more details/pix on Edgun (FX)magazine….
Note sure if this had been posted before but here it is… Should be that hard for guys with mechanical/cnc skills.
http://www.buksforum.nl/Forum/content.php?121-Edgun-Magazijnen
All Replies
You guys should spend more time outside shooting your airguns.
Deal.
:hug:
And because those manufacturers openly admit to manufacture is the reason that Ed may not have anything to do with Cricket. Uh, did it ever enter your mind that maybe, just maybe he just doesn’t want anyone to know.
Let’s agree to disagree. 😀
🙄
Yeah and Fiat owns Ferrari, Toyota, Honda, Ford and Chevy all do the same thing. Problem with your theory AGAIN, none of these companies HIDE the fact they do this… So really your example is crap.
You don’t think any of this through and you are calling me closed minded?
You should quit, you’re not very good at this. 😉
Why should someone think something through on something they don’t believe? You’re too closed minded. Just because the Edgun internals are different than the Cricket makes this case closed shut is preposterous. Believe what you want but I cannot debate with someone who cannot think with reason or be open-minded towards the belief that GM builds both the Cadillac and their less glitzy Chevrolet.
You’ll have to beat this horse without me. Have a nice day.
:horse:
Ed has let us into his mind in numerous posts on the way he does business and designs his rifles. In fact he has been more open about his ways than any other designer I can think of in this industry. You’ve read all his posts right?
Designers leave their fingerprints on everything, even if they try not to, they end up doing something similar on different projects that involve the same items (in this case air guns that are bullpups). They simply can’t help it.
I might believe that Ed could have funded Cricket (and had someone else design the rifle without his input), I would sooner believe Ed designed the MRod then the Cricket. In fact that “script” makes more sense then yours. 😆
The Cricket and Matador are so different, no way they same person designed them.
Perhaps you should open up your rifles and see for yourself. Just looks at the trigger linkages to start with. Then the regulators. Why design a totally different regulator for a rifle that only sells for $200 less? Why go to a totally different barrel manufacturer when you developed a relationship with LW? All just to avoid selling a multshot version that he already developed?
You have done a great job not answering some of the most simple points of FACT I have made (barrel suppliers, different design for a rifle of slightly less retail value) in my refuting of your theory… I’ll bet you haven’t even taken the time to think about it.
I have obviously taken the time to think thru your “script” and poked it full of holes. If you “respected” my opinion you would think it thru, but you haven’t or you’d likely come to the same conclusion that everyone else has…
You are entitled to your opinion, i’m just trying to tell you your opinion makes no sense at all when you actually think about it… 😉
Why did I mention the internals… Well because you started with this.
Stating in no uncertain terms that Ed “created” the Cricket.
Now your saying this…
Either he created the Cricket or he didn’t…
I say no way.
Why?
Isn’t it obvious by looking at the inside of the rifles? 😕 😯
Ed is a perfectionist, every single part of the airguns he releases shows this. His design expresses a love for what he makes that is hard to hide in a cheap version.
I don’t see why he would start another line where things have been value engineered and sell them for only a few hundred dollars less than his high quality model. Sure he may have made a few prototypes due to his skill and perfecting ability to create amazing machines. But Ed just wouldn’t design something like the Cricket the way it is currently being manufactured. The whole EdGun line is proof of this. The Lelya has so many things based on the Matador’s idea it’s like a miniMatador! And none of it carries over to the Cricket.
Would the guy that designs the engine for a Ferrari also design the engine for a Fiat? If he did you would see the similarities, they would be hard to miss… The only similarity between the EdGun and the Cricket is the fact they are bullpups.
To look at your use of the word “created” in a different way. Would he have someone else design everything if he funded (created) Cricket? Why, when obviously his love for this is in the design of the item itself? Would he not use a few things that work really well in the EdGun in the Cricket version?
But then why develop a multi-shot EdGun and promise it to everyone if it would kill the “script”? 😕
Will we ever know the truth? 😆
What was the post you were referring to earlier?
Ed mentioned in an earlier post something to the effect that he had produced a prototype for Hooligun, or. something.. It wasn’t super clear.
I’m not just dismissing your idea out of hand btw, I think the point you bring up is interesting. It’s making for some good thought on what could possibly be happening here! 😀
Oh, I had a nice long conversation about Crickets with Peter at TGAG when I ordered a customized AA400 pistol for field target. Based on a few things he said about the barrels and who makes them and knowing Ed’s relationship with LW it’s highly improbable that Ed would go through all the trouble of finding another supplier for his barrels for his Cricket bullpup when he could just use LW… 😉
I want to believe Ed is playing Jekyll and Hyde! 😛
It would certainly explain both companies moving out of Russia and the delay in getting large quantities to the USA! 😀
“Ed just wouldn’t design something like the Cricket the way it is currently being manufactured”.
When did Ed let you into his mind? Just because he designed the Edgun one way and perhaps the Cricket another way, that doesn’t add up to anything. Maybe that’s what they wanted to do. Who knows. The design of one has nothing to do with the design of another product.
Once again, I respect your opinion on this issue, all I ask is that you respect mine too. I think Ed has something to do with the Cricket. Period.
I am done with this as we can beat this horse to death until eternity.
:horse:
As i understand by a few videos of Ed in the last Gun Show, the only link between him and Cricket are the supplier of their riflestocks, same factory… only this.
Similar looks doesn´t means same factory… almost all Big Game Rifles looks more similar than this two, and noone can even think about they are made for the same factory.
Mac
Guys, from my many emails to Ed and Tony, I am firmly convinced that Ed doesn’t have anything to do with Cricket.
Ed was building air guns a few years before the designer of the Cricket got into the business.
Ed has posted a conversation between him and the Cricket builder that went something like, (Cricket maker to Ed) you have come up with the perfect stock for a bull pup and no matter what I try, my stocks end up looking like yours if I want a comfortable and useable stock. Ed’s reply was something like: yes, that is why I made it like that.
I don’t own a Cricket so; I can’t say how they compare to the Matador. I have seen pictures of the Cricket’s internals and I don’t believe, for one second, that Ed would want to have anything to do with designing/building the gun.
It might sound like I am bashing the Cricket; I’m not! It seems to shoot well and the owners of them seem to be happy with them.
I like Synopsys’s description of a Ferrari engine to a Fiat!
I have a couple of other high dollar air guns that use a magazine. Without exception, all of them shoot better 100 yard groups with a single shot loading tray.
I don’t understand people insisting on a magazine! I like to push my Matadors out past 125 yards, if I miss, the ground squirrel runs to the hole or the vermin bird flies off. If they stick around for a couple of seconds, I will try again.
If you do it right the first time: you don’t need a quick follow up shot!
It was light until you failed to see the reference of the internals and went sideways with something to do with tea… 😉
Why did I mention the internals… Well because you started with this.
Stating in no uncertain terms that Ed “created” the Cricket.
Now your saying this…
Either he created the Cricket or he didn’t…
I say no way.
Why?
Isn’t it obvious by looking at the inside of the rifles? 😕 😯
Ed is a perfectionist, every single part of the airguns he releases shows this. His design expresses a love for what he makes that is hard to hide in a cheap version.
I don’t see why he would start another line where things have been value engineered and sell them for only a few hundred dollars less than his high quality model. Sure he may have made a few prototypes due to his skill and perfecting ability to create amazing machines. But Ed just wouldn’t design something like the Cricket the way it is currently being manufactured. The whole EdGun line is proof of this. The Lelya has so many things based on the Matador’s idea it’s like a miniMatador! And none of it carries over to the Cricket.
Would the guy that designs the engine for a Ferrari also design the engine for a Fiat? If he did you would see the similarities, they would be hard to miss… The only similarity between the EdGun and the Cricket is the fact they are bullpups.
To look at your use of the word “created” in a different way. Would he have someone else design everything if he funded (created) Cricket? Why, when obviously his love for this is in the design of the item itself? Would he not use a few things that work really well in the EdGun in the Cricket version?
But then why develop a multi-shot EdGun and promise it to everyone if it would kill the “script”? 😕
Will we ever know the truth? 😆
What was the post you were referring to earlier?
Ed mentioned in an earlier post something to the effect that he had produced a prototype for Hooligun, or. something.. It wasn’t super clear.
I’m not just dismissing your idea out of hand btw, I think the point you bring up is interesting. It’s making for some good thought on what could possibly be happening here! 😀
Oh, I had a nice long conversation about Crickets with Peter at TGAG when I ordered a customized AA400 pistol for field target. Based on a few things he said about the barrels and who makes them and knowing Ed’s relationship with LW it’s highly improbable that Ed would go through all the trouble of finding another supplier for his barrels for his Cricket bullpup when he could just use LW… 😉
I want to believe Ed is playing Jekyll and Hyde! 😛
It would certainly explain both companies moving out of Russia and the delay in getting large quantities to the USA! 😀
Ok, no one is stating anything about “ass backwards” so why resort to tactics like that. If you believe Ed then so be it. I don’t. I think he is involved in some manner.
Mechanically inclined? Would a full machine shop with CNC qualify?
To say a manufacturer is not concerned with resale value of a given product is naive to say the least.
The internal workings prove nothing, zero, zip, nada. I think there is a relation, period. You don’t, that’s fine and I respect your opinion. Just respect mine.
This is not a passing contest. Geesh lighten up.
Tea in China? Are you really that obtuse?
Have you compared them? 😯 Are you mechanically inclined in the slightest?
Why would someone who designed the EdGun do some of the stuff that is in the Cricket?
It’s FAR more compelling then your ass backwards “script”. 🙄
If Ed so badly wants to keep the EdGun a single shot then why has he developed a multi shot version as well as an electronic triggered version? Was there also a full auto electronic trigger one too, I can;t remember… 😕 It doesn’t make any sense to spend valuable resources developing something, tell his customers that it will be offered for sale shortly and then not do it.
And how would it damage the EdGun brand to have a single and multi-shot version. Sounds like expansion to me… 😕 Sounds like a few other high end brands who have no issues with sales numbers.
On top of that everyone who would sell as you state would end up buying ANOTHER rifle from Ed, he would effectively double his money from the same folks who have already bought a single shot. Ed doesn’t care what the market is for a used rifle, he is looking to make and sell new ones. To not release a product he spent time developing is bad business. You have it backwards.
Saying he isn’t releasing the multi-shot version because the single shot version sales would tank is preposterous. If that was the case then why do single shot rifles even sell? Why are they even made anymore? By your reasoning they are obsolete right? But I own several for one reason and one reason only…
If you know how Ed works you know why he has not released the multi-shot version.
😀
Yes and what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? So, you’re saying just because the internals are different is conclusive evidence that Ed had nothing to do with its manufacture, ownership, etc? Pretty flimsy if you ask me.
Have you seen the inside of the Cricket compared to the EdGun?
Exhibit A.
Internals.
Case closed… 😆
I have a feeling we will never know the real answer! 😉
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
?
Why when I have to be at work during the weekdays? 😉
I shoot two airgun competitions a month and practice the other two weekends, how about you? 😀
The middle of the week is my break from airgun shooting!!! 😯