AR M4 style rifle, which one?

I have had a few Semi-auto pistols from Ruger and both were more reliable than the Glock I had.

There had to be something wrong with that Glock. Ruger makes a fine little pistol. But one thing the Glock is, is reliable. I've seen them jam for various reasons usually due to user error or outside interference, but I own 4 and none of them have ever jammed or malfunctioned on me. And I have at least 10K rounds through them collectively.

What kinds of reliability problems did you have with it?
 
My experience with Colt has been that they're nice but you pay more for the Colt name. Great rifle, but no better than the ones I mentioned above.

Completely untrue. Colt is the only AR manufacturer that builds their rifles to military spec. Most manufacturers have some of the things on the check list, but never all. There is a great chart over at m4carbine.net that shows the differences between the various manufacturers.

I wont say that none of it is paying for the pony, but there are very legitimate and tangible differences between colt and other ar manufacturers. There's a reason why they are the best.
 
There had to be something wrong with that Glock. Ruger makes a fine little pistol. But one thing the Glock is, is reliable. I've seen them jam for various reasons usually due to user error or outside interference, but I own 4 and none of them have ever jammed or malfunctioned on me. And I have at least 10K rounds through them collectively.

What kinds of reliability problems did you have with it?
The reliability reputation is why I bought it.
It had feed problems. Could have been magazine, could have been a weak spring, but it was not ergonomic and pointed crooked on the draw, so the decision to sell it was easy.

If I was to get another glock, they would first have to redesign their clunky brick like grips.
 
Bitch, bitch, bitch. Argue, argue, argue. Nonsense, nonsense and more nonsense. WTF is the matter with you people? The OP asked for opinions on ARs and you all turn it into a pissing match.

Here's my opinion which probably stinks as bad as the rest of them. They come into the shop for minor work that the owner can't or doesn't want to do. Any of the major brands are just fine. They all go bang and do what an AR is supposed to do. DPMS, Rock River, S&W, Bushmaster, Stag Arms, etc, are all good. You can drive yourself nuts over the minutia, but it doesn't add up to a hill of beans.

BTW, if you Google AR-15, you will find hours or maybe days of reading material and discussions similar to what you get here although they may be less cordial. :eek:

My only suggestions are to get one with a flat top so that you can remove the carrying handle and put a scope or other optical sight on it. Also, decide what kind of ammo you want to shoot. If you want to shoot cheaper 55 or 62 grain ammo, make sure the rifling twist is 1:9 or even 1:8 I bought a DSA ZM4 with a 1:7 twist. In retrospect, that was a mistake. It shoots 69 and 75 grain bullet great, but patterns like a shotgun with 55 grain ammo.:(
 
The reliability reputation is why I bought it.
It had feed problems. Could have been magazine, could have been a weak spring, but it was not ergonomic and pointed crooked on the draw, so the decision to sell it was easy.

If I was to get another glock, they would first have to redesign their clunky brick like grips.

ya know i used to think glocks had a thick grip too but i was comparing my 32C to my SIG P225 (which everyone loves as its a single stack) and the difference in grip dimensions was really small, a lot less than i figured, they do sure feel thick though, especially the .45's..

also i have put a lotta rounds thru glocks, 17's, 19's, 20's, 21's, 32's, 33's, 26's & 27's & i have had exactly -0- malfunctions thru them, no break in time needed, all have been 100% out of the box.

i cant say that about the ruger pistols i have had contact with, broken in or not, and talk about clunky lol.
 
Bitch, bitch, bitch. Argue, argue, argue. Nonsense, nonsense and more nonsense. WTF is the matter with you people? The OP asked for opinions on ARs and you all turn it into a pissing match.

Here's my opinion which probably stinks as bad as the rest of them. They come into the shop for minor work that the owner can't or doesn't want to do. Any of the major brands are just fine. They all go bang and do what an AR is supposed to do. DPMS, Rock River, S&W, Bushmaster, Stag Arms, etc, are all good. You can drive yourself nuts over the minutia, but it doesn't add up to a hill of beans.

BTW, if you Google AR-15, you will find hours or maybe days of reading material and discussions similar to what you get here although they may be less cordial. :eek:

My only suggestions are to get one with a flat top so that you can remove the carrying handle and put a scope or other optical sight on it. Also, decide what kind of ammo you want to shoot. If you want to shoot cheaper 55 or 62 grain ammo, make sure the rifling twist is 1:9 or even 1:8 I bought a DSA ZM4 with a 1:7 twist. In retrospect, that was a mistake. It shoots 69 and 75 grain bullet great, but patterns like a shotgun with 55 grain ammo.:(

i have a pre-ban colt A2 w/a 1-7" bbl and it does pretty good with 55's though it does better with the heavier stuff, hardly a shotgun lol.

really ya shouldnt use the liter stuff for anything but practice anyway, for its intended uses 556 needs something like a 75gr or 77gr to work well.

mine shoots the 55's plenty good enough for practice.

most of the AR''s i have seen lately were 1-8" or 1-9" anyway, i was suprised mine being a pre-ban was 1-7".
 
Bitch, bitch, bitch. Argue, argue, argue. Nonsense, nonsense and more nonsense. WTF is the matter with you people? The OP asked for opinions on ARs and you all turn it into a pissing match.

Exactly why I stopped posting on this thread. There's a certain manufacturer who has a cult-like following; the fans of which have a tendency to get really nasty and really arrogant really quick regarding this subject. Their favorite AR is the only "real" AR because they have one and they say so because they read so on such-and-such websites and they attended so-and-so's tactical carbine course and he hugged them and praised them for buying his favorite AR too so now they are experts on the subject and will not hesitate to blast you with their profound expertise on the subject at the drop of a hat, which of course is a size XXXL hat made by a "tier one" manufacturer, so you know how important it is.

:rolleyes:

Here's my opinion which probably stinks as bad as the rest of them. They come into the shop for minor work that the owner can't or doesn't want to do. Any of the major brands are just fine. They all go bang and do what an AR is supposed to do. DPMS, Rock River, S&W, Bushmaster, Stag Arms, etc, are all good. You can drive yourself nuts over the minutia, but it doesn't add up to a hill of beans.

Yep. Definite +1

BTW, if you Google AR-15, you will find hours or maybe days of reading material and discussions similar to what you get here although they may be less cordial. :eek:

Yep. Been there, experienced that. It's just like the 80's Cola Wars, but everyone has guns. Not just any guns, but the best guns, because they say so. I'm so fed up with it I rarely post at a certain AR-related website anymore and I've completely left a couple other ones.

My only suggestions are to get one with a flat top so that you can remove the carrying handle and put a scope or other optical sight on it. Also, decide what kind of ammo you want to shoot. If you want to shoot cheaper 55 or 62 grain ammo, make sure the rifling twist is 1:9 or even 1:8 I bought a DSA ZM4 with a 1:7 twist. In retrospect, that was a mistake. It shoots 69 and 75 grain bullet great, but patterns like a shotgun with 55 grain ammo.:(

I agree. I like 1/9. It's worked great for me. My AR has shot everything I've fed it for years without a single problem.


And with that, I leave this thread before the troll fest begins.
 
Completely untrue. Colt is the only AR manufacturer that builds their rifles to military spec.

And? What does that even mean? Military Spec doesn't always mean the best. The original Colts rusted shut in Vietnam. I don't get why every little part being mil spec means it's better. Unless someone is just one of those people that like having what the military has. But I still don't see how that proves it's better. Many current 1911s are not the same as the military ones issued back in the day. And many of them are far better for it. Mil Spec means nothing in terms of quality, accuracy, or sometimes even durability. Many aftermarket manufacturers make non mil spec stuff that is FAR superior to what our joes have.



but there are very legitimate and tangible differences between colt and other ar manufacturers.

I agree.


There's a reason why they are the best.

Prove it. I've handled RRA's and Armalites that can spank a colt out of the box. Best is very subjective. Are you suggesting that Colt's are more accurate, reliable, and durable than any other AR made? That's a BOLD statement.
 
The reliability reputation is why I bought it.
It had feed problems. Could have been magazine, could have been a weak spring,

Man that sucks. You must have gotten a dud.


but it was not ergonomic and pointed crooked on the draw, so the decision to sell it was easy.

Yeah I had that same problem when I first started shooting them. Believe it or not is goes away after about 1000 rounds. And I haven't noticed it hurting my ability to point weapons with a normal grip angle either.

If I was to get another glock, they would first have to redesign their clunky brick like grips.

You looked at any of the SF models. I've held a few but don't own any. They seem a lot better. Currently I'm saving my pennies to get a tricked out SA Operator so no new Glocks for me at the moment.
 
I know there are alot of die hard Colt fans out there, but PLEASE quit telling everyone that they are the top of the line ARs on the market. I have had the opportunity to carry a Colt AR for 13 years now and have fired every configuration from the A-1 to the M-4 and everything in between. They are not as awesome as some make them out to be.

If you want a quality product, look at the RRA or DPMS they are much more solid products IMHO. I have carried, owned, or fired Colt, RRA, DPMS, Armalite, and Bushmaster over the years and would honestly put Colt at the bottom of the list.

Murph
 
And? What does that even mean? Military Spec doesn't always mean the best. The original Colts rusted shut in Vietnam. I don't get why every little part being mil spec means it's better. Unless someone is just one of those people that like having what the military has. But I still don't see how that proves it's better. Many current 1911s are not the same as the military ones issued back in the day. And many of them are far better for it. Mil Spec means nothing in terms of quality, accuracy, or sometimes even durability. Many aftermarket manufacturers make non mil spec stuff that is FAR superior to what our joes have.

Then I submit that you are very ignorant where thes rifles are concerned. Here is an explanation from someone who is far more knowledgable about these rifles than I.

"Ever wonder why a Colt LE6920 sells for over $1k while an Olympic Plinker sells for under $600 on occasion? One reason is that there are dozens of places to change parts away from the specifications military contractors must provide to cheaper parts and practices that may not be necessary for commercial ARs. Not all of these changes are bad. Many of them will never be noticed by 99% of shooters; but some of them can effect function and I think it is important that a buyer understand what type of trade they are making when purchasing a rifle.

Quite simply the "Pony" costs more because it cost more to make an AR with a Pony on it. Colt uses parts that are held to a higher standard than other makers (according to the technical data package) and assembles them properly (staked carrier keys and castle nuts, etc.). Brands like Bushmaster, RRA, DPMS, et alia are less expensive because they cut corners on manufacture and assembly, it really is as simple as that. This doesn't make them bad, but it certainly does render them not as good. Whether this fact will be in evidence for a range gun is debatable, and most ARs are never subjected to the kind of use where the extra QA/QC will be noticable. A Colt M4 (#6920) is better than a Bushmaster, Armalite, RRA, DPMS "M4". Whether the differences in quality matter to you is a function of your budget and the intended use of the rifle, not any objective analysis of the guns themselves. Here's a good list of general differences:


1. Use cheap extruded or cast charging handle instead of proper forged charging handle.**
2. Cheap shot-filled or plastic buffer instead of correct military rifle or carbine buffer.***
3. 4140 barrel steel instead of 4150 MIL-B-11595.*
4. Don't proof test the barrel or bolt.*
5. No need for magnetic particle inspection of barrel or bolt.*
6. Don't test-fire the rifle prior to selling it.***
7. Replace heat-shielded handguard with lower grade plastic and no heat shield handguards.**
8. Use the same front sight base for every model instead of F-marked front sight base for flattops.*
9. Cast front sight base instead of forged.*
10. Cast upper and lower receivers.**
11. Plastic upper and lower receivers.**
12. Have a bunch of uppers that don't quite meet the Picatinny spec? We'll take them at a discount!**
13. Torquing and staking the gas key is something the customer can do.***
14. No chrome-lining.*
15. Why buy chrome-silicon springs designed for the weapon when we can use a cheaper steel and cut them to fit?***
16. That part is only a little out of spec. We can make it work with a little grinding and save money on parts too!***
17. Why use trained monkeys for assembly when regular monkeys work for half and can do the job almost as well?***
18. Make so many exceptions to your "lifetime warranty" that it will be impossible for anyone to ever make a valid claim against your "warranty."
19. Nobody will ever notice a few .001" difference on that part.**
20. Our patented spray-paint finish is much better than anodizing.**
21. Shipping every rifle with an HBAR profile to save machining costs, even if it is an entry rifle/"lightweight" carbine.*
22. Replace metal parts with plastic -plastic magazine release, trigger guard or delta ring.**
23. Use an Unmarked/mismarked A2 Elevation Adjustment Knob for the rear sight.**
24. Plastic A2 trapdoors in the butt of the rifle stock.**
25. Replace forged AR15 hammer with cast hammer.**
26. No drain hole in stock screw.**
27. Dremel cut feed ramps instead of feed ramps cut prior to anodizing.***
28. Use cheaper cast/extruded receiver extension instead of military extension (different diameter also).**
29. No parkerizing under the FSB.*
30. Straight pins or even roll pins instead of taper pins in FSB.***
31. Using A2 windage drums on detachable carry handles.**
32. Don't mark the barrel with chambering or twist rate.**
33. Don't stake the castle nut in place.**
34. Don't shot-peen the bolt during manufacturing.*




I've attached a chart that goes through the various manufacturers and how each of them fall short of the proper specs for these rifles. Again, because other companies don't do this doesn't necessarily make their rifles "bad", however it will not hold up to the use and abuse of a colt because the parts are not as robust and the assembly is not the same.

The question that the buyer needs to ask themselves is whether or not they want to cut corners to save money or spend more to get the best quality. Its a personal choice and there isn't a right or wrong answer. However it is a guarantee that there will be the usual folks that will get their panties in a bunch because someone has the audacity to point out the facts regarding their RRA or bushmaster.
 

Attachments

  • m4chart.gif
    m4chart.gif
    57 KB · Views: 27
The original Colts rusted shut in Vietnam.

As a point of historical fact, one of the reasons that the first colts in vietnam performed so very poorly is because the brainiacs in government (McNamera and his bunch) decided that they knew more about firearms than the folks building the M16. So they decided to strip a bunch of "nonessential processes" (chrome lining, etc) and use cheaper ammunition to save money.

Thats what happens when rifles aren't built to spec. Of course none of us are slogging around the jungle looking for charlie so a FTF isn't a big deal, but there are consequences to taking shortcuts on a rifle.
 
Then I submit that you are very ignorant where thes rifles are concerned.

LOL. Maybe. I will say that I spend more time actually shooting ARs than I do reading fanboy publications about them. So you may have a point. My opinion comes from my own experiences and they aren't fed to me by any web site or magazine article or blog. I go with what I have found works.

Here is an explanation from someone who is far more knowledgable about these rifles than I.

Who goes by the name????

"Ever wonder why a Colt LE6920 sells for over $1k while an Olympic Plinker sells for under $600 on occasion?

This is an unfair and absurd comparison. Because there is a drastic difference between Colt's Quality and Oplympic does not mean that connection can be made between RRA, Bushy, or Armalite or any of the other fine AR manufacturers. It's like comparing a Springer Loaded to a Hi-Point.


One reason is that there are dozens of places to change parts away from the specifications military contractors must provide to cheaper parts and practices that may not be necessary for commercial ARs. Not all of these changes are bad. Many of them will never be noticed by 99% of shooters; but some of them can effect function and I think it is important that a buyer understand what type of trade they are making when purchasing a rifle.

I would agree with this statement to a degree. And I will suggest that in most cases with quality manufacturers the difference makes no difference in performance. But I like how he says 99% wouldn't notice so that anyone who disagrees can just be lumped into the 99% ignorant category and dismissed.

Quite simply the "Pony" costs more because it cost more to make an AR with a Pony on it.

We'd have to see their balance sheets to substantiate this. So this statement can't really be considered fact.

Colt uses parts that are held to a higher standard than other makers (according to the technical data package)

Can you post this "data Package" to substantiate this? You could make your standard hand forged and folded parts, but is it really needed?

and assembles them properly (staked carrier keys and castle nuts, etc.).

I have personally seen Colts with poor staking jobs on them. So this is untrue.

Brands like Bushmaster, RRA, DPMS, et alia are less expensive because they cut corners on manufacture and assembly, it really is as simple as that.

mmmmmmmmm, not buyin it.

This doesn't make them bad, but it certainly does render them not as good.

Complete opinion without field test data to back it up.


Whether this fact will be in evidence for a range gun is debatable, and most ARs are never subjected to the kind of use where the extra QA/QC will be noticable. A Colt M4 (#6920) is better than a Bushmaster, Armalite, RRA, DPMS "M4". Whether the differences in quality matter to you is a function of your budget and the intended use of the rifle, not any objective analysis of the guns themselves. Here's a good list of general differences:

Again, opinion and unsubstantiated bull. You can't just say they're better. You gotta prove it somehow. This writer obviously has something to gain by patting Colt on the back. Perhaps money? Perhaps a sponsorship? Perhaps a career? Who knows. But it most definitely sounds biased. So I reject it.


1. Use cheap extruded or cast charging handle instead of proper forged charging handle.**
2. Cheap shot-filled or plastic buffer instead of correct military rifle or carbine buffer.***
3. 4140 barrel steel instead of 4150 MIL-B-11595.*
4. Don't proof test the barrel or bolt.*
5. No need for magnetic particle inspection of barrel or bolt.*
6. Don't test-fire the rifle prior to selling it.***

I'm sure some companies do at least one of these things. I'm really not gonna bother looking at your chart cause it doesn't really mean anything. They all don't do all of this though. I'm pretty sure Bushy, RRA, and Armalite all test fire their products before shipping them. So you gotta point out who is doing what.

7. Replace heat-shielded handguard with lower grade plastic and no heat shield handguards.**

Not really important since most guys go with a railed forearm nowadays and those are far superior to colt factory handguards.

8. Use the same front sight base for every model instead of F-marked front sight base for flattops.*

Don't know about this one so can't comment.

9. Cast front sight base instead of forged.*
10. Cast upper and lower receivers.**
11. Plastic upper and lower receivers.**
12. Have a bunch of uppers that don't quite meet the Picatinny spec? We'll take them at a discount!**

I know for a fact that this isn't true on every rifle other than colt.


13. Torquing and staking the gas key is something the customer can do.***

Again, I've seen some sloppy staking jobs on Colts.

14. No chrome-lining.*

This is just a lie. I know some guns don't have them. But a large number do.

15. Why buy chrome-silicon springs designed for the weapon when we can use a cheaper steel and cut them to fit?***

Don't even know if this matters. There are companies that make far better springs than what come in a Colt, so it doesn't mean all springs are crap.

16. That part is only a little out of spec. We can make it work with a little grinding and save money on parts too!***
17. Why use trained monkeys for assembly when regular monkeys work for half and can do the job almost as well?***
18. Make so many exceptions to your "lifetime warranty" that it will be impossible for anyone to ever make a valid claim against your "warranty."
19. Nobody will ever notice a few .001" difference on that part.**

Now the guy is just panicing and throwing poo across the room.

20. Our patented spray-paint finish is much better than anodizing.**

My Bushies, RRAs, and Armalites all have black anodizing and EXTREMELY durable parkerizing. Not that powder gray colt stuff. They are the way a "BLACK" rifle should be. They're not gray rifles.


21. Shipping every rifle with an HBAR profile to save machining costs, even if it is an entry rifle/"lightweight" carbine.*

That's just a plain lie. All three companies I've mentioned have different barrel configs.

22. Replace metal parts with plastic -plastic magazine release, trigger guard or delta ring.**

Not true on my Armalite. Bushmaster does have a plastic trigger guard plate... but I replaced it with a nice RRA winter guard made of metal.


23. Use an Unmarked/mismarked A2 Elevation Adjustment Knob for the rear sight.**

Don't know enough about that to comment. Could be true or just a fat lie. I know my rifles hit where I point them.

24. Plastic A2 trapdoors in the butt of the rifle stock.**

Who still uses those?

25. Replace forged AR15 hammer with cast hammer.**
26. No drain hole in stock screw.**
27. Dremel cut feed ramps instead of feed ramps cut prior to anodizing.***
28. Use cheaper cast/extruded receiver extension instead of military extension (different diameter also).**
29. No parkerizing under the FSB.*
30. Straight pins or even roll pins instead of taper pins in FSB.***
31. Using A2 windage drums on detachable carry handles.**
32. Don't mark the barrel with chambering or twist rate.**
33. Don't stake the castle nut in place.**
34. Don't shot-peen the bolt during manufacturing.*[/i]

All of these I'm sure have been done by someone, but this guy implies that everyone but Colt does this. And it's just simply a big fat lie. It is obvious this person has something to gain by bashing everyone other than Colt.


I've attached a chart that goes through the various manufacturers and how each of them fall short of the proper specs for these rifles. Again, because other companies don't do this doesn't necessarily make their rifles "bad", however it will not hold up to the use and abuse of a colt because the parts are not as robust and the assembly is not the same.

Then why do I know so many Joe's that refuse to buy a Colt because they've seen so many of them crap out under pressure? My best friend is a retired marine and says he'll never waste his money on a Colt. And before you go trying to lump him into the 99% of us ignorant rifle owners. He may very well be one of the best shooters in the southeast. He's won many a sniper competition and IDPA match. And placed 25 out of 50 at an invitational sniper shoot a year or so ago with 49 of the best shooters in the country. Not saying he's an expert. But he knows what works. You know what he's got in his safe? A Bushmaster Dissipator and two RRAs with stainless barrels. Not because he's cheap. But because he didn't see the point in wasting money on a name.

The question that the buyer needs to ask themselves is whether or not they want to cut corners to save money or spend more to get the best quality. Its a personal choice and there isn't a right or wrong answer. However it is a guarantee that there will be the usual folks that will get their panties in a bunch because someone has the audacity to point out the facts regarding their RRA or bushmaster.

It is a fact that there is a difference. That it is better is pure supposition and is absurd without any real test data to confirm it. Just saying it's better doesn't make it better. you say Colt is the best, have you ever shot a Les Baer AR? How about an LMT? No one is saying that Colt is a bad weapon. They're nice. But not worth what you pay for them. I have a 1,200 dollar RRA that will beat a 1,200 dollar Colt hands down. Because you get more for your money with other companies. You can show me all the parts lists you want. But without any side by side accuracy, durability, and reliability tests, your opinion has just as much value as everyone elses. And that's all it is. Opinion. It's great that you're a fan of Colt. And you should feel good that I'd never own one on a dare. That means more for you. But with Colt's "Go F yourself" policy with civilians, they'll never get a dime of my money. And now that they're not top dog in contracts, you're gonna see a huge crawling back on their hands and knees beggin us poor little civies to buy their products. I for one will gladly turn my back on a company that has turned it's back on us for years. They are no friend to the gun owning population.

Do you really think anyone takes Colt fans seriously? When 80% of AR guys say that just about any of the top quality companies turn out a fine product and then a flaming 10% of Colt fanboys come out yelling "It's Colt or Death". Anyone with half a brain passes that off as fanatics doing what fanatics do. And for that reason Companies like Bushmaster, RRA, and Armalite have enjoyed a great deal of success and have loads of satisfied customers. Even if we are ignorant and don't know how make good smart rifle go bang.
 
As a point of historical fact, one of the reasons that the first colts in vietnam performed so very poorly is because the brainiacs in government (McNamera and his bunch) decided that they knew more about firearms than the folks building the M16. So they decided to strip a bunch of "nonessential processes" (chrome lining, etc) and use cheaper ammunition to save money.

So much for Colt's standards huh. Wonder why they let a product like that out of their hands. Maybe Colt just doesn't know how to build a quality rifle for a decent price. Or maybe they just don't care. Wonder how many guys died cause of their faulty product.

Thats what happens when rifles aren't built to spec. Of course none of us are slogging around the jungle looking for charlie so a FTF isn't a big deal, but there are consequences to taking shortcuts on a rifle.

I've drug my rifles through mud and snow and even salt water and they're still going strong. Not bad for corner cut rifles huh?
 
I know there are alot of die hard Colt fans out there, but PLEASE quit telling everyone that they are the top of the line ARs on the market. I have had the opportunity to carry a Colt AR for 13 years now and have fired every configuration from the A-1 to the M-4 and everything in between. They are not as awesome as some make them out to be.

If you want a quality product, look at the RRA or DPMS they are much more solid products IMHO. I have carried, owned, or fired Colt, RRA, DPMS, Armalite, and Bushmaster over the years and would honestly put Colt at the bottom of the list.

Murph

I hear that so often from people that have actually used Colts in the field.
 
I don't have time to wade through all of your comments. Suffice it to say that your position seems to be that you demand proof and then dismiss it when provided. Not very logical if you ask me. But I will address this one comment.


Again, opinion and unsubstantiated bull. You can't just say they're better. You gotta prove it somehow.


Again I posted a chart looking at the most popular manufacturers but it seems you are too lazy to read it so let me spell this out for you. Colt's bolts are MPI inspected, pressure tested and shot peened. RRA does none of this. Colt uses an M16 bolt carrier. RRA does not. Colt uses M4 feedramps on all its models. RRA does not. Colt produces its barrels from 4150 steel. RRA uses 4140. Colt MPI tests its barrels. RRA does not. Colt pressure tests it barrels. RRA does not. Chrome lining is standard on all Colt AR's. It costs extra on RRA AR's. Colt uses taper pins on the FSB. RRA does not. Colt parkerizes under the FSB. RRA does not. Colt uses a staked castle nut. RRA does not. I could go on, but hopefully you get the point.

These differences are hardly unsubstantiated and certianly not bull. They may not be important to you, but they result in a higher quality rifle. This simply isn't debatable.

Companies like RRA, bushmaster, DPMS, etc do good business and make money because the average shooter wants an AR for cheap. They are going to use it at the range a couple of times a month and thats it. It will never see combat, or high round counts, or adverse conditions. however because these rifles work fine for their intended user doesn't mean that they are of equal quality to a colt.

And as an aside, I'm not a colt fanboy. In fact, I don't own a colt AR. Rather I have an LMT. I purchased it because the laws in my state forbid me from owning a complete colt rifle and the LMT is the next best thing to a colt. I don't need to own something to understand the facts and know quality when I see it.
 
I don't have time to wade through all of your comments.

You mean like the ones where I've first hand seen poor fit and finish and staking jobs on Colts. you mean like where I know for a Fact that I own a 1,200 RRA that will embarrass and 1,200 Colt? Or perhaps the comments where real professionals that use these types of weapons in real wars often come back with a bad opinion of Colt. You know, like real world experience? Yeah you probably wouldn't want to address those. They don't really work into your "Colt is King" world.


Suffice it to say that your position seems to be that you demand proof and then dismiss it when provided. Not very logical if you ask me.

Not proof that they are different. Proof that they are better. And so far all you've offered up for that is opinion. No actual field test results.

Again I posted a chart looking at the most popular manufacturers but it seems you are too lazy to read it so let me spell this out for you. Colt's bolts are MPI inspected, pressure tested and shot peened. RRA does none of this. Colt uses an M16 bolt carrier. RRA does not. Colt uses M4 feedramps on all its models. RRA does not. Colt produces its barrels from 4150 steel. RRA uses 4140. Colt MPI tests its barrels. RRA does not. Colt pressure tests it barrels. RRA does not. Chrome lining is standard on all Colt AR's. It costs extra on RRA AR's. Colt uses taper pins on the FSB. RRA does not. Colt parkerizes under the FSB. RRA does not. Colt uses a staked castle nut. RRA does not. I could go on, but hopefully you get the point.

I never said there weren't differences. Just that it doesn't make the Colt better. Why don't you do a comparison of what goes in a Les Baer and compare it to Colt. Lot's more attention to detail I can promise you. No one said Colt wasn't good. But the best? Hardly.

These differences are hardly unsubstantiated and certianly not bull.

The differences are fine. That it makes the Colt better or even the best is pure opinion.


They may not be important to you

Really they're not because it doesn't seem to cause a lack of accuracy, reliability, or durability. I'll put money on the fact that a Bushmaster, RRA, or Armalite will hang in there and perform just as well as a Colt.

but they result in a higher quality rifle.

Pure opinion, nothing more. That statement means absolutely nothing.


This simply isn't debatable.

Of course if is. Until you provide proof that these differences cause a Colt to some how be more reliable, durable, or accurate in the field. Of course it's debatable.


Companies like RRA, bushmaster, DPMS, etc do good business and make money because the average shooter wants an AR for cheap. They are going to use it at the range a couple of times a month and thats it. It will never see combat, or high round counts, or adverse conditions. however because these rifles work fine for their intended user doesn't mean that they are of equal quality to a colt.

I've taken these rifles into some nasty places and they do fine. And a few of them have a super high round count and they're still ticking. Do you use your AR for Combat? If you're a soldier you'll use the one your given. Not the one you purchased.

And as an aside, I'm not a colt fanboy.

Yeah ya are. You just don't own one. I actually have owned them and got rid of them cause they weren't all they were cracked up to be. So I let some other sucker pay for the pony.

the LMT is the next best thing to a colt.

Dude, LMT is far better than a Colt by far.

I don't need to own something to understand the facts and know quality when I see it.

You see the pony and drink the koolaid.
 
Back
Top