I obviously don’t have a clue but I can’t fathom it working for them as is. Prices are the same but you took away the custom hands on part of the man/man’s shop building you the rifle. Wilson may build a better gun but you’ve took away the Melvin part.
I think they will have to get some rifles out there and get people fired up for them or cut the price in half.
I don't have a NULA and never dealt with Melvin but it wouldn't shock me if Wilson didn't see the premiums people were paying for lightweight rifles with limited supply from Kimber/Barrett. Probably said "I already make a 1911 better than Kimber and I have a pile of good machinists here - it makes sense for me to try and apply what we know with what Melvin does and be a player in that market"
I get why Wilson did it, but do we even know if they're going to retain the NULA name/marketing/faith and goodwill or will they re-brand and thus differences in customer experience between them and Melvin aren't as stark for returning customers of Melvin's?
It's interesting to me from a market fit/business perspective as I doubt I'm in the market for a NULA/Wilson rifle - just interesting is all.
