View Full Version : S&W M&P Sport II observations
A friend of Pappabear's son recently bought an M&P Sport II carbine. I did some work on the gun and noticed too many things not to do a little write up about it.... and why we buy BCM guns that meet or exceed specification.
Lower First thing we noticed is that the lower is very nice looking. The trigger guard is integral to the lower... I'd say it was part of the Forging, but I've got no idea if it's forged or what the aluminum is... because Smith simply lists the lower as "Aluminum". The upper, however is listed as 7075 T6.
LPK The LPK looks like something you'd find in a rimfire AR. Partially skeletonized hammer, etc. Does not inspire confidence.
Barrel The barrel is 4140 and doesn't appear to be Chrome lined. Probably QPQ which wouldn't be too bad... but I couldn't tell. The gas port looked like it was sized reasonably. I didn't have time to measure it, but based on eyeballing ports and how the gun runs, I don't think it was terribly over-gassed.
For whatever reason, Smith reamed their taper pins in the opposite direction of the industry. So I ended up driving a taper pin into my orange brownells pin removal jig on accident.
Handguards The stock handguards are a joke. We (AR enthusiasts) used to look down on single shielded handguards. Well these thing are just plastic with no shields for heat. I suppose most people would change them out anyway, but crappy none the less.
Mag Catch The mag catch was the last straw, and what caused me to take the time to write about the gun. I got a call from Pappabear who told me the guy's gun took a crap on him on Saturday. I was worried that some of my work was the cause. But after he showed up with the gun, I could see that the engagement latch on the mag catch had fallen off the mag catch pin... totally disabling the gun's semi automatic firing ability.
I've never seen this happen. But another example of cut corners on these guns. Pappa donated Colt OEM parts to the gun and got the rifle back up and running.
So this $700+/- gun will likely end up costing just as much or more than a good BCM, or a 6920 by the time you fix/replace all the sub par components.
Thank you for sharing your observations, and for the polite but informed push-back on the most recent round of entry-level lionizing going on around here.
Popping my popcorn now... ;)
The gun also choked once on a mag of known good handloaded ammo. It drove the bullet back into the case. It also locked back, bolt catch on the carrier one time... instead of catching the bolt like it's supposed to...
Which leads me to another observation that I just remembered. It comes with what appears to be a carbine buffer. I didn't weigh it, but it wasn't marked. When the gun comes back for more repair, I'll weigh the buffer and maybe get pics of some of the other issues.
Perfect example of buy once, cry once.
Sad sad days where skeletonized hammers are becoming common in the manufacturing process.
How many noobs baught ARs because the salesman said: "And thez gots all them thurr militareh partz inut." While showing them the hole in the hammer conning them into an ultra-tacticool-defense-attack-rifle.
Vegasshooter
10-03-16, 13:23
Markm, I have personally seen enough to never recommend a S&W. I saw one where the castle nut on the RE tube wasn't even remotely staked. This allowed it to, of course, come loose. The guy didn't catch it in time. This caused the end plate to loosen. The rear take down pin spring then came out of the upper. Internally, the buffer retaining pin came out and allowed the buffer and spring to move forward, causing disassembly to be a PITA. All this because of a lack of proper staking. A 10 minute job.
Having just spent the weekend with Will from Semper Paratus at an Armorer course, I'm convinced that 80% of the guns out there are crap. We had 12-14 guys in the class. There were multiple different brands. Almost every single one that wasn't a Colt or other tier 1 gun had issues. One guy was ready to just leave his gun there, and totally start over.
I have 110% decided that it's Colt, BCM, DD, Noveske, KAC,Sionics now that I have seen the top quality they do, or I will build my own. Good enough just ISNT.
Doc Safari
10-03-16, 13:35
I actually bought one of these as a "truck gun" since I already have my Colt and BCM.
I knew going in that it was a "Grade B" carbine.
Here's what I observed:
1. Castle nut staking
Right off the bat I could see this was half-assed. You couldn't really call it any more than "token" staking. It took about five minutes to fix with a Phillips screwdriver tip and a hammer.
2. Handguards
No heat shield at all. I ditched these in favor of proper heat-shielded handguards.
3. Trigger guard integral with receiver
I'm not sure if I like this or not yet.
4. Bolt Carrier Group
Bolt was marked MP, surprisingly. The carrier key is staked pretty well, maybe just a tad less than a BCM or Colt, but still pretty good--much better than some others I've seen. The bolt carrier also appears to have the "shortened" belly like some manufacturers supply instead of the full bellied M16 carrier.
5. Barrel
No, the barrel is not chrome-lined. I believe it's coated or treated with a process similar to how Glock treats its slides. It's been a while since I read up on this though so my description may not be exact. Anyhoo.....it's supposed to be very corrosion and wear resistant.
6. Front sight
My front sight post was barely screwed in. I screwed it down enough that the post's base was more or less flush with the front sight base. The front sight base is "F" marked.
7. FCG
The hammer appears to be MIM. I don't know what you mean by "skeletonized" but my hammer was solid, with what appears to be air space on both sides. I'm guessing other parts in the FCG are MIM also. I expect at some point to replace the entire FCG including the mag catch. I hope they last a few thousand rounds. I noticed the safety has more play than I consider normal when on "Fire". It was solid while on "Safe."
Mine came with an unmarked buffer also.
It's my beater. I knew I was getting an inferior product and I'm satisfied that I'll be carrying a "half price" AR with me on the ranch when I'm out in the bad weather. I'd rather this one get rained on and sand in it. I've decided I want to baby my "good" AR's more since they may be hard to get once the next president takes office.
I've put nearly 200 rounds through it during a long range session. I deliberately "pushed" it a little by not letting it cool between mags, slapping the bolt release, yanking the stock open and closed, etc., to see if I could break something just messing with it. So far it's good to go.
I do expect to replace parts on it as time goes by. I hope it goes five or six thousand rounds before I have to start swapping components.
I kinda like the lower/trigger guard thing. It's good looking, but the lack of any spec on Smith's website makes me wonder. Billet? Casting?
The barrel is 1/9 which isn't too bad. I've not seen a 1/9 that wouldn't run 77 gr smk length bullets.
I didn't even get into the Bolt group. I hadn't planned on doing a write up when I had the gun the first time. We'll see how it holds up.
Doc Safari
10-03-16, 15:12
I knew I was going to just iron-sight mine with the carry handle, and it's as accurate as any other AR I've got.
My next thing is to have a spare LPK on hand.
I forgot to mention earlier that if components fail on this rifle, I plan to use it for "repair practice"--something I hate like the Dickens to do on a "good" AR since I don't know how ham-handed I'm going to be. I've never effed up an anvil with my bare hands, but I've done some stupid shit.
The BCG is what pleasantly surprised me. MP marked bolt and pretty nicely staked carrier key I was not expecting. That makes me feel better if I have to install a new hammer spring after 200 rounds or something.
My buffer is also unmarked. I don't plan to change it. The gun shoots with commercial .223 which is what I take to the range 99% of the time anyway. I'm guessing Smith installed what worked and left it alone. Prolly I will leave it alone too.
My buffer is also unmarked. I don't plan to change it. The gun shoots with commercial .223 which is what I take to the range 99% of the time anyway. I'm guessing Smith installed what worked and left it alone. Prolly I will leave it alone too.
I wouldn't bank on that. Even Colt put carbine buffers in guns for a long time. I've just never seen a gun that ran optimally with a plain old carbine buffer. Knowing that this guy's gun has already had a few malfs, I might try to get him to run an H2. The only guns I've had that like buffers lighter than H2 are the 14.5 bcm middies. And they still do best with an H1.
Doc Safari
10-03-16, 15:23
I wouldn't bank on that. Even Colt put carbine buffers in guns for a long time. I've just never seen a gun that ran optimally with a plain old carbine buffer. Knowing that this guy's gun has already had a few malfs, I might try to get him to run an H2. The only guns I've had that like buffers lighter than H2 are the 14.5 bcm middies. And they still do best with an H1.
Good to know. I made a promise that I was not going to defeat the budget-price of this AR by swapping out parts unnecessarily. So far I've only "had" to swap out the handguards because the originals were so pathetic and unusable.
But your point is noted. I wonder if I should experiment with an H buffer under the theory that it might save wear and tear by toning down the violence of the action?
The gun also choked once on a mag of known good handloaded ammo. It drove the bullet back into the case. It also locked back, bolt catch on the carrier one time... instead of catching the bolt like it's supposed to...
Which leads me to another observation that I just remembered. It comes with what appears to be a carbine buffer. I didn't weigh it, but it wasn't marked. When the gun comes back for more repair, I'll weigh the buffer and maybe get pics of some of the other issues.
It is a CAR buffer.
C4
But your point is noted. I wonder if I should experiment with an H buffer under the theory that it might save wear and tear by toning down the violence of the action?
I would.. at a minimum. The correct buffer will slow bolt speed and smooth out the cycle. Testing was done by RSilvers, and essentially, the H2 buffer most closely matched the performance of a rifle buffer system. That is a desirable thing for sure. I'd love to hear what you think if you swap buffers. I truly don't think an H2 is too much, and I'll buy it off of you if it makes your gun run poorly.
Doc Safari
10-03-16, 17:07
I would.. at a minimum. The correct buffer will slow bolt speed and smooth out the cycle. Testing was done by RSilvers, and essentially, the H2 buffer most closely matched the performance of a rifle buffer system. That is a desirable thing for sure. I'd love to hear what you think if you swap buffers. I truly don't think an H2 is too much, and I'll buy it off of you if it makes your gun run poorly.
Let me think about this. All of my BCM's are carbines and have H buffers. I'd really rather keep things as reliable as possible. Since I shoot mostly .223 (and slightly underpowered PMC at that), I might install an H buffer and go from there. We'll see. I'll post results if I go that route.
Slight thread drift, shoved an H buffer in an old Bushy that I have, that would appear to have some similar issues to the M&P in as much as lack of staking, the BCG probably had a lot less before I took care of that issue, ect. The H buffer did a lot to smooth the cycling out and have been impressed with that bastard with it in there, it is close to my Middies. Now, after I put it in there, it would have issues with FTF junk Tula and some silver bear ammo. My BCM middy with an H buffer had the same issues with the same ammo. Now, decent brass cased .223 as well as all 5.56 has functioned fine. Now, I have not shoved an H2 or H3 in either of them though so I can not speak to how either of them would function with the junk ammo and a heavier buffer but it is on my long term to do list.
Alnamvet68
10-04-16, 07:39
A friend of Pappabear's son recently bought an M&P Sport II carbine. I did some work on the gun and noticed too many things not to do a little write up about it.... and why we buy BCM guns that meet or exceed specification.
Lower First thing we noticed is that the lower is very nice looking. The trigger guard is integral to the lower... I'd say it was part of the Forging, but I've got no idea if it's forged or what the aluminum is... because Smith simply lists the lower as "Aluminum". The upper, however is listed as 7075 T6.
LPK The LPK looks like something you'd find in a rimfire AR. Partially skeletonized hammer, etc. Does not inspire confidence.
Barrel The barrel is 4140 and doesn't appear to be Chrome lined. Probably QPQ which wouldn't be too bad... but I couldn't tell. The gas port looked like it was sized reasonably. I didn't have time to measure it, but based on eyeballing ports and how the gun runs, I don't think it was terribly over-gassed.
For whatever reason, Smith reamed their taper pins in the opposite direction of the industry. So I ended up driving a taper pin into my orange brownells pin removal jig on accident.
Handguards The stock handguards are a joke. We (AR enthusiasts) used to look down on single shielded handguards. Well these thing are just plastic with no shields for heat. I suppose most people would change them out anyway, but crappy none the less.
Mag Catch The mag catch was the last straw, and what caused me to take the time to write about the gun. I got a call from Pappabear who told me the guy's gun took a crap on him on Saturday. I was worried that some of my work was the cause. But after he showed up with the gun, I could see that the engagement latch on the mag catch had fallen off the mag catch pin... totally disabling the gun's semi automatic firing ability.
I've never seen this happen. But another example of cut corners on these guns. Pappa donated Colt OEM parts to the gun and got the rifle back up and running.
So this $700+/- gun will likely end up costing just as much or more than a good BCM, or a 6920 by the time you fix/replace all the sub par components.
Have you contacted Smith & Wesson regarding your observations? Have you called S&W and sought answers to your questions regarding the barrel/bore finish, lower aluminum material, whether the trigger guard is forged...I have, and the lowers are forged in house using 7075; the barrel and bore is melonite like treated (they now call it corrosion resistant). Looking at the hammer/LPK, I don't see a skeletonized hammer, nor MIM parts as you alluded to; in fact, the only objective comment you've made is that the plastic no shield handguard is a joke. Lastly, and I have to ask again, did you contact S&W for warranty service regarding the magazine catch? I strongly suspect that had the name S&W been substituted, with the names of "other" brands so heavily "lionized" here on this forum, that this thread would have been locked in a nano-second.
The most s&w's warranty dept could do is replace a defective sub standard part with another sub standard part. I doubt s&w is gonna source replacement parts from Colt, DD, BCM, etc.
As far as Markm's post, it seemed fair. He pointed out good and bad.
Have you contacted Smith & Wesson regarding your observations? Have you called S&W and sought answers to your questions regarding the barrel/bore finish, lower aluminum material, whether the trigger guard is forged...I have, and the lowers are forged in house using 7075; the barrel and bore is melonite like treated (they now call it corrosion resistant). Looking at the hammer/LPK, I don't see a skeletonized hammer, nor MIM parts as you alluded to; in fact, the only objective comment you've made is that the plastic no shield handguard is a joke. Lastly, and I have to ask again, did you contact S&W for warranty service regarding the magazine catch? I strongly suspect that had the name S&W been substituted, with the names of "other" brands so heavily "lionized" here on this forum, that this thread would have been locked in a nano-second.
Always interesting to see some new low posting member makes such a statement with absolutely no support of proof that's the case nor has ever been the case.
Have you contacted Smith & Wesson regarding your observations? Have you called S&W and sought answers to your questions regarding the barrel/bore finish, lower aluminum material, whether the trigger guard is forged...I have, and the lowers are forged in house using 7075; the barrel and bore is melonite like treated (they now call it corrosion resistant). Looking at the hammer/LPK, I don't see a skeletonized hammer, nor MIM parts as you alluded to; in fact, the only objective comment you've made is that the plastic no shield handguard is a joke. Lastly, and I have to ask again, did you contact S&W for warranty service regarding the magazine catch? I strongly suspect that had the name S&W been substituted, with the names of "other" brands so heavily "lionized" here on this forum, that this thread would have been locked in a nano-second.
As a S&W LE dealer and the guy that got the call when S&W was originally coming up with the SPORT idea, let me see if I can shed some light on the topic. First, S&W designed this gun to be as cheap as possible. They were going after the entry level market so every corner was cut in order to see the original street price of $500. The barrel was originally a 4150 5R barrel. They stopped using those a couple years ago because of the cost and availability. S&W originally used CMT/STAG BCG's. This company was found to be sending them rejected parts and they pulled the plug on that relationship. Next, they moved onto LMT (for a short time). Due to availability issues, they had to find a different vendor. Last time I checked, they were using Microbest for their BCG's. So this should be the BCG that is in the SPORT and SPORT II (which is good and is why the SPORT II is typically reliable).
S&W has steadily been making more and more parts in house. The majority of the LPK's are made by them. While I would not put any of their LPK in any of my own guns, I think they are just fine for the hobby shooter.
The original barrels were not honed prior to meloniting and they were horrible shooters (read burrs). Once they corrected this issue, they have been (typically) 1MOA-1.5MOA shooters. The barrels are over gassed (as are all S&W AR's). This is something I have fought to fix, but lost.
In the end, this is an entry level gun. While the SPORT II takes steps to make it more desirable, the cost is now in the mid-$600 range. This takes it dangerously close to COLT OEM's. Close enough, that I would not recommend buying it.
C4
Doc Safari
10-04-16, 09:20
The barrels are over gassed (as are all S&W AR's). This is something I have fought to fix, but lost.
Interesting. So a person should be able to install an H or even an H2 buffer without affecting reliability.
Interesting. So a person should be able to install an H or even an H2 buffer without affecting reliability.
Yes. I would change out the buffer spring to a SPRINCO blue and use an H2 or H3 (assuming you are shooting quality ammo).
C4
Have you contacted Smith & Wesson regarding your observations? Have you called S&W and sought answers to your questions regarding the barrel/bore finish, lower aluminum material, whether the trigger guard is forged...I have, and the lowers are forged in house using 7075; the barrel and bore is melonite like treated (they now call it corrosion resistant). Looking at the hammer/LPK, I don't see a skeletonized hammer, nor MIM parts as you alluded to; in fact, the only objective comment you've made is that the plastic no shield handguard is a joke. Lastly, and I have to ask again, did you contact S&W for warranty service regarding the magazine catch? I strongly suspect that had the name S&W been substituted, with the names of "other" brands so heavily "lionized" here on this forum, that this thread would have been locked in a nano-second.
No. This is not my gun. I have not time to annoy smith with what I can already see myself. If the owner wanted to, he could. I have no idea if any parts are MIM and did not allude to that. The FCG looks like a rimfire set. Cheap stuff.
I understand you own one and want to get mad at me for pointing out that many corners are cut. But if you open your mind up and do a little reading and learning here, you'll think back on this thread and say... Wow. I learned a lot here on M4C. If you choose to gain nothing from the very experienced AR enthusiasts on this board, then that's up to you too.
Have you contacted Smith & Wesson regarding your observations? Have you called S&W and sought answers to your questions regarding the barrel/bore finish, lower aluminum material, whether the trigger guard is forged...I have, and the lowers are forged in house using 7075; the barrel and bore is melonite like treated (they now call it corrosion resistant). Looking at the hammer/LPK, I don't see a skeletonized hammer, nor MIM parts as you alluded to; in fact, the only objective comment you've made is that the plastic no shield handguard is a joke. Lastly, and I have to ask again, did you contact S&W for warranty service regarding the magazine catch? I strongly suspect that had the name S&W been substituted, with the names of "other" brands so heavily "lionized" here on this forum, that this thread would have been locked in a nano-second.
I really don't post here much because there are many people that are much smarter than I am when it comes to the AR platform but I have to ask.......Would you happen to be a S&W owner?
Silly posts like this usually show up from owners of a sub-par firearm when they seem to have their feelings hurt because the brand they bought is not up to snuff and is low quality.
There are several pinned topics here that will allow you to educate yourself on what a quality AR is. Don't take anything personal, we all make mistakes and these guys are just telling the truth about a lower quality product, it's not personal. Listen, learn, and get yourself a quality carbine/rifle, you'll be glad you did.
Alnamvet68
10-04-16, 18:13
No. This is not my gun. I have not time to annoy smith with what I can already see myself. If the owner wanted to, he could. I have no idea if any parts are MIM and did not allude to that. The FCG looks like a rimfire set. Cheap stuff.
I understand you own one and want to get mad at me for pointing out that many corners are cut. But if you open your mind up and do a little reading and learning here, you'll think back on this thread and say... Wow. I learned a lot here on M4C. If you choose to gain nothing from the very experienced AR enthusiasts on this board, then that's up to you too.
I really don't post here much because there are many people that are much smarter than I am when it comes to the AR platform but I have to ask.......Would you happen to be a S&W owner?
Silly posts like this usually show up from owners of a sub-par firearm when they seem to have their feelings hurt because the brand they bought is not up to snuff and is low quality.
There are several pinned topics here that will allow you to educate yourself on what a quality AR is. Don't take anything personal, we all make mistakes and these guys are just telling the truth about a lower quality product, it's not personal. Listen, learn, and get yourself a quality carbine/rifle, you'll be glad you did.
To the contrary. I am not mad or upset at all...I own a Sport II, as well as a 6920 OEM-1, and a Midwest industries Basic M4. What I am concerned with is the constant bashing of anything other than Colt, BCM, DD, or Sionics. I'm sure there is much to learn, but I have spent the greater part of my adult life in the military (29.5 years), and have a tiny bit of knowledge when it comes to primary and secondary weapons, so let's just say I don't know shit because my post count says so. That said, I'm not going to go into what makes my S&W unique and reliable, but I am slowly approaching the 5K round count, without so much as a FTF, FTE, or loss of a mag catch, or the whatever it is that those who don't own one spend an inordinate amount of time vilifying a rifle they really know nothing about. If the forum is not for the intelligent discussion of all AR15's available to the consumer, then what's the point; are we just an infomercial for just a select few "lionized" brands?
Always interesting to see some new low posting member makes such a statement with absolutely no support of proof that's the case nor has ever been the case.
Regardless of how I feel about this thread Alnamvet68 is correct in the statement you highlighted. I watched, and would be happy to post links here, two threads just this past week where someone mentioned an issue with a BCM part and the moderator immeadiately jumped in and threatened the op with shutting down the thread if he hasn't contacted BCM.
These aren't the only couple threads and this happens all the time here. I get a lot of knowledge here and could really care a less, and I don't own any of the entry level guns that get so badly bashed here. However people who do own these guns get treated like garbage and it's too bad. It's extremely obvious which companies are being catered to here.
MeanCarbine
10-04-16, 19:03
Always interesting to see some new low posting member makes such a statement with absolutely no support of proof that's the case nor has ever been the case.
Someone started a thread the other day regarding their BSM stock that broke. That thread was locked down almost instantly.
Leaveammoforme
10-04-16, 19:09
To the contrary..../snip/...are we just an infomercial for just a select few "lionized" brands?
Local Carbine match this past weekend. 9 shooters on my squad. 3 guns went down. A fourth had a one time issue. Guess what brands the problematic rifles were not.
This is just a tiny sample size of one squad, on one Saturday, at one match with almost a 45% failure rate. This cycle repeats itself day after day.
The brands that a person will see recommended on M4C have earned that right. I would love to see an inexpensive, entry level gun pass (and even exceed) par on a regular enough ratio to earn that right. It would save us all a good chunk of change.
Not all "lower tier" rifles are going to blow up. Some may run like scalded apes. But, without fail, when a rifle chokes it's one of the normal suspects.
Got one that runs? Great drive on. But, one that works won't magically make up for the ones that don't.
Regardless of how I feel about this thread Alnamvet68 is correct in the statement you highlighted. I watched, and would be happy to post links here, two threads just this past week where someone mentioned an issue with a BCM part and the moderator immeadiately jumped in and threatened the op with shutting down the thread if he hasn't contacted BCM...Forum rules make clear that specific complaints with a manufacturer have to have had good faith attempts at resolution with the manufacturer before they're considered for public airing.
That's quite different from a thread in which an overall impression of a rifle is given along with specific observations, from a member with an established record of informed contribution.
Leaveammoforme
10-04-16, 19:25
Regardless of how I feel about this thread Alnamvet68 is correct in the statement you highlighted. I watched, and would be happy to post links here, two threads just this past week where someone mentioned an issue with a BCM part and the moderator immeadiately jumped in and threatened the op with shutting down the thread if he hasn't contacted BCM.
/snip/
Someone started a thread the other day regarding their BSM stock that broke. That thread was locked down almost instantly.
I saw both. One was an unsubstantiated drive by and the other was a broken stock.
Simple house rules. Contact the manufacturer(s) and see what they say. Post away about the negative or positive experience afterwards. Nothing other than protecting sponsors from false accusations.
To the contrary. I am not mad or upset at all...I own a Sport II, as well as a 6920 OEM-1, and a Midwest industries Basic M4. What I am concerned with is the constant bashing of anything other than Colt, BCM, DD, or Sionics. I'm sure there is much to learn, but I have spent the greater part of my adult life in the military (29.5 years), and have a tiny bit of knowledge when it comes to primary and secondary weapons, so let's just say I don't know shit because my post count says so. That said, I'm not going to go into what makes my S&W unique and reliable, but I am slowly approaching the 5K round count, without so much as a FTF, FTE, or loss of a mag catch, or the whatever it is that those who don't own one spend an inordinate amount of time vilifying a rifle they really know nothing about. If the forum is not for the intelligent discussion of all AR15's available to the consumer, then what's the point; are we just an infomercial for just a select few "lionized" brands?
The term "bashing" is usually used when someone owns the firearm in the discussion. Having read through this thread, all I saw was the truth. Sometimes you have to eat a little crow and accept your lumps.
The SPORT II's represent a great AR (in the $500-$530 range). Not so much in the $600 range. We are all thrilled that you like it and that it does what you want. Just be under no illusion that it is equal to the brands you listed.
Oh, and thank you for your service!
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I saw both. One was an unsubstantiated drive by and the other was a broken stock.
Simple house rules. Contact the manufacturer(s) and see what they say. Post away about the negative or positive experience afterwards. Nothing other than protecting sponsors from false accusations.
That's bull shit though. In this case detailed photos were posted showing the damage. The same people who preach about sticking up for our constitutional rights here "2nd amendment" are shutting people down on the 1st ammendment. You should be able to post up photos and a detailed description of issues you're having regardless of who the manufacturer is. This is how people get informed and make decisions. I love the manufacturer in question in this case and own lots of their products, I also have no doubts they will handle it, but basically what you're saying is if a company comes here and sponsors this site, you will make sure that nothing but great things will be said about their products. This is really almost hilarious and I'm sort of surprised you would admit this is the way things work here.
Leaveammoforme
10-04-16, 19:58
That's bull shit though. In this case detailed photos were posted showing the damage. The same people who preach about sticking up for our constitutional rights here "2nd amendment" are shutting people down on the 1st ammendment. You should be able to post up photos and a detailed description of issues you're having regardless of who the manufacturer is. This is how people get informed and make decisions. I love the manufacturer in question in this case and own lots of their products, I also have no doubts they will handle it, but basically what you're saying is if a company comes here and sponsors this site, you will make sure that nothing but great things will be said about their products. This is really almost hilarious and I'm sort of surprised you would admit this is the way things work here.
First off, I'm not associated with M4C. My "Site Sponsor" tag is because I sent $20 to help pay the bills.
Secondly, If a person follows the rules that they agreed to when they signed up we wouldn't have these discussions.
Contact the manufacturer. Give them a chance to sort it out. Post away positive or negative experience from there.
That's bull shit though. In this case detailed photos were posted showing the damage. The same people who preach about sticking up for our constitutional rights here "2nd amendment" are shutting people down on the 1st ammendment. You should be able to post up photos and a detailed description of issues you're having regardless of who the manufacturer is. This is how people get informed and make decisions. I love the manufacturer in question in this case and own lots of their products, I also have no doubts they will handle it, but basically what you're saying is if a company comes here and sponsors this site, you will make sure that nothing but great things will be said about their products. This is really almost hilarious and I'm sort of surprised you would admit this is the way things work here.No, it isn't bullshit -- it's a forum rule with a valid purpose: minimize shill complaints. Your take away that "protection" was "admitted" is ridiculous; Leaveammoforme clearly stated the opposite.
Also, time to revisit the Constitution; it protects you from governmental infringement on your natural rights -- no more, no less. There's no such thing as constitutional rights on a privately owned discussion forum.
First off, I'm not associated with M4C. My "Site Sponsor" tag is because I sent $20 to help pay the bills.
Secondly, If a person follows the rules that they agreed to when they signed up we wouldn't have these discussions.
Contact the manufacturer. Give them a chance to sort it out. Post away positive or negative experience from there.
I get it. My point is that regardless of how a manufacturer handles an issue doesn't take away the fact that the issue happened in the first place. I have no doubt the manufacturer in this case will take care of it, but it still broke and that should be allowed to be shared with the community so someone who may have a need for a seriously robust stock that will hold up to anything doesn't get a tainted list of reviews of said product.
Don't get me wrong here. I don't give a shit how people run this forum. I come here to read and further educate myself on the platform that I love. I also participate in the exchange and have had lots of great experiences with wonderful people there. But a few of the things that go on here leave me scratching my head sometimes.
No, it isn't bullshit -- it's a forum rule with a valid purpose: minimize shill complaints. Your take away that "protection" was "admitted" is ridiculous; Leaveammoforme clearly stated the opposite.
Also, time to revisit the Constitution; it protects you from governmental infringement on your natural rights -- no more, no less. There's no such thing as constitutional rights on a privately owned discussion forum.
A shill complaint I understand. But a thread started with documentation and detailed description of what happened is different. Or should be different. Hey I get it man. This ain't my forum and I don't make the rules. Deep down I'm not going to lose any sleep over it and for the most part people are great here and I've gotten a lot of useful info. Just don't get a few things thats all.
I get it. My point is that regardless of how a manufacturer handles an issue doesn't take away the fact that the issue happened in the first place...No, this statement makes clear that as yet you do not get it: by establishing a resolution process has been entered into with the manufacturer, false complaints intended to unjustifiably smear businesses can better be weeded out.
Your statement assumes the a priori integrity of the complaint -- something that's far from guaranteed.
SeriousStudent
10-04-16, 20:28
That's bull shit though. In this case detailed photos were posted showing the damage. The same people who preach about sticking up for our constitutional rights here "2nd amendment" are shutting people down on the 1st ammendment. You should be able to post up photos and a detailed description of issues you're having regardless of who the manufacturer is. This is how people get informed and make decisions. I love the manufacturer in question in this case and own lots of their products, I also have no doubts they will handle it, but basically what you're saying is if a company comes here and sponsors this site, you will make sure that nothing but great things will be said about their products. This is really almost hilarious and I'm sort of surprised you would admit this is the way things work here.
Putting on my mod hat:
The United States Constitution addresses what the government may do in regard to your speech in the first amendment.
It has absolutely nothing to do with the rules of this forum. When people sign up for this forum, they agree to the rules. Period.
If anyone does not like it, they are absolutely welcome to either not post and simply read, or go someplace else.
I cannot think of a single person that I have ever grabbed in a headlock, and forced to join or post against their will. I am one serious IT Ninja computer bad-ass, but even my powers only go so far.
Simply put: If people don't like it here, they don't have to be here. People join M4C, not the other way around. It's a pretty valuable resource that the vast majority of people pay nothing to read.
But the constant sniping in damn near every thread by some people needs to stop. It can stop voluntarily, or not voluntarily.
But it will stop.
The mods, staff, Industry Professionals and SME's all donate their time for free. I don't make a nickel doing this. I've never gotten a free class or free piece of gear from anyone.
So questioning the motives of the volunteers that make this place work is not a terrific idea, nor is is well-received.
SeriousStudent
10-04-16, 20:30
Now, if someone wishes to discuss Smith and Wesson AR's, please do so.
If people want to discuss how this place is operated, stop hijacking this thread.
Doc Safari
10-04-16, 22:32
I forgot to add to my first post that the receiver extension (at least on mine) is Mil-spec diameter and not commercial. I don't own any commercial diameter stocks and two of my Mil-Spec stocks fit just fine. FYI.
I agree totally with Grant that the Smith is worthwhile if the price is appropriately low.
For all intents and purposes, it's another form of "expanse" carbine, but one that is at least usable right out of the box. I suspect anyone who shoots one extensively will end up replacing a few of the "inferior" parts after a few thousand rounds (I hope it goes that long).
My plan is to shoot it "as is" to test the spirit of the low-price concept, but the minute an FCG part buckles it's getting a quality LPK.
I forgot to add to my first post that the receiver extension (at least on mine) is Mil-spec diameter and not commercial. I don't own any commercial diameter stocks and two of my Mil-Spec stocks fit just fine. FYI.
I agree totally with Grant that the Smith is worthwhile if the price is appropriately low.
For all intents and purposes, it's another form of "expanse" carbine, but one that is at least usable right out of the box. I suspect anyone who shoots one extensively will end up replacing a few of the "inferior" parts after a few thousand rounds (I hope it goes that long).
My plan is to shoot it "as is" to test the spirit of the low-price concept, but the minute an FCG part buckles it's getting a quality LPK.
I believe this sums up the spirit/purpose/goal of the Sport II and Expanse quite nicely.
Local Carbine match this past weekend. 9 shooters on my squad. 3 guns went down. A fourth had a one time issue. Guess what brands the problematic rifles were not.
This is just a tiny sample size of one squad, on one Saturday, at one match with almost a 45% failure rate. This cycle repeats itself day after day.
The brands that a person will see recommended on M4C have earned that right. I would love to see an inexpensive, entry level gun pass (and even exceed) par on a regular enough ratio to earn that right. It would save us all a good chunk of change.
Not all "lower tier" rifles are going to blow up. Some may run like scalded apes. But, without fail, when a rifle chokes it's one of the normal suspects.
Got one that runs? Great drive on. But, one that works won't magically make up for the ones that don't.
What you saw is what we see play out in training classes over and over again. Another issue is user induced malfunctions. Meaning that they took a perfectly good factory built rifle and screwed with it in some way to make it unreliable. The worst though are home builds (as everyone with a YT account believes that they are an armorer).
C4
To the contrary. I am not mad or upset at all...I own a Sport II, as well as a 6920 OEM-1, and a Midwest industries Basic M4. What I am concerned with is the constant bashing of anything other than Colt, BCM, DD, or Sionics.There are many brands beyond those mentioned that get high marks here. What you call "bashing" I call assessing against a particular standard. That's the key thing to remember: the negative appraisals aren't applied against any and every use for AR ownership, but against a particular standard that has reasonably been deemed an essential minimum against a particular use standard. Taking exception to harsh assessments has to be weighed against these factors.
I'm sure there is much to learn, but I have spent the greater part of my adult life in the military (29.5 years), and have a tiny bit of knowledge when it comes to primary and secondary weapons, so let's just say I don't know shit because my post count says so.Doubtless you're knowledgeable, and I completely agree that post count is a bullshit dodge in these discussions.
That said, I'm not going to go into what makes my S&W unique and reliable, but I am slowly approaching the 5K round count, without so much as a FTF, FTE, or loss of a mag catch, or...That's unacceptable; if you have knowledge about your stock or modified Sport that might explain why knocks against it are unfounded or can be overcome, why be coy? Share it.
...who don't own one spend an inordinate amount of time vilifying a rifle they really know nothing about.You can't push back against what you claim are unfounded assumptions with more of your own; you don't know who does or does not own a Sport, or irrespective of ownership has spent meaningful time using or researching one. Too, "negative appraisal" when judged against a particular build philosophy and intended use is distinct from "vilification". And owning a rifle is not de facto "really knowing it", nor does not owning it mean it can't be known.
If the forum is not for the intelligent discussion of all AR15's available to the consumer, then what's the point; are we just an infomercial for just a select few "lionized" brands?Intelligent discussion is exactly what I see going on here; that some don't like that there's a particular focus here and builders who meet the standard that falls within the purview of that focus, and so get the bulk of attention and recommendation while the builders that don't get called out or left behind, says nothing universal about any of the builders or their products, only that the forum specializes rather than generalizes.
There are posters in this thread who have demonstrated deep knowledge about the Sport, who come to different conclusions than you do about it. Rather than blast the place and everyone in it, care to speak to the specific points raised that are within the context of the discussion? I'd like you to go into what makes your Sport unique and reliable because I think it's great that it is and the information's valuable.
Vegasshooter
10-05-16, 13:28
I have no dog in the fight. My guns run. I rely on them to. When we talk about guns crapping in classes....I'm the guy running and teaching those classes. I've been to 2 different armorer schools, and am an instructor for a adept with 1300 or so rifles on the street. What I write comes from things I SEE, things I have personally had to FIX. Not things I read, or heard about on the Internet. With all respect in the world for the military and the brave men and women who serve, being in the military doesn't make one knowledgeable about AR-15's. First off, depending on your MOS, the extent of weapons training can be very little. Secondly, the military runs Colt, and FN.Every rifle in the military is built to spec, to the TDP, and inspected. FN has military reps right there at the factory where the rifles are being built. So to say one's military time equates to knowledge on AR's doesn't necessarily hold true.
I have seen what happens when corners are cut. I've seen rifles go down. The truth is, the "commercial" grade rifles have a higher failure rate than rifles from the top end companies. That is simply a fact.
My dept was one of the very first departments that fielded S&W AR's. In the beginning they were garbage. The failure rate was an honest 50%. We sent a ton of guns back. Loose parts, no staking, unable to get a battlefield zero, loose barrels. I say this from what I personally saw. They have gotten better. Better, but they ARE NOT BCM, or Colt, or Sionics.
I have no dog in the fight. My guns run. I rely on them to. When we talk about guns crapping in classes....I'm the guy running and teaching those classes. I've been to 2 different armorer schools, and am an instructor for a adept with 1300 or so rifles on the street. What I write comes from things I SEE, things I have personally had to FIX. Not things I read, or heard about on the Internet. With all respect in the world for the military and the brave men and women who serve, being in the military doesn't make one knowledgeable about AR-15's. First off, depending on your MOS, the extent of weapons training can be very little. Secondly, the military runs Colt, and FN.Every rifle in the military is built to spec, to the TDP, and inspected. FN has military reps right there at the factory where the rifles are being built. So to say one's military time equates to knowledge on AR's doesn't necessarily hold true.
I have seen what happens when corners are cut. I've seen rifles go down. The truth is, the "commercial" grade rifles have a higher failure rate than rifles from the top end companies. That is simply a fact.
My dept was one of the very first departments that fielded S&W AR's. In the beginning they were garbage. The failure rate was an honest 50%. We sent a ton of guns back. Loose parts, no staking, unable to get a battlefield zero, loose barrels. I say this from what I personally saw. They have gotten better. Better, but they ARE NOT BCM, or Colt, or Sionics.
There are more than enough legit SMEs on this forum that will agree with that assessment, but you can lead a horse to water, you can't make him think. It's a very similar discussion when someone mentions 1911s and is convinced a Taurus 1911 or other entry level 1911 is "just as good as a Wilson and you're just paying for the name" type comments commence. All comments trying to correct the statement are by "elitists" and it goes down hill rapidly from there. What's usually ignored is the SMEs who comment feel X entry level gun, be it 1911 or AR can have it's place as plinkers, training guns, etc, but should be avoided if it's meant to be a first line tool for HD/SD/Duty for same reasons you mention.
I have heard nothing but generally positive comments about the S&W AR when it's price point and intended use is kept in context.
I actually bought one of these as a "truck gun" since I already have my Colt and BCM.
I knew going in that it was a "Grade B" carbine.
Here's what I observed:
1. Castle nut staking
Right off the bat I could see this was half-assed. You couldn't really call it any more than "token" staking. It took about five minutes to fix with a Phillips screwdriver tip and a hammer.
2. Handguards
No heat shield at all. I ditched these in favor of proper heat-shielded handguards.
3. Trigger guard integral with receiver
I'm not sure if I like this or not yet.
4. Bolt Carrier Group
Bolt was marked MP, surprisingly. The carrier key is staked pretty well, maybe just a tad less than a BCM or Colt, but still pretty good--much better than some others I've seen. The bolt carrier also appears to have the "shortened" belly like some manufacturers supply instead of the full bellied M16 carrier.
5. Barrel
No, the barrel is not chrome-lined. I believe it's coated or treated with a process similar to how Glock treats its slides. It's been a while since I read up on this though so my description may not be exact. Anyhoo.....it's supposed to be very corrosion and wear resistant.
6. Front sight
My front sight post was barely screwed in. I screwed it down enough that the post's base was more or less flush with the front sight base. The front sight base is "F" marked.
7. FCG
The hammer appears to be MIM. I don't know what you mean by "skeletonized" but my hammer was solid, with what appears to be air space on both sides. I'm guessing other parts in the FCG are MIM also. I expect at some point to replace the entire FCG including the mag catch. I hope they last a few thousand rounds. I noticed the safety has more play than I consider normal when on "Fire". It was solid while on "Safe."
Mine came with an unmarked buffer also.
It's my beater. I knew I was getting an inferior product and I'm satisfied that I'll be carrying a "half price" AR with me on the ranch when I'm out in the bad weather. I'd rather this one get rained on and sand in it. I've decided I want to baby my "good" AR's more since they may be hard to get once the next president takes office.
I've put nearly 200 rounds through it during a long range session. I deliberately "pushed" it a little by not letting it cool between mags, slapping the bolt release, yanking the stock open and closed, etc., to see if I could break something just messing with it. So far it's good to go.
I do expect to replace parts on it as time goes by. I hope it goes five or six thousand rounds before I have to start swapping components.
You know it makes me wonder if AR's are outlawed how will we be able to get spare parts.
We had an older S&W carbine in my class in Ohio. That area for the bolt catch was actually milled incorrectly and was so out of spec, the bolt would only intermittently lock to the rear even when dry firing. The smallest tap would send the bolt forward.
The gun also choked once on a mag of known good handloaded ammo. It drove the bullet back into the case. It also locked back, bolt catch on the carrier one time... instead of catching the bolt like it's supposed to...
Which leads me to another observation that I just remembered. It comes with what appears to be a carbine buffer. I didn't weigh it, but it wasn't marked. When the gun comes back for more repair, I'll weigh the buffer and maybe get pics of some of the other issues.
Uh no. It's because companies like S&W, BM, etc.. are not going to change anything. Would they send him a new mag catch? Probably not as it would require to be sent back for replacement. At that point if someone has a spare it makes more sense to replace it.
Do you think they are going to address non-staking of the receiver extension when they aren't done across the board? Nevermind, I'll answer it. They won't. The same way they are going to add heat shields or anything else. Go back and re-read Grant's post. He pretty much covered it.
Regardless of how I feel about this thread Alnamvet68 is correct in the statement you highlighted. I watched, and would be happy to post links here, two threads just this past week where someone mentioned an issue with a BCM part and the moderator immeadiately jumped in and threatened the op with shutting down the thread if he hasn't contacted BCM.
These aren't the only couple threads and this happens all the time here. I get a lot of knowledge here and could really care a less, and I don't own any of the entry level guns that get so badly bashed here. However people who do own these guns get treated like garbage and it's too bad. It's extremely obvious which companies are being catered to here.
It was locked because he made no effort to contact BCM about a stock that broke. Not ongoing continuous issues that are common to all of these carbines.
Someone started a thread the other day regarding their BSM stock that broke. That thread was locked down almost instantly.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
The 1st does not apply to a private website such as M4C, Facebook or anywhere else.
That's bull shit though. In this case detailed photos were posted showing the damage. The same people who preach about sticking up for our constitutional rights here "2nd amendment" are shutting people down on the 1st ammendment. You should be able to post up photos and a detailed description of issues you're having regardless of who the manufacturer is. This is how people get informed and make decisions. I love the manufacturer in question in this case and own lots of their products, I also have no doubts they will handle it, but basically what you're saying is if a company comes here and sponsors this site, you will make sure that nothing but great things will be said about their products. This is really almost hilarious and I'm sort of surprised you would admit this is the way things work here.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
The 1st does not apply to a private website such as M4C, Facebook or anywhere else.
I get it man. We moved on from this and tried to get back on topic, so there is no need to bring this back up to stir the pot.
Uh no. It's because companies like S&W, BM, etc.. are not going to change anything. Would they send him a new mag catch? Probably not as it would require to be sent back for replacement. At that point if someone has a spare it makes more sense to replace it.
Do you think they are going to address non-staking of the receiver extension when they aren't done across the board? Nevermind, I'll answer it. They won't. The same way they are going to add heat shields or anything else. Go back and re-read Grant's post. He pretty much covered it.I wouldn't defend S&W on their AR build philosophy for my purposes, but I'll speak up for their overall customer service: my direct and observed experience is they honor warranties, will make a problem gun right on their time and dime (including shipping), and often send out small replacement parts for free.
I don't like that I've had to use their CS, but credit where it's due -- overall they run it well.
You know it makes me wonder if AR's are outlawed how will we be able to get spare parts.From our personal supply of back up rifles and parts we've been accruing along with ammunition and magazines.
This is why Colt is always the better option for a lower priced AR-15. For what local FFL's are charging for S-W or Ruger, one can skip coffee for a week and buy a Colt. At least with Colt you can be reasonably assured that the damn thing will work.
For the record, neither of my AR-15's are Colt (nor Ruger or Smith for that matter), so I have no dog in the fight regarding cheap brands vs the "lionized" brands.
Thanks for your permission, Maybe we can make you a mod.
I get it man. We moved on from this and tried to get back on topic, so there is no need to bring this back up to stir the pot.
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 14:25
Yes. I would change out the buffer spring to a SPRINCO blue and use an H2 or H3 (assuming you are shooting quality ammo).
C4
I reread this post and I've got some questions.
I've got a spare H buffer already so I was planning to use that. I shoot mostly commercial .223 like PMC so I don't want to go overboard in the recoil reduction.
My main desire is to maintain reliability, but it would be nice to cut down on the pounding the gun takes as long as reliability is preserved.
When you suggest the Sprinco blue spring and H2 or H3 buffers, I'd like to know what you're basing this on. Is that combination a suggestion based on experience with Smiths in particular, or is that a general recommendation for any carbine that is overgassed?
Is the Sport II so overgassed that it's necessary to change both the spring and buffer no matter what ammo is to be used?
Is changing out both components only necessary if one intends to feed it a steady diet of full power 5.56?
Would it be better to change one component, see how that shoots, then change the next component, see how that shoots...and so on?
Is the H2 or H3 buffer overkill? (All of my BCM's and Colts appear to have H buffers.)
Same question for the Sprinco blue spring...is it overkill to change this in addition to adding a heavier buffer?
I reread this post and I've got some questions.
I've got a spare H buffer already so I was planning to use that. I shoot mostly commercial .223 like PMC so I don't want to go overboard in the recoil reduction.
My main desire is to maintain reliability, but it would be nice to cut down on the pounding the gun takes as long as reliability is preserved.
When you suggest the Sprinco blue spring and H2 or H3 buffers, I'd like to know what you're basing this on. Is that combination a suggestion based on experience with Smiths in particular, or is that a general recommendation for any carbine that is overpassed?
A long history of messing with AR's, springs and buffers is what I am basing it on. Keep in mind, you can also run an H2 with a Colt 6920 (which is really just marginally over gassed).
Is the Sport II so overgassed that it's necessary to change both the spring and buffer no matter what ammo is to be used?
Is changing out both components only necessary if one intends to feed it a steady diet of full power 5.56?
Would it be better to change one component, see how that shoots, then change the next component, see how that shoots...and so on?
Is the H2 or H3 buffer overkill? (All of my BCM's and Colts appear to have H buffers.)
Same question for the Sprinco blue spring...is it overkill to change this in addition to adding a heavier buffer?
The CS Blue spring doesn't take a set like a SS spring does. The normal life span of a USGI SS spring is typically only about 3,000rds or 3yrs (or less if you keep the bolt locked to the rear). So that is why I use the CS spring in all my gun (as you are going to get about 100,000 cycles out one).
I would suggest buying an H2 and H3 buffer just to have. That way you can experiment with your guns and different ammo types.
C4
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 14:56
Good info Grant!
I was not aware that recoil spring life was affected by the mere passage of time!
Good info Grant!
I was not aware that recoil spring life was affected by the mere passage of time!
Yep. All spring wear out just sitting in a gun (especially if the slide or BCG is locked back).
C4
Yep. All spring wear out just sitting in a gun (especially if the slide or BCG is locked back).
C4
I don't doubt that whatsoever yet at the same time, I've always heard (from IPs on M4C no less) that mag springs are unaffected by being stored loaded for years.
How do some springs wear out under compression yet other don't? Different types of spring? Genuine question, I've always wondered this.
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 15:41
I don't doubt that whatsoever yet at the same time, I've always heard (from IPs on M4C no less) that mag springs are unaffected by being stored loaded for years.
How do some springs wear out under compression yet other don't? Different types of spring? Genuine question, I've always wondered this.
Good question, and when we're talking about springs wearing out just sitting in the gun are we talking about every little spring on an AR15 or just the action spring?
I would hate to be caught in this limbo of having to replace every spring on every AR I own every three years. That's enough to make me take up bow and arrow instead!
I don't doubt that whatsoever yet at the same time, I've always heard (from IPs on M4C no less) that mag springs are unaffected by being stored loaded for years.
How do some springs wear out under compression yet other don't? Different types of spring? Genuine question, I've always wondered this.
Depends. What are the mag springs made out of?? SS and CS differ greatly.
C4
That's enough to make me take up bow and arrow instead!
Don't forget, a bow is one big spring. [emoji6]
Good question, and when we're talking about springs wearing out just sitting in the gun are we talking about every little spring on an AR15 or just the action spring?
I would hate to be caught in this limbo of having to replace every spring on every AR I own every three years. That's enough to make me take up bow and arrow instead!
All springs. Example, the bolt catch spring. People will swear up and down that the Magpul BAD lever doesn't cause any issues, until the day when their spring wears out.
C4
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 15:51
All springs.
C4
I imagine they become less springy over time, but I can't imagine you'd have to replace every spring on the gun periodically. If that's the case how do 50-year old surplus weapons still function?
Depends. What are the mag springs made out of?? SS and CS differ greatly.
C4
Yeah, not sure. I just remember a few threads here where people were asking about the effects of long term loaded mag (Pmag & USGI) storage. An IP here & others said mags were unaffected by being stored loaded. They said the cycling of mags is what wears out the spring.
Hey Doc. Just a suggestion but I run the Vltor A5 system in all my guns and it really helps with reduced recoil and smoothing out the cycling. Most places don't have the complete kit in stock right now but there are a couple sites that have both the spring and buffer kit and the buffer tube separate so you can put together the kit like that. I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to extend the life of critical components and reduce the felt recoil while preserving excellent reliability. I run Larue Stealth barrels in two of my custom builds and those are known for having large gas ports which obviously causes the gun to be slightly overgassed. The Vltor is a perfect combo in those guns though and I've never had a hiccup. Hope that helps and just do a little research on the A5 system in your free time. I think you will find that the general consensus is that it's a perfect setup in a gun that is running a little overgassed.
All springs. Example, the bolt catch spring. People will swear up and down that the Magpul BAD lever doesn't cause any issues, until the day when their spring wears out.
C4
Grant, why would using the Magpul bad lever put any more tension on the bolt catch spring than using the bolt catch alone? I don't see how it would affect it any more than hitting the catch with your finder to drop the bolt carrier.
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 16:11
Hey Doc. Just a suggestion but I run the Vltor A5 system in all my guns and it really helps with reduced recoil and smoothing out the cycling. Most places don't have the complete kit in stock right now but there are a couple sites that have both the spring and buffer kit and the buffer tube separate so you can put together the kit like that. I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to extend the life of critical components and reduce the felt recoil while preserving excellent reliability. I run Larue Stealth barrels in two of my custom builds and those are known for having large gas ports which obviously causes the gun to be slightly overgassed. The Vltor is a perfect combo in those guns though and I've never had a hiccup. Hope that helps and just do a little research on the A5 system in your free time. I think you will find that the general consensus is that it's a perfect setup in a gun that is running a little overgassed.
I'm sure those parts are all that, but remember the concept is to keep the Smith at a "budget" price.
I ordered an H buffer from Bravo Company for $22.95.
I replaced the handguard with a heat-shielded one that I got at a gun show for $20.00
I ordered a spare LPK just in case for $34.99 (if just one lower receiver part fails I'll use the whole kit I think).
So total upgrades have cost me $78.00, and if the LPK stays in the parts box then my upgrades have only cost me $42.95
Not bad for a rifle that cost me about what a Glock costs, i.e., just about half what a top tier AR costs.
Grant, why would using the Magpul bad lever put any more tension on the bolt catch spring than using the bolt catch alone? I don't see how it would affect it any more than hitting the catch with your finder to drop the bolt carrier.
Added weight. We have seen more bolt catch springs worn out than ever before.
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I imagine they become less springy over time, but I can't imagine you'd have to replace every spring on the gun periodically. If that's the case how do 50-year old surplus weapons still function?
Not all springs are overly important or it just means your Beating your gun to death. Look at the Gen 3 Glock guide rod assemblies. It is only 2,000rds.
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sure those parts are all that, but remember the concept is to keep the Smith at a "budget" price.
I ordered an H buffer from Bravo Company for $22.95.
I replaced the handguard with a heat-shielded one that I got at a gun show for $20.00
I ordered a spare LPK just in case for $34.99 (if just one lower receiver part fails I'll use the whole kit I think).
So total upgrades have cost me $78.00, and if the LPK stays in the parts box then my upgrades have only cost me $42.95
Not bad for a rifle that cost me about what a Glock costs, i.e., just about half what a top tier AR costs.
Sounds like you've got a good start on things. I just figured it couldn't hurt to have another option just in case. I hope the parts will help with the issue.
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 16:24
Not all springs are overly important or it just means your Beating your gun to death. Look at the Gen 3 Glock guide rod assemblies. It is only 2,000rds.
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If I read your post right you're saying only springs like the action spring have to be replaced frequently because of the beating they take, but something like a front takedown pin spring would stay functional for a long time.
Added weight. We have seen more bolt catch springs worn out than ever before.
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I guess that makes sense. When you say they are wearing out faster, at what rate would you say that the bad lever will deport a spring in comparison to just using the stock bolt catch? I personally use and love the bad lever. They are extremely easy to manipulate and makes the process of working the bolt carrier a breeze. Also love that I don't have to shift my hands around to work the gun. Even if the spring wears out quicker I don't think I would switch back to not using one at this point. It's just one of those parts that Magpul hit the nail on the head with in my opinion. That said I will be ordering a few extra springs this afternoon though now. So thanks for the info.
Alnamvet68
10-07-16, 16:42
Having received several email's asking what I did to my Sport 2 to make it more reliable, I'll list the upgrades with my overall cost.
M & P 15 Sport 2 - $525.00 OTD
KVP H2 buffer - $30.
Sprinco blue buffer spring - $$20.00
ALG Defense complete LPK with ACT trigger - $0.00. (Close friend and neighbor who is still on active duty is a certified NSW Armorer. He has a side business building custom AR's. He needed a 1/2 cord of seasoned hardwood and I needed the LPK. He said that the ALG LPK was 100% milspec and found that all 18 or so parts dropped right in to my S & W...his words, "your Sport is milled and drilled to spec...".
Lastly, I did swap the BCG for a full auto milspec ToolCraft, not that I was concerned with the OEM semi BCG, which was
perfectly fine. $90.00.
$665.00 total.
It's just one of those parts that Magpul hit the nail on the head with in my opinion.
It's actually one of their biggest flops.
Doc Safari
10-07-16, 16:50
He said that the ALG LPK was 100% milspec and found that all 18 or so parts dropped right in to my S & W...his words, "your Sport is milled and drilled to spec...".
That's good to know. I was wondering if they did something funky with the hole sizes.
It's actually one of their biggest flops.
You think so? What is it that makes it a huge flop in your opinion? I also use the Phase 5 extended bolt release. Both work great for what they are designed to do. For me at least.
You think so? What is it that makes it a huge flop in your opinion? I also use the Phase 5 extended bolt release. Both work great for what they are designed to do. For me at least.
It's an unnecessary device that can, & does, induce malfunctions.
A simple Google search (https://www.google.com/search?ei=aRj4V5X9E8jLjwS3zL-wDg&q=bad+lever+site%3Am4carbine.net&oq=bad+lever+site%3Am4carbine.net&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.12...4534.20064.0.21145.31.31.0.0.0.0.895.7205.0j19j6j3j1j1j1.31.0....0...1.1.64.mobile-gws-serp..2.5.1079...0i22i30k1j33i160k1.5VrtRkK6vPY) shows many people that have had issues.
It's an unnecessary device that can, & does, induce malfunctions.
A simple Google search (https://www.google.com/search?ei=aRj4V5X9E8jLjwS3zL-wDg&q=bad+lever+site%3Am4carbine.net&oq=bad+lever+site%3Am4carbine.net&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.12...4534.20064.0.21145.31.31.0.0.0.0.895.7205.0j19j6j3j1j1j1.31.0....0...1.1.64.mobile-gws-serp..2.5.1079...0i22i30k1j33i160k1.5VrtRkK6vPY) shows many people that have had issues.
For every product on the planet you can find people who don't like it so I take those reviews with a grain of salt. Also I spent some time reading thru the links you provided and there are way more folks who have not had issues and love their bad lever than people who have had bad experiences in those threads. It's a personal preference thing I guess, but I've never had a single issue with any of my built rifles, so obviously by default I've never had an issue with a bad lever. All I know is that they are faster in every aspect of manipulating the rifle, both on reloads and for clearing malfunctions, and they allow me to get both hands on the rifle and get it into action quicker, so as long as I don't have issues with mine I will continue using them. Of course at the first sign of an issue they will come off as fast as they go on. Really they are a stupid simple product, so how they would be such an issue for some folks is a little confusing. They weigh next to nothing, and all it does is extent a latch that is already there for easier and more convenient manipulation so I'm scratching my head as to how people could have such issues with them.
For every product on the planet you can find people who don't like it so I take those reviews with a grain of salt. Also I spent some time reading thru the links you provided and there are way more folks who have not had issues and love their bad lever than people who have had bad experiences in those threads. It's a personal preference thing I guess, but I've never had a single issue with any of my built rifles, so obviously by default I've never had an issue with a bad lever. All I know is that they are faster in every aspect of manipulating the rifle, both on reloads and for clearing malfunctions, and they allow me to get both hands on the rifle and get it into action quicker, so as long as I don't have issues with mine I will continue using them. Of course at the first sign of an issue they will come off as fast as they go on. Really they are a stupid simple product, so how they would be such an issue for some folks is a little confusing. They weigh next to nothing, and all it does is extent a latch that is already there for easier and more convenient manipulation so I'm scratching my head as to how people could have such issues with them.
That's a clue...
It has nothing to do with people arbitrarily "not liking it". If even only 10% of owners had problems, that's too much. There's way too many negative experiences out there & at the end of the day, it's still unnecessary.
Hopefully it won't fail you at the worst possible time.
That's a clue...
It has nothing to do with people arbitrarily "not liking it". If even only 10% of owners had problems, that's too much. There's way too many negative experiences out there & at the end of the day, it's still unnecessary.
Hopefully it won't fail you at the worst possible time.
So when you say "fail" what is there to fail on it? I mean really, it weighs nothing so there is just no way in hell I would accept that this teeny tiny little feather light material is going to wear out a bolt catch spring any faster than not using one. So what's left to fail? Its a bolt catch not some technical product that has hundreds of moving parts working in unison. There is a spring, a pin, and a plunger, that's it. I'm not understanding what is there that can actually go down any different than if someone was hitting the catch itself with their palm or finger to drop the bolt or to lock it back.
So when you say "fail" what is there to fail on it?
Ugh
Fail you... as in disappoint you, let you down. Like maybe from causing a malfunction at the most inopportune time.
SeriousStudent
10-07-16, 22:39
Every little thing does not have to be an argument.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.