View Full Version : Older DD or Newer 6720
I'm adding another AR to the family. used is as a general purpose, SHTF, HD backup carbine. I have two good choices at almost identical price points. One is an original Daniel Defense with the Savannah roll marks. The other is a colt 6720 with a 13 inch quad rail and low profile gas block well executed. the rifles are so similar and the amount of wear, which is almost none, so similar , it basically comes down to is either rifle inherently superior to the other? Your thoughts please? Thanks in advance
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
I have a DD M4V1 with the Savannah roll mark. Been flawless through 2,000+ rounds using a wide variety of ammo. Extremely accurate as well. Is the DD a full DD rifle and not just the lower? If so, the DD all day long. The 6720 is meh at best.(subjectively)
Yes, all DD. Weight equalled out by slightly heavier rail on Colt. Heavier bbl on DD. Why 6720 men?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Yes, all DD. Weight equalled out by slightly heavier rail on Colt. Heavier bbl on DD. Why 6720 men?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Meh, not men.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Not a fan of the lightweight barrel or the fact that the barrel isn't floating. It's less accurate than the DD. you'll have to drop money on the Colt to bring it up to par with the DD. Having typed that, if you don't need rails, floating barrel, or need a leightweight barrel, then the 6720 would probably fit your needs.
Colt has 13" ff quad rail and lo profile gas block. Thanks. Don't see why LW bbl less accurate unless faster loss because of heat under sustained fire.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
I'd buy a colt LT6720-R before either of those.
Yeah, well no one at my gun club has a used LT6720R- WTF for sale right now.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
You can buy one from gunbroker for $1100
556BlackRifle
07-31-15, 10:10
Colt has 13" ff quad rail and lo profile gas block. Thanks. Don't see why LW bbl less accurate unless faster loss because of heat under sustained fire.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
I'm not crazy about LW barrels in general (there are exceptions) because of rapid heat buildup and flex. IMO where an LW barrel shines is close quarters work, clearing rooms and such. For this reason, I might lean towards the Colt. But Then again, the DD is one hell of a nice rifle and possibly a better choice because the weight is the same and because it should be more accurate under sustained fire. Also, DD quality and workmanship is worth considering. I guess DD gets my vote but I wouldn't feel bad owning either one. (Buy both. ;) )
To me it would come down to the rail on the Colt. If it's a good rail that is equal to the DD, then I'd take the Colt. If not then I'd go DD.
To me it would come down to the rail on the Colt. If it's a good rail that is equal to the DD, then I'd take the Colt. If not then I'd go DD.
Colt has a Troy rail. Good, but not as good as DD. So the rifles themselves are roughly equal in quality?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Colt has a Troy rail. Good, but not as good as DD. So the rifles themselves are roughly equal in quality?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Id go DD then. I would take a Daniel Defense rail over a Troy, but that more of a personal preference thing.
As for quality Id say its a wash. The Daniel Defense has nicer parts than Colt but I wouldnt say its better quality.
DD is known to be over-gassed.
"It is known"?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
DD is known to be over-gassed.
I thought that was only their Mk18 barrels?
Id go DD then. I would take a Daniel Defense rail over a Troy, but that more of a personal preference thing.
As for quality Id say its a wash. The Daniel Defense has nicer parts than Colt but I wouldnt say its better quality.
It depends on how you define "nicer"
A DD rifle will have better cosmetics. The Colt will be more dimensionally in spec.
I thought that was only their Mk18 barrels?
It's both their 11.5" and 10.3" barrels. It could be others.
Thanks for the replays so far. I was leaning toward the DD until I started seeing a few remarks about early DDV1s from the Savannah days not being so hot. Of course, some say Colt quality is down. O Wizened Ones, what say you?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Thanks for the replays so far. I was leaning toward the DD until I started seeing a few remarks about early DDV1s from the Savannah days not being so hot. Of course, some say Colt quality is down. O Wizened Ones, what say you?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Colt quality has never been down.
There have been reports of over-gassing on all DD barrel lengths.
Do your own research.
There have been reports of over-gassing on all DD barrel lengths.
Do your own research.
Saw zip about 16" M4s being overgassed.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Ive shot and examined one DD 16" gun and one of their quasi mk18 guns. Both guns were carbine length gas systems and both were overgassed. All things being equal, id take a Colt over a DD...no question. However, the colt you mentioned has had work done on it (FF rail and lo pro gas block, right?). Im not too fond of the troy rail. Also, the gas block is a critical piece. What kind of lo pro gas block was installed? Id want to make certain that gas flow was squared away. What kind of rail is on that DD, a lite I?
Ive shot and examined one DD 16" gun and one of their quasi mk18 guns. Both guns were carbine length gas systems and both were overgassed. All things being equal, id take a Colt over a DD...no question. However, the colt you mentioned has had work done on it (FF rail and lo pro gas block, right?). Im not too fond of the troy rail. Also, the gas block is a critical piece. What kind of lo pro gas block was installed? Id want to make certain that gas flow was squared away. What kind of rail is on that DD, a lite I?
I was trying not to write a Russian novel. the FSB was Dremeled down. Best possible gas block.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
It depends on how you define "nicer"
A DD rifle will have better cosmetics. The Colt will be more dimensionally in spec.
How do you figure Colt is closer to spec? The commercial rifles are not built on the same machines as the government rifles. The machining centers Colt uses are probably 40 years old! I'll take DD QC over Colt any day of the week! Colt cannot compete. That's why they are where they are at today.
How do you figure Colt is closer to spec? The commercial rifles are not built on the same machines as the government rifles. The machining centers Colt uses are probably 40 years old! I'll take DD QC over Colt any day of the week! Colt cannot compete. That's why they are where they are at today.
Nope.
Colt got to where they are today because of unfunded union liabilities and lack of participation in the civilian marketplace.
It has nothing to do with QC or their engineering prowess.
Could you really go wrong either way? I know this threads talking point is choosing one or the other, but if the op is looking for "general purpose, SHTF, HD backup carbine" then I would not hesitate to either way. But if pressed, I would go with the Colt.
I'm not going to ask you how much either of the two rifles are priced at, but have you considered just buying a brand new rifle?
I'm not trying to come off ignorant of the question you posted, but today's prices on AR's are probably the best they'll be for a long time.
For example, a brand new Colt 6920 or 6720 will be ~$800(?); I may be off a little.
It's hard to imagine a far cheaper price than that, and with a new gun you have piece of mind that if something goes wrong you still have warranty. A gun that was tweaked with, or used always has that bit of uncertainty.
There was a thread here a while back where someone was considering buying/trading what appeared to be a very lightly used SR-15. Upon closer inspection it turned out someone somewhere replaced some critical parts with heavily worn out ones.
To me it would come down to the rail on the Colt. If it's a good rail that is equal to the DD, then I'd take the Colt. If not then I'd go DD.
Got beat to it - depends which rail (even within the rails from one manufacturer).
The great news is that the OP is choosing between two very good options... that's why it's not super easy.
jonbondave
08-01-15, 01:06
I don't think a LW barrel is going to lose you anything but some ounces. The LW barrel and the standard government profile will be identical aft of the gas block where the weight counts. adding extra weight to the 8 inches after the gas block is not adding much in terms of stability to the barrel.
I'm not going to ask you how much either of the two rifles are priced at, but have you considered just buying a brand new rifle?
I'm not trying to come off ignorant of the question you posted, but today's prices on AR's are probably the best they'll be for a long time.
For example, a brand new Colt 6920 or 6720 will be ~$800(?); I may be off a little.
It's hard to imagine a far cheaper price than that, and with a new gun you have piece of mind that if something goes wrong you still have warranty. A gun that was tweaked with, or used always has that bit of uncertainty.
There was a thread here a while back where someone was considering buying/trading what appeared to be a very lightly used SR-15. Upon closer inspection it turned out someone somewhere replaced some critical parts with heavily worn out ones.
True, a stock 6720 at G&R is ~$800, but then there's tax, shipping, FFL, background check and upgrading to a FF rail. PLUS, I try to buy w/o paperwork whenever I can. The owners of both of these guns are well known to me and there is no dime store smithing / parts swappage here.
Beat Trash
08-01-15, 11:19
Can you arrange to shoot both of the guns? if so, then buy whichever one you like better after shooting them.
Or just buy both...
I've shot both. Very slight edge to FD. Not a noob. Looking for
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Just buy one. Thread over.
I have heard people saying Colt QC is slipping. However whenever Ive investigated the claims they were either talking about that Colt branded cheapo rifle (Seriously Colt?) or were just Colt haters who couldnt produce any real evidence. Colt rifles still get inspected by third party QC personnel.
I have heard people saying Colt QC is slipping. However whenever Ive investigated the claims they were either talking about that Colt branded cheapo rifle (Seriously Colt?) or were just Colt haters who couldnt produce any real evidence. Colt rifles still get inspected by third party QC personnel.
Thanks, this is the kind of info I come to M4C for. I also found another thread in which Iraqgunz indicates that early Daniel Defense guns with the Savannah roll mark are not the equal of the recent offerings. no specifics, no specifics were given because that o p suggested going private.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
How do you figure Colt is closer to spec? The commercial rifles are not built on the same machines as the government rifles. The machining centers Colt uses are probably 40 years old! I'll take DD QC over Colt any day of the week! Colt cannot compete. That's why they are where they are at today.
False, on all accounts. Colt's factories, like most reputable manufacturers, are regularly updated. There are numerous sources out there for this type of thing, but ill suggest a piece entitled "Behind the scenes at Colt" published by guns and ammo in 2012. In said article you will see numerous pictures of raw forgings, bolt carriers on lathes, finished rifles, discussions on various pieces of equipment etc. Colt's civilian guns are built in the same fashion as their military guns. A civilian Colt 6921 upper, for example, is a military M4 carbine upper. The two are analogous.
There have been reports of over-gassing on all DD barrel lengths.
Do your own research.Or you could back-up your statement. ;)
Or you could back-up your statement. ;)
Or you could stop being lazy.
There have been lots reports of over-gassing with DD.
I really don't care either way.
XD40Colorado
08-02-15, 13:56
I'd go with the Colt and here's why:
At that time, DD was just starting out. It's kind of like buying a new-model year car; you want the bugs worked for a year or so first. Daniel Defense now is absolutely good to go, and I'd say in the top tier with Colt, BCM, Noveske, etc. If it was a new DD vs an old colt, I would go with new DD; I own a DD MK12, and it's the most quality rifle I've over owned, for whatever that's worth, but I haven't owned any of the other brands (I did own a BCM ELWF but didn't actually shoot it, sold it befroe I shot it).
Or you could stop being lazy.
There have been lots reports of over-gassing with DD.
I really don't care either way.What you don't care about is irrelevant. Overly broad, arguably negative claims about a manufacturer's product minus verifying -- or even supporting -- evidence isn't what this site's about. Advising everyone else to do your legwork in order to substantiate your claims is the definition of lazy.
What you don't care about is irrelevant. Overly broad, arguably negative claims about a manufacturer's product minus verifying -- or even supporting -- evidence isn't what this site's about. Advising everyone else to do your legwork in order to substantiate your claims is the definition of lazy.
What do you want me to do? Purchase DD barrels in every length and test them?
I don't have the time nor do I care to search for threads substantiating my claims.
If you think my claim is false, then ignore it and carry on.
MountainRaven
08-02-15, 17:03
I always thought that M4c was a place where if you said something, you would have to back it up with evidence.
Or offer the qualifier, "In my experience," denoting that you have seen their guns and they have been over-gassed.
If it's second-hand information, then you qualify it by saying, "Leo Valentine says they're over-gassed," (you may have to explain who Leo Valentine is).
If you're in a hurry, you could qualify it by saying, "I remember hearing/reading that they're over-gassed, but I can't find where I heard/read it. Will update when I find the source."
People with the title of 'Subject Matter Expert' or 'Industry Professional' might be able to get away with not qualifying their statements - there is a reason why they have those titles, afterall.
&c., &c., &c.
IOW, if you cannot substantiate what you're saying, don't say it at all.
I always thought that M4c was a place where if you said something, you would have to back it up with evidence.
Or offer the qualifier, "In my experience," denoting that you have seen their guns and they have been over-gassed.
If it's second-hand information, then you qualify it by saying, "Leo Valentine says they're over-gassed," (you may have to explain who Leo Valentine is).
If you're in a hurry, you could qualify it by saying, "I remember hearing/reading that they're over-gassed, but I can't find where I heard/read it. Will update when I find the source."
People with the title of 'Subject Matter Expert' or 'Industry Professional' might be able to get away with not qualifying their statements - there is a reason why they have those titles, afterall.
&c., &c., &c.
IOW, if you cannot substantiate what you're saying, don't say it at all.
There's no need for this in this case because this is not something that people actually dispute. It's common knowledge at this point. Nobody actually says "I believe DD's barrels are not overgassed". That would be dumb.
The military CQBR 10.3" barrel done by Crane & Colt has (and is spec'd) for a .070 gas port for optimum reliability with M855 ammo. It's also proved to have 100% reliability with M193, Mk 262 and all other .mil 5.56 loads.
If you try to run this same port size with commercial ammo, you will experience some malfunctions with super weak ammo. This is usually steel case Tula & Wolf .223 but can also happen with ammo like PMC .223 if your gun is particularly dirty, etc…
So ALL manufacturers that make a 10.3" or 10.5" barrel for the commercial market decided to enlarge their gas port from mil-spec for increased reliability with ammo commonly used in civilian rifles. Most went with a gas port of around .074 which has been proven over many years and millions of rounds to be great.
DD decided to go way further. They've stated multiple times that their gas port right now is at .081. But many of us have measured (both with calipers and pin gauges) new barrels and seen ports as high as .088. This IS extremely overgassed and will produce malfunctions with a suppressor on. DD JUST commented on TOS not more than a week ago and validated this — and they've done so numerous times throughout the years. You can try to mitigate this with an extremely heavy buffer (Griffin, H3, etc…) and possibly a strong spring, but you still end up with increased recoil, increased parts wear, etc… And sure, you could say that well it's great because you want your rifle 100% reliable with any ammo you throw at it. Except that nobody has ever reported a malfunction with all other manufacturers barrels that are in the .074 - .076 range (LMT, Noveske, BA, Colt, etc…).
It's pretty ridiculous to claim otherwise since there's years of data readily accessible with nothing more than Google and plenty of official statements from the company itself verifying it. Nobody is going to go buy every single barrel in the market just to "show evidence" of something that is already common knowledge. I'd feel pretty comfortable stating that a Geissele SSA-E is a much smoother, cleaner trigger than a standard Colt mil-spec but I'm not about to bust out a video camera and a bunch of tools to "show evidence".
Many (not all) Daniel Defense barrels are overgassed for what they need to be for 100% reliability. This can also decrease reliability if you ever intend on putting a suppressor on that barrel. It's up to you whether that's important or not. Many people run DD barrels over many many years and have 0 problems with them.
Personally, I never intend to run Tula .223 with my rifles and would rather have a rifle closer to mil-spec, that's softer shooting, easier on parts, and that I can run a can on without ever worrying about malfunctions.
I bought the DD yesterday- gassy old POS that it is...
I've seen it perform for months at our 2 gun matches; it will do just fine as a 4th AR. Thanks for all your help.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
MountainRaven
08-03-15, 10:00
There's no need for this in this case because this is not something that people actually dispute. It's common knowledge at this point. Nobody actually says "I believe DD's barrels are not overgassed". That would be dumb.
The military CQBR 10.3" barrel done by Crane & Colt has (and is spec'd) for a .070 gas port for optimum reliability with M855 ammo. It's also proved to have 100% reliability with M193, Mk 262 and all other .mil 5.56 loads.
If you try to run this same port size with commercial ammo, you will experience some malfunctions with super weak ammo. This is usually steel case Tula & Wolf .223 but can also happen with ammo like PMC .223 if your gun is particularly dirty, etc…
So ALL manufacturers that make a 10.3" or 10.5" barrel for the commercial market decided to enlarge their gas port from mil-spec for increased reliability with ammo commonly used in civilian rifles. Most went with a gas port of around .074 which has been proven over many years and millions of rounds to be great.
DD decided to go way further. They've stated multiple times that their gas port right now is at .081. But many of us have measured (both with calipers and pin gauges) new barrels and seen ports as high as .088. This IS extremely overgassed and will produce malfunctions with a suppressor on. DD JUST commented on TOS not more than a week ago and validated this — and they've done so numerous times throughout the years. You can try to mitigate this with an extremely heavy buffer (Griffin, H3, etc…) and possibly a strong spring, but you still end up with increased recoil, increased parts wear, etc… And sure, you could say that well it's great because you want your rifle 100% reliable with any ammo you throw at it. Except that nobody has ever reported a malfunction with all other manufacturers barrels that are in the .074 - .076 range (LMT, Noveske, BA, Colt, etc…).
It's pretty ridiculous to claim otherwise since there's years of data readily accessible with nothing more than Google and plenty of official statements from the company itself verifying it. Nobody is going to go buy every single barrel in the market just to "show evidence" of something that is already common knowledge. I'd feel pretty comfortable stating that a Geissele SSA-E is a much smoother, cleaner trigger than a standard Colt mil-spec but I'm not about to bust out a video camera and a bunch of tools to "show evidence".
Many (not all) Daniel Defense barrels are overgassed for what they need to be for 100% reliability. This can also decrease reliability if you ever intend on putting a suppressor on that barrel. It's up to you whether that's important or not. Many people run DD barrels over many many years and have 0 problems with them.
Personally, I never intend to run Tula .223 with my rifles and would rather have a rifle closer to mil-spec, that's softer shooting, easier on parts, and that I can run a can on without ever worrying about malfunctions.
I don't believe that anyone was making claims to the contrary, only asking that claims be substantiated.
And you have substantiated your claims. Thank you.
However, it seems obvious to me that it is not, "Common knowledge." Further, it appears that (from the information you have provided) that such issues are restricted to DD's Mk18 clone.
XD40Colorado
08-04-15, 16:01
I agree with it only being the 10.3" barrel - I have a DD MK12 and used to own a V5. Zero issues of any type with either.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.