View Full Version : Buy Em Cheap and Stack em Deep
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 07:40
This is even more important for those about to have a ban go into effect later this year.
PSA has Built Lowers for $199. You cannot even build them this cheap using decent parts.
No one can bitch durring the next ban/runup that they didn't have a chance to buy a few more.
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/featured/psa-ar-15-complete-blem-lower-magpul-moe-edition-od-green-no-magazine.html
This is even more important for those about to have a ban go into effect later this year.
PSA has Built Lowers for $199. You cannot even build them this cheap using decent parts.
No one can bitch durring the next ban/runup that they didn't have a chance to buy a few more.
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/featured/psa-ar-15-complete-blem-lower-magpul-moe-edition-od-green-no-magazine.html
What if I want an actual mil-spec receiver extension and an H buffer?
Does PSA ever let you pay a little bit more for an upgrade instead of paying for parts I don't want and then replacing them later?
What if I want an actual mil-spec receiver extension and an H buffer?
Does PSA ever let you pay a little bit more for an upgrade instead of paying for parts I don't want and then replacing them later?
"Machined from Aluminum Forgings 7075-T6
Hardcoat Anodizing: MIL-A-8625F, Type III, Class 2
Milspec Diameter Receiver Extension
Magpul MOE Stock
Magpul MOE Polymer Trigger Guard
Magpul MOE Pistol Grip
Staked M4 Lock Nut
Standard Carbine buffer
Un-notched Hammer compatible with 9mm use
Caliber: Multi"
--
I guess you'll have to source your own H-buffer...
"Machined from Aluminum Forgings 7075-T6
Hardcoat Anodizing: MIL-A-8625F, Type III, Class 2
Milspec Diameter Receiver Extension
Magpul MOE Stock
Magpul MOE Polymer Trigger Guard
Magpul MOE Pistol Grip
Staked M4 Lock Nut
Standard Carbine buffer
Un-notched Hammer compatible with 9mm use
Caliber: Multi"
--
I guess you'll have to source your own H-buffer...
"Milspec diameter" IS NOT milspec. It is simply the same diameter as milspec.
That's why they don't simply call it milspec, and that is why they don't list what it is made from. Because I guarantee it's 6061 or similar, and not the 7075 that is milspec.
Please read more carefully.
It says mil spec diameter receiver extension, that would only leave you having to replace the buffer and spring. To me that seems like a pretty good deal. Even if it came with a h buffer, many would still replace it with heavier weight buffers. Ymmv though!
this would be perfect for a 22LR build.
It says mil spec diameter receiver extension, that would only leave you having to replace the buffer and spring. To me that seems like a pretty good deal. Even if it came with a h buffer, many would still replace it with heavier weight buffers. Ymmv though!
"mil spec diameter" is not milspec.
That is why they say "milspec diameter" and not simply milspec.
That is why they don't tell you what it is made of.
Because I guarantee it's 6061, or similar, and not 7075-T6.
That is why I asked if PSA, for people who choose to have the part be the stronger milspec material, allows for an upgrade instead of buying an entirely new part.
This is why marketing departments exist. To knowingly and intentionally mislead people into believing they are buying something they are not, without ever actually lying. It's all about what you say, and what you don't say.
Gotcha warp, didn't catch that. Yea I'd agree about having your own options on parts. Still nice to see parts, gear, etc becoming available again though.
Gotcha warp, didn't catch that. Yea I'd agree about having your own options on parts. Still nice to see parts, gear, etc becoming available again though.
It is VERY nice to see.
Pretty much everything but ammo is back, and ammo is continuing to (slowly) trend downward in price.
What I couldn't believe was BCM BCG's being in stock for $190 for DAYS at Ranier Arms recently. Those, and the PSA lowers/PMAG deals, and PSA complete rifles with Aimpoint PRO's for $1k, have been the most shockingly-good deals I've seen recently.
black22rifle
08-16-13, 08:20
"Milspec diameter" IS NOT milspec. It is simply the same diameter as milspec.
That's why they don't simply call it milspec, and that is why they don't list what it is made from. Because I guarantee it's 6061 or similar, and not the 7075 that is milspec.
Please read more carefully.
I have asked them about this before, the only true mil spec 7075-t6 buffer tube is their premium tube.
Clue me in on the point of collecting lowers. Just curious
Toyoland66
08-16-13, 08:54
Because lowers can be built into rifles..?
It seems like lowers, LPK's, and BCG's have been tne hardest items to get during the "panics".
If you look around you can find LMT defender and BCM blem lowers in stock right now. They are more expensive than the PSA lowers suggested but there are no questions about their quality.
Clue me in on the point of collecting lowers. Just curious
The lower is the part that is considered the firearm and has the serial number. As you probably know, you have to get your lower from someone with a Federal Firearms License. This is a registered purchase (in that it says you purchased a long gun, it won't specifically say what it is). The upper and all other parts are not regulated so anybody can simply order one online. I'm 16 and I just got my BCM upper. States like California are considering banning all semi-auto rifles with detachable magazines. Having a few legal lowers allows people to build their rifles after the ban. Thats the way I see it anyway. Hope this helps.
Levi
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 09:05
I have asked them about this before, the only true mil spec 7075-t6 buffer tube is their premium tube.
And it makes shit for difference. People are here splitting hairs. I have cheap $40 Milspec buffer kits all the way to the system on my SR15/SR25, and they all work.
I post a deal and you guys are bitching about something that doesn't even matter.
Read less and shoot more. You might be suprised by what you will find out.
Show me an instance where the use of a 7000 series Alum would have made a difference vs a 6000 series alum..................
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 09:07
Because lowers can be built into rifles..?
It seems like lowers, LPK's, and BCG's have been tne hardest items to get during the "panics".
If you look around you can find LMT defender and BCM blem lowers in stock right now. They are more expensive than the PSA lowers suggested but there are no questions about their quality.
There is no question about PSA quality. LMT and BCM lowers are 2x or more than the cost of these.
The whole point is being able to stack a bunch of lowers should there be a future state/fed ban, and being able to build a bunch of rifles on the cheap.
The lower is the part that is considered the firearm and has the serial number. As you probably know, you have to get your lower from someone with a Federal Firearms License. This is a registered purchase (in that it says you purchased a long gun, it won't specifically say what it is). The upper and all other parts are not regulated so anybody can simply order one online. I'm 16 and I just got my BCM upper. States like California are considering banning all semi-auto rifles with detachable magazines. Having a few legal lowers allows people to build their rifles after the ban. Thats the way I see it anyway. Hope this helps.
Levi
Really? You're way ahead of the curve then hanging out at M4C vs "other" forums spewing mall ninja nonsense and know far more than I did at 16 about such topics. There was no internet when I was 16, so I have a decent excuse at least. Good on you. ;)
And just to make sure I have said it to sound like some nosy uncle: safety first, safety last, safety always. :cool:
This is even more important for those about to have a ban go into effect later this year.
PSA has Built Lowers for $199. You cannot even build them this cheap using decent parts.
No one can bitch durring the next ban/runup that they didn't have a chance to buy a few more.
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/featured/psa-ar-15-complete-blem-lower-magpul-moe-edition-od-green-no-magazine.html
Wow, that really is an impressive price.
jerrysimons
08-16-13, 09:15
It is VERY nice to see.
Pretty much everything but ammo is back, and ammo is continuing to (slowly) trend downward in price.
What I couldn't believe was BCM BCG's being in stock for $190 for DAYS at Ranier Arms recently. Those, and the PSA lowers/PMAG deals, and PSA complete rifles with Aimpoint PRO's for $1k, have been the most shockingly-good deals I've seen recently.
Yeah too bad we all blew our wad during the panic!
Relatively speaking of coarse, I refused to pay more than MSRP, but 15 dollars for a Gen 3 P-Mag is much more than $10!
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 09:17
Really? You're way ahead of the curve then hanging out at M4C vs "other" forums spewing mall ninja nonsense and know far more than I did at 16 about such topics. There was no internet when I was 16, so I have a decent excuse at least. Good on you. ;)
And just to make sure I have said to sound like some nosy uncle: safety first, safety last, safety always. :cool:
+1. I was just about to post about him having more comon sense and being more level headed at 16, then half the people who live on this site.
You would be HIGHLY served to also research elsewhere on the net. M4C tends to get some pretty polar (and many times wrong) personalites that care more about brand then the actual merits of the product.
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 09:19
Wow, that really is an impressive price.
Yea man, Ive bought a bunch and have directed friends and family to do the same.
For 90% of rec shooters, this is a very good choice and lets them spend money on a good upper/optics and some ammo. Throw a Sparc or TR-25 on there and 10 mags or so, and you can have a nice little servicble setup for under $1K.
+1. I was just about to post about him having more comon sense and being more level headed at 16, then half the people who live on this site.
You would be HIGHLY served to also research elsewhere on the net. M4C tends to get some pretty polar (and many times wrong) personalites that care more about brand then the actual merits of the product.
There are also much more "informed" folks on this forum than any other.
C4
There are also much more "informed" folks on this forum than any other.
C4
Opinion and informed opinion are two very different things to be sure.
if we're going to let non mil-spec 6061 extruded receivers fly why not save a few more bucks and get an 8620 bolt and 4140 barrel steel?
to me, it's also the idea of them trying to sneak this by. because how many of you just saw the words "mil-spec" and "buffer tube" and just assumed forged 7075? comes across as shady to me, and makes me wonder if any other corners are cut. I'll buy PSA stripped lowers but not their LPKs with buffer tubes
+1. I was just about to post about him having more comon sense and being more level headed at 16, then half the people who live on this site.
You would be HIGHLY served to also research elsewhere on the net.
On a general merit, the net has such a high noise to signal ratio, I tend to advise people find a few solid sources of intel, and stick to them until such a time they have the knowledge of the topic to discriminate between the signal to noise of the topic at hand. Using a topic I know, nutrition, supplements for example: I find people simply get more confused the more sources they look at on the 'net unless/until they have a base understanding to be able to discriminate between noise and signal and know BS from useful, and or at least enough to know where to go for clarification on the subject.
Personally, people new to a topic, I will mention a few sites/sources I trust, and tell them to stick to those like glue to prevent intel over load/paralysis by analysis.
M4C seems to be a very concentrated source of very good info on the AR platform (recommend to me by a source I trust) and fire arms/fire arm related info.
That's not to say others don't exist of course.
M4C tends to get some pretty polar (and many times wrong) personalites that care more about brand then the actual merits of the product.
Well now you've done it! :D
if we're going to let non mil-spec 6061 extruded receivers fly why not save a few more bucks and get an 8620 bolt and 4140 barrel steel?
to me, it's also the idea of them trying to sneak this by. because how many of you just saw the words "mil-spec" and "buffer tube" and just assumed forged 7075? comes across as shady to me, and makes me wonder if any other corners are cut. I'll buy PSA stripped lowers but not their LPKs with buffer tubes
I know I though that when I bought the PSA complete lower... Yeah I'm a little disappointed, But I think comparing the receiver ext. to the bolt/barrel, eh... I guess I'll try to remember to have the stock completely collapsed if I ever have to mortar it...
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 10:12
On a general merit, the net has such a high noise to signal ratio, I tend to advise people find a few solid sources of intel, and stick to them until such a time they have the knowledge of the topic to discriminate between the signal to noise of the topic at hand. Using a topic I know, nutrition, supplements for example: I find people simply get more confused the more sources they look at on the 'net unless/until they have a base understanding to be able to discriminate between noise and signal and know BS from useful, and or at least enough to know where to go for clarification on the subject.
Personally, people new to a topic, I will mention a few sites/sources I trust, and tell them to stick to those like glue to prevent intel over load/paralysis by analysis.
M4C seems to be a very concentrated source of very good info on the AR platform (recommend to me by a source I trust) and fire arms/fire arm related info.
That's not to say others don't exist of course.
Well now you've done it! :D
I agree with almost everything you have said. However, the gear snobs and brand pushers here eclipse anything I have ever seen on the internet.
I mean, its almost as if G&R and/or BCM owned this site.
You do some searching around the net, you might be suprised what you find about some sites. Some of us have been lurking around the firearms boards since the mid-late 90's. There is alot of drama that has gone down, and most people have no idea.
I come here beacuse there IS good info that is pushed, and some people whose opinion I respect, also post here. It is better than most of the sites and although some of the info may be a bit bias, most of the bullshit it kept to a min. I shoot mostly high end gear and products, but that will not keep me from acknowledging that there are many cheaper products that are completly servicble and for 90% of shooters (including most on this site) is more that adaquate.
I agree with almost everything you have said. However, the gear snobs and brand pushers here eclipse anything I have ever seen on the internet.
I mean, its almost as if G&R and/or BCM owned this site.
You do some searching around the net, you might be suprised what you find about some sites. Some of us have been lurking around the firearms boards since the mid-late 90's. There is alot of drama that has gone down, and most people have no idea.
I come here beacuse there IS good info that is pushed, and some people whose opinion I respect, also post here. It is better than most of the sites and although some of the info may be a bit bias, most of the bullshit it kept to a min. I shoot mostly high end gear and products, but that will not keep me from acknowledging that there are many cheaper products that are completly servicble and for 90% of shooters (including most on this site) is more that adaquate.
It may be what I call internet site group think but Colt, BCM and Daniel Defense put out the highest quality build and material on the market for a reasonable price.
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 10:18
I know I though that when I bought the PSA complete lower... Yeah I'm a little disappointed, But I think comparing the receiver ext. to the bolt/barrel, eh... I guess I'll try to remember to have the stock completely collapsed if I ever have to mortar it...
Everyone knows that only 7075t6 is an acceptable aloy for buttstroking the enemy to death. 6061 will just disenegrate into pixie dust rendering your weapon useless.
If people even stopped to think about what material is being used for what application, none of this BS would even come up.
You can tell the difference between how a 4140/4150/CMV barrel shoots? The company cutting/Forging the barrel is 1000 times more important than the type of steel they use. Its the same kind of ignrance that makes people think that CHF is somehow a better/more expensive way to make a barrel than RifleCut/Button. They will sure as hell pay a premium for it, nonetheless.
Tell me how a buffer tube even starts to see the same kind of pressure that a barrel , much less an upper (which does not even take a fraction of the presure/heat the barrel and barrel extension take) sees? Oh yeah, the TDP says it so it must be truth.
I agree with almost everything you have said. However, the gear snobs and brand pushers here eclipse anything I have ever seen on the internet.
I mean, its almost as if G&R and/or BCM owned this site.
You do some searching around the net, you might be suprised what you find about some sites. Some of us have been lurking around the firearms boards since the mid-late 90's. There is alot of drama that has gone down, and most people have no idea.
I come here beacuse there IS good info that is pushed, and some people whose opinion I respect, also post here. It is better than most of the sites and although some of the info may be a bit bias, most of the bullshit it kept to a min. I shoot mostly high end gear and products, but that will not keep me from acknowledging that there are many cheaper products that are completly servicble and for 90% of shooters (including most on this site) is more that adaquate.
So long as those cheaper products are very clear and up front about why their product is cheaper, it's all good.
But if you pay as much attention as you seem to, surely you have noticed that a great number of people fall victim to marketing, such as in this case, and think that a part is something it is not due to the wording used by the manufacturer/retail. That "milspec diameter" phrase used here is a textbook perfect example.
There is a difference between a person making an informed decision that a 6061 receiver extension that was made with a diameter that allows milspec stocks is plenty for them and a great way to save a few bucks, and a person thinking they are buying a 7075-T6 (etc) milspec part because they read into the statement, just like the manufacturing/marketing department intended.
So long as those cheaper products are very clear and up front about why their product is cheaper, it's all good.
But if you pay as much attention as you seem to, surely you have noticed that a great number of people fall victim to marketing, such as in this case, and think that a part is something it is not due to the wording used by the manufacturer/retail. That "milspec diameter" phrase used here is a textbook perfect example.
There is a difference between a person making an informed decision that a 6061 receiver extension that was made with a diameter that allows milspec stocks is plenty for them and a great way to save a few bucks, and a person thinking they are buying a 7075-T6 (etc) milspec part because they read into the statement, just like the manufacturing/marketing department intended.
I fell victim to this. :(
I hope my S&W came with 7075-T6 RE.
Assembling my new lower, I used a generic "Mil-Spec" RE, I know for a fact now that just means diameter.
I, however, think I will never notice the difference.
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 10:25
It may be what I call internet site group think but Colt, BCM and Daniel Defense put out the highest quality build and material on the market for a reasonable price.
The only one of those that even comes close to a "reasonable" price compared with the rest of the market is Colt. There is no disputing that they make good products, but both BCM and DD has drasticaly increased their prices over the years into premium AR territory. In fact, I build a DD rifle on their website beacuse I had just bought a V5LW and wanted to see what they cost, it was damn near 1800 for a rifle with a rail. That is pushing SR15 territory, and most will agree, quality and perfmance is not even in the same balpark.
When you can build a rifle with good parts for aroun $700-800, it starts to make your $11-1200 6920 (which are carbines, not even middies with that retarded m4 cut barrel) not as attractive. Thats a AP or Eotech difference for what really ammounts to nothing.
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 10:29
So long as those cheaper products are very clear and up front about why their product is cheaper, it's all good.
But if you pay as much attention as you seem to, surely you have noticed that a great number of people fall victim to marketing, such as in this case, and think that a part is something it is not due to the wording used by the manufacturer/retail. That "milspec diameter" phrase used here is a textbook perfect example.
There is a difference between a person making an informed decision that a 6061 receiver extension that was made with a diameter that allows milspec stocks is plenty for them and a great way to save a few bucks, and a person thinking they are buying a 7075-T6 (etc) milspec part because they read into the statement, just like the manufacturing/marketing department intended.
When a company says Milspec for a tube or RE, they are talking about the geometry. This is how the distinguish it from a commercial one.
Milspec - fits Milspec Stocks
Commercial - Fits Commcercial stocks
PSA is not being misleading whatsoever. Hell they probally buy their tubes from the same place 75% of the other manufactures buy theirs from.
You are the only one that seems to be hung up on the type of alloy they use, as if it even made a lick of difference in the perfomance of the rifle. You wouldn't even know the difference if it wasnt labeled. In the remote and extreamley rare chance that your tube was to fail, you think a 7075 vs a 6061 is going to make a difference? The tube does not even come close to getting the heat and pressure that other parts that even start to matter what type of alloy is used. Get real.
"Milspec diameter" IS NOT milspec. It is simply the same diameter as milspec.
That's why they don't simply call it milspec, and that is why they don't list what it is made from. Because I guarantee it's 6061 or similar, and not the 7075 that is milspec.
Please read more carefully.
I did read carefully. on their site they list two Mil Spec Diameter RE, one 7075 and one 6061, both 6 position.
how is it you know which one is included?..
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 10:33
I fell victim to this. :(
I hope my S&W came with 7075-T6 RE.
Assembling my new lower, I used a generic "Mil-Spec" RE, I know for a fact now that just means diameter.
I, however, think I will never notice the difference.
This is the kind of shit I am talking about.
Some people on this site get the rooks and novies all worked up over what ammounts to bullshit, and then they are running around worrying about insignificant shit, when they should be focused on learning to shoot and improving their skills.
Its like an episode of the twighlight zone.
...
This is why marketing departments exist. To knowingly and intentionally mislead people into believing they are buying something they are not, without ever actually lying. It's all about what you say, and what you don't say.
That has been and will be the case for almost all manufactures of all products.
It will always be "buyer beware".
Most marketers will always have low cost options like what the OP posted.
It is another good reason to do your own DD and find and use quality sites like M4carbine to know to ask exactly what kind of Rec Ext it has and know the difference.
To know that a 6061 Rec Ext. is not as strong allows lets the buyer make an informed decision.
I would prefer that PSA would operate differently, but, I can deal with them the way they are.
There are other places that offer good deals and more options.
The only one of those that even comes close to a "reasonable" price compared with the rest of the market is Colt. There is no disputing that they make good products, but both BCM and DD has drasticaly increased their prices over the years into premium AR territory. In fact, I build a DD rifle on their website beacuse I had just bought a V5LW and wanted to see what they cost, it was damn near 1800 for a rifle with a rail. That is pushing SR15 territory, and most will agree, quality and perfmance is not even in the same balpark.
When you can build a rifle with good parts for around $700-800, it starts to make your $11-1200 6920 (which are carbines, not even middies with that retarded m4 cut barrel) not as attractive. Thats a AP or Eotech difference for what really ammounts to nothing.
Parts/current price list with links for this?
I did read carefully. on their site they list two Mil Spec Diameter RE, one 7075 and one 6061, both 6 position.
how is it you know which one is included?..
I'll PayPal you $15 if the 7075-T6 RE is the one included in the product listed in the OP.
Get PSA to tell us which one it is.
There is a reason they say what they do. That is not the mil-spec receiver extension.
It shouldn't be a big deal, just tell customers up front exactly what it is that is being sold. Simple as that.
All I wanted to know was if anybody knows if PSA lets you choose to pay more to substitute on products like that for people who might want the "premium" 7075 tube and an H (or H2 or whatever) buffer.
But according to some people full disclosure and options seems to be a bad thing because apparently there's no way that anybody who wants an H buffer and 7075 RE is concerned with actually shooting. :confused:
I agree with almost everything you have said. However, the gear snobs and brand pushers here eclipse anything I have ever seen on the internet.
I mean, its almost as if G&R and/or BCM owned this site.
Oh come on bro, you know that aint the case. I solid list of brands are "go to" in addition to those on M4C. We don't need to list them, but you're exaggerating heavily. Yes, the same brands tend to pop up, but they should it appears from all I have gathered at least.
I think the major hang up is this:
Those who point out X brands is more than likely good enough for 90% of shooters out there, and those who will claim those brands are just as good as the DD, BCM, Colts, out there.
You know one is true, one is not, but the concepts tend to get tangled together. BM makes an AR that is probably perfectly fine for 90% of shooters who out 100-200rnds a year through an AR at the range. As does all manner of brands.
But even at the lower costs ends, people may be better off with one brand (say the S&W) vs say BM.
That's as much as I can say on the matter as it's getting outside my lane.
As for industry related drama, I tend to stay out of it as I have enough to deal with in my own industry, but if you have a few threads you think I should read on other forums, PM me the URL.
I agree with almost everything you have said. However, the gear snobs and brand pushers here eclipse anything I have ever seen on the internet.
I mean, its almost as if G&R and/or BCM owned this site.
You do some searching around the net, you might be suprised what you find about some sites. Some of us have been lurking around the firearms boards since the mid-late 90's. There is alot of drama that has gone down, and most people have no idea.
I come here beacuse there IS good info that is pushed, and some people whose opinion I respect, also post here. It is better than most of the sites and although some of the info may be a bit bias, most of the bullshit it kept to a min. I shoot mostly high end gear and products, but that will not keep me from acknowledging that there are many cheaper products that are completly servicble and for 90% of shooters (including most on this site) is more that adaquate.
I too have been on gun forums since the 90's. From my experience, what people THINK they know and what they ACTUALLY know are two different things (as they were never directly involved in any of the conversations).
For me personally, I am and have been friends with Paul (owner of BCM). There is no more trustworthy, honest guy in the firearms industry than him. NONE! So ya, I like to see his company do well and fully support him. If that makes me a "fan boy" or "brand pusher," I will wear that title with pleasure!
I also stock Colt, DD, S&W, Noveske, KAC and LMT AR's. Could I stock other brands of AR's? Yes. By monday, I could have a shelf full of DPMS, BM, RRA, Oly, etc. I CHOOSE not to though. Why? Because at the end of the day, their products are just a little bit cheaper than the quality AR's so why bother with the hassle of returns, broken parts or guns not running?? As they say, "Juice is not worth the squeeze."
At the end of the day, we all like what we like and that is just fine with me.
C4
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 10:48
Parts/current price list with links for this?
Take my OP + http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/featured/psa-ss12g2-chf-16-5-56mm-1-7-mid-length-a2-profile.html
Then you can order 10 Mags, a TR25 and a few boxes of ammo and still be under $1000.
Take my OP + http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/featured/psa-ss12g2-chf-16-5-56mm-1-7-mid-length-a2-profile.html
Then you can order 10 Mags, a TR25 and a few boxes of ammo and still be under $1000.
Not bad.
This deal is good for those in at-risk states who don't know how to put together a complete lower. For those that do, I don't really think this is that great (stripped lowers are going for $70-$100 almost every week now!). For the same price you can build something with better parts (like an ALG QMS trigger and actual milspec RE w/ H buffer).
This is the kind of shit I am talking about.
Some people on this site get the rooks and novies all worked up over what ammounts to bullshit, and then they are running around worrying about insignificant shit, when they should be focused on learning to shoot and improving their skills.
Its like an episode of the twighlight zone.
actually this isn't bullshit. there is a difference in products that matter to people who need the best because their lives or the lives of others depend on it. if you look at the founding goals/principles of this site, that is what the mission is here. other sites may have other focuses, such as, hunting, gaming, sporting use of an AR. there is nothing wrong with that as far as that goes. but it's wrong to say one is the same as another...
now, to the RE in question, it says Mil Spec Diameter, no mention of the material used and they do have RE with both materials available... to most people the diameter is the critical component as it determines the type of stock. all in all, we are talking about a budget build, using a blem lower and I would not be surprised if the RE is one of their 6061 as it fits the cost model.
however, I don't think it's misleading as no claims of excellence are made and regardless of the material, 6061 will be a serviceable piece for 99.99% of the people out there in all their uses. and for the .01% that need the better product, they probably won't be looking at $199 complete lowers anyway.
the problem I have with this discussion, is that someone has guaranteed (assumed) that the RE is shit and is basically accusing PSA of underhanded dealing. there's a reason this Complete Blem Lower is $199 other people's are $350. caveat emptor...
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 11:00
I too have been on gun forums since the 90's. From my experience, what people THINK they know and what they ACTUALLY know are two different things (as they were never directly involved in any of the conversations).
For me personally, I am and have been friends with Paul (owner of BCM). There is no more trustworthy, honest guy in the firearms industry than him. NONE! So ya, I like to see his company do well and fully support him. If that makes me a "fan boy" or "brand pusher," I will wear that title with pleasure!
I also stock Colt, DD, S&W, Noveske, KAC and LMT AR's. Could I stock other brands of AR's? Yes. By monday, I could have a shelf full of DPMS, BM, RRA, Oly, etc. I CHOOSE not to though. Why? Because at the end of the day, their products are just a little bit cheaper than the quality AR's so why bother with the hassle of returns, broken parts or guns not running?? As they say, "Juice is not worth the squeeze."
At the end of the day, we all like what we like and that is just fine with me.
C4
Grant, I understand where you are coming from. Historicaly, the price between BM/DPMS and companies like colt, early LMT, Early BCM were about the same. In that case there is no comparison.
We have been fortunate to have alot of newer companies come out who do not make AR's the old way. We have options now. There are good products at all price points.
I have seen too many of these "garbage brands" that certian people here bash, run... and run well. Just beacuse it does not have BCM or DD or a pony on the side of it, doesn't mean it's a POS.
It used to be that we evaluate a product, then grade it. Now, people look at a compnany or even a price point, and have their mind made up before they even see the product.
Can you honestly tell me that a new shooter with limited funds and somone who just wants to learn to shoot, needs to go out and buy a $1500 BCM or DD rifle, when they can get a quality, lower priced brand.
I have spent alot of money with you over the years grant. In fact you, build me a couple uppers when I was still in Iraq in 2005. The problem is you only recomend products that you sell, and tend to demonize those you don't. Anyone who has been on the board for more than a few months can see this.
Back to the whole point of this thread was to let people who want to buy a few or a bunch of realitive inexpesnive, YET SERVICEABLE lowers have a stab before they sell out.
My go to guns are KAC. That doesn't mean I have any sort of issue picking up a PSA or Spikes rifle and shooting the piss out of it.
....
When you can build a rifle with good parts for around. $700-800,
...."good" is subjective and that is where we start the pissing contest as to what is "good enough" and "good as".
Those that have a desire for home owner quality subjectively believe that their economy weapons is GTG.
Most on this sight prefer combat ready weapons and objectively pick the weapons in the upper price range.
In both of these situations, knowledge is power, not emotion or lack of waiting and saving 1K worth of ammo to get a truly better weapon!
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 11:02
This deal is good for those in at-risk states who don't know how to put together a complete lower. For those that do, I don't really think this is that great (stripped lowers are going for $70-$100 almost every week now!). For the same price you can build something with better parts (like an ALG QMS trigger and actual milspec RE w/ H buffer).
Price out a lower, good LPK, Tube/spring/buffer, MOE stock, MOE Grip and MOE TG and let me know how that works. The fact that it's already built and ready to go is just icing on the cake.
No shit u can build a better lower, but thats not the point of one thats $199, ready to rock.
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 11:06
...."good" is subjective and that is where we start the pissing contest as to what is "good enough" and "good as".
Those that have a desire for home owner quality subjectively believe that their economy weapons is GTG.
Most on this sight prefer combat ready weapons and objectively pick the weapons in the upper price range.
In both of these situations, knowledge is power, not emotion or lack of waiting and saving 1K worth of ammo to get a truly better weapon!
Combat weapons? Are we a little high on our horse now. What exactly is a combat weapon? One of my combat weapon's (used in combat) was a piece of shit H&R m16A2 that had more miles on it than jenna jamson. It was a malfunction machine, and the only way I was able to get it replaced, was by smashing the barrel on the side of a 5 ton.
The snobbery around here is sickening. People seem to have this illusion that if they hang around a website that LAV, Haley, Pat Rodgers use, they are somehow an equal. Then they can piss on those who aren't as "enlightened".....
steyrman13
08-16-13, 11:08
Combat weapons? Are we a little high on our horse now. What exactly is a combat weapon? One of my combat weapon's (used in combat) was a piece of shit H&R m16A2 that had more miles on it than jenna jamson. It was a malfunction machine, and the only way I was able to get it replaced, was by smashing the barrel on the side of a 5 ton.
The snobbery around here is sickening. People seem to have this illusion that if they hang around a website that LAV, Haley, Pat Rodgers use, they are somehow an equal. Then they can piss on those who aren't as "enlightened".....
If this site is sooo sickening, so much snobbery, and you disagree with the knowledge base, then why stick around?
I believe Grant supports those brands because he has seen less issues and failures from them and doesn't support other ones because he has.
Same as some mechanic or sponsor supporting Chevy over ford or ford over dodge etc.
I understand your OP for people looking for a cheap deal, some just had concerns that they could pay skittle extra to configure it differently like BCM or G&R offer on their deals
I have seen too many of these "garbage brands" that certian people here bash, run... and run well. Just beacuse it does not have BCM or DD or a pony on the side of it, doesn't mean it's a POS.
It used to be that we evaluate a product, then grade it. Now, people look at a compnany or even a price point, and have their mind made up before they even see the product.
Can you honestly tell me that a new shooter with limited funds and somone who just wants to learn to shoot, needs to go out and buy a $1500 BCM or DD rifle, when they can get a quality, lower priced brand.
the easy answer here is if you stick with the B,C, or D brand, you don't have to evaluate it - it's a known good product. the unfortunate thing is that some models of the "lesser" brands will cost just as much...
a lot of inexperienced buyers will be tricked into this because of the bells and whistles that boost the price but do not add to the quality/reliability of the firearm. it's like buying a lower priced car with the entire catalog full of options on it, still not being as good a car as the better one with fewer options.
you are right about snap judgements though. for awhile I was running a GG&G upper on a Rock River lower. anyone looking at this gun might assume it was trash. what they would not know is that the lower was bought stripped and I built with quality components. the GG&G upper was made for them by LMT using their barrel (although it was a 1/9 twist) and BCG. the only sketchy thing about it was the GG&G rail and folding front sight/gas block. not that it didn't work - it was actually pretty clever - but rail was not free float and they were heavy.
when I was able to afford more guns I only bought top quality ones and later sold that gun to someone I care very much about. it has over 7,000 rounds on the original components and hasn't missed a beat. and it's still very accurate. not bad for a piece of trash, huh?..
actually this isn't bullshit. there is a difference in products that matter to people who need the best because their lives or the lives of others depend on it. if you look at the founding goals/principles of this site, that is what the mission is here. other sites may have other focuses, such as, hunting, gaming, sporting use of an AR. there is nothing wrong with that as far as that goes. but it's wrong to say one is the same as another...
now, to the RE in question, it says Mil Spec Diameter, no mention of the material used and they do have RE with both materials available... to most people the diameter is the critical component as it determines the type of stock. all in all, we are talking about a budget build, using a blem lower and I would not be surprised if the RE is one of their 6061 as it fits the cost model.
however, I don't think it's misleading as no claims of excellence are made and regardless of the material, 6061 will be a serviceable piece for 99.99% of the people out there in all their uses. and for the .01% that need the better product, they probably won't be looking at $199 complete lowers anyway.
the problem I have with this discussion, is that someone has guaranteed (assumed) that the RE is shit and is basically accusing PSA of underhanded dealing. there's a reason this Complete Blem Lower is $199 other people's are $350. caveat emptor...
http://www.fotoblography.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/straw-man.jpg
Grant, I understand where you are coming from. Historicaly, the price between BM/DPMS and companies like colt, early LMT, Early BCM were about the same. In that case there is no comparison.
We have been fortunate to have alot of newer companies come out who do not make AR's the old way. We have options now. There are good products at all price points.
I have seen too many of these "garbage brands" that certian people here bash, run... and run well. Just beacuse it does not have BCM or DD or a pony on the side of it, doesn't mean it's a POS.
It used to be that we evaluate a product, then grade it. Now, people look at a compnany or even a price point, and have their mind made up before they even see the product.
Can you honestly tell me that a new shooter with limited funds and somone who just wants to learn to shoot, needs to go out and buy a $1500 BCM or DD rifle, when they can get a quality, lower priced brand.
I have spent alot of money with you over the years grant. In fact you, build me a couple uppers when I was still in Iraq in 2005. The problem is you only recomend products that you sell, and tend to demonize those you don't. Anyone who has been on the board for more than a few months can see this.
Back to the whole point of this thread was to let people who want to buy a few or a bunch of realitive inexpesnive, YET SERVICEABLE lowers have a stab before they sell out.
My go to guns are KAC. That doesn't mean I have any sort of issue picking up a PSA or Spikes rifle and shooting the piss out of it.
From what I know of Grant to date, I think he tends to sell what he recommends, vs recommends what he sells. There's a difference in my book.
Combat weapons? Are we a little high on our horse now. What exactly is a combat weapon? One of my combat weapon's (used in combat) was a piece of shit H&R m16A2 that had more miles on it than jenna jamson. It was a malfunction machine, and the only way I was able to get it replaced, was by smashing the barrel on the side of a 5 ton.
The snobbery around here is sickening. People seem to have this illusion that if they hang around a website that LAV, Haley, Pat Rodgers use, they are somehow an equal. Then they can piss on those who aren't as "enlightened".....
Just because you used a particular weapon in combat was a POS, does not have shit to do with the a type or class of weapon that you would consider for use in combat.
I respect your service in combat.
....but a little less emotion man!
I do think that you seem to have a very caustic attitude and dislike for this site, too bad you feel this way.
You seem to jump to conclusions and can not tolerate any other fact or opinions.
Hope you have a good day anyway!
PSA 6-Position Mil-Spec Diameter Buffer Tube 6061, $24.99
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/ar-15-05/lower-parts/individual-parts/palmetto-state-armory-6-position-mil-spec-buffer-tube.html
PSA Complete 5 Position Mil-Spec Diameter Buffer Tube Assembly, $49.95
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/ar-15-05/lower-parts/individual-parts/psa-complete-5-position-mil-spec-diameter-buffer-tube-assembly.html
PSA 6-Position Mil-Spec Diameter Buffer Tube 7075, $34.95
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/ar-15-05/lower-parts/individual-parts/palmetto-state-armory-6-position-mil-spec-buffer-tube-6305.html
...The problem is you [Grant] only recommend products that you sell, and tend to demonize those you don't. Anyone who has been on the board for more than a few months can see this...
Grant sells what he recommends and refuses to sell what he "demonizes". There is a distinct difference.
There are technical reason to choose a 7075 RE over one made from 6061. The threads of the 6061 part are going to be softer and greater care must be taken during assembly to prevent damaging them. If made from a forging, 7075 is a better choice. 6061 is a poor choice of material for forging as it's susceptible to intergranular inclusions which cause corrosion. That's why AR receivers were changed from 6061 to 7075 very early on. This isn't a problem if the RE is extruded. 6061 is a better alloy for extruding than 7075.
From a practical standpoint, the shooter probably won't see a difference in performance between a forged RE made of 7075 and an extruded RE made of 6061, but the difference in price is a mere $10. You make a good point about barrels, but that discussion would completely derail this thread.
When it comes to advertising, it's been my experience that the buyer needs to learn the language of the seller, whether it's PSA, BCM, G&R Tactical or anyone else. Some are clear, some are harder to understand and some rely heavily on obfuscation and misdirection. It's up to the buyer to determine what the seller is saying or hiding and make their purchases accordingly
So who has data on failure rates for PA lowers?
I picked up one of these lowers for $199. Mental masturbation aside its a good deal. I tend to be a "stockpiler" and I make no bones about it. I do not resale for profit either. Its not a matter of "if" there is another serious threat to our rights but "when".
Grant, I understand where you are coming from. Historicaly, the price between BM/DPMS and companies like colt, early LMT, Early BCM were about the same. In that case there is no comparison.
We have been fortunate to have alot of newer companies come out who do not make AR's the old way. We have options now. There are good products at all price points.
I have seen too many of these "garbage brands" that certian people here bash, run... and run well. Just beacuse it does not have BCM or DD or a pony on the side of it, doesn't mean it's a POS.
The definition of "good" is always in the eye of the beholder. Most people shoot UNDER 500rds a YEAR. In this instance, buy whatever you like (as it really doesn't matter).
It used to be that we evaluate a product, then grade it. Now, people look at a compnany or even a price point, and have their mind made up before they even see the product.
At least for me, the ONLY factory built gun I actually shoot is a KAC SR15 MOD1. All my AR's are built by ME from parts that I like. So I evaluate AR's on their quality of components and how they are assembled. Everything else is irrelevant.
Can you honestly tell me that a new shooter with limited funds and somone who just wants to learn to shoot, needs to go out and buy a $1500 BCM or DD rifle, when they can get a quality, lower priced brand.
Who says they have to spend that? I have BCM and Colt AR's in stock for a little over $1k! Hell, buy the best CHEAP AR on the market (S&W SPORT)! Nothing beats it IMHO.
I have spent alot of money with you over the years grant. In fact you, build me a couple uppers when I was still in Iraq in 2005. The problem is you only recomend products that you sell, and tend to demonize those you don't. Anyone who has been on the board for more than a few months can see this.
Demonize is a pretty aggressive word I think. Tell the truth is more like it.
Back to the whole point of this thread was to let people who want to buy a few or a bunch of realitive inexpesnive, YET SERVICEABLE lowers have a stab before they sell out.
This really isn't the forum forum that. There is a thread for that topic.
C4
Since people are getting "technical", nothing is truly milspec unless if it is produced for procurement under a .gov contract and manufactured by a certified / contracted manufacturer / vendor and meets the TDP specs and goes under .gov inspectors and passes those inspections.
From what I know of Grant to date, I think he tends to sell what he recommends, vs recommends what he sells. There's a difference in my book.
Correct Sir. When I have a COP or .MIL guy standing in my shop asking me what gun should they bet their life on, I cannot recommend (in good conscience) a gun that I do not believe in. Other dealers might be able to sleep at night, but I cannot.
So if I won't own it, I don't sell it. Simple as that. Let us also realize that the BULK of the gun business is in the LOW END firearms, accessories and ammo (like 80%). I choose to only operate in the 20% (high quality items). Could I make more money if I lowered my standards? Yep, sure could.
C4
steyrman13
08-16-13, 13:14
Since people are getting "technical", nothing is truly milspec unless if it is produced for procurement under a .gov contract and manufactured by a certified / contracted manufacturer / vendor and meets the TDP specs and goes under .gov inspectors and passes those inspections.
No disrespect here, more of a curiousness of semantics. If I were to build a house to a specification set to DR Horton, would that house not be a "DR Horton Spec" house? Same concept. If it is built to the Military Specifications outlined in the TDP, could not any manufacturer who follows the specs be building a "Milspec" rifle. Meaning built to spec? There would be no way to "prove" that it is built to Milspec without testing it, but if it proved to be built with the called for materials and to the dimensions and "specs" than would it not be " Milspec?"
I do ask this bc I have seen people bring this up many times here and other places.
Grand58742
08-16-13, 13:22
So what some of you are saying...
That this:
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/16-m4-cmv-chrome-lined-premium-rifle-kit-2632.html
Added to one of the blemished lowers they throw on sale from time to time for around $70 which brings the grand total up to $570 is not a good deal?
It does have the proper specs on the BCG and barrel. But minus the 7075 RE and H1 buffer, so add in another $23 for the buffer, $35 for the RE and you still come in well under seven bills for the whole thing.
I understand some want the "best" for hard use carbines, but are we getting too far into specifics to see that sometimes inexpensive does not mean cheap?
So what some of you are saying...
That this:
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/16-m4-cmv-chrome-lined-premium-rifle-kit-2632.html
Added to one of the blemished lowers they throw on sale from time to time for around $70 which brings the grand total up to $570 is not a good deal?
It does have the proper specs on the BCG and barrel. But minus the 7075 RE and H1 buffer, so add in another $23 for the buffer, $35 for the RE and you still come in well under seven bills for the whole thing.
I understand some want the "best" for hard use carbines, but are we getting too far into specifics to see that sometimes inexpensive does not mean cheap?
I think it is an excellent deal and everyone should buy them up (for no other reason than a hot spare).
C4
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 13:27
Since people are getting "technical", nothing is truly milspec unless if it is produced for procurement under a .gov contract and manufactured by a certified / contracted manufacturer / vendor and meets the TDP specs and goes under .gov inspectors and passes those inspections.
Right on.
If people had any idea of the ammount of items/compononets we reject before acceptance or get sent back as latent defects, then their head would spin.
All Milspec (not RE's) means is thats what the dod or agency speced or required . I could write a 500 page white paper on the history of procurement , purchasing, and government design oriented products that would make you never want to use the word milspec, again.
Long story short, just beacuse some agency or DoD wants something (and if they designed it, 90% of the time it will not work/fail) does not mean the product is the best of its type.
It's become a buzz word that I equate with terms like "bananna clips".
Right on.
If people had any idea of the ammount of items/compononets we reject before acceptance or get sent back as latent defects, then their head would spin.
All Milspec (not RE's) means is thats what the dod or agency speced or required . I could write a 500 page white paper on the history of procurement , purchasing, and government design oriented products that would make you never want to use the word milspec, again.
Long story short, just beacuse some agency or DoD wants something (and if they designed it, 90% of the time it will not work/fail) does not mean the product is the best of its type.
It's become a buzz word that I equate with terms like "bananna clips".
This is why informed consumers who do their due diligence learn what the milspec is, and determine for themselves if it's "better" than other choices, or not, and if it's worth the [likely] additional cost, to them, or not.
Right on.
If people had any idea of the ammount of items/compononets we reject before acceptance or get sent back as latent defects, then their head would spin.
All Milspec (not RE's) means is thats what the dod or agency speced or required . I could write a 500 page white paper on the history of procurement , purchasing, and government design oriented products that would make you never want to use the word milspec, again.
Long story short, just beacuse some agency or DoD wants something (and if they designed it, 90% of the time it will not work/fail) does not mean the product is the best of its type.
It's become a buzz word that I equate with terms like "bananna clips".
I would agree that it IS possible to go ABOVE the TDP (no question). In fact, I can think of several ways to do it (economically) that would provide a superior product (IMHO).
With that said, VERY FEW companies meet the TDP.
So if companies are not meeting the TDP, what standard are they meeting???
C4
TurretGunner
08-16-13, 13:37
I would agree that it IS possible to go ABOVE the TDP (no question). In fact, I can think of several ways to do it (economically) that would provide a superior product (IMHO).
With that said, VERY FEW companies meet the TDP.
So if companies are not meeting the TDP, what standard are they meeting???
C4
I tend to defer to the manufacture as the expert in relation to their products. They are the ones who did the R&D, engineering, sourcing of materials, manufacturing, QC, ect.
There is no standard for AR15's outside of what we accept as "standard".
The TDP is ONE baseline set forth to build the M16/M4. Are there better ways to do things? Aboslutley.
Knowning what we know about the Stoner System, and how it works, incorporating new techologies into it, I think the TDP is less relevent then when everyone was worrying about weather or not the the FSB was markerd or it was parked underneath.
I shoot a SR15M1, just like you. We can both agree, that it's not standard, and that its proablly the best product on the market of its type (AR15).
skijunkie55
08-16-13, 13:46
Is it just me, or hasn't this horse been beaten enough?
I feel like a quality vs standards vs price discussion happens every single time something like this is posted (BCG, Barrels, Triggers...)
While I enjoy the page after page of Brand A vs Brand B vs the US Military standard, couldn't we just drop the OP into the "Where can I get it" thread and be done? It is a great deal. PSA has lots of them lately.
flamesuit (on)
Carry on....
http://i.imgur.com/Hkq3c.gif
Oh, and Happy Friday everyone :D
No disrespect here, more of a curiousness of semantics. If I were to build a house to a specification set to DR Horton, would that house not be a "DR Horton Spec" house? Same concept. If it is built to the Military Specifications outlined in the TDP, could not any manufacturer who follows the specs be building a "Milspec" rifle. Meaning built to spec? There would be no way to "prove" that it is built to Milspec without testing it, but if it proved to be built with the called for materials and to the dimensions and "specs" than would it not be " Milspec?"
I do ask this bc I have seen people bring this up many times here and other places.You pretty much answered the question here. I am definitely not entering into the PSA lower argument just stating that nothing is truly milspec unless if it met what I stated in my first post. So what does this mean? It means that the government inspectors located at the manufacturers facility are ensuring that all materials, build process and testing is done in accordance to the TDP.
As for others who build parts, rifles etc, they could state that they build towards meeting military specifications, however nothing is truly milspec. Milspec often implies that everything produced follows the same materials, build process, testing and protocol's developed for the TDP which is very often not the case. Not saying anything about PSA, but as an example of the receiver extension, just because it fits stocks designed for a tube that fits military specifications, does not make it Milspec.
Might sound like semantics, but the inference many companies use with the word or wording of "milspec" is often misleading to uninformed buyers. Just like if you built homes using DR Hortons designs. Might look like a DR Horton home and you claim it to be a DR Horton spec home, but who is to say that your build process, choice of materials and craftsmanship is of the same quality as DR Horton. Just to be fair it is possible to build a rifle that meets or exceeds military specifications, or you might actually build the home better than DR Horton, but that does not make it a DR Horton home or a milspec rifle.
Even if I use the exact same materials, testing, build process etc, that is similar to milspec standards, it is still not Milspec. It was built towards military specifications but it is not truly milspec. Semantics perhaps, but there is a certain amount of "implied" meaning or guarantee of quality build process, materials and testing when you label things milspec or DR Horton. How do I know that something touted as "milspec" is actually of true milspec quality? You don't really unless if a company goes far enough to provide proof of how their rifle is built, parts, materials used and testing process. Not many do that. Oh, btw, DR Horton is a poor example. ;)
Bottom line for me is, PSA seems to make pretty good entry level stuff, using some pretty good components at very impressive price points, and they seem to stand by their products. If it suits your needs and budget, go for it. If you prefer Colt, BCM, Noveske, etc...then buy that. But why to do have to go on and on with either nitpicking one brand, or trying to convince everyone they are all the same? Can'r we simply agree that there are differences in quality, and differences in price, and we should all attempt to meet our own needs? This shit gets old, especially on what is advertised as a serious use, no-nonsense, technical based forum.
Sorry a few posts popped up while I was typing. Indeed rifles can be built to exceed Milspec. Milspec is simply a minimal .gov standard that the manufacturer / vendor must follow / meet in order for it to pass inspection. On the plus side, it does tend to ensure that the commonly noted critical areas of the rifle are built to a certain standard, using certain material types and testing procedures that are known to produce a quality weapon.
Bottom line for me is, PSA seems to make pretty good entry level stuff, using some pretty good components at very impressive price points, and they seem to stand by their products. If it suits your needs and budget, go for it. If you prefer Colt, BCM, Noveske, etc...then buy that. But why to do have to go on and on with either nitpicking one brand, or trying to convince everyone they are all the same? Can'r we simply agree that there are differences in quality, and differences in price, and we should all attempt to meet our own needs? This shit gets old, especially on what is advertised as a serious use, no-nonsense, technical based forum.Maybe I need to re-read this thread. I don't see anyone here saying that the item mentioned in the first post was pure crap or too expensive and wouldn't work for the majority of enthusiasts out there? I don't think that anyone argued that there are differences in quality, prices and that everyone should purchase according to their own needs? I think this is often the sentiment of this forum. Be an informed buyer, purchase the best rifle that you can afford that meets your own individual needs. This does not mean that anyone should be delusional that all rifles are the same because they outwardly look alike. Because we know that they are not.
I tend to defer to the manufacture as the expert in relation to their products. They are the ones who did the R&D, engineering, sourcing of materials, manufacturing, QC, ect.
There is no standard for AR15's outside of what we accept as "standard".
Oooh, I wouldn't. Most AR "builders" don't know anything (as they do not make anything in house OR have products made to their drawings). On top of that, are only concerned about price point.
There are tons of standards for AR15's. Colt builds theirs identically to how M4's are made. BCM follows the TDP to the letter. There are others as well that do this.
The TDP is ONE baseline set forth to build the M16/M4. Are there better ways to do things? Aboslutley.
Agree. Which companies do it better?
Knowning what we know about the Stoner System, and how it works, incorporating new techologies into it, I think the TDP is less relevent then when everyone was worrying about weather or not the the FSB was markerd or it was parked underneath.
I shoot a SR15M1, just like you. We can both agree, that it's not standard, and that its proablly the best product on the market of its type (AR15).
The KAC gun (for the most part) follows the TDP (which is ONE of the reasons why it is so good).
C4
steyrman13
08-16-13, 14:13
You don't really unless if a company goes far enough to provide proof of how their rifle is built, parts, materials used and testing process. Not many do that. Oh, btw, DR Horton is a poor example. ;)
I know it was :) ,just tried to think of a recognizable name for most anyone.
I think you brought up my point in the above quote. DD I think has brought up enough to prove with LAV torture test, BCM as well with their T&E, which is why they are some of the recommended brands that meet or exceed Milspec.
Maybe I need to re-read this thread. I don't see anyone here saying that the item mentioned in the first post was pure crap or too expensive and wouldn't work for the majority of enthusiasts out there? I don't think that anyone argued that there are differences in quality, prices and that everyone should purchase according to their own needs? I think this is often the sentiment of this forum. Be an informed buyer, purchase the best rifle that you can afford that meets your own individual needs. This does not mean that anyone should be delusional that all rifles are the same because they outwardly look alike. Because we know that they are not.
I think we are on the same page actually. Maybe I blew this out of proportion, it just seemed one side was saying PSA was "just as good", and the other side was nitpicking PSA.
I think we are on the same page actually. Maybe I blew this out of proportion, it just seemed one side was saying PSA was "just as good", and the other side was nitpicking PSA.
Seemed more to me that this was mostly everyone agreeing it's decent price for what it is, but for a tad more, one can get a higher quality.
Which always spins into "good enough" for who is mostly to use it, and so forth.
I see milspec similar to other standards such as Iso and GMP, knowing something is made using those codified standards increases likelyhood of consistency and quality but in no way guarantees it. But, it's a good place to start...
Supplement companies for example may make a big deal out of a product being made in a GMP certified place, and the product itself may or may not be a POS.
Not identical comparison, but you get the gist. That's my (non expert) take on it anyway.
Almost impossible to believe that in one day we have all this over a fellow member alerting us of an otherwise great deal.
steyrman13
08-16-13, 15:33
Almost impossible to believe that in one day we have all this over a fellow member alerting us of an otherwise great deal.
I agree. I think the OP had good intentions of sharing a fairly good deal, especially for the ones with who he mentioned with a ban coming to their state. As Someone pointed out it may have been best suited in the "Where can I get it thread" maybe?
It took a turn south after about 12 or more posts
Turretgunner,
1. We have a thread for this kind of stuff. This isn't it.
2. This isn't the first time you have stirred the pot calling people brand snobs/whores, etc..
3. How much experience do you actually have with commercial type ARs from all the other manufacturers? Wait- don't answer that its irrelevant because I can guarantee that between Grant and myself we have seen hundreds and hundreds of them to include the failures and shortcomings.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.