PDA

View Full Version : colt vs. "others"



kgj1119
10-05-06, 16:12
Is it worth spending the money on Colt rifles, and parts, or are there other companies that make parts that are the "same" as Colt?

C4IGrant
10-05-06, 18:23
Is it worth spending the money on Colt rifles, and parts, or are there other companies that make parts that are the "same" as Colt?


There are only two tier 1 manufacturers (Colt and FN). Everyone else is tier 2 or 3.

With that said, LMT and BCM are very close to a tier 1 manufacturer IMHO. They are also considerably less coin than a Colt.


C4

Submariner
10-05-06, 19:18
If you are buying a complete gun, Colt provides a lifetime warranty. That's worth a few dollars more. Buy from another Colt dealer for less and send it to Ken Elmore for the reliability mods. That gets you his expertise on a continuing basis as a client.

After attending Dean Caputo's Operator's Diagnostic Course (See November 2006 SWAT, p. 58) before one of Pat Roger's carbine classes, I came away glad I had been buying, selling, building and shooting Colts over the last twentysomething years. I have no more complete factory guns but lots lots made of Colt parts and they run. From what I have read here and heard from folks whom I trust, I would probably spend money with Paul at BCM. Colt doesn't do mid-length barrels; Paul does. YMMV.

Idea: Borrow a carbine, take Dean's class piggy-backed with Pat's class and then make an informed decision.

BrianXD
10-05-06, 22:15
Who is Ken Elmore and what mods does he do?

Wayne Dobbs
10-05-06, 23:19
Take a look here: www.specializedarmament.com

rob_s
10-06-06, 07:12
I made the choice to switch all my rifles to Colts. I owned in the past LMT, Bushmaster, Rock River Arms, Cav Arms, and DPMS. I built myself two test-bed carbines to find out what add-ons I liked with Bushmaster/LMT, and RRA/J&T, as the base guns and then sold them off and bought two Colt 6520s. I left one stock and put the add-ons from the test guns that I liked the most on the other.

I am very happy with my Colts, but in fairness I never had any issues with any of the other guns that I bought/built either.

knightsar
10-06-06, 10:43
Colt is not the company that it use to be. My last LE6920 I purchased was not anywhere the same as the last Colts that I have owned in the past. Function is perfect but as far as cosmetics they have really slipped. I bought my LE6920 from Ken Elmore with no problems and would recommend them if you want a new Colt. I am very partial to LMT right now, they seem to be making top notch rifles and parts. I have recently purchased a LMT upper and I am extremely happy with it.

C4IGrant
10-06-06, 11:08
Colt is not the company that it use to be. My last LE6920 I purchased was not anywhere the same as the last Colts that I have owned in the past. Function is perfect but as far as cosmetics they have really slipped. I bought my LE6920 from Ken Elmore with no problems and would recommend them if you want a new Colt. I am very partial to LMT right now, they seem to be making top notch rifles and parts. I have recently purchased a LMT upper and I am extremely happy with it.


I have seen some funky anodized Colt's that were way off. I think every company puts out a lemon from time to time and Colt is no different. I have also seen some LMT's that looked like they drop tested it in gravel before they sent it to me.



C4

fivepointoh
10-06-06, 11:27
Colt is not the company that it use to be. My last LE6920 I purchased was not anywhere the same as the last Colts that I have owned in the past. Function is perfect but as far as cosmetics they have really slipped. I bought my LE6920 from Ken Elmore with no problems and would recommend them if you want a new Colt. I am very partial to LMT right now, they seem to be making top notch rifles and parts. I have recently purchased a LMT upper and I am extremely happy with it.


okay but do Colt's still run the same as they used to? that should be the important question....sounds to me you're more concerned w/ the looks than the function. if you're not then cool but when i hear someone knocking a company over looks i'm thinkin...then don't buy it...and save it for me to pick up b/c if it's something that is reliable and works almost 100% of the time....i'd take that any day over a "pretty" product that i'm continually having to work on. just my opinion though.

Pat_Rogers
10-06-06, 12:45
My strong feeling is that guns are tools, and as Jeff Cahill once stated, can be looked at like power drills on the pegboard. As long as they turn 'round when you press the trigger, that is all i care about.
I don't own any pretty guns, though i do have some that are collectible.
I abhor the term "fit and finish" and believe that almost all on the errornet use it because they have nothing viable to say- therefore, insert fluff.
If the finish is rough, scratched, dinged, purple or whatever, so what? It will likely receive some Krylon anyway, but even if not- does it adversely affect reliability?
Back to the original question.
There is a difference, and that difference can be major. All the makers are capable of turning out both good and bad.
Colt has been making M16 types for a long time. They still make more in a month than anyone else makes in a year.
And they make to a standard.
I'd give LMT and Noveske a real close second (though they make different class of gun) and BCM makes a terrific upper.
Any of the mass market builders are probably OK for most non fighting applications, but their is a difference between shooting and fighting, and i don't want to accept "just as good as" in a gunfight

Harv
10-06-06, 16:38
Ya know.. My Wife picked me out based on my "Fit and Finish"....:p

Where AR's are concerned.... I can't even tell ya if I ever looked at any of my uppers and lowers to see if the finished matched.... (I did look to see if they have bolts in them....)

I now currently run a BCM upper and a LMT lower that after I run about 1-2K thru it, I will know if it's reliable or not...

Everyone is gonna tell ya THERE gun runs great.. but statistically speaking... there Bucketheads and there one or two samples means Jack....

I want and will pay for that added reliability... some don't... you have to decide what's important to you and what you do with it. Once you figure that out.... the choice becomes a lot easier.....

Fit and Finish...... I thought those were two gay guys from Sweden........:p

knightsar
10-06-06, 18:16
Well I don't know how this thread turned into a knightsar bashing contest but here goes. I have owned Colt AR 15's for over 20 years and reserve the right to reject one if I don't like the looks of it. I stated the fact that my LE6920 I got from SAW, that it didn't look as good as the others. It runs fine but I expected that when I bought it. My LMT and My KAC run just as good as it. I also have a AK that dosn't look good but I bought it knowing that it goes bang every time. Funny how you all accused me as a safe queen buyer, that is a laugh.

Pat_Rogers
10-06-06, 18:28
Harv- unsure of your fit, but your finish is a little rough around the edges....
Looking fwd to the WI class!

45-Bravo
10-08-06, 14:12
IMHO, you get what you pay for. Colt is a premium product at a premium price and I feel that they are the best of the best. I never have any problems with any of my Colts. (and one is 42 yrs. old).

yasirabbas
12-14-06, 02:58
I Have This Gun This Is Best I Ever Have

jmart
12-14-06, 05:50
Ya know.. My Wife picked me out based on my "Fit and Finish"....:p



But the real question is, "Are you a tool"? ;)

IceHandLuke
12-18-06, 15:09
well I am a big Colt fan and all my ARs have been colts except two custom jobs. If you can find a solid custom builder like Tromix you will find the quality is better than Colt but you are going to pay for it. I dont think Tromix even makes ARs anymore because he was priced out of the market by all of the "Stags" and "Bushmaster" types. Not to knock Bushmaster, I think they run a pretty good product as well.

DPMS has some slick tack hammer setups as well.

SethB
12-18-06, 15:37
I just got me a 6920 and I've been eyeing the BCM midlength barrel that's sitting in my closet.

I think I'll slap the two together and have the best of both worlds.

I wish Paul would sell his barrels separately so I wouldn't have to buy an upper and all those small parts as well.

C4IGrant
12-18-06, 16:13
I just got me a 6920 and I've been eyeing the BCM midlength barrel that's sitting in my closet.

I think I'll slap the two together and have the best of both worlds.

I wish Paul would sell his barrels separately so I wouldn't have to buy an upper and all those small parts as well.


BCM DOES sell barrels alone (when he has them).




C4

SethB
12-18-06, 16:30
With or without the FSB? I don't have the scratch for his jig.

C4IGrant
12-18-06, 16:38
With or without the FSB? I don't have the scratch for his jig.


If you don't want a FSB, I can remove it for you.



C4

Mike91A
12-18-06, 21:27
Anyone try CMMG complete rifles or barrels only with FSB? Looked at their web site and saw barrels similar to Colt contours and materials ,chrome lining etc but half the price ?Considering buying one .

KevinB
01-05-07, 06:56
I have a select Fire BM lower -- only thing left in it that is BM is the lower body...

WisP35
01-05-07, 18:49
Bushmaster bolts are MP tested and heat treated, that goes for the carrier to. I dont see why they would be weaker, do you think it could be a coincidence or that you might be misinformed, seeing as how you thought BM bolts arennt heat treated? I own a BM that had a canted fsb and BM replaced it. I am not happy with thier QC but I do know that most thier parts are mil spec, and bolts are heat treated for sure.

C4IGrant
01-05-07, 19:13
Bushmaster bolts are MP tested and heat treated, that goes for the carrier to. I dont see why they would be weaker, do you think it could be a coincidence or that you might be misinformed, seeing as how you thought BM bolts arennt heat treated? I own a BM that had a canted fsb and BM replaced it. I am not happy with thier QC but I do know that most thier parts are mil spec, and bolts are heat treated for sure.

What if they didn't heat treat their bolts some of the time and or use the proper steel? This would be why we see far more BM bolts broken than any other to date.

BM weapons are not a mil-spec weapon in multiple ways (can list them if you like).


C4

Dport
01-05-07, 19:16
Bushmaster bolts are MP tested and heat treated, that goes for the carrier to. I dont see why they would be weaker, do you think it could be a coincidence or that you might be misinformed, seeing as how you thought BM bolts arennt heat treated? I own a BM that had a canted fsb and BM replaced it. I am not happy with thier QC but I do know that most thier parts are mil spec, and bolts are heat treated for sure.
Not every bolt is MP tested. There was a big tado over at TOS about this a couple of years ago. The accepted belief is Colt does MP test every bolt.

rob_s
01-05-07, 20:47
I do know that most thier parts are mil spec, and bolts are heat treated for sure.
How do you kknow that?

WisP35
01-05-07, 23:06
"the accepted belief is that colt does"
Well, what if I dont accept this belief, nor the belief that BM does either.
I can understand that not every bolt that leaves any factory is MP inspected, but you said they werent heat treated.
They are.
Are you gonna tell me not every bolt is heat treated? And is that the accepted belief?

WisP35
01-05-07, 23:11
Im not disputing that BM has good QC nor the best parts,much less bolts.
But to say that they arent heat treated is not true.

Question
How many people have had a BM bolt fail on them prematurely or at all?
Now, how many people have had any other brand bolt fail?

WisP35
01-05-07, 23:19
There is a thread on another site with a rifle that has 20,000 rnds in it, still functioning. Guess who made the bolt?
BM
And I have to say, it still looks great.

Now having an extra bolt is a must, but if I reallly thought any bolt was inferior I wouldnt go near it.
When my bolt fails ill let you know.

Zeef
01-06-07, 04:05
How do you kknow that?

What I'd like to know is just who is having these Bushmaster problems? Who? And how many times has this happened?
Is this one of those One guy gets a bad gun, posts it, and now the whole damn manufacturer is damn to hell scenes? See a lot of this on AR-15.com, where I now do not waist time.

I shot my friends, son's Christmas-purchase BM M4 today. It shot to the left until we switch from the imported shit to Remingtons. In this case Bushmaster made a good rifle - no problems to report - sorry rob! ...not

Z

rob_s
01-06-07, 06:12
You guys are missing the point entirely. Anyone can make a good rifle, even an Oly Plinker can turn out to run reliably for 10s of 1000s of rounds. The issue is that the liklihood that a Bushmaster will not be a good rifle is relatively high.

Zeef, I don't know where you've been, or how long you've been involved with ARs, but you can't have been involved for very long.

rob_s
01-06-07, 06:13
"the accepted belief is that colt does"
Well, what if I dont accept this belief, nor the belief that BM does either.
I can understand that not every bolt that leaves any factory is MP inspected, but you said they werent heat treated.
They are.

Again, how do you know?

Robb Jensen
01-06-07, 06:35
There is a thread on another site with a rifle that has 20,000 rnds in it, still functioning. Guess who made the bolt?
BM
And I have to say, it still looks great.



Your point is illogical. Your arguing from the particular to the general, opposite of the rules of logic. That's like saying since my cat is a gray tabbie, then all cats must be gray tabbies. Which we know isn't true.

I've broken a Bushmaster bolt in less than 3K rounds. Logic says this doesn't mean that all Bushmaster bolts will break before 3K rounds, it's means that some might, one of mine did.

It's really a possibility/probability issue. It's possible good MP tested bolts (i.e. Colt/FN/CMT/LMT etc) may break as soon as a non-MP tested bolt (like Bushmaster) but the probablity that the MP tested bolt will fail quickly is much lower.

Dport
01-06-07, 07:41
"the accepted belief is that colt does"
Well, what if I dont accept this belief, nor the belief that BM does either.
I personally don't believe they have to to meet a .mil contract. The only things inspected 100% in the .mil is stuff like BMD weapon systems. Could a company go above and beyond? Sure. I don't know either way.


I can understand that not every bolt that leaves any factory is MP inspected, but you said they werent heat treated.

Actually, there Sparky, I said nothing of the sort. Keep your posters straight.

C4IGrant
01-06-07, 08:44
"the accepted belief is that colt does"
Well, what if I dont accept this belief, nor the belief that BM does either.
I can understand that not every bolt that leaves any factory is MP inspected, but you said they werent heat treated.
They are.
Are you gonna tell me not every bolt is heat treated? And is that the accepted belief?

Lack of heat treating could be the reason why we see so many broken BM botls (is just a theory). The other reason could be them using cheaper steel than the spec calls for (don't know).



C4

Nathan_Bell
01-06-07, 10:51
Lack of heat treating could be the reason why we see so many broken BM botls (is just a theory). The other reason could be them using cheaper steel than the spec calls for (don't know).



C4

Poor heat treating is also a likely cause. You can over-harden, use incorrect heat cycling, or wrong atmosphere in your ovens and turn a perfectly good piece of steel into something that has a very good relationship to glass. Hard and brittle.

I am not claiming this is the problem, but I have seem a few things break in my life due to bad HT.

Zeef
01-07-07, 03:31
You guys are missing the point entirely. Anyone can make a good rifle, even an Oly Plinker can turn out to run reliably for 10s of 1000s of rounds. The issue is that the liklihood that a Bushmaster will not be a good rifle is relatively high.

Zeef, I don't know where you've been, or how long you've been involved with ARs, but you can't have been involved for very long.

I've been involved with ARs enough to wonder if you ever shot one, let alone own one.

Bushmaster rifles not reliable? Prove it, show me something other that hear-say... And pleae don't give me some <yawn> link to a infamous AR15.com rumor thread. The only catagory missing there is ARs and Prozac

I've dealt with enough closet-comandos to know bullshit and hype when I see it.

Robb Jensen
01-07-07, 10:55
I've been involved with ARs enough to wonder if you ever shot one, let alone own one.


You need to do your homework before spouting off. If you had you would know that Rob_S recently took a Pat Rogers course using a Colt AR.



Bushmaster rifles not reliable? Prove it, show me something other that hear-say... And pleae don't give me some <yawn> link to a infamous AR15.com rumor thread. The only catagory missing there is ARs and Prozac


We've given numerous examples of when/why Bushmasters have failed. You may choose not to believe that they have higher failure rates than Tier 1 guns, this is purely your opinion and not based in fact. Those of us that work on ARs see the lower Tier guns have all kinds of problems and lower problems with Tier 1 guns.



I've dealt with enough closet-comandos to know bullshit and hype when I see it.

Apparently not. You can either grow up and post and converse maturely or you will be banned/locked on this site (consider this a warning!) Everyone on this site deserves respect. I deleted your credibility quiz posts, you are not the grantor of credibility and this is trolling.

Cold Zero
01-07-07, 11:12
Zeef:

i have both bushmaster and colt guns.

my b.m. came from the factory with the infamous front sight base canted to the left and a defective barrel. back to the factory it went and the new barrel and customer service were good.

the next time it went back to the factory, it was for a bad trigger sear that was causing double firing. again, customer service was good, at n.c..

this gun has about 12-15k rounds thru it with the original bolt and carrier. so i think we can say it has been rung out thoroughly.;) i do expect the bolt or carrier to poop the bed shortly.

i did not have a problem with the gas key because i had it properly staked early on. the problems i had with b.m. are common problems with them. their q.c. is lacking and you get what you pay for. i feel that i got one of the better b.m. guns and still had the above problems.

conversely, i have had no problems with any of the colts that i own. i would not buy another b.m. because who needs all the problems? let's not forget that i also paid for shipping and insurance 2 times back to b.m., a likely thing to happen if you buy a b.m.. the difference in price between the 2 co. is not as great as people think....:eek:

Harv
01-07-07, 11:18
ZEEF

I've been involved with ARs enough to wonder if you ever shot one, let alone own one.


Wow.... what Rock you been livin under...

No one is saying that Bushmaster is junk... The one I have has seen 14K thru it.. but not with the original bolt which lost a locking lug around 12K.. It is not a surprise to any of the more experienced trainers who see Hundreds of Rifles firing Millions or rds per year that Due to Bushmaster taking certain Manufacturing shortcuts, they have a higher failure rate then those guns that are built closer to the spec. I flipped thru one particular trainers picture book, whom I consider a SME on.. and the pics were mostly of broken Bushmaster bolts around the 10'12K rd count (Huh.. go figure, just about when mine broke)

Everyone over at ARFCOM will refer to the guy and his Carbine with 20K like it is the holy grail..... News flash... It's ONE GUN..... Try taking 500 Bushmasters and 500 Colts and shoot 20K thru them each and then come back and tell me you 've been around....:rolleyes:

Up until 12K when my Bushmaster broke... I could have argued the same thing.. Bushmasters are great and your all wrong... but the fact is they take shortcuts, they do not use the correct steel in manufacturing there bolts, they do not use the same level of QC called out in the TDP and they take shortcuts like one size FSB's for both Rifles and carbines,etc.

That does not mean that you would not see one or two that work... I can drink and drive and never get caught my whole life... that does not make it right or smart.. I'm just playing the odds... Owning an AR made that way is the same thing... It may work fine you whole life or it may not... what each shooter has to do is understand the facts and choose based on there needs and what is important to them..

To ignore the facts shows complete ignorance of the AR system and those who make them.

jmart
01-07-07, 15:27
Up until 12K when my Bushmaster broke...

In your opinion, is that reasonable service life for a high wear item? Do Colt bolts last longer on average? Do you replace (or is it your plan) to replace your Colt bolts on a set interval or do you let them fail before replacing them?


.....but the fact is they take shortcuts, they do not use the correct steel in manufacturing there bolts.....

What alloy does BM use? Also, do you know if BM manufactures their bolts or are they out sourced?

FWIW, I emailed BM tech support a couple of days ago and asked them those same questions. I'm curious if they will respond. If they do I will post their response.

Here's one last question about bolt service life, whether or not maint has anything to do with it. Given that a bolt is a mechanical device, a moving part which undergoes severe stress, do lubing practices have an effect on bolt life? For those that tend to use a fair amount of lube and/or better lube that stays put (e.g., TW25B, SLIP2000, etc.), will bolts lubed accordingly last longer than bolts that are allowed to run dry or lubed inadequately?

C4IGrant
01-07-07, 17:52
I've been involved with ARs enough to wonder if you ever shot one, let alone own one.

Bushmaster rifles not reliable? Prove it, show me something other that hear-say... And pleae don't give me some <yawn> link to a infamous AR15.com rumor thread. The only catagory missing there is ARs and Prozac

I've dealt with enough closet-comandos to know bullshit and hype when I see it.


This is easy, take a carbine class with Pat Rogers and ask to see his book of broken parts. Should answer all your questions.



C4

C4IGrant
01-07-07, 17:56
In your opinion, is that reasonable service life for a high wear item? Do Colt bolts last longer on average? Do you replace (or is it your plan) to replace your Colt bolts on a set interval or do you let them fail before replacing them?



What alloy does BM use? Also, do you know if BM manufactures their bolts or are they out sourced?

FWIW, I emailed BM tech support a couple of days ago and asked them those same questions. I'm curious if they will respond. If they do I will post their response.

Here's one last question about bolt service life, whether or not maint has anything to do with it. Given that a bolt is a mechanical device, a moving part which undergoes severe stress, do lubing practices have an effect on bolt life? For those that tend to use a fair amount of lube and/or better lube that stays put (e.g., TW25B, SLIP2000, etc.), will bolts lubed accordingly last longer than bolts that are allowed to run dry or lubed inadequately?

If you get an AR to run (any AR) for 12K without ANYTHING breaking, consider yourself blessed! Bolts (especially on semi AR's) should have a life of 10-12K. Many never make it this far and give up the ghost at around 6-8K.

I have been told that BM makes their own bolts. I have no data about the kind of steel they use. The TDP says it should be 158 Carpenter steel.

I think bolts that are properly lubed, will last longer as there is less stress on them.


C4

Hardgear, LLC
01-07-07, 21:28
These comments are not meant to be pro or con any particular manufacturer.

I will say all of you who hang your hat on "Mil spec" or "TDP" should spend some time working on Military contracts.

First problem is it is a stretch to automatically accept Mil specs as well written documents that have specifications that are relavant to the products use. I don;t know the m16 mil specs well enough to form an educated opinion either way. My guess is most people postin here don't either.

Second problem is assuming your particular gun meets all of the required Mil specs. I wish I had a dollar for every waiver on the Trident Program that has my name on it.

The third arguement I hear alot is a reference to "in service". By that standard we should all be driving Crown Vics. It's not like everything in the Gov't's inventory was purchased based upon objective criteria that is relavant. Sorry to be so cynical, but if you have seen what I have, you would be cynical too.

Now one poster made a reference to a poor finnish on his rifle. That observation was quickly dismissed as not relavant. This is true in terms of function (maybe), but was there Mil-spec requiring a certain finish requirement? If there is, then the rifle did not meet the TDP. So the next question is what else didn;t it meet? Back to the poor finish. Why would there be a requirement for coverage, consistency and depth? So if you are inclined to blow it off as not necessary, then what else in the TDP is over specified? My guess is a lot.

I think Pat said it best, for the average civilian user, the commercial brands are fine.

IMHO, if you want to pay the premium for a Colt then fine, but do not jump to the conclusion that your particular gun is better than anyone elses as it may not be.

YMMV

Bomber

C4IGrant
01-08-07, 09:15
These comments are not meant to be pro or con any particular manufacturer.

I will say all of you who hang your hat on "Mil spec" or "TDP" should spend some time working on Military contracts.

First problem is it is a stretch to automatically accept Mil specs as well written documents that have specifications that are relavant to the products use. I don;t know the m16 mil specs well enough to form an educated opinion either way. My guess is most people postin here don't either.

Second problem is assuming your particular gun meets all of the required Mil specs. I wish I had a dollar for every waiver on the Trident Program that has my name on it.

The third arguement I hear alot is a reference to "in service". By that standard we should all be driving Crown Vics. It's not like everything in the Gov't's inventory was purchased based upon objective criteria that is relavant. Sorry to be so cynical, but if you have seen what I have, you would be cynical too.

Now one poster made a reference to a poor finnish on his rifle. That observation was quickly dismissed as not relavant. This is true in terms of function (maybe), but was there Mil-spec requiring a certain finish requirement? If there is, then the rifle did not meet the TDP. So the next question is what else didn;t it meet? Back to the poor finish. Why would there be a requirement for coverage, consistency and depth? So if you are inclined to blow it off as not necessary, then what else in the TDP is over specified? My guess is a lot.

I think Pat said it best, for the average civilian user, the commercial brands are fine.

IMHO, if you want to pay the premium for a Colt then fine, but do not jump to the conclusion that your particular gun is better than anyone elses as it may not be.

YMMV

Bomber

The only TRUE way to get a tier one AR is to be issued one. With that said, the next best thing to look at is materials used. Very few other manufacturers use the same materials and test their weapons like Colt does. In fact, only LMT and FN do. BCM's uppers are inline with the big three, but they do not offer lowers or BCG's at this present time.

I agree that going "mil-spec" is not always the best way to do things, but following no spec at all is FAR worse and is why we see dremeled feed ramps, loctited RE's, improperly staked carriers keys and a host of other problems.


C4

rob_s
01-08-07, 10:19
While I'm really beginning to wonder if you're actually looking for information or just for everyone to agree with you. This is the last time I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.



Bushmaster rifles not reliable? Prove it, show me something other that hear-say... And pleae don't give me some <yawn> link to a infamous AR15.com rumor thread. The only catagory missing there is ARs and Prozac
what would you like to see as proof? As Grant said, Pat Rogers keeps a book that you would be welcome to look at if you took one of his classes. Anything beyond there is going to be "hearsay", but I'll say it anyway.

I worked for 3 years selling "assault rifles" at a gunshop. We stocked Colts, Bushmasters, and Armalites, and we could order others (Olympic, for example). At the time I was like you, I thought that Bushmaster was easily the equal of Colt, and better because it cost less. I pushed Bushmaster hard, and talked people into them over the other makers. This was not out of any financial gain (we made more on the Colts, actually) but because I believed in what I was saying. There were still plenty of customers that were more knowledgeable than I was so we still sold our fair share of Colts as well. I never once had a Colt come back to the shop, and I sent, I would guess, 5% of the Bushmasters back.

So what does that tell us? Not much really, but what it told me was that there was something going on at Colt that obviously wasn't going on at Bushmaster. Canted FSBs, broken bolts, purple anodizing (albeit not really a big deal) were all seen in the Bushmasters (as well as other individual problems).

With that said, nobody that I know of ever died because the rifle I sold him broke, and the Bushmaster was adequate for the uses of the customer. It wasn't as good as Colt, but for all of the people that I sold them to, it was good enough.

I also run a monthly carbine match at which we have approximately 30 shooters per month. I would say that in the two years I've been doing this, I've probably seen well over 100 different shooters as the regulars kind of cycle through. This means even more different guns as people bring out different guns from time to time. I have yet to hear of or see a Colt failing at my matches, yet I have heard of and seen on average, about one Bushmaster every-other match go down for a variety of QC reasons.

I also took Pat Rogers class myself last month (so I did get to see "the book":p ) and to my knowledge the only Colt in the class that failed did so with very questionable ammo, and aftermarket barrel, and what turned out to be a very inconveniently located popped primer stock under the gas key. The same cannot be said for the Bushmasters in class.

I have taken alot of heat on this site for stating that for many (most?) users BM and RRA's questionable quality control practices are a non-issue for the vast majority of shooters; "almost as good" is "good enough". Many will never experience problems, and many more won't be troubled when it does occur to them. You may well be one of those people, and there is nothing wrong with that. If, however, you envision an AR as being a possible means of defending the lives of yourself or your family, I strongly urge you to open your eyes and look around. At the end of the day it's not my ass you're protecting.

rob_s
01-08-07, 10:27
IMHO, if you want to pay the premium for a Colt then fine, but do not jump to the conclusion that your particular gun is better than anyone elses as it may not be.

That is very true. However I can take my Colt out of the box and put it next to someone else's fresh-out-of-the-box Bushmaster or RRA and within 60 seconds point out at least 7 different areas where my Colt is a better product.
1) Staked receiver extension plate/castle nut
2) Properly staked carrier gas key
3) FSB taper pins
4) Truthful barrel markings (BM has acknowledged that they test a random sampling of barrels, not every one)
5) Proper cut feedramps
6) Proper F marked FSB
7) MP marked bolt

These are quantifiable facts. They don't even begin to touch on QC, but are things that BM and RRA voluntarily and intentionally do not do. Add in the fact that BM and RRA use sub-standard barrel steel (which is a known fact but isn't readily verifiable by looking at the gun) as well as the potential for a crooked FSB and other QC issues, and it is a fact that the Colt has features that the BM and RRA do not. Everyone has to decide if these features are worth the added cost, if they want to add them themselves after the fact (thereby greatly increasing the cost), or if "almost as good" is "good enough".

No matter what someone choose, everyone should be educated and/or educate themselves as to what they are buying.

Hardgear, LLC
01-08-07, 13:39
That is very true. However I can take my Colt out of the box and put it next to someone else's fresh-out-of-the-box Bushmaster or RRA and within 60 seconds point out at least 7 different areas where my Colt is a better product.
1) Staked receiver extension plate/castle nut
2) Properly staked carrier gas key
3) FSB taper pins
4) Truthful barrel markings (BM has acknowledged that they test a random sampling of barrels, not every one)
5) Proper cut feedramps
6) Proper F marked FSB
7) MP marked bolt

These are quantifiable facts. They don't even begin to touch on QC, but are things that BM and RRA voluntarily and intentionally do not do. Add in the fact that BM and RRA use sub-standard barrel steel (which is a known fact but isn't readily verifiable by looking at the gun) as well as the potential for a crooked FSB and other QC issues, and it is a fact that the Colt has features that the BM and RRA do not. You (and everyone really) have to decide if these features are worth the added cost, if you want to add them youself after the fact (thereby greatly increasing the cost), or if "almost as good" is "good enough".

No matter what you, or others, choose, everyone should be educated and/or educate themselves as to what they are buying.


Rob,

I understand what you're saying and agree with most of it. You keep mentioning "you" (refering to me). Please do not make me out to be the poster child for RRA or Bushmaster as I am not.

What I said is a simple and true. There are a lot of folks on the various gun boards who place much to much emphasis on TDP, Mil Spec, in service and MP. Talk to any Military Armorer and you will quickly see that Colt is not immune to QC issues despite the magical QC rogram people seem to think COlt may have.

Tp

rob_s
01-08-07, 14:14
You keep mentioning "you" (refering to me). Please do not make me out to be the poster child for RRA or Bushmaster as I am not.

I edited my post to reflect your wish. My original wording was in response to this portion of your post:

if you want to pay the premium for a Colt then fine
.
.
.
.


What I said is a simple and true. There are a lot of folks on the various gun boards who place much to much emphasis on TDP, Mil Spec, in service and MP. Talk to any Military Armorer and you will quickly see that Colt is not immune to QC issues despite the magical QC rogram people seem to think COlt may have.
Yep. I was simply pointing out that the reasons for choosing Colt go far and away beyond simply their QC. Also, while I often refer to the Mil Spec when talking about Colt, the reality that my post (second from the bottom, page 4) addresses the real reasons I only buy Colts now. Quite frankly I don't care if they meet a spec or not, they've been borne out to me to have features worth paying for that the others don't have and they have proven to be more reliable than the others. That's enough for me to pony up ("Pony"? Get it?;) ) the extra cash to buy a Colt.

jmart
01-08-07, 16:47
Quite frankly I don't care if they meat a spec or not, ....

I dunno. Something about this thread just seems fishy to me.

Submariner
01-08-07, 19:33
I also took Pat Rogers class myself last month (so I did get to see "the book":p ) and to my knowledge the only Colt in the class that failed did so with very questionable ammo, and aftermarket barrel, and what turned out to be a very inconveniently located popped primer stock under the gas key. The same cannot be said for the Bushmasters in class.

One of mine. The problem, however, was from gas cuts into the bolt face from shooting LC brass swaged with an out of spec Dillon 600 swage. It made Dean Caputo's presentation, too.:D

jmart
01-08-07, 20:45
One of mine. The problem, however, was from gas cuts into the bolt face from shooting LC brass swaged with an out of spec Dillon 600 swage. It made Dean Caputo's presentation, too.:D

I'm really curious how you attributed this to an out of spec swager. How many other rounds blew primers? Did YOU reload these? If not, how do you know what type of swager was used?

How many "Dillon-swaged" rounds were successfully fired prior to the one locking up the gun?

rob_s
01-08-07, 21:21
I'm really curious how you attributed this to an out of spec swager. How many other rounds blew primers? Did YOU reload these? If not, how do you know what type of swager was used?

How many "Dillon-swaged" rounds were successfully fired prior to the one locking up the gun?
If you re-read his post, it wasn't just from one round it was from repeated rounds leaking gas around the primer and onto the bolt face.

jmart
01-08-07, 21:38
If you re-read his post, it wasn't just from one round it was from repeated rounds leaking gas around the primer and onto the bolt face.

Is this the recent Lakeland FL class posted on 10-8? If so, here's the explanation posted by Anthony Martinez. It was in refernce to his 6920 that went down:

"Ammo was of dubious origins from Sportsman's Guide. I was running out of ammo and borrowed some of this from a classmate and is headstamped 5.56 and couple of other symbols I can't make out clearly. I thought it was Guatemalan surplus but it appears that there were mixed flavors of ammo in that tub.

Alledgedly, it came from Sportman's Guide. It was loose ammo. Most of it appears to be headstamped; AD 5.56 86 or maybe it's 88. Not sure what that makes it....ADCOM possibly? I'd like to know also. "

Again, if this is the case in hand, where are we to infer that the problem was an "out-of-spec" Dillon swager? If this is not the case, then I apologize in advance, but then here is another acse of another Colt going down, but in all probability due to bad ammo rather than a weapon defect.

rob_s
01-08-07, 21:42
We're talking about two different classes, two different incidents, two different rifles. I agree that Submariner's post was confusing. It makes more sense if you read the "topic" he posted though.

WisP35
01-08-07, 22:24
This is for the guy that said every COLT bolt is MP inspected.
Colt follows Mil-spec requirements right?
Well, mil-spec does NOT require every bolt, every barrel, or every part they ship to be MP inspected.
They inspect batches just like everyone else!
This is a fact!

WisP35
01-08-07, 22:26
On the topic of BM bolts you are right that they are not top quality bolts, I agree with you there.
I will be replacing a few parts on my BM upper, one of whivh will be the bolt and carrier. Probably an LMT or FN bolt.
Thanks for the heads up on the bolts

jmart
01-08-07, 22:43
We're talking about two different classes, two different incidents, two different rifles. I agree that Submariner's post was confusing. It makes more sense if you read the "topic" he posted though.


OK, fair enough. But still, there's no solid evidence made to support the claim the problem was due to an out of spec swager. It just as easily could have been a hot load. Were these once-fired cases that were swaged and then shot after the first reload? Where were the cases sourced?

IMHO, often there are posts that diagnose issues without presenting or evaluating all the facts. All too often I see something attributed to "bad ammo" or a "bad mag". I'm not willing to just accept that and shrug it off. I'm not saying there is a definitive alternative explanation, just that there's nothing presented here to make the case unequivically.

Hardgear, LLC
01-09-07, 06:40
He guys.....I don't mean to be obstinate but using anecdotal stories to prove or dis-prove reliablity claims is rediculous.

I doubt anyone on this gunboard has enough empirical data to say with authority what the failure rates are with any of the manufacturers. Absent this data, only unsubstantiated claims can be made.

I doubt these anecdotal stories will satisfy a "chi squared" analysis for randomness of this sampling.

There is a huge difference between "Colt is more reliable" and "In my experience Colt is more reliable"

Bomber

Edited ....spelling errors

Submariner
01-09-07, 06:45
Again, if this is the case in hand, where are we to infer that the problem was an "out-of-spec" Dillon swager? If this is not the case, then I apologize in advance, but then here is another acse of another Colt going down, but in all probability due to bad ammo rather than a weapon defect.

Before 2000 I personally swaged better than 16,000 once fired LC cases and reloaded them (25.5 gr. H335, 55 gr. FMJ and WW primer). I never assumed there could be a problem with the primer pockets. Out of the 16,000+ rounds (all fired by me or my children in classes or workups) there was one popped primer.

I'm trying to get a decent pic that I can post. Imagine a series of cuts of various depths beginning at the ring on the bolt face normally left by primers going into the hole in the bolt face (think a$$hole). I showed the bolts to Pat at a class. He had a worried look on his face and took lots of pictures. This past summer, I found that Dean Caputo included one pic into his presentation. When he got to that slide, I pulled out the bolt and showed it to him. He, too, had a worried look.

It ended up being proved after I returned the swage plate to Dillon. They acknowledged it was out of round and sent me another. Gas erosion resulted in the cuts on the bolt face.

BTW, the Colt never went down because of this erosion issue (other than with the one popped primer and I think that would have happened in any gun with that particular round). We shot up all that ammunition and then changed bolts. I concluded risk from doing so was negligible. (I've since switched to Remington brass; no crimp to remove). One is on its way to Grant for dissection.

jmart
01-09-07, 07:09
Did the fired cases look like either of these two? Case on left is containing gas, case on right is leaking gas around the primer.

http://www.zediker.com/tubb/images/speedlock/cwspair450.jpg

Did you ever pierce primers with that load?

Also, the problem could have been Win primers. A bunch of competition guys who load warm loads have switched to Fed Match, CCI or Remington 7 1/2 primers since they handle pressure better. Winchester primers are known to be soft. Source for that info is from many members who post on the nationalmatch.us website

rob_s
01-09-07, 08:45
He guys.....I don't mean to be obstinate
are you sure?;)



I doubt anyone on this gunboard has enough empirical data to say with authority what the failure rates are with any of the manufacturers. Absent this data, only unsubstantiated claims can be made.
What would you call Pat's book?


I doubt these anecdotal stories will satisfy a "chi squared" analysis for randomness of this sampling.
Again, I think that Pat's book is about as close as you'll get.


There is a huge difference between "Colt is more reliable" and "In my experience Colt is more reliable"

Not really. Every time somebody opens their mouth to say anything, there is an implied "in my opinion" in front of it. I can't prove to you that Colt is more reliable any more than you can prove to me that the sky is blue.


Edited ....spelling errors
Missed one.;)
rediculous = ridiculous

At the end of the day, you either believe the person telling the story or you don't.

I know what I've seen, and I've seen enough to know that Colts are more reliable than the other brands. It's really no sweat off my balls if you believe or not, or if you choose to buy one based on my experience or not. All I, or anyone else, can do is relay my/our experiences and opinions and leave it up to you to decide if that information is useful to you or not.

Submariner
01-09-07, 09:07
Did the fired cases look like either of these two? Case on left is containing gas, case on right is leaking gas around the primer.

I don't recall. Sorry. I did not keep the brass.


Did you ever pierce primers with that load?

Never noticed it on any we policed after class. Nor did anyone else. This would certainly be more noticeable than what you have in the pic.


Also, the problem could have been Win primers. A bunch of competition guys who load warm loads have switched to Fed Match, CCI or Remington 7 1/2 primers since they handle pressure better. Winchester primers are known to be soft. Source for that info is from many members who post on the nationalmatch.us website

I have since switched to Rem 7 1/2 and CCI #41 primers. I accepted Dillon's mea culpa and moved on. Soft primers might have contributed to it.

C4IGrant
01-09-07, 09:23
This is for the guy that said every COLT bolt is MP inspected.
Colt follows Mil-spec requirements right?
Well, mil-spec does NOT require every bolt, every barrel, or every part they ship to be MP inspected.
They inspect batches just like everyone else!
This is a fact!


This is a slippery slope. Meaning that the TDP doesn't require every bolt to be inspected, but some companies do it (like FN). LMT and Colt also state that they do as well. Then again, BM said they did as well and then later said that they lied about it and only did batches.

I think batches are fine, but don't tell folks that you are doing everyone of them when your not.


C4

Submariner
01-09-07, 09:36
This is a slippery slope. Meaning that the TDP doesn't require every bolt to be inspected, but some companies do it (like FN). LMT and Colt also state that they do as well.

Don't you really mean FN, LMT and Colt state that they do. Do you personally witness FN testing every bolt or do you rely on a statement of someone from FN whom you trust? CLynch comes to mind.

C4IGrant
01-09-07, 09:39
Don't you really mean FN, LMT and Colt state that they do. Do you personally witness FN testing every bolt or do you rely on a statement of someone from FN whom you trust? CLynch comes to mind.


I have someone I trust on the inside at FN and that gurantees for me that FN HPT/MP tests each and every bolt. His word is good enough for me.

I do not have a friend inside Colt or LMT so I will not say for 100% that they do everyone one.



C4

WisP35
01-09-07, 13:39
All im saying is that in my opinion mil-spec does NOT require every bolt to be MP tested, so why would Colt, who adheres to Mil-spec test every single bolt when they dont have to.And I have heard from reliable sources that Colt does not test every si ngle one. Nor does anyone else that I know of, unless you go with the cmt, stag bolts that cost a few extra dollars and are guaranteed to be tested.

WisP35
01-09-07, 13:41
Anyway, im done with this discussion, you guys let me know when your colt bolt fails and ill let you know when my BM bolt fails, thanks

Jim Colborn
01-09-07, 16:00
This was sent to me as an attachment in regards to Colt MP testing their bolts.



-4150 magnetic particle inspected barrel steel.

Bushmaster and Colt are the only complete AR manufacturers to offer 4150 grade steel. Bushmaster MP tests one barrel out of every barrel run, Colt tests every barrel.

-Magnetic particle inspected bolts.

Again, only Bushmaster and Colt do this. Yet again, Bushmaster only does one bolt out of every run of bolts, and Colt again tests every bolt.

--High pressure testing.

Colt only.

-Double heat shielded handguards on M4 models.

Colt only.

-1/7 twist barrels.

Colt only. Others will make special runs of 1/7 barrels at inflated prices.

-Chrome lining.

Colt, Bushmaster, Armalite. RRA offers chrome lining upon request for an additional charge.

-Mil Spec buffer tube dimensions.

Colt only.

-Lifetime warranty.

Colt, RRA, Armalite.

C4IGrant
01-09-07, 16:34
This was sent to me as an attachment in regards to Colt MP testing their bolts.



-4150 magnetic particle inspected barrel steel.

Bushmaster and Colt are the only complete AR manufacturers to offer 4150 grade steel. Bushmaster MP tests one barrel out of every barrel run, Colt tests every barrel.

-Magnetic particle inspected bolts.

Again, only Bushmaster and Colt do this. Yet again, Bushmaster only does one bolt out of every run of bolts, and Colt again tests every bolt.

--High pressure testing.

Colt only.

-Double heat shielded handguards on M4 models.

Colt only.

-1/7 twist barrels.

Colt only. Others will make special runs of 1/7 barrels at inflated prices.

-Chrome lining.

Colt, Bushmaster, Armalite. RRA offers chrome lining upon request for an additional charge.

-Mil Spec buffer tube dimensions.

Colt only.

-Lifetime warranty.

Colt, RRA, Armalite.


Just as an FYI, there is two different types of 4150 steel. BM uses the cheaper of the two and Colt uses the proper 4150.



C4

Hardgear, LLC
01-09-07, 20:43
are you sure?;)


What would you call Pat's book?

Again, I think that Pat's book is about as close as you'll get.

Not really. Every time somebody opens their mouth to say anything, there is an implied "in my opinion" in front of it. I can't prove to you that Colt is more reliable any more than you can prove to me that the sky is blue.

Missed one.;)
rediculous = ridiculous

At the end of the day, you either believe the person telling the story or you don't.

I know what I've seen, and I've seen enough to know that Colts are more reliable than the other brands. It's really no sweat off my balls if you believe or not, or if you choose to buy one based on my experience or not. All I, or anyone else, can do is relay my/our experiences and opinions and leave it up to you to decide if that information is useful to you or not.


No offense to Pat....and I do know him btw, his data is exactly that. His data. It is still based upon a relatively small sample size and has no control weapons or standard protical. At the end of the day it\'s anecdotal. It's a lot more weapons than most of us will ever be around but who is to say it's statistically valid? MTBF is a function of many things including maintenance and use. Did these weapons all have the same maintenance and round count?

Please don't mis interpret what I am saying. My cynicism comes from my education and experience. I have a BSME and worked in the Aerospace industry for a long time on Military contracts. I am very experienced in failure analysis and ND Inspection and QC. I wrote a book while working for Martin Mareitta on SPC.

Nothing in this thread approaches anything more than hearsay and conjecture. That does not mean Colt isn't the best. All I know from my 20 plus years as an ME working in manufacturing is you do not inspect in quality. I also know that Mil specs may or may not be relavant to the end user application. Colt may or may not adhere to their own QC specs. I used to perform Mil Q 9858A inspections and you'd be surprised at the Brand name companies who did not pass. You'd be surprised at how many waivers are written with a dispostion of UAI on programs a lot more technical in nature than an M4.

Colt may be the best, but there isn;t anyone here who can prove it.

Bomber

jacketch
01-09-07, 21:07
All I know from my 20 plus years as an ME working in manufacturing is you do not inspect in quality.
Bomber

Good post. Several things though.
After 40 years in manufacturing management I know that you can, if the right processes are used, inspect out defects (it is however more expensive than doing it right the first time.) Also, constant improvement can't move forward if you don't know what your defects are and/or which direction your defect levels are going. Without the knowledge that inspection and testing provide, you are just guessing about your processes.

Hardgear, LLC
01-09-07, 23:09
Good post. Several things though.
After 40 years in manufacturing management I know that you can, if the right processes are used, inspect out defects (it is however more expensive than doing it right the first time.) Also, constant improvement can't move forward if you don't know what your defects are and/or which direction your defect levels are going. Without the knowledge that inspection and testing provide, you are just guessing about your processes.

Thanks....I agree that process design is paramount. If you have a good process then conceivably, you do not need to inspect parts (Quality is free). If you have a process whose control limits are within the spec limits, then taking variable data on a sampling basis is all that should be required. 100% Inspection is a crutch for a poorly designed process.


Bomber

Jim Colborn
01-10-07, 06:48
Grant, thanks for the clarification on the steel.

"No offense to Pat....and I do know him btw, his data is exactly that. His data. It is still based upon a relatively small sample size ..."

Lord knows that I do not have to come to Pat's defense but I would think that if you extrapolate the numbers of carbines and problems Pat gets to see in his classes, you would find what he staes is correct.

Here is the bottom line. There are members here who have a wealth of information and expierence. Take it if you want and make an informed decision on what to buy. All carbines, cars, boats, etc are not created equal. If you think they are then great. If you have a BM, Armalite, super soaker,etc and it functions, great. Shoot it and be happy.

Nuff said.

Jim

Hardgear, LLC
01-10-07, 07:35
double tap....sorry

Hardgear, LLC
01-10-07, 07:42
Grant, thanks for the clarification on the steel.

"No offense to Pat....and I do know him btw, his data is exactly that. His data. It is still based upon a relatively small sample size ..."

Lord knows that I do not have to come to Pat's defense but I would think that if you extrapolate the numbers of carbines and problems Pat gets to see in his classes, you would find what he staes is correct.

Here is the bottom line. There are members here who have a wealth of information and expierence. Take it if you want and make an informed decision on what to buy. All carbines, cars, boats, etc are not created equal. If you think they are then great. If you have a BM, Armalite, super soaker,etc and it functions, great. Shoot it and be happy.

Nuff said.

Jim

Jim,

You're right there are members with a wealth of varying experience. Not all of that experience indicates you can take anecdotal information and "extrapolate" general statements.

Lord knows that I do not have to come to Pat's defense but I would think that if you extrapolate the numbers of carbines and problems Pat gets to see in his classes, you would find what he staes is correct.

Please don't mis characterize what I said. I did not challenge Pat's observations.

I'm not for or against Colt or RRA or BM or Stag or anyone else. I'm just giving a different way to look at it. A lot of folks throw out mil-spec, MP, TDP as some sort of magical proof of something. The way it's done indicates to me, that they have no experience with what benefit those terms actually have.

There is no guarantee that any of them translates into a meaningful and cost effective end user benefit and that is the bottom line. Nuff said.

Bomber

ETA. I am in no way contridicting or inpuning Pat's experience. I do however think there are some who are taking Pat's comment's out of context.

rob_s
01-10-07, 08:23
Here is the bottom line. There are members here who have a wealth of information and expierence. Take it if you want and make an informed decision on what to buy. All carbines, cars, boats, etc are not created equal. If you think they are then great. If you have a BM, Armalite, super soaker,etc and it functions, great. Shoot it and be happy.

Nuff said.

Bingo bango. That really is all that needs to be said.

Hardgear, it sounds like you're arguing just to argue, or arguing a side point that has little impact on the discussion at hand. At the end of the day I don't think anyone really cares WHY Colts are more reliable, just that they are. Most people don't really give a damn what's in the milspec, who follows it and who doesn't, or what it even really means for that matter. All they care about is that their one particular sample works when they want it to and that they have confidence that it will continue to do so. How you get that confidence is a completely individual process.

Hardgear, LLC
01-10-07, 08:58
Bingo bango. That really is all that needs to be said.

Hardgear, it sounds like you're arguing just to argue, or arguing a side point that has little impact on the discussion at hand. At the end of the day I don't think anyone really cares WHY Colts are more reliable, just that they are. Most people don't really give a damn what's in the milspec, who follows it and who doesn't, or what it even really means for that matter. All they care about is that their one particular sample works when they want it to and that they have confidence that it will continue to do so. How you get that confidence is a completely individual process.


You obviously don't know me as I do not argue for fun. As you said, how a person arrives at their decision is an individual choice. They should however try and get as many data points as they can so that an informed decision is being made.

It seems that you are having a hard time grasping that not everything is clear cut. There is another side to the coin. I'm not trying to convince anyone that they should or should not buy a particular brand.

Harlan

I am so arguementative that I have not been banned from any websites ;)

rob_s
01-10-07, 09:09
It seems that you are having a hard time grasping that not everything is clear cut. There is another side to the coin. I'm not trying to convince anyone that they should or should not buy a particular brand.

Then what ARE you trying to say? Nobody knows as much as you about the Milspec and TDP? That nobody has as much manufacturing experience as you?

What is this other side that you speak of, since you won't come out and say what your opinion really is? You keep going back to "I'm not saying that one brand is better or not, I'm just saying your criteria for making your choice is flawed". Does that matter? The topic at hand is whether or not Colt makes a better rifle than the other manufacturers. Do you have an opinion on this?

I agree with you in that nobody should make their purchase based solely on the "fact" (and we don't even know if it is fact) that Colt produces all of their non-military contract guns in accordance with the milspec, and that even if they do that doesn't mean much.

My point to you is that nobody cares, or at least nobody should. Everyone that I've come across with any sort of real exposure to a broad range of AR pattern rifle manufactuers comes to the same conclusion; Colts are the most reliable. Not infalible, just more reliable than the other makers. I know it may not satisfy your engineering and manufacturing requirements, but it's more than good enough for me.

GlockWRX
01-10-07, 12:05
My point to you is that nobody cares, or at least nobody should. Everyone that I've come across with any sort of real exposure to a broad range of AR pattern rifle manufactuers comes to the same conclusion; Colts are the most reliable. Not infalible, just more reliable than the other makers. I know it may not satisfy your engineering and manufacturing requirements, but it's more than good enough for me.

If I may, I think what Hardgear is saying is that to 'prove' that system A is more reliable than systems B and C, a statistically valid population of each must be tested to rigorous and repeatable standards. The results can be examined and a clear conclusion might be available (or not).

Unfortunately, very few of us have the funds to purchase 10, 20 , or 100 of each kind of rifle and subject them to a battery of tests lasting 10's of thousands of rounds. So, in the absence of valid data we guess.

Like you, nearly all of us gathers what info we can: technical specs, anecdotal assertions of other users, opinions of more knowledgeable people we trust, limited personal experience, and plain gut feel. From that we make our decision.

More specifically regarding Colt:
>They do things, or at least claim to, that would make defects in their products less likely (additional testing and inspections, etc.)
>They have numerous government contracts, and therefore meet the required specifications for that contract that are more stringent than the requirements for commercial sale (assuming that contract guns and commerical guns like the 6920 are made to the same specs)
>Knowledgable users such as Pat Rogers, Dean Caputo, and experienced members of this forum that I respect endorse Colt rifles
>My limited personal experience has always been positive with Colt products

When all of that is combined, it makes Colt look like a good guess. I assume Colt makes good products, and that's what I usually buy. LMT also has similar attributes and that's why I bought some of their stuff, too.

For an engineer like myself and Hardgear, we can't say that Colt is better than anyone else despite the preponderance of anecdotal data that points that way. A conclusion like that needs info that simply isn't available. One can testify to their own experience (which you ably have) and let others draw their own conclusions and place their own value on that experience.

I guess what I'm saying is that there is a big difference between knowing A is better than B and C, and assuming A is better than B and C.

DrMark
01-10-07, 12:15
Hardgear, it sounds like you're arguing just to argue...

Nah, he's just being precise, as we Engineers are wont to do. :)

In the grand totality of AR production, the data set we have is relatively small... too small to provide a definative answer as to reliability.

That does not mean that the answer we derive from extrapolating from that available data set, or from combining everyone's acecdotes, is not the right answer.

Hardgear, LLC
01-10-07, 16:16
Rob,

I'm not sure why I deserve so much attention. The 2 posters below your last post get it. As DRMark said, the anecdotal evidence may point one way but it is not definitive.

Rather than focus on what we disagree on, here is a sampling of statements you made that are in complete alignment with what I've been saying:

How do you kknow that?

Again, how do you know?

While I'm really beginning to wonder if you're actually looking for information or just for everyone to agree with you.

No matter what someone choose, everyone should be educated and/or educate themselves as to what they are buying.

I can't prove to you that Colt is more reliable any more than you can prove to me that the sky is blue.

Harlan

jacketch
01-10-07, 17:15
Although I will agree that to get an exact measure of the degree of reliability of each brand of rifle, a testing of a meaningful sample of each rifle would need to be tested under the same methods.

One thing that I think that is missing from the discussion is the quantity of rifles manufactured. Re:


More specifically regarding Colt:
>They do things, or at least claim to, that would make defects in their products less likely (additional testing and inspections, etc.)

Since Colt manufactures or buys so many parts/rifles (far more than their competitors), and since they do such comprehensive testing, they would likely have a huge database of information regarding procurement, materials, manufacturing processes and all the other mundane things that go into a finished product. Experience also counts (wouldn't Ford like to have Toyota's experience at producing a top quality product).

Due to the litigious nature of our society and the competitive nature of any manufacturing business, Colt would be downright foolish if it didn't use all of that information to make the product right the first pass (and consequently reduce defect costs associated with part failures, rework, process downtime, recalls and potential lawsuits.) The things they could and likely do to increase their bottom line and protect their assets are also the things that would provide a top tier product for their customer.

Quality isn't inspected into the product but inspection (with huge sample numbers) can be a keystone for developing a robust process if the data is used to constantly improve the process. That is an advantage none of the other manufacturers can buy or borrow.

Aubrey
01-10-07, 20:02
Regarding statistical sample sizes and proving conclusively that Brand C is better than A, B, D or R:

This reminds me of the tobacco companies arguing that there is no conclusive evidence that tobacco causes cancer. It also reminds me of the medical exspurts arguing that there is no conclusive evidence that antioxidants prevent cancer. If we wait around until there is conclusive evidence to show anything, it may be too dang late.

As the late Jack O'Connor wrote, you have to pick your experts and decide who you are going to trust. Sometimes this means that you must trust your isntincts, your gut, your intuition. Few things in life are certain.

Consider this: Most of us only have a glimpse into Pat Rogers work day, as he does few open classes and evidently lots of MIL/Gov-only classes. What do you think those MIL/Gov shooters are armed with. He has reported that there are far more weapon-related problems in the open (civilian courses). We do have an idea of what is represented there. What is represented in his infamous book? With all of the MIL/Gov training that he does, don't you think that this might be a fair statistical sampling of certain makers weapons (assuming of course that he keeps pictures of failed parts from those courses in his book)?

Dport
01-10-07, 20:22
Consider this: Most of us only have a glimpse into Pat Rogers work day, as he does few open classes and evidently lots of MIL/Gov-only classes. What do you think those MIL/Gov shooters are armed with. He has reported that there are far more weapon-related problems in the open (civilian courses). We do have an idea of what is represented there. What is represented in his infamous book? With all of the MIL/Gov training that he does, don't you think that this might be a fair statistical sampling of certain makers weapons (assuming of course that he keeps pictures of failed parts from those courses in his book)?
Or just as likely, without supporting data, this is a good indication of maintenance habits. Most organizations like that have trained armorers who maintain the guns, unlike civilian shooters.

Every Tom, Dick and Dport thinks they can build and maintain an AR with zero training.

Aubrey
01-10-07, 21:11
Very true. Even a "tier-one" weapon won't run for long without proper lube while being fed junk ammo from junk mags.

variablebinary
10-12-07, 18:09
When you buy Colt you eliminate 99% of the guesswork usually involved in getting an AR15. You know you're getting an A-Game product that is built and tested correctly time and time again.

Shihan
10-12-07, 21:11
Ya know.. My Wife picked me out based on my "Fit and Finish"....:p




Its funny about that on the outside "fit and finish" I look perfectly fine. On the inside my BCG(spinal cord) is tore up.

Shihan
10-12-07, 21:13
Well I don't know how this thread turned into a knightsar bashing contest but here goes. I have owned Colt AR 15's for over 20 years and reserve the right to reject one if I don't like the looks of it. I stated the fact that my LE6920 I got from SAW, that it didn't look as good as the others. It runs fine but I expected that when I bought it. My LMT and My KAC run just as good as it. I also have a AK that dosn't look good but I bought it knowing that it goes bang every time. Funny how you all accused me as a safe queen buyer, that is a laugh.

Well if it makes you feel any better when I get a LMT order in and one of the items is going to be for personal use I look them over and keep the one that looks the best.

Ekie
10-15-07, 10:58
My hobby is military weapons, and as such the discussion here in regards to Mil-Specs and the TDP are of interest to me.



Armalite is a little different then the other companies in that I think they have the official TDP. What brings them down is the fact that they have changed hands several times and do not seem interested in followig the specs in the TDP.


"ArmaLite's" original "TDP was for what Colt referred to as a Model 601. There have been thousands of engineering change orders made to the "AR-15s" TDP since then. In other words, if Mark acquired a copy of ArmaLite's "TDP" when he bought ArmaLite it would be outdated.



I think that the big buys (LMT, FN, Colt) make most of their parts in house and also buy from other manufacturers (as they cannot keep up with demand). They generally buy the items in the white and finish them in house. They also do their own QC so even though they might not have made said part, they still ran it through their QC system to make sure it meets their specs.


Yes, Colt traditionally makes the ten most important parts in house. Such things as bolts, carriers, barrels, upper and lower, etc. Since 2002 they have used some Diemaco parts though. Diemaco was a licensed manufacturer, and is currently owned by Colt.


Bushmaster bolts are MP tested and heat treated, that goes for the carrier to. .

Bushmaster QC is discussed in detail here, MP testing of bolts is not discussed:

www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/Blackrifle.pdf



First problem is it is a stretch to automatically accept Mil specs as well written documents that have specifications that are relavant to the products use. I don;t know the m16 mil specs well enough to form an educated opinion either way. My guess is most people postin here don't either.


The M16/M4 TDP is very detailed, to such a point that other manufactures have built the same product using it without much difficulty, ie H&R, Hydramatic, and FN. That is why Colt gets so bent out of shape when their TDP is not handled properly.



Second problem is assuming your particular gun meets all of the required Mil specs. I wish I had a dollar for every waiver on the Trident Program that has my name on it.


You can see the waivers to the TDP and Mil-Spec on M16/M4 contracts on-line, public info. I have not found any of concern. Last bad idea waiver I am aware of was in 1965 for cyclic rate specs.



The third arguement I hear alot is a reference to "in service". By that standard we should all be driving Crown Vics. It's not like everything in the Gov't's inventory was purchased based upon objective criteria that is relavant. Sorry to be so cynical, but if you have seen what I have, you would be cynical too.


Good point, but my thing is USGI stuff, so genuine stuff is of interest, and look alikes are not.



Now one poster made a reference to a poor finnish on his rifle. That observation was quickly dismissed as not relavant. This is true in terms of function (maybe), but was there Mil-spec requiring a certain finish requirement? If there is, then the rifle did not meet the TDP. So the next question is what else didn;t it meet? Back to the poor finish. Why would there be a requirement for coverage, consistency and depth? So if you are inclined to blow it off as not necessary, then what else in the TDP is over specified? My guess is a lot.


Yes, the finish is addressed in the TDP, have never been interested enough to bother with finding out how close to purple you can get and still be OK, or how pretty something has to look, or how many scratches are allowed, etc. I still lack interest.



What I said is a simple and true. There are a lot of folks on the various gun boards who place much to much emphasis on TDP, Mil Spec, in service and MP. Talk to any Military Armorer and you will quickly see that Colt is not immune to QC issues despite the magical QC rogram people seem to think COlt may have.


Despite the TDP mistakes are made, and the alternative is? And how is this alternative comparable?


This is for the guy that said every COLT bolt is MP inspected.
Colt follows Mil-spec requirements right?
Well, mil-spec does NOT require every bolt, every barrel, or every part they ship to be MP inspected.
They inspect batches just like everyone else!
This is a fact!

USGI requirements for service rifles and carbines is 100 percent proof testing of bolts and barrels. This has been the case prior to the M16 even being a service rifle. Please refer to part 3.4.4 of MIL-C-71186(AR).



Bushmaster MP tests one barrel out of every barrel run, Colt tests every barrel.


According to the TDP the proof marking MP means Magnetic particle and Proof fired. Bushmasters barrel making is covered in great detail here:

www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/Blackrifle.pdf

No mention of proof testing of barrels, or anything else.



-Magnetic particle inspected bolts.

Again, only Bushmaster and Colt do this. Yet again, Bushmaster only does one bolt out of every run of bolts, and Colt again tests every bolt.


No mention of bolt testing or inspection:

www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/Blackrifle.pdf



Since Colt manufactures or buys so many parts/rifles (far more than their competitors), and since they do such comprehensive testing, they would likely have a huge database of information regarding procurement, materials, manufacturing processes and all the other mundane things that go into a finished product.

Yes, for example, Colt had a 2 percent rejection rate on barrels found with cracks during magnetic particle testing. Reference:

M16 Rifle System Reliability and Quality Assurance Evaluation by O. P. Bruno, N. C. Krause, N. J. Miller, C. J. McArthur, R. J. Smith. Aberdeen Research and Development Center, July 1968; Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.

ioc102
10-16-07, 14:01
All these debates, praises, dissings etc... in my humble opinion, all one has to do is to ensure certain parts are well-made and are from reliable sources to guarantee a reliable rifle.

I have a Bushmaster ( gasp!) that I bought brand new. I know their lower receiver is well-built as well as the upper receiver ( told by the "keyhole" mark on the upper.) I also know that the critical parts are: bolt, gas key, buffer, receiver extension.

So...I switched the OEM bolt with a LMT "MP" bolt, took care of the gas key with a P-MOACKS and switched out the Buffer for an "H" buffer, staked the Castel Nut on the receiver extension. So far 1500 rounds with average 80 to 120 rounds per sustained fire session later, no problems, nothing came loose.

Do the homework and your rifle will be fine!

IOC

C4IGrant
10-16-07, 14:10
All this debates, praises, dissings etc... in my humble opinion, all one has to do is to ensure certain parts are well-made and are from reliable sources to guarantee a reliable rifle.

I have a Bushmaster ( gasp!) that I bought brand new. I know their lower receiver is well-built as well as the upper receiver ( told by the "keyhole" mark on the upper.) I also know that the critical parts are: bolt, gas key, buffer, receiver extension.

So...I switched the OEM bolt with a LMT "MP" bolt, took care of the gas key with a P-MOACKS and switched out the Buffer for an "H" buffer, staked the Castel Nut on the receiver extension. So far 1500 rounds with average 80 rounds per sustained fire sessions later, no problems, nothing came loose.

Do the homework and your rifle will be fine!

IOC

You kind of bring up a good point. Yes you can buy an "ok" gun, switch the most important parts out, ream the barrel (if it has a .223 chamber), stake the gas key, stake the castle nut, upgrade the buffer, etc etc. The problem is that most people don't know about doing anything like that, don't want to buy the tools to do it and they don't want to pay someone to do it. When you add up the cost of a new BM and then change parts out, the cost gets you into the neighborhood of what an LMT weapon would cost you.

So the question is, does that really make sense to do???



C4

ioc102
10-16-07, 14:18
Grant,
you're right! My point is that in case someone DID purchase anything else than a Colt, he didn't have to freak out and ditch that weapon right away and possible loose money in the process, just upgrade it and it'll be fine. I didn't mean for someone to purposely purchase a tier 2 then spend more money for the upgrade. That wouldn't make any sense. BTW, I learned a lot from you and other more experienced builders. Thanks for all the info!

IOC

SIMBA-LEE
09-07-11, 12:34
I think Pat said it best, for the average civilian user, the commercial brands are fine.

IMHO, if you want to pay the premium for a Colt then fine, but do not jump to the conclusion that your particular gun is better than anyone elses as it may not be.

YMMV

Bomber

Exactly! Milspec that may be years or decades old doesn't necessarily identify the best up to date specs & materials for AR parts and guns. I've shot Colts (4-5) for almost 40 years and I've also shot BM's, Areo Precision, Spikes, DPMS, etc. and never had a problem with any of them that wasn't my fault or magazine related.

However, I realize that an AR repair guy obviously knows which makes & models fail the most, but what's the percentage of failures compared to round counts and number sold? And are they current models that are failing, or years old models that have since been upgraded by the manufacturer and are now built to better standards?

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 12:42
You have officially won the M4C 2011 Necropost of the Year Award. :big_boss:


Exactly! Milspec that may be years or decades old doesn't necessarily identify the best up to date specs & materials for AR parts and guns. I've shot Colts (4-5) for almost 40 years and I've also shot BM's, Areo Precision, Spikes, DPMS, etc. and never had a problem with any of them that wasn't my fault or magazine related.

However, I realize that an AR repair guy obviously knows which makes & models fail the most, but what's the percentage of failures compared to round counts and number sold? And are they current models that are failing, or years old models that have since been upgraded by the manufacturer and are now built to better standards?

40Arpent
09-07-11, 13:54
You have officially won the M4C 2011 Necropost of the Year Award. :big_boss:

Were bonus points added for quoting someone that hasn't posted in over 4 years?

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 14:09
Yes among other things.


Were bonus points added for quoting someone that hasn't posted in over 4 years?

lamarbrog
09-07-11, 14:32
Colt makes a good product. However, their affiliation with the UAW is enough to turn me away from them. On top of this, they've had a long history of producing guns drastically out of spec specially for sale to the civilian market when the competition didn't. In addition, they don't make a MidLength, which with a 16" barrel is really a much better system.

Aside from just wanting the Pony... Can't see any reason to get a Colt.

Colt is also expensive for what you get, especially considering the generous donation to the NRA-ILA you're going to have to make to clear your conscience for doing business with the gun grabbers.

Even mentioning FN in a "Tier" is pointless, since they're not commonly available. I can't imagine why we'd not consider LMT "Tier One"... It's good enough for our elite troops, but not good enough for you?

BCM and Daniel Defense both make excellent products. We've seen Pat Rogers put a BCM through the paces and it performed commendably.


Based on my experience with the platform, it's pretty resilient. Almost any sub-par rifle can be made functional without much effort.

For example (not saying I've done this) take a stock... Bushmaster. It's certainly not a bad rifle, we've seen lots of people use them (sometimes fairly hard) and they generally don't do too bad. That said, it's certainly not a Colt, BCM, LMT, DD, etc.

So, let's fix it. Replace the bolt with one that's built to spec... BCM, for example. If the carrier has a firing pin shroud, that'll do fine. If not, replace it. If you use the original, swap the gas key and replace the fasteners with good ones and stake it properly. Upgrade to an H or H2 buffer if you feel the need. Maybe swap the FCG pins.

At most, we're looking at about $150 in upgrades, and we've eliminated practically everything that could be a problem.

Just my take on it...

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 14:50
Really? Please enlighten us as to which guns were out of spec and which ones from others were? Up until a few years ago there were no other AR's available that could come close to meeting the QA/QC of a Colt 6920.

Midlengths are fairly new and there are plenty of carbine shooters who don't believe in the system.

I can think of plenty of reasons to get a Colt. Especially with the current pricing.

How are Colts affiliated with gun grabbers? Please don't tell me it's because they made some modifications to their weapons in order to continue commercial sales to civilians.

Exactly how much experience do you have with the platform again?


Colt makes a good product. However, their affiliation with the UAW is enough to turn me away from them. On top of this, they've had a long history of producing guns drastically out of spec specially for sale to the civilian market when the competition didn't. In addition, they don't make a MidLength, which with a 16" barrel is really a much better system.

Aside from just wanting the Pony... Can't see any reason to get a Colt.

Colt is also expensive for what you get, especially considering the generous donation to the NRA-ILA you're going to have to make to clear your conscience for doing business with the gun grabbers.

Even mentioning FN in a "Tier" is pointless, since they're not commonly available. I can't imagine why we'd not consider LMT "Tier One"... It's good enough for our elite troops, but not good enough for you?

BCM and Daniel Defense both make excellent products. We've seen Pat Rogers put a BCM through the paces and it performed commendably.


Based on my experience with the platform, it's pretty resilient. Almost any sub-par rifle can be made functional without much effort.

For example (not saying I've done this) take a stock... Bushmaster. It's certainly not a bad rifle, we've seen lots of people use them (sometimes fairly hard) and they generally don't do too bad. That said, it's certainly not a Colt, BCM, LMT, DD, etc.

So, let's fix it. Replace the bolt with one that's built to spec... BCM, for example. If the carrier has a firing pin shroud, that'll do fine. If not, replace it. If you use the original, swap the gas key and replace the fasteners with good ones and stake it properly. Upgrade to an H or H2 buffer if you feel the need. Maybe swap the FCG pins.

At most, we're looking at about $150 in upgrades, and we've eliminated practically everything that could be a problem.

Just my take on it...

charmcitycop
09-07-11, 15:45
Honestly, I think some people just like being different. Colt does not cost much more than most other AR15 rifles, especially if you shop around. Why bother with buying a subpar rifle, then spend money upgrading it? If you want a 16" M4 buy a 6920 and expend that energy elsewhere.

d90king
09-07-11, 15:48
Colt makes a good product. However, their affiliation with the UAW is enough to turn me away from them. On top of this, they've had a long history of producing guns drastically out of spec specially for sale to the civilian market when the competition didn't. In addition, they don't make a MidLength, which with a 16" barrel is really a much better system.

Aside from just wanting the Pony... Can't see any reason to get a Colt.

Colt is also expensive for what you get, especially considering the generous donation to the NRA-ILA you're going to have to make to clear your conscience for doing business with the gun grabbers.

Even mentioning FN in a "Tier" is pointless, since they're not commonly available. I can't imagine why we'd not consider LMT "Tier One"... It's good enough for our elite troops, but not good enough for you?

BCM and Daniel Defense both make excellent products. We've seen Pat Rogers put a BCM through the paces and it performed commendably.


Based on my experience with the platform, it's pretty resilient. Almost any sub-par rifle can be made functional without much effort.

For example (not saying I've done this) take a stock... Bushmaster. It's certainly not a bad rifle, we've seen lots of people use them (sometimes fairly hard) and they generally don't do too bad. That said, it's certainly not a Colt, BCM, LMT, DD, etc.

So, let's fix it. Replace the bolt with one that's built to spec... BCM, for example. If the carrier has a firing pin shroud, that'll do fine. If not, replace it. If you use the original, swap the gas key and replace the fasteners with good ones and stake it properly. Upgrade to an H or H2 buffer if you feel the need. Maybe swap the FCG pins.

At most, we're looking at about $150 in upgrades, and we've eliminated practically everything that could be a problem.

Just my take on it...

Well, your take on it is retarded. I cant believe this drivel hasn't been deleted within minutes of you posting it.

C4IGrant
09-07-11, 15:55
Colt makes a good product. However, their affiliation with the UAW is enough to turn me away from them.

Colt had no say in the Union thing. From what I know, they don't like them either. ;)


On top of this, they've had a long history of producing guns drastically out of spec specially for sale to the civilian market when the competition didn't. In addition, they don't make a MidLength, which with a 16" barrel is really a much better system.

Out of spec? If you are talking about their hammer/trigger pins, that is no longer an issue.

While I am a fan of the middy gas system, truth is its most beneficial reason is the longer rail. This can be overcome by going with a low profile GB and longer rail.


Colt is also expensive for what you get, especially considering the generous donation to the NRA-ILA you're going to have to make to clear your conscience for doing business with the gun grabbers.

Currently, Colt is the ONLY TDP holding company that you can buy parts and guns from. At $990 for a 6920, that is a fantastic deal for what you get.




C4

d90king
09-07-11, 15:58
This might help put things in perspective.



Hi everybody.

I've been lurking for a month or so, and have seen a lot of good information. There's enough traffic here to keep things interesting, but it's still definitely focused on quality information. Perfect balance.

A little bit about myself: I'm a college student, fresh out of high school. I just changed majors from mechanical engineering to business.

Obviously, I'm kind of a youngin', at just shy of 19. Firearms have been my #1 interest/hobby/passion for quite a while, though. I did a number of science fair projects in the field of terminal ballistics. One such project got me a $5000 scholarship to attend the engineering program of a fairly prestigious private college (didn't use it). Another project I wrote an article on that ended up being published in a nationally distributed gun magazine last summer. I'm currently "retired", but spent a good portion of my time in high school and my summers working in a gun store.


That's really about all there is. I look forward to learning a lot from y'all, as well as sharing my own knowledge.

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 16:15
I have sent Mr. lamarbrog a PM (hint I wasn't asking you). Should I not receive a sufficient and timely reply I have a feeling he will get "disappeared".

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 16:20
they've had a long history of producing guns drastically out of spec specially for sale to the civilian market when the competition didn't.

You are misinformed. Colt civilian ARs weren't produced out of spec, they were precisely built to a different spec.

In the early 90's, Colt was on the verge of bankruptcy. The Connecticut Sate Legislature didn't want Colt to go out of business, so they approved a loan to keep Colt afloat, on the condition that Colt stopped producing assault rifles for the civilian market. The result was the Sporter line, which featured larger Fire Control Group pins, an unshrouded Bolt Carrier, a hardened steel Sear Block to keep people from retrofitting M16 Bolt Carriers, no Bayonet Lug, and large double-screw Pivot Pins. These modifications prevented the Sporters from being easily converted into military-capable rifles. More importantly, they were different enough from the previous incarnation of Evil Black Rifles that Colt was able to secure their loan from the State of Connecticut and remain in business.

That time has passed, and the Assault Weapons Ban has expired. Post-2009 production civilian ARs are once again built with military-spec pin sizes, Bolt Carriers, Bayo Lug, no Sear Block, etc.

Read more, post less.

Terry
09-07-11, 17:14
Colt's are no longer any more money than any other quality AR, and actually, with what Grant is selling SP6920's for, just might be the best deal going.
That myth has to die, imo.

lamarbrog
09-07-11, 18:17
Really? Please enlighten us as to which guns were out of spec and which ones from others were? Up until a few years ago there were no other AR's available that could come close to meeting the QA/QC of a Colt 6920.

Midlengths are fairly new and there are plenty of carbine shooters who don't believe in the system.

I can think of plenty of reasons to get a Colt. Especially with the current pricing.

How are Colts affiliated with gun grabbers? Please don't tell me it's because they made some modifications to their weapons in order to continue commercial sales to civilians.

Exactly how much experience do you have with the platform again?

Okay, up until a few years ago... We aren't a few years ago, we are now.

"Carbine shooters" can believe in the Easter bunny if they wish... Not sure what that's supposed to tell me.

Colt is owned, in part, by the UAW. It's a union which supports anti-gun politicians. Part of your purchase price on Colt products funds gun control. This is no big secret... Look it up.

And if Colts were not out of spec... Then neither is DPMS. It's just a different spec. Olympic Arms is probably "in spec" too... doesn't make it a good spec.

Sure, they're fixed now. But it's not exactly a good legacy. On top of that.... it doesn't matter if Colt likes the UAW, they are owned by them.

Colt staying in business isn't a major concern to me. Let 'em go. It's not my job to keep them in business no matter what. Let someone else step up and take over their share of the market... someone who doesn't comply with gun grabbers so they can balance their check book and someone who isn't owned by the UAW.

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 18:34
lamar,

I know that you think you are smart- and that may be the case. But, you have ZERO operational experience with the M16 platform.

I have no idea about the Colt/UAW connection nor do I give a rats ass.

DPMS is absolutely out of spec as is BM, Stag Arms, Oly Arms, etc.... We aren't talking about "sporting" versions of Colts. We are speaking of the 6920, 6933 and others. Those other companies cannot even meet the basics of the TDP.

Regardless of what store you worked at or what your particular job was there, please don't presume to think that your few years of experience matches that of those of us who actually have used these weapons in combat or have spent countless hours working on, inspecting and shooting the AR.

FYI- I am not 19 and my two oldest kids are actually older than you are. I have about 25 years of experience with the M16 which is longer than you have been breathing.


Okay, up until a few years ago... We aren't a few years ago, we are now.

"Carbine shooters" can believe in the Easter bunny if they wish... Not sure what that's supposed to tell me.

Colt is owned, in part, by the UAW. It's a union which supports anti-gun politicians. Part of your purchase price on Colt products funds gun control. This is no big secret... Look it up.

And if Colts were not out of spec... Then neither is DPMS. It's just a different spec. Olympic Arms is probably "in spec" too... doesn't make it a good spec.

Sure, they're fixed now. But it's not exactly a good legacy. On top of that.... it doesn't matter if Colt likes the UAW, they are owned by them.

Colt staying in business isn't a major concern to me. Let 'em go. It's not my job to keep them in business no matter what. Let someone else step up and take over their share of the market... someone who doesn't comply with gun grabbers so they can balance their check book and someone who isn't owned by the UAW.

lamarbrog
09-07-11, 18:44
You need operational experience to be able to comment on the AR15?

While I absolutely hold anyone who has served in our armed forces in high esteem..... I don't confuse that with a knowledge of firearms. Realistically... I've seen about as many veterans who think that running an AR15/M16 dry is good for a desert environment, as who know the truth on that issue. It doesn't make them bad people, doesn't make them stupid... but let's not confuse military service and knowledge of firearms.

To someone who is interested in the field... yes, it can be a a good chance for hands on experience. It doesn't automatically make anyone an expert, though.

Let's not make this personal. Insulting me based on my age does nothing to help your argument, nor does it do anything to hurt mine. It's just a baseless personal attack, nothing more.

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 18:52
No, and that's not what I said. Re-read it. What i am telling you is that you think you know alot about the AR when in fact you don't.

Your 18 months of working in sales at a gun store doesn't mean you know anything about the system, the TDP, etc... Experience is gained through hands on time, not reading something in a book or on the internet.

Finally I wasn't insulting you about your age. I am simply stating that your few years of reading about the AR on the internet and in magazines does not equal hand on experience.


You need operational experience to be able to comment on the AR15?

While I absolutely hold anyone who has served in our armed forces in high esteem..... I don't confuse that with a knowledge of firearms. Realistically... I've seen about as many veterans who think that running an AR15/M16 dry is good for a desert environment, as who know the truth on that issue. It doesn't make them bad people, doesn't make them stupid... but let's not confuse military service and knowledge of firearms.

To someone who is interested in the field... yes, it can be a a good chance for hands on experience. It doesn't automatically make anyone an expert, though.

Let's not make this personal. Insulting me based on my age does nothing to help your argument, nor does it do anything to hurt mine. It's just a baseless personal attack, nothing more.

DeltaSierra
09-07-11, 18:54
You need operational experience to be able to comment on the AR15?

It for **** sure helps if you have a clue about the subject at hand, before you start making groundless statements..





Insulting me based on my age does nothing to help your argument, nor does it do anything to hurt mine. It's just a baseless personal attack, nothing more.

I can't say that I agree with you in the least.

When someone of the age group in question (I might add that I am on the young side, but I am just old enough to know that I don't know everything) makes numerous unfounded statements over a short period of time, it becomes very clear that they have little to no real experience, and are just playing an experienced "internet tough guy"....

Belmont31R
09-07-11, 18:55
Does "you don't know what the **** you're talking" about sound better?




All these other brands only came about in the last few years. Colt has been making these guns since the 60's. If you can't appreciate that, and want to see them go you're dumb. If they had gone out of business then who would be making military guns? Bushmaster? Armalite? Neither of them come close to building quality guns.



You obviously don't know how business works, either. There are all sorts of deals with states, feds, and local municipalities. Tax breaks, loans, land purchases, ect.

g5m
09-07-11, 18:57
lamarbrog,

for you to be so belittling of the experience of the members of this site is very revealing.
FYI Iraqgunz' sig line "Multiple armorer certifications" carries a lot of weight.

lamarbrog
09-07-11, 18:57
No, and that's not what I said. Re-read it. What i am telling you is that you think you know alot about the AR when in fact you don't.

Your 18 months of working in sales at a gun store doesn't mean you know anything about the system, the TDP, etc... Experience is gained through hands on time, not reading something in a book or on the internet.

Finally I wasn't insulting you about your age. I am simply stating that your few years of reading about the AR on the internet and in magazines does not equal hand on experience.

Who says I worked in sales? I won't deny that I sold a few guns in my time... But I mainly acted as a range officer, and kept the fleet of rental guns operational. I've dealt with my fair share of M16/AR15 hands on. When you keep rifles running that see a few thousand rounds of mag dumps every week... being operated by novices... you pretty soon have an idea or two about how to keep them running.

Arguing with someone who has the power to ban me is a losing battle... I think I'll leave this at that. Way to welcome the new guy.

GIJew766
09-07-11, 19:04
You need operational experience to be able to comment on the AR15?

Hoss, IG has been working on the M16 FOW longer than you've been on this earth. Methinks he knows a bit more than you do.

Arguing semantics over the spec a company follows is ridiculous. As has been stated, the SPORTER versions of the Colt carbines were "out of spec" to the TDP, but only due to the constraints placed on them by the State. Their LE/MIL carbines were still being built to the TDP and are to this day.

As for your months behind the counter at a gun store, that means didly shit around here. Based on your posts, I'd have to lump you in with the fudds behind the counters who claim that the SEALs are running SIG 556's in A-Stan...


All the standard cautions apply. Stay in your lane and read more, post less.


H

Belmont31R
09-07-11, 19:04
Who says I worked in sales? I won't deny that I sold a few guns in my time... But I mainly acted as a range officer, and kept the fleet of rental guns operational. I've dealt with my fair share of M16/AR15 hands on. When you keep rifles running that see a few thousand rounds of mag dumps every week... being operated by novices... you pretty soon have an idea or two about how to keep them running.

Arguing with someone who has the power to ban me is a losing battle... I think I'll leave this at that. Way to welcome the new guy.



His pinky finger has more experience than you.


It has nothing to do with being a new guy. You're going to get jumped when you start out spewing a bunch of crap and act like you know everything when you're talking to people who have done this for a living for a very long time, instructors, ect. You're not "arguing" with another 19 year old kid who ran the rental shack. You're being told you don't know what you're talking about by people who do know what they are talking about.

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 19:08
lamar,

Your own internet profile where you clearly stated that you were in sales. In addition unless you won the lottery or are independently wealthy you don't retire at the ripe age of 19.

Now having said all of that- you are testing my patience. So let me throw this out there. Since you claim to be so smart. Why did you purchase a 20" rifle that was assembled using the wrong components? Instead of using some of your super powers or doing some research you bought a piece of shit and then tried to make it right. Think about that the next time you make another Colt post.

In the event that your memory has faded here is a link- http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?3307-Feed-Ramps-Incorrect

Let me add one more thing if I may. How exactly did you get a job working at a gun store (building AR's no less) when you aren't even of legal age and you have no formal experience or schooling? What armorer course did you attend?


Who says I worked in sales? I won't deny that I sold a few guns in my time... But I mainly acted as a range officer, and kept the fleet of rental guns operational. I've dealt with my fair share of M16/AR15 hands on. When you keep rifles running that see a few thousand rounds of mag dumps every week... being operated by novices... you pretty soon have an idea or two about how to keep them running.

Arguing with someone who has the power to ban me is a losing battle... I think I'll leave this at that. Way to welcome the new guy.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 19:17
I think Colt today is about the name and nothing else. Their guns are production guns with little to no attention to details. I am sure companies like DD, BCM, LMT...pay considerable more attention to details and QA than Colt. As far as being milspec and such, that is the minimum standard and the companies I mentioned, among others, exceed the minimum standards.

lamarbrog
09-07-11, 19:23
That was my official title. You could be "Sales", "Manager", or "Maintenance". I chose to give my official title, rather than explaining some tirade of every little thing I ever did. When my other stuff was done, I'd go do sales after I had done my necessary work on the rentals and if someone else wanted a turn on the range or if I thought I had been rattled around enough for one day. Make a mountain out of a molehill...

I put "retired" in quotes for a reason... it was sarcasm. I moved a long distance for college, so I had to leave that job. I didn't "quit"... that would imply I was displeased in some fashion. I certainly wasn't "fired". You really seem to enjoy picking words out of context and coming to all sorts of conclusions from them.

I don't know why you mention it is a 20"... I like 20" rifles and actually paid extra for it. Is that a problem? They shoot more mildly and don't wear parts as bad... and I happen to like the older styling. Just because you like a carbine doesn't mean there's something wrong with me because I like a rifle.

The reviews on the rifle online were limited, but seemed to be good overall. My communication with the company indicated they had good specifications. They claimed a 158 Carpenter bolt, a 4150 barrel, etc. They were a little off in some ways, but nothing that really bothered me.

I didn't get a chance to totally go through the rifle when I picked it up... I was running behind schedule and had to "grab and go". Am I not allowed to be busy?

The rifle does have problems... but it isn't anything I can't fix... I'll put a new gas key on in the next couple weeks, and run 1000 rounds through it in a short period for test firing.

With as many rifles that come through my hands... I think I'm allowed to have a mild screw up every now and again. Yes, I screwed up... or, rather, they screwed up and I didn't catch it right away... I should have been on the ball. I'll admit I should have been paying attention, and that's what I get for not.

Everyone makes mistakes... You've never bought anything that was a piece of crap?

Iraqgunz
09-07-11, 19:35
You seem to enjoy playing games. The bottom line is that your purchased an incorrectly built piece of shit less than a month ago, yet you want to come here and preach about Colt or how smart you are when it comes to the AR.

I mentioned 20" rifle because that is what you bought. The fact that you not only bought a piece of shit, but kept it after you noticed the issues it had says a ton.

Yes, I have purchased crappy things before. I bought a crappy coffee pot the 2nd time I was in Iraq because I didn't want to spend money on a good one. What I don't do is spent my money on shitty firearms and accessories. Also, don't buy shitty AR's and then purport to recommend other choices to people on the internet.

The bottom line is that you aren't as smart as you think you are. End stop. As far as I am concerned your participation on this thread is over.


That was my official title. You could be "Sales", "Manager", or "Maintenance". I chose to give my official title, rather than explaining some tirade of every little thing I ever did. When my other stuff was done, I'd go do sales after I had done my necessary work on the rentals and if someone else wanted a turn on the range or if I thought I had been rattled around enough for one day. Make a mountain out of a molehill...

I put "retired" in quotes for a reason... it was sarcasm. I moved a long distance for college, so I had to leave that job. I didn't "quit"... that would imply I was displeased in some fashion. I certainly wasn't "fired". You really seem to enjoy picking words out of context and coming to all sorts of conclusions from them.

I don't know why you mention it is a 20"... I like 20" rifles and actually paid extra for it. Is that a problem? They shoot more mildly and don't wear parts as bad... and I happen to like the older styling. Just because you like a carbine doesn't mean there's something wrong with me because I like a rifle.

The reviews on the rifle online were limited, but seemed to be good overall. My communication with the company indicated they had good specifications. They claimed a 158 Carpenter bolt, a 4150 barrel, etc. They were a little off in some ways, but nothing that really bothered me.

I didn't get a chance to totally go through the rifle when I picked it up... I was running behind schedule and had to "grab and go". Am I not allowed to be busy?

The rifle does have problems... but it isn't anything I can't fix... I'll put a new gas key on in the next couple weeks, and run 1000 rounds through it in a short period for test firing.

With as many rifles that come through my hands... I think I'm allowed to have a mild screw up every now and again. Yes, I screwed up... or, rather, they screwed up and I didn't catch it right away... I should have been on the ball. I'll admit I should have been paying attention, and that's what I get for not.

Everyone makes mistakes... You've never bought anything that was a piece of crap?

seb5
09-07-11, 19:42
Jeez, I just read the posted link, what a train wreck! Why would anyone familar with more than the nuts and bolts (supposedly) of the AR system buy that kind of sub par system? Did I read correctly where he referenced the 16" gas system on a 20" barrel and loc titing the gas key:rolleyes: This is a classic example of someone who seems very interested in the system, reading a bunch and believing they know what they don't know.

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 20:05
And if Colts were not out of spec... Then neither is DPMS. It's just a different spec. Olympic Arms is probably "in spec" too... doesn't make it a good spec.

Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. DPMS, Bushmaster, Olympic, and other makers of AR cheese say they follow the proper spec, but in reality their efforts are a bit loose and all too often their products are outside the acceptable limit. That goes for lower receiver machining, chamber reaming, metallurgy and heat-treatment, pin diameters, and a host of other conditions not visible to the naked eye. Gas key and castle nut staking are so simple to identify that a grade-school student can pick up on it once he knows what to look for, yet those companies can't even get that right.

An old Colt Sporter is not a true AR in the strictest sense. It is a Sporter, a different rifle machined to accomodate different parts. The Upper Receiver, Lower Receiver, and the complete Lower Parts Kit are Sporter-specific and will not interchange with most AR's, even earlier and later Colts. Some Colt AR models carried some of these features into more modern times. Colt built the Sporter-type AR's to exacting tolerances with the correct materials. They are well within their spec and are high-quality rifles. The same cannot be said of the other brands to which you try to compare it.

djegators
09-07-11, 20:11
I think Colt today is about the name and nothing else. Their guns are production guns with little to no attention to details. I am sure companies like DD, BCM, LMT...pay considerable more attention to details and QA than Colt. As far as being milspec and such, that is the minimum standard and the companies I mentioned, among others, exceed the minimum standards.


Can you quantify any of this?

PlatoCATM
09-07-11, 20:20
I've never seen someone so stupid that they admit to buying a knockoff that sucks and continues to berate the gold standard. Maybe you should pony up the funds and find out what you're missing in the colt. You've easily wasted the couple hundred dollars in savings with you ass-pains and fixes and will most likely continue to pay. Or you could save more money and put a chinese RDS on it and bitch about Aimpoint.

fdxpilot
09-07-11, 20:55
Colt is owned, in part, by the UAW. It's a union which supports anti-gun politicians. Part of your purchase price on Colt products funds gun control. This is no big secret... Look it up.

Did look it up. Colt, having been run into the ground by an UAW strike, agreed to end the strike in an arrangement that resulted in Colt being sold to a group of private investors, the State of Connecticut, and the UAW itself. That lasted about 4 years, ending with the company's chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1992. In 1994, the assets of Colt were purchased by Zilkha & Co, a financial group owned by Donald Zilkha.

So your info, is only partially correct, and long out of date. Your rant against "Union owned Colt" is as out of touch as most of your other posts.

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 21:00
To Arfcom with him. He'll fit in gloriously with the huge gaggle of ignorant know-it-alls there.

Don't forget your Dremel.

d90king
09-07-11, 21:17
Shit guys, at this point and time this is like making fun of the kid licking the windows on a short yellow bus. It's not worth the energy and Wyndex needed to re-clean clean the windows after he gets off the bus.

seb5
09-07-11, 21:52
Shit guys, at this point and time this is like making fun of the kid licking the windows on a short yellow bus. It's not worth the energy and Wyndex needed to re-clean clean the windows after he gets off the bus.

I will welcome all 19 year old college freshman that have an interest in firearms to any discussion. They are the ones that will have to take up the cross so to speak and there are fewer and fewer of them today. But I think it's presumptious of that same kid to come on here and post advice based on what he has read on the internet stated as his experiences as if he knows anything from first hand experience. As stated in other threads he needs to read more, ask questions, learn, and refrain from giving advice as this stage of his development as an AR guru. Most of the crap he's spouting is just a repeat of information all over these boards.

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 21:53
You're right, I usually wouldn't waste my time and electricity arguing with an opinionated teenager who says lots but knows little.

But I value the good information on M4C. It is therefore sometimes necessary to debate with fools in order for the facts to be properly presented and expose the bullshit for what it is.

Otherwise, M4C would be like any of hundreds of other piss-poor gun forums, with groups of similarly-thinking semi-literate morons espousing their opinions as truth, while emotionally and noisily drowning out sensible posters who have constructive information to pass along.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 22:03
Can you quantify any of this?

Sure, would you Compare a Colt to a KAC or a LaRue OBR, both not-milspec. DD and BCM with their parts individually tested manufactured with top notch components, at or exceeding milspec. I am new to ARs, have been reading and learning a lot on this forum. For the price of a Colt one can do much better, IMO, going with a BCM or DD.

Colt you pay for name, plain and simple. Same with 1911s, not in discussion here.

Is it proven the midlength system is better than carbine on 14.5" and 16" barrels? I believe so.

How many BCM and DDs lemons you see? Would it be because of more attention to detail instead of just pumping rifles through an assembly line?

Customer service? I used Colt's CS before, 3 months to work on a 1911 that wouldnt feed HPs, came from service with the same problem. Used DD CS before because of a chipped off rail, one week turn around on their dime.

Comparing parts - Colt BCG vs BCM or DD BCG? How about barrel?

Would I get a Colt? Maybe, but would have a DD or BCM as my first.

kwelz
09-07-11, 22:13
Sure, would you Compare a Colt to a KAC or a LaRue OBR, both not-milspec. DD and BCM with their parts individually tested manufactured with top notch components, at or exceeding milspec. I am new to ARs, have been reading and learning a lot on this forum. For the price of a Colt one can do much better, IMO, going with a BCM or DD.

Colt you pay for name, plain and simple. Same with 1911s, not in discussion here.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.


I am new to ARs

I am new to ARs

I am new to ARs

I am new to ARs

That kind of says it all.

djegators
09-07-11, 22:15
Sure, would you Compare a Colt to a KAC or a LaRue OBR, both not-milspec. DD and BCM with their parts individually tested manufactured with top notch components, at or exceeding milspec. I am new to ARs, have been reading and learning a lot on this forum. For the price of a Colt one can do much better, IMO, going with a BCM or DD.

Colt you pay for name, plain and simple. Same with 1911s, not in discussion here.


Hmmm....I'm sorry, I thought you were going to quantify your statement.

Belmont31R
09-07-11, 22:16
Sure, would you Compare a Colt to a KAC or a LaRue OBR, both not-milspec. DD and BCM with their parts individually tested manufactured with top notch components, at or exceeding milspec. I am new to ARs, have been reading and learning a lot on this forum. For the price of a Colt one can do much better, IMO, going with a BCM or DD.

Colt you pay for name, plain and simple. Same with 1911s, not in discussion here.



No one makes a completely mil spec weapon available for civilian purchase right now.


Colts are around the same price as BCM and DD. Its not just paying for a name. They have been available for right around 1k each for a while now. Comparable to other brands with similar stock features.


What about an SR15 is not mil spec or does not exceed the standard?

DeltaSierra
09-07-11, 22:17
Sure, would you Compare a Colt to a KAC or a LaRue OBR, both not-milspec. DD and BCM with their parts individually tested manufactured with top notch components, at or exceeding milspec. I am new to ARs, have been reading and learning a lot on this forum. For the price of a Colt one can do much better, IMO, going with a BCM or DD.

Colt you pay for name, plain and simple. Same with 1911s, not in discussion here.

But, no one other than Colt (and FN) actually manufactures a weapon that fulfills the exact requirements of the Technical Data Package.

No one is saying that BCM or DD are not great rifles, that are exceedingly high quality, but to claim that either of those companies are manufacturing rifles to the exact specifications set forth in the TDP is simply untrue.



From what I understand, at this time, the actual Colt M-4 TDP is restricted from open publication per the following link (If I am misunderstanding this information, please, set me strait.)

http://www.dodig.mil/audit/reports/fy97/97165sum.htm

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 22:17
Sure, would you Compare a Colt to a KAC or a LaRue OBR, both not-milspec. DD and BCM with their parts individually tested manufactured with top notch components, at or exceeding milspec. I am new to ARs, have been reading and learning a lot on this forum. For the price of a Colt one can do much better, IMO, going with a BCM or DD.

Colt you pay for name, plain and simple. Same with 1911s, not in discussion here.

More opinions, no facts.

Move along.

GermanSynergy
09-07-11, 22:21
The people with the least amount of experience with this platform seem to be awfully opinionated about it.

sullafelix
09-07-11, 22:21
Someone needs to put this thread out of it's misery

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 22:22
More opinions, no facts.

Move along.

What more facts do you need? :lol:

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 22:27
But, no one other than Colt (or FN, but since you cannot buy an FN as a civilian, it is not really part of this discussion) actually manufactures a weapon that fulfills the exact requirements of the Technical Data Package.

No one is saying that BCM or DD are not great rifles, that are exceedingly high quality, but to claim that either of those companies are manufacturing rifles to the exact specifications set forth in the TDP is simply untrue.



From what I understand, at this time, the actual Colt M-4 TDP is restricted from open publication per the following link (If I am misunderstanding this information, please, set me strait.)

http://www.dodig.mil/audit/reports/fy97/97165sum.htm

Is it that important to follow the TDP? As I said I am new on rifles but I would much rather KAC or OBR or DD .... "non-TDP" compliant than a Colt because it meets the minimum requirements.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 22:32
No one makes a completely mil spec weapon available for civilian purchase right now.


Colts are around the same price as BCM and DD. Its not just paying for a name. They have been available for right around 1k each for a while now. Comparable to other brands with similar stock features.


What about an SR15 is not mil spec or does not exceed the standard?

That is exactly what I mean - SR15 does not follow the TDP, is Colt better? I dont think so, SR15 exceeds the standard.

And, for the same price of a Colt one can do better with BCM and DD - its simple, compare what you get from each manufacturer for $1000.

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 22:34
Is it that important to follow the TDP? As I said I am new on rifles but I would much rather KAC or OBR or DD .... "non-TDP" compliant than a Colt because it meets the minimum requirements.

News flash for you, homes: If it doesn't meet TDP, it is inferior to one that does. Colt and FN have the Technical Data Package to produce M16/M4's. Nobody else. Hence Colt/FN > all the others.

Read more, post less.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 22:41
News flash for you, homes: If it doesn't meet TDP, it is inferior to one that does. Colt and FN have the Technical Data Package to produce M16/M4's. Nobody else. Hence Colt/FN > all the others.

Read more, post less.

Ok, I will take my DDs that don't fit the TDP, and I am sure the KAC and LaRue and Noveske and BCM owners out there will be upset because their rifles are inferior to Colts because they don't follow Colt's specs :lol:

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 22:47
Ok, I will take my DDs that don't fit the TDP, and I am sure the KAC and LaRue and Noveske and BCM owners out there will be upset because their rifles are inferior to Colts because they don't follow Colt's specs :lol:

Again you misunderstand. It's not Colt's specs, it's Military Specs. You know, the Marine Corps, the U.S. Army... the professionals who use their rifles and carbines every day to defeat bad guys in far-off lands to keep you safe and free. This is a fighting carbine we're talking about here, not a safe queen or range plinker. If it's not good enough for the .mil, it's not good enough for me.


SR15 does not follow the TDP, is Colt better? I dont think so, SR15 exceeds the standard.

How can you say that when you clearly don't even know what the standard is? Hell, KAC doesn't even know what the standard is. Colt has the proprietary Technical Data Package required to produce mil-spec weapons, and I'll bet you a bag of Doritos that they didn't fax it to KAC. If they don't know what's in the standard, how can you possibly claim that KAC has already exceeded it?

All you're doing here is spewing ill-formed opinions.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 22:51
Again you misunderstand. It's not Colt's specs, it's Military Specs. You know, the Marine Corps, the U.S. Army... the professionals who use their rifles and carbines every day to defeat bad guys in far-off lands to keep you safe and free. This is a fighting carbine we're talking about here, not a safe queen or range plinker. If it's not good enough for the .mil, it's not good enough for me.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Colt-M4-Data-Rights-The-Individual-Carbine-Competition-06942/

...OK ;)

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 23:02
A Googled article verifying what I've already told you.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 23:14
A Googled article verifying what I've already told you.

I am glad I quoted you above where you say the TDP is not Colts...you are clueless man.

p.s. Have you ever heard of Eugene Stoner? Do some reading...

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 23:18
I am glad I quoted you above where you say the TDP is not Colts...you are clueless man.

p.s. Have you ever heard of Eugene Stoner? Do some reading...

The TDP isn't Colt's. It's owned by the U.S. Army. Colt and FN (and no one else) have copies of it in order to produce M16's and M4's for the .mil.

The late Mr. Stoner hasn't had anything to do with AR's in decades.


You're not very good at this, are you?

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 23:21
The TDP isn't Colt's. It's owned by the U.S. Army. Colt and FN (and no one else) have copies of it in order to produce M16's and M4's for the .mil.

The late Mr. Stoner hasn't had anything to do with AR's in decades.


You're not very good at this, are you?

If you say so, enjoy your Colt.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 23:31
Here is more learning material

http://www.pepperlaw.com/publications_article.aspx?ArticleKey=198

kwelz
09-07-11, 23:36
If you say so, enjoy your Colt.

That is the extent of your argument? There are a lot of people who Work in the industry, have decades of experience working on and with the M16/M4 platform. You would do well to speak less and read more of what they have to say.

Will488
09-07-11, 23:37
Very disappointed in the personal attacks.

SpaceWrangler
09-07-11, 23:45
Here is more learning material

http://www.pepperlaw.com/publications_article.aspx?ArticleKey=198

Read that years ago. I don't recall KAC, DD, or BCM being mentioned in it. What does the article have to do with your previously-posted assertions about 'Colt vs. Everybody Else' quality?

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 23:50
That is the extent of your argument? There are a lot of people who Work in the industry, have decades of experience working on and with the M16/M4 platform. You would do well to speak less and read more of what they have to say.

Kwels, I have been listening and posted my thoughts on the issue. I defend my position when a post is made claiming XYZ rifles are inferior because they don't follow Colt's M4 TDP.

brzusa.1911
09-07-11, 23:58
Read that years ago. I don't recall KAC, DD, or BCM being mentioned in it. What does the article have to do with your previously-posted assertions about 'Colt vs. Everybody Else' quality?

You are mistaken, the article is to show you that the TDP is in fact Colt's, which you called up numerous times above saying I was wrong.

As far as quality compared to others, my opinion is I would buy a Colt before I bought a Bushmaster, RRA, DPMS, ... but I would buy a DD, BCM, .... before I would buy a Colt.

Lots of Colts fans here, people who know about ARs like them and vouch for them, I don't see however many of the top guys here that I like to follow running them although they do speak well of them.

kwelz
09-08-11, 00:02
Kwels, I have been listening and posted my thoughts on the issue. I defend my position when a post is made claiming XYZ rifles are inferior because they don't follow Colt's M4 TDP.

I have read each and every one of your posts and have yet to see you make a coherent and complete argument. And by the way, I also read closely enough to know how to spell peoples names properly.

kwelz
09-08-11, 00:03
You are mistaken, the article is to show you that the TDP is in fact Colt's, which you called up numerous times above saying I was wrong.


That is the problem with quoting an out of date article and not bothering to update your information. Colt had to give up the TDP to the Government last year.

SpaceWrangler
09-08-11, 00:07
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/Stretch67/Fun/thumbs.gif

rackham1
09-08-11, 00:10
Can a mod kill this thread please?

DD, BCM, LMT are great... yes, yes... we all agree.

It was entertaining to read that other guy's tailspin... at least it was original. Now we're into mega deja vu.

Iraqgunz
09-08-11, 01:18
brzusa,

Alot of your info is flat out wrong or dated. This thread is officially closed due to some peoples' lack of reading comprehension.