Question re AIA M10 No 4 mk IV origin

[Steve]

Maybe I post on too many veteran's sites but the bad feelings about Vietnam are still very much in evidence. But that's really not important. Advertising is everything.

Based on what I was told by the businesses in the US, the Vietnam issue was one of their concerns. Private citizens expressed that to me as well. If it was not a problem for AIA, why would they refuse to answer? What would Lawrence Ord in Oz have to gain by lying about it? Or other Oz rifle owners for that matter?

It's very disturbing to me that no one is willing to talk about something that should be completely out in the open.

[Cantom]

Ron, did you read my article? Stamps didn't enter into it, at least, according to Tristar. Expired permits was given as the official reason. Tristar had no reason to lie about that.

The guy at the first US distributor(was it Tristar?)told me it wasn't that country of origin thing, he just couldn't get any stock from AIA. He said people liked the rifles and he only had feed problems with one of them.

The Hams have obviously had teething problems with their enterprise. I just hope people (especially influential ones with websites hint hint) give them a chance to make a go of it. In this day and age of anti-gun governments(like n Australia and Canada) and the UN, how hard must it have been to even get to where they are? We are after all shooters on here and I think new gun companies should be encouraged, not destroyed.
Marstar not handing over a free rifle for a test to someone who was being critical of them is not a reason to torpedo the whole company, is it? They may be fine rifles eh?

[tiriaq]

One of the stories is that the barrels are US made, having been left behind when the US left Vietnam. Supposedly Mini-gun barrels. I have no idea if there is any truth to this story. I do not know what the dimensions of such a barrel are, and if it could be used for this purpose. This would explain the chromed bore, though. I am unaware of anyone making a "match grade" rifle barrel with a plated bore.
It is very common for manufactured goods to contain parts made in various countries. No one even questions quality when Winchester and Browning guns are made in Japan, and so marked. The big difference here is the secrecy and evasiveness. The rifles are not inexpensive. It would be nice to know that there is an ongoing supply of spare parts, that there is a manufacturer standing behind the product. The US distributor's marks on rifles imported into Canada does not suggest fresh ongoing production, but rather an unsold batch that happened to be on hand.
As far as Norinco goes, these rifles look better finished than any Norinco product.
I would not expect all the parts of a firearm or any manufactured product to be made entirely in one facility, under one roof. Every manufacturer contracts out. As far as a "Made in ...." label goes, the definition is a technical one, based on regulations which specify the amount of production, content, etc. that took place in that country. Has anyone seen one of these rifles that actually has a "Made in ...." stamp on it?

[Steve]

As I said, failure of these rifles entering the US had nothing to do with Vietnam as far as the US gov't was concerned. Tristar referred to expired permits. The businesses were only concerned with Vietnam at first insofar as it might have affected their sales. AIA it seems was much more worried about it however.

Tristar was the first company. SDI was the second.

The Hams (owners of AIA) are NOT new to business. Their business was started in 1993 as Australian Collector Arms. In 1996, the AIA name started being used. This was when they were selling to Oz only. How many years of teething are allowed?

Let's be clear on a couple of things here. At first, I was actually excited to lend a hand. I was thrilled at the prospect of handling a brand new Lee Enfield clone. Marstar asked me to review the rifle, after they discovered who it was that emailed them for information regarding prices and availability.

I NEVER asked them if they wanted me to do an article. Further to that, had I been LOANED a rifle, I would only have been able to keep it after finishing the contracted review, if I paid for it. The price would have been less than retail, but certainly NOT free.

As I was working up my story, it was necessary to gather some information and ask questions. Simple stuff I thought. One of the questions was, "What is the country of origin?" That question was not well received. When I asked about product liability, you would have thought I had attempted to conjure up the devil! John St. Amour didn't communicate with me after questions were raised. I was given over to another person.

When people started ducking for cover, examining the rifle became secondary. This whole thing has nothing to do with brand new businesses or anti-gun governments. It has to do with answering a couple of easy questions. It has to do with truth and honesty.

Consider this: recently, Remington started importing Zastava rifles. They are being marketed as their Models 798 and 799. They announced publicly where they got them. Same with their Spartan line from Russia. No need to hide that info and Remington didn't try.

The fact of the matter is, no other firearms company on the planet hides this sort of information. They freely give it out to anyone who asks. You can write Remington. You can email Remington. You can phone Remington. They do not run or attempt to hide from consumers. Same with the other rifle makers.

Why is AIA hiding?

[Steve]

Has anyone seen one of these rifles that actually has a "Made in ...." stamp on it?

There is NO "Made in Vietnam" or "Made in Australia" stamp. On the left side of the action, this is stamped - "Australian International Arms - Brisbane, Australia"

[Claven2]

Well, I am certainly willing to give the rifle's a chance. In my case, I never buy a new car in the first year of production as I know it will have lots of bugs.

With these new Enfields from Australia, I may one day buy one, but I want to see their real world track record better established first. Just my personal opinion. (which in no wayu reflects the official opinion of milsurps.com - for the record )

[Oatmeal Savage]

Steve, I visited your site and read your article, well done and informative.

OS

[Steve]

You're welcome.

I do not hate this rifle. Unlike some that have said that they are a poor copy of the original and rail against them, I think that they could be a great, updated version. Until someone that represents AIA answers my very simple questions, I will not buy one. They are potentially dangerous. Sadly, their silence sounds like a warning siren.

There's a line from the TV show Friends I believe that said, "It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye!" How true.

[bearhunter]

Don't let the "Made in Vietnam" moniker scare you.
The AIA rifles are darn good.
The fit, finish, reliability and accuracy are excellent and commensurate with their price.
I have an M10 B2 Match.
It's very accurate and has low recoil due to its weight and basic design
The components are well made and tough.
I'm not sure of the metalurgy used in the rifle and its corresponding parts, but if the appearance of the rifle is any indication, there's not thing to worry about.
I can't see there being any problems with the AIA No 4 style rifles that wouldn't be found with any other No 4 made in Canada, USA or England.
The Vietnamese have had a long relationship with martial firearms and their care. The Aussies aren't slouchses either.
As far as my rifle goes, other than a heavier than I like trigger pull, they seem to have worked out all of the bugs.
No it's not a normal No4, the receiver is beefed up, the steel in it "may" be superior to the originals, the front sight is clamped to the barrel and the rear top wood is held on with barrel clamp springs.
If it's to much of a variant for your particular tastes, so be it, but don't knock it as far as reliability, quality, fit/finish or accuracy are concerned. bearhunter

[Steve]

I don't think that anyone here is concerned about where it's made. I disagree about the price however for reasons already stated at my site. Metalurgy is the big sticking point for me, which walks arm in arm with liability.

No one has owned and fired one long enough to judge its ability to sustain in the long haul. We'll have to wait for that.

No one has "knocked" it. Myself and some others have asked questions. Questions which have not been answered. The bling has blinded more people than the others who quesiton it. When the questions are answered, we'll see.