I cited those threads and they are full of incorrect information- for one FN uses 7075 REs.
Hate it or love it- the FN offering checks all the same blocks as a 6920.
Well that’s good. Maybe the lesser equipped rifles were just display models for shot show or something.
I checked their website earlier today and saw an 18" rifle gas DMR style rifle that looked promising.
I have no love or fear of FN… Nor any specific inside knowledge on their civvy sale AR.
I did note the statements of fact around Colt/FN TDP law based on forum references that are far from documented fact.
It’s a forum phenomenon, by the 2nd or 3rd mention something becomes accepted as dogma.
Only Colt & FN legal staff know the exact terms and what those boundaries are.
Just like other companies selling far more AR’s claim to have access to the TDP but are not licensed… We give them a pass. But declare that FN could not build a comparable rifle without crossing that line?
There is a line that FN could not legally cross. We just don’t know what it is and how far it goes. It’s probably something thing short of putting semi parts in an otherwise production gun with a different rollmark. (Though some conjecture they just can’t market it as “identical”)
Does that mean their current offering is solid or not? Don’t know.
But I’d probably trust their core components (barrel, receiver, etc) more than the generics most people accept.
To me this is a business failure for Colt and FN… They’d both make more money if they licensed a civvy legal same quality clone. It won’t erode Colt 6920 type sales, not that they care about civvy sales anyway.
They have dicked around and let other companies meet the pro-sumer and nostalgia market demand.