I wish some company made knock-off magazines so some of these PCP makers would stop price gouging. It's inexcusable for them to sell a plastic and aluminum magazine for $80-100 just because they are the only company making them.
Knock-off PCP magazines?
- Thread starter blackdiesel
- Start date
I purchased a 10 round magazine for my .25 Marauder that was 3D printed in Ukraine I think. Normally they're 8 rounds. The quality isn't great, but it's good enough and it works.
Upvote 0
OEM Marauder magazines are not too expensive. I'm talking about magazines for guns like Daystate, FX and RAW,
Upvote 0
That's why I didn't buy a Gamo Urban or Coyote and the .22 mags are "only" $50, the .25's for the Coyote are $80. That's just crazy. These rifles are pretty much entry level PCP's. No thanks Gamo!
Ed
Ed
Upvote 0
Yeah, let's ALL buy stolen intellectual property, because it's a victimless crime and the manufacturer "deserves" to be ripped off, if only because someone says so or because we "feel" like a manufacturer charges too much. That won't hurt innovation at all. Personally, I'm sick and tired of companies making profits I haven't personally deemed them to be deserving of.
In no way will our rewarding those who pirate/steal others' designs commoditize the products we buy, driving quality and innovation into a lowest common denominator - the basement. Absurd is the notion that manufacturers, if forced to lower magazine prices to compete with those who've stolen their designs, might be forced to raise the pricing on the guns themselves to sustain an acceptable rate of return on their investments.
Lastly, don't tell me that it's my personal responsibility to factor magazine pricing into the overal price/feature/quality matrix as I choose which gun to buy and that if I didn't like the pricing I shouldn't have bought the thing. That's just silly capitalist thinking.
In no way will our rewarding those who pirate/steal others' designs commoditize the products we buy, driving quality and innovation into a lowest common denominator - the basement. Absurd is the notion that manufacturers, if forced to lower magazine prices to compete with those who've stolen their designs, might be forced to raise the pricing on the guns themselves to sustain an acceptable rate of return on their investments.
Lastly, don't tell me that it's my personal responsibility to factor magazine pricing into the overal price/feature/quality matrix as I choose which gun to buy and that if I didn't like the pricing I shouldn't have bought the thing. That's just silly capitalist thinking.
Upvote 0
Its bsa mags more or less and their fairly high quality, there is a cheaper version around for around 20.
Upvote 0
First of all it's not piracy to offer third party parts as long as they don't market them as name brand parts. Go outside and look at your car then go to a parts store and see how many different companies make replacement parts for it. So don't try to steer this to a illegal/piracy direction. And I'm willing to bet that if someone offered magazines at a significantly lower price the gun makers will adjust their price. I think they are gouging consumers because they are the only team in town.
Upvote 0
When a product is priced properly, there is no room for third parties to enter said market. (Period) It is only when there is room (PROFITABILITY) for a third party to enter the market with a competing product that they will then do exactly that.
Stealing a patented product idea is just that...... stealing. If the product has no patent, or the patent has expired, then it is up to the original manufacturer/marketer of the product to offer the product at a price that makes it too profitless for another company to enter the market with a competing product. In other words......defending your market by making it completely unattractive to possible competitors.
Supply and demand is the fundamental driver of all pricing structures whether it be airgun magazines, tampons, or drinking water. It really has nothing to do with capitalism, although capitalism is based on the dynamics of supply and demand.
When you're the only entity supplying a certain product, these rules are upset and a small window of opprotunity is created where a higher than "typical" price can be asked for the product in question. If your price is too high, you have left yourself open to competition and therefore have only yourself and your failure to analyze the market properly to blame for the fact that you now have competition where there once was no competition.
Stealing a patented product idea is just that...... stealing. If the product has no patent, or the patent has expired, then it is up to the original manufacturer/marketer of the product to offer the product at a price that makes it too profitless for another company to enter the market with a competing product. In other words......defending your market by making it completely unattractive to possible competitors.
Supply and demand is the fundamental driver of all pricing structures whether it be airgun magazines, tampons, or drinking water. It really has nothing to do with capitalism, although capitalism is based on the dynamics of supply and demand.
When you're the only entity supplying a certain product, these rules are upset and a small window of opprotunity is created where a higher than "typical" price can be asked for the product in question. If your price is too high, you have left yourself open to competition and therefore have only yourself and your failure to analyze the market properly to blame for the fact that you now have competition where there once was no competition.
Upvote 0
New rifles come with a magazine, so if you want more, it's an extra.
They're not cheap. Better airguns and accessories are pricey when compared to rimfire stuff.
my Brocock mag was $79, and the Urban mags are $49. If I keep the urban, guess I'll get a spare. 10/22 mags go for like $19
They're not cheap. Better airguns and accessories are pricey when compared to rimfire stuff.
my Brocock mag was $79, and the Urban mags are $49. If I keep the urban, guess I'll get a spare. 10/22 mags go for like $19
Upvote 0
Then there is the part where you cant buy/find any mags,no one has them in stock -necessity is the mother of invention... anyone have a fx .25 cal single shot tray they want to sell kinda thing
Upvote 0
There is nothing new in these 100 dollar mags. They are just a rip off. If Crosman can sale their mags for under 20 bucks. I am sure Daystate could sale their's for under $30. That is still 50% higher. I just bought a Daystate rifle. I gave 200% more then I gave for my Marauder. If they can sale the rifle for 200% more, why not the magazines? Every time someone says something about what looks to them like price gouging, and looking for an after market product. All this stuff about stealing a companies product comes up. Nonsence. The only people getting ripped off are people like me. The ones that buy these high priced rifles, that the companies know they can make a ton of money on parts. Did I know that Daystate charged too much for their magazines? Yes. Will I buy an over priced magazine from Daystate. Yes. Only one. Would I buy an after market one at half the cost if one was marketed? Yes, 2 or 3 even. Do I think I would be stealing anything from Daystate? No. Do I care if Daystate goes out of business because I didn't buy from them? No.
Self indexing rotary magazines go back to the 1800s. Nothing new here. If a company prices their product so high that they leave an opening for a market to fill and still make a profit doing it. That is what will happen. If I was a young man, I would jump on this like a tick on a hound dog. Making magazines for airguns would be a good small business to start. There are all kinds of other things it could grow into making. One could even sale magazines to Daystate, BSA, FX and more. If these companies can only make a profit at $100 for a magazine. They left too much room for improvement on the manufacturing process.
The problem is not the after market companies stealing from the big name companies. It is the big name companies either price gouging, or not doing any kind of a job with the manufacturing process, and cost reduction. That leaves the door open for someone that can fill the gap. And someone will.
Self indexing rotary magazines go back to the 1800s. Nothing new here. If a company prices their product so high that they leave an opening for a market to fill and still make a profit doing it. That is what will happen. If I was a young man, I would jump on this like a tick on a hound dog. Making magazines for airguns would be a good small business to start. There are all kinds of other things it could grow into making. One could even sale magazines to Daystate, BSA, FX and more. If these companies can only make a profit at $100 for a magazine. They left too much room for improvement on the manufacturing process.
The problem is not the after market companies stealing from the big name companies. It is the big name companies either price gouging, or not doing any kind of a job with the manufacturing process, and cost reduction. That leaves the door open for someone that can fill the gap. And someone will.
Upvote 0
For anyone believing that this whole knockoff/pirate thing is OK in principle or that laser scanning an item which (someone else has invested the time and $ to develop) and banging out copies is not abhorrent, I present the following three cases:
Each of these is an innovative product that a fellow AGN reader and airgun enthusiast has invested their time into. None of these innovations is patented. The first is an amazing bipod mount. The next is a nifty mag holder which installs in the stock. The third is also a great little mag holder, differing in that it installs on the scope rail. Note that in the case of the two mag holders, neither is copying the other. They are each competing ethically by attempting to build a better product than the other guy.
None of these three products have the design complexity of a mag. All three are 'just" plastic little doodads that someone is charging $25 or more for. Surely, given the minuscule material costs, each of these innovators must be "gouging" us - his fellow hobbyists, right? Are these guys not making "too much" profit? Are these products not ripe for cloning? Should someone among us not simply scan these items and make them more cheaply?
No, of course not. We couldn't look them in the eye if we did something so underhanded.
The temptation, of course, is to say "yeah, but they are just little guys, that's not the same as sticking it to the man, aka (insert big, mean gun manufacturer here)". Well in my book, that's just a big fat rationalization. What's next on that slippery slope? Will it be OK to clone that innovative smooth twist barrel? How about cloning those new Crown barrels that are on the way? Why not the whole gun?
The word "profit" seems like a dirty concept to some, but profit drives the innovation we all crave.
Attempting to rationalize or justify making copies of someone else's designs is not an exercise in supply/demand economics. It's just an exercise in bad business ethics.
Each of these is an innovative product that a fellow AGN reader and airgun enthusiast has invested their time into. None of these innovations is patented. The first is an amazing bipod mount. The next is a nifty mag holder which installs in the stock. The third is also a great little mag holder, differing in that it installs on the scope rail. Note that in the case of the two mag holders, neither is copying the other. They are each competing ethically by attempting to build a better product than the other guy.
None of these three products have the design complexity of a mag. All three are 'just" plastic little doodads that someone is charging $25 or more for. Surely, given the minuscule material costs, each of these innovators must be "gouging" us - his fellow hobbyists, right? Are these guys not making "too much" profit? Are these products not ripe for cloning? Should someone among us not simply scan these items and make them more cheaply?
No, of course not. We couldn't look them in the eye if we did something so underhanded.
The temptation, of course, is to say "yeah, but they are just little guys, that's not the same as sticking it to the man, aka (insert big, mean gun manufacturer here)". Well in my book, that's just a big fat rationalization. What's next on that slippery slope? Will it be OK to clone that innovative smooth twist barrel? How about cloning those new Crown barrels that are on the way? Why not the whole gun?
The word "profit" seems like a dirty concept to some, but profit drives the innovation we all crave.
Attempting to rationalize or justify making copies of someone else's designs is not an exercise in supply/demand economics. It's just an exercise in bad business ethics.
Upvote 0
I guess companies that makes third party/replacement barrels, stocks, trigger assemblies, etc are stealing? As I stated earlier there is nothing illegal, improper or otherwise "evil" about companies that offer third party parts for guns and other items. Some gun makers outsource some of their parts from these third party makers. look at Benjamin, Green Mountain makes their 25 cal barrels. Any gun that uses LW or CZ barrels get them from another company. A magazine is simply a loading device. The spring loaded auto-indexing types works the same as other spring loaded auto-indexing magazines just with different sizing and other small details.
Upvote 0
After seeing Matt in a video at FX and hearing him say they 3D print mags to test a design before production I can say I would love to have the file so I could 3D print my own. There is NO ISSUE with copying ANYTHING (even patented items) for personal use. FX also produced a native fill probe with included foster as a one piece assembly for Matt so why do we have to buy an extra foster nipple for our fill probes when FX clearly has the capability of producing them and has the design on file already?
Things to think about.... its all about who you know!
Thurmond
Things to think about.... its all about who you know!
Thurmond
Upvote 0
listen to this guy already, this is how it is. If you ever sold or bought spare parts for cars you wouldnt argue against it.
Upvote 0
Mousefart, your 3 examples are not the same as the OP's knock off magazines. Your examples are of some very neat add ons. I don't think there is a market big enough for anyone to copy their product. And they are not nessesary to the operation of the rifle. A magazine is a part of a repeating rifle. With out it it is a single shot. There is no inovation in the magazine. It is a copy or variation of someone elses design that has been in use for a long time. No one is steeling anything. It is just like the piston in your car engine. Let's say you own a Ford. You can buy a piston from Ford, or from a bunch of companies making pistons that will fit your brand new Ford. None of the companies are doing anything wrong. Ford did not design the piston. Ford just copied from someone else.
The bipod mount in your example is not new. It has been done before. On a shotgun. As for the Magazine holders, that has been done as many ways as there are guns and magazines. Nothing new there either. And yes someone will be using a copy of the FX smooth twist barrel, A long time ago gunsmiths building muzzle loaders tried only rifling the end of the barrel The smooth twist is a variation on that. Air Force airguns has an interchangeable barrel system. The Crown is a variation on that. It is almost impossable to come up with a new innovation.
Profit is not a dirty word. But it doesn't drive the innovation of products we crave. The products we crave creates the market that the companies sale to. How much we are willing to pay for said products creates the profits for the companies. If a company can not make a product at a price that the comsumer is willing to pay they will go out of business. If someone makes the same product at a price we are willing to pay they will be the one that stays in business. Simple.
Not trying to argue, and that is all I have to say on the subject. You have a good day.
The bipod mount in your example is not new. It has been done before. On a shotgun. As for the Magazine holders, that has been done as many ways as there are guns and magazines. Nothing new there either. And yes someone will be using a copy of the FX smooth twist barrel, A long time ago gunsmiths building muzzle loaders tried only rifling the end of the barrel The smooth twist is a variation on that. Air Force airguns has an interchangeable barrel system. The Crown is a variation on that. It is almost impossable to come up with a new innovation.
Profit is not a dirty word. But it doesn't drive the innovation of products we crave. The products we crave creates the market that the companies sale to. How much we are willing to pay for said products creates the profits for the companies. If a company can not make a product at a price that the comsumer is willing to pay they will go out of business. If someone makes the same product at a price we are willing to pay they will be the one that stays in business. Simple.
Not trying to argue, and that is all I have to say on the subject. You have a good day.
Upvote 0
I agree with op's sentiment, he's not asking for carbon copied fx rifles for half the price, he's asking for a third party solution/alternative to an accessory/after-market part for his air gun without being taken to the bank. Sue him!
Upvote 0
Third party mags, in addition to being less expensive, are sometimes improved designs. I still have a couple of Rcmachine mags for Air Arms 410/510 rifles. They are superior to AA mags, and cheaper.
Upvote 0
The price of mags is nothing compared to the price of 30cal ammo for the FX. At .10/rnd for a .01 of material is a bigger problem. Maybe Trump will deregulate the lead mining and we will will have made in America back again.
Upvote 0