View Full Version : 1st tier, 2nd tier?
New to the forum and I have been reading a lot of topics before posting and I have my first question. I see a lot of reference to third tier AR manufactures and 3rd tier quality guns etc... but there is no reference to which is what. I did read a bit about what is mil-spec and what is not and what some manufactures claim etc ...
So my question is ... is there an actual list of what manufactures are considered by most to be the 1st tier, 2nd tier 3rd tier or is this more of a personal point of view? Are there any that pretty much everyone seems to agree is in one place or the other?
I have a Colt 6520 and a Sig 516 and I love them both. I'm wondering where the quality seems to fall with those for example. Is the Sig barrel mil-spec with proper 5.56 chamber and barrel composition? Sure shoots nice although it is piston so it is in some ways not comparing apples to apples, but the barrel should be the same. But I don't see much mention of where that fits in the "tiers".
Failure2Stop
09-25-12, 09:13
Tiers are bullshit.
The best way to determine if a gun is built to be shot for a long time is adherence to TDP, or a good reason why the part(s) used did not meet the protocol.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
New to the forum and I have been reading a lot of topics before posting and I have my first question. I see a lot of reference to third tier AR manufactures and 3rd tier quality guns etc... but there is no reference to which is what. I did read a bit about what is mil-spec and what is not and what some manufactures claim etc ...
So my question is ... is there an actual list of what manufactures are considered by most to be the 1st tier, 2nd tier 3rd tier or is this more of a personal point of view? Are there any that pretty much everyone seems to agree is in one place or the other?
There are no actual tiers and is honestly personal opinion. I put rifles into different groups based off of my experience with them, but that is just my preferences.
I have a Colt 6520 and a Sig 516 and I love them both. I'm wondering where the quality seems to fall with those for example. Is the Sig barrel mil-spec with proper 5.56 chamber and barrel composition? Sure shoots nice although it is piston so it is in some ways not comparing apples to apples, but the barrel should be the same. But I don't see much mention of where that fits in the "tiers".
Your 516 is a piston gun. So some of it just isn't going to follow the TDP. With that said, you can still look at the barrel steel, bolt steel, testing done, etc and get an idea of how well it is made.
IMHO, when you get into anything that is basically NOT an M4, you need to just look at materials used and how it was assembled. Then pay attention to other owners reviews of said gun.
C4
Ah I get it. So when someone here says that xyz is just a third tier manufacturer what they mean is that "to them" they are a 3rd tier quality manufacturer. Of course someone else might consider that same company a 1st tier manufacturer. This can be confusing to someone reading that kind of thing written by someone whose opinion is valued. It leads a person to believe that there are actual rankings of companies that follow the specs more closely than others and as such are listed in order of their adherence to it.
I wonder how the Sig516's non-piston parts such as barrel etc... compare quality wise. I see a lot of opinons like "Sig stuff is not as good" or "I've heard that Sig stuff is not as good" but these seem to be personal opinions more than factual data. Does anyone have any factual data about how Sig's barrels, frames, bolts and other parts other than piston parts, compare from a technical standpoint?
The following is my opinion developed by reading here and elsewhere and for the ever-helpful Chart.
First Tier: Colt, BCM, Daniel Defense, Noveske, KAC, and Centurion (uppers only). MAYBE JP Enterprises, Wilson Combat and Les Baer could fit into this tier, but I am not well enough informed to actually put them in.
Other Tiers: Crap that I do not wish to own. No offense, but any Sig from Exeter, NH falls into the crap tier. Sig from Germany is usually much better quality.
Tiers are bullshit.
Yep. When you start to read a reply and someone it talking tiers... tune them out..
As others have mentioned tiers are BS. Any fanboy will put whoever built their M4 as tier 1. As Grant said, find a manufactor that is mil spec and follows the TDP and then talk to said owners. Still will be a biased opinion but at least talk to people who run their rifle hard instead of someone who has a safe queen.
As far as your rifles our concerned if both work for you and are dependable it doesn't matter about their "tier".
S. Galbraith
09-25-12, 13:40
Tiers are bullshit.
The best way to determine if a gun is built to be shot for a long time is adherence to TDP, or a good reason why the part(s) used did not meet the protocol.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
TDP is great, but I would also think that industry reputation counts for something to. Just because Noveske doesn't follow the TDP with their M249 MG barrel steel, doesn't mean it isn't just as good or better than the TDP barrel steel. Cost and availability are important factors in the TDP, so sometimes you can get something better for a little more money.
Very true, buying say an upper with better specs than a name brand even though the brand might be no name. Specs rule in my opinion. You can buy cheaper lowers and uppers with better specs than the big brand companies.
As others have mentioned tiers are BS. Any fanboy will put whoever built their M4 as tier 1. As Grant said, find a manufactor that is mil spec and follows the TDP and then talk to said owners. Still will be a biased opinion but at least talk to people who run their rifle hard instead of someone who has a safe queen.
As far as your rifles our concerned if both work for you and are dependable it doesn't matter about their "tier".
Bingo!!
vicious_cb
09-25-12, 23:24
I like to group ARs into 2 tiers:
Tier: I can depend on this gun with my life or Tier: its a POS hobby gun :cool:
I like to group ARs into 2 tiers:
Tier: I can depend on this gun with my life or Tier: its a POS hobby gun :cool:
Yes, exactly what I was thinking.
bullittmcqueen
09-26-12, 10:18
This is the problem I've always had with the Chart. The casual observer or shooter who has little technical knowledge of the AR-15 style rifle looks at that chart and assigns brands into "tiers", good, bad, or indifferent. The order of the names on the chart is the thing most people immediately look at, not the actual information about the particular brands. I thought the second file which was written by the author of the chart was actually much more informative as it aimed to educate shooters about the TDP and what they should look for in a rifle before buying or building.
Knowledge is power in many things in life and these rifles are no different. I agree there are no such things as tiers, just manufacturers who either adhere to a standard or not and it is the responsibility of the buyer/shooter to decide what they are comfortable with before buying. Obviously, more intricate knowledge of the TDP and the reputations of different manufacturers are more helpful than any "Chart".
To reiterate, tiers are bullshit and so is blind adherence to the TDP (although this is the simplest way to go about it). Ultimately, the best gun for a person is the one that meets their needs and budget. The only variable is whether or not someone is competent to make that determination. Become your own SME.
Tiers are just ordering mechanisms. There are various levels of AR quality. If you don't like the word "tier" because of its military implication and corollary mall-ninja'ness when used improperly, then fine, I'm with you. But there quite obviously ARE various levels of AR quality that manufacturers can be logically ordered by. This isn't to say that every single rifle from every single manufacturer can be placed nicely into some hierarchical chart. I'm just saying that natural groups do emerge when comparing various examples.
A simple example that is not all inclusive by any means:
1) BCM / DD
2) RRA / BM
When considering these four manufacturers, there is clearly a logical way to group them. You might even say -- put them into a tiered order. Gasp.
Tiers are just a somewhat less precise way of stratifying things than ordering from best to worst. It is nowhere near unique to the military/firearms community.
In the AR market, it would be hard to list the absolute #1 best AR manufacturer. It's a lot easier to group them into tiers where everything in a given tier is roughly equal and you can't go wrong. From reading posts on M4C I would have to conclude that the most recommended brands known for quality, accuracy, and customer service are great, brands like BCM, DD, Colt, and Noveske. Maybe KAC, LaRue, Rainier (if they count), Centurion, H&K, LWRC, and LMT as well. Then you get "bad" brands like Oly, Bushmaster, DPMS, and DTI. And middle of the road brands like Spikes, RRA, PSA, Stag, S&W, and maybe CMMG.
That makes an easy 3 tier system, doesn't it? You could even name the tiers "Take into combat," "Commercial grade," "Don't trust with your life."
Tiers are just ordering mechanisms. There are various levels of AR quality. If you don't like the word "tier" because of its military implication and corollary mall-ninja'ness when used improperly, then fine, I'm with you. But there quite obviously ARE various levels of AR quality that manufacturers can be logically ordered by. This isn't to say that every single rifle from every single manufacturer can be placed nicely into some hierarchical chart. I'm just saying that natural groups do emerge when comparing various examples.
A simple example that is not all inclusive by any means:
1) BCM / DD
2) RRA / BM
When considering these four manufacturers, there is clearly a logical way to group them. You might even say -- put them into a tiered order. Gasp.
Pretty much this.
1859sharps
09-26-12, 14:10
TDP is great....
should be viewed as the minimum standard if you are looking to stake your life on AR type rifle verse the end all.
It is entirely possible for someone to manufacture an AR/M4 type rifle and exceed the TDP standard.
should be viewed as the minimum standard if you are looking to stake your life on AR type rifle verse the end all.
It is entirely possible for someone to manufacture an AR/M4 type rifle and exceed the TDP standard.
Yes it is, but rarely do we see it.
C4
Ah I get it. So when someone here says that xyz is just a third tier manufacturer what they mean is that "to them" they are a 3rd tier quality manufacturer. Of course someone else might consider that same company a 1st tier manufacturer. This can be confusing to someone reading that kind of thing written by someone whose opinion is valued. It leads a person to believe that there are actual rankings of companies that follow the specs more closely than others and as such are listed in order of their adherence to it.
I wonder how the Sig516's non-piston parts such as barrel etc... compare quality wise. I see a lot of opinons like "Sig stuff is not as good" or "I've heard that Sig stuff is not as good" but these seem to be personal opinions more than factual data. Does anyone have any factual data about how Sig's barrels, frames, bolts and other parts other than piston parts, compare from a technical standpoint?
Sure. It's all just personal opinion. However, there are some common observations from multiple experiences of knowledgeable people that allow categorizing different manufacturers, at least in a broad sense. Milwaukee vs DeWalt might be a horse apiece, but not many would argue Milwaukee vs Century (Harbor Freight).
I see it more are a "Go" or "No Go" type of delineation.
AR15s that are built correctly from quality components are in the "Go" category, whereas rifles built incorrectly from inferior components are simply a "No Go".
Go:
Colt, Daniel Defense, Bravo Co., LMT, Noveske etc.
No Go:
Bushampster, Rock River, DPMS, Stag etc
The only place where someone really shed light on the components and build specs was "The Chart" (https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=html) that is linked to in the technical forum.
Without a simplistic reference like that, in order to discern if a rifle was good to go we really had to wade through a massive amount of anecdotal information on gun forums or publications. That is why companies like Bushampster still outsell a company like Bravo Co.
Cameron
That makes an easy 3 tier system, doesn't it? You could even name the tiers "Take into combat," "Commercial grade," "Don't trust with your life."
This seems to be the most reasonable, but its hard to differentiate the Commercial grade and Dont trust with your life, because if im going to trust my life on my firearm, its going to be Combat grade, not Commercial.
BCM, Colt, DD, LMT, KAC, Noveske are the 6 i would trust my life with.
Your S&W's, Sigs, Stags, PSAs, Cmmgs have potential, but havent been proven to be truely combat grade yet.
Rock River, DPMS, Olympic arms, Bushmaster, Delton, Windham Weaponry, ect dont cut it for me.
Like most have said, Look at the technical specs, and ignore the fancy rails, stocks, and 2 stage triggers ect.
Tiers are just ordering mechanisms. There are various levels of AR quality. If you don't like the word "tier" because of its military implication and corollary mall-ninja'ness when used improperly, then fine, I'm with you. But there quite obviously ARE various levels of AR quality that manufacturers can be logically ordered by. This isn't to say that every single rifle from every single manufacturer can be placed nicely into some hierarchical chart. I'm just saying that natural groups do emerge when comparing various examples.
A simple example that is not all inclusive by any means:
1) BCM / DD
2) RRA / BM
When considering these four manufacturers, there is clearly a logical way to group them. You might even say -- put them into a tiered order. Gasp.
This is probably the best answer to the thread topic. We all tend to rank things and for many of us when someone mentions Tier 1 and AR in the same sentence, we think of Colt, BCM, DD and very few others. When you hear Tier 2 or Tier 3, then it gets argumentative. Stick with quality and life gets much easier.
everyusernametaken
09-26-12, 17:25
TDP should be viewed as the minimum standard if you are looking to stake your life on AR type rifle verse the end all.
It is entirely possible for someone to manufacture an AR/M4 type rifle and exceed the TDP standard.
Yes it is, but rarely do we see it.
C4
This is a good point. While a lot of claims are made about the (ir)relevance of TDP, the products which don't adhere to it as closely as they (legally) can are most often not made to a similar or higher standard.
I'm not saying this is universally true, but in my selection/grading process, those which don't follow TDP need to provide more detailed information and/or justify why they made the decisions they did in design and production choices, moreso than those who we accept as "known good" manufacturers.
As far as reliability the only things that matter are the BCG and the LPK. A barrell is always reliable, maybe not accurate but reliable. Everything else on the rifle makes almost no difference
As far as reliability the only things that matter are the BCG and the LPK. A barrell is always reliable, maybe not accurate but reliable. Everything else on the rifle makes almost no difference
This not accurate. The barrel can have an out of spec chamber, oversized gas port, etc that will directly affect reliability.
C4
This not accurate. The barrel can have an out of spec chamber, oversized gas port, etc that will directly affect reliability.
C4
Well I would consider that defective but I see your point. I'm saying the high price people pay for a complete rifle are only insuring reliability for a few parts of the rifle that really matter. The upper/lower receiver, a barrell that is in spec and has the right size port, etc.. dont make much of a difference.
Things that are out of spec will usually give you problems right away, a bolt breaking at 500 rounds in an emergent situation rather than at the expected time would be the type of reliability problems I would be concerned about because you can't predict them. If something doesn't work on your rifle you fix/replace it immediately but a part breaking unexpectedly is a bad situation you can't predict.
Hmmmm...I try to post as little as possible and just read and learn from the plethora of knowledge on this forum. After reading this thread though:
My take as complete noob here and as someone who appreciates quality(when I know better :D), is that there are no tiers. Manufacturers either meet or exceed the TDP. Period.
If I want to learn about commercial grade etc. I'll go to other sites...there are several that I can think of off of the top of my head. I joined here after lurking for weeks because of the knowledge and the no bullshit but entertaining responses from knowledgeable people. Not to mention the opportunity for training classes/networking etc.
Basically...if a manufacturer can't meet the "minimum" standard...what does that say for both the rifle in question and the manufacturer's commitment to quality? For what most of these manufactures charge at retail for their rifles there is no reason for them to not meet the TDP which has been established for quite a while now.
The more I learn the more I can't stand the fact that some of these mfgs try to make different models or "tiers" and then those supposedly better rifles in their lines still don't meet the TDP. Once I found out my rifle probably wasn't up to what I want to do with it I promptly got a new one. That's just what one noob did though...I don't see a grey area with certain firearms; it either is or isn't.
I'll step off of my soapbox now...I know I'm still new here.
Have a good one,
T
MrRightWing
09-26-12, 22:10
I see it more are a "Go" or "No Go" type of delineation.
AR15s that are built correctly from quality components are in the "Go" category, whereas rifles built incorrectly from inferior components are simply a "No Go".
I wouldn't use a "go/no go" delineation considering what go/no go actually means in regard to rifles. ;)
Tiers are just a somewhat less precise way of stratifying things than ordering from best to worst. It is nowhere near unique to the military/firearms community.
In the AR market, it would be hard to list the absolute #1 best AR manufacturer. It's a lot easier to group them into tiers where everything in a given tier is roughly equal and you can't go wrong. From reading posts on M4C I would have to conclude that the most recommended brands known for quality, accuracy, and customer service are great, brands like BCM, DD, Colt, and Noveske. Maybe KAC, LaRue, Rainier (if they count), Centurion, H&K, LWRC, and LMT as well. Then you get "bad" brands like Oly, Bushmaster, DPMS, and DTI. And middle of the road brands like Spikes, RRA, PSA, Stag, S&W, and maybe CMMG.
That makes an easy 3 tier system, doesn't it? You could even name the tiers "Take into combat," "Commercial grade," "Don't trust with your life."
Pretty much this.
DTI. I assume that is DelTon. What makes them "bad"?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Alaskapopo
09-26-12, 23:58
I used to be a big fan of the chart but now I realize that the chart only handles guns that are M4 clones. You may want to deviate from that and its not milspec but that does not mean its not good. For example Troy handguards and stainless barrels etc.
Pat
My take as complete noob here and as someone who appreciates quality(when I know better :D), is that there are no tiers. Manufacturers either meet or exceed the TDP. Period.
T
That's a good starting point, however there is much more to it than that. Most gun guys take it for granted that KAC, Noveske, and Larue make very high quality weapons. In my experience with all three I find that to be true but do they follow 'the TDP"? Some would say they exceed it. How do you define exceeding the TDP?
People also assume that Colt, LMT, BCM, and DD meet it but how do most of us really know?
FWIW all of the above mentioned weapons systems are up to trusting your life to in my opinion based on my experiences with all of them and anecdotal evidence posted and experienced by thousands of shooters worldwide.
Don't reinvent the wheel, go with a proven platform and carry on.
That's a good starting point, however there is much more to it than that. Most gun guys take it for granted that KAC, Noveske, and Larue make very high quality weapons. In my experience with all three I find that to be true but do they follow 'the TDP"? Some would say they exceed it. How do you define exceeding the TDP?
People also assume that Colt, LMT, BCM, and DD meet it but how do most of us really know?
FWIW all of the above mentioned weapons systems are up to trusting your life to in my opinion based on my experiences with all of them and anecdotal evidence posted and experienced by thousands of shooters worldwide.
Don't reinvent the wheel, go with a proven platform and carry on.
Well the tdp calls for button rifled chrome lined 14.5" barrel with 203 cuts, for example. Using hammer forging you can get equal performance if not better than button rifling, but it's not tdp.
It has been my experience that tiers are BS as well. My Del-Ton Extreme Duty 316 has kept pace with my buddies Colt. It all comes down to TDP in my opinion.
I know Del-Ton has had a "rocky" past but they are beginning to put out some quality firearms. Unlike my friend, I decided to skip on the kool-aid for the time being. I would love to get a BCM upper and build my own next but for now the Del-Ton I bought has performed flawlessly for me. Tack driver, no failures as of yet, tough and sturdy. Sure the one I bought might be their only good rifle (lol). But I put this one through its paces. When I got it I lubed the heck out of it and took it to the range and shot 200 rounds through it, no problems. Tried dropping it, etc etc. It held up just fine. So all of this is subjective. If you find one you like just buy it. I cant stand it when I see others say, "Your rifle is crap because its not a horsey!" because when it comes down to it as long as it meets TDP, chances are it will be just as good as a Colt. On a rifle to rifle basis that is.
I try to not look at it with my brand blinders on and look at specs. The AR platform is so modular does it really matter with all of the options out there?
Just my two cents. Hate on it or not. :)
Failure2Stop
09-27-12, 08:26
TDP is great, but I would also think that industry reputation counts for something to. Just because Noveske doesn't follow the TDP with their M249 MG barrel steel, doesn't mean it isn't just as good or better than the TDP barrel steel. Cost and availability are important factors in the TDP, so sometimes you can get something better for a little more money.
Thus the inclusion of these words:
Tiers are bullshit.
The best way to determine if a gun is built to be shot for a long time is adherence to TDP, or a good reason why the part(s) used did not meet the protocol.
There are parts that are "better" than that required by the TDP, however, the manufacturer should be able to clearly articulate and provide data as to why that part is "better" or "better at a specific application".
The examples are endless, and there is a big difference between manufacturers that use substandard and untested parts and those that use higher grade/more expensive materials/manufacturing processes.
DTI. I assume that is DelTon. What makes them "bad"?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
What makes them good?
C4
I used to be a big fan of the chart but now I realize that the chart only handles guns that are M4 clones. You may want to deviate from that and its not milspec but that does not mean its not good. For example Troy handguards and stainless barrels etc.
Pat
Agree. I always told people to look at the bigger picture. So for instance, if you have a 4150 type barrel and it is a middy, you can still follow the metal specs and testing for it.
C4
Edited out for sake of thread.
It has been my experience that tiers are BS as well. My Del-Ton Extreme Duty 316 has kept pace with my buddies Colt. It all comes down to TDP in my opinion.
I know Del-Ton has had a "rocky" past but they are beginning to put out some quality firearms. Unlike my friend, I decided to skip on the kool-aid for the time being. I would love to get a BCM upper and build my own next but for now the Del-Ton I bought has performed flawlessly for me. Tack driver, no failures as of yet, tough and sturdy. Sure the one I bought might be their only good rifle (lol). But I put this one through its paces. When I got it I lubed the heck out of it and took it to the range and shot 200 rounds through it, no problems. Tried dropping it, etc etc. It held up just fine. So all of this is subjective. If you find one you like just buy it. I cant stand it when I see others say, "Your rifle is crap because its not a horsey!" because when it comes down to it as long as it meets TDP, chances are it will be just as good as a Colt. On a rifle to rifle basis that is.
I try to not look at it with my brand blinders on and look at specs. The AR platform is so modular does it really matter with all of the options out there?
Just my two cents. Hate on it or not. :)
So 200rds and "dropping" it and an AR is good. Got it and will use this as my new "Good to Go" standard.
C4
Edited out for sake of thread.
Failure2Stop
09-27-12, 09:47
Im fairly certain I did not tell you that you should use that as a standard to which you should judge an AR. Bought it. Got it out of case. Lubed it. Took it to range and shot 200 rounds with no issues gives me good initial impressions on any fire arm. Im just stating my experience with it up to this point. But do with it what you wish. If you want to use that as a good to go standard be my guest, I would not advise it. But let me guess, Colt fan boy? BCM, DD Fan Boy? Del-Ton taint your kool aid?
1- Cool your jets. Just in case you are not aware, this is a warning from a moderator. Grant has been here for a loooooooooong time, a certain degree of deference has been earned.
2- This site generally bases it's opinions of firearms over tens of thousands of rounds over multiple samples. It is entirely possible to get a bad Colt or a great Bushmaster. However, the number of failures with those generally advised against far outweigh those that are recommended. Without intimate knowledge of every detail of a company's manufacturing and testing processes it is impossible to do a point by point identification of what makes them "bad". Instead we have track record, as seen my users and trainers (that see hundreds of different rifles every year while each one is generally firing over a thousand rounds over two days of training).
If you love your AR, great, rock on and peace to ya, but do not mistake your sample size of 1 over a couple of hundred rounds to counter what others have seen over decades of experience.
Edited out for sake of thread.
But let me guess, Colt fan boy? BCM, DD Fan Boy? Del-Ton taint your kool aid?
I know you're new here, but Grant owns one of the best shops there is online regarding the AR-15 platform. It's small, but quality.
He does a lot of testing that he can't/won't talk about most likely due to NDAs or just trying not to sling mud.
He is definitely a subject matter expert on the weapon platform.
On another note, the overall quality of ARs has gone up a LOT in the last few years or so. Even bottom feeder ARs will tend to run pretty well. But even with a lifetime warranty, what I want is a weapon that won't fail when I need it the most. Now for me, it doesn't make much of a difference because I'm issued Colt or FN and that's what I'll use on-duty. But for many LEOs, contractors, and others who may have to run personally owned carbines, it's best to trust proven brands that have been repeated both in this thread and on this forum ad nauseum.
Edited out for sake of thread.
jonconsiglio
09-27-12, 09:53
It's not a good idea to call anyone a douche unless they really are being one. That's all.
Edited out for sake of thread.
Anyways. Back on track with Tier 1 and Tier 2 comments. So a few posts ago I asked a serious question. "Why is Del Ton Bad?" Someone asked me why they are good. I replied with why I think they are good. So, why are they bad?
I asked a serious question as to why they were bad. He just replies with "Why are they good?" I apologize but I was not looking for Sarcasm. If that is not what he intended then I am sorry for that as well. Still would like to know why they are bad though :)
This isn't my first rodeo and when people commonly ask the question you did is because they KNOW that the gun is good and want someone to try and prove them wrong. This attitude usually stems from pride of ownership (married to their purchase) which would be true in your case.
So instead of me writing 2 pages of what's wrong with gun, I simply want to see if you know what makes them good.
Hint, I already know the answers to both questions BTW. ;)
As F2S said, if you like the gun, drive on. I would just advise you that 200rds through ANY platform is not enough to even form an opinion. Dropping your gun serves no purpose either.
Take two or three carbine schools with it and THEN get back to us with how it did.
C4
P.S. welcome to M4C!
Fair enough Grant. I dont have the time or the money to do those schools. Would LOVE to but I just cant. So to the "simple" folk out there 200 rounds lubed out of the box with no failures is plenty.
I know they are good. But I also enjoy others opinions. So if folks have an opinion that lends to why Del-Tons are bad I would love to hear it. Not that I want to bash them because they dont like Del Ton, its that most folks bash anything that isnt a Horsey. Just the way it is and in some cases its warranted.
When I asked what makes them bad I was actually looking for some dialogue to that effect. Also, perhaps what people think puts them at Tier 3 (assuming tiers arent BS).
When I was contracting at SPAWAR, lots of guys I interacted with in Bahrain, Naples, Japan had Colts and BCM and they loved them. Guys also had STAG, Bush(master?), and Smith among others. But I will tell you that mileage varied, even with Colts. So the talk about putting ARs into tiers doesnt make sense to me. If you had to I guess you could put the companies in two catagories:
Realiable and Not Reliable. Would you agree?
I do believe in the past Del-Ton was in the latter. However recently Del-Ton has been producing firearms to much higher quality that in years past. I like to be informed so that is why I asked what makes them bad.
Fair enough Grant. I dont have the time or the money to do those schools. Would LOVE to but I just cant. So to the "simple" folk out there 200 rounds lubed out of the box with no failures is plenty.
Wait, you’re a Defense Contractor and you don't have $150 dollars for a 1 day carbine school???? If so, you might want to figure that one out before doing anything else!
I know they are good. But I also enjoy others opinions. So if folks have an opinion that lends to why Del-Tons are bad I would love to hear it. Not that I want to bash them because they dont like Del Ton, its that most folks bash anything that isnt a Horsey. Just the way it is and in some cases its warranted.
How do you know they are good?? Are you a professional armorer the works on AR's all day with intimate knowledge of the TDP?? Have you owned 10-20 different AR brands, shot thousands of rounds through each of them (via carbine schools) and have figured out who makes a good product and who doesn't?
When I asked what makes them bad I was actually looking for some dialogue to that effect. Also, perhaps what people think puts them at Tier 3 (assuming tiers arent BS).
What good will that info do for you know (as you already own the gun)? Would you sell it if you found out they are at the bottom?
C4
Fair enough Grant. I dont have the time or the money to do those schools. Would LOVE to but I just cant. So to the "simple" folk out there 200 rounds lubed out of the box with no failures is plenty.
I know they are good. But I also enjoy others opinions. So if folks have an opinion that lends to why Del-Tons are bad I would love to hear it. Not that I want to bash them because they dont like Del Ton, its that most folks bash anything that isnt a Horsey. Just the way it is and in some cases its warranted.
When I asked what makes them bad I was actually looking for some dialogue to that effect. Also, perhaps what people think puts them at Tier 3 (assuming tiers arent BS).
When I was contracting at SPAWAR, lots of guys I interacted with in Bahrain, Naples, Japan had Colts and BCM and they loved them. Guys also had STAG, Bush(master?), and Smith among others. But I will tell you that mileage varied, even with Colts. So the talk about putting ARs into tiers doesnt make sense to me. If you had to I guess you could put the companies in two catagories:
Realiable and Not Reliable. Would you agree?
I do believe in the past Del-Ton was in the latter. However recently Del-Ton has been producing firearms to much higher quality that in years past. I like to be informed so that is why I asked what makes them bad.
A little off-topic, but since I'm not Navy I have to ask, is SPAWAR pronounced "spa" (as in where you go to find sweaty half-naked people) or "spay" (as in what you do to female cats/dogs)?
And on topic again, 200 rds failure-free out of the box isn't "high quality," it's what you should expect from any weapon from any manufacturer, be it an AR or a pistol. It's when you get into high round counts that the higher quality weapons begin to distinguish themselves from the lower quality ones. Accuracy also plays a part.
A little off-topic, but since I'm not Navy I have to ask, is SPAWAR pronounced "spa" (as in where you go to find sweaty half-naked people) or "spay" (as in what you do to female cats/dogs)?
It is pronounced both ways. I worked for them on the East Coast and we always pronounced it SPA WAR. It seems that on the West Coast it was more of the "SPAY WAR."
C4
Long story. What I make goes right out the door as soon as it gets to the bank.
Im not a professional armorer. Let me rephrase. I "believe" they are good.
Not looking for confrontation, all I wanted was for someone to answer a VERY simple question.
Anyways, look you obviously are going to fight me tooth and nail over this simple question. If you aren't going to just answer the question and instead flaunt your supreme knowledge. Lets move on. Forget I asked.
It is pronounced both ways. I worked for them on the East Coast and we always pronounced it SPA WAR. It seems that on the West Coast it was more of the "SPAY WAR."
C4
In Charleston we used Spay too. You heard a pretty even mix there. But yeah folks in San Diego used Spay more often than not.
Long story. What I make goes right out the door as soon as it gets to the bank.
Im not a professional armorer. Let me rephrase. I "believe" they are good.
Not looking for confrontation, all I wanted was for someone to answer a VERY simple question.
Anyways, look you obviously are going to fight me tooth and nail over this simple question. If you aren't going to just answer the question and instead flaunt your supreme knowledge. Lets move on. Forget I asked.
When you state your opinion as FACT, then you are going to get questioned (FYI).
C4
It is pronounced both ways. I worked for them on the East Coast and we always pronounced it SPA WAR. It seems that on the West Coast it was more of the "SPAY WAR."
C4
SPAY WAR sounds like it could be a reality show on Animal Planet. And it would be hilarious. Who can take out the most animal ovaries in the shortest amount of time?! Find out next on Spay War!
SPA WAR could be a reality show on HGTV, but wouldn't be anywhere near as funny as SPAY WAR.
;)
SPAY WAR sounds like it could be a reality show on Animal Planet. And it would be hilarious. Who can take out the most animal ovaries in the shortest amount of time?! Find out next on Spay War!
SPA WAR could be a reality show on HGTV, but wouldn't be anywhere near as funny as SPAY WAR.
;)
LOL. Just so you know what it really is: http://www.public.navy.mil/spawar/Pages/default.aspx
I worked for them from 99-2002.
C4
Eh well, it is what is it. Seems this forum is only for professional AR stress testers.
McBride, you're in way over your head brother. Take a deep breath, step away from the keyboard and do some educational reading.
Why don't you start here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=7376
And here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=56063
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Eh well, it is what is it. Seems this forum is only for professional AR stress testers.
Who said that?? Again jumping to conclusions or listing your opinion as fact (especially when you have very little knowledge on the subject) is going to attract attention on this forum.
As a young boy, my Father always told me; "Don't talk to talk. If what you have to say has no value to the other person then don't say anyting."
He was a wise man.
I would suggest a lot more reading and less posting. The search function on here does work. So start reading all the DT threads if you want more info on them.
C4
McBride, you're in way over your head brother. Take a deep breath, step away from the keyboard and do some educational reading.
Why don't you start here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=7376
And here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=56063
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
For the record here I do not have buyers remorse. I like my rifle just fine. I just wanted to ask what people think makes a Del-Ton bad. That is all, nothing more, nothing less. It has been blown out of proportion by me and others. Lets move on.
For the record here I do not have buyers remorse. I like my rifle just fine. I just wanted to ask what people think makes a Del-Ton bad. That is all, nothing more, nothing less. It has been blown out of proportion by me and others. Lets move on.
I didn't say you did, nor did I say you should. Take some time to read the stickies and most of your tier questions will be answered. Or, try out the search button, keyword: del-ton
Cool off, read more, post less.
There is a plethora of evidence archived on this Site that will answer your questions. If you take the time to read past the thread title, you will find some good information on what separates a quality AR from makers like RRA, Bushmaster or DTI.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Failure2Stop
09-27-12, 13:49
I just wanted to ask what people think makes a Del-Ton bad.
Numerous observed failures most likely caused by substandard parts.
These were observed and noted years ago, and possibly the "new DelTon" offerings will be better, but that is yet to be seen.
Thanks. Yeah that is what I have seen in researching the past couple hours. I cant find much of anything, good or bad thats recent. I ran Del-Ton's current Extreme Duty 316 through "The Chart" (yeah I know). It has everything that "Tier 1" manufacturers rifles have save one thing, track record.
Thanks. Yeah that is what I have seen in researching the past couple hours. I cant find much of anything, good or bad thats recent. I ran Del-Ton's current Extreme Duty 316 through "The Chart" (yeah I know). It has everything that "Tier 1" manufacturers rifles have save one thing, track record.
Alot of manufacturers have taken cues from the infamous "chart" in an attempt to step up their game. The harder thing to determine is proper assembly, lpk quality, dependability of CS when you need it, correct chamber dimensions and gas port sizes. Both of which can lead to malfunctions and early parts failure. The thing that scares me about a company like DTI is their use of various barrel steels and twist rates. I'd rather deal with a company where I have no doubts about the quality of the build or materials used. There is a reason companies like KAC, BCM and Daniel Defense have the reputation they do. Top quality gear and excellent customer service for the rare occasions that you need it.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Yeah. Which would be one reason I want to lump these manufacturers in one of two groups. Reliable and Not Reliable, rather than tiers.
As for Del-Ton, I like mine. The new Del-Ton has great customer service as far as I can tell. They are pretty local to me too. They are pretty easy to get a hold of on the phone (unlike PSA). However I have not had to send anything back to them yet (crossing my fingers).
But time will tell if the little things are present when it comes to quality, not just the "Chart-Points". Is there a place I check this Del-Ton against when it comes to gas port sizes? I guess I can just look up dimensions online (assuming they are available).
Yeah. Which would be one reason I want to lump these manufacturers in one of two groups. Reliable and Not Reliable, rather than tiers.
Personally I would take a Colt that didn't run over a Del-Ton that does. Why? Because at the end of the day, I can fix the Colt, but I cannot remove Del-Ton name from the gun. Food for thought. ;)
As for Del-Ton, I like mine. The new Del-Ton has great customer service as far as I can tell. They are pretty local to me too. They are pretty easy to get a hold of on the phone (unlike PSA). However I have not had to send anything back to them yet (crossing my fingers).
LOL, yes we know. :D
The thing to remember is that about 85% of gun manufacturers tell lies. So when you read a companies spec sheet (especially one that has a long history putting out "OK" AR's), I will need to see hard copies of all certs, tests and physically watch them build the gun from scratch before ever believing anything they tell me.
Some light reading for you on this subject: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=56063
From looking at this gun (SD 316) it appears that it is nearly the same price as a Colt 6920! Honestly, I cannot imagine buying one of these instead of a Colt for nearly the same price.
C4
Are we really discussing Del-Ton? Next we will need to cover whether McDonald's Happy Meal toys are milspec. Just put that Del-Ton in a refuse dumpster and be happy.
Thanks. Yeah that is what I have seen in researching the past couple hours. I cant find much of anything, good or bad thats recent. I ran Del-Ton's current Extreme Duty 316 through "The Chart" (yeah I know). It has everything that "Tier 1" manufacturers rifles have save one thing, track record.
I have a friend that works for my department and fancied himself as an AR assembler. He initially bought a Del-Ton and realized he could save money and assemble them himself. He wanted to use his new thingy on duty. By the 3rd day of a 5 day tactical(around 600 rounds) school his rifle was having multiple FTF's and FTE per magazine. He used my rifle to complete the course.
After re staking the carrier, replacing the extractor spring and buffer and replacing the buffer I got it running again. As for his 2 Del-Ton uppers and unassembled lowers that I ended up working on within a year; there were several issues that popped up. One lower was out of spec and required a massive amount of force to remove or insert a magazine. The upper had an M4 upper receiver and rifle barrel ramps, which a dremel resolved. After tinkering with them they all ran but there is no way I would trust them.
As the department armorer I told him he couldn't carry the Del-Ton or any of his franken creations on duty and suggested he sale them, cut his losses and buy something more appropriate for duty use. He is currently carrying an issued Colt and on the SWAT team and bought one as his personal carbine as well.
After my experience I wouldn't take one if you gave it to me. I feel that strong about it. FWIW I don't own any Colts either so I'm not a Pony fan boy.
I don't care if they're currently good to go, I'll never know because I won't ever own one. To me they're in the same league as Olympic and American Spirit Arms.
If it meets your expectations and you are happy with it, good for you.
oldgus3836
09-27-12, 22:24
What does LBK stand for and where can I find the list of acronyms. Saw a lot folks on this thread and someone stated LBK Thanks I searched no luck
What does LBK stand for and where can I find the list of acronyms. Saw a lot folks on this thread and someone stated LBK Thanks I searched no luck
It's LPK, for Lower Parts Kit. Any acronym that you find -- just put it into the search feature and you'll probably be able to figure out its meaning from context.
oldgus3836
09-27-12, 22:45
Thanks
There are parts that are "better" than that required by the TDP, however, the manufacturer should be able to clearly articulate and provide data as to why that part is "better" or "better at a specific application".
The TDP is a manufacturing document, so I don't believe that "better" or "worse" are accurate descriptors. Either it meets specs or it doesn't. IMO what's needed is a performance standard. We do this with handguns (probably because we don't know manufacturing specs for every pistol) why not rifles even if they do have the same outward appearance?
Considering the lack of care Colt has giving the civilian AR market in the past, I wonder if it is just a matter of time until they start cutting corners and no longer follow the TDP on their "Made for civilian AR's".
They are the ones that in the past have put in sear blocks, different size pin holes, cut bolt carriers, changed carriers to unshroud the firing pin, used over-sized front pivot holes, taken off bayo. lugs, etc.
Now that they have lost another military contract ............ who knows what they might do to cut corners or be politically correct again.
Considering the lack of care Colt has giving the civilian AR market in the past, I wonder if it is just a matter of time until they start cutting corners and no longer follow the TDP on their "Made for civilian AR's".
They are the ones that in the past have put in sear blocks, different size pin holes, cut bolt carriers, changed carriers to unshroud the firing pin, used over-sized front pivot holes, taken off bayo. lugs, etc.
Now that they have lost another military contract ............ who knows what they might do to cut corners or be politically correct again.
Everything you mentioned about Colt “cutting corners” was to save their ass during the AWB. Most of them were to make it harder to convert it to full auto; Colt didn’t do it to cut corners.
Considering the lack of care Colt has giving the civilian AR market in the past, I wonder if it is just a matter of time until they start cutting corners and no longer follow the TDP on their "Made for civilian AR's".
They are the ones that in the past have put in sear blocks, different size pin holes, cut bolt carriers, changed carriers to unshroud the firing pin, used over-sized front pivot holes, taken off bayo. lugs, etc.
Now that they have lost another military contract ............ who knows what they might do to cut corners or be politically correct again.
I don't think so as they really only know how to do it one way. Keep in mind that they still sell M4A1's to all kinds of people/groups and Govt's.
Don't confuse what CT made them do VS them wanting to do.
C4
If I remember correctly, Colt had already changed the size of the front take down holes, firing and hammer pin holes, gone to the "AR 15" style carrier, and changed the hammer itself long before AWB.
During AWB is when the sear block was added, the half moon carriers arrived, and the bayo. lug was cut off.
Then Colt finally gave civilians what they wanted but had to carve the "Le, Law Enforcement only" disclaimer on the side. Where over this 30+ year time period has Colt ever showed any care at all towards the civilian AR market ? History does not lie.
Now, they feel like they need our dollars. New models, colors etc. are showing up. They even sell out their faithful dealers and sell Ar's to Walmart.
Right now is a good time to buy a Colt. Who knows about tomorrow. Just don't get fooled again.
Failure2Stop
09-28-12, 15:11
The TDP is a manufacturing document, so I don't believe that "better" or "worse" are accurate descriptors. Either it meets specs or it doesn't. IMO what's needed is a performance standard. We do this with handguns (probably because we don't know manufacturing specs for every pistol) why not rifles even if they do have the same outward appearance?
The performance standard was already created and met, which is why the TDP is such a powerful data set. It tells someone how to make a carbine that will meet that required performance point.
However, one can certainly also use parts that are "better". You could use a different barrel making process to get longer life. You could use non-destructive testing on bolts and instead use more modern techniques to verify durability. You could use a different FCG with better wear properties. You could change the action spring and tube to reduce wear and recoil. You could put on a different grip, or different stock. You could go to a mid-length gas system, or alter port size. You could go with a different barrel profile and material to get a higher degree of precision. One could also make cheaper/worse choices in order to reduce manufacturing cost.
So I stand by my statement that if you are deviating from the TDP, I want a clear articulation of "why" before I consider spending money for it. Not all changes are good, and neither are they all bad, and if it's different than the TDP there are only 3 things it can be: better, worse, or no change.
Wow. I went away for the weekend and apparently a lot of conversing was done ;)
Thank you all that replied for the information. I think the simple posts about the companies that trusted people here have already verified to be following the TDP and have known reliability reputations is a good place to start. One post that lists the companies that are verified to meet or exceed the TDP would be good. "The chart" I looked at and is a bit confusing. Spikes Tactical appears to meet in that chart but yet I see numerous posts in here from the well respected people that they are crap. But if they meet the TDP then why is that?
My Colts are well spoken of in here and I have had good results with them. Looks like I made a good purchase there. But of course my Sig rifles won't be on the chart because they are piston guns and as such are not really M4's. So it is hard for me to find out if their barrels and other parts meet the TDP.
Wow. I went away for the weekend and apparently a lot of conversing was done ;)
Thank you all that replied for the information. I think the simple posts about the companies that trusted people here have already verified to be following the TDP and have known reliability reputations is a good place to start. One post that lists the companies that are verified to meet or exceed the TDP would be good. "The chart" I looked at and is a bit confusing. Spikes Tactical appears to meet in that chart but yet I see numerous posts in here from the well respected people that they are crap. But if they meet the TDP then why is that?
My Colts are well spoken of in here and I have had good results with them. Looks like I made a good purchase there. But of course my Sig rifles won't be on the chart because they are piston guns and as such are not really M4's. So it is hard for me to find out if their barrels and other parts meet the TDP.
I think there is some TRUST issues going on here. With that said, I would take a ST AR over the MAJORITY of other AR's out there, but not over a BCM/DD/KAC/Noveske/Colt.
C4
MrRightWing
10-01-12, 13:39
What does LBK stand for and where can I find the list of acronyms. Saw a lot folks on this thread and someone stated LBK Thanks I searched no luck
An LBK is a "Lower Build Kit" that some companies offer. They are different from a Lower Parts Kit in that they have everything you need to complete a stripped lower.
Personally I would take a Colt that didn't run over a Del-Ton that does. Why? Because at the end of the day, I can fix the Colt, but I cannot remove Del-Ton name from the gun ...
C4
Now that would be a great signature! :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.