james lambert 3,059 Posted October 1, 2013 Report Share Posted October 1, 2013 In this post I will discuss the differences in the Tooth and Nail buttstock adapter, and the Firebird buttstock adapter. The first photograph shows two iterations of the Tooth and Nail buttstock adapter, along with the original Tromix adapter. Note Tooth and Nail's first attempt had no provision for the location of the threaded hole in the upper receiver to vary. This resulted in customers breaking their lower receivers. The design was refined and can now accomodate variances seen in the MKA factory parts and it also sports a nicer paint job. It should be noted Firebird uses only high quality milspec hard anodize on all of their aluminum parts. With the T&N design, the customer is limited to using only collapsible type stocks and the buttstock's rotation is controlled by a single small set screw on the bottom of the adapter. In the Firebird design, a generous slot was provided from the beginning to allow for the variances in the MKA uppers. Also, with the Firebird design, the customer is not limited to a collapsible only stock arrangement, but instead has the ability to use any collapsible or fixed stock on the market made for an AR-15. Also, stock rotation is controlled by the forward face of a fixed stock, or in the case of a collapsible stock, the originally designed egg plate, exactly the same way stocks are indexed on an AR-15. Compared to a Firebird adapter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toothandnail 275 Posted October 1, 2013 Report Share Posted October 1, 2013 In this post I will discuss the differences in the Tooth and Nail buttstock adapter, and the Firebird buttstock adapter. The first photograph shows two iterations of the Tooth and Nail buttstock adapter, along with the original Tromix adapter. Note Tooth and Nail's first attempt had no provision for the location of the threaded hole in the upper receiver to vary. This resulted in customers breaking their lower receivers. The design was refined and can now accomodate variances seen in the MKA factory parts and it also sports a nicer paint job. It should be noted Firebird uses only high quality milspec hard anodize on all of their aluminum parts. With the T&N design, the customer is limited to using only collapsible type stocks and the buttstock's rotation is controlled by a single small set screw on the bottom of the adapter. In the Firebird design, a generous slot was provided from the beginning to allow for the variances in the MKA uppers. Also, with the Firebird design, the customer is not limited to a collapsible only stock arrangement, but instead has the ability to use any collapsible or fixed stock on the market made for an AR-15. Also, stock rotation is controlled by the forward face of a fixed stock, or in the case of a collapsible stock, the originally designed egg plate, exactly the same way stocks are indexed on an AR-15. IMG_0687.JPG IMG_0685.JPG Compared to a Firebird adapter. IMG_0689.JPG IMG_0697.JPG IMG_0695.JPG Quote Link to post Share on other sites
haugpatr 972 Posted October 1, 2013 Report Share Posted October 1, 2013 It is in really poor taste for Firebird to attack a business member on this forum and especially tacky to spam the boards with multiple threads. This series of posts really makes Firebird look bad. I also remember a Firebird employee talking trash on this forum. It reminds me of the douche bags at Alliance Armament. A top notch builder would be too busy to make posts like this on a forum, Firebird obviously has plenty of free time, that is what most people will take away from this thread. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CalveryDemon 4 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) To quote a smart HOG "A top notch builder would be too busy to make posts like this on a forum, Firebird obviously has plenty of free time, that is what most people will take away from this thread." I have products from both companies; all satisfactory except the Firebird lower (has a jacked up bolt / mag release). Build some shit and kill the drama. . Even "IF" you build a superior product, your shooting your damn self in the foot for your lack of tack. Professionalism, GET SOME. Edited October 2, 2013 by CalveryDemon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gunfun 3,931 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 I think he is reacting to how many of T&N's products seem to be pretty much knock offs of his products. I'm frankly surprised he didn't do it a long time ago. These threads are in the public section, so unless they get moved, it is in an open area where anyone on either side can comment. Whether that will increase or decrease people's perception of his products is up to debate, as is whether the products are knock-offs, and whether that matters when patents aren't involved. Form your own opinions. I'm interested in what each has to say. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Get-n-Ready 8 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Im no expert but these side by side pics are all telling,Im glad Ive chose the parts I did. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ShadowFire 220 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Yeah despite the fact that the adapter is really used, the apex on the threads look perfect. Nice job T&N Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rebel Katt 6 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Im no expert but these side by side pics are all telling,Im glad Ive chose the parts I did. Definitely! At least they shouldn't need to be replaced in the near future right? RK Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted October 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 The used early adapter came to us just as it is seen in the pic with a broken lower. I GAVE the customer a new lower and traded him our adapter for his, it has been in a ziplock bag since then. Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
steveUK 9 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 It is plainly clear that all this has come about over Matt's post about having 4 out of the top 5 in an amateur championship match and was immediately attacked by JT as they took offence for some reason, what is it with people picking holes in success. As for the side by side comparisons they are a joke. Having spent 25 years in sales and marketing and having produced independent reviews myself as well as read lots of so called side by side comparisons produced by manufacturers it is clear they are never unbiased. By default if one of the companies writes it then it is never written in and objective way, emotions, pride and insecurities always come in to them and they end up bashing the other product, plus their own products always come out on top as they only focus on their perceived advantages and will rarely self critique their own work. The only way is to have both companies send complete guns with all their parts to an independent third party on a long term test, maybe a magazine, we could then all read the review and make our own minds up. However, the review must contain the basics of a good independent review in the real world, price, quality, fit for purpose, ease of use, ease of installation etc etc must all be covered. In the end though it is us the consumers who will make up our own mind and choose a product that suits our needs and budget, some will go for their favourite brand, best customer service, best quality or others the cheapest price, but each serves a purpose and each is equally important to us. Now let's stop this bashing of products, it's immature, wastes time and serves no one 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brookers 0 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 This is all very interesting Jim, but when are you going to sort out an export licence for your products? Here in the UK I can purchase T&N kit just by picking up the phone. Personally I would like the choice of spending my money with you as well! Brookers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GTY Machining 0 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Go ahead, keep crapping where you eat. www.toothandnailarmory.com, matt@toothandnailarmory.comSome other fun stuff we do. Arguing with a Moron on the internet is like wrestling a pig in the mud, you both get dirty, but the pig enjoys it. I have read this post over many times. gentlemanjim Seemed to post a comparison between the 2 companies producing products for the MKA 1919. He was not dis-tasteful or did he say buy my products not Toothandnail products. It was a side by side comparison. Many of you all attacked Firebird Precision with insulting comments and tried to attack Firebird character. I didn't see anyone point out the exemplary character displayed in the above quote from Toothandnailarmory. I agree that professionalism is required. Firebird posted side by side pics to compare products allowing the consumer to decide. Whereas Toothandnailarmory portrayed a negative backlash with no professionalism. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toothandnail 275 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Jim, I can honestly and proudly say we had not had a single Firebird part in our shop up until September 27, 2013. On this day a customer called me and stated that he had assembled his gun with your lower and his reliability dropped from 100% to 70%. He asked if he could stop by before we left for the match this last weekend so we could help him out. We told him that would be fine. A few hours after he arrived, he left with a gun that functioned 100%. We focus on our customer service not who's parts come through the door. I wouldn't care if someone shipped us a stock gun and all Salem 6 products. If they wanted the work done and assembled, we would do that for them because that's the business we are. The pictures you have posted are the most detail we have seen of any of your products. We have not copied a single item of yours. Everything has been developed here, in Missouri, with long hours and a lot of prototype parts. Our designs are just that...Ours. Every single one of our parts was done in house. From conception, to CAD drawing, to writing the code for the mills, to milling the actual part, and final finishing. EVERYTHING is done here in our shop. Anyone with mechanical knowledge and some experience with CAD can sit down and draw some parts to work with this gun. There are certain constraints and boundaries that every company must deal with which is why you will have some parts that look similar, there is no way around it. I don't see Firestone complaining because Pirelli has a round tire as well. Companies generally let their products speak for themselves and let customers decide. As a business who has been in this market for just under a year, we are constantly improving our products as well as developing new ones. We have had some QC issues in the past and we may have a few in the future, its part of running a manufacturing business. We have expanded from doing this part time, to full time with 4 employees. With growth there is always problems and mistakes that must be worked out. If we have a customer that has an issue with anything at all, we get it resolved, the same day. We have always stood behind our products and always will. ETA: My son just informed me we have installed a few firebird anti-walk FCG pins that customers have supplied. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted October 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 The photos and descriptions I have posted have nothing to do with who placed where in any match, its completely irrelevant If people did well in a match, thats great! What gear they used means nothing to me, a good shooter will do well with any brand equipment. This was all about showing parts side by side with an honest description of each to the best degree possible. Who originally designed the parts is also irrevelant at this point, but it was mentioned. The gun and parts I used are logged into my books, and would also appear in the T&N books as well, so the origin can be tracked. I invite any owner of T&N parts that vary in any way from the pics I posted, to post your own pics. Please show me any inconsistancy with what I have shown. I know there is an engineering company in Colorado that has done studies on many firearms and components for many companies in the firearms industry. They are Professonal Engineers with the ability to test and evaluate designs,stress analysis as well as metalurgy and manufacturing processes. I would be happy to pay for one half the cost to have both guns and all the parts evaluated by that company, as their findings would be beyond Reproach. I am NOT bashing anyone, nor am I attacking anyone I am only showing products side by side. Any reader may simply discount any thing I have said about the parts from both companies, and just compare the pics, they are what the are, and they speak for themselves. If you are a reader who is happy to see both sets of parts side by side, thats great. If you are a reader who is upset at seeing both sets of parts side by side, thats fine as well. This whole thing can be seen for what it was intended, or you may twist it or call it whatever you like, you may defame me or call me any name you like. The representations were honest and I stand by what I have shown. Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toothandnail 275 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 I see nothing wrong with a side by side comparison. That is fair. What is not fair is a competing company taking parts off a gun that has been used to what extent I do not know (abnormal wear marks on several parts). Then comparing their new or used parts to the competition. It is a completely biased comparison. I am not calling anyone a liar but anyone can see that results can easily be swayed in your favor if you are the one doing the comparison. This is not a biased comparison. An individual on a different forum posted this up. Found it a few weeks ago. I have linked to page 4 where he does a comparison. Read the whole thread if you wish. http://www.theoutdoorstrader.com/threads/360210-MKA-1919-Shotgun/page4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted October 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Matt Lets come to an honest accord here, and lets do it openly in front of all to see. I do have some issues with you, that is plain to see, so I will just lay it on the table. I quess this started when you first made handguards, I made a comment about the slots being the same as mine. I got ripped by you and people in your camp. We made comments that we did not care what slots you used, but would defend the design of our side charging system. I even said I would share the design for a very small royalty. Shortly after, you started making the side charging system. That sort of set the tone for all this. The design of the hammer was in production here years before you were in business, and now you use that design. I guess I dont care much that you are manufacturing it, and you may have come to the idea independantly, I dont know. But it did add to what had come before. And as before, any comment was met with a flood of very nasty comments by your followers. And now you make the replacement ramp, the pics you have posted show it is the same product we designed. I designed that ramp early in 2011 and applied for a patent . It went into production aug 2011 and was first sold to the public in jan 2012. Can you see where I might have an issue with this history? I would very much like this situation to be solved,and an undestanding come to. As to my posts comparing our products, please point out anything that you feel is unfair or incorrect. Regards Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toothandnail 275 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 JIm, From the information, if you can call it that, i have on your side charging system our systems do not use the same components. I do not know 100% as I have not handled your parts in person. You, from my understanding of what has been posted here, use a small detent to hold your charging handle in place while not being used. We use the friction of the charging handle against our slide/wear plate. We both make side charging systems. I do not know how yours interfaces with the gun as I have not seen it as stated many times before. There is really only one way someone can make a non-reciprocating charging handle for this platform as far as interface goes. Ours utilizes the front of the drive block to cycle the action. If they are the same then they are because that is the simplest and most cost effective way of doing so. If our designs are identical then I can understand there being a problem. If ours was a flagrant copy of yours then yes I can understand there being a problem. It was however come up with through design and testing done here in our shop by myself and my son. Did you make the first configuration for this weapon, yes. I will give you props for that but there are multiple guns on the market that have a non-reciprocating forward charging handle. The hammer design was also developed in our shop. It does look similar to your design but both designs look similar to the factory hammer as well. We took our measurements off a factory hammer and drew it up in CAD. We had 6 different designs that were cut out and tested. We proceeded to go with the design that functioned the best. Up till yesterday when you posted a picture of your hammer I had never seen one that you made or designed. The replacement ramp was your original idea. I will give you that. We had no intention of making one until a customer contacted us and stated that he had a broken feed ramp done by his local gunsmith. We told him that we did not make a replacement feed ramp at that time but instead suggested he send his lower receiver to you. He stated that he had several bad experiences with you in the past and refused to send his lower to you. He insisted on sending us his gun and having us take a look at it. We took on the project because we try to offer the best customer service available. We develop products that are needed and that people request. The feed ramp designed was done by my son. I sat next to him as he took measurements, using the factory lower and 12 gauge shells, this allowed us to develop the optimum shape. He then drew it up in his CAD program. Wrote the g-code and milled it out. If you feel it is direct copy and infringes on any patents you have I would be more than happy to send one to you for you to verify that. We have no control over what people say on these forums as far as one guy bashing the other. They form their opinions by observation like anyone else. We have never really understood the animosity you have towards us but am glad you are wanting to clear the air. Thanks, Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted October 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Matt The early components that mimick ours, are water under the bridge, and I will let it be. The ramp is patented. An article of the patent is a ramp that replaces the original, and is itself replaceable. So ANY ramp that is replacing the original, infringes on our patent. I politely ask that you stop making them. I would very much perfer this be setteled right now man to man , than later by other means. If you will comply, no further action will occur, and I will make the service of ramp replacement available to you. In addition, the TAC-12 lower is pat pending, the TAC-12 upper is pat pending, as are TAC-12 a1 upper and lower. The pistol grip adapter is also pat pending. and as long as yours interfaces to the lower as it does now, it is no problem. I also have applied for patent on a billet lower for the BR-99. If you will play straight and honest with me, I will respond in kind. I do this in attempt to mend the relationship between our companies.. The ball is now in your court How do you wish to play this out? regards Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toothandnail 275 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Jim, Would you mind sending a copy of your patent for the ramp over to me? A patent number would also suffice. I would just like to look it over. As stated before if you do have a legitimate patent in place we have no issues and will cease production. We have made and installed 2 ramps to date so no big loss there. Also as we have stated before we have no intention of creating a lower receiver at this time. For future reference what part of those do you have patented? Dimensions or the concept? If so I would like patent numbers on those as well. We have played straight and honest with you from day one. We have not tried to hide anything we have done from anyone. We asked you in a PM when we started if you had patents on anything and got no response. Not once have we posted on this forum bashing your products nor do we advise customers against your products. The tension was started by your employees stirring the pot. None of this should have come to light as there is a place for business conversations. Whether it be PM's or email between us. Please use those methods of communication in the future. Thanks, Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted October 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 A simple no would have been fine Quote Link to post Share on other sites
toothandnail 275 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 So your saying NO you WON'T produce the patent numbers? or NO you DON"T have them? IF you have a legit patent, why won't you produce it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gunfun 3,931 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Insert inventor name here: http://www.google.com/advanced_patent_search Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Anubis 38 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Firebird's patents are currently in the pending status. Provisionals are forthcoming; however, you won't be hearing directly from Jim again. Further correspondence will come from another source. Everything here was done respectfully, without any name calling from Firebird's part. You chose to be less than cordial in your responses. Therefore Jim has decided he is finished with the discussion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
steveUK 9 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 :-) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KIRCH76 12 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 A PENDING STATUS MEANS NOTHING! Until it is approved nothing can be done. Have fun with that..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SHOTGUN MESIAH 855 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AR-12 Shotgun 16 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 Glad to see the truth come out about these bogus patents. Millions of patent pending projects get rejected from being patented. I honestly see nothing here worth spending the big money to actually obtain a real patent. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CalveryDemon 4 Posted October 2, 2013 Report Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) Now he decides to sit the rest of the game out and send in a minion? Anything said on behalf on FB as an agent of this company, legally will be held against FB. The agent relationship was formally acknowledged in numerous post. All that put aside, your idea that any feed ramp would be a infringement on a patent is erroneous. You may patent a particular design or style. I assure you, you will lose this battle so don't waste your time & money. Edited October 3, 2013 by CalveryDemon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.