View Full Version : New Bushmaster Texas DPS M4
RioGrandeGreen
03-13-08, 20:55
I was going to buy one of those too before I bought a Stag. Maybe I shoulda waited.
...I almost don't dare post my happiness with my new carbine. I'm painfully aware that Bushmaster resides on the dreaded right side of "THE CHART" (nice work), but my experience with Bushmaster carbines is extensive much and more than satisfactory.
I understand your reluctance, it can be tough here. But, all for the better in the end I assure you. Still, I and others regularly support Bushmaster for legit, first hand reasons despite the flak. I am talking thousands of rounds, but still none class lll in my case. Only shot Colt's that way. But, if it works well for years with good 5.56 as mine have, then that is relevant for the intended purposes.
Welcome aboard. :)
RioGrandeGreen
03-13-08, 21:29
We have Colt M4A1's at work and they work pretty good even without a real good cleaning after qualifying. I do admire them because some people just do not understand the meaning of a clean gun and they still keep going and going.
I was going to but an LMT but could not justify the expense to the "domestic account".
After spending a few weeks reading here, I almost don't dare post my happiness with my new carbine. I'm painfully aware that Bushmaster resides on the dreaded right side of "THE CHART" (nice work), but my experience with Bushmaster carbines is extensive much and more than satisfactory.
With the funky political wind that's blowing, I found it pretty easy to sell my wife on a new black rifle. She loves her 8 year old Bushy "AK" (has seen her through 2 week-long carbine classes) and I really liked the specs and price of the TX DPS model; I paid $898.32 out the door at GT Distributors. Here's the ad copy:
Texas "M4" Carbine
This is the same rifle (except for TX DPS Markings) that passed the Texas D.P.S. torture test and is now being issued to Texas D.P.S. troopers. 3,400 of these rifles have been ordered from GT Distributors by Texas D.P.S., the largest purchase of an AR15/M4 weapon outside of a Federal Agency Purchase.
Features of the Bushmaster #BCWA3F16M4TX.
A3 (removable) carry handle
Stepped 16” chrome lined 1/9 “ barrel with flashhider
Oversize hand guard (Mine has double heat shields)
6 position butt stock with staked castle nut (nicely staked)
M4 feed cuts (smoothly executed)
Carrier key screws staked (better looking than my other Bushys - but none have ever been a problem, and I'm a "school junkie" and shoot them hard.)
Sling
One 30 round magazine standard ( I got 2)
Before shooting, I swapped the BCG for a Colt M16 BCG I had in the safe.
Anyway, I took it to the range with a couple of buddies who had oohed and ahhed at it when I brought it back from lunch on the day I bought it. We shot the heck out of it, probably 700 rounds in 4.5 hours. As expected, it ran flawlessly. After zeroing at 50 (it was damn close as is), it allowed the best of us to shoot 1.5 - 2.75" groups with cheap Federal American Eagle until we were bored with sandbags.
Put me down for a happy camper. I fully expect to get many, many years of trouble free service out of this carbine.
Fred
NRA LE Instructor:
Handgun
Shotgun
Tactical Handgun
Select Fire
Patrol Rifle
Tactical Shooting
Colt LE M16 Armorer
Sig LE Armorer P-series
Keep spreading the good word, your voice is heard and with time they'll come around...:D
The only thing I found troubling about your post was the lack of pictures.... :p Sorry, but I'm a sucker for a good picture - please post. Sounds as if you got a great deal on a great rifle! Congrats on your new carbine!
http://www.gtdist.com/ProductDetail.aspx?PartNumber=BFM-BCWA3F16M4TX
Good price, nice cop store.
the DPS model didnt come with a YHM rear BUIS or an EO-Tech??? I know for a fact that they ordered YHM rear BUIS and EO-Techs, I cant remember if they were 552's or 512's.
-DM-
variablebinary
03-14-08, 00:02
HBAR?
The BM DPS carbine is a good indicator of what BM could routinely produce for a working gun if they so desired.
Having installed a Colt M16 BCG, you've eliminated some significant potential issues. If the balance of the gun performs out of the box, it will likely do so for some time.
Credit where credit is due. Enjoy.
milspec receiver extensions?
HBAR?
Nope - "M4 profile" - stepped for a 203.
milspec receiver extensions?
Commercial.
Any chance we could get pics of the staking (castle and key) and the ramps?
Remember, The Chart lists specific models of rifles as offered by various vendors, and it was my intention to list the most common model and the one most likely to appear on a dealer's rack.
Agree that these rifles would appear that (someone at) BM does know how to do some of these things, but chooses not to on their regular production rifles.
John_Wayne777
03-14-08, 06:29
After spending a few weeks reading here, I almost don't dare post my happiness with my new carbine.
:D
It's not as bad as all that!
Yes, Bushmaster isn't exactly the most revered name in AR weapons around here, but even then there is ample acknowledgment that they do manage to build rifles that work when you get one without QC issues up front....and if you have a positive experience with one of their weapons then the rest of us are genuinely happy that they got yours right....ESPECIALLY if it is an issue weapon.
And you wanna know a secret?
I've actually spent time with the majority of mods and staff on this site in training classes, all while packing my old reliable Bushmaster carbine....and nobody threw rotten apples at me or anything. ;)
There were some rather puzzled glances at my chrome plated Beretta (Dude....is that a Taurus???) and the rather odd way my Bushmaster is set up, but no "Begone foul creature!!! Thy carbine dost stain the honor of this range!!!" Heck, even Larry Vickers didn't make fun of me.
...well, at least not for my choice in carbines, anyway....
It's all good, baby. It's all good....
I like Colts' products just fine, but I don't like their politics or past positions regarding civilian sales, so I don't buy them.
Can you elaborate? PM is fine if you don't want to continue the hijack.
Can you elaborate? PM is fine if you don't want to continue the hijack.
I can hijack with the best of them! :D
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE1D61431F937A15750C0A964958260&sec=&spon=
The BM DPS AR's tend to be one of their best products for sure.
Here is my question though, you paid almost $900 and then added a Colt BCG (which is worth at least $200). I understand that you had the Colt sitting around, but the price is still there. So now you are looking at an $1100 weapon.
You can buy an LMT (in parts) for around $929 and don't have to "swap" anything out.
C4
Brand loyalty through excellent personal experience. My 1st AR was a Bushy. My favorite (of 7) is a BM. A BM Patrol carbine got me through 2 NRA Instrucor courses.
I didn't feel I "had to" swap anything - I did because the BCG had been sitting there for years, and I wanted it in a new rifle, to wear together with the BE.
I WANTED the DPS M4 - not a LMT, not a Noveske.
It is great that you had a good personal experience with BM. Many do not. The point though is that BM is not even in the same ball park as the LMT and it is just about the same price.
If you want a BM, then by all means get a BM. I just don't understand why if the prices are about the same.
C4
The only thing I found troubling about your post was the lack of pictures.... :p Sorry, but I'm a sucker for a good picture - please post. Sounds as if you got a great deal on a great rifle! Congrats on your new carbine!
Tried to post pix, but I keep getting a "page cannot be displayed after selecting the file path. Do I need to have a higher membership level to post pics?
Tried to post pix, but I keep getting a "page cannot be displayed after selecting the file path. Do I need to have a higher membership level to post pics?
The pics could be too big. What size are they?
C4
The pics could be too big. What size are they?
C4
17 MBs as JPEGs
03 MBs as .bmps
Those are most likely too big.
You are welcome to e-mail them to me and I will get them up for you.
C4
Grant, I've done business with you before and been very happy.
On this point I'm not sure what you mean by saying they are close in price.
The LMT M4 on your site is $1250. http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=HGSTD16
However if you want to price it close to what he paid for that bushy I'd be happy to take you up on it!
Otherwise there is quite a difference between that and less than $900 out the door.
Grant, I've done business with you before and been very happy.
On this point I'm not sure what you mean by saying they are close in price.
The LMT M4 on your site is $1250. http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=HGSTD16
However if you want to price it close to what he paid for that bushy I'd be happy to take you up on it!
Otherwise there is quite a difference between that and less than $900 out the door.
er..UHHHHH, he said "$929 (in parts)"
I actually like it when a guy hijacks his own thread. There oughta be a name for that!
BTW, that NYT article doesn't speak that poorly of Colt...as it does of the commie rag itself.
Edit: LMT pricing is significantly less if you look at upper and lower separately.
Grant, I've done business with you before and been very happy.
On this point I'm not sure what you mean by saying they are close in price.
The LMT M4 on your site is $1250. http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=HGSTD16
However if you want to price it close to what he paid for that bushy I'd be happy to take you up on it!
Otherwise there is quite a difference between that and less than $900 out the door.
When you buy a factory built weapon, the manufacturer collects the 11% FET. When you the consumer buys an AR in parts (for personal use), there is no FET collected and as long as the weapon is for personal use, you do not owe the FET. ;)
A word of warning, not ALL manufacturers offer their parts (uppers, lowers, BCG's, etc) at cheaper prices. Some companies (like RRA) actually make it more expensive to buy their uppers and lowers seperate than if you buy a complete gun and pay the FET. :rolleyes:
C4
Those are most likely too big.
You are welcome to e-mail them to me and I will get them up for you.
C4
C41Grant has kindly offered too post some pics I sent him. Meanwhile, I'll try this...
I'm a little confused - After considering an ADS and a parts gun from J&T/DS, I had narrowed my choice on a 2nd AR to a Bushmaster from my local Sportsman's Warehouse or an LMT from Grant.
Bushmaster was around $900, but I'd buy a spare LMT BCG - total cost around $1030. It would be an exact copy of my existing rifle (still need to buy the LMT BCG as a spare for that one though).
My other option is an LMT from Grant at $1250, but I would still buy a spare LMT BCG for $130, bringing the cost up to $1380.
I figure a spare BCG is a good thing to have, regardless of make of rifle.
Then I saw this posted on this thread...
You can buy an LMT (in parts) for around $929 and don't have to "swap" anything out.
Here is my confusion...
On the LMT web site, I priced out seperate components to make a complete rifle as follows...
LMT : 16" Upper Receiver Assembly with flash suppressor - $485
LMT : 5.56, Standard F/A Bolt Carrier Group - $129
LMT : Charging Handle Assembly - $23
LMT : Handguards - $39
LMT : Defender Lower with Collapsing Stock and Standard Trigger - $330
LMT : Tactical Adjustable Rear Sight - $119
Total cost - $1125
None of the parts listed were at the high end of LMT's options list. Even so, what can I eliminate that I don't need to bring the price down? I'd still probably buy from Grant, either a complete gun or parts, but how do I get it down to the level he mentioned earlier?
There is no picture 17MB as a jpeg and 3 as a bmp. Other way around.
So why does Bushy make these special rifles?
Simple mathmatics I beleive..
Grants website info...
Complete LMT rifle 1250.00
LMT Defender Lower with Collapsing Stock and Standard Trigger ..330.00
M4 Flattop Upper Receiver w/ 1/7 Twist, Chrome-lined Barrel, and M4 barrel extension. Includes a Gas Tube, A2 Flash Suppressor, LMT Charging Handle and PRI Military Latch. ...485.00
CMT Bolt Carrier Group (MP Tested...135.00
LMT handgaurds 35.00
Grand total.....985.00
I dont kn ow about you but 985.00 is a heck of lot better than 1250.00:D :D
Hey thats not funny.......I paid the 1250 for my LMT:D But I am also lazy and dont trust myself to start screwing with things. Untill I can buy the 10.;5" upper:cool:
I didn't realize the LMT upper included the charging handle, but that only accounts for $23. One still needs a sight, and I know I would want a very durable sight - I have no immediate plans to buy an optic, and I want whatever sight I put on the stay on, without moving around, even if hit or bumped. That is why I bought an A2 for my first rifle - seemed stronger.
If I buy an upper, a lower, a BCG and handguards, how hard is it to put them together? It's not like I am building a parts gun. Wouldn't it be the same as the procedure I go through whenever I disassemble for cleaning and reassemble?
If I buy an upper, a lower, a BCG and handguards, how hard is it to put them together? It's not like I am building a parts gun. Wouldn't it be the same as the procedure I go through whenever I disassemble for cleaning and reassemble?
It's all a simple, 2 minute job that doesn't require a single tool. Mount handguards, insert charging handle, insert BCG, snap upper and lower together - done. If you don't have good hand strength, you might want a partner when mounting handguards. There's a tool to make the job easier, but it is NOT necessary.
And to answer your question, yes, you do that anyhow when you clean it. Proceed with confidence.;)
...
So why does Bushy make these special rifles?...
My educated guess is that the TX DPS decided to contract with Bushmaster for the production of a rifle that fits their department's needs/requirements.
Here's a few links:
http://www.gtdist.com/TXDPS-AR15.htm
http://www.gtdist.com/ProductDetail.aspx?PartNumber=BFM-BCWA3F16M4TX
TX DPS rifle requirements (PDF document):
http://www.gtdist.com/M4-specsheet.pdf
Moon Doggie
03-24-08, 00:39
Uh
I am new and all, but why the Hate for Bushmaster ? I have 1 AR-15 and I use it for Hunting Coyotes, Crows and Groundhogs.
I am looking into buying another AR-15, but one with a 16" Barrel.
So what is "The" AR-15 to buy ? I thought about buying a "Kit" Gun from some Company, and then Building myself to save Hard to come by Money ?
Maybe I need to read on here a little more :confused:
Moon Doggie
Uh
I am new and all, but why the Hate for Bushmaster ? I have 1 AR-15 and I use it for Hunting Coyotes, Crows and Groundhogs.
I am looking into buying another AR-15, but one with a 16" Barrel.
So what is "The" AR-15 to buy ? I thought about buying a "Kit" Gun from some Company, and then Building myself to save Hard to come by Money ?
Maybe I need to read on here a little more :confused:
Moon Doggie
The issue is: what are you going to use your rifle for? If your intended purpose is to shoot 'yotes, dogs, birds, or cans then a Bushmaster might be a viable solution.
If your intention is to have a hard use rifle that's capable of anything, and capable of maximum reliability then Colt, LMT, or a custom built rifle from Grant or some of the other vendors here
is the solution you should look to.
No machine is perfect, but if you want to maximize the possibility that it will go bang every damn time you pull the trigger then I would not look to BM. Get a Colt or LMT and be done with it.
Oh, and welcome :cool:
While I would prefer to see more "obvious" staking on Bushy BCs, I have never seen one come loose.
I would prefer that as well, having shot their gas keys loose because the staking sucked. I could have passed on the canted FSB too, and the unstaked castle nuts.
Commercial tubes even on the DPS rifle? Blah :rolleyes:
I didn't realize the LMT upper included the charging handle, but that only accounts for $23. One still needs a sight, and I know I would want a very durable sight - I have no immediate plans to buy an optic, and I want whatever sight I put on the stay on, without moving around, even if hit or bumped. That is why I bought an A2 for my first rifle - seemed stronger.
If I buy an upper, a lower, a BCG and handguards, how hard is it to put them together? It's not like I am building a parts gun. Wouldn't it be the same as the procedure I go through whenever I disassemble for cleaning and reassemble?
LMT uppers generally do not come with charging handles.
Putting an upper and lower together involved pushing two pins in.
C4
Uh
I am new and all, but why the Hate for Bushmaster ? I have 1 AR-15 and I use it for Hunting Coyotes, Crows and Groundhogs.
I am looking into buying another AR-15, but one with a 16" Barrel.
So what is "The" AR-15 to buy ? I thought about buying a "Kit" Gun from some Company, and then Building myself to save Hard to come by Money ?
Maybe I need to read on here a little more :confused:
Moon Doggie
There is no Bushmaster hate and any negative is because of fact. BTW welcome to the forum.
Wayne Dobbs
03-24-08, 15:39
My experience with Bushmasters was exclusively with the POS State Dept. issued ones we had in Iraq. Carrier keys were not staked and were not even locktited. Castle nut staking didn't exist and the chambers were not NATO spec.
Since you've put a Colt BCG, that takes care of one biggie. If the gun is going to be shot hard, I'd get the chamber reamed to true NATO spec with one of Ned Christensen's reamers, properly stake the carrier key and stake the castle nut. It sounds like your front sight dimensions and orientation were GTG out of the box, which was a frequent problem with the DOS guns. Also, make sure you have the right extractor spring and insert, since it's likely you don't.
Once this is all accomplished, the carbine should be pretty solid. I would keep very good round count records on it and decide upon a good PM schedule with regard to parts replacement, inspection, etc.
I was going to say that BM should already do all this and once you've spent the money and time to do all this, you've spent the money to buy a Colt, but I won't do that....
variablebinary
03-24-08, 16:01
Lots of departments I've worked with wont put Bushmaster on their approved list. Some have had enough issues in the past to help them make their decision.
You can build a complete LMT carbine for less than a factory Bushy these days.
Lots of departments I've worked with wont put Bushmaster on their approved list. Some have had enough issues in the past to help them make their decision.
You can build a complete LMT carbine for less than a factory Bushy these days.
Would you please name some of those Dept.s? I've been pleasantly surprised at the enormous number of large organizations that not only "approve" BMs, but issue them exclusively.
Thanks,
Fred
Would you please name some of those Dept.s? I've been pleasantly surprised at the enormous number of large organizations that not only "approve" BMs, but issue them exclusively.
Thanks,
Fred
I know of two maybe three right off the top of my head... One of them being Rowlett PD with is a decent sized Dept.
Others being The Oklahoma Bureau of Investigations, and I believe the OHP, at one time about 7 years ago both of them had a law suit filed against Bushmaster in court for faulty weapon systems. The first purchase lot of 98 weapons for the OSBI and OHP, 93 of those weapons had sear failure's....only reason that I have first hand knowledge of this happening is my best friend was one of their purchasing agents.
Uh
I am new and all, but why the Hate for Bushmaster ? I have 1 AR-15 and I use it for Hunting Coyotes, Crows and Groundhogs.
I am looking into buying another AR-15, but one with a 16" Barrel.
So what is "The" AR-15 to buy ? I thought about buying a "Kit" Gun from some Company, and then Building myself to save Hard to come by Money ?
Maybe I need to read on here a little more :confused:
Moon Doggie
JLM summed it up pretty well, so I don't have much to say except that I have also posted positive, fairly extensive, first-hand experience with the two Bushmasters I have owned. Currently I have the 14.5" Izzy with the fixed hider (making it 16.1"). The gas keys are not staked as deep as my Colt's, but are better than other brands I have seen and have yet to come loose. But, that is not at full-auto, either, and the Colt's, LMT's, etc are designed for that as well. Class III or not, putting a couple thousand rounds through a 6920 in a day should not be an issue. Maybe not for most Bushmasters, either, but some have faltered a bit more under extreme duress.
Thus, the "suitable for the purpose" statements can come into play. Still, well over 2,500 rounds of high end 5.56 with my Bushmaster and no FTF's or FTE's.
the1911fan
03-25-08, 09:55
Would you please name some of those Dept.s? I've been pleasantly surprised at the enormous number of large organizations that not only "approve" BMs, but issue them exclusively.
Thanks,
Fred
Pepper Pike, Ohio PD
We are'nt big but we took delivery of 6 in 2001 and 3 of them had to be sent back due to the front sight being installed improperly so much so that we could not get the guns on paper at 50 yards.
Countless issues with the carrier keys until they were staked
Countless issues with the castle nut until they were staked
The chambers were overly tight and had issues feeding long AOL bullets (over 62 grain)
The feedramp cuts are shallow
Pepper Pike, Ohio PD
We are'nt big but we took delivery of 6 in 2001 and 3 of them had to be sent back due to the front sight being installed improperly so much so that we could not get the guns on paper at 50 yards.
Countless issues with the carrier keys until they were staked
Countless issues with the castle nut until they were staked
The chambers were overly tight and had issues feeding long AOL bullets (over 62 grain)
The feedramp cuts are shallow
I am pretty sure Bushmaster has addressed and corrected to an extent some of those issues, specifically the staking issue and the chambers, in the past 4-5 years from what I heard and read numerous times. I know my newer Bushmaster ('04) is staked better than my older one ('98) was, and the chamber is definitely spec (been tested and shoots only 5.56). Can't speak for the chamber in my older one, as I never had it tested and even worse I believe I shot all .223 through that one. :(
That was before the magic of the internet allowed us to find and acquire some of the best 5.56 at will (at once great prices, too!).
johnson601
03-25-08, 10:44
Since my return back to the states I have learned much about police depts and police officers in general ( hell, I am one). First thing I learned is that pd's often approve and issue crap. I now know of two pd's that approve of Olyimpic Arms and issue them! I couldn't believe it either. If anyone wants to know what is worth carrying, check out what the military uses and trust that. Or get something that meets mil specs. So simple, yet so hard...
I am pretty sure Bushmaster has addressed and corrected to an extent some of those issues, specifically the staking issue and the chambers, in the past 4-5 years from what I heard and read numerous times. I know my newer Bushmaster ('04) is staked better than my older one ('98) was, and the chamber is definitely spec (been tested and shoots only 5.56). Can't speak for the chamber in my older one, as I never had it tested and even worse I believe I shot all .223 through that one. :(
No, they really haven't.
Well staked carrier keys have been seen, but they're the exception, not the rule.
Receiver extension nuts are staked by request/contract only.
BM chambers are better than many others, and generally okay, but still found with some variance.
Barrels are often installed poorly.
BM still does not install a proper extractor spring assembly except by request/contract.
BM has opted for a standard that satisfies the lowest common denominator of commercial consumer. They are capable of substantially more, but they prefer mediocrity.
They are not unserviceable. They are serviceable with a comparatively greater number of caveats, though.
Here are FVC3 pics.
C4
http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/BM/Bushy%20key%20stake.jpg
http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/BM/Bushy%20ramp.jpg
http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/BM/DPS%20M4C%20stake.jpg
My personal opinion on why BM seems to have so many issues with their AR's is because they do not make a single thing in house. This means that they are relying on other companies to do their QC for them. This works if the other company has high QC, but if they do not, then it does not work out so well.
So how does BM fix their issues. The easiest way is to hire more QC people that know what they are looking for. The harder thing to do is to start making things in house so that you can control what goes on.
C4
Here are FVC3 pics.
C4
Looks like their "staking" technique has regressed a bit, or maybe I was that lucky. So much for my earlier comment...
No, they really haven't.
Well staked carrier keys have been seen, but they're the exception, not the rule.
Receiver extension nuts are staked by request/contract only.
BM chambers are better than many others, and generally okay, but still found with some variance.
Barrels are often installed poorly.
BM still does not install a proper extractor spring assembly except by request/contract.
BM has opted for a standard that satisfies the lowest common denominator of commercial consumer. They are capable of substantially more, but they prefer mediocrity.
They are not unserviceable. They are serviceable with a comparatively greater number of caveats, though.
Between this well articulated post and Grant's new photo's of that stake job, I will have to assume that I may have gotten a bit lucky with my newer Bushmaster. The outsourcing would explain the inconsistencies.
saromans134
03-26-08, 17:56
I have to admit I to have owned some Bushmasters and had an issued one at one time as well. Never had a problem with them. One even ran through a 3 day rifle class with 1300 rds in 106 degree weather with out a hic up. All that said though when I plop down money for a work carbine these days it has not been a BM anymore. Maybe I was lucky during that time with the ones I had.
God damn I have to say that the big staking arguement is the dumbest one yet. Your a moron if you base a purchase solely on that.
Buy an automatic punch and stop whining. Sure I have personally seen Bushmasters shoot a bolt carrier loose because of improper staking. Take the 5 seconds and stake it, end of story.
God damn I have to say that the big staking arguement is the dumbest one yet. Your a moron if you base a purchase solely on that.
Buy an automatic punch and stop whining. Sure I have personally seen Bushmasters shoot a bolt carrier loose because of improper staking. Take the 5 seconds and stake it, end of story.
But Mactastic, youre not factoring in the $4.00 extractor spring/insert and the other 5 minutes it might take to stake the castle nut.
Balance that against the fun of trashing all the lesser weapons! Heck of it is, there is plenty of metal deformation around the screws on that carrier. If you ever had to remove similarly staked screws during some mechanical project, you'd look at it and think "oh SH^* !" how am I gonna back those out?
God damn I have to say that the big staking arguement is the dumbest one yet. Your a moron if you base a purchase solely on that.
Buy an automatic punch and stop whining. Sure I have personally seen Bushmasters shoot a bolt carrier loose because of improper staking. Take the 5 seconds and stake it, end of story.
If there short cutting on something as simple and costless as staking what else are they skimping on? This is called a clue!
But Mactastic, youre not factoring in the $4.00 extractor spring/insert and the other 5 minutes it might take to stake the castle nut.
Balance that against the fun of trashing all the lesser weapons! Heck of it is, there is plenty of metal deformation around the screws on that carrier. If you ever had to remove similarly staked screws during some mechanical project, you'd look at it and think "oh SH^* !" how am I gonna back those out?
Here is the simple truth. If a company cannot do the SIMPLE things correctly, what makes you think that they can do everything else properly?
Pat Rogers has a book of broken parts that he carries around. It is filled with broken BM AR's.
Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn both advise heavily against the use of a BM product for serious work.
Do you think these three instructors just got up on day and said "Hmm, let's tell everyone to not use BM for no reason at all!"
Can you take a BM and is improperly assembled and make it work? Sure can. The question is, should have too??
C4
But Mactastic, youre not factoring in the $4.00 extractor spring/insert and the other 5 minutes it might take to stake the castle nut.
Balance that against the fun of trashing all the lesser weapons! Heck of it is, there is plenty of metal deformation around the screws on that carrier. If you ever had to remove similarly staked screws during some mechanical project, you'd look at it and think "oh SH^* !" how am I gonna back those out?
:rolleyes:
In your contest to see who can be the biggest wiseguy, as stated well earlier you are both missing the big picture. Keep in mind my positive posts about Bushmaster here in this thread alone. Also know that I may have sounded exactly like you when I first came here. But, there is a method to the madness as they say.
The bottom line is who makes these weapons the best? Which are ideal under the harshest conditions? Which should you use if your life is on the line and failure isn't an option under those conditions? These educated shooters here are telling you just that. I realized that and you should, too.
Keep all that you see and hear in these forums in context. They are not bashing, just judging based on level of experience that most of us simply do not have. Remember, these forums are not so much about what will kill a vicious little prairie dog the best, but rather bad people that want to kill you fast and hard, so expectations are as high as possible.
As stated, my Bushmaster is perfect for general use, never a problem so far. But, all things considered, if I were lined up to work overseas for a year, I would want bring the most dependable weapon anywhere to protect my life and that of my men. Having to check, modify and/or replace internal stock parts that are fine in other brands is not how I would want to start things off with my primary weapon.
On a somewhat related note, does anybody know who actually makes Bushmaster's barrels?
On a somewhat related note, does anybody know who actually makes Bushmaster's barrels?
Most likely several different companies.
C4
Some here sit back and smugly slam every non- Colt, LMT, Noveske, whatever. If any of my BMs had let me down during a week long carbine course, I'd factor that into my choices - but they have not. If any had experienced loose keys or buffer tubes, I wouldn't defend the brand. If I had ever had non mag-related failures or poorly sized chambers, or canted FSBs or any of that kind of thing, I'd have to nod and harumph and agree that I'd seen that, too. But in god-only-knows how many thousands of rounds over many years, I have had nothing but excellent service from my BMs.
Just so I am reading this right, you have run one BM through one carbine course? If that is not correct, please clarify.
It is great that your BM runs great, there are lots of others out there that do not. You mention several KNOWN issues with BM's (poor gas key and castle nut staking, canted FSB and tight chambers). All of those issues have actually been acknowledged by BM. Even in my recent conversation with a VP at BM, they TOLD me about all of these things happening (and some that I have not heard of or seen).
When looking at a weapon, you cannot look at just one or two. You have to compare the weapons in LARGE QTY's. The simple fact is that every dog has his day and it IS possible for BM to put out a quality AR. As generalization though, they do not at this point and time.
As I posted earlier, I do know know of any professional trainer that recommends BM for serious use. I would hope that you view this as a clue.
As the site lead trainer in the nuclear security industry, it was my job to read and respond to EVERY operating experience report generated industry-wide. The majority of faciities fielded BM rifles (we did not, we had Colts- A1s to M4S). OEs had to be written if a loose round was found in the bottom of a mag pouch or if Officer Schmuketelly's mag dropped from his rifle, or if a bolt broke during training. Considering the number of rounds the NRC required we shoot, and the number of rifles out there - there were very, very few problems. Any general trend would have resulted in the entire industry ceasing use of all affected weapons and fixing the problem or repalcing the response weapons. That never happened with weapons - though it did with more than one batch of ammo and some accessories.
Your BM's were most likely cherry picked and or built to your reqs (like the DPS ones are). This is most likely a very good weapon as they put much more effort into it. The general consumer though does not get this level of scrutiny. You guys kind of live on an island and you have to realize that there are a whole bunch of other BM's out there.
Was there a window of time or a certain model BM that may have had problems? Maybe - I don't claim to be a BM historian or the AR industry know-it-all. I only Know what I have experienced, what my industry has experienced, and what many fellow BM shooters have experienced. Those experiences have been overwhelmingly positive. Positive enough that I am uncomfortable sitting quiet when someone who knows the answer disingenously asks "Milspec or commercial buffer tube on that BM?" like the answer matters one freakin' bit to the strength or durability of the thing. I have NEVER seen a buffer tube break at the threads - the tube itself is actually thicker - not thinner than mil-spec.
In the 90's BM was a good quality AR I think. Much past that, they have been seeing more and more issues. As I said, you are on an Island with your BM. The rest of the free world gets a much different weapon than what you most likely have.
The receiver extension is a good one. It is true that the commercial RE's are bigger than the mil-spec ones. They are also made out of MUCH cheaper materials than the mil-spec RE's. Does this matter to the casual shooter? No, not really. If someone wants the strongest part they can get though, the should NEVER choose a commercial RE. Oh and, RE's do break.
If BM is doing something poorly, why so many contracts - including military contracts? Are all the buyers for all these big agencies assholes?
This is a good one that is often seen on the errornet. BM (like many other manufacturers) generally win contracts for the following reasons:
1. Low Cost
2. Availability
Currently BM has ZERO .Mil contracts (according to the VP at BM I just spoke too).
Purchasing officers are NOT trigger pullers. Their job is to save money and fill the req. This means buying whatever you can get your hands on.
Oh wait, Podunk PD and Backwater Sheriff's Dept. don't have them on the approved list. I'll call TX and TN and a few dozen others and bring them up to speed.
Why not call them out on their published claim that they build to "Mil-spec or better"? If you really believe that's not true, why not challenge them?
End of Rant
Lot's of places do not have them on the "allowed" list (not just a handful).
I have called them out on their "mil-spec" quote. Almost nothing on the BM AR follows the TDP. Not the barrel steel, not the testing done, not the extractor internals, not the feed ramps, not the receiver extension, not how they assemble the weapon, etc ,etc.
I have tried to exchange info with you in a positive manner and not bring it down to a pissing match. I fully respect that you and the group you work for have had a positive experience with BM. I also do not doubt what you say either.
What I am trying to show you though, is that the BM's you have (that were most likely ordered under contract with specifics reqs) is not what everyone else gets.
C4
variablebinary
03-27-08, 13:49
Can Bushmaster make a good carbine? Yes. They make plenty of perfectly functioning guns.
However, the biggest issue with Bushmaster IMHO is they arent as consistant, as say, Colt. The QC and proofing isnt as strict so more lemons slip through.
The competition is just alot tougher all around and Bushmaster still conducts business like they are they only game in town
If it works for you great.....
I know a couple dead guys unimpressed with BM's QC/QA. I've seen near 90% failure rates involving hundreds of carbines. That LE buys something is absolutely NO indicator of quality, in fact probably the opposite. Bean counters need a weapon thats reasonably priced, to sit in a car for 20 years and hold up to a mediocre rd ct. The majority of LE weapons will shoot less in the entirety of service life than I do in week.
I have no $$ interest in pimping or disparaging any companies wares... But I've seen serious statistical trends with some makes. If you carry a BM or DPMS I would re-evaluate.
I am always amazed that people put stock in what LE agencies buy. This should actually be classified as a warning of what not to buy (in most instances).
C4
As Rob_S would say, ask the people who buy them because their LE has them:
"Where's your crown Vic?"
FVC3,
You started this thread with reservations, and are now mad that they've come true? Were you just looking for a fight?
No one said you were not an expierianced shooter (1978, why does that dound so much like someone I've been working with?), only that those here are expieiranced, and are sharing their thoughts and insights.
You say you've had excellent results with your personally owned BM's,(7 ?), how do you reconcile that with all the problems everyone else is having?
When I worked at another facility in the DOE complex, BM's were bought post 9/11, I saw alot more then 7 fail to make it thru 3 rounds to zero.
Armorers working at the DOE academy specifically recommended against BM, not even for a "fun gun", as it "won't be any fun, if it doesn't work".
I know of another org. in the complex, that bought BM, due to availability, as soon as they could, they switched to Colt, because the BM "suck" as I was told.
What NRC site do you work at? I used to work at one, a few years back, and do not remember the reporting standards, or shooting schedule you speak of. Maybe things have changed, but the outage workers, always told us, how we were the only site that carried rifles, were so strict, etc. We'd loose rounds all the time, it happends, don't recall any reports. Just curious.
Bob
FVC3,
You started this thread with reservations, and are now mad that they've come true? Were you just looking for a fight?
No one said you were not an expierianced shooter (1978, why does that dound so much like someone I've been working with?), only that those here are expieiranced, and are sharing their thoughts and insights.
You say you've had excellent results with your personally owned BM's,(7 ?), how do you reconcile that with all the problems everyone else is having?
When I worked at another facility in the DOE complex, BM's were bought post 9/11, I saw alot more then 7 fail to make it thru 3 rounds to zero.
Armorers working at the DOE academy specifically recommended against BM, not even for a "fun gun", as it "won't be any fun, if it doesn't work".
I know of another org. in the complex, that bought BM, due to availability, as soon as they could, they switched to Colt, because the BM "suck" as I was told.
What NRC site do you work at? I used to work at one, a few years back, and do not remember the reporting standards, or shooting schedule you speak of. Maybe things have changed, but the outage workers, always told us, how we were the only site that carried rifles, were so strict, etc. We'd loose rounds all the time, it happends, don't recall any reports. Just curious.
Bob
Not mad - certainly not looking for a fight. Most folks here have had something substantial to add to the discussion - even if some of it is a bit snide and condescending.
You, R Moran, are showing your ignorance. "NRC site"? No one even peripherally in the industry would refer to a licensee site as an "NRC site". The NRC is the regulatory agency. If you got your info from outage workers, I've got to wonder if you perhaps worked at a convenience store NEAR the site or something. Every response post at every last operating reactor in the US is equipped with a long gun - and has been for many years. The Officers at some sites might not be aware of what goes on at higher levels, so they could possibly be unaware of OEs. At my site, and the others directly affiliated with it, we discussed OEs with Officers at each trimesterly training session at least. We would attend Shift Briefings and do training sessions complete with sign-offs over serious incidents anywhere in the industry. Are you saying you were an armed responder or TRT team member at a nuclear facility?
BTW, I was Site Armorer / F.I. for years before I was lead trainer - never heard any of my peers gripe about their Bushys at the many conferences and drills I attended over the years.
PALADIN-hgwt
03-27-08, 19:17
xxxxx
You, R Moran, are showing your ignorance. "NRC site"? No one even peripherally in the industry would refer to a licensee site as an "NRC site". The NRC is the regulatory agency. If you got your info from outage workers, I've got to wonder if you perhaps worked at a convenience store NEAR the site or something.
I would suggest, based upon this response and the one to myself just before, that you need to relax a bit.
As stated, you asked for advice and feedback and you got the best you will get anywhere. Now you want to berate those that said things you don't want to hear. The remark about the convenience store is an uncalled for insult (no disrespect to anyone who works hard) in the context of the discussion.
Not one person here said that you don't have extensive experience, nor was it insinuated. Personally, I don't know what the **** you have done or where you did it. I was speaking in general terms, and so were the others. Nothing was directed at you, so I would assume it would be appropriate to stop acting that way.
Oh wait, Podunk PD and Backwater Sheriff's Dept. don't have them on the approved list. I'll call TX and TN and a few dozen others and bring them up to speed.
Well lets just go ahead and forget "Podunk PD and Backwater Sheriff's Dept."(I'm sure those PDs and SOs enjoy being called that), and skip to larger agencies.
They (Bushmaster) are NOT on Dallas PDs approval lists. Never have been, never will be.
They ae NOT on DCSOs approval list.
Plano PD is not happy wih theirs, but perhaps Mr Dobbs can elaborate more on this. I will not post the rumors about PPD until or unless the become fact.
And what military contracts does BMI have. If I'm not mistaken, those contracts bragged about earier were cancelled.
JLM summed it up pretty well
Even a broken watch is right twice a day :cool:
I shot a local agency BM rifle that had such a weak hammer spring in it that it wouldn't reliably light ammo with commercial primers in it as well. Armorer's comment to the person that was issued that weapon was 'sometimes they do that'.
Uhhhh.......jahh..........:rolleyes:
Hopefully that sometime isn't at 3am when a tweaker is coming at you with a large pipe wrench.
2nd largest municipal agency around here rolls with the Colts. Nothing is perfect obviously, but some things are more perfect than others.
I would agree with everything Grant has said here as well.
I know a couple dead guys unimpressed with BM's QC/QA
That might be funny if it wasn't so serious.
I've dropped the use of their parts completely for recreational guns. It is just too frustrating.
I've also concluded the parts they sell are rejects as over 2/3 of the parts I've bought from them have an easily noticeable issue.
There is a notice QC difference in the factory guns compared to the parts they sell.
The last two barrels I bought from them were shit. One had 1/8" of forward and aft play in the handguard cap. The other had the FSB tipped forward, yes forward.
The last 3 out of 4 stripped lowers from them all had magazine well issues.
The receiver extension is a good one. It is true that the commercial RE's are bigger than the mil-spec ones. They are also made out of MUCH cheaper materials than the mil-spec RE's. Does this matter to the casual shooter? No, not really. If someone wants the strongest part they can get though, the should NEVER choose a commercial RE. Oh and, RE's do break.
I am the last person on this list to try and claim any sort of expert status -- I learn new things all the time.
However, I think the above is overly broad. It may be true of BMs commercial spec tubes, but more than one company makes RE tubes to the commercial spec and I would be surprised if ALL of them are made of cheaper material. I would also be surprised if all the ones made to mil-spec dimensions are made out of better material.
For the topic at hand:
For the record, my gun is made with BM parts (on the upper) from the late 90s and works great. I cannot claim the heavy use that some people regularly see but it has been through a few multi-day high round classes without issue. I have not seen a complete BM rifle in a long time so cannot comment on those. However, back around 2000 or 2001 a friend bought a complete BM upper with their (YHM?) railed gas block preinstalled. The thing shook loose in less than 50 rounds. I was not overly impressed at all with it.
My brother has a 98 era post-ban BM carbine that seems to work well, and another friend had a BM DCM gun that worked well.
It seems to me that based on the collective experience here, BM commercial offerings have, at least in the last many years, been hit-or-miss. Definitely not something I would stake my life on.
Chad
Not mad - certainly not looking for a fight. Most folks here have had something substantial to add to the discussion - even if some of it is a bit snide and condescending.
You, R Moran, are showing your ignorance. "NRC site"? No one even peripherally in the industry would refer to a licensee site as an "NRC site". The NRC is the regulatory agency. If you got your info from outage workers, I've got to wonder if you perhaps worked at a convenience store NEAR the site or something. Every response post at every last operating reactor in the US is equipped with a long gun - and has been for many years. The Officers at some sites might not be aware of what goes on at higher levels, so they could possibly be unaware of OEs. At my site, and the others directly affiliated with it, we discussed OEs with Officers at each trimesterly training session at least. We would attend Shift Briefings and do training sessions complete with sign-offs over serious incidents anywhere in the industry. Are you saying you were an armed responder or TRT team member at a nuclear facility?
BTW, I was Site Armorer / F.I. for years before I was lead trainer - never heard any of my peers gripe about their Bushys at the many conferences and drills I attended over the years.
Convenience store? I wish, I'm always taller when I leave one.
I'm fully aware of what NRC is, and that the sites are privately owned and regulated by the NRC. I use the term NRC site, to differanitate it from a DOE owned and run site, which is a different animal, most people don't know thre is adifference or what it is. I've heard the term numerous times, by those in the industry, or perhaps its just those in DOE.
Yes, when I first got out of the Army, I worked as an armed officer and a member of the TRT. "98-'00. Shearon Harris, NC. I never had the oppurtunity to visit aother site, the outage workers did, and told us of there expieriance's, again, perhaps things have changed. Thats why I asked.
The trainer when I was there, was a former Capt. Force Recon Marine, last I saw he worked at Triple Canopy,
the security manager was very pro--Pro-force. We still didn't do, what I would call a lot of shooting. The guy who took his place was a 'tard.
I now work at a DOE site, currently re-certifying for SRT. If that matters to you.
Bob
I would suggest, based upon this response and the one to myself just before, that you need to relax a bit.
As stated, you asked for advice and feedback and you got the best you will get anywhere. Now you want to berate those that said things you don't want to hear. The remark about the convenience store is an uncalled for insult (no disrespect to anyone who works hard) in the context of the discussion.
Not one person here said that you don't have extensive experience, nor was it insinuated. Personally, I don't know what the **** you have done or where you did it. I was speaking in general terms, and so were the others. Nothing was directed at you, so I would assume it would be appropriate to stop acting that way.
No - you ****ing relax. I, too, spoke in general terms until it was passive-aggressively suggested that the armament and training I spoke of wasn't quite remembered that way...
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations locks all nuclear licensees into certain requirements. The Post 9-11 Training Order was much more specific and homogenized training throughout the industry.
You simply cannot have been doing the job and not be aware of these requirements. Your butt was out there runnin' and gunnin' every 3-4 months.
Your own prejudices are showing - not mine. I casted no aspersions on convenience store workers and insulted no one. Any negative slant was in your head - not mine.
Convenience store? I wish, I'm always taller when I leave one.
I'm fully aware of what NRC is, and that the sites are privately owned and regulated by the NRC. I use the term NRC site, to differanitate it from a DOE owned and run site, which is a different animal, most people don't know thre is adifference or what it is. I've heard the term numerous times, by those in the industry, or perhaps its just those in DOE.
Yes, when I first got out of the Army, I worked as an armed officer and a member of the TRT. "98-'00. Shearon Harris, NC. I never had the oppurtunity to visit aother site, the outage workers did, and told us of there expieriance's, again, perhaps things have changed. Thats why I asked.
The trainer when I was there, was a former Capt. Force Recon Marine, last I saw he worked at Triple Canopy,
the security manager was very pro--Pro-force. We still didn't do, what I would call a lot of shooting. The guy who took his place was a 'tard.
I now work at a DOE site, currently re-certifying for SRT. If that matters to you.
Bob
' 98 - '00 Puts you leaving before many of the bigger changes in training. Earlier though, you mentioned getting BM rifles post 9-11.
The outage workers you spoke with must have been mistaken, or perhaps had only worked some low-level waste sights that did not require a response to 10CFR.
DOE sights can be "a different animal" though generally speaking, thay are MORE heavily defended than most.
Keep the bad guys on the other side of the fence!
What the hell do you know about me to contrast me against "these experienced shooters"!? The fact that I am I am new here does not reflect on my experience or judgment.
This is where you started with your baby like responses.
As I stated earlier, no one here, including myself, said that you lacked experience before you started your tantrums. Additionally, I was one of the first posts to support Bushmaster after your initial post.
And yes, you most certainly did take a shot at R.Moran by stating he was ignorant and must have worked at a convenience store. The only negative aspects of this thread are your unwarranted, immature hostilities genius, period.
You must have been great to be stationed with. :eek:
The only negative aspects of this thread are your unwarranted, immature hostilities genius, period.
+1, really making friends after only 2 weeks on the forum. .:rolleyes:
I would suggest to anyone making comments in this thread that they back up their statements with fact or edit their posts.
M4 carbine doesn't want or need conjecture and guessing games presented as facts. They won't tolerate it. I'm surprised a mod hasn't come in and severely busted some skulls. I know a few that surely wouldn't like the way this thread has gone. It's by technical or factual anymore.
If you want to be a continuing part of M4 you'd better follow the leader and try to learn from the experts this site takes pride in attracting. They don't tolerate back and forth BS.
I am the last person on this list to try and claim any sort of expert status -- I learn new things all the time.
However, I think the above is overly broad. It may be true of BMs commercial spec tubes, but more than one company makes RE tubes to the commercial spec and I would be surprised if ALL of them are made of cheaper material. I would also be surprised if all the ones made to mil-spec dimensions are made out of better material.
For the topic at hand:
For the record, my gun is made with BM parts (on the upper) from the late 90s and works great. I cannot claim the heavy use that some people regularly see but it has been through a few multi-day high round classes without issue. I have not seen a complete BM rifle in a long time so cannot comment on those. However, back around 2000 or 2001 a friend bought a complete BM upper with their (YHM?) railed gas block preinstalled. The thing shook loose in less than 50 rounds. I was not overly impressed at all with it.
My brother has a 98 era post-ban BM carbine that seems to work well, and another friend had a BM DCM gun that worked well.
It seems to me that based on the collective experience here, BM commercial offerings have, at least in the last many years, been hit-or-miss. Definitely not something I would stake my life on.
Chad
We and some others in the firearms industry have checked a good many commercial RE's. They are generally made out of cheaper material (not 7075) and are extruded (not forged).
C4
Jay Cunningham
03-28-08, 16:24
FVC3,
I work at an NRC regulated facility and I am intimately familiar with the equipment that our Site Protection staff employs. I am also familiar with the requirements to be a Site Potection "officer" - with OPSEC in mind, I'm neither particularly impressed with their requirements nor with your attitude.
If you'd like to discuss this offline, I'd be happy to. Until then I suggest you throttle back a few notches.
FVC3,
I work at an NRC regulated facility and I am intimately familiar with the equipment that our Site Protection staff employs. I am also familiar with the requirements to be a Site Potection "officer" - with OPSEC in mind, I'm neither particularly impressed with their requirements nor with your attitude.
If you'd like to discuss this offline, I'd be happy to. Until then I suggest you throttle back a few notches.
Nor I with your attitude, or with your lack of perspective - out of all this bile, you choose that to latch onto? I never spoke of officer requirements - I spoke of the large number of BMrifles, their hard use, and the low number of issues in a highly regulated industry.
http://www.mediablvd.com/forums/style_emoticons/mediablvd/popcorn.gif
Jay Cunningham
03-28-08, 17:13
Nor I with your attitude, or with your lack of perspective - out of all this bile, you choose that to latch onto? I never spoke of officer requirements - I spoke of the large number of BMrifles, their hard use, and the low number of issues in a highly regulated industry.
Their Bushmaster rifles (ours use them too) are neither "run hard" nor does the "highly regulated" aspect extend to the weapon, gear and training aspects of Site Protection personnel, unless you count "shall be armed with a 9mm semi-automatic pistol and a .30 semi-automatic rifle" as stated in CFR.
Certain DOE personnel tasked with site protection duties actually are reasonably well-trained and equipped (such as those tasked with certain sites within the INEL facility, for example) but if you are discussing the average American nuke plant - those rifles are low round count.
Ridgerunner665
03-28-08, 17:19
but if you are discussing the average American nuke plant - those rifles are low round count.
Yes they are...I worked at the Oak Ridge, TN facility for a while. (Wackenhutt)
We did get some fun training...and trained hard...just not all that often.
FVC,
Did you not suggest I worked at a conveniance store, instead of a Nuclear Power generating site?
If things have changed since I left that industry, great, I was merely relaying my experiances. And, when incident reports get written, aren't all parties involved required to make a statement? I never did, for the types of incidents you are speaking of, that I was involved in.
DOE is most definately a different animal, I've been involved with DOE for about 8 years now, and 3 sites.
The protection any DOE facility with in the complex recieves depends on what teh facility does and what type of material is present. It can range from plane jane security officers to something akin to an infantry bn. Wackenhut, Lockhead-Martin, doesn't matter, DOE sets the standard, and we all meet the minimum. Its not all "Defense". I'll put many of them up against many "real cops" any day, we usually do, once a year, and do quite well.
If you worked at Oakridge, and didn't get much training and shooting, well, I'm glad I worked at other facilities, as I've gotten plenty at them.
Back on topic, I guess....
The BM carbines I spoke of were issued to a DOE facility, I was working at, post 9/11, and they flat out sucked. I know that for a fact.
How do you reconcile your experiance, against all of those that have noted problems?
This is how I do it....
I'd bet that the number of weapons sold by BM that have problems, is probably a small percentage of what they build.
I'd bet that same number from a company likee Colt is miniscule compared to the BM, number.
It only took something like a 1.8% failure rate, to cause LAPD(?) to pull the G21 from service.
Bob
Ridgerunner665
03-28-08, 18:05
We got plenty of training...I was just saying I wanted more;)
I later transferred to a BAE facility in Kingsport, TN (closer to home)
Ridge,
Did you work at the DOE faciility, or is there a Power Plant in that area also? Just askin.
Bob
Ridgerunner665
03-28-08, 18:30
It was DOE...I mostly kept inventory at both places. I wasn't there long enough to get into anything really interesting. It was an 80 mile drive to get there.
The BAE plant makes AmRam, Stinger, H.A.R.M., Sidewinders...things like that.
Ridgerunner665
03-28-08, 18:45
Since I been driving a truck...I have been to every nuclear power plant in this country (I think) I always get loads of those dirty catalysts going to Mount Holly, NC to get cleaned and rebuilt...and I have yet to see any seriously armed guards at any of them...maybe they are there...but I haven't seen them.
the1911fan
03-28-08, 18:57
Why doesn't Bushmaster make ALL their AR's to the TX DPS standard?
Gotta wonder why not
Why doesn't Bushmaster make ALL their AR's to the TX DPS standard?
Gotta wonder why not
I think one simple, and obvious explanation would be: it would raise the price of their rifles, and make them less attractive to buyers.
If a Colt was 1200 and a BM was 1100, I know what I would buy.
I know what I would buy anyway, I'm just sayin' :cool:
the1911fan
03-28-08, 23:22
I think one simple, and obvious explanation would be: it would raise the price of their rifles, and make them less attractive to buyers.
If a Colt was 1200 and a BM was 1100, I know what I would buy.
I know what I would buy anyway, I'm just sayin' :cool:
The OP paid $898 and I think BM would make plenty of $$ selling the TX DPS models as their entry level rifle for $750-$800 at least then they would be putting out an improved product line. And Maybe shoot the rifle before it ships to verify the damn thing can be zeroed without a trip back to the factory.
The OP paid $898 and I think BM would make plenty of $$ selling the TX DPS models as their entry level rifle for $750-$800 at least then they would be putting out an improved product line. And Maybe shoot the rifle before it ships to verify the damn thing can be zeroed without a trip back to the factory.
O, YOU had a canted FSB too eh? :p
For 898 I see no reason not to spend the additional cash to get a LMT. But that's just me.
the1911fan
03-29-08, 01:36
O, YOU had a canted FSB too eh? :p
3 of the 6 we bought could not hit paper at 50 yards due to the FSB they had to go back to the factory
For 898 I see no reason not to spend the additional cash to get a LMT. But that's just me.
Me either (My patrol rifle is a personally purchased LMT) ...but what do I know I work for PoDunk PD:D I am applying to BackWater S.O.
Why doesn't Bushmaster make ALL their AR's to the TX DPS standard?
Gotta wonder why not
Good question. My thought is that they cost more to make and is not as profitable.
C4
the1911fan
03-29-08, 11:47
Just like the consumer, companies eventually pay front end or back and eventually BM will get what they pay for.
I have 3,000 rds. through my Bushy, but I have not experienced any problems with mine, the carrier keys were staked properly, proper M4 feed cuts, etc. I bought mine in 04.
I have 3,000 rds. through my Bushy, but I have not experienced any problems with mine, the carrier keys were staked properly, proper M4 feed cuts, etc. I bought mine in 04.
No problems probably due to the fact that certain simple things were done correctly to begin with.
I have 3,000 rds. through my Bushy, but I have not experienced any problems with mine, the carrier keys were staked properly, proper M4 feed cuts, etc. I bought mine in 04.
I don't doubt that. I don't doubt that they CAN make a rifle that works.
The problem is, said making of a good rifle seems to be subject to: their whim, what year it is, the relative humidity inside, astrological alignment, and various other unknown variables :cool:
See Dano's post, what he said doesn't exactly blow my skirt up :o
I have 3,000 rds. through my Bushy, but I have not experienced any problems with mine, the carrier keys were staked properly, proper M4 feed cuts, etc. I bought mine in 04.
3000rds in four years is very little shooting. A little more than ~60rds a month by my math. Any significant quantities in a short time interval, esp while hot, fouled, etc?
Which model BM do you have?
Can you post a pic of the ramps, staking, etc?
the dps model is nice butt for about $70 more you can get a rock river which has some nicer things on it. also at GT dist
the dps model is nice butt for about $70 more you can get a rock river which has some nicer things on it. also at GT dist
And for under $1K, you can have a LMT M4 which smokes both BM and RRA.
C4
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.