DPMS and Bushmaster ARs become "desirable" when bankrupt?

[HankC]

Bushmaster and DPMS were considered entry level when market only have a few brands, then considered better brands when more and more cheap ones in the market. Now they bankrupted and getting hard to find, does that make them more desirable, or even collectable, and increase value? They were part of AR legend. I have New in Box Bushmaster and wonder!

 

[mcb]

They made so many I suspect it will be years/decades before they have any true collectors value, and then only if left is original factory configurations that are desirable. Not much demand for quadrails anymore... The older Bushmaster made in Windham will probably gain value faster. Same for St Cloud DPMS guns. It's going to be a long time if ever before the Huntsville guns get any real collector's value.

Most of my ARs are built on Remington made Bushmaster/DPMS/Rem lowers. I would not make a safe queen out of any Bushmaster or DPMS, Remington involved or not.

 

[Charlie98]

Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it... this includes firearms.

Right now, the AR market is red hot... if there was ever a time to sell, this is it. I don't think any AR will approach 'collector value' besides something significant like an original Colt or Armalite. Both the Bushy and the DPMS were entry-level AR's, I saw them just a year ago NIB for as little as $350...

 

[jmorris]

I own BM and DPMS lowers they are what they are, no matter who’s name is on them, to me.

There are old stamp collectors out there looking for this or that to make something complete. I bet there’s even a few folks in search of a pristine baby poop green 1976 Pinto station wagon to complete a collection.

For people that just want to use one, no there won’t be any value increase unless cheaper alternatives that do the same thing cease to exist.

 

[HankC]

One thought is when there is another AWB the bankruptcy establishes the Pre-Ban!

 

[BreechFace]

I would say Bushmaster probably will down the road, mainly the Windham made ones will gain some value. Their reputation back then was solid and it has name recognition for good and bad.

I don't personally see DPMS gaining any value over time, in my opinion it will always be just another value lined AR.

 

[entropy]

Bushmaster and DPMS were considered entry level when market only have a few brands, then considered better brands when more and more cheap ones in the market. Now they bankrupted and getting hard to find, does that make them more desirable, or even collectable, and increase value? They were part of AR legend. I have New in Box Bushmaster and wonder!

If you really think that to be the case (I don't), CDNN is selling off the remnants.

 

[mcb]

I would say Bushmaster probably will down the road, mainly the Windham made ones will gain some value. Their reputation back then was solid and it has name recognition for good and bad.

I don't personally see DPMS gaining any value over time, in my opinion it will always be just another value lined AR.

This always sort of surprises me, I have always been of the opinion DPMS was better than Bushmaster. The DPMS patterned AR-10 was probably the closest thing to a standard the AR-10 ever got. And DPMS took it to the next level with the GII. IMHO the DPMS GII was in many ways one of the best 308 ARs on the market. It was smaller and lighter than an AR-10 having more parts/size in common with an AR-15 than an AR-10 and was chambered in a number of cartridges in the 308 Win family.

 

[ilbob]

I doubt that it will make the rifles themselves especially valuable. But the names themselves as brand names might have some value. I would not be surprised if someone acquired the names and started selling generic ARs with either brand name stamped on it.

 

[BreechFace]

This always sort of surprises me, I have always been of the opinion DPMS was better than Bushmaster. The DPMS patterned AR-10 was probably the closest thing to a standard the AR-10 ever got. And DPMS took it to the next level with the GII. IMHO the DPMS GII was in many ways one of the best 308 ARs on the market. It was smaller and lighter than an AR-10 having more parts/size in common with an AR-15 than an AR-10 and was chambered in a number of cartridges in the 308 Win family.

It was no slight to DPMS. I just remember the old Bushmaster from Windham, and they were solid performers, accurate, reliable and great longevity. There is no way I would pick a DPMS over a older Windham Bushmaster. But that is just me. Now talking about Remington owned Bushmaster, then yes I would favor DPMS.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

OMG. I used my son's first AR built on a DPMS receiver with quadrail forearm upper in the last (loosely open) modern military match.
Should I go hide my head in shame? Or buy it from him as a future collectible?

 

[Outlaw75]

This always sort of surprises me, I have always been of the opinion DPMS was better than Bushmaster.

Well, I can remember the Mil-Spec era when Bushmaster was considered rock solid and DPMS was always considered a bit suspect, especially their entry level models. In fact, the only thing at that time that topped BM was Colt.

 

[Charlie98]

OMG. I used my son's first AR built on a DPMS receiver with quadrail forearm upper in the last (loosely open) modern military match.
Should I go hide my head in shame? Or buy it from him as a future collectible?

I own BM and DPMS lowers they are what they are, no matter who’s name is on them, to me.

It's not that DPMS (for example, I speak from experience...) was a bad firearm, as jmorris mentions... the lower and upper receivers are generic. It's how and with what they were assembled with that makes them good or bad, unreliable or 100%, a tack driver or scattergun. Generically speaking, Bushy and DPMS were entry-level guns... that's all. Take a $400 DPMS Oracle, their bottom line AR, true up the upper receiver face and spin on a quality barrel... and you have what would likely be a very good AR.

Think of the lower as a stripped Chevrolet 350 block... you can build that motor with junkyard parts, and have a motor that works, or pump it up with high-performance parts... and have a motor that really works.... but at the end of the day, it's the same building block.

 

[mcb]

It was no slight to DPMS. I just remember the old Bushmaster from Windham, and they were solid performers, accurate, reliable and great longevity. There is no way I would pick a DPMS over a older Windham Bushmaster. But that is just me. Now talking about Remington owned Bushmaster, then yes I would favor DPMS.

But Remington owned Bushmasters and DPMS guns, especially those marked Huntsville, literally came off the same machines run by the same people. The only difference between a Remington Bushmaster and a Remington DPMS was the roll mark on the side of the magwell and the accessories.

 

[ilbob]

But Remington owned Bushmasters and DPMS guns, especially those marked Huntsville, literally came off the same machines run by the same people. The only difference between a Remington Bushmaster and a Remington DPMS was the roll mark on the side of the magwell and the accessories.

There are hand tools made at the same factory, on the same machine, with the same stock, and similar finishing, that the only real difference is the brand name stamped on them. People will argue over which tool is better even though the only difference is the brand name. That is pretty much what branding is about.

 

[wally]

One thought is when there is another AWB the bankruptcy establishes the Pre-Ban!

The next AWB is confiscation. The Democrats made that clear during the primaries, they are now using their tools in the media to try and make you forget what they said then.

Don't vote, don't bitch later. We need to step it up a notch.

 

[MAKster]

This always happens! Company stops selling a gun because there is no demand but then some people think it is now valuable because they can no longer buy it.

 

[BreechFace]

But Remington owned Bushmasters and DPMS guns, especially those marked Huntsville, literally came off the same machines run by the same people. The only difference between a Remington Bushmaster and a Remington DPMS was the roll mark on the side of the magwell and the accessories.

I know this.

Which is why I would choose DPMS, they have been more innovative in the later stages as you mentioned before with the GII AR10 and their AR15 product line was better than the Remington Bushmaster product line.

 

[mcb]

This always happens! Company stops selling a gun because there is no demand but then some people think it is now valuable because they can no longer buy it.

I would argue Remington's decision to quit making ARs (killing Bushmaster and DPMS brands) was not because the product was not selling but because Remington's leadership made poor decisions due to political and financial pressures that were not necessarily aligned with the 2A community. Hence the bankruptcy and auction of Remington.

I know this.

Which is why I would choose DPMS, they have been more innovative in the later stages as you mentioned before with the GII AR10 and their AR15 product line was better than the Remington Bushmaster product line.

This is funny too since DPMS and Bushmaster for the past 8+ years were "innovated" by the same core group of Remington R&D engineers. The DPMS GII was design by Remington, the 450 Bushmaster and 300 BO was brought to market by Remington (in partnership with others).

 

[dh1633pm]

They didn't go bankrupt. The new CEO closed them down. It was a political choice. A friend who works at the Arms worked making Bushmaster rifles and worked with the transition when they were purchased. He is an AR15 expert in every way. I have a DPMS single shot lower. I like it.

 

[BreechFace]

This is funny too since DPMS and Bushmaster for the past 8+ years were "innovated" by the same core group of Remington R&D engineers. The DPMS GII was design by Remington, the 450 Bushmaster and 300 BO was brought to market by Remington (in partnership with others).

In my opinion Bushmaster was not innovative the last 8 years almost whatsoever outside of the 450 Bushmaster which I love but that's more Remington than Bushmaster. Remington has always done well for the most part designing cartridges, they suck at getting them into the market.

They purchased the rights to "kick around" MagPul's "Masada" and relabel it Bushmaster ACR and flounder with it and ultimately letting it die on the vine. So the only innovative hardware I've seen come out of Bushmaster the last 8 years has been bought from MagPul and ultimately met it's demise; which kind of irks me as I thought the "masada" rifle was interesting enough with the switch barrel to have legs.

So whatever the difference between how the R&D folks at Remington handled things, DPMS actually provided results where as the Bushmaster line floundered around and never amounted to much.

Just my opinions take it for what it's worth.

 

[mcb]

They didn't go bankrupt. The new CEO closed them down. It was a political choice. A friend who works at the Arms worked making Bushmaster rifles and worked with the transition when they were purchased. He is an AR15 expert in every way. I have a DPMS single shot lower. I like it.

Well they did go bankrupt with Remington in March 2018. Then Remington made the "political decision" to close Bushmaster, DPMS, TAPCO in January 2020 and then Remington enters bankruptcy again in July.

 

[dh1633pm]

I get what your saying. But that was 2018. They were not closed down as a result of that. They were profitable ventures until the boss choose to shot them down for political reasons more recently.

 

[mcb]

I get what your saying. But that was 2018. They were not closed down as a result of that. They were profitable ventures until the boss choose to shot them down for political reasons more recently.

I agree completely. And I suspect that decision may have pushed Remington into the second bankruptcy soon then it might have otherwise. The fire sale of Bushmaster and DPMS inventory at the beginning of this year did not help Remington, especially viewed in hind-sight with with Covid-19 and social unrest later in the year.

 

[ilbob]

Remington had a lot of management issues. Like many businesses with such issues it did not end well for the company. It probably had very little to do with Remington as a firearms company . Other firearms companies have done quite well during that same time frame.