 Remington reps panic after the second failure to feed of 4 (likely a magazine issue, but they only had what they had at the Remington booth).
          So tell me again how I’m “low information”. Just because I hurt your feelings because I don’t like “Big Green”, doesn’t make you right. I see JWT already provided you enough examples.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          I thought about getting the 5-R but then considered that they use an H S Precision stock and H S Precision had the audacity to hire Lon Horiuchi as a PR guy. Lon Horiuchi btw, murdered Vicki Weaver on Ruby Ridge.

          I’ll find a different rifle, thank you.


        4. avatar Tracy Taylor says:

          I always wanted a 1911 , …. looked at colt , then bought a remington R1 1911 enhanced … except for the rear adjustable sight , i changed out to a fixed , its a stellar handgun… bought it august 2018 , put over 4000 rounds thru it, no issues … its an awesome shooting handgun… (imo)

        5. avatar Red says:


          Nope, didn’t miss that, my point was “how much Remington’s quality, o͟n͟ ͟m͟a͟n͟y͟ ͟o͟f͟ ͟t͟h͟e͟i͟r͟ ͟f͟i͟r͟e͟a͟r͟m͟s͟, has either improved or been good to go”.

          I did not make an absolute statement like Jeffery “𝙰̲𝚕̲𝚕̲ the companies that sold to Remington” which as I noted is patently false.

          Jeffery went on to say another absolute statement, which I disproved with the reviews from this site “…Remington has been producing poor quality work for a while, so this is inevitable….” When he said “poor quality work ” that means all the work, which again is false.

          Your last paragraph in your reply under “..Remington HAS gotten better..” further disproves Jeffery’s blanket absolute statements.

          Finally in his reply Jeffery goes on to admit that he is biased “..because I don’t like “Big Green”…” and if you only read his, as usual low information and biased comments, you would conclude Remington has no quality products. Go and look for a bad Rem 1911 review, they are far and few.

          I have not found people who talk in absolutes, worth their salt.

        6. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

          @Red, well that’s like your opinion, man.

          Your blanket statement about my posts being low information also means you’re a hypocrite.

  3. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    Strange they would update the sites if they weren’t ready to go public with info.

    Does this mean the acr is really, truly dead? It never got to live to it’s potential. That would be too bad for its snazzy stock.

    Also, AAC? I still like the tirant models.

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      Update, AAC site still looks normal vs the others. On the other hand this is all just speculation and assumptions until they actually say what is happening, so who knows.

    2. avatar ColdNorth says:

      From a Canadian perspective, it’s sad to lose the ACR. It was a good, if expensive, non-restricted alternative to the AR (Non-restricted means you can use it beyond just shooting on a special range, as well as not register it). Losing a decent NR option hurts the market up here, so I hope someone decides to pick up the line elsewhere.

      And maybe it’s just nostalgia talking, but I hope someone saves Marlin.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Nothing nostalgic about it. Marlin made a damn fine lever gun. The individual shooter has to decide for themselves if that lever gun has meaning to them in today’s world.

        But Marlin made good lever guns. Made. Past tense.

        1. avatar Wood says:

          I love a good Marlin lever better than any Winchester. But I wouldn’t have anything to do with a Remlin. Everything Cerberus has touched has turned tits up or is in the way there. Would love it if they bought the DNC 🤪

  4. avatar MouseGun says:

    In all honesty, does anyone really care at this point? Remington has been going down on flames for well over a decade at this point, and everyone knows it.

  5. avatar Robert A says:

    “I personally use a DPMS 11.5″ barrel for my SBR’ed Colt.”

    Can some one explain the attraction of short barrel rifles to me? Is it because Uncle Sam says you can’t one without going through the ATF Paperwork drill? I ask because a friend who has one cited that exact reason. They are dangerously loud. What purpose do they serve exactly?

    1. avatar Jim says:

      Do your own research, Fudd.

      1. avatar Arandom Dude says:

        “Fudd” is basically our “ok Boomer.”

      2. avatar Wood says:

        Don’t be a dick.

      3. avatar John Henry says:

        So in other words cupcake you can’t answer his question.

    2. avatar Ben says:

      Rifle power and accuracy combined with more maneuverability at close range. Think sub gun use but with rifle power.

    3. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      i doubt if having to file is an attraction. i’ll assume some folks enjoy fireballs. it seems obvious that a shorter platform wields more easily in confines. plus i keep hearing that with subsonics (300blk or whatevs) you can add a can and still have a maneuverable overall length. i’ve shot those little ak pistols- they’re dumb fun. no suppressors in ill so no attraction for me.
      i would like a pcc, whichever one g. flag recommends, that is swappable between 9mm (cheap fun) and 10mm, serious business. but it seems they need differing bcg’s, so, meh.

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        .300 BLK is optimized for 10″ barrels due to the quick powder burn. 5.56 is optimized for a 20″ barrel. More or less, and YMMV depending upon your setup and specific ammo.. I’ve seen crazy AR builds with as short as 5.5″ barrels which would truly be flamethrowers, but then you lose substantial muzzle velocity.

        1. avatar D.T.O.M. says:

          “.300 BLK is optimized for 10″ barrels due to the quick powder burn.”

          HAz, Can we put this “theory” to rest once and for all. 300 BLK will continue to gain significant muzzle energy as barrel length increases to 16 inches and beyond.

          Mrgunsngear Channel does a great video ‘debunk’ on this topic.

        2. avatar EWTHeckman says:


          Bullet velocity is not increased by powered burning, it’s accelerated by high pressure gases. Even after there is no more powder burning, the pressure is still high enough to continue the acceleration in longer barrels.

          The advantage of a shorter burn in in shorter barrels is that you do not get powder burning outside the barrel, thus avoiding the fireball and excessive noise.

        3. avatar I Haz A Question says:


          You need to learn to read. I said “optimized”. The .300 BLK cartridge was developed by Advanced Armament Corp. to perform best in a 9″ to 10.5″ suppressed barrel under subsonic loads with 220gr bullets. Supersonic loads (my preference) can be used very effectively in longer barrels out to 16″. But then, I did say “YMMV depending upon your setup and specific ammo”.

          Please to learn Engrish, then please to try making the sense.

    4. avatar Shire-man says:

      Can someone explain to me why so many people need the wants, joys and toys of others explained to them?

      1. avatar Tim U says:

        Because those people demanding an explanation feel folks should only need or want what they think they need or want.

        1. avatar Bre says:

          Or maybe you are being to acerbic and it was a genuine question and not self righteous judgment. Maybe he/she actually wants to know why people like them. Being a jerk to someone who asks a question, especially since he/she seemed to be looking for a real answer, only makes you and us 2a people in general look like paranoid tools.

          Real answer to your question: some people think its fun and cool or a good conversation starter/head turner at the range, some people like them as an object of defiance for the government saying we shouldn’t have them, sometimes certain calibers like 300blk or .45acp cartridges work really well with shorter barrels, they are more compact for indoors especially as suppressor hosts, more controllable than a pistol but more compact than a rifle, smaller and often lighter for backpacking, in milder calibers like .22lr and 9mm and .357 they make great youth guns due to the small size and weight. Just to name a few reasons.

    5. avatar Luis Valdes says:

      Robert A; I SBR’ed my Colt so I can have a more compact duty rifle since at the time when I did it. The agency I worked for didn’t issue us rifles. But they let use qualify with a personally owned Colt. Most guys had older SP1s and SP2s in 20″ configurations.

    6. avatar RedFlagRising says:

      Because bullets flying sideways are more tactical.

      1. avatar Someone says:

        It’s the twist of your rifling that stabilizes the bullet, not the length of you barrel.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Be cool, jwm. Just don’t say it.

    7. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Robert A.,

      The most popular use-case for short-barreled rifles:

      The idea is to get increased “stopping power” of rifle cartridges along with increased maneuverability compared to rifles with 20+ inch barrels — both of which are significant advantages in close-quarters combat.

      Then, you put a suppressor on your short-barreled rifle and you get increased stopping power (compared to handgun cartridges), similar maneuverability of rifles with 16-inch barrels, and far more QUIET operation. Once again, all of those are significant advantages in close-quarters combat.

      The fact that you have to send paperwork to the ATF and pay for a tax stamp before you can acquire that short-barreled rifle (and suppressor if you want one of those as well) sucks.

    8. avatar N says:

      It’s to be short and easy handling in close quarters, but mostly the ‘this is naughty’ reason.

    9. avatar billy.hill says:

      Imagine being so poor your toys have to have a specific purpose???

      1. avatar M. Juan Garand says:

        Best answer I have read in a long time.
        I might even steal it for myself!

    10. avatar Raimius says:

      It’s nice to have a suppressed carbine that is still carbine length. An 8-12in barrel with a can is often similar length to a 16in carbine.

    11. Well I wanted to get a DPMS AR10, guess I can’t

  6. avatar ARLibertarian says:

    That’s a shame. I own one of each.

    Or I DID, until the unfortunate boating accident in the Ozarks a few years back….

    1. avatar guy says:

      Saw the whole thing it was such a disaster.

  7. avatar Inigo Carmine says:

    “Can some one explain the attraction of short barrel rifles to me?”
    Lighter and significantly easier to carry (either slung or to maneuver with). They are ideal for indoor environments / home defense.
    Not every shot needs to be made at 500+ yards.

    Increased competition is finally starting to clear out some of the Deadwood in the firearms world. I welcome better products at lower prices.

    1. avatar Isaac says:

      SBRs actually do alright in PRS style competitions. I was reading a article a while back about a (I think) 14 inch .308win bolt gun. The author claimed that the shorter barrel really helped towards the long strings of fire and positional shooting.

      Remember, precision is just consistency. Long/ short, it doesn’t matter as long as it is consistent.

  8. avatar Dude says:

    They also recently dropped their double stack 1911s and maybe even their 9mm 1911s.

  9. avatar David Bradford says:

    I have not been a fan of Remington since they bought Marlin and made poor quality controlled crap then put the Marlin name on it. Shameful IMHO.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      I’m not one to defend Remington very often, but Marlin was doing a pretty good job of ruining their own name before Remington ever bought them out. Of course, it went from bad to worse for a while afterwards, but they eventually got it more or less right and saved the brand. At the time, Marlin wasn’t worth anything but it’s trademark.

  10. avatar Tim U says:

    Maybe I’ll use this opportunity to go searching for more backup/replacement parts. I have a DPMS I’m fond of, because it was my first rifle I bought when I became an adult. It was from the ban era, bought the day it was legal to own again (and stamped with the hideous “le only” on the side of the lower).

  11. avatar jwtaylor says:

    Good. Remington needs to focus on providing consistent quality.
    It is far better to stop production of a line than to kill it’s reputation with sub-par workmanship.
    Lean up, focus the brand, and build a good reputation. Then, if and when the AR market regains the margins required to be profitable at the “budget” price point, bring back the brands and gain the dividends of a better product and a better reputation.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Its. Hell.

    2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      Are they closing it and auctioning off the tooling, or are they closing it and selling it as a turn-key? One is far more valuable than the other…

      1. avatar jwtaylor says:

        We don’t even know if these brands are being sold.

    3. avatar Southern Cross says:

      If you think what is sold in the US is bad, you should see what is exported to the colonies. It’s better to buy an old Remington rifle purely for the receiver and then go nuts with a Brownells catalog.

  12. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Just looked at Remington’s site. There’s a few rifles in the “MSR” section but they’re the high end camo ones. I wouldn’t be surprised if those go away as inventory clears out. They’re probably slower to sell than the “black” rifles were.

    I saw a thread on one of the gun boards that Remington brought pallets of MSR parts to Knob Creek and sold them off. That would seem to make sense based on this.

  13. avatar PK says:

    “emphasizing sporting-directed firearms from Remington and Marlin”

    Oh, gee, there’s a winning strategy in today’s markets…

  14. avatar Kap says:

    Big Green screwing us again by going PC all because of a bunch of C**ts suing them, Havent bought a big green product in years, Mostly produce Junk,

  15. avatar James Swan says:

    Purchased a XM-15 over the weekend. Could not register the firearm to Bushmaster warrant site. Just called customer service after reading this article. The nice lady told me that they will continue to warranty and service Bushmaster firearms but the websites are down and They are just going to focus on Remington and Marlin products for the foreseeable future. Just sucks

  16. avatar James Campbell says:

    When Para got shuttered, then Remington announced they would produce the double stack 1911 a la Caspian/Para, I jumped at the chance to purchase a New Old Stock Para 14/45 at the range I frequent.
    The Remington “R” is a sure sign of poor quality IMHO, yet they blame a highly competitive AR market for their failure. Total BS.
    Companies like Colt and Remington need to design and produce better products to remain profitable.
    People will pay for quality and innovation, my last 2 rifle purchases (in 2019) were a POF P308 SPR Gen4 EDGE in Robar NP-3 finish, and a Steyr AUG NATO Spec 20″ barrel in black finish. I could have purchased around 10 entry level ARs for the money, but will ALWAYS pay up for quality, innovation, and reliability.
    The bean counters at Colt and Remington knew the price of everything, yet the VALUE of NOTHING.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      And that, ladies and germs, is what James Campbell has to say.

      Note how he always provides his gun inventory by specific make/model and boasts about how he spends on the “better” items while looking down his nose at the lower tier products many other TTAG’ers have and are satisfied with. Not only poor OPSEC, but elitist.

      Every once in a while James says something beneficial, but it gets lost in the fog of the rest of his elitist commentary and loses its flavor.

      1. avatar James Campbell says:

        Oh, thanks for that in depth analysis.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          You’re welcome. Always glad to help a fellow POTG improve.

        2. avatar James Campbell says:

          I totally understand how you missed the intent of my post, it was pointing out that buyers willing to pay a premium will purchase from manufacturers that innovate and improve on firearm designs, while maintaining high quality control levels.
          These companies usually care more about producing better products and keeping good employees motivated and challenged. Remington cares more about it’s board members and shareholders then their employees, firearms and customers.
          If you’re not advancing designs, processes and quality, you are losing. What innovative design advancements has R done in the past few decades? NONE!
          Lick the lollipop of mediocrity once, and you suck forever.

        3. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Now THAT was a much better post. You got right to the point, structured your opinion(s) with a wordflow that’s easily followed and understood, and avoided the chest-thumping and declaration of your allegedly superior inventory.

          As I said before, always glad to help a fellow POTG improve. Class dismissed.

        4. avatar Taurus 4 Life says:

          I think what ‘I Haz A Question’ is trying to say is nobody needs to read your humble bragging nonsense.

        5. avatar James Campbell says:

          Hey Taurus4Life, you’re clueless. If I was here on TTAG to brag, I would mention (BRAG ON!)….my 7000s S/N 1900 DWM Am Eagle US Cavalry Trials Luger (+95% bluing and straw). Or my 99% Walther P5 Lang (one of a few dozen produced, last two examples to be sold in the US (sold by Sportsmans Attic in Minot ND last year) exceeded $8k on GB). Either handgun is EASILY worth triple the VALUE of the POF or AUG. (BRAG OFF!)
          Again, CLUELESS.
          I you choose or can only afford inexpensive hardware, that’s fine.
          Just don’t swerve those who don’t, and freely explain WHY they dont. Stay in your lane.

        6. avatar Taurus 4 Life says:

          Man James you are such a choad!

        7. avatar James Campbell says:

          Well, that comment MIGHT bother me IF I cared what you thought, but…, don’t care.

      2. avatar James Campbell says:

        Does mentioning I have a pair of unfired NIB Heckler & Koch P7 M13s that each exceed the value of the POF or AUG make me a BIGGER choad Taurus?
        Oh well, I guess I am!

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:


    2. avatar James Campbell says:


      1. avatar James Campbell says:


  17. avatar jwtaylor says:

    Remington is still selling ARs. They offer several under the Remington brand on their website. They just are are all above $1,000.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      They’re marketing ARs for hunting purposes only. It looks like the lawsuit did have an effect.

      1. avatar James Campbell says:

        Good point. I appreciate how Frank DeSomma makes it clear why the 2nd A exists, and it’s got nothing to do with hunting.

      2. avatar jwtaylor says:

        Their website specifically says hunting or defense. And how is an AR only for hunting?

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Why is this comment here? I deleted it and replaced it with the one below. Hours later, this reappears? Comment section has been weird lately.

      3. avatar jwtaylor says:

        Under Modern Sporting Rifle section, the Remington website does say “for hunting or defense.” The only thing that makes some of those models more “hunting” than defense is the camo.

        That said, you’re likely right, or at least that may have added to the decision to pull down those brands. After all, if they aren’t making money, and they are making problems, get rid of the problem.

        The potential upside is that, in a beautiful, perfect world, Remington could come out with an improved brand based on increased quality, bring back those budget brands with better quality control, but less stupid marketing like “consider your man card reissued”.

        1. avatar James Campbell says:

          Agree 100%

        2. avatar Dude says:

          Missed the defense line. Just noticed they only had one with the minimum barrel length and they’re all named “Varmint” or “Predator” (and all camo).

          I’m all for dumping the dumb marketing. Like Springfield Armory showing the guy that ran out of gas in the backcountry, but he was prepared enough to bring his small AR with him, just in case. Like if you want to be prepared maybe fill up with gas before heading out into the sticks.

  18. avatar GS650G says:

    I Like the DPMS .308 Ar10. Good gun, no problems, reliable.

    1. avatar Darkman says:

      Must concur. I’ve had one since 2017. Real deer and hog slayer.

  19. avatar saikatana says:

    Remington started digging its grave prior to 1970. That is when they decided that all Remington weapons would be sold under a system called “Fair Trade Pricing” wherein Remington dictated what their weapons would sell for. This set the minimum price so Remington controlled the market and secured a base line of value. Until they got busted by the Government for price fixing. I believe some companies are attempting this even today.

    1. avatar JP Ruiz says:

      The price-fixing thing is also why DuPont Chemical Corporation sold off all of it’s ownership of Remington and ceased business ties with them all together.
      Big Green lost it’s corporate sugar daddy that could go out and buy raw-materials for them in-bulk at very low prices.

      Not only that, even after their patent on the twin-action-bar for the pump action expired, they threw reckless lawsuits at Winchester and Mossberg, and they ultimately did Winchester in. Mossberg, thankfully survived, and they are kicking Remington’s rear in the shotgun market.

      Glock would be my biggest suspect in doing what Remington did. I would lean towards them on getting unfair subsidies from the Austrian government though.

  20. avatar Austin Knudsen says:

    Here’s the straight skinny: blame the employee unions for this one. Union labor is expensive, which drives up the cost of any product. Right now, the AR-15 market isn’t bearing $1,000+ rilfes; it’s too saturated with quality ARs selling at cheaper prices.

    In the Remington union employee collective bargaining contract, the union demanded and received the condition that all Bushmaster rifles be made in the Illion, NY plant, with union labor. This was untenable for corporate Remington, which ultimately found out these Bushmaster rifles made in NY were too expensive to sell (and the QC too poor) due to union labor costs. So what did Remington do? It started manufacturing the R15 (without the name ‘Bushmaster’) rifle in a southern, non-union state in a new manufacturing facility.

    While Remington may shoulder some blame here for continuing to utilize union labor in NY, I applaud them for at least attempting to keep the doors of its historic plant in NY open. No, I blame the labor unions themselves. Under their outdated system, quality control has plummeted because employee promotion is based on union seniority, not on ability and talent. Instead of having the brightest, most talented innovators working in the Remington custom shop making new exciting products, you have the longest-tenured union employees (even though they may have been the janitor for 30 years) sitting in the custom shop with no clue how a bolt action 700 works. Higher and higher wage and concession demands have increased the price of the products to the point Remington doesn’t make money on the products produced in NY. We shouldn’t be surprised that corporate Remington needed to get creative to work around these union problems.

    Northeastern U.S. labor unions have killed the Winchester plant. They’ve all but killed the Colt plant. They are working on killing the Remington plant. There’s a reason more and more firearm manufacturers are fleeing to non-union southern and western states.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      While I agree unions should protect the rights of workers, sometimes they’ve taken their demands so far their actions are destructive to the business. Traditionally union and management relations are antagonistic and combative. In Germany and Japan union and management relations are more cohesive. Most companies will have the union represented at senior management level. Whose model is successful?

  21. avatar No_Ones_Home says:

    It’s not just Remington subsidiaries. Mossberg has dropped their MMR line of AR’s. Noticed they were not an option back in early January on Mossberg’s website. That explained why the Mossberg JM-Pro AR trigger was discounted about everywhere online around the holidays. The only autoloader rifles listed for Mossberg are .22’s.

  22. avatar JP Ruiz says:

    Everyone is talking about labor issues, quality control issues connected to labor issues, Remington losing sales to companies making higher quality products, and market saturation as being factors in why it looks like Remington has fled the MSR market. Those things are factual to every degree, and it’s appropriate for us to recognize those facts.

    However, it is inappropriate for us to ignore the Bloomberg and CT State Supreme Court and their filthy SLAPP Lawsuit against Big Green likely being what seems to be the straw that has broken the camel’s back in Remington leaving the MSR Market. When it does come out that Remington has left the MSR Market, the MSM is going to parade the news with Bloomberg at the forefront, and behold, we’re in a Presidential Election Cycle with Bloomberg running for President.

    I sincerely hope that people are paying attention to the 2020 Democrat Presidential Primary, as well as the fact that the social media and mainstream media waves are being saturated by Bloomberg. Joe Biden is looking like a hapless corpse, and I have a suspicion that given the recent Presidential Primary Rules Changes by the DNC, Bloomberg has already bought off the 2020 Democrat Presidential Nomination away from Bernie Sanders.

    Bloomberg’s flooding of the advertising waves is beyond annoying; it’s now alarming. He has his own Media Company and Big Tech Firm, so not only is he a Wallstreet Mogul, he’s one of the Big Tech Oligarchs of Silicon Valley.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      In the finance industry, Bloomberg IS the media. Every brokerage, bank, credit institution, and so on will have one or more Bloomberg terminals with several thousand dollars per year subscription fees.

  23. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    I’d list poor management before “Trump slump”.

  24. avatar econmics for dummies says:

    Market is flooded with ARs from complete ones for $300 to the gucci ones.

    When a market is flooded with a product a company produces, decisions have to be made in the best interest of the company and for the shareholders. It’s simple economics really, not surprising and a smart move.

  25. avatar American Patriot says:

    They are just going the way of the “liberal”.

  26. avatar Darkman says:

    I contacted Bushmaster about the possibility of them going out of business. They stated they were still in business and I could order parts through their specialty parts center. Ahlman’s Sales. No way to order complete firearms at this time.

  27. avatar Darkman says:

    Must Concur. I’ve have had one since 2017. Very reliable. Excellent deer and hog slayer.

  28. avatar lefty says:

    I recall both when Remington destroyed spare Nylon 66 parts[the 66s out shoot the Ruger 10/22/have better triggers/sights/a tang safety ]and their[then new]parkerized 870 12ga slug shotguns had to be fouled with 25+ rounds.Is both Remington and its union both guilty:YES .I’m only surprised that Remington&Kimber are still in the Marxist paradise of New York State,and that Henry is still in New Jersey.
    Its only getting worse with the Demoncraps and RINOs.

  29. avatar GS650G says:

    DPMS ORacle in .308 is still listed on BUds for about 750 or so. That’s a good price on a well made gun while they last

    1. avatar Poor man’s James Campbell says:

      The DPMS Oracle is an excellent platform as well, unless you ask Cames Jampbell.

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        You don’t need to ask. He’ll tell you anyway.

        1. avatar Darkman says:

          My guess is @ James Campbell is either Vlad’s interweb site name or his Bunkie. They seem to be made for each other. Considering their Opinions and Bull Shit flow down the same stream.

  30. avatar Joe says:

    Time to dump any stock I had in Remington, Barnes and Marlin.
    Needless to day, I won’t be buying any more products made by any of the three companies above or any of their other subsidiaries. Too bad they don’t have the BALLS to stand up for the Bill of rights, the constitution and the 2nd amendment.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      You have stock in Barnes and Marlin?

  31. avatar Jeffrey Epstein says:

    I kinda wondered when I saw a bunch of parts for sale on CDNN for DPMS and Bushmaster. Including machined receivers that weren’t anodized and other stuff you don’t often see like carriers without the gas key. There are also lots of Remington 1911 parts including frames. It looks like they just turned off the machines and sold everything that wasn’t nailed down to CDNN.

    If you have a Bushmaster AR10 I’d checkout CDNN and get any spares you think you might need that are proprietary.

  32. avatar Ark says:

    Cerberus killed Remington, we’re just watching the corpse twitch from Cerberus aggressively humping it.

  33. avatar miforest says:

    hedge fund stripped and flipped Remington and left it an empty shell.

    In order to buy Remington, Cerberus, as most private-equity firms would, created a new entity, a holding company. Instead of Cerberus buying a gun company, Cerberus put money into the holding company, and the holding company bought Remington. The entities were related but — and this was crucial — each could borrow money independently. In 2010, Cerberus had the holding company borrow $225 million from an undisclosed group of lenders, most likely hedge funds. Because this loan was risky — the lenders would be paid only if Remington made a lot of money or was sold — the holding company offered a generous interest rate of around 11 percent, much higher than a typical corporate loan. When the interest payments were due, the holding company paid them not in cash but with paid-in-kind notes, that is, with more debt. These are known as PIK notes.

    The holding company now had $225 million in borrowed cash. Cerberus, meanwhile, owned most of the shares of the holding company’s stock, basically slips of paper they acquired when they created the holding company. The handoff happened next: The holding company spent most of the $225 million buying back its own stock, effectively transferring all the borrowed cash to Cerberus. Cerberus would keep that money no matter what. Meanwhile Remington continued rolling along as though nothing had happened, because Remington itself was not responsible for the holding company’s debt. Remington was just an “operating company” that the holding company owned, something that allowed the holding company to borrow money, the way you would take a necklace to a pawnshop. These were garden-variety maneuvers in a private-equity buyout. In the trade, this is called “financial engineering.” People get degrees in it.
    remington them borrowed hundreds of millions , bought their own shares from the holding company and ended up deeply in debt without gaining any assets . there is a mile long article on this in the NYT

    1. avatar PM in Fl. says:

      Thanks it’s a shame what bean counters have devised to destroy American business and get rich themselves. Having an MBA used to be worth something, sadly no longer.

    2. avatar Kopperhed says:

      finally, a non-politically biased opinion. Hedge funds and shell companies are the death of everything good…… “we can’t sell it until it’s dead….”

  34. avatar Bemused Berserker says:

    I can’t help but wonder if this shuttering doesn’t have its roots in the Sandy Hook Lawsuit against Remington. While the upholding of the suit is very Bogus (a 3rd party uses a Bushmaster he obtained by killing the owner and its Remington Advertising’s fault?), add that into a saturated market and some poor business decisions, and voilá, you have to shut down smaller assets. Both Colt and Remington made these decisions after the Connecticutt Supreme Court upheld the plaintiff’s suit. Coincidence?

  35. avatar Firepower4u says:

    Once the company’s got bought by “the group” most of us immediately stopped supporting them. We saw this coming.

  36. avatar zak says:

    LOL diaper, why don’t you write this article making references to OK BOOMER or you don’t want to piss off half your audience and lose money? go ahead, cut off half of your readership and pander to the diapers instead. you don’t need us boomers. we’re dumb, senile and useless anyway. right? like you say elsewhere? why don’t you say it here?

    1. avatar Boomer smashed says:

      Boomer you guys sold America out long ago, now you cry when we notice.

  37. avatar William Wade says:

    Colt leaving the AR competition does not surprise me. They were so over priced. Anyone who bought a Colt was just paying for the name stamped on the firearm.
    I bought my son a “Colt” M16 in .22 LR when he was 11. It cost almost as much as a real AR at the time. Once I tried ordering another magazine and an extractor for it as Colt was the only one supplying them. Found out that Umerex was the manufacturer of the rifle and they no longer made the firearm or parts for it.
    Things like that are what causes companies to fail.

  38. avatar Rob says:

    Well I’m sure glad I got my DPMS Oracle when I did and I have it upgraded. It’s a real good shooter and there is plenty of after market parts for the getting. Just sucks to see a couple of fine rifle companies shut down.

  39. avatar ck says:

    Too bad, an Oracle was my first AR it’s a great reliable rifle. But like many I’ve switched to Palmetto. I love out shooting the bolt action guys with a cheap AR.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email