Crosman doesn't have enough sense to re-issue it when 50 YO ones are getting snapped up before you can log on to the classifieds at a price they should be able to make a buck on especially if it were available in different bull barrel lengths like the current variants of the Ruger it was styled from(it's not like it isn't all walnut and blued steel for overhead). to offer as modular upgrade options say in a price range starting at $125 with barrel options and sighting options and maybe a flat top receiver with Weaver rail or various front/rear sight combos and maybe a 1911 grip variant available that could run to double to triple the entry level starter.

Mechanically, it's a far simpler gun to tool up for and assemble that the P-17, so it's not like they would be trying to bring back the 600 for under $500 MSRP(although if they did, maybe they would re-issue the Copperhead W/C to feed them).
There's no EPA(well, yet on co2), DOT, or NTSA to deal with as say GM would in to attempting to reissue the '62 Vette in its original "form factor" today with modern suspension.
I'm just sayin'.

The old canned zinc helps make it a little bulletproof. But it is an interesting thought, probably the trends toward emulating the latest in PB designs show it not as popular as others. While the used ones do sell for top $$$ it's still a narrow market? Then again who knows, they could be building the molds right now.

I didn't mean the materials as the p-17 just the number of moving parts and complexity of design.
Like the Glocks I suppose it could be "plastic" with a steel tube liner for the pressure bearing handle.

Sweet machine this thing is and mine is in original box, looks nearly factory new, only marks are on loading port area.

I think I will look for a MKII next.

 

I'd be willing to pay up to $200 for a new one IF it was the same specs for seals, barrels and threads.

I wonder if CNC steel or brass would cost less now than the molded aluminum did then.

Could we get a definitive answer from Chip at Crosman about why they don't re-visit the old designs?

From our group here I wonder if the QB78 is inferior or superior to the CR180. I doubt a new CR180 could be made for the same retail price of the QB78s, but I'd be willing to pay more if the performance is markedly better.

I buy the MKI and MKII for the design and function, not the vintage factor. Never had the newer CR2300s to play with, so don't know if those make the MKs redundant now. Maybe they do.

Mal....any snow? I got bupkis here in Geneva.

K in NY

Factory dovetails and a shrouded barrel and it still wouldn't be as long as some "pistol" carbines.
I have both a 160 and a QB 78 but the QB has been tuned somewhere in Souther California so it's an apples and oranges not counting the fact that the 160 can't be scoped and the shrouded QB can't be iron sighted.

with the improvements and mods that makes them what they are today. Power doubled seal value,bigger knurled bolt knob,longer barrel etc.
I have 2 180's,(just traded one for a 4x12x Hawke)1 QB(22) that was made in southern CA. it still holds air and they are tack drivers.
Sadly I don't think Crosman will bring them back. Sure would be nice.

Just because a few hundred folks want one isn't cause to spend hundreds of thousands to gear up and start making em.

Sure, I'd like to see Sheridan re-issue clones of the Supergrade rifles, but I know WHY they stopped making em after only abut a year .... cause nobody was buying em!

nt