Be an informed consumer!

[QuietShootr]

Do you acknowledge the guy standing on the streetcorner holding a sign warning of an impending space alien attack? Do you even try to tell him how crazy he is? Or do you just laugh, shake your head and keep walking? How is that so different from your "fanboi" described above?

And I hope that last line was directed at the fictitious fanboi you described, and not at me.

Hell, no, not you! And no, I generally don't bother telling him how crazy he is unless he keeps coming on my lawn to tell me about the impending space alien attack.

[bo-hoss]

An example: Carpenter 158 was really trick material in the late 1950's and early 1960'swhen the AR-15/M-16 rifle bolt was developed. I know of at least 3 materials that are a vast improvement over C158 and would offer advantages over the current offering/spec. It is too bad the Govt. wont look at what is going on in Aerospoace and ordinance development and realize they could improve performance AND save $$$ by updating the Mil-Spec standards as applicable.

[shadow65]

Since I was one of those "I don't need the best" guys in the beginning of my AR experience I have to say this. I can spend $105 on a Del-Ton BCG, and have, not knowing exactly what I am getting. Or I can spend $140 on a Bravo Company BCG and know the bolt is HP/MPI tested and is at least held to Mil-Spec standards. Same with the upper, lowers, barrels, etc.
It's a relatively small difference in price to know that the part will more than likely not only work and fit correctly, but even stand up to abuse.
I just read a posting about a bolt from Del-Ton that sheared lugs off after less than 500 rounds. That's not saying they all do, but when is the last time you heard of a BCM Bolt failing in 500 rounds?
I don't like wasting money and do not have to have the best. I can't afford it. But I've learned over the years that in the long run, I don't save anything by buying the least expensive. Now I pay the extra for a part I know will stand up and work correctly.
Buy once, cry once. I have a big tupperware tub full of cheap parts I bought over the years. None are in or on my rifles anymore.
Dave

[rob_s]

An example: Carpenter 158 was really trick material in the late 1950's and early 1960'swhen the AR-15/M-16 rifle bolt was developed. I know of at least 3 materials that are a vast improvement over C158 and would offer advantages over the current offering/spec. It is too bad the Govt. wont look at what is going on in Aerospoace and ordinance development and realize they could improve performance AND save $$$ by updating the Mil-Spec standards as applicable.

Here's what gets lost in statements like the above...

While there may be newer, better, longer-lasting materials and methods that would improve the overall performance or longevity (neither of which are an issue with the current spec IMHO, YMMV) but what is TRULY pathetic is that even though C158 is 1950s technology the majority of manufacturers CAN'T EVEN MEET THAT LEVEL!

[MarshallDodge]

Excellent post with tons of good information on why there are differences in prices when it comes to firearms.

Whenever the subject comes up, and someone recommends a brand XYZ carbine, I always ask if the they know why the guns are a few dollars different in price. They never can tell me why but are quick to point out how their sample of one has performed for them.

[bo-hoss]

C158 is 1950s technology the majority of manufacturers CAN'T EVEN MEET THAT LEVEL!

Unless you have a govt contract to warrant such an expenditure, The majority of manufacturers are not going to invest big $$$ in purchasing an entire lot of C158.

I do agree...There is some JUNK out there...... buyer beware!! Do the research!

[C4IGrant]

Here's what gets lost in statements like the above...

While there may be newer, better, longer-lasting materials and methods that would improve the overall performance or longevity (neither of which are an issue with the current spec IMHO, YMMV) but what is TRULY pathetic is that even though C158 is 1950s technology the majority of manufacturers CAN'T EVEN MEET THAT LEVEL!

C4

[rudy99]

C158 is 1950s technology the majority of manufacturers CAN'T EVEN MEET THAT LEVEL!

Unless you have a govt contract to warrant such an expenditure, The majority of manufacturers are not going to invest big $$$ in purchasing an entire lot of C158.

I do agree...There is some JUNK out there...... buyer beware!! Do the research!

Is it really a factor of the cost associated with raw materials?

I did a little searching for the actual TDP and noticed it looks like the Colt TDP is proprietary information that must be licensed from Colt (another cost of doing business). Perhaps not a lot of companies wish to go through the cost of licensing Colt intellectual property. This may be an issue addressed in other threads, but I haven't had enough history here to come across this information. Perhaps I'm missing something here or mis-interpreting the data.

Sources:
http://www.defensereview.com/colt-defense-rebuts-matt-coxs-army-times-article-army-acquires-rights-to-m4/

As long as the Government desires to procure the M4 Carbine, it must continue to license rights to use the Licensed Technology for the M4 Carbine, including M4 Components, from Colt. The Licensed Technology comprises of: (1) Proprietary Data owned by Colt, including the M4 technical data package; (2) Improvements made and owned by Colt; and (3) intellectual property owned or controlled by Colt, pertaining to patents, copyrights and trade secrets. Colt has no interest in transferring ownership of the Licensed Technology to the Government.

The Colt M4 Carbine - Intellectual Property Problems, Successful Negotiations, and a Long, Long Bid Protest

DoD Report No. 97-165, The Procurement of M4 Carbines

This is touched on a bit here: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=33939, however the discussion appears to be based on an article that was later debunked by Colt (see my link above).

[bo-hoss]

I believe C158 can only be bought in complete heat treat "batches" or lots. This requires $100,000+ dollars to purchase one of these lots. I speak from my similar materials experiences at work but I stand to be corrected.That is a lot of cash for a business to have tied up without some sort of contractual commitment, or alot of customers.

[CaptainDooley]

BM, Oly, DPMS, etc. HAVE a lot of customers (and contracts).