Author Topic: Update on Winchester (Read 987 times)

Brett · « **on:** May 18, 2006, 04:46:31 PM »

I will post this on the Todays Important News forum but thought this forum gets more traffic so am posting here as well.

USRAC TO HELP CITY ATTRACT BUYERS FOR WINCHESTER PLANT . . . U.S. Repeating Arms Co., which recently closed its historic Winchester firearms plant in New Haven, Conn., will repay $850,000 in tax benefits and help attract buyers for the plant, Mayor John DeStefano announced last week. The city and USRAC have come to terms on a "stand still" agreement in which the company agreed not to immediately remove its equipment and inventory from the facility. "Without this agreement, U.S. Repeating Arms could have removed all of their equipment and inventory on March 31 and left town. Instead, along with meeting their financial commitments to the city, they are providing a reasonable time period in which to market the Winchester site and hopefully to find a successor firearms manufacturer," DeStefano said.

Rogue Ram · « **Reply #1 on:** May 23, 2006, 07:46:30 PM »

Heard some scuttlebutt that this whole thing is about union busting. Supposedly they will keep the plant shut a certain amount of time, then re-open (different place?) hiring non-union workers.

Who knows. Whole thing is sad.

RR

qajaq59 · « **Reply #2 on:** May 23, 2006, 10:48:16 PM »

That is a pretty old plant with not the newest of equipment so I don't hold out much hope for it. And someone trying to buck overseas labor in New Haven CT is going to have a tough time doing it. CT is a very expensive place to do business.
But I'd be as happy as can be if someone could do it.

Land_Owner · « **Reply #3 on:** May 24, 2006, 09:42:24 AM »

A new buyer would want indemnification from the enviromental cleanup "problems" (if any) associated with Winchester's long manufacturing history at the site (there are bound to be some). Unfortunately, no such "Hold Harmless" agreement withstands the US EPA's strict liability for each and every documented title to land holder of that site back to antiquity. Meaning, if someone buys the land today, he/she is 100% responsible for its cleanup, if there is any, just as any predecessor title holder to that land is also 100% responsible to the Citizens of the United States. Getting liability off of the table (EPA, suits at law, employee issues, etc.) and into someone else's hands is one hurdle not to be overcome lightly.

Land Owner
If it was easy, anybody could do it.

Ron T. · « **Reply #4 on:** May 26, 2006, 10:43:44 AM »

Like (I'm sure) many here and all over our great Nation, I'm beginning to feel a bit "uneasy" what with one American industry or plant after another closing up and moving to another country.

The "trickle" of here-to-fore totally American industries and companies moving to other places has become a "flood" and now, with one of our very "basic" industries closing it's traditional plant which made rifles with a name 'most every American "knew" ("Winchester")... a plant in which they made two products that almost EVERY American has heard of and either owned, handled or at least SAW... the original "cowboy rifle", the Model 94 lever-action rifle and, for 'most all hunters, the
Rifleman's Rifle, the Model 70!!!

'Tis a sad day, indeed, for all Americans... especially us older Americans who grew up knowing and respecting the name of the most famous rifle-maker in the world... "WINCHESTER"!!!

In truth, it's almost like a "good friend" has passed away unexpectedly! :eek:

:roll:

Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

BlkHawk73 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 26, 2006, 01:35:59 PM »

was the union that killed themselves on this deal. Insisting to have exclusive manufacturing along with some other demands that they company just could'nt financially cope with. Wonder just how much those union folks were grabbing an hours, including benefits.

qajaq59 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 27, 2006, 12:41:06 AM »

It's tough all around when it comes to manufacturing in the US, and especially CT. That is an expensive state to live in and the taxes are high so the workers need more money, and the companies need more as well. Neither wanted to see the plant close but it was a road they were stuck on and the end was inevitable.
And lets face it, people were not buying the Winchesters like they used to. I see far more black guns at the ranch then levers. A lot of guys want the newer jazzier looking guns, for lack of a better word, and Winchester wasn't building them. People that are now willing to pay $900 for a used Winchester didn't even want one before they announced the closing. Times change I guess but seeing them go down wasn't pleasant.

Savage .250 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 27, 2006, 03:43:40 AM »

Petersen`s Hunting : A few snippets from the article.
" Everyone also agreed the New Haven plant would never again be used to manufacture firearms."
"Labor costs were too high and workers too disgruntled: the union contracts were unrealistic, quality control was horrible, the equipement was ancient and the property where it sits an environmental disaster."
" We have tried for 10 years to make this plant profitable, but we have not been able to do so. Closing the plant is a financial, bottom line situation."
" Both rifles( Win model 70 and the 94) would return to the marketplace wthin a couple of years, and most believed the guns would be made overseas. There were some who thought the Model 70 , at least, might continue to be made in this country in smaller numbers and in higher-grade guns."
Somebody mentioned, "union-busting." Could be the other way
around. Looks like "they" were part of the problem.

DWTim · « **Reply #8 on:** May 27, 2006, 04:06:10 AM »

It's sad because I had a USRAC-made 1400 shotgun about 15 years ago, and it was nicely made compared the the Japanese models.

Being a Connecticut native, I know firsthand how this state gouges its residents. While it's easy to start a business here, you'll get taxed up to your eyeballs. Gov. Rell kind of had an epiphany, and I think the powers that be are realizing that maybe, just maybe, a 33 cents/gallon gas tax, inventory tax, and equipment taxes are bad for business. And that's only three of 'em!

Also: I challenge their notion of "environmental disaster". The fact that the workforce isn't sick or dead tells me otherwise.

qajaq59 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 27, 2006, 07:08:49 AM »

Quote

Being a Connecticut native, I know firsthand how this state gouges its residents.

We were too but the day I retired we headed south. Lower taxes and no snow.

nomosendero · « **Reply #10 on:** May 27, 2006, 07:13:25 AM »

Inventory Tax ? Equipment Tax ? Wow, it is amazing what the Socialist
Gov. folks in the Northeast do to business, between them & the Unions
they could break anyone. But, they have caused alot of companies to
move down here, I guess that I should thank them for that.

NYH1 · « **Reply #11 on:** May 31, 2006, 06:19:42 AM »

Maybe what hurt Winchester was that they made JUNK! I've had 5 Winchester firearms. 3 of them were junk. I know when I'm looking to buy a new firearm and since I've had trouble with 60% of the firearms I've had from a specific manufacture.........I do look at them again.

1-Pre-'64 Winchester model 88 308 Win. AWESOME rifle, shoots just around one inch groups. The only Winchester I still own!

2- Winchester model 94 Big Bore 356 Win. Never had any trouble with it, but I never really shot it that much. Just sold it to my friend.

3- Winchester model 94 30-30 Win. Shoot about 6 inch groups at 100 yards. Sold it (15 years ago), bought a Marlin 336 35 Rem and haven't looked back!

4- Winchester Ranger 120 20 ga. every time I pumped a new round the ejection spring would come out with the spent shell. Had it fixed a few times, it was never right. Sold it and bought a Remington 870!

5- Winchester model 94 Big Bore 444 Mar. This was the single worst firearm I've ever owned........bar none! Sold it and bought a Marlin in 444 Mar.!

Here is my experience with Winchester!

Questor · « **Reply #12 on:** May 31, 2006, 07:50:33 AM »

The best thing to do is to sell the Winchester name and the blueprints, then open up elsewhere, leaving Connecticut to deal with the abandoned property.

DWTim · « **Reply #13 on:** May 31, 2006, 07:57:31 AM »

It's funny how luck can have it that way sometimes.

I still won't touch a Taurus. Many years back, I took a look at a model 85, new under the glass. It had a 16 pound trigger, gritty action, and even skipped in double action. Then, I saw a guy blow the grips off a Taurus wonder 9 at the range. People are telling me that the quality has improved. I guess I have to get with the times.

Remingtons? Every 1100 I've ever seen, the rubber o-ring dries out, and the gun fails to unlock the bolt. Easy fix, but that's not the engineering I'd expect from a mid-level shotgun made by a tier 1 manufacturer. All the 870s (note: express models) I grew up with had a single action arm off the forend. They all broke. I'd say you get what you paid for, except I've never seen a cheaper Mossy fail in the field (two action arms).

I hate Federal shotshells, but I seem to be in the minorty. I've had failures to feed in the field because either the brass is out of spec, or the shell is too long. Lots of protruding primers, too. Just about everyone here swears by that brand, but after missing two shots out hunting because of feeding problems, I changed brands for good.

I've owned two Winchester shotguns, an auto and a 1300. Both were great guns. None have ever failed or fell apart. My brother has a couple of Winchester leverguns. They take a beating. None have failed. As far as I know, they all were made at USRAC. Not trying to put down the "other guy", just pointing out how lemons sometimes find their way to the same person. :o)

NYH1 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 31, 2006, 07:10:25 PM »

Quote from: DWTim

Remingtons? Every 1100 I've ever seen, the rubber o-ring dries out, and the gun fails to unlock the bolt. Easy fix, but that's not the engineering I'd expect from a mid-level shotgun made by a tier 1 manufacturer.

Yep!

Quote from: DWTim

All the 870s (note: express models) I grew up with had a single action arm off the forend. They all broke. I'd say you get what you paid for, except I've never seen a cheaper Mossy fail in the field (two action arms).

This I don't understand. I have two 870 Express shotguns. One is a 12 ga. and the other is a 20 ga. both have twin action arms. To be honest I thought all 870's had twin action arms!