The Official Why My DPMS, Del-Ton, Oly Arms, Etc. Is Better Than Anything Else Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seacoastnh

I need an out of the box reliable AR 15.

Further left is better quality, so the Colt is more reliable then the LMT and the DPMS?

How much more reliable?

Is the DPMS ten times more likely to fail?

---

What is your definition of reliable?

I don't understand what you have against the chart... It simply lists how certain manufacturers follow, or don't follow, the TDP. (If my understanding of the chart is not correct, correct me.)

If you're bushy, is "out of the box reliable" for your needs, that's great. I don't see where you're going about the chart being worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justin_247

Seacoast,

Here's an idea... instead of pushing your bodily excrement fetish on us and constantly asking questions without providing any data yourself, how about you list something on the Chart that is completely unnecessary and has no beneficial value? Otherwise, all of these provocations are senseless and troll-like.

---

Gee Justin you made a number of statements related to statistics above, where are the numbers. You said "statistically insignificant" did you make that up?

Pointing out that the chart does not measure quality because it fails to address failure rates is not the same as claiming to know the relationship between a particular feature and failure of the end product.

I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?

I doubt it has any affect on the above, but I am a chart skeptic.

Don't forget the numbers you implied you had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jklaughrey

Your second picture looks a little better. However in Justin's defense your first picture was canted at an angle which clearly showed a gap on the right top indent. Perhaps you should look at your picture more objectively so you can clearly see what was discussed. Or perhaps in the future better picture quality. New camera, better lighting would be a start. Shall we find you a chart for cameras?

---

I was going to go hunting when I got home, but it's raining. I'll bust out the D90 and my lil 50mm lens for better pics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seacoastnh

I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?

---

Where does it say that?

This is what is says: "There have been some reports of these parts rusting in the unprotected area, but it is unlikely that rust in these locations will affect the function of the carbine."
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?k...=5&output=html
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6642

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dieselgeek

When it's posted right below the post it is obvious. Key is staked fine. If I told you it was colt you prob shove it right up your... Upper receiver.

---

You don't have the sense God gave a mule... you won't be here long...

D90 is GTG, you should have a very nice picture to share then.

Seacoast it sounds as almost if you want a "Guarantee" that whatever you purchase based upon the information provided will never have issue. The "Chart" merely shows what brands use what, and if they are reliable parts and will be the least likely to experience failure. Like all things there are failure points in everything.

Did the Priest give you a Guarantee that your marriage would be perfect after you said your vows. Did your wife Guarantee to you that she would remain pristine and beautiful and not show her age or gain weight after having kids. Did your mirror give you a Guarantee that you would always look "awesome" in that sleeveless t-shirt that accentuates your goatee and mullet. NO

Just find what suits you and be done. Anything from the 1st left to the 5th position on the chart shall serve you well out of the box without upgrade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seacoastnh

Gee Justin you made a number of statements related to statistics above, where are the numbers. You said "statistically insignificant" did you make that up?

Pointing out that the chart does not measure quality because it fails to address failure rates is not the same as claiming to know the relationship between a particular feature and failure of the end product.

I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?

I doubt it has any affect on the above, but I am a chart skeptic.

Don't forget the numbers you implied you had.

---

I didn't imply anything. I said you should speak with Pat Rogers, Grant Timberlake, or Rob Sloyer. Before you do that, I encourage you to read more from SMEs on this site, Lightfighter, and even ARFCOM, and you will discover what I'm saying is entirely accurate.

You have yet to demonstrate any knowledge at all on this matter, so I don't see why I should go about wasting more time to cook you a proverbial steak so that you can eat most of it and then insult my cooking after your stomach is full.

How did the wheels fall off of this so quick?

I do not think the information seacoast is demanding exists. I'm unaware of any scientific study, that lists the numbers of rifles produced by every manufacturer, and also has an all encompassing list of every single malfunction, by every single rifle, with every single owner/operator, distilled down to cause, to eliminate ammo, magazine and operator error.

So, yea, you can keep demanding "proof", because you know its not there.

What we do have though, is a large number of anecdotal accounts, as reported here, and other web forums. Much of it, is reported by top level, well known and respected instructors, who by nature of their job, see alot of carbines, all under, reasonably similar conditions and round counts. They can ID the malfunction and the cause. After a while, trends begin to emerge, again while unscientific, there it is.

Par Rogers and Larry Vickers, have both noted trends of poor performing guns from specific manufacturers. Reports of an entire swat team's issue of guns, not working properly, and an LE rep on vacation. These are men who don't have the luxury of waiting for customer service.
I personally witnessed the same type of situation.

Paul Howe, chimed in, and I mentioned his findings also, he is the only one who has not seen an issue with one particular brand. Its a stumper, but even he has stated, he will keep better track of it, and see what happens.

So what do we have left to go on? A list of known better or at least minimal parts quality, manufacturing and assembly techniques and procedures, etc. etc. "the chart" as it were.

No one said, a gun from the left side, guarantees you trouble free performance, and a gun from the right, will automatically be a headache. Only that, the chances of a good, trouble free, reliable and durable gun, will come from the left side.

If you read the "explanations" part, as a consumer, you can decide what is and what is not important to you.
Remember though, there is a difference between a "better product" and a "better choice".

Now, wheres that "tap out" emoticon I've been asking for:laugh:

Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JC0352

What is your definition of reliable?

I don't understand what you have against the chart... It simply lists how certain manufacturers follow, or don't follow, the TDP. (If my understanding of the chart is not correct, correct me.)

---

As I pointed out early on it is like the consumer report that ranks the Hyundai over the Honda because the Hyundai has more speakers and better acceleration. It is missing the quality of manufacturing component.


I am open to any reasonable and understandable definition of reliability.

I have been using the statement of failure to function out of the box.

Let say when it is delivered reliablity is failure to fire, failure to cycle or extremely poor accuracy.

A true analysis would include time and rounds fired.

[/QUOTE]I am open to any reasonable and understandable definition of reliability.

I have been using the statement of failure to function out of the box.

Let say when it is delivered reliablity is failure to fire, failure to cycle or extremely poor accuracy.

A true analysis would include time and rounds fired.[/QUOTE]

Your looking for Purple dragons and Pink unicorns. I think you would have a better chance at proving the paternity of Nancy Pelosi is actually Glenn Beck!