Sabre Defense Contract?

[Kentucky Cop]

Is Sabre Defense now the third company building mil-spec M4"s for the goverment?:confused: The article I read stated that they are slated to build around 5,000 rifles to to help the turnover for Navy and Marine Corp.
For as long as I have been lurking here, I have never heard any mention of Sabre Defense and now they are pushing out guns out with Colt and FN. Interesting.....

Ky Cop

[kodiak22]

Not M4's but M16a4's. and yes i believe they were awarded the contract earlier this year.

[Kentucky Cop]

I have never heard a whisper of this company. Are they reliable? I just got off their website and they are asking a pretty penny for their rifles. I will stick with my colts and Smith's unless anyone here wants to chime in and sway my mind. Anybody have any experience with them? I just learned that my department authorized these along with our Colts, Smiths, Double Star's, and yes, Bushmasters.

[Jay Cunningham]

Sabre has made good stuff for quite a while.

[RojasTKD]

I have never heard a whisper of this company. Are they reliable? I just got off their website and they are asking a pretty penny for their rifles. I will stick with my colts and Smith's unless anyone here wants to chime in and sway my mind. Anybody have any experience with them? I just learned that my department authorized these along with our Colts, Smiths, Double Star's, and yes, Bushmasters.

I would take a Saber Defense rifle before a Smith, Double Star and of course Bushmaster (Smith is pretty good too, but I think Saber makes a superior AR).

[Kentucky Cop]

After a review of the site, I am kinda partial to the M5 model with the full rail. At first glance, it appears to be well thought out.

[Kentucky Cop]

I would take a Saber Defense rifle before a Smith, Double Star and of course Bushmaster (Smith is pretty good too, but I think Saber makes a superior AR).

In the range master's defense, he authorized the Double Star for several reasons. They are a central Kentucky business and he felt that many officers would rather keep the money in state instead of to a big manufacture with the way the economy is. I can respect him giving officers that option. And for the BM, no clue......

Do you have or ever shot a Sabre. I would be interested in the M5 model depending on what the good folks here say. Katar, who I respect, stated that they are good to go. This M5 model appears to be the equivalent of the M&P 15T but a couple hundred more.

[HD1911]

Not to get off of Topic...but why does it seem like, to me atleast, that Departments are not authorizing LMT's?

[Army Chief]

I suspect that simple "familiarity" has something to do with LMT's woes in this area. Most department authorizations seem to be based upon (a) what seems to be dominant on the market, such as Bushmaster, or (b) what has a clear record of performance with certain named federal agencies, such as Colt. Since LMT is still a fairly small company in terms of overall market share, and their military contracts have generally been for components, rather than for complete rifles, the typical rangemaster doesn't have a lot to go on when it comes to first-hand LMT experience.

Adding to the problem is that many LMT-based rifles are bought as components and assembled by the user/operator, rather than delivered as complete weapon systems. That introduces potential liability issues into the equation, and even though we might find this nigh unto ridiculous in the case of something like a completed upper, the fact remains that departments tend not to approve weapons that fail to meet the "factory assembled" criterion.

AC

[rmecapn]

In the range master's defense, he authorized the This M5 model appears to be the equivalent of the M&P 15T but a couple hundred more.

Attention to detail, officer. Review the chart again and you will find that the SD barrel is made of higher quality steel. The twist rate is also different.

Still, if you want the best quality for the best price, it will be BCM, regardless of configuration.

[HD1911]

I suspect that simple "familiarity" has something to do with LMT's woes in this area. Most department authorizations seem to be based upon (a) what seems to be dominant on the market, such as Bushmaster, or (b) what has a clear record of performance with certain named federal agencies, such as Colt. Since LMT is still a fairly small company in terms of overall market share, and their military contracts have generally been for components, rather than for complete rifles, the typical rangemaster doesn't have a lot to go on when it comes to first-hand LMT experience.

Adding to the problem is that many LMT-based rifles are bought as components and assembled by the user/operator, rather than delivered as complete weapon systems. That introduces potential liability issues into the equation, and even though we might find this nigh unto ridiculous in the case of something like a completed upper, the fact remains that departments tend not to approve weapons that fail to meet the "factory assembled" criterion.

AC

Thanks for you insight. I guess i don't understand why military and law enforcement contracts don't include the LMT, being as they do sell "complete rifles". I have an LMT CQB MRP and it seems to be one of the best "out-of-the-box" setups out there. But it is, indeed, heavy for an AR.

Sorry to the OP, wasn't trying to get this thread off-topic.

[Cruncher Block]

Do you have or ever shot a Sabre. I would be interested in the M5 model depending on what the good folks here say. Katar, who I respect, stated that they are good to go. This M5 model appears to be the equivalent of the M&P 15T but a couple hundred more.

I own a Sabre Defence M4 Carbine. While I would have preferred a mid-length (and Sabre recommends them), the price at which I found the carbine made it hard to pass up.

Spec-wise, the stock bolt was not MPI. The carrier key was staked with three indentations per screw on top. The receiver extension was commercial. It came with a CAR buffer.

All of these shortcomings were very easy to remedy.

On the plus side, a chrome-lined vanadium alloy 1:7 twist barrel with M4 feed ramps is a good thing.

With just 600-700 rounds and a quick introductory carbine class, it has run fine. Of course, many shooters on here have 10 times that through their carbines so I'm certainly not proclaiming it "flawless".

[wingo]

I have a Sabre full mid upper with around 3000 rounds now. I have one of the first from Talon Arms. No noted barrel wear, even with a lot of steel cased silverbear. The only thing I have noted is some slop started around the bolt, I think because of running it dry frequently.

Right now I would go with the BMC because of the cost, but will pick up the 14.5 mid complete Sabre in 6.5 or 6.8 if it can be had.