Winchester

[Johnch]

I just talked to a Winchester / Us Repeating Arms rep this AM .
At a dealer trade show .

He stated all US production will stop soon or all ready has ( model 70 and lever guns , maybe more models)
But models made in Japan or Belguim will still be made .

He would not go into why .

He did hint that some production "MAY" shift off shore soon

I have a 06 catalog , he stated not all shown was or will be produced .

Sad to see the way things have gone.

Johnch

[9.3X62AL]

I think it is too early to speculate very deeply about the "why's" of this decision by Winchester--there's a LOT that isn't out there in the public domain, I'm sure. It is sad to see an old-line American gun maker shuttering the windows--esp. since Winchester finally brought back the CRF Model 70 a few years ago. That was one of the few good moves made by Winchester since 1963, and other "positives" in their line mostly came from Japan or Belgium since that time.

I love my Model 1894's, make no mistake--I have pre-'64 and post-'64 examples, but NONE of the Angle Eject or safety-ridden models. We must face facts here--the Marlin 336 series is a superior design (I turned in my Nomex and turnouts when I retired--flame me gently). The 336 is much easier to field-strip to the point where the owner can clean the bore from the breech end, and scope mounting on a Marlin lever gun receiver is very much like installing a scope on a bolter.

Marlin also offers a MUCH wider range of calibers in a receiver size that are tailored to revolver cartridges like the 357 and 44 Magnums. 1892 reproductions abound, but not many by Winchester and not nearly as affordably as Marlin. Marlin remains committed to the Micro-Groove rifling profile for some perverse reason, but through tinkering and tweaking most of us handicapped with this affliction can use our poured projectiles with relative accuracy.

Additionally, there are the 45/70-class offerings in the 1895 series of Marlin rifles, also affordable for working stiffs--while 1886 repros are often dolled-up fanciful renditions too expensive and artful to fire or ride in the gunrack of a pickup truck.

My view--Marlin built lever rifles primarily for people to USE, while Winchester seemed to cater to collectors more than hunters. The more basic Model 94 was largely a bone thrown to the field and forest users, and even some of those got gussied-up into "brothel gun case" examples. These have an advantage over a Chevy Vega or Ford Pinto up on blocks in the front yard in that they don't rust as readily or take up so much space--indoor storage is the key--but their respective "collector values" are similar in character and yield.

Lever gun rant concluded--now for the Model 70. Once the post-64 bolters came online, it was just a matter of time until the Rem 700's accuracy potential and the Ruger 77's caliber proliferation AND near-miss CRF capability in the Mark II series would bury the Model 70. My own view is that the Win 70 CRF is certainly the best hunting rifle action of the 3 U.S. makers mentioned above. I think that the fast-building popularity of the CZ-550 since 2000 was the "stake through the heart" of Winchester's bolt rifle market share.

To conclude--some gunmakers just don't get it--and Winchester was chief among them. The Remington 870 vs. the M-1200/1300 (another 1964 casualty)......not even close. The Rem 1100-series vs. the 1400/1500.....oh, please. You can't run crap against quality and hope that name recognition will sweep the field for you, then add a paint job to your Yugo and hope that catering to showroom-bound finish admirers will carry the day. Not gonna happen.

Winchester's departure is either the just reward of "idiot wind" marketing schemes--or the longest-lived bustout scam in history.

Let the firestorm commence.

[StarMetal]

Well I'll flame you gently Deputy Al. Actually not a flame at all. I like the Winchester better. To me it has smoother lines and prettier. It's also alot lighter and they don't have those fat bublulous forearms like a Marlin. One has to understand that when the levers were conceived they were NEVER intended to be scoped. Even Marlin didn't intend that, but hit happen that their solid top receiver made the transition better then Winchester.

I have great respect for Col Cooper and I remember one time he was talking about "assault rifles" and made the statement that if it weren't for the magazine tube on a 94 Winchester being liable to get dented and put the it out of action, that it's one of the greatest assaul rifles ever made. Light, fast and fast handling, cartridge of an appropiate size conductive to enough power, but yet not excessive recoil, and except for the noted magazine tube possible fault, extremely dependable and sturdy. Notice, he didn't say 336 Marlin.

Now before you jump me I own both Marlin and Winchester. Both are in 45 Long Colt. I'm also tired of hearing the Winchester lever rattle stories. Alot of guns rattle. Hell, any gun with sling swivels that aren't just so rattle too. Pump shotguns are notorious for rattles. Flipping off certain types of safeties make alot of noise. Cocking back a single action is noisey. So let's get over that point.

According to a few strictly lever action forums I've visited the Winchester 94 is actually stronger then a Marlin. They did blow up test and the Winnies handled it better.

Bottom line: both are great rifles and I would hate to see either of them go out of business. Like Trpr Bret says about me being a big chevy motorhead, it broke my heart when Chevy dropped the Chevelles, Camaros, and most of all reardrive cars!!!! I hope Winchester doesn't break my heart and shutdown too.

By the way Chevy has a Camaro concept car that is alot like late 60's Camaros in a fashion like Ford recently done to the Mustang.

Joe

[9.3X62AL]

Joe--

Full agreement on aesthetics, sir. I'm a lot more "disappointed" than I am "dissatisfied" here. I like both Winchester and Marlin lever guns, they evoke a LOT of fond memories for me--and continue to make them.

The Win 86 and 92 actions are a LOT smoother than the Marlin 95 or 94, and are likely stronger as well. The 94 might be more stout than the 336--that's not my point, though. All of these actions have sufficient strength to contain their intended cartridges safely and beyond.

My post was just an expression of dismay at the departure of a favored gunmaker. My first deer and most of my first game birds fell at the bark from a Winchester.

It's just sad--and I fear that S&W may be in a similar inadmirable market position due to brain-dead marketing decisions. The "niches" are done to death--time to return to the things that built the company in the first place, high-quality moderately-priced service and field revolvers in calibers people can shoot for a while. These days, a lot of S&W's customers have to drive some distance and pay some money to shoot--and I think a shooting DAY should be a DAY.....not the fifteen minutes it takes to get fatigued and flinched-out by a hand cannon.

I'm really ranting here.....time to watch some NFL, methinks.

[Scrounger]

Joe--

Full agreement on aesthetics, sir. I'm a lot more "disappointed" than I am "dissatisfied" here. I like both Winchester and Marlin lever guns, they evoke a LOT of fond memories for me--and continue to make them.

The Win 86 and 92 actions are a LOT smoother than the Marlin 95 or 94, and are likely stronger as well. The 94 might be more stout than the 336--that's not my point, though. All of these actions have sufficient strength to contain their intended cartridges safely and beyond.

My post was just an expression of dismay at the departure of a favored gunmaker. My first deer and most of my first game birds fell at the bark from a Winchester.

It's just sad--and I fear that S&W may be in a similar inadmirable market position due to brain-dead marketing decisions. The "niches" are done to death--time to return to the things that built the company in the first place, high-quality moderately-priced service and field revolvers in calibers people can shoot for a while. These days, a lot of S&W's customers have to drive some distance and pay some money to shoot--and I think a shooting DAY should be a DAY.....not the fifteen minutes it takes to get fatigued and flinched-out by a hand cannon.

I'm really ranting here.....time to watch some NFL, methinks.

Just too much good sense, simply and clearly stated.

[The Nyack Kid]

Im sad to see what is happening to winchester . sad but not suprised . manufactioning is dieing in this country and untill we (as a country ) come to value it more that we curantly do , then we will continue to loss Amarican Icons like winchester.

[fecmech]

"The "niches" are done to death--time to return to the things that built the company in the first place, high-quality moderately-priced service and field revolvers in calibers people can shoot for a while."

Speaking of S&W and "niches" I read somewhere recently (Rifleman I think) that S&W has sold 40,000 of those 500 Magnums so far! I could'nt believe it but talked to a local gun store owner and he said he's sold every one he got in, one guy even wants one in every barrel length!. Oh well. S&W may not be so crazy after all.

[waksupi]

I've also taken a lot of game with Winchesters, over the years. I started out hunting seriously with a single barrel 20 bore. My older brother had it before me, then my brother Gary used it. This year, his youngest shot his first deer with it, I do believe.
I've killed truckloads of deer, antelope, and elk with my old Model 70, and a few fell to an 86 lever action. I've been pretty satisfied with them over the years. I hope thier quality doesn't fall, in the next reincarnation.

[Blackwater]

Fellas, I'm a firm believer in cause and effect, and as Nyak said, I can't say I'm surprised. Remember when WW started injecting hot melt glue of some kind into the mortises to "bed" their rifles? When they did that, I KNEW that the folks with the reins didn't know spit about guns, and it was also 99% sure that they didn't even know enough to separate the wheat from the chaf and know the difference between good advice and bad. That NEVER leads to anything good, in the end, and the current closing is just the natural and inevitable result of that.

We "moderns" have, as a whole, adopted the premise that the leadership of a business is all about the beancounters' calculations. It's NOT! Business is, and always HAS been, about leadership, and if the leaders of a corporation or business don't know spit about their products, then something BAD is GONNA' happen sooner or later. We live in the "Age of Information," but there's a HECK of a difference between data/information and KNOWLEDGE and WISDOM. In the final analysis, business will ALWAYS boil down, in the end, to making a good decision ... or not. And the results are prima face' evidendence that the current "modern" theory of "business" is .... well, not workin' so hot!

The machinations of the @#$%^&* American lawyers and the current affinity to sue at the drop of a hat ..... or the IMAGINED possibility of same ..... is runnin' the gun business more than any knowledge of the product or the clientele.

Then there's the relative lack of real knowledge of weapons and their use and utility, and thought about the actual inner workings of same, that factor in, too. Far too many current firearms users have far too little real knowledge of their guns and ammo, or of how they're most effectively and properly used and cared for. Back when a great percentage of the population had served in the military, real knowledge and ability with guns was common. Not so today, despite what the numbers would indicate about the number of guns in circulation. The presence of a gun in a home is just a statistic, and does NOT mean they really know their guns, their use, etc. Just try to get THAT through a current business leader's head! I DARE you!

And this isn't just unique to the gun industry, either, not by a LONG shot! But that's another story for another day, maybe.

Sadly, the universities, dominated by liberal philosophy and practice, have completely abandoned the appreciation and utility of REAL KNOWLEDGE about their business' endeavors and products. Liberalism itself is at the root of it all, whether it's immediately apparent to many or not. I kid you not! The philosophy of thought processes used to "educate" (or "train" or even "indoctrinate") the young heads full of mush that attend our institutions of higher learning these days, or any other, are the driving force behind all the APPLICATIONS thereof. Thus, if liberal philosophy dominates academia, the approach they use in selecting what and how they teach WILL, most CERTAINLY, affect the end product, and thus the ability or inability of the businesses that will be run by these young folks WILL be affected, and affected adversely by the neglect of the essential elements of knowledge of product and clientele, which CANNOT be thoroughly or deeply understood or appreciated by the simple collection and perusal of the kind of statistics that can be accumulated and colated in an effort to identify "trends" objectively.

I submit that little about the modern man is "objective," and that MOST of what we do is based on SUBJECTIVE factors. I think the gun industry is a sterling example of this principle.

As I stated earlier, when WW started injecting the mortises with some sort of hot melt glue to "bed" them, I KNEW then that the leadership was ignorant of what they were actually doing, and TRYING to do, and I said to myself right then that WW would, sooner or later, close or be bought out by someone who DID know what to do with the company. I'm no prophet or seer or soothsayer, but .... well, I don't think you HAVE to be in order to have forseen this closing. It's just simple cause and effect, and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Also, as Nyak noted, unless and until this nation gets off their kick of bad-mouthing businesses, and swallowing every "conspiracy theory" to come down the pike about them, then IT'S JUST GONNA' GET WORSE, and WW won't be the last example of what I'm talking about, but the harbinger of things to come.

Bill Ruger was the last leader of a gun company who really KNEW guns, and that's a BIG part of the reason that Ruger has done so well financially when other companies have had such problems. He KNEW what was needed, and he KNEW it had to be supplied in a businesslike manner or the beancounters wouldn't have any good news, and the effort would be for naught in the end. Ruger was the heart of the company, and Sturm was the head, and the one-two punch of the combination led them in the right directions to make good guns both affordable and profitable, so the business could survive and even prosper.

One reason I know this is that I've seen the same dang principle ruin or nearly ruin some other businesses. It really IS the principles upon which education and business are based that overide aspirations, clinical education, and everything else. I've seen it dozens of times in business big and small, and there's a lesson in WW's closing, IF other gun mfgs. will just SEE and HEED it. Run by bean counters and lawyers, though, I ain't optimistic, and that fact saddens me deeply - MUCH more than the simple closing of one plant. AND .... I don't really think it takes a prophet or seer or soothsayer to see this, either. Businessmen from 70 years ago could tell you that, but they've gone on now, and can't speak, so they can't be booed or hissed due to speaking the Truth, now.

Mark my words, we're gonna' see MORE of this kind of thing, NOT LESS. And not a bit of it is really NECESSARY, either, which is the damnable SHAME of it all.

[StarMetal]

Blackwater,

I don't totally agree with you on Winchester. Someone sure was on the right track with the reintroduction of the pre-64 type action for the Model 70. That was a good move. They've had some other innovations too. I think their gob of hot melt was a poor attempt at glassbedding, a move in the right direction with the wrong procedure.

The reason Ruger done so well is he had a knack for what the shooting public would like or wanted and his product were cheaper then everyone elses (in price not quality) and they were brute strong. He also brought back the single action at the perfect time. That's why his company done so well. I have a few friends that knew Bill Ruger and they said (plus I've heard many other places) he was an egotistical bastard.

Joe

[MTWeatherman]

I really, really hate to see WW close...and to me the decision doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

Ford and GM are in trouble too...as are a lot of other American manufacturers. However, the first move for them will be to downsize and those plans are already underway. They will drop model lines, attempt to increase productivity, quality, etc... all done to be more competitive. They lost money but didn't immediately decide to go out of business but to try to do what it takes to turn the company around. Bad decisions emphasizing short-term profits over long-term quality were made by both in the past (much like Winchester) and have hurt them against the Asian competition. Whether or not they are successful remains to be seen but I certainly hope they are. This country doesn't need to lose any more manufacturing jobs than it already has.

Why close? Isn't there enough profit to continue some lines? I find it extremely difficult to believe that there isn't enough demand for the '94 or 70 to justify some production, even if it is curtailed.I don't know how many of those rifles they've sold recently but most sporting goods stores stock them. If they weren't selling them, they wouldn't have them in inventory. I'd be shocked if another company didn't pick up the '94 design...its only real competion is the Marlin or Rossi...and the Marlin 30-30 comes complete with Microgroove...their .44 Mag with a 1 in 38" twist. Maybe Rossi will pick up the '94. The design certainly should have a large enough following to warrant its production. Winchester put an effort into enhancing the '94 recently...a tang safety to keep the old sleek appearance of the receiver intact...a.Timber version in 450 Marlin, etc. It seemed as though the line was about to be enhanced...then suddenly the decision comes out to close the entire company.

I won't accept that the Marlin 336 is superior to the '94...or the other way around for that matter. It all depends on personal preference or intended use. I prefer the '94 Winchester. I like its sleek design. To me it packs, and handles better...it simply feels like a more compact package. The Winnie is also easier than the Marlin to manually loaded a single round at a time...just peek over the top of the reciever and push the cartidge in...with the Marlin you have to turn it sideways and get the cartridge lined up in the ejection port to do it. You really need to point the barrel down and use gravity to help you. Winchester is much better at the bench...and easier to pull that round out of the chamber for the same reason.

I only install a scope on a lever to work up loads...then take it off and use a receiver sight. I guess I'm a traditionalist. To me, a scope just doesn't belong on a lever action...but a bolt action looks naked without one. However, although the AE will take a scope, if a scope sighted lever were my choice, I'd go with Marlin. A lot of the loading convenience of the '94 and the compact carrying ability disappears with a scope on it. The Marlin does have a smoother feel to it while operating the lever. However, that sound of the '94 brings back a lot of memories ...and while both the Winne and Marlin are reliable firearms, if you jam a cartridge, you'll find the Winnie is the more user friendly in freeing it.

Damn...if the '94 is gone for good...it is one helluva loss!!!!!!!!!!

[felix]

Joe, most folks confuse egotism with enthusiasm. It's wrong to attack a person, but not a product. Sam Walton? He and Bill Ruger would really exciting competitors should Bill had been interested in retail stores. ... felix

[floodgate]

Guys:

I too will miss the 94, though it hasn't been the same since the '60's, and the pistol round versions had to make some serious compromises. But back to the old 30&30's - if you've ever "busted" a case in either (as I have, pushing multiple reloadings just TOO far), the Marlins (square or round bolt) just duct the gas right back into your face - since the locking block just goes part-way into the bottom of the bolt; the Westchester locking block covers the whole back of the bolt and fans the gas out upwards. On the other hand, "short-stroking" (my particular problem - my gunsmith buddy used me to prove out his feed alteration jobs) will jam a Winchester where it won't a Melvin. Dif'rent strokes, like they say....

Floodgate

[StarMetal]

Felix

I talked to one of Rugers upper management people and he said Bill was real hard on them, swore at them alot, threatened to fire them if some product they wanted to produce would fall short in sells. Yeah he was a great inventor and all, but from a host of people that knew and worked with him, he wasn't easy to get along with. I'm not attacking him or his products, just stating what little I know about him. That upper management guy I just spoke of....he related a meeting about how they wanted to make the 9mm pistol in other calibers and Bill didn't, but they persuaded him...and that's where the threats came in, to fire all of them involved if the other calibers didn't sell....well they did.

Joe

[felix]

Well, that said, Joe, is why Walmart left Sturm-Ruger in the dust. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix

That reminds me I was in the gun business and had two good friends in it also. Ruger wouldn't let you have a dealership if you sold S&W's and in the later years, after I quit, I heard they wouldn't give you a dealership unless you had a store front and insurance, the whole nine yards. I know the selling of S&W's was true, not sure of the other, but like I said Bill Ruger was a real charactor.

Joe

[Blackwater]

Star, I hear ya' on the classic CRF action, but that's just something the guys in the know were able to get through. I'm not entirely sure that FN didn't intend to close that plant from the outset, though that's just a suspicion without any real basis, other than knowing that most all of Europe never really has had a problem with undermining the US's business.

These things are never ones that come from a single cause, but rather from a number of things working together. The coarsening of the taste of the consumers is part of it too, as are the increasing cost of production even of the ores and minerals, and most everything else that it takes to produce. Surely the legal climate can't be left out.

However, if Ruger got through all these problems, then any other company equally adeptly and ably led could do the same.

As to Ruger's personality traits, I have no knowledge of that, but I DO know he led his company to be THE most SUCCESSFUL one in the good ol' USA, and that ain't no small thing, at all. I also know he really appreciated the really good things. Look at the art he loved and came to collect. That says a lot about him that anecdotal stories, however true, just can't. I'd tend to think that he'd worked so long and hard, and put in virtually his life's blood in the enterprise, that when he gave in to others, he didn't have any more patience with them and any excuses they offered than he did with his own.

What I'm saying is that he was incredibly hard on his own self at points along the company's way, and given that and other indications of his personality, I doubt he was any harder on his employees than he was on himself. That's "equal treatment," I think, and however foreign it may be to most of our senses of propriety, it's not entirely unwarranted. Also, as the size of the operation, and the necessity of results became, and the less TIME he had to instruct his main men in problem solving, the more understandable such behavior becomes. It'll never be pleasant nor welcome, of course, but there DO come times when a leader has to exercise his authority and make demands that are just plain necessary.

This too supports my alegation that WW's biggest problem was their neo-management style, done according to "current conventional wisdom." Ruger saw and KNEW what HAD to be done, and demanded that the goals be met. He'd done nothing less when it was mostly him and Sturm doing the leading, and he wasn't about to let his "baby" suffere from the "problems" his employees saw. After all, at upper management levels, it's the chief dawg's JOB to keep his and his employees' eyes on the prize. Make sense?

I think one of Bill's pet peeves was the inefficiency of the bureaucratic elements of modern business, but there's just no other way to get big things done today. Maybe he was just a bit of a throwback to different times, climes and people, and just didn't fit the mould devised by more "modern" business theories, but then .... that's my point, really. He was a git'r done type of guy, and that IS wha the bottom line is all about. Sometimes, too, especially nowadays, I think, good employees have to be pushed to realize their true potential, and achieve goals their true abilities are capable of.

Again, this is just judging him by what I know and can verify about him from a distance. Sometimes, though, that view comes closer to being fully accurate than a closer up view, because closeups get so darn personal sometimes. I just can't help but think that there may well come a day when we'll all wish for more managers like Ruger, and fewer like WW's. YMMV, of course, but I come from a date and time and place and people where what a man WAS and what he DID was a LOT more important than whether he barked a lot and kicked butt now and then. His son wasn't the man his father was, as a corporate leader, but at least he apparently had the good sense and good graces to realize that, and he apparently CAN at least tell fairly whether advice is good or bad, for the most part.

I'm in awe that ANY gun company can continue in business and make a good product in our legal, governmental regulatory and economic environment. I'll take my hat off to ANY American who can do that, ANY time! It ain't something that many can really do, I think. I just wish we had more Bill Rugers around. Despite their obvious competition, I think Ruger would have rued WW's demise more than any of us here, because it DOES strike right at the heart of the question of whether his or ANY gun company can long survive with the insane conditions of today seem to be getting worse all the time. There are all sorts of sharks in the water swimming in circles around ALL the gun companies, and the scrungy
@#$%^&* liberal lawyers whose sole aim is to end private American gun ownership are the ones with the biggest teeth. The regulatory problems, from HR matters on up, are just an inconvenience and a price hiker and bottom line thinner. The price and availability of the raw materials is gonna' catch up with all manufacturing companies, too, sooner or later .... IF the Iranians don't start WWIII soon??? That's only half in jest, too.

That old Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times," has surely fallen on us, and HEAVILY, I think.

[felix]

Ruger's big profits come from investment casting golf club heads for the biggies. ... felix

[felix]

Joe, doing business with Walmart is being a willing slave to them. If your company is going to do business, they have to have a staffed store front in Bentonville AR, right next to the Walmart headquarters. Walmart standards are next to none. They know their market well and project goods to meet that market without exception. Tough? That word is way too soft. ... felix

[sundog]

Yup, it's all about money. Winchester, Wal-Mart, uhhh..., Worldcom, Enron..., sometimes it goes all wrong. sundog

[StarMetal]

In China I heard that the Chinese are calling Walmart there "The Great Wall of Mart". Hahahahahaha heard it on the news. Glad to see they have a sense of humor.

Joe

[swheeler]

And who do they hire for illegals, Koreans?

[JohnH]

My two cents on Winchester failing is this.... They quit listening to their potential customers, failed to take advantage of the market and let their competionn do what they should have done.

In the face of overwhelming demand for rifles chambered in the like soft 25-20, 32-20 and 357 Magnum, Winchester did nothing. Instead they brought out a line of not quite magnum magnums that no one was asking for.

Savage owns the "made for blue collar salaries" bolt rifles. Instead of at least attempting to have an offering in that market, they ceeded it to Savage. At least Remington is putting up a fight.

And instead of doing a manufacturing redesign on it's older lever or pump guns to meet the demands of the Cowboy Shooters, winchester ahs acted as if that market didn't exist, untill they reintroduced the 38-55 and 25-35 in the '94. Meanwhile, Taurus is introducing a beefed up and modernised version of the Model 63 in 357 Magnum and 45 Colt.

Winchester is failing because they are unresponsive to the firearms market. Whoever said the current managment don't know beans about firearms is right, and not only do they not know anything about firearms, they don't know anything about markets, marketing, and who their customers are and what they want.

US Repeating Arms is failing because of idiot decisions made by the managment. Unfortunately the people who will suffer the most because of these bad decisions are the folks out on the shop floor making thier living building the product.

I doubt we've seen the last of the Winchester name, but we are seeing the end of a long line of bad decisions that began with Oliver failing to market John's A5.

[StarMetal]

Who said Winchester is failing? Maybe they just decided to throw in the towel. Also they've made alot of changes on the 94 from since the first original model. Fact is if none of you fellows work in upper U.S. Repeating Arms (they aren't winchester and yall keep using Winchester) or have friends that do, none of you know why they are shutting their doors. Not flaming you, just that everyone, including me, chime in as to why they are quitting. Doesn't matter if we would know, it's not going to stop them. I hate to see them go.

Joe

[keeper89]

Joe, got to agree with you on that last post. I also hate to see them go even though I am not a big lever action fan I do like bolt guns and have 2 model 70 variants that I have no intention of getting rid of.......... :castmine:

[steveb]

Gone but not forgotten
The American Made New Haven Ct Winchester

[Blackwater]

Joe, ultimately, as to the inner workings of USRA, you're right, of course. However, it's not out of line to have watched what happened and inferred reasonably a number of things about the management and the reasons for the closing. As you say, it's darn sure a shame, and a shame of very high order, too, that they're closing. Can't help but believe someone will pick up the name and the pieces that can still be used, and give the name a rebirth. What with the status of the education and training and philosophy of modern business leaders now, though, I ain't gonna' hold my breath 'till they "do it right," both gun-wise and business-wise. Call me a curmudgeonly old agnostic or worse. That's just my take on it all. It's just a dang shame, though, above all else.