Silver Shogun Technical Question

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by unkated

By selling them over-priced (multiply taxed as you said below) used weapons?

Everything taxed is taxed every time it changes hands. The more times a taxable item changes hands, the more times it’s taxed by one level of government or another. This affects all taxable firearms sales in the US proportionately.

Originally Posted by unkated

People who don't generally buy weapons will be disinterested.

While it’s true that people who don’t generally buy weapons will be disinterested, the observation is a tautology in that everything sold is put onto a market in which some potential consumers will be disinterested. Depending on whose figures you believe, many as 1 American household in 3 or as few as 1 in 6 have a gun in the household. This means that at least half of American households are disinterested. As many as 83% are disinterested. Yet manufacturers of AR-15 style rifles don’t seem to be throwing up their hands because their market is less than universal.

Originally Posted by unkated

People who are interested in weapons for use will not be interested in expensive worn weapons when better can be had (read as Galil) at the same or better price.

Consumers are not as rational as this universally. Some are, to be sure. You may be, and my hat is off to you for that if you spend your money based solely on logic. But people with money to spend also buy for coolness factors that have nothing to do with good sense. Back in the mid-90’s, marketers observed a distinct uptick in sales of Chinese-made SKS carbines when someone smart started marketing them as “cowboy carbines”. Same rifle, increased sales. While a perfectly rational consumer looking to buy a very serviceable rifle like the AK-74 or the Galil may pick the Galil for good reasons, the United States has literally millions of gun owners who buy firearms just to have them. Their money is just as good as the money of the gun owner who is going to purchase a single rifle for an identified need.
One only needs spend a brief period looking at US auto sales trends to realize that the strictly rational is at best one factor driving consumer choices in automobiles, to carry the idea of consumer spending based on values other than sheer serviceability a step further. For example, when I got back from Iraq, I bought a used 2000 Toyota Echo for $7,000. I bought a standard so I could get the best fuel efficiency, plus power when I needed it. The safety rating is perfectly adequate. I have two car seats in the back for my children, though the car is a 2-door. The inconvenience of folding the passenger seat forward is modest, and I’m still fit enough to lift a young child into the car seat behind the driver’s side. Depending on how much highway driving I am doing, I get 37-39 mpg. This is in line with the fuel efficiency of some hybrids that cost a lot more. I have as much carrying capacity as a more prestigious and more expensive automobile would give me. So why aren’t the roads filled with Toyota Echos? Market research shows that men want pickup trucks, regardless of fuel efficiency or whether they ever end up transporting light cargo. Not all men, of course. The point is that American consumers will happily pay more to get less based on factors quite aside from practical concerns like fuel efficiency. This thinking can be found among consumers buying all sorts of consumer goods.
Also, point of order: no prices have been posted anywhere in this thread, so a claim that Galil is cheaper than a rebuilt AK-74 is pure speculation. You may be right, but at the moment there are no figures on the table to prove such an assertion one way or the other.

Originally Posted by unkated

There will be some who will buy them for the cachet of a weapon used in combat.

Agreed completely. In fact, I would go so far as to say that you have identified the principal sales appeal.

Originally Posted by unkated

Real-world introduction of the QBZ-95, QBZ-95B & QBB-95B (Assault Rifle, carbine & LMG chinese weapons that fire the Chinese 5.8mm cartridge) were introduced in 1997. In the midst of war, wishing to ramp up production and to not complicate munitions needs at the front, I'd suggest that they would most likely stick to the Type 81 asslt rifle and LMG, that fire 7.62mm S.

All the more reason to get rid of captured AK-74; i.e, sell them to the United States or anyone else who will pay cash for them, provided a little common sense regarding Chinese interests is applied. They aren’t going to leave any captured equipment lying around. The PRC is in a fight for her life because the Politburo won’t personally survive if China is forced to come to the bargaining table by defeat on the battlefield. What is captured must be reissued or exchanged for something the Chinese want more (not necessarily more rifles of a different caliber).

Originally Posted by unkated

Why not just have a 5.45 WP factory in Nevada?

For the reasons I outlined in previous posts. Now, if a case can be made that there’s more money for US defense contractors in paying for tools, fixtures, training, and possibly new facilities than in not constructing a 5.45B factory, then we should expect suitable factories to appear. However, your observation about Chinese choices in weapons suggests that the bean counters of the potential investing corporations will point out that there isn’t a big market for 5.45B in China. The market, then, is going to be the US civilian market based on the AK-74 and anyone overseas who is not inclined to buy from the Soviet Bloc. Not having any numbers in front of me, I can’t develop an ROI for a new 5.45B ammunition line in CONUS. I do know that corporate investors are skittish creatures who like to have some assurance that tools and fixtures will be used to their maximum capacity until they break. I’m not sure any such assurance can be made for a 5.45B line in CONUS in 1995 or 1996. The bean counters probably would tell their respective boards that leveraging Congress into mandating that the incoming AK-74s be retooled for 5.56N is a more cost effective solution for the corporation than paying for a new assembly line.

Originally Posted by unkated

Of course, the US could retool factories and sell 5.45mm WP to china (export! or at least pay down our trade deficit) and domestically. Better revenue stream.

By the time there are serious conversations about opening a 5.45B line in the US, there will be no US trade deficit with China. China will be buying as much American materiel as possible in the interests of getting the US solidly behind Chinese victory. Whatever the US is willing to sell, China will buy with cash and then on credit because the Chinese understand that the US, driven by the logic of capitalism, will gleefully lend and sell until it’s too late to back out. All will be coming up roses until we realize with a start that China falling will result in China defaulting, which will cause very serious losses to US lenders. Quite naturally, the bankers will be the first ones to realize this problem. Having stampeded into selling China on credit enough stuff to explode the dreams of avarice, the US will find itself chained to China’s fate. Suddenly, buying Chinese will become necessary so that China can repay her debts. Unfortunately, Chinese industry will be either retooling for the war effort, behind enemy lines in Manchuria, or getting flattened by Soviet strategic air power from the beginning of 1996 onwards. In this light, buying anything the Chinese can sell for hard currency takes on a logic of its own. Since the Chinese probably aren’t going to use AK-74 themselves, nor will they be inclined to leave them lying around, selling them to American collectors makes a certain sense.

Originally Posted by Raellus

Web, I think the way you end up answering this question really depends on whether it is more about world-building or storytelling.

This is a very valid point. To some degree, it’s about building scenarios in my own head. In my mind, the ridiculous makes for good storytelling provided the ridiculous is not a deus ex machina. “They came across a container of captured Soviet weapons and, by happy coincidence, a usable assembly line for ammunition nobody but the Soviets use” requires more suspension of my disbelief than “They came across a warehouse of captured Soviet weapons being reworked to fire the most common assault rifle ammunition in the US”. The former is just silly. The latter is merely far-fetched. I can work with far-fetched.

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

I thinking, there are a lot of good points but, I don't think the US would sell the AK-47 on the open market. They are just too much in demand by the CIA to equip anti soviet forces ie the free polish legion, and by the military for testing and behind the lines missions and special ops folks.

That’s food for thought.