View Full Version : Anyone here see the new bushmaster-SD minimalist?
Obviously they timed out the release for the shot show, just wanted to gauge everyone's opinions of it.
titsonritz
12-14-16, 11:44
Bushmaster is <ahem> "minimalist" alright, I'm sure it'll be well received here. :no:
Uhm no. Yah, minimalist is a good name for it.
MSparks909
12-14-16, 14:03
You lost my interest at "Bushmaster."
Inkslinger
12-14-16, 14:24
I'm a minimalist when it comes to Bushmaster.
GAPATRIOT75
12-14-16, 14:24
The few BM I've looked at here locally looked to be very poor quality, I wouldn't touch one.
Has anybody actually used a minimalist to verify how crappy they are, or is it all just groupthink Internet wisdom?
Bushmaster is <ahem> "minimalist" alright, I'm sure it'll be well received here. :no:
Their QC is definitely minimalist
No offense OP, but it looks like lipstick on their pig.
Freedom group/Cerberus seems to have screwed up everything they touch. If you want to pay homage to bushmaster, Windham weaponry is the same plant and many of the old bushmaster employees.
Specs actually look pretty good.
FA BCG - Which I'm sure will be properly staked (in spite of what others will say)
4150 1:8 Barrel - Will handle just about any load, and is actually a personal preference of mine over 1:9 & 1:7
Rifle Length KM Handguard - That'll provide a good sight radius and capitalizes on the mounting method everyone seems to be moving towards.
ALG ACT Trigger - Widely regarded as one of, if not the best, "mil-spec" triggers
MFT Stock - Might not be a runaway favorite when it comes to stock choices, but it's better than the standard stock that comes on most rifles.
AAC 51T Flash Hider - A decently popular, suppressor ready, MD that comes standard. This will be entertaining to see how many will overlook this feature and write it off as meaningless because it's "still a Bushmaster". To anyone else with objectivity, it's pretty nice to get a $100ish MD that's ready to rock with some popular cans, instead of a $10 birdcage.
Possibly the greatest feature...a Staked Castle Nut. Gasp! Haw can that be???
Overall, this has some very nice upgrades over the standard parts, allegedly weighs only 6lbs, and is selling for under $900 right now. I'm sure many will scoff at it, and find reasons to disparage anyone that buys one. Being new, it's yet to be seen how it will perform, so it's premature to rush to either camp of lovers or haters. Still, at face value, it seems like it has the makings for a solid rifle.
The groupthink derp will certainly be strong in this thread; given the roll mark. It'll be thrown into an arbitrary tier. Whatever. I'll be interested in hearing some range reports, but will definitely look elsewhere for actual honest user reviews.
I like it. I don't own one and probably never will, I've already got all I need/want. However, I've got to say that the last several Shrubmasters I've bought for my agency have ran very well with some serious rounds from the SWAT guys. The damned loctited castle nut is a PITA when I'm wrenching on them but for the most part they have been running much better than the ones purchased 10 years ago. I always did the 30 minute QC check up before issuing them posted by one of our moderator's here many moons ago.
jackblack73
12-14-16, 18:31
Possibly the greatest feature...a Staked Castle Nut. Gasp! Haw can that be???
How do you know the castle nut is staked? From the pic on their website it's clearly not staked. I suppose it could be staked in another spot, but it's not apparent from the pic.
This could be the greatest ar-15 to have ever been assembled. Made by god Stoner himself. Problem is that BM shot themselves in the foot years ago with crappy parts and QC. So they will have quite the row to hoe to salvage their reputation, if and I repeat, IF it is even possible at this point. So yes there will be the typical internet group think and internet derp, but BM has no one to blame but themselves. If I wanted such a weapon I would NOT buy the BM simply due to not wanting to possibly waste my hard earned money on trash. I would find a similar model from a trusted brand, even if it cost a few dollars more. And that mindset that is what BM will be up against.
SeriousStudent
12-14-16, 20:03
I am curious.
What size is the gas port?
What steel is used in the bolt, the bolt carrier, and the gas key?
What fasteners are they using to attach the gas key to the bolt carrier? What torque value in inch/pounds are they using? Is the gas key staked? If so, how? Is any adhesive used when attaching the gas key?
Is the bolt HP/MPI tested? If so, is it batch tested or is each bolt tested?
Is the barrel parkerized or finished under the gas block or FSB?
If an FSB is used, is it the proper height for the barrel/upper receiver?
Is the chamber truly a 5.56? If you run one of Ned's chamber reamers through it, how much steel do you get? See this gentlemen right here: https://www.m4carbine.net/member.php?528-Ned-Christiansen He makes very, very useful and precise tools.
Those are just a few questions I can think of, off the top of my head.
cbear758 - I am not poking you in the eye at all. These are honest questions that I ask about on every carbine or rifle I buy or build. You should ask them as well.
The Dumb Gun Collector
12-14-16, 20:25
On paper it looks pretty solid. Hopefully BM has turned over a new leaf. Hell, this isn't rocket science--at this point if an outfit like that is putting out garbage they just don't care. I would probably just get a Colt Unit but I am Colt guy.
How do you know the castle nut is staked? From the pic on their website it's clearly not staked. I suppose it could be staked in another spot, but it's not apparent from the pic.
I haven't seen it in person, so I'm basing this off of one of the retailer's spec sheet. Last item on the specifications tab. All of the other specs seem to match each of the "press" releases, so I'll give the retailer the benefit of the doubt that they got it right.
https://www.impactguns.com/bushmaster-minimalist-sd-ar15-556-16in-barrel-aac-brake-30-rd-mag-604206910561.aspx
For the record, one of my rifles is a Bushie M4A3. It's seen around 5000 rounds; with an unstaked castle nut that's never budged. And, I know I'm not the only one to discover an unstaked castle nut has stayed in place. So, while a case could be made that CN staking is not absolutely critical, it's one of the frequently levied complaints against Bushmaster. Now, perhaps that argument can be put to bed with this new release. Although, I still frequently see comments about them not having M4 Feed Ramps, Staked Carrier Keys, etc. All things they actually have been doing for at least the past decade. Yet, somehow, the accusations still live on. It's funny, as by that same token, I should be able to criticize Colt for using plastic buffers. They did do that at one point, right? Or maybe even judge their quality based upon the Expanse line. Now, we know that wouldn't fly. So, why do such arguments get a pass when evaluating other brands?
Sorry for the rant. Outside of answering the question on the CN, none of the rest was pointed at you.
Short answer, going down is easier than going up.
I could explain it in detail with a novel, but it's been covered here multiple times. Check any of the qc/qa, just as good as , and manufacturing question threads.
I haven't seen it in person, so I'm basing this off of one of the retailer's spec sheet. Last item on the specifications tab. All of the other specs seem to match each of the "press" releases, so I'll give the retailer the benefit of the doubt that they got it right.
https://www.impactguns.com/bushmaster-minimalist-sd-ar15-556-16in-barrel-aac-brake-30-rd-mag-604206910561.aspx
For the record, one of my rifles is a Bushie M4A3. It's seen around 5000 rounds; with an unstaked castle nut that's never budged. And, I know I'm not the only one to discover an unstaked castle nut has stayed in place. So, while a case could be made that CN staking is not absolutely critical, it's one of the frequently levied complaints against Bushmaster. Now, perhaps that argument can be put to bed with this new release. Although, I still frequently see comments about them not having M4 Feed Ramps, Staked Carrier Keys, etc. All things they actually have been doing for at least the past decade. Yet, somehow, the accusations still live on. It's funny, as by that same token, I should be able to criticize Colt for using plastic buffers. They did do that at one point, right? Or maybe even judge their quality based upon the Expanse line. Now, we know that wouldn't fly. So, why do such arguments get a pass when evaluating other brands?
Sorry for the rant. Outside of answering the question on the CN, none of the rest was pointed at you.
This is not meant as an argument at all simply a statement of facts. I've personally owned two Bushmasters manufactured in the last 10 years and have 3 shooting buddies who bought bushys in the same time period as well. I can tell you for certain none of the castle nuts were staked, they had poorly staked carrier keys, one had an FSP so canted it pushed the gas tube off center causing the BCG to mash the tube until it wouldn't cycle anymore. Another one of them came from the factory without a roll pin holding the gas tube into the FSP. They were all purchased over the course of about 6 years separate from one another at different stores.
While most of these things are cheap and easy fixes it is simply an obvious sign that they have poor QC and don't truly care about the products they put out. They charge just as much or more as known quality brands who put out better quality products and have better customer service.
Mine is a sample size of 5 and many people here that don't have good things to say about Bushmaster have had sample sizes of a much larger number over a greater period of time than I have.
With all that said I have no doubt there are Bushmasters out there that are g2g and chugging along with high round counts but my experiences wouldn't allow me to ever purchase anything from them again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
titsonritz
12-14-16, 23:48
For me, there are too many known quantities out there to ever consider BM again.
From my experiences of owning an M4A3, I can try to provide some answers for the items below. My particular rifle is around 5 years old (Ilion stamped). Based upon price point and overall features, the Minimalist and M4A3 seem to be quite comparable. While there are clearly some differences, I'm inclined to think that the "nuts and bolts" components are cut from the same cloth. I've seen plenty of other Bushmaster models; some older, some newer. It's not easy to ascertain exactly what type of material is used when handling a rifle, but things like carrier staking, proper feed ramps, etc. have always been fairly consistent for those I've handled.
I am curious.
What size is the gas port?
I've never been inclined to measure mine. The gunsmith I use has measured some, and has claimed they generally come in around .06". This seems to fall in line with what professional reviewers on some of the gun pages have found as well. From personal experience, most all of the 5000-ish rounds I've fired have been 5.56. I have shot some lower powered .223, but the vast majority has been the former. I've not ever had an issue with feeding, extraction, etc. The only failures I've experienced with this rifle were the result of occasional improper seating of a mag and reduced power FCG springs that I tried for a short while.
What steel is used in the bolt, the bolt carrier, and the gas key?
At one point I had contacted BM about this. Bolts were C158, and Carriers were 8620. The BCGs they use have historically come from Toolcraft.
What fasteners are they using to attach the gas key to the bolt carrier? What torque value in inch/pounds are they using? Is the gas key staked? If so, how? Is any adhesive used when attaching the gas key?
Below is a photo of my BCG. The staking is fine, and Toolcraft does use Grade 8 screws.
http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t648/kmwood06/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsbvwfcryx.jpeg (http://s1318.photobucket.com/user/kmwood06/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsbvwfcryx.jpeg.html)
Is the bolt HP/MPI tested? If so, is it batch tested or is each bolt tested?
IIRC, at the time I spoke to them, they were both MPI and HP tested. Although, I am not sure who did the testing (TC or BM) or if it was batch or individual.
Is the barrel parkerized or finished under the gas block or FSB?
I do not believe it is on my M4A3. How monumental a flaw this is might be debatable, but I'll cede that the Minimalist may not be if things have remained the same. For the record, I've not looked at any newer production M4A3s to verify what was being done in the years after my purchase.
If an FSB is used, is it the proper height for the barrel/upper receiver?
No FSB on the model in question. My M4A3 has a standard FSB, but I had no problem obtaining a 50/200 zero. We're talking about a difference of only .04". At one point I had adjusted the post higher than my OCD self would have preferred, but that was later determined to be the fault of a cheap BUIS I opted for when moving away from the Detahable Carry Handle. More recently, I have seen reports that they are using F marked FSBs. But, again, I never found it to be an issue, and there's no FSB on the Minimalist. So, for this particular model, the FSB is irrelevant.
Is the chamber truly a 5.56? If you run one of Ned's chamber reamers through it, how much steel do you get? See this gentlemen right here: https://www.m4carbine.net/member.php?528-Ned-Christiansen He makes very, very useful and precise tools...
I've never cast the chamber, but have not had any issues with pressure or extraction when firing 5.56; which I do almost exclusively. Actually, the first 500 rounds that went through it were Independence 55gr pills. This is a notoriously hot round, and many refuse to shoot it altogether. Frankly, I've wanted one of Ned's chamber gauges, but have not yet found it to be a necessity. Again, I do know of professionals that have measured BM chambers, out of the box, and found them to meet the 5.56 tolerances. Ultimately, Bushmaster has been around for a long time. If there were something were drastically wrong with their chambers, leading to hazardous and catastrophic failures, user reports of such would be prevalent. Even more minor issues are fairly rare. One a related note, if anyone wants to send me one of Ned's gauges, I'll gladly throw it in my chamber and then send it back to its owner.
I'm not saying they're always perfect, or don't produce a lemon every now and then. That applies to all mfgs. Some do it on a more regular basis than others, but no one is immune. I will say that I'm pleasantly surprised that the initial comments, while some still being critical of BM as a whole, are acknowledging that the Minimalist looks good on paper and could be a solid choice. It's yet to be seen if that'll turn out to be the reality. Given my experience with them, and the features this new model offers, I very well may be one of the many that will be able to provide some firsthand insights.
AAC 51T Flash Hider - A decently popular, suppressor ready, MD that comes standard. This will be entertaining to see how many will overlook this feature and write it off as meaningless because it's "still a Bushmaster". To anyone else with objectivity, it's pretty nice to get a $100ish MD that's ready to rock with some popular cans, instead of a $10 birdcage.
Freedom group putting their flash hider on their rifle, in order to sell more of their cans when the HPA passes is hardly surprising. A muzzle device that costs them a few bucks (they're not paying retail) moves a $600 can? Heck yeah, throw it on there.
This is where gas port size becomes very relevant...
I haven't seen it in person, so I'm basing this off of one of the retailer's spec sheet. Last item on the specifications tab. All of the other specs seem to match each of the "press" releases, so I'll give the retailer the benefit of the doubt that they got it right.
https://www.impactguns.com/bushmaster-minimalist-sd-ar15-556-16in-barrel-aac-brake-30-rd-mag-604206910561.aspx
For the record, one of my rifles is a Bushie M4A3. It's seen around 5000 rounds; with an unstaked castle nut that's never budged. And, I know I'm not the only one to discover an unstaked castle nut has stayed in place. So, while a case could be made that CN staking is not absolutely critical, it's one of the frequently levied complaints against Bushmaster. Now, perhaps that argument can be put to bed with this new release. Although, I still frequently see comments about them not having M4 Feed Ramps, Staked Carrier Keys, etc. All things they actually have been doing for at least the past decade. Yet, somehow, the accusations still live on. It's funny, as by that same token, I should be able to criticize Colt for using plastic buffers. They did do that at one point, right? Or maybe even judge their quality based upon the Expanse line. Now, we know that wouldn't fly. So, why do such arguments get a pass when evaluating other brands?
Sorry for the rant. Outside of answering the question on the CN, none of the rest was pointed at you.
If you think the expanse got a free pass around here, you should do a little more reading...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Specs actually look pretty good.
FA BCG - Which I'm sure will be properly staked (in spite of what others will say)
4150 1:8 Barrel - Will handle just about any load, and is actually a personal preference of mine over 1:9 & 1:7
Rifle Length KM Handguard - That'll provide a good sight radius and capitalizes on the mounting method everyone seems to be moving towards.
ALG ACT Trigger - Widely regarded as one of, if not the best, "mil-spec" triggers
MFT Stock - Might not be a runaway favorite when it comes to stock choices, but it's better than the standard stock that comes on most rifles.
AAC 51T Flash Hider - A decently popular, suppressor ready, MD that comes standard. This will be entertaining to see how many will overlook this feature and write it off as meaningless because it's "still a Bushmaster". To anyone else with objectivity, it's pretty nice to get a $100ish MD that's ready to rock with some popular cans, instead of a $10 birdcage.
Possibly the greatest feature...a Staked Castle Nut. Gasp! Haw can that be???
Overall, this has some very nice upgrades over the standard parts, allegedly weighs only 6lbs, and is selling for under $900 right now. I'm sure many will scoff at it, and find reasons to disparage anyone that buys one. Being new, it's yet to be seen how it will perform, so it's premature to rush to either camp of lovers or haters. Still, at face value, it seems like it has the makings for a solid rifle.
The groupthink derp will certainly be strong in this thread; given the roll mark. It'll be thrown into an arbitrary tier. Whatever. I'll be interested in hearing some range reports, but will definitely look elsewhere for actual honest user reviews.
When evaluating a gun, you really have to break it down into three categories. They are:
1. Quality of the components (metal used, brands used, etc).
2. QC done (HPT, MPI, parts run through go/no go gauges, etc).
3. Assembly (was it assembled properly and will it be assembled consistently over time).
So the ugly truth about BM is that they have a LONG record of cutting corners, not following something as standard as the TDP and properly assembling their guns. As a former BM LE dealer (and one that used to work on them a lot), I think they will probably run ok for most folks, but I wouldn't not raise my trust level in BM just yet.
C4
I haven't seen it in person, so I'm basing this off of one of the retailer's spec sheet. Last item on the specifications tab. All of the other specs seem to match each of the "press" releases, so I'll give the retailer the benefit of the doubt that they got it right.
https://www.impactguns.com/bushmaster-minimalist-sd-ar15-556-16in-barrel-aac-brake-30-rd-mag-604206910561.aspx
For the record, one of my rifles is a Bushie M4A3. It's seen around 5000 rounds; with an unstaked castle nut that's never budged. And, I know I'm not the only one to discover an unstaked castle nut has stayed in place. So, while a case could be made that CN staking is not absolutely critical, it's one of the frequently levied complaints against Bushmaster. Now, perhaps that argument can be put to bed with this new release. Although, I still frequently see comments about them not having M4 Feed Ramps, Staked Carrier Keys, etc. All things they actually have been doing for at least the past decade. Yet, somehow, the accusations still live on. It's funny, as by that same token, I should be able to criticize Colt for using plastic buffers. They did do that at one point, right? Or maybe even judge their quality based upon the Expanse line. Now, we know that wouldn't fly. So, why do such arguments get a pass when evaluating other brands?
Sorry for the rant. Outside of answering the question on the CN, none of the rest was pointed at you.
A staked CN really isn't that big of a deal (as they typically loctite them on). This is of course "A Method," but is really not the best choice (especially if you wan to remove it easily).
The issue that most people should have is that BM AR's are not following the TDP. At best, they batch test stuff, use cheaper steel, chambers are out of spec, over gassed, etc. So what you "think" upsets people about the BM, really isn't the case.
The Expanse was designed to compete against the S&W SPORT II. Was it a good idea for Colt to offer an entry level gun for the uber cheap AR buyer? No, I don't think so, but I am not in charge and had no vote on the subject. To put things in context, if BM ACTUALLY made a TDP following M4 and then came out with a cheaper model, I would be fine with it.
C4
KalashniKEV
12-15-16, 10:19
Freedom group putting their flash hider on their rifle, in order to sell more of their cans when the HPA passes is hardly surprising.
Bingo.
This was the only interesting thing that jumped out at me.
I'm actually surprised they didn't go 14.5" and perm the device on.
Post-HPA, they will probably sell it with a cheaper, further junked-out version of the 556-SD can as a package. Plus selling the cheap can cheap.
All of which will be great... until some assburger shoots up a movie theater/school/GFZ with one and we can enjoy suppressors getting totally and completely banned.
JFC, $900 for a BM? Not no but hell no....
When evaluating a gun, you really have to break it down into three categories. They are:
1. Quality of the components (metal used, brands used, etc).
2. QC done (HPT, MPI, parts run through go/no go gauges, etc).
3. Assembly (was it assembled properly and will it be assembled consistently over time).
So the ugly truth about BM is that they have a LONG record of cutting corners, not following something as standard as the TDP and properly assembling their guns. As a former BM LE dealer (and one that used to work on them a lot), I think they will probably run ok for most folks, but I wouldn't not raise my trust level in BM just yet.
C4
As a guy who builds and modifies products for a living, I'd like to point out that inspectors and inspections (HPT, MPI, etc.) do nothing to control quality. They can only be used to verify quality. The person who makes the product controls quality.
Bushmaster is like a cheating spouse. Yes, they can change, but they're gonna have to work hard to prove it and do you really wanna take that chance?
As a guy who builds and modifies products for a living, I'd like to point out that inspectors and inspections (HPT, MPI, etc.) do nothing to control quality. They can only be used to verify quality. The person who makes the product controls quality.
Bushmaster is like a cheating spouse. Yes, they can change, but they're gonna have to work hard to prove it and do you really wanna take that chance?
Oh, I get it, but most don't so I just roll it in to a catch all.
C4
I have a cheap BM patrolman m4a3, that was the only ar15 available in my LGS store after Sandy Hook in a panic buy. I shoot about 2k different ammo, 223 and 5.56 from it, and only had once a tula round stuck in chamber. CN was not staked, so I did it myself. I have used same lower for a few uppers and the lower seems to be in spec. Again, that was the only ar15 available those days.
As a guy who builds and modifies products for a living, I'd like to point out that inspectors and inspections (HPT, MPI, etc.) do nothing to control quality. They can only be used to verify quality. The person who makes the product controls quality.
Bushmaster is like a cheating spouse. Yes, they can change, but they're gonna have to work hard to prove it and do you really wanna take that chance?
To expand on that point, it's a tool to control what leaves the facility... perhaps qa not qc.
Again it's a tool. You can test the part and still send out bad ones, depending on what your system dictates and how effective it is.
And you know this how exactly? I can point to many "specs" listed by Bushmaster in the past that looked good on paper, and yet didn't translate into real life.
On to your groupthink derp comment. You're free to disappear anytime you like when the "groupthink" doesn't agree with you.
Specs actually look pretty good.
FA BCG - Which I'm sure will be properly staked (in spite of what others will say)
4150 1:8 Barrel - Will handle just about any load, and is actually a personal preference of mine over 1:9 & 1:7
Rifle Length KM Handguard - That'll provide a good sight radius and capitalizes on the mounting method everyone seems to be moving towards.
ALG ACT Trigger - Widely regarded as one of, if not the best, "mil-spec" triggers
MFT Stock - Might not be a runaway favorite when it comes to stock choices, but it's better than the standard stock that comes on most rifles.
AAC 51T Flash Hider - A decently popular, suppressor ready, MD that comes standard. This will be entertaining to see how many will overlook this feature and write it off as meaningless because it's "still a Bushmaster". To anyone else with objectivity, it's pretty nice to get a $100ish MD that's ready to rock with some popular cans, instead of a $10 birdcage.
Possibly the greatest feature...a Staked Castle Nut. Gasp! Haw can that be???
Overall, this has some very nice upgrades over the standard parts, allegedly weighs only 6lbs, and is selling for under $900 right now. I'm sure many will scoff at it, and find reasons to disparage anyone that buys one. Being new, it's yet to be seen how it will perform, so it's premature to rush to either camp of lovers or haters. Still, at face value, it seems like it has the makings for a solid rifle.
The groupthink derp will certainly be strong in this thread; given the roll mark. It'll be thrown into an arbitrary tier. Whatever. I'll be interested in hearing some range reports, but will definitely look elsewhere for actual honest user reviews.
I have seen factory BM's made within the last few years that in fact were not staked correctly, and still didn't have M4 feed ramps. And they still have screwed up chambers as was evidenced in the class I just taught recently where a BM carbine that was produced in 2012 was screwed up.
Your assertion that their stakings within the last decade are all good to go, is also just that. I see hundreds of guns from all manufacturers in my classes throughout the year, to include BM. Many of these were made post Sandy Hook and they still have the same old issues.
I haven't seen it in person, so I'm basing this off of one of the retailer's spec sheet. Last item on the specifications tab. All of the other specs seem to match each of the "press" releases, so I'll give the retailer the benefit of the doubt that they got it right.
https://www.impactguns.com/bushmaster-minimalist-sd-ar15-556-16in-barrel-aac-brake-30-rd-mag-604206910561.aspx
For the record, one of my rifles is a Bushie M4A3. It's seen around 5000 rounds; with an unstaked castle nut that's never budged. And, I know I'm not the only one to discover an unstaked castle nut has stayed in place. So, while a case could be made that CN staking is not absolutely critical, it's one of the frequently levied complaints against Bushmaster. Now, perhaps that argument can be put to bed with this new release. Although, I still frequently see comments about them not having M4 Feed Ramps, Staked Carrier Keys, etc. All things they actually have been doing for at least the past decade. Yet, somehow, the accusations still live on. It's funny, as by that same token, I should be able to criticize Colt for using plastic buffers. They did do that at one point, right? Or maybe even judge their quality based upon the Expanse line. Now, we know that wouldn't fly. So, why do such arguments get a pass when evaluating other brands?
Sorry for the rant. Outside of answering the question on the CN, none of the rest was pointed at you.
I have a much older Bushmaster that is very good quality, very nice rifle. My friend recently bought a new Bushmaster and the thing is JUNK!
The fit and finish it very poor. The over all quality is just lacking compared to my older rifle.
I have a much older Bushmaster that is very good quality, very nice rifle. My friend recently bought a new Bushmaster and the thing is JUNK!
The fit and finish it very poor. The over all quality is just lacking compared to my older rifle.
Can you tell us what "good quality" means? Is this just referring to fit and finish?
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well one of the main starting point would be that the fit and finish is superior on this older one. There's no play between the upper and lower. Minimal machining marks on everything compared to the newer one my friend purchased. This staking on the carrier was correct. I've never had any problems with extraction or feeding. I've got to be sitting somewhere around 15k+ and so far nothing's broken...
Rifle works as well as any of my Colt, DD or Noveske rifles.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Singlestack Wonder
12-20-16, 09:03
Unbelievable....another "bm is a good ar on par with Colt, BCM, and DD" thread...
kdubya....spend some time reading here and learn. I too had fantasizes that all ar's were gtg before I found this place and was awakened. Of course if you would rather feel good about rifles from bm, dpms, rra, model 1, delton, spikes, or other low end offerings, you could always visit TOS.
I think the problem is is that people only remember the Bushmaster of years past. A lot of people don't realize that it's not the same company that it used to be and that the current owners have basically run it into the ground with quality control issues.
Unfortunately their current reputation for those that are aware has even tanked the resale value of their older stuff that didn't suck as bad. :(
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
I think the problem is is that people only remember the Bushmaster of years past. A lot of people don't realize that it's not the same company that it used to be and that the current owners have basically run it into the ground with quality control issues.
Unfortunately their current reputation for those that are aware has even tanked the resale value of their older stuff that didn't suck as bad. :(
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
My best friend and I each owned pre freedom group Bushmasters and it was no better than any of the ones our friends bought after they took over.. It may be different people but it is the same lack in QC in my experiences.
Freedom Group --when it bought Marlin--ruined a series of fine lever guns. They haven't done so well with traditional Remington products either. I never though that anybody could screw up the 870 pump gun. In print I've seen their bosses admit that they didn't do right by the Marlin line. I don't remember if the others were included in the apology. But let me focus on the Bushmaster AR. With FG's resources, they should be able to crank out good ARs. Didn't Remington make a butt load of M16s or M4s under Colt's licensing? So somebody there should know the difference. My unfounded contention is that they can do it right and still be competitive. I just don't understand why they will not. Maybe the answer is like the one I would apply to a population of kids who were illiterate. Until ordered to stop saying this, I would state, "When they could have they wouldn't, and when they wanted to, they couldn't.
Freedom Group --when it bought Marlin--ruined a series of fine lever guns. They haven't done so well with traditional Remington products either. I never though that anybody could screw up the 870 pump gun. In print I've seen their bosses admit that they didn't do right by the Marlin line. I don't remember if the others were included in the apology. But let me focus on the Bushmaster AR. With FG's resources, they should be able to crank out good ARs. Didn't Remington make a butt load of M16s or M4s under Colt's licensing? So somebody there should know the difference. My unfounded contention is that they can do it right and still be competitive. I just don't understand why they will not. Maybe the answer is like the one I would apply to a population of kids who were illiterate. Until ordered to stop saying this, I would state, "When they could have they wouldn't, and when they wanted to, they couldn't.
I won't say they ARE changing but it seems like they're TRYING to change with the stuff they're making here in HSV. The RM380 seems to be well made from my looks at them as do the 1911s. That said the BM line is supposed to be made here too and nothing seems to have changed there. I suppose time will tell whether the turn around effort works at all and if it does whether it works on just some products or all.
It's especially perplexing considering the workforce here in HSV. There's a fair bit of precision manufacturing and assembly related to DoD and NASA programs that has produced population of people pretty well equipped to be competent assembly techs on something like an AR.
Well one of the main starting point would be that the fit and finish is superior on this older one. There's no play between the upper and lower. Minimal machining marks on everything compared to the newer one my friend purchased. This staking on the carrier was correct. I've never had any problems with extraction or feeding. I've got to be sitting somewhere around 15k+ and so far nothing's broken...
Rifle works as well as any of my Colt, DD or Noveske rifles.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Ok. Fit and finish and upper/lower play is really the WORST standard to use to judge and AR. If we used these two categories as "standards" no one would ever buy a Colt (which is arguably the industry standard for a fighting gun).
Now the staking of the carrier being good IS a positive. At the end of the day though, the gun is still over gassed and just about every corner they could cut with materials and testing was done on your BM.
C4
I think the problem is is that people only remember the Bushmaster of years past. A lot of people don't realize that it's not the same company that it used to be and that the current owners have basically run it into the ground with quality control issues.
Unfortunately their current reputation for those that are aware has even tanked the resale value of their older stuff that didn't suck as bad. :(
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Not to pick on you or sound rude, but can you tell us what were the "golden years" for a QUALITY BM AR15?
C4
Not to pick on you or sound rude, but can you tell us what were the "golden years" for a QUALITY BM AR15?
C4
Bushmaster had "golden years" for no other reason than that every time a Bushmaster XM-15 was used in a notorious mass-shooting, douchebags would run out and buy them in numbers.
"Quality" and "Bushmaster" may not be used in the same sentence without blasphemizing.
Bushmaster had "golden years" for no other reason than that every time a Bushmaster XM-15 was used in a notorious mass-shooting, douchebags would run out and buy them in numbers.
"Quality" and "Bushmaster" may not be used in the same sentence without blasphemizing.
I thought their golden years were when the only thing to compare them to was Olympic arms cast receiver BS....
Well one of the main starting point would be that the fit and finish is superior on this older one. There's no play between the upper and lower. Minimal machining marks on everything compared to the newer one my friend purchased. This staking on the carrier was correct. I've never had any problems with extraction or feeding. I've got to be sitting somewhere around 15k+ and so far nothing's broken...
Rifle works as well as any of my Colt, DD or Noveske rifles.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
This seems like something that is constantly preached over on the TOS and couldn't be farther from the truth.
It also seems there may be an emotional attachment by some people to their low quality AR's and will attempt to defend their poor quality at all costs. The fact is, NO, BM is not "as good as" or even comparable in quality to the brands that are listed in your post.
BM is a joke when it comes to a properly built AR, they really don't do much right. Every BM I have ever come in contact with had some sort of issue, usually a stuck case while the owner fires 5.56 through their out of spec chamber.
The "as good as" nonsense should not even be mentioned here, ever. It's been explained over and over again by people with far more knowledge and experience than I have and those people have gone into detail on the subject. I guess there are those who just don't understand and never will, no matter the proof and facts presented to them.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.