View Full Version : The Official Why My DPMS, Del-Ton, Oly Arms, Etc. Is Better Than Anything Else Thread
Well apparently some of my most recent posts have hurt alot of peoples' feelings when I criticize their DPMS, Delton, CMMG, Oly Arms, you name it selection. The reason behind this post is simple. Many of us consider AR's to be fighting weapons. Not something that we show off to our friends, shoot dirt clods with and take cool pictures with in our latest tactical garb.
Many of those who defend these substandard weapons will do so without listening to any reason or the voice of experience. So in order to prevent another 500 hundred if these threads from appearing I am starting this one. Here is the deal.
1. If you want to post why you think your xxxxx carbine/rifle is better than Daniel Defense, Colt, BCM, Noveske, LMT or other known proven weapons be prepared to explain why.
2. If you think that holding to the TDP or trying to produce a good quality weapon isn't important explain to us why. If you think that staking the carrier key or endplate is unnecessary please tell us why.
3. If you have an exceptional tale of how your carbine/rifle has performed in high count training or otherwise please share it with us.
4. If you feel that you can't wait for a good weapon and have to have something else now. Then explain why it's necessary.
My RRA National Match A2 trumps all because .............................
it's mine :D
Good idea gunz.
I can say that after owning approx. 16 BM's over the last 20+ years that I have learned the short comings of this paticular brand. I dumped my last BM about 5 yrs ago for a LMT. After giving it to my wife I now have a Colt 6920 and can truly say that I am now completely satifised with my decision and it's performance. I will "blame" my long term BM ownership on two things; not having the education to make an informed, intelligent decision and listening to the gun shop BS. I'm feel I am now sufficently educated and have for years now ignored the gun shop BS that is so typical.
I will offer some friendly advise to those who own the lower tier brands, recognize their place in the world of weapons. As bottom feeders. Not to say they will not serve "your" needs but, as 'gunz said, if you defend them as being "as good as" then offer proof. If it is just a range toy or safe queen then any number of lower priced brands should serve in that role. Otherwise I will need to see some hard, overwhelming proof that the lower end of the spectrum is "just as good as"
Also, understand we/I am not talking about your car, wife, dog etc., we are discussing a mechanical instrument. Do not get butt hurt. If it fills your needs then good, if not, understand there are some fixes that will improves it's place in the world or you can do the same as I have, trade up. I did and am glad I did.
I think this thread can serve another function as well.
It is "possible" that some of these brands are reacting to market forces, and have started tightening up their show a bit. I see that some manufacturers renowned for junk have at least started offering better material parts as an option, and I saw a photo the other day of a Del-Ton gas key that was properly staked. I know, kind of like Ahab's White Whale, but there it is....
I know that I'd be happy if the AR market were completely flooded with "as good as" guns that really were "as good as".
Should posters share their experience or credentials as the begining of their post so as to allow the reader to gain insight to their viewpoint? I know that your (Iraqgunz) background clearly gives weight to your opinion versus me as a neophyte arguing the merits of brand X. Also experience or lack of adds/subtracts weight. Just a thought...
Sure, why not.
Should posters share their experience or credentials as the begining of their post so as to allow the reader to gain insight to their viewpoint? I know that your (Iraqgunz) background clearly gives weight to your opinion versus me as a neophyte arguing the merits of brand X. Also experience or lack of adds/subtracts weight. Just a thought...
It is "possible" that some of these brands are reacting to market forces, and have started tightening up their show a bit. I see that some manufacturers renowned for junk have at least started offering better material parts as an option, .
Absolutely. With the Obamamania over and the gun business slow, the companies selling junk are starting to realize they are losing business because people know their product is inferior.
2. If you think that holding to the TDP ... isn't important explain to us why.
Responding to just this point just with respect to the lower receiver:
My understanding is that the lower receiver is a low stress part, so a billet lower will work just fine, as long as the dimensions are correct (pins fit, mag drops free, fits with milspec upper, etc.).
What I like about a billet lower is the larger diameter finger hole that is integral to the receiver rather than a separate part pinned in place. That is just a personal preference based on aesthetics, not function. Also, I do like the look of some billet lowers.
If I have misunderstood and there are times when the greater strength of a forging rather than billet are necessary, please tell me. Or if there is some other point that I overlooked, please set me straight. Thanks.
I will repeat here what I have posted several times in other threads. Over about 10 years I have gone through lots of ARs, many of them custom builds. Some were just good deals. Some were guns that I thought would be fun, etc. Brands included Bushmaster, Olympic Arms, DPMS, Rock River, CMMG, etc. (I know I am missing a couple but I am drawing a blank at the moment). They were shitty guns. I thought they were average guns when I bought them, but I learned. In other words, I am not as stupid now as I was then.
I have gotten rid of most of those shitty AR-15s (still trying to sell some - send a PM if interested :D ) in lieu of the half dozen that are at or very, very close to the TDP. In some cases I had to sell 2 shitty AR-15s to generate the money to pay for one good AR-15. In other cases I only had to add $200 to the selling price of a shitty AR-15 to get a good one. So it was not painful at all. Now I have to get rid of my shitty M1As from SA and get one good one from Fulton Armory.
About 15 years ago I went the same route on optics. I was absolutely DONE with Bushnell, Bausch & Lomb, Redfield, Weaver, Tasco, etc. So I threw some of those crap optics in the trash and sold others, and implemented a policy that nothing crappier than a Leupold could go in the safe. And I live by that policy. I have not purchased a Leupold in 10 years, sticking to better quality options.
I guess I should clarify the whole TDP thing. I am talking about important stuff like proper grades of steel for the bolt, small parts, barrel, etc...
I used a Mega Machine billet lower to build my wifes carbine. Everything fit 100% and I had no issues with it at all.
I would even use BM lowers to build a rifle/carbine if I had to. I agree that it is more or less a "low stress" part. I know that there have been pics posted of some lowers that have cracked or broken at the rear where the lower receiver extension meets up. How and why is unknown.
Responding to just this point just with respect to the lower receiver:
My understanding is that the lower receiver is a low stress part, so a billet lower will work just fine, as long as the dimensions are correct (pins fit, mag drops free, fits with milspec upper, etc.).
What I like about a billet lower is the larger diameter finger hole that is integral to the receiver rather than a separate part pinned in place. That is just a personal preference based on aesthetics, not function. Also, I do like the look of some billet lowers.
If I have misunderstood and there are times when the greater strength of a forging rather than billet are necessary, please tell me. Or if there is some other point that I overlooked, please set me straight. Thanks.
I will repeat here what I have posted several times in other threads. Over about 10 years I have gone through lots of ARs, many of them custom builds. Some were just good deals. Some were guns that I thought would be fun, etc. Brands included Bushmaster, Olympic Arms, DPMS, Rock River, CMMG, etc. (I know I am missing a couple but I am drawing a blank at the moment). They were shitty guns. I thought they were average guns when I bought them, but I learned. In other words, I am not as stupid now as I was then.
I have gotten rid of most of those shitty AR-15s (still trying to sell some - send a PM if interested :D ) in lieu of the half dozen that are at or very, very close to the TDP. In some cases I had to sell 2 shitty AR-15s to generate the money to pay for one good AR-15. In other cases I only had to add $200 to the selling price of a shitty AR-15 to get a good one. So it was not painful at all. Now I have to get rid of my shitty M1As from SA and get one good one from Fulton Armory.
About 15 years ago I went the same route on optics. I was absolutely DONE with Bushnell, Bausch & Lomb, Redfield, Weaver, Tasco, etc. So I threw some of those crap optics in the trash and sold others, and implemented a policy that nothing crappier than a Leupold could go in the safe. And I live by that policy. I have not purchased a Leupold in 10 years, sticking to better quality options.
Good idea for a thread, given the recent preponderance of posters espousing the superiority of their poor to mediocre guns.
Since it's the purpose of this thread, I'll share the experience I have had with my first AR, a Stag Arms A3. I still own it, but keep it mostly as a range toy now that I don't feel quite comfortable trusting my life to it.
Background: I'm a citizen with a strong belief in personal responsibility which extends to self defense and am fascinated with mechanical things, so guns are a natural fit for me. I enjoy running drills to make myself better, and see myself as proficient especially with some automatic pistols and I'm getting there with ARs.
On to my Stag...
I bought my Stag merely 18 months ago. Since then I have put around 2500 rounds through it, mostly doing drills. I've had exactly one stoppage from this gun, a double feed, about a month after I bought it. Other than that the only issue I've had with it is a cracked buffer retaining pin. I noticed it cracked during an inspection after a range trip. I am not sure what caused it--I'm thinking maybe just that it has a carbine length gas system while having a carbine buffer in it from the factory before I knew better.
That said, the barrel didn't go through MPI or a HPT. Neither did the bolt, nor was it shot peened. It's also not made of the correct steel. The bolt carrier isn't chrome lined. It doesn't have M4 feed ramps... I think I've listed enough.
So while it has been a good gun that has treated me right, I now know that not all AR-15s are created equal and buy accordingly.
I think this thread can serve another function as well.
It is "possible" that some of these brands are reacting to market forces, and have started tightening up their show a bit. I see that some manufacturers renowned for junk have at least started offering better material parts as an option, and I saw a photo the other day of a Del-Ton gas key that was properly staked. I know, kind of like Ahab's White Whale, but there it is....
I know that I'd be happy if the AR market were completely flooded with "as good as" guns that really were "as good as".
I, on the other hand, have a Del-Ton that has a quasi-staked gas key. Yes, they did push the sides in towards the screws, but there was no contact with the screws. Obviously, they tried but didn't quite achieve the desired results. I now have a BCM BCG that has replaced the Del-Ton BCG. I am sure this are other "issues". When I purchased the Del-Ton, it was right after Obama took office, and I have since learned quite a bit by following threads on this site.
I recognize a few people here from another smaller forum I've posted a couple of times on but I've been lurking here off and on for a while so I thought I'd go ahead and post up my experience.
I bought my Bushmaster on Nov. 12, 2008 and have since put about 1000 rounds down the pipe. My only issue with it have been a couple of stove pipes. Not bad but still unacceptable IMO. I see no reason why a rifle should ever really do that. The Colts I've seen in training never did that, or experienced any other issues, when digesting magazine after magazine of Wolf steel cased ammo. So in my quest to fix this issue and on the advice of others I sent money to BCM for a bolt carrier group and H buffer. They got here last week... and I didn't install them.
I looked long and hard at the new parts, decided the Bushy wasn't deserving, and am placing an order for a BCM upper to go on my current lower. :big_boss:
Some interesting notes on my BM from 2008:
- Purchase Nov. 12, 2008
- Approximately 1000 rounds through it.
-The gas key was about 1/2 staked from the factory. That is, one side was touching the bolts holding the gas key (or really close) and the other half wasn't. Even on the side that's done a bit better it's nowhere nearly as well done as BCM or Colt carriers. I staked it by hand at around 250 rounds.
-They didn't even try to stake the castle nut.
-The bolt carrier is the newer style semi-auto unit that has a lot more metal in it than the original semi-auto carriers.
-Came with a carbine buffer.
-Has M4 feed ramps.
-Trigger is heavy but crisp with no gritty feeling. It has very little slack to take up. :confused:
-Chamber seems to be 5.56 Nato (55gr 5.56 accounts for well over half the rounds I've put through it).
-It's WAY over gassed. This is to the point that it stings ones face and really burns the eyes to shoot NTCH without glasses on. In comparison I'd say that it's about half as painful (maybe 3/4 if it really gets the eyes) as getting hit by an 8% solution of pepper spray... fortunately it doesn't last nearly as long.
The only issues I had with my Bushy was trying to run the upper on a FA lower. I replaced The semi BCG and she ran fine on SA, FA was a no go. I changed buffers and buffer springs with no luck. I think it was an issue with the gas tube. I put an LMT 10.5" upper on and it runs like a sewing machine.:D
pistolman1974
10-29-10, 23:52
I bought a Del-ton Ar-15 during the "great scare" after I bought it I had the gas key staked, bought and installed a bolt upgrade kit ( black insert, spring and o- ring) and had the castle nut staked. then bought a Magpul CTR stock. It's a good shooter and I enjoy it. Presently the lower is wearing a BCM complete 20" upper while I get the $$$ for a spikes tactical lower :D
Bolt_Overide
10-30-10, 04:40
As Ive said before, Ive made the mistake of buying a few of the crap guns, I for one will never make that mistake again.
Paul Howe with CSAT here. Just a few early thoughts. I run Tac Rifle Instructor courses and Tac Rifle Operator courses where there might be 10-12 Instructors in the course and up to 24 shooters in the two-day classes, sometimes 36 shooters at one time on various ranges.
I have seen all rifles good and bad break, both old and new. Most have been LWRC due to their quality control and accuracy. I had one Noveske last year I had to put hands on to get it running.
We currently run 5 of the DPMS CSAT rifles that were built under my last POC and a crew that turned out quality weapons. DPMS has been bought out and the QC is questionable now because my POC was forced out, new management in, etc. It goes in cycles.
I have issued our DPMS guns to many students to shoot when their rifle failed. Some folks rent these guns. They have run great and I think I got a good batch.
I think there is something to be said for a weapon company that is small and keeps their QC through stable management. I like to work with and promote such companies to help give them a boost up when I can and shoot their guns and give them feedback often.
Customer support by the company is important. I have heard of Mr. Noveske calling folks personally telling them to immediately ship their rifle back to be fixed as he understands QC. Also, larger companies put out more guns and when there is a problem, more guns get out to customers with a problem and discontent spreads.
In short, all have problems at one point. I believe the smaller companies fix their problems faster as they are still able to do so without a great deal of red tape. I feel sorry for the shooter and their $2500 rifle that craps out on them during day 1 of the course. We just issue them a rental and they keep on shooting.
I am running another course shortly and will keep track of all malfunctions/problems and report them to this thread.
Thanks,
Paul
Thank you Mr. Howe for taking the time to visit M4c and give your input.
It is always appreciated.
Suwannee Tim
10-30-10, 11:25
People often fall in love with things like guns, cars, football teams, political parties and the like. I don't. I never love something that can't love me back. It's OK to fail to be objective about your wife, your kids, even your cat, because you love them. No one really expects you to acknowledge that your new baby is ugly or your teen son is a creep, in fact, it is probably better not to acknowledge such. Failure to properly evaluate things is another matter. The Universe does not care that you love Chevys because you daddy loved Chevys and his daddy loved Chevys. Chevrolet is now Government Motors and that's not a good thing. Same with rifles. If you consistently fail to acknowledge mistakes you will have a considerably harder and less prosperous life.
Mr Howe,
I've attended a few of your courses and hope to do so again. We appreciate your insights. I also read your newsletter, regularly, and recall you commenting on your success with DPMS. This is in complete contrast to the expieriances, observations and opinions of other high quality well known instructors.
Considering the poor performance wittnessed by other instructors of DPMS products, prior to there take over, do you think its possible that your POC may have taken the extra time and QC to build your specific/individual guns delivered to you, better then the average gun they have send out the door?
Bob
Bob,
Thanks and I think companies get into a cycle of doing things right and then when they get large enough, they are bought out. Many times the buyers bring in their own management and QC folks that were never part of the original process. They go through a period of re-learning and many times the folks that brought the company up to high levels leave because of new management headaches.
I don't think DPMS made me special guns, they were just at that point in their cycle that things were right with the company. My POC Evin was a top notch guy and I have not had any contact with them since he left.
As for other instructors, many get free rifles or sign contracts with companies that sponsor them, so they decline to bring up issues openly, but hopefully do so internally.
If someone sends me a gun to T & E, I do so and give them feedback internally. If it works and I like it, I put it in my web letter. I don't have any contracts with any gun makers and have not been approached by many. Many look at the plain Jane hardware I put on rifles they send shake their heads. It either shoots as advertised or it does not. Not much grey area. One should not need a bunch of Gucci add on stuff to make it run.
Thanks again and I hope this helps.
Paul
Paul,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience with us.
Rmplstlskn
10-30-10, 15:54
I think all this ties in with the glitz & glam "Gun Mag" industry, and as the "gun mag" thread here pokes fun of, the bought-off "gun experts" that rave and praise whatever crap they were given to write about this month. People read that drivel and believe it... No escaping the influence upon those who do not yet know better.
For some it takes YEARS to break free of AR ignorance... I have been recreationally shooting AR's since the early 80's, and I do not know when I "saw the light," and I still have much baggage to UNLEARN. Sometimes it is just pure ECONOMICS... I have yet to afford a Noveske, but I have been able to swing a Colt and Sabre. Sometimes it is just as simple as $$$...
This site, the CHART, and our reviews here will turn those that want to turn, and piss off those not yet ready.
Rmpl
I owned a dpms m4 style for years and it was a "good rifle" this was back in 2003 and it served me well for a bush-gun, But one of my mentors taught me all about AR-15's (and many other rifles) and I learn from that point that the bolt and barrel are really the heart of your rifle so one should never skimp on thoses parts, that why I build my own uppers. so I know whats in my rifles, but with companies like Bravo offering the great bang for the buck uppers, bcg, etc; I don't know why people with a sub par gun would not at least upgrade to a BC, bcg just my two cents.
The AR15 system has no room for error when it comes to the quality of materials, dimensions, and manufacturing protocol. This is why this system gets a bad rap because of certain companies and their tendency to cut corners.
If an AKM chamber is a little too tight for extraction, no worries, the cartridge taper will help. If not the taper, then the big extractor. Something like the 7.62x39mm AKM has multiple fail safes to deal with one potential problem. The AR15 does not.
The reason for AR15 bolts to be made of a certain type of metal and be shot peened, etc, etc, is because of its small size. I wonder if a Galil bolt is shot peened or made of a metal equal or superior to a mil-spec AR15 bolt......
With the AR15, it must be built 100% mil-spec, or it will have issues.
justin_247
10-31-10, 11:05
I recommend we add some criteria for this thread. It's one thing to say, "I own a ton of DPMS rifles, some with 15,000 rds through them, without any that regularly malfunction." But it's quite another to explain why they have performed that well. So, I think each user should state:
(a) when they purchased the rifle
(b) the number of rounds fired and the number of malfunctions
(c) if the gas key and castle nut are properly staked
(d) if the BCG is semi or full auto
(e) what kind of buffer it came with
(f) whether M-4 feed ramps are present or not
(g) if possible, whether it has a 5.56 chamber or not
I would not be at all surprised if DPMS and their ilk sent a ton of T&E rifles that actually were built pretty close to spec in order to increase their presence. And I would not be at all surprised if the rifles used by the 3-gun competitors they sponsor had some significant upgrades that you don't see in the rifles they sell to gun shops.
I recommend we add some criteria for this thread. It's one thing to say, "I own a ton of DPMS rifles, some with 15,000 rds through them, without any that regularly malfunction." But it's quite another to explain why they have performed that well. So, I think each user should state:
(a) when they purchased the rifle
(b) the number of rounds fired and the number of malfunctions
(c) if the gas key and castle nut are properly staked
(d) if the BCG is semi or full auto
(e) what kind of buffer it came with
(f) whether M-4 feed ramps are present or not
(g) if possible, whether it has a 5.56 chamber or not
I would not be at all surprised if DPMS and their ilk sent a ton of T&E rifles that actually were built pretty close to spec in order to increase their presence. And I would not be at all surprised if the rifles used by the 3-gun competitors they sponsor had some significant upgrades that you don't see in the rifles they sell to gun shops.
Good idea. I left a couple of those things out so I'll go back and edit my post.
Also, and I'm sure someone with experience tere will chime in, but from what I've read and heard the DPMS 3 gun rifles are pretty much custom guns in DPMS clothing. I really don't see how they could be anything else.
The AR15 system has no room for error when it comes to the quality of materials, dimensions, and manufacturing protocol. This is why this system gets a bad rap because of certain companies and their tendency to cut corners.
<snip>
With the AR15, it must be built 100% mil-spec, or it will have issues.
Actually, I disagree to a certain degree with this.
I think the engineering of the AR system is still amazingly tolerant of all kind of material, dimension and manufacturing asshattery. This is why we get dumbasses on here all the time stating their Plum Crazy or Blackthorne $300 AR kicks ass. Those crappy rifles still somehow manage to run, despite the steep hill they have in front of them, thanks to a myriad of reasons why they shouldn't work.
It's nowhere near as finicky as advertised.
However, if you buy a bunch of them, and run them hard, those things will show in increased failure rates.
Thanks for all the feedback and I appreciate the guys with all the internal knowledge of the AR platforms. I have shot the platform for over 30 years, but I have never taken an armorers class.
I have an instructor/operator class next week and will have over 35 students at one point. I will will track all malfunctions, stoppages, make, mileage on the gun, etc., during the course and attempt to attribute a cause and report back to this forum.
I conduct a weapons maintenance class on day two for the instructors and on the final day for the two-day student class.
Thanks,
Paul
Doc Safari
11-01-10, 08:58
I don't understand this eagerness to skimp on things like HP and MPI where critical parts like the bolt are concerned. If the rifle comes apart because the bolt was substandard then all those specs suddenly will become important to you.
It was nothing but Colt for me mostly, although I did buy into the hype that Bushmaster was just as good for a while. Several malfunctions and other QC problems later I got rid of the Bushmasters and decided never again would I settle for lower quality just to save a few hundred bucks.
Thank you Mr. Howe for taking the time to visit M4c and give your input.
It is always appreciated.
Agree. Good post Mr. Howe and all correct. Every company is capable to producing something that will run and something that will fail.
C4
I think it's important to get away from terms like "TDP" and "milspec" in general as, in the case of the former, few have seen it and, in the case of the latter, many misuse it. As I said in an article earlier this year, the spec can be divided into four categories
dimensions
materials
testing
assembly
what most companies mean when they say "milspec" is only #1, and even then not completely (as in the case of receiver extensions). This is why I have made every attempt to scrub the term from the Chart & E of F and instead try to address desirable features and explain why they are desirable.
That said, and again from another current article of mine, while"milspec" should be a base standard and not a goal, until more manufacturers can meet the standard it will have to serve as a goal.
People often fall in love with things like guns, cars, football teams, political parties and the like. I don't. I never love something that can't love me back. It's OK to fail to be objective about your wife, your kids, even your cat, because you love them. No one really expects you to acknowledge that your new baby is ugly or your teen son is a creep, in fact, it is probably better not to acknowledge such. Failure to properly evaluate things is another matter. The Universe does not care that you love Chevys because you daddy loved Chevys and his daddy loved Chevys. Chevrolet is now Government Motors and that's not a good thing. Same with rifles. If you consistently fail to acknowledge mistakes you will have a considerably harder and less prosperous life.
You sound like someone I could get along with.... You mean to say that people should consider facts before jumping to conclusions? Such an outlook is almost heretical in this country right now...;)
I think it's important to get away from terms like "TDP" and "milspec" in general as, in the case of the former, few have seen it and, in the case of the latter, many misuse it. As I said in an article earlier this year, the spec can be divided into four categories
dimensions
materials
testing
assembly
what most companies mean when they say "milspec" is only #1, and even then not completely (as in the case of receiver extensions). This is why I have made every attempt to scrub the term from the Chart & E of F and instead try to address desirable features and explain why they are desirable.
That said, and again from another current article of mine, while "milspec" should be a base standard and not a goal, until more manufacturers can meet the standard it will have to serve as a goal.
Agree Rob. Many lower quality AR manufacturers use the fact that their gun will interface with either an M4/M16 upper or lower is how they define "Mil-Spec."
The other point that needs to be discussed in threads like these is "statistical sampling." Meaning that if your frame of reference is ONE GUN or your "buddies" gun, then you need to realize that is not enough experience to say whether or not brand "A" is reliable.
I could go out and buy a Colt 6920 and an Oly. The Colt could go down inside of 3,000rds and the Oly would run 100%. From this, could I make the assumption that Colt sucks and Oly is a much better gun? Yep. Would that be accurate? No.
Quality materials coupled with correct installation is what really makes a gun run. Can you get away with using cheap materials, but installing things correctly? Yes (at least for awhile). On the flip side of this, you can have quality materials, but not assembly them correctly and the weapon will fail.
Most companies that use lower grade materials and don't follow any of the .Mil testing procedures, but follow SOME of the .Mil methods for assembly can produce a gun that will generally run for thousands of rounds. So in other words, they "get by." This is what adds much confusion for the consumer and why IZGuns felt the need to start a thread. Yes, your low quality AR is or has been reliable for you. Realize though that you are rolling the dice and at any time, something will either come apart or break.
C4
First I would like to say that while IG's thread is a good idea, I have a feeling that we aren't going to get many takers from the owners of lower tier guns. It is my thought that with the amount of knowledge on this forum, people wont be lining up to get lectured...
But that said here is my experience:
It is hard for me to get butt hurt about something that I am admittedly new too, and that I don't have any real world experience with. I am a full on gear head, and it is important that my gear live up to what it is advertised for. If I bought a snow board at Walmart for my first ever trip, and that trip happened to be to the top of Breckenridge, if the board snapped I don't think I would be upset, hell I might be to dead to be anything... Cheap gear is what it is, cheap.
But I think from my personal experience people get a little more attached to their guns (and vehicles) more so then other kinds of kit. It is like an extension of them, and their ego. This has always been odd to me, as I have nothing to prove to anyone but myself, but the male ego is ****ing amazing when it comes to feeling special. Maybe with guns it is the idea of passing the gun down through the generations? I know that I cherish my mothers lever action that she gave me. Maybe people just don't want to hear that their purchase may not get passed down to little Johnny due to cheap parts?
Personally I purchased a SW MP15ORC (the C stands for compliant as I live in New York), and boy have I learned a lot in the 3500 rounds through the gun, replaced buffer spring, reamed chamber, ext. Do I own a top tier weapon at this point? No! Do I trust my life to it? Yea I do, but only after a lot of time on this forum. So I am willing to admit I didn't purchase a top tier gun, and if I had expendable income pouring out of my ass, I would buy another M4, but I don't, and so I wont.
This forum actually guided my purchase, and if it wasn't for Rob's chart I would have purchased a DPMS. The local gun shop guys swore by DPMS, said they were as good as Colt, that Colt was over ratted, and that I should just save the 700 (yes at the time DPMS were 700 dollars cheaper then Colts in my state), and get a Panther. However knowing that I knew absolutely nothing about the platform I found this forum, and I started reading and reading while I saved up the money. This was combined with shopping around my area. I am the kind of person that is reluctant to buy things online, and I made the choice at the time to only buy a gun I could hold, and feel, and not to order online. This limited me to my local gun shops. After much research my best two options were a Colt match gun and SW. I went with the SW.
What I have learned about SW I could write a book about, and everyone in a Ban State should read what I am about to write:
There is a ton of info out there about SW's learning curve regarding this platform. They didn't always have the right chamber, pMags wouldn't drop free, ext. My SW has what I think is a low serial number on the lower 73XXX. Since the purchase of the gun I have had the following problems:
2nd Round: Failure to feed, two scratches the length of the shell.
750 rnds: Failure to eject, stuck steel Wolf Case. Case ejects after re-charging handle.
775 rnds: Failure to eject, stuck steel Wolf Case, Case ejects again after using charging handle.
800 rnds: Failure to eject, stuck steel case, case puts gun out of action, and requires cleaning rod for removal. (all three of these failures were in the same high round count session).
After the above trip I came to this forum and get leaps and bounds of help. The gun ended up going back to SW, and they return it quickly and without complaint. They reamed the chamber, replaced the buffer and spring (with another carbine buffer and spring), and did an extractor upgrade.
Then:
2250 rnds: Shooting Romanian Surplus Ammo the extractor rips off the brass lip on the case, resulting in a stuck case that requires a cleaning rod to remove. This happened 2 more times with this ammo on another trip to the range.
I came back to this forum. Ended up listening to the advice of the experts and replaced the buffer with an H-buffer. I ate through the rest of that crappy Romanian ammo with no problems and haven't had a function problem since, but:
I just bought a single point sling attachment for the rifle. A MI that fits over the buffer tube and requires no smith work to attach. The result was a return, as my gun's compliant buffer tube (which is extended to prevent me from shortening the rifle) is commercial in spec and not MilSpec. The result is that I have to use a different sling attachment.
All and all I have found myself very frustrated with this rifle at times, but have been able to address most of the problems. What I am frustrated with the most is living in a Ban State. I am convinced that in order to get rid of the surplus early rifles SW made prior to the end of the AWB, that the company pushed them on to the Ban States for sale at large outfitters like Gander Mnt. I am convinced they offered these large outfitters a deal on all these rifles that no longer lived up to their new standards, and that I just happened to purchase one. I am half tempted to ask SW to honor their advertisements and replace all of the out of spec parts, but am not really interested in the long drawn out process that this would be.
So all and all there you go. That is a very humble assessment of my tier 2 rifle, and how it has caused me headaches. I do love the gun, it groups better then any of my friends AR's, even other SW's. Since I am a tall guy the stalk is pinned where I like it, so no complaints there, and since the Hbuffer it hasn't had so much as a hiccup. But I did learn a lot, and may do things differently if I had the chance.
GermanSynergy
11-01-10, 11:09
I have a Bushmaster lower, purchased many years ago during the ban days (2001 IIRC). It has since been retrofitted with a LPK from G&R Tactical, milspec RE/LMT SOPMOD and Stark grip.
I got rid of the upper around 2004/2005 when I wanted a Colt 6920.
120mm,
I agree, Pat Rogers has noted the same. That some of these truly crappy rifles even run at all is a testament to the design.
RobS,
Agree also, long ago, I thought we should just skip all the "mil spec" talk, as its much more then most people think it is. If you just look at the sheer numbers of guns manufactured by some, and the few problem guns that they put out the door, it should become obvious.
Many trainers, such as Pat, have noted the low quality and malfunction prone nature of the lower grade guns. However, no one has said that every gun they produce will choke constantly, and the better guns will never malfunction.
I've taken a few classes with Mr. Howe, and spoke with other well known instructors about his curriculum and thoughts. His reputation for integrity amongst all of them, is beyond reproach. I do not question what he has seen. That he has had better results then others with DPMS, is a conundrum, perhaps its the op tempo of his classes, he's just been lucky, or whatever, but I'd love to know why the differing experience.
Bob
seacoastnh
11-01-10, 15:10
I thought this thread was going to be interesting, but the chart lovers have arived like ants at picnic.
This forum actually guided my purchase, and if it wasn't for Rob's chart I would have purchased a DPMS.
This site, the CHART, and our reviews here will turn those that want to turn, and piss off those not yet ready.
Rmpl
Okay chart lovers lets hear what makes the “Chart” more useful than a consumer report that ranks a Hyundai over a Honda because the Hyundai has better acceleration and two more speakers?
To me it appears to be nothing more than a check list of manufacturing specifications. You need only read a few posts into the thread that links the “Chart” and you start to find claims of certain manufacturing practices and features that improve reliability that are not listed in the “Chart.” This goes on for 50 pages.
I am not a manufacturing expert, but I believe the manufacturing process and controls are important. If you believe the process and quality controls are not important, then the chart is everything you believe it is. It has the specs, it must be quality, or maybe it’s a Hyundai.
If on the other hand you believe variation and deviation in the manufacturing process significantly impact quality then share with me the virtues of the “Chart” in discerning quality? Hopefully you have more than brand A uses batch testing and brand B tests each one.
What is the failure rate for each manufacturer after the weapon leaves the factory? Customer service won’t put Humpty Dumpty back together if Humpty bet his life on the wrong manufacturer.
I am going to speculate that Colt has a team of engineers that are responsible for managing deviation and variation in their manufacturing process and that if a company sell parts to colt, its process and quality controls are checked by colt. Colt may well belong in the first position, but what about the rest of the pecking order?
I want out of the box reliability, not customer service. Which column on the chart should I be looking at?
Grumpy MSG
11-01-10, 19:04
Wow, the Mil.Spec. crowd sounds like they want to lynch folks who dare to think that non Mil.Spec. is not just scrap metal. Hmmmmmmmm. Colts with big pins, not milspec, huge POS; no flash supressor, not milspec, POS; AR15 bolt carrier not M16A1 carrier, POS; no bayonet lug (doesn't matter that you don't own bayonet), POS; 1 in 9 barrel (doesn't matter that you only shoot 55 grain FMJ), not milspec, POS; I could ramble on with a shopping list of these deficiencies. How about the Magpul, Tango Down, Troy... fans out there. Most of their products have no NSN, not Mil.Spec. POS. You can only use the M16 buttstock (moving sling swivel, not trap door), M16A1(fixed swivel, trap door), and the M16A2(longer, fixed swivel, trapdoor) or the two variants of M4 stock(one with, one without sling swivel) and the Crane SOPMOD. You can only use the A1 or A2 pistol grips. Absolutely, positively you cannot use a midlength gas system. You can see where i am going with this, relying strictly on Mil.spec. limits your options. Here is a story for you, I had 28 years in the Army (National Guard for much of it) I have had the opportunity to deal with lots of Mil.Spec. rifles, some brand new, others freshly remanufactured, others well worn, and some worn out. I plenty of experience as an operator, the one week armorers course, a good mechanical aptitude and 16 months in an active duty Infantry arms room. The rifles I dealt with during my career were M16A1s, M16A2s, M16A4s and M4s. I handled the Colts, the H & Rs, G.M. Hydramatics, and FNs.
I have seen brand new Colts come from the manufacturer failing the functions check. I pulled them from the box, degreased them and checked them myself. It happened both with M16A1s and A2s. I saw it happen with freshly remanufactured M16A1s, most of those were Hydramatics (2 should have been coded out, not remanufactured, worn out trigger and hammer pin holes), I have a firm belief they were made with softer aluminum than Colts and H & Rs. Several of those remanufactured rifles were marked M16A1MOD (they used to be M16s), two were marked XM16E1 (the earliest M16A1s). I will tell you all manufacturers have some problem rifles. It is how they stand behind them that matters.
Now instead of telling all the Delton, CMMG, DPMS, Bushmaster guys their rifle sucks, we should be helping them to improve the reliability of their rifle. After all, selling a rifle because the bolt carrier or castle nut wasn't staked seems pretty extreme. If the bolt holds up to 500 rounds, chances are it wasn't cracked and magnetic particle inspection wouldn't have found anything anyway. The odds of all the lugs cracking off at one time is incredibly low, almost non-existant, so there is another not so major issue. Is the chamber too tight would be an important one, but again not necessarily cause to sell the rifle.
I know my first privately owned AR has a Sendra lower receiver, with a bunch of M16A1 parts, has been a Frankengun changed from an A1 knockoff, to an A2 knockoff, to an A4 knockoff and back to an A1. With all I did with it, it still goes bang whenever I tell it to (99 44/100% of the time). If I feed it crap ammuntion it is not the rifle's fault it won't chamber a corroded round. Did it fire 100% of the time, I'd be lieing if I said it did, but slap up on the magazine fixed it every time I remember a problem. I have never been anal enough to log how many rounds I have fired.
Rmplstlskn
11-01-10, 19:24
Then come the CHART haters...
I only wish I had access to "The CHART" years and decades ago... Would have saved myself a lot of frustration and problem AR15 diagnosis, as well as $$$.
The CHART is so people do not have to RE-LEARN history and past experience...
Rmpl
If you don't like the chart don't use it. All it is is information. I think it is a great place to go so you can at least know what you're buying.
The Honda like the Colt, LMT, or BCM will give you longer trouble free service with more reliability over the years. I have never owned a Honda car but my snow blower, trimmer and push mower are all Honda and they rock. Just like. My LMT and BCM guns.
dieselgeek
11-01-10, 20:39
I thought this thread was going to be interesting, but the chart lovers have arived like ants at picnic.
Okay chart lovers lets hear what makes the “Chart” more useful than a consumer report that ranks a Hyundai over a Honda because the Hyundai has better acceleration and two more speakers?
To me it appears to be nothing more than a check list of manufacturing specifications. You need only read a few posts into the thread that links the “Chart” and you start to find claims of certain manufacturing practices and features that improve reliability that are not listed in the “Chart.” This goes on for 50 pages.
I am not a manufacturing expert, but I believe the manufacturing process and controls are important. If you believe the process and quality controls are not important, then the chart is everything you believe it is. It has the specs, it must be quality, or maybe it’s a Hyundai.
If on the other hand you believe variation and deviation in the manufacturing process significantly impact quality then share with me the virtues of the “Chart” in discerning quality? Hopefully you have more than brand A uses batch testing and brand B tests each one.
What is the failure rate for each manufacturer after the weapon leaves the factory? Customer service won’t put Humpty Dumpty back together if Humpty bet his life on the wrong manufacturer.
I am going to speculate that Colt has a team of engineers that are responsible for managing deviation and variation in their manufacturing process and that if a company sell parts to colt, its process and quality controls are checked by colt. Colt may well belong in the first position, but what about the rest of the pecking order?
I want out of the box reliability, not customer service. Which column on the chart should I be looking at?
very well put
Oh boy, a lot of people failing to understand the chart, the fact that we all know EVERY MANUFACTURER can put out lemons and the fact that we know that only certain parts of the TDP actually matter.
Good luck Rob_S.
C4
The best thing About the Chart is that so many people are better educated now than they were before that I don't even have to bother spanking the idjits. It's like they're standing on the side of the road screaming "the moon is made of green cheese!"
Rmplstlskn
11-01-10, 21:03
Oh boy, a lot of people failing to understand the chart, the fact that we all know EVERY MANUFACTURER can put out lemons and the fact that we know that only certain parts of the TDP actually matter.
Good luck Rob_S.
C4
And my comment on re-learning history and past experience didn't help... Not what I intended to say...
Meant to say that the Chart helps us know who makes what and how, so that we don't have to re-learn this info every few years when a new batch of shooter comes along...
My posts seem to suck lately... Need to re-read before I hit POST IT...
Rmpl
dieselgeek
11-01-10, 21:09
THE MOON IS NOT MADE OF CHEESE?????
I own a "non elite" AR with some "elite" parts in it. I think why people get defensive is the stance that some people take.
Elite breaks = Freak Accident
non elite breaks = your gun sucks crap.
I'm not one of those people to get upset about things like that, but some posters seem to think they've hit a high level in life for buying a "better gun". I like the thread by RobS ( I think he also wrote the chart) who explains how to check for a few things on your gun if it's not one of the top brands. Really I think any AR owner should check for these things. Anyway my Bushy is working well for now. It's a never ending project and I'm not brand loyal to it. Really as soon as BCM has that nice BCG back in stock I'm grabbing it. I'll keep my current properly staked OEM one for a backup. Rob, it sucks that you put so much work into something to have it debated everyday. Again I think it's the attitude that some people get when there gun is on the far right that does not match well with the attitude of members with guns on the far left.
:big_boss:
edit: I'm saying you might hurt someones feelers
Now instead of telling all the Delton, CMMG, DPMS, Bushmaster guys their rifle sucks, we should be helping them to improve the reliability of their rifle. After all, selling a rifle because the bolt carrier or castle nut wasn't staked seems pretty extreme. If the bolt holds up to 500 rounds, chances are it wasn't cracked and magnetic particle inspection wouldn't have found anything anyway. The odds of all the lugs cracking off at one time is incredibly low, almost non-existant, so there is another not so major issue. Is the chamber too tight would be an important one, but again not necessarily cause to sell the rifle.
:rolleyes:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=7376
dieselgeek
11-01-10, 21:43
:rolleyes:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=7376
Oh look it's roollleee eyes.
I think this kinda proves my point.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Oh look it's roollleee eyes.
I think this kinda proves my point.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Actually, all it proves is that you suck at reading.
This forum clearly does not condemn people for buying sub-par carbines, and in fact, most of the high post count membership advocates fixing the gun you have versus selling and buying new, in most cases.
Your straw man, ad hominem attacks are what are out of line. You and seacoastnh obviously have not done a good job of reading the forum prior to attacking "the chart". Heck, you haven't even read and understood the posts a few before yours that broke down that "the chart" is not the end-all, be-all.
What this thread is about is the periodic waves of mouth-breathers who are obviously lack the ability to read, understand and apply the knowledge that some pretty talented folks offer for free on this web-site.
Is there a tendency for some of the newly converted and less erudite to just respond with "BCM good, Bushmaster bad!"? Yes, there is. However, I would guess that even those who realize their BM is a piece of shit and "make it work" have much, much more into their still marginal carbine then they would have if they bought the best carbine available.
The best thing About the Chart is that ...
The worst thing about the chart is that it did not exist prior to me spending thousands of dollars on shit rifles and learning (in part) the hard way. :D
I see that the "chart haters" have low post counts. This shows me that they need to research this forum quite a bit more and they will quickly see that this forum does NOT beat up on the "non chart" manufacturer's, they simply show proof as to why they would not defend their lives or the lives of others with that specific "non chart" rifle. Ignorance is not an excuse or proof that ........... Well, see the thread title.
Oh look it's roollleee eyes.
I think this kinda proves my point.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Hardly. The thread I linked to, which is stickied in AR General Discussion, was specifically created for the purpose of "helping them to improve the reliability of their rifle"...and by the creator of the chart, no less.
So it sounds like the lower isn't as important as the upper. For those of us with crappy gun uppers, what's the best way to sell off these things at a "fair" price?
GermanSynergy
11-01-10, 22:31
Sell them at a yard sale or at a gun show. Given the abundance of quality uppers out there, you're going to take a bath on the price. Just sayin...
So it sounds like the lower isn't as important as the upper. For those of us with crappy gun uppers, what's the best way to sell off these things at a "fair" price?
.
I have given the Chart to a few people and the first thing they do is to see if their gun is on the left side. They don’t read the “Explanations” …nope straight to trying to figure out how big their tee-tee is compared to…, oh …I mean where their gun is in relations to the other guy’s. If they are on the right side, they get defensive…like right now! Rare is the person that humbly takes that information and asks, “What can I do about it?” or "Aww, guess I should have researched more!"
I’ve probably posted this 2 or 3 times the past week, “The Chart is a compilation of FACTS”…Period! People need to understand that they can’t argue with facts. The Chart is not an opinion. The opinion is where someone determines that they don’t need 4150 CM and/or shot peening and/or blah! blah! AND then claim that their gun is still “as good as Brand XX”. THAT is an opinion.
If you listen long enough to the people complaining about the Chart, they usually end up being the “offended” guys whose guns are on the right side. I would venture to say that the gun without 4150 CM, shot peening, and blah blah actually costs more than the gun that does have these (or other) “elements” of a quality rifle.
To me, the biggest improvement that could be made to the Chart is to have a pre-requisite of first reading the “Explanations”, pass a test, and then you can see the Chart. Then, maybe, just maybe people would then understand…but probably not… :)
.
jklaughrey
11-01-10, 22:47
Well that would really make us elitist according to the "other site'. I am all for there being some form of learning curve before allowed to continue. On that note as in all things and products there is the correct way and the incorrect way, or the other way. The "Chart" simply is the information so you can go about things the correct way. If you don't and learn later, well there is info to correct your product, just be sure to correct your attitude. M4C is for learning not "puffing up" when your incorrect choice is outed and you think we are questioning your manhood.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 07:34
This thread has been great so far. Almost everyone is defensive and attacks if anyone slightly disagrees with them. That just makes them "chart haters" now. I think the gun lube needs to go around a few necks. Might help the head pop out of a certain place. Rob great chart and great follow up post on how to improve your Rifle. I think people on both sides of the chart need to take off the blinders.
iPhone post excuse the sloppiness of it.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 07:38
Actually, all it proves is that you suck at reading.
This forum clearly does not condemn people for buying sub-par carbines, and in fact, most of the high post count membership advocates fixing the gun you have versus selling and buying new, in most cases.
Your straw man, ad hominem attacks are what are out of line. You and seacoastnh obviously have not done a good job of reading the forum prior to attacking "the chart". Heck, you haven't even read and understood the posts a few before yours that broke down that "the chart" is not the end-all, be-all.
What this thread is about is the periodic waves of mouth-breathers who are obviously lack the ability to read, understand and apply the knowledge that some pretty talented folks offer for free on this web-site.
Is there a tendency for some of the newly converted and less erudite to just respond with "BCM good, Bushmaster bad!"? Yes, there is. However, I would guess that even those who realize their BM is a piece of shit and "make it work" have much, much more into their still marginal carbine then they would have if they bought the best carbine available.
My oh my you stamp a seal on my point every time you post. We're going to be great friends.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 07:42
I see that the "chart haters" have low post counts. This shows me that they need to research this forum quite a bit more and they will quickly see that this forum does NOT beat up on the "non chart" manufacturer's, they simply show proof as to why they would not defend their lives or the lives of others with that specific "non chart" rifle. Ignorance is not an excuse or proof that ........... Well, see the thread title.
I think depending your life on what a manufacture says they do to a Rifle is pretty bold.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 08:19
double post
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 08:21
No need to troll and attempt to stir that pot.
I thought this thread was going to be interesting, but the chart lovers have arived like ants at picnic.
Okay chart lovers lets hear what makes the “Chart” more useful than a consumer report that ranks a Hyundai over a Honda because the Hyundai has better acceleration and two more speakers?
That's exactly the point man. It's the only consumer report on manufacturing quality and specification that I could find! How is that a problem to you?
Let me guess when you buy a car you just walk up to the one you want, sit in it, and drive off... :rolleyes:
My oh my you stamp a seal on my point every time you post. We're going to be great friends.
The majority of all your posts lack any technical value. You are in a technical forum so please discuss the facts.
If you do not know any facts in regards to this subject, keep your fingers away from the keyboard.
The best thing About the Chart is that so many people are better educated now than they were before that I don't even have to bother spanking the idjits. It's like they're standing on the side of the road screaming "the moon is made of green cheese!"
Rob,
Well I can tell you that of all the research I did on brand quality ext before my purchase the only thing I found that even came close to answering some of my questions was The Chart, and this forum.
With that said wasn't IG's intention for starting this thread to discuss the lower tier guns and hear what people who own them think of them, and why they bought them? Seems like most of the people that I am assuming own lower tier guns are simply bitching and moaning about The Chart. Turning this into just another thread knitting circle where they can all stroke their egos. I'm three pages into it and haven't heard a single person other then myself and Grumpy talk about their rifles...
All I can say is I am a Vietnam era vet. Did I serve in Vietnam...no. I was just post Vietnam. I trained with the old M16 that probably had seen wartime service. I qualified Expert. Our biggest concern was crappy ammo. Cases and cases of ammo some with the bullet dislodged. Some with the bullet seated in too far. The M16 I fired was capable of making pop-up silhouette target hits at 300 meters with iron sights. If I did my part, the weapon did it's part. There was no burst switch. It was either selective fire or full auto.
When it was clear that Obama was going to become president, I contacted my best friends dad(ret. Army Col. FFL) to obtain an M4 style rifle for me. I asked for a different brand and after waiting about 6 months in the week I moved from Alabama back home to Arizona, he had obtained a Del-Ton. I didn't know anything about this site at that time.
After starting to follow this site, I started finding out about staking, HPT, alloys,... and the like.
Ultimately, all my weapons are SHTF weapons. I don't have wads of cash to spend. For the weapons I own I want to be able to carry most of the spare parts I need in case I need to bug-out at some point. And I want extreme reliability. I have settled on a good 870 shotgun, a good AR variant, and a Glock. I also have a Wilson Combat KZ. I have moved away from .45 to .9mm due to the ability to carry more ammo.
For this site, I have nothing but kudos. It has been truly eye opening.
At some point, I would like a middy BCM and put the Del-Ton upper out to pasture. With age comes clarity and wisdom.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 09:22
The majority of all your posts lack any technical value. You are in a technical forum so please discuss the facts.
If you do not know any facts in regards to this subject, keep your fingers away from the keyboard.
Oh the technical things like "your bushmaster is a piece of shit"
Got it.
CaptainDooley
11-02-10, 10:00
So it sounds like the lower isn't as important as the upper. For those of us with crappy gun uppers, what's the best way to sell off these things at a "fair" price?
I'd say try the equipment exchange on TOS - plenty of people over there that would pay a "fair" price (i.e. close to what you paid for it) for it.
Oh the technical things like "your bushmaster is a piece of shit"
Got it.
People are entitled to their opinion on guns and gear. If someone makes a claim (like what you posted), they should back it up with some technical facts.
The fact remains that none of your posts are discussing anything of any technical value.
Provide the link where someone told you that your BM is shit.
Provide the link where someone told you that your BM is shit.
That's what I'm wondering. The poster should read the first few paragraphs of my detailed description of my rifle (my long post), hell read the whole thing for crying out loud.
I have yet to meet a rock climber that if given sufficient scientific data that his climbing harness is prone to failure, will stick by that harness and swear his/her life on it. Same goes for cold weather gear, for tires on cars ext... When Firestone tires were blowing up on Ford Explorers how many people that still had those original tires on the cars were arguing that the data was bullshit? I know that if the tires hadn't exploded two years prior to the release of the data on our Explorer, we would have replaced them in a heartbeat, and not suffered from a 80 mph blowout on a Wyoming highway.
That is the purpose of collecting data, and that is the purpose of this thread. I have yet to see any Oly, or BM, or DPMS owners post photos of their properly staked carrier key, ext. If these companies are improving their QC this is the thread where owners can illustrate those improvements by presenting us with the data.
You'll notice that I have several complaints about my SW rifle, and I have a theory why the problems I have seen happened. It is very obvious however that SW addressed some of these issues with their newer runs of the M&P. It is for those reasons that they sit further to the left of the chart. But they still sit behind BCM. Is my ego hurt because of this? No, but I am 1000x more educated as a result of this forum. I would have resigned myself to the failures I had had I not had easy access to data and experience.
No one is telling you "bushmaster is shit", they are simply saying that due to Data A, Data B, and Data C there are better more reliable options out there that you can spend your money on.
Nothing about this thread is challenging your manhood.
I'm three pages into it and haven't heard a single person other then myself and Grumpy talk about their rifles...
I and my limited experience with AR platform take exception to that. See page 1.
I can also say that the Colts I've shot ran much better than my bushmaster. Their reliability and smoother cycling is what ultimately got me wondering about all this chart business. I saw it before I bought my gun but was under the impression that it was mostly fitment stuff and the smooth talking salesman didn't help matters.
I think his problem and many others problem is that they can't see better steel as easily as a gov't profile barrel or what have you. The guy who sold me mine kept telling me to look at them because all the parts are the same... yadda yadda yadda. I can actually see some of the differences now.
I think I'll be keeping my bushy upper for a while as a show and tell piece for other shooters to look at, handle, and shoot. It's about as efficient as an early 90's Chevy diesel but it does run.
Also, the one thing that didn't make a bit of sense, even when I bought my BM, is why they would shave the top of the front sight base off the ORC models and leave no way to mount a front sight other than buying their flip up that is supposed to clamp to their shaved gas block. Seems like they're trying hard to create new problems to solve.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 11:02
Is there a tendency for some of the newly converted and less erudite to just respond with "BCM good, Bushmaster bad!"? Yes, there is. However,
I would guess that even those who realize their BM is a piece of shit and "make it work" have much, much more into their still marginal carbine then they would have if they bought the best carbine available.
Right here. He was posting in response to my post where I said I owned a BM. Can't say any one know jack crap about anyones rifle with out seeing/ using it.
Right here. He was posting in response to my post where I said I owned a BM. Can't say any one know jack crap about anyones rifle with out seeing/ using it.
He did not call your BM a POS. He stated that when people realize that their AR is a POS, they will spend more money attempting to upgrade it than if they just bought a better gun from the start.
His post was of value and accurate.
Your post's are not. Stick to the facts based off of first hand knowledge of the subject or stay out of the technical forums.
Consider this your warning.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 12:07
Why was my post of my bcg deleted.
He said bushmaster. It was obvious he was speaking to me by saying "make it work". Don't know why you're denying it.
Also my statements are off my first hand knowledge.
http://tapa.tk/mu/414366d5-4569-08a0.jpg
The value I learned from the chart and from various posts from SMEs and industry people was to fix what I had (even though it was not an optimum upper) rather than running out in buying a new rifle. The savings for now has allowed me to train more with my carbine to be a proficient shooter. The most critical components were replaced with inexpensive BCM parts, and the rifle continues to function well for my need until it shits and I buy a better one.
But in my mind, the caveat is this. If one plans on running (example) 2K + rounds w/o cleaning on a harsh shooting schedule, a manufacturer who didn't take short cuts on the building process (like MPT testing, staked keys, type of materials used, etc) will statistically have a gun that will function relatively well in that case. Budget brands who don't go through the process will have guns that will still RUN, but not in I think only if they are maintained and cleaned often (maybe like cleaning at every couple hundred of rounds).
The reason we see failures with many of the budget/"inferior" guns out there is because of the harder level of use here on this forum. Granted, a well made rifle should continue to function w/o cleaning as long as well lubricated. Lesser quality guns will function well, but they'll need more cleaning and maintenance in order to run.
With the market field being more competitive and manufacturers with good costs (ie BCM, etc), if one was in the market of an AR, it is better to buy once and buy right. But for those who already bought a rifle with known parts/spec issues, all hope is not lost as long as proper parts are replaced/checked....and the gun is maintained A LOT more often (although this last point isn't an ideal component of a "fighting gun.")
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 12:33
Also I agree that if you can get a better rifle for a tad bit more money then you SHOULD do it. I picked up my bushy from a friend in trade for money owed for services rendered. I changed it around enough that I should of bought a nicer one with they money I put into it. That being said my gun is not a piece of shit. And like I was saying it's the snobby attitude that turns people into chart haters. Again I'm not a chart hater. I agree that it's a guide and ymmv.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 12:41
I will go with a couple of claims of other posters that have not been disputed, so are probably factual, but first.
The best thing About the Chart is that so many people are better educated now than they were before that I don't even have to bother spanking the idjits. It's like they're standing on the side of the road screaming "the moon is made of green cheese!"
I see that the "chart haters" have low post counts. This shows me that they need to research this forum quite a bit more and they will quickly see that this forum does NOT beat up on the "non chart" manufacturer's, they simply show proof as to why they would not defend their lives or the lives of others with that specific "non chart" rifle. Ignorance is not an excuse or proof that ........... Well, see the thread title.
To you chart lovers that believe the number of posts someone has made or owning an effete yellow visor is indicative of their knowledge let me first apologize for misunderstanding the purpose of the chart. I thought the purpose of the chart was to guide someone unfamiliar with AR’s to a high quality reliable AR, since process control is essential to quality and reliability and the chart does not address process control then the purpose of the chart could not possibly be quaility and reliability. Just cause you have all the right parts in the box does not mean you have a functional AR.
Second, if I were lost in the woods miles from the nearest shitter and overcome by the urge to crap and all I had was a print out of the chart, I too would come to appreciate its value. I would even appreciate multiple copies of the chart.
Now on to what appear to be facts and three simple questions. I have reading the posts regularly for a few months. I recall a post by Ghost1960 complaining about the performance of his BCM upper. The post appears to have first been moved, then inaccessible and is now gone.
The second post, linked below, complains of out of the box problems with his BCM.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=61361
No one seems to be calling BS on the claim, so I believe it is valid. Possibly even a fact.
For those that have not reviewed the chart in detail BCM is ranked second by our yellow visor attired hero and is a forum favorite.
Questions:
Are instances of where the total of the BCM product being less than the sum its parts a problem with the manufacturing process or quality control or statistically insignificant based on manufacturing volume?
If the same failure rate was experienced by Colt, LMT or Bushmaster would it be news? What I am getting at here is does two or however many out of the box failures there have been represent a significant percentage of the manufacturing volume?
Where is the information on the sacred chart that guides the first time AR buyer to the reliable AR, surely the chart should be able to answer such a question based on its stated objective?
I am sure one of you chart humpers will be quick to point out that every manufacture makes something that turns out to be “parts is parts” but you have to put it into context of overall production volume for it to have any more meaning than someone claiming their bushmaster has never failed.
I am not trying to pick on BCM. I have never seen a BCM and I don't personally know anyone that owns one. They may well be the best of the best.
But you chart humpers want facts, drawings explanations, now lets have some cold hard statistics from you, not anecdotal "my bcm has never failed, and I have alot of posts."
I don't even know where to begin with you.
Can you state your purpose/question in one simple straightforward sentence so that perhaps someone can make sense of it and attempt to respond?
So far every one of your posts is not much more than ranting and raving and I'm unsure how anyone is supposed to respond to that.
I like the way [insert brand here] Trucks look. But I trust a mechanic more then myself if that mechanic tells me that said brand is prone to breaking, and having problems. You are making a hollow argument against people with real world experience.
If the combination of quality parts decreases both in the field and out of box failures, then the chart holds every bit of knowledge that you are claiming it doesn't. I realize that is hard for you to wrap your head around, but it really isn't that difficult of a concept. A+B=C.
Maybe you should re-take whatever class gave you an introduction into the Scientific Process.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 12:54
Would you like a shovel to help you with that hole your digging?
Why was my post of my bcg deleted.
He said bushmaster. It was obvious he was speaking to me by saying "make it work". Don't know why you're denying it.
Also my statements are off my first hand knowledge.
http://tapa.tk/mu/414366d5-4569-08a0.jpg
I've been following this thread pretty regularly, and unless you posted your original post prior to 9:00 am Eastern Time, I never saw this picture.
Everything I have read from the detractors up to this point really comes down to my original statement:
I think from my personal experience people get a little more attached to their guns (and vehicles) more so then other kinds of kit. It is like an extension of them, and their ego. This has always been odd to me, as I have nothing to prove to anyone but myself, but the male ego is ****ing amazing when it comes to feeling special
CaptainDooley
11-02-10, 13:00
The second post, linked below, by btaksier complains of out of the box problems with his BCM.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=65753
No one seems to be calling BS on the claim, so I believe it is valid. Possibly even a fact.
That link goes to a post about a parallax tactical barrel installed by the end user. How does BCM figure into that?
Why was my post of my bcg deleted.
He said bushmaster. It was obvious he was speaking to me by saying "make it work". Don't know why you're denying it.
Also my statements are off my first hand knowledge.
We deleted your pic of a BCG because it had no value (as you simply posted a pic of a BCG with comments).
No, it was not obvious which is why we called you on it and your low none technical posts.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 13:18
That link goes to a post about a parallax tactical barrel installed by the end user. How does BCM figure into that?
Sorry about that I meant to link to the 12 moa upper.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=61361
Sorry about that I meant to link to the 12 moa upper.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=61361
One barrel not shooting that good of a group is not something I would be concerned about. Now if you see 100 of them, then I would be alarmed.
C4
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 13:37
I like the way [insert brand here] Trucks look. But I trust a mechanic more then myself if that mechanic tells me that said brand is prone to breaking, and having problems. You are making a hollow argument against people with real world experience.
If the combination of quality parts decreases both in the field and out of box failures, then the chart holds every bit of knowledge that you are claiming it doesn't. I realize that is hard for you to wrap your head around, but it really isn't that difficult of a concept. A+B=C.
Maybe you should re-take whatever class gave you an introduction into the Scientific Process.
Thanks for providing the anticipated anecdotal response.
I don't even know where to begin with you.
Can you state your purpose/question in one simple straightforward sentence so that perhaps someone can make sense of it and attempt to respond?
So far every one of your posts is not much more than ranting and raving and I'm unsure how anyone is supposed to respond to that.
Rob_S I believe the posters that follow you comprehended my post, perhaps your view was obscured by your visor.
I was recently doing some reading on the topic of understanding chaos theory and variation in the manufacturing process. This vindicated my early impression that the “Chart” is crapp.
Now here is the point, the best parts do not necessarily yield the best product.
There are countless variables in manufacturing that affect the end result. The only way to know the quality of a part or complete weapon is to know the failure rate and causes of the failure at different time intervals.
While the chart has dribbles about pressure testing, individual testing and batch testing that might lead some to believe there is science afoot, the absence of failure rates renders it meaningless.
If you, or anyone else, could provide the failure rate for each AR by manufacturer at various intervals during its life cycle based on round count and time that would be useful.
Simply put Rob, your chart fails to meaningfully address quality.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 13:39
One barrel not shooting that good of a group is not something I would be concerned about. Now if you see 100 of them, then I would be alarmed.
C4
That is my question, is it one failure in five million or is it one in a hundred?
Not just for BCM, but for all the manufacturers.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 13:47
We deleted your pic of a BCG because it had no value (as you simply posted a pic of a BCG with comments).
No, it was not obvious which is why we called you on it and your low none technical posts.
The post above the pic of the bcg claimed no BM owners show bcg pics. So I followed right up with mine which was staked correctly. Not that hard to understand.
If you missed it here it is
That is the purpose of collecting data, and that is the purpose of this thread. I have yet to see any Oly, or BM, or DPMS owners post photos of their properly staked carrier key
IB4 generic 1 and a million reply.
I was recently doing some reading on the topic of understanding chaos theory and variation in the manufacturing process. This vindicated my early impression that the “Chart” is crapp.
Now here is the point, the best parts do not necessarily yield the best product.
There are countless variables in manufacturing that affect the end result. The only way to know the quality of a part or complete weapon is to know the failure rate and causes of the failure at different time intervals.
I don't think you read that book very close. Do you honestly believe that you can take inferior metals input into the same manufacturing process and come out with a better gun at the end a meaningful number of times because of multiple variable set theory? That's some fuzzy logic, alright.
I smell a person from a third tier manufacturer trying to justify corner cutting.
The post above the pic of the bcg claimed no BM owners show bcg pics. So I followed right up with mine which was staked correctly. Not that hard to understand.
If you missed it here it is
IB4 generic 1 and a million reply.
If you are addressing someones comment, quote them and then answer the question.
Posting pics of a poorly staked gas key without explanation is of no value to the thread.
Act like an adult, make concise posts and add quality information to the thread.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 15:02
I don't think you read that book very close. Do you honestly believe that you can take inferior metals input into the same manufacturing process and come out with a better gun at the end a meaningful number of times because of multiple variable set theory? That's some fuzzy logic, alright.
I smell a person from a third tier manufacturer trying to justify corner cutting.
No I don't believe that at all and I did not make that claim. The highest quality parts coupled with the best process are most likely to yield the highest quality result.
I have no involvement in the industry and I do not claim to be an expert on manufacturing. Just pissing in the Koolaid of the chart worshippers by pointing out the claims of quality in the sacred chart are not supported by any numbers.
I have two complete Noveske rifles, a LMT lower and an old bushmaster. So far the Noveskes are on track to match the bushmaster's reliability. Of course my sample size is too small for that to be a statistically meaningful observation.
justin_247
11-02-10, 15:03
No one seems to be calling BS on the claim, so I believe it is valid. Possibly even a fact.
It may well be and I'm sure if he contacted BCM with his issue, Paul Buffoni will gladly help him correct the issue.
Are instances of where the total of the BCM product being less than the sum its parts a problem with the manufacturing process or quality control or statistically insignificant based on manufacturing volume?
Statistically insignificant based upon quality control and the company's eagerness to understand any problems and correct them.
If the same failure rate was experienced by Colt, LMT or Bushmaster would it be news? What I am getting at here is does two or however many out of the box failures there have been represent a significant percentage of the manufacturing volume?
Bushmaster is rather notorious for its quality control issues and chronic inability to meet the minimum standards required by the military.
Where is the information on the sacred chart that guides the first time AR buyer to the reliable AR, surely the chart should be able to answer such a question based on its stated objective?
At the bottom is a tab called "Expanation of Features" that explains everything in it.
I am sure one of you chart humpers will be quick to point out that every manufacture makes something that turns out to be “parts is parts” but you have to put it into context of overall production volume for it to have any more meaning than someone claiming their bushmaster has never failed.
It's simply not true that "every manufacture makes something that turns out to be 'parts is parts'."
But you chart humpers want facts, drawings explanations, now lets have some cold hard statistics from you, not anecdotal "my bcm has never failed, and I have alot of posts."
These are very easy to find. There are numerous instructors who run high-round count courses and take note as to which brands of rifles go down and which ones easily handle the stress put upon them by the users. For example, Pat Rogers of EAG Tactical keeps a book that documents every failure he has in his course, the cause of it, the brand of the rifle, and, if possible, the remedy.
If anything, your post has demonstrated your inability to comprehend basic information or to do any modicum of research on this issue. Instead, you demonstrate your ignorance with a lengthy and profane post that reflects very poorly upon yourself.
Were it not for the hard work of folks like Rob Sloyer, Grant Timberlake, and the other SMEs on this site in getting out this important information, many of us would have purchased inferior, failure-prone rifles that cannot be trusted. Personally, before I found this site, I was interested in purchasing a DPMS. After educating myself and asking numerous questions, which were kindly answered with detailed answers, I decided upon a DD rifle instead.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 15:07
If you are addressing someones comment, quote them and then answer the question.
Posting pics of a poorly staked gas key without explanation is of no value to the thread.
Act like an adult, make concise posts and add quality information to the thread.
When it's posted right below the post it is obvious. Key is staked fine. If I told you it was colt you prob shove it right up your... Upper receiver.
justin_247
11-02-10, 15:12
I have two complete Noveske rifles, a LMT lower and an old bushmaster. So far the Noveskes are on track to match the bushmaster's reliability. Of course my sample size is too small for that to be a statistically meaningful observation.
What do you mean by this? The post makes no sense, because Noveske's are highly reliable and Bushmaster's are usually not.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 15:14
What do you mean by this? The post makes no sense, because Noveske's are highly reliable and Bushmaster's are usually not.
BLINDED BY THE LIGHT.
Ok, I'll bite. (just because I like playing devil's advocate)
I like my Rock River Varmint upper. It does not match TDP, it wouldn't even register on the chart.
But for what I ask of it, it does a GREAT job.
The barrel is a stainless bull barrel, which definitely isn't 4150. But it will shoot sub .5MOA.
It has not been MPI, but for a bench gun with a 1" thick barrel, I'd be shocked if it has an issues that .223 ammo would cause issues with.
It does not have a 5.56 chamber. It has a Wylde chamber. Which is perfectly fine for bench rest shooting. I haven't ever had a failure to extract with it (or any failure at all), but I know it isn't 5.56.
It came with a rifle stock, so the extension wasn't commercial. But first on the list was a UBR stock to replace it, which includes its own buffer extension.
The chart IS great. Information helps us all. I used it when buying a BCM upper recently. You just have to know what your needs are, what information the chart provides, and where you want to make what sacrifices.
justin_247
11-02-10, 15:17
When it's posted right below the post it is obvious. Key is staked fine. If I told you it was colt you prob shove it right up your... Upper receiver.
No, the key is very poorly staked. On your picture, both attempts at a staking job on the right side of the carrier are barely even touching the screw.
justin_247
11-02-10, 15:24
BLINDED BY THE LIGHT.
Brilliant answer! Very informative. I really know a lot about your rifle's problems now and your experiences. Really, a brilliant post.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 15:26
No, the key is very poorly staked. On your picture, both attempts at a staking job on the right side of the carrier are barely even touching the screw.
Nope, sorry looks to be clearly touching the screws and doing it well.
http://tapa.tk/mu/414366d5-73b5-5993.jpg
justin_247
11-02-10, 15:33
Nope, sorry looks to be clearly touching the screws and doing it well.
http://tapa.tk/mu/414366d5-73b5-5993.jpg
Dare to compare:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6993
Your staking is marginal.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 15:33
It may well be and I'm sure if he contacted BCM with his issue, Paul Buffoni will gladly help him correct the issue.
As I stated early on it is out of the box reliability that I am interested in as measure of quality, customer service is irrelevant to the concept.
Statistically insignificant based upon quality control and the company's eagerness to understand any problems and correct them.
Excellent, what are the numbers? What is the basis for your personal knowledge?
Bushmaster is rather notorious for its quality control issues and chronic inability to meet the minimum standards required by the military.
I am aware the reputation of bushmaster for poor quality and LMT's reputation for good quality, so what is your point?
At the bottom is a tab called "Expanation of Features" that explains everything in it.
Like the radio with an extra speaker in the Hyundai, the feature may or may not make it a better product.
It's simply not true that "every manufacture makes something that turns out to be 'parts is parts'."
Well I gave you an example of BCM producing a "part is parts" or as someone in the thread referred to it a "lemon." Produce anything long enough and you will produce a defect, it is all about understanding probability and as I wade through your post I can see the concept is lost on you.
Whether you ship it or not is another part of the equation.
These are very easy to find. There are numerous instructors who run high-round count courses and take note as to which brands of rifles go down and which ones easily handle the stress put upon them by the users. For example, Pat Rogers of EAG Tactical keeps a book that documents every failure he has in his course, the cause of it, the brand of the rifle, and, if possible, the remedy.
I am pleased to hear it, go a ahead and post the samples sizes and your the regression analysis and I will accept my failures with google.
If anything, your post has demonstrated your inability to comprehend basic information or to do any modicum of research on this issue. Instead, you demonstrate your ignorance with a lengthy and profane post that reflects very poorly upon yourself.
Were it not for the hard work of folks like Rob Sloyer, Grant Timberlake, and the other SMEs on this site in getting out this important information, many of us would have purchased inferior, failure-prone rifles that cannot be trusted. Personally, before I found this site, I was interested in purchasing a DPMS. After educating myself and asking numerous questions, which were kindly answered with detailed answers, I decided upon a DD rifle instead.
Keep thirsty koolaid drinker!
You just have to know what your needs are, what information the chart provides, and where you want to make what sacrifices.
Bingo.
Just pissing in the Koolaid of the chart worshippers...
There it is.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 15:39
Your second picture looks a little better. However in Justin's defense your first picture was canted at an angle which clearly showed a gap on the right top indent. Perhaps you should look at your picture more objectively so you can clearly see what was discussed. Or perhaps in the future better picture quality. New camera, better lighting would be a start. Shall we find you a chart for cameras?
justin_247
11-02-10, 15:40
Seacoast,
Here's an idea... instead of pushing your bodily excrement fetish on us and constantly asking questions without providing any data yourself, how about you list something on the Chart that is completely unnecessary and has no beneficial value? Otherwise, all of these provocations are senseless and troll-like.
Your second picture looks a little better. However in Justin's defense your first picture was canted at an angle which clearly showed a gap on the right top indent. Perhaps you should look at your picture more objectively so you can clearly see what was discussed. Or perhaps in the future better picture quality. New camera, better lighting would be a start. Shall we find you a chart for cameras?
There are a couple people in this thread who are obviously not interested in learning anything. They are here to "piss in the kool-aid," as they see it. Having a rational argument with such fanatics (of what, I don't know--perhaps pissing?) is impossible. So what if his carrier key has feel-good staking instead of mechanically-sound staking; he has a point to make!
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 15:50
Bingo.
I need an out of the box reliable AR 15.
Further left is better quality, so the Colt is more reliable then the LMT and the DPMS?
How much more reliable?
Is the DPMS ten times more likely to fail?
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 15:52
I forgot Stifled what was his point exactly? Oh yeah to bring down the "Chart" and all knowing members of M4C.
Hope he packed a year supply of MH meals. If not I hear Grant wants a group buy. Maybe he can get some leftovers.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 15:53
We have given you the tools to make an informed decision. Shit or get off the pot!
I need an out of the box reliable AR 15.
Further left is better quality, so the Colt is more reliable then the LMT and the DPMS?
How much more reliable?
Is the DPMS ten times more likely to fail?
What is your definition of reliable?
I don't understand what you have against the chart... It simply lists how certain manufacturers follow, or don't follow, the TDP. (If my understanding of the chart is not correct, correct me.)
If you're bushy, is "out of the box reliable" for your needs, that's great. I don't see where you're going about the chart being worthless.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 16:02
Seacoast,
Here's an idea... instead of pushing your bodily excrement fetish on us and constantly asking questions without providing any data yourself, how about you list something on the Chart that is completely unnecessary and has no beneficial value? Otherwise, all of these provocations are senseless and troll-like.
Gee Justin you made a number of statements related to statistics above, where are the numbers. You said "statistically insignificant" did you make that up?
Pointing out that the chart does not measure quality because it fails to address failure rates is not the same as claiming to know the relationship between a particular feature and failure of the end product.
I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?
I doubt it has any affect on the above, but I am a chart skeptic.
Don't forget the numbers you implied you had.
dieselgeek
11-02-10, 16:03
Your second picture looks a little better. However in Justin's defense your first picture was canted at an angle which clearly showed a gap on the right top indent. Perhaps you should look at your picture more objectively so you can clearly see what was discussed. Or perhaps in the future better picture quality. New camera, better lighting would be a start. Shall we find you a chart for cameras?
I was going to go hunting when I got home, but it's raining. I'll bust out the D90 and my lil 50mm lens for better pics.
I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?
Where does it say that?
This is what is says: "There have been some reports of these parts rusting in the unprotected area, but it is unlikely that rust in these locations will affect the function of the carbine."
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=html
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6642
CaptainDooley
11-02-10, 16:12
When it's posted right below the post it is obvious. Key is staked fine. If I told you it was colt you prob shove it right up your... Upper receiver.
You don't have the sense God gave a mule... you won't be here long...
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 16:12
D90 is GTG, you should have a very nice picture to share then.
Seacoast it sounds as almost if you want a "Guarantee" that whatever you purchase based upon the information provided will never have issue. The "Chart" merely shows what brands use what, and if they are reliable parts and will be the least likely to experience failure. Like all things there are failure points in everything.
Did the Priest give you a Guarantee that your marriage would be perfect after you said your vows. Did your wife Guarantee to you that she would remain pristine and beautiful and not show her age or gain weight after having kids. Did your mirror give you a Guarantee that you would always look "awesome" in that sleeveless t-shirt that accentuates your goatee and mullet. NO
Just find what suits you and be done. Anything from the 1st left to the 5th position on the chart shall serve you well out of the box without upgrade.
justin_247
11-02-10, 16:16
Gee Justin you made a number of statements related to statistics above, where are the numbers. You said "statistically insignificant" did you make that up?
Pointing out that the chart does not measure quality because it fails to address failure rates is not the same as claiming to know the relationship between a particular feature and failure of the end product.
I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?
I doubt it has any affect on the above, but I am a chart skeptic.
Don't forget the numbers you implied you had.
I didn't imply anything. I said you should speak with Pat Rogers, Grant Timberlake, or Rob Sloyer. Before you do that, I encourage you to read more from SMEs on this site, Lightfighter, and even ARFCOM, and you will discover what I'm saying is entirely accurate.
You have yet to demonstrate any knowledge at all on this matter, so I don't see why I should go about wasting more time to cook you a proverbial steak so that you can eat most of it and then insult my cooking after your stomach is full.
How did the wheels fall off of this so quick?
I do not think the information seacoast is demanding exists. I'm unaware of any scientific study, that lists the numbers of rifles produced by every manufacturer, and also has an all encompassing list of every single malfunction, by every single rifle, with every single owner/operator, distilled down to cause, to eliminate ammo, magazine and operator error.
So, yea, you can keep demanding "proof", because you know its not there.
What we do have though, is a large number of anecdotal accounts, as reported here, and other web forums. Much of it, is reported by top level, well known and respected instructors, who by nature of their job, see alot of carbines, all under, reasonably similar conditions and round counts. They can ID the malfunction and the cause. After a while, trends begin to emerge, again while unscientific, there it is.
Par Rogers and Larry Vickers, have both noted trends of poor performing guns from specific manufacturers. Reports of an entire swat team's issue of guns, not working properly, and an LE rep on vacation. These are men who don't have the luxury of waiting for customer service.
I personally witnessed the same type of situation.
Paul Howe, chimed in, and I mentioned his findings also, he is the only one who has not seen an issue with one particular brand. Its a stumper, but even he has stated, he will keep better track of it, and see what happens.
So what do we have left to go on? A list of known better or at least minimal parts quality, manufacturing and assembly techniques and procedures, etc. etc. "the chart" as it were.
No one said, a gun from the left side, guarantees you trouble free performance, and a gun from the right, will automatically be a headache. Only that, the chances of a good, trouble free, reliable and durable gun, will come from the left side.
If you read the "explanations" part, as a consumer, you can decide what is and what is not important to you.
Remember though, there is a difference between a "better product" and a "better choice".
Now, wheres that "tap out" emoticon I've been asking for:laugh:
Bob
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 16:19
What is your definition of reliable?
I don't understand what you have against the chart... It simply lists how certain manufacturers follow, or don't follow, the TDP. (If my understanding of the chart is not correct, correct me.)
As I pointed out early on it is like the consumer report that ranks the Hyundai over the Honda because the Hyundai has more speakers and better acceleration. It is missing the quality of manufacturing component.
I am open to any reasonable and understandable definition of reliability.
I have been using the statement of failure to function out of the box.
Let say when it is delivered reliablity is failure to fire, failure to cycle or extremely poor accuracy.
A true analysis would include time and rounds fired.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 16:26
[/QUOTE]I am open to any reasonable and understandable definition of reliability.
I have been using the statement of failure to function out of the box.
Let say when it is delivered reliablity is failure to fire, failure to cycle or extremely poor accuracy.
A true analysis would include time and rounds fired.[/QUOTE]
Your looking for Purple dragons and Pink unicorns. I think you would have a better chance at proving the paternity of Nancy Pelosi is actually Glenn Beck!
As I pointed out early on it is like the consumer report that ranks the Hyundai over the Honda because the Hyundai has more speakers and better acceleration. It is missing the quality of manufacturing component.
I am open to any reasonable and understandable definition of reliability.
I have been using the statement of failure to function out of the box.
Let say when it is delivered reliablity is failure to fire, failure to cycle or extremely poor accuracy.
A true analysis would include time and rounds fired.
I don't think you could use the car argument... The two cars could be in the same class, but there are no standards to use as a baseline. ARs are based on a military weapon, which has minimum standards in regard to dimensions, materials used, yada yada. Doesn't common sense dictate that the weapon that doesn't meet some of those standards will be more likely to fail?
justin_247
11-02-10, 16:36
As I pointed out early on it is like the consumer report that ranks the Hyundai over the Honda because the Hyundai has more speakers and better acceleration. It is missing the quality of manufacturing component.
There is a myriad of information on this website regarding quality of manufacture.
Just on the chart, for example, the purpose of HPT and MPI is to verify that a component meets quality control standards so as to increase lifespan, strength, and reliability, ie, to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic failure. The purpose of using the proper quality of steel in the manufacture of barrels is to increase lifespan, reliability, accuracy, and avert catastrophic failure under high-stress conditions. The purpose of checking to see whether the carrier key or the castle nut is properly staked is to ensure that the weapon doesn't come apart after usage, thereby inducing a potentially catastrophic failure. The purpose of parkerizing underneath the FSB is in order to ensure that it is removable in case one needs to replace a broken one or a bad gas tube or barrel. The purpose of using a mil-spec receiver extension instead of a commercial-spec one is to ensure that the inferior metal the commercial extension is manufactured out of doesn't fail in a high-stress environment, such as using it to knock in a door, and to ensure maximum compatibility with most stocks.
And this is just the absolute baseline of the information out there that exists. Whether or not a company does these things speaks measures about the quality of rifles produced by said manufacturer.
I could go on and on about just the chart. The SMEs on this website have forgotten more about these weapons than the vast, vast majority of people learn in a lifetime, and can explain in far greater detail the above information and why things are.
If you really want to go into quality details, there's a plethora of information on other items on this website. There are threads discussing why certain castle nuts and receiver end plates from certain brands are superior to others in strength due to their metallic composition. There are threads on why Carpenter 158 is used on bolts versus other kinds of steel. There are threads on the benefits of 7075 aluminum versus 6061.
But all of this is useless if you simply hang out in this thread asking mindless questions without bothering to actually hang around the site and read a little!
When it's posted right below the post it is obvious. Key is staked fine. If I told you it was colt you prob shove it right up your... Upper receiver.
Stupidity and acting like an idiot is not something we take to well around here.
Bye.
RogerinTPA
11-02-10, 16:43
I see that the "chart haters" have low post counts. This shows me that they need to research this forum quite a bit more and they will quickly see that this forum does NOT beat up on the "non chart" manufacturer's, they simply show proof as to why they would not defend their lives or the lives of others with that specific "non chart" rifle. Ignorance is not an excuse or proof that ........... Well, see the thread title.
Mouth breathers with nothing to do from TOS and other forums, cheering and heaping praise on BM, OLY, DPMS, Stag....etc... because, it's what they own and are emotionally attached. It happens a couple of times a year.
Folks, keep to technical discussions. If you don't know what you are talking about, understand what the chart really says or are just upset that you bought a low quality AR and are wanting to justify it, step away from the keyboard or you will find yourself looking in from the outside.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 16:43
How did the wheels fall off of this so quick?
I do not think the information seacoast is demanding exists. I'm unaware of any scientific study, that lists the numbers of rifles produced by every manufacturer, and also has an all encompassing list of every single malfunction, by every single rifle, with every single owner/operator, distilled down to cause, to eliminate ammo, magazine and operator error.
So, yea, you can keep demanding "proof", because you know its not there.
Bob
What I did was point out a significant deficiency in the chart.
I did demand proof once Justin made the following claim that it existed:
Statistically insignificant based upon quality control and the company's eagerness to understand any problems and correct them.
I suspect Colt could tell you the number of defects they will likely produce next year. I will concede that it is not likely to happen and that the information on failure rates for various manufacturers is not readily available.
The point is that the chart fails to address manufacturing quality in any meaningful way.
The Koolaid drinkers and those wearing the effete yellow visor claim that my observation is false or that the chart is misunderstood.
I am not looking for the information, I am not asking for the information except sarcastically in response to one of ROb_S' posts as way of reinforcing my point.
Does the chart mean that the DD is an order of magnitude more reliable than the S&W? Two orders of magnitude? Three?
The chart can't quantify reliability.
I am comfortable with my purchases.
As an aside you only need a statistically significant sample, not information on every failure of every rifle.
Doc Safari
11-02-10, 16:47
I don't think you could use the car argument... The two cars could be in the same class, but there are no standards to use as a baseline. ARs are based on a military weapon, which has minimum standards in regard to dimensions, materials used, yada yada. Doesn't common sense dictate that the weapon that doesn't meet some of those standards will be more likely to fail?
A better analogy would be a real German HK91 versus one of the Century 922(r) compliant builds. I think there would be no doubt that the genuine Heckler & Koch rifle would be superior to a gun being sold as a replica by Century Arms. You have to think of the "right of chart" M4's as being more like Century builds, and "left of chart" M4's as being more like the genuine military rifle.
I know it's a hard pill to swallow if you just spent $900 on a Bushmaster, DPMS, Spike's, or CMMG, or something, but I had to finally admit years ago that, yes, there really is a difference in AR quality.
justin_247
11-02-10, 16:59
I suspect Colt could tell you the number of defects they will likely produce next year. I will concede that it is not likely to happen and that the information on failure rates for various manufacturers is not readily available.
The point is that the chart fails to address manufacturing quality in any meaningful way.
The Koolaid drinkers and those wearing the effete yellow visor claim that my observation is false or that the chart is misunderstood.
I am not looking for the information, I am not asking for the information except sarcastically in response to one of ROb_S' posts as way of reinforcing my point.
Does the chart mean that the DD is an order of magnitude more reliable than the S&W? Two orders of magnitude? Three?
The chart can't quantify reliability.
I am comfortable with my purchases.
As an aside you only need a statistically significant sample, not information on every failure of every rifle.
So, this data is so important to you, but you're not going to call any of the major manufacturers or any of the people that I mentioned and try to get said data? If you refuse to do that, then you have accomplished nothing except waste a ton of air. Raising a criticism but doing nothing to help means that all you've done is wasted air.
You want consumer data? Pick up the newspaper and see how many bad guys got gunned down with soldiers wielding these weapons yesterday. When you're done with that, look and see who's manufacturing those weapons... HINT HINT: it ain't Bushmaster!
What you fail to understand is that the TDP, from which the chart was based, is the result of decades of research and design from government agencies cooperating with the firearms industry to determine how to ensure that the *millions* of rifles being fielded are reliable right off the shelf. The TDP, and the chart that follows from it, are the result of decades of the very same consumer reporting data that you're requesting.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 17:01
I don't think you could use the car argument... The two cars could be in the same class, but there are no standards to use as a baseline. ARs are based on a military weapon, which has minimum standards in regard to dimensions, materials used, yada yada. Doesn't common sense dictate that the weapon that doesn't meet some of those standards will be more likely to fail?
I made the statement earlier that the highest quality parts and highest quality manufacturing processes are likely to produce the most reliable product.
That is a fair criticism of the car analogy. The fact remains just because a manufacturer starts with a box of milspec parts and performs whatever test, absent manufacturing controls reliability is not a certainty.
The chart only addresses what the manufacturing process starts with, not the process itself.
The fact remains just because a manufacturer starts with a box of milspec parts and performs whatever test, absent manufacturing controls reliability is not a certainty.
Proper assembly of those parts during manufacturing is crucial to a reliable weapon, but if Bushmaster/RRA, etc. settles for lower quality steel and batch testing instead of testing everything, do you think they're inclined to put the parts together as well as Colt/BCM, who goes the extra mile in parts quality and testing?
Proper assembly of those parts during manufacturing is crucial to a reliable weapon, but if Bushmaster/RRA, etc. settles for lower quality steel and batch testing instead of testing everything, do you think they're inclined to put the parts together as well as Colt/BCM, who goes the extra mile in parts quality and testing?
One of the best points made so far.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 17:12
We can invite you to the party, but we can't force you to dance. Good luck with whatever purchases you have made or will make in the future. Now back under your bridge...troll!
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 17:17
So, this data is so important to you, but you're not going to call any of the major manufacturers or any of the people that I mentioned and try to get said data? If you refuse to do that, then you have accomplished nothing except waste a ton of air. Raising a criticism but doing nothing to help means that all you've done is wasted air.
You want consumer data? Pick up the newspaper and see how many bad guys got gunned down with soldiers wielding these weapons yesterday. When you're done with that, look and see who's manufacturing those weapons... HINT HINT: it ain't Bushmaster!
What you fail to understand is that the TDP, from which the chart was based, is the result of decades of research and design from government agencies cooperating with the firearms industry to determine how to ensure that the *millions* of rifles being fielded are reliable right off the shelf. The TDP, and the chart that follows from it, are the result of decades of the very same consumer reporting data that you're requesting.
You have a reading comprehension problem. I did not demand the information. Except for the numbers supporting your claim of "statistically insignificant", did you make that up? Are statistics possible without numbers?
I merely pointed out a deficiency with the chart based on the author's stated purpose.
I don't care about bushmaster. I own one, but so what. I have been sipping the Noveske and LMT Koolaid like a fine bourbon for a couple of years now and I am content with my purchases. I got to good stuff long before the magical chart showed up.
Next I going for KAC Koolaid, I know it is off the chart but I am willing to take the chance.
justin_247
11-02-10, 17:23
You have a reading comprehension problem. I did not demand the information. Except for the numbers supporting your claim of "statistically insignificant", did you make that up? Are statistics possible without numbers?
And I told you exactly where to find them, and you ignored it. Congratulations, you're willingly ignorant!
Next I going for KAC Koolaid, I know it is off the chart but I am willing to take the chance.
Yep, and if you had bothered to read anything on this site, you would know *exactly* why it's not on the Chart (hint hint: it's in the first paragraph of the "explanation of features" section of the Chart). But then, you don't read anything, much less attempt to comprehend anything... you're just a troll. Good luck to you.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 17:27
Proper assembly of those parts during manufacturing is crucial to a reliable weapon, but if Bushmaster/RRA, etc. settles for lower quality steel and batch testing instead of testing everything, do you think they're inclined to put the parts together as well as Colt/BCM, who goes the extra mile in parts quality and testing?
In my first post I said the following:
I am not a manufacturing expert, but I believe the manufacturing process and controls are important. If you believe the process and quality controls are not important, then the chart is everything you believe it is. It has the specs, it must be quality, or maybe it’s a Hyundai.
If on the other hand you believe variation and deviation in the manufacturing process significantly impact quality then share with me the virtues of the “Chart” in discerning quality? Hopefully you have more than brand A uses batch testing and brand B tests each one.
I am going to speculate that Colt has a team of engineers that are responsible for managing deviation and variation in their manufacturing process and that if a company sell parts to colt, its process and quality controls are checked by colt. Colt may well belong in the first position, but what about the rest of the pecking order?
I want out of the box reliability, not customer service. Which column on the chart should I be looking at?
I don't think we disagree on what is necessary for a good manufacturing process.
I merely claim that the chart can't quantify quality.
I don't think you read that book very close. Do you honestly believe that you can take inferior metals input into the same manufacturing process and come out with a better gun at the end a meaningful number of times because of multiple variable set theory? That's some fuzzy logic, alright.
I smell a person from a third tier manufacturer trying to justify corner cutting.
Agreed about your logic.
I smell a teenager that thinks he is smarter then he is.
I merely claim that the chart can't quantify quality.
Just my opinion, but I think you're reaching a bit too far to drive your point home, and have come up lacking.
Could you think of a better way to quantify quality; besides materials used, testing procedures, dimensions to follow? I honestly can't.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 17:43
And I told you exactly where to find them, and you ignored it. Congratulations, you're willingly ignorant!
Yep, and if you had bothered to read anything on this site, you would know *exactly* why it's not on the Chart (hint hint: it's in the first paragraph of the "explanation of features" section of the Chart). But then, you don't read anything, much less attempt to comprehend anything... you're just a troll. Good luck to you.
Your stupidity is starting to annoy me. I asked if the BCM barrel that was shooting 12 MOA out of the box was statistically significant. It was somewhat a rhetorical question, but you took the bait and in response you said:
Originally Posted by justin_247
"Statistically insignificant based upon quality control and the company's eagerness to understand any problems and correct them."
I was fairly confident that you did not know even know the number of barrels produced by BCM over any time period much less how many failed to fire acceptable groups and therefore could not possibly know whether it was "statistically significant."
I say you are lying about any knowledge about the quality control program at BCM, production numbers and nature of any failures that may have occurred.
But you can read the Chart!
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 17:48
Agreed about your logic.
I smell a teenager that thinks he is smarter then he is.
Not even close, though some in this thread would accept your statement as fact based on your post count.
Much like they worship the chart.
Let's all calm down and take a quick lesson in common sense.....
This is what most should get from the chart. I like to be very short and sweet ...
The chart is based on FACT... PROVEN FACT.
The chart does not promote ANY brand of weapon.
The chart shows which brands have matched or exceeded the TDP.
If there is something missing from the chart on your rifle, it does NOT mean it FAILS.
The two most important questions you should ask yourself about your weapon or the one you are thinking about purchasing are this....
1.) Will my rifle stand up to a ton of abuse and still be reliable enough to protect myself or others?
2.) If I'm planning to spend XXX amount of money on rifle "a" and there is a rifle further left on the chart, is it worth the extra amount of money for that extra piece of mind.
Wow, this thing has jumped the shark. Shocking.
No I don't believe that at all and I did not make that claim. The highest quality parts coupled with the best process are most likely to yield the highest quality result.
I have no involvement in the industry and I do not claim to be an expert on manufacturing. Just pissing in the Koolaid of the chart worshippers by pointing out the claims of quality in the sacred chart are not supported by any numbers.
Perhaps you should stay in your lane, open your ears and listen and dial back the admitted trolling then. You see to want to force the discussion here into your preconceived dialog of "chart worshippers".
The point you brought up about parkerizing under the FSB is a perfect example:
"You say that I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?"
This isn't even a claim you are making about so-called worshippers of the chart, but you are actually saying that the chart is making a claim that it is demonstrably not (quite the opposite in fact), as pointed out by JC0352.
I suspect Colt could tell you the number of defects they will likely produce next year. I will concede that it is not likely to happen and that the information on failure rates for various manufacturers is not readily available.
The point is that the chart fails to address manufacturing quality in any meaningful way.
The Koolaid drinkers and those wearing the effete yellow visor claim that my observation is false or that the chart is misunderstood.
I am not looking for the information, I am not asking for the information except sarcastically in response to one of ROb_S' posts as way of reinforcing my point.
Does the chart mean that the DD is an order of magnitude more reliable than the S&W? Two orders of magnitude? Three?
The chart can't quantify reliability.
I am comfortable with my purchases.
As an aside you only need a statistically significant sample, not information on every failure of every rifle.
You are correct that you are extremely unlikely to see internal QC data of any kind publicized by any company...and as such, it really is a pointless question. You've stated as much anyways by basically admitting that you are trying to stir the pot and lob rhetorical points over the fence.
No, the chart doesn't "mean" that any particular rifle is any order of magnitude more "reliable" than any other rifle. It also doesn't claim to. The prevailing sentiment in this community is not that a Colt is 1.687 times less likely to fail than a Bushmaster, so stop trying to put everything into that little compartment. It is a collection of features that are present in the M4 carbine used by the United States military, and the chart itself in tandem with the myriad of technical threads on this forum in which we are graced with the presence of subject matter experts in things like 'manufacturing processes' explain why these features are desirable in a fighting carbine. Take it for what it is, and stop trying to make it something it's not.
If you are comfortable with your purchases, rock on.
On a side note, I would recommend that you tone down the "effete" and "stupidity" comments or you will probably run into problems here.
I don't know does lack of finish under the front sight base results in a weapon more likely to fail? According to the chart it results in an inferior weapon so that means less accurate, shorter life span, more likely not to function out of the box or what?
In my experience, it results in rust under the FSB, which can cause FSB removal to be quite difficult.
If nobody's going to start singing kumbayah together, then somebody ought to douse the fire and send everyone to their bunks.
The_Hammer_Man
11-02-10, 18:51
When someone comes to me for information about AR-15/M-16's they usually ask me which brands/types of rifles/carbines I like and why.
In other words they're asking me which of the plethora of weapons being manufactured today do I have faith in. I then answer them by sharing information about products that I've "had good luck with" or that have consistently given me the results I wanted.
1) reliability
2) accuracy
IN THAT ORDER!
Why that order? Because sometimes,not always, in order to get one you have to sacrifice the other. With that said let me add that THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS to that rule. If you have any experience in fabricating or servicing AR-15/M-16's you know this for fact. It's a never ending search for "known good" parts and being meticulous in your assembly of those parts.
Definition of faith in this instance is :
The expectation that the weapon in question will go bang in a reliable and accurate fashion every time you squeeze the trigger.
How can we support that expectation? By making sure that all the parts being installed in our weapons meet a certain tolerances and consistency. It is impossible to hit the bullseye every time so they've developed testing parameters to help "keep them in the black". It's not perfect but it's the best mere humans can do at this time.
When I first looked at "The Chart" I was rather amused to find most of my part sources on there.(on both sides of the "line") Also, I found sources that I hadn't considered before.
(no examples here.. not setting off a brand war!)
This helped me to upgrade the quality of parts I was using in my builds.
Why was that important to me? It increased the amount of "faith" I had in my finished product. It allowed me to base my expectations of reliability and accuracy upon "known good" parts and accessories.
Now let's address assembly of those parts.
IF you start with "known good" parts, and keep all your ducks in a row, you SHOULD be able to assemble a reliable rifle/carbine that will perform up to expectation.
Your mileage will vary!!!!!
Give 10 cooks the same ingredients/recipe to make a cake and you'll end up with TEN DIFFERENT TASTING CAKES!! They'll be similar but not equal. Some will be better than others period.
Gonna stop now because I'm going brain dead.
seacoastnh
11-02-10, 18:55
No, the chart doesn't "mean" that any particular rifle is any order of magnitude more "reliable" than any other rifle. It also doesn't claim to. The prevailing sentiment in this community is not that a Colt is 1.687 times less likely to fail than a Bushmaster, so stop trying to put everything into that little compartment. It is a collection of features that are present in the M4 carbine used by the United States military, and the chart itself in tandem with the myriad of technical threads on this forum in which we are graced with the presence of subject matter experts in things like 'manufacturing processes' explain why these features are desirable in a fighting carbine. Take it for what it is, and stop trying to make it something it's not.
If you are comfortable with your purchases, rock on.
On a side note, I would recommend that you tone down the "effete" and "stupidity" comments or you will probably run into problems here.
Your are right about the parkerizing. I could parse the language used in the chart, but it off my initial point.
I believe the author and primary proponent of the chart has made the claim that one of the purposes of the chart is to assist individuals new to the AR in picking a "quality" AR. The search is not working for me so I can't say for sure. I claim reliability is a fundamental component of quality. Since the chart can't quanity reliability it can't quantify quality. Had the point been merely acknowledged early on the suffering would have been over earlier.
As for "effete" and "stupidity" I always wait for the first stone to be cast by someone else, it was in response to "idjitts" and "mindless" respectively.
Pointing out a deficiency in the sacred chart was a tough call. I expected and recieved irrational responses. Not many substantive responses, while some profess to understand chaos and variation theory they seem incapable of admitting the chart does not account for it.
CaptainDooley
11-02-10, 19:44
I would say this - if manufacturer is aware of the correct parts and intentionally doesn't use them and intentionally doesn't testthem properly, they more than likely do not have a quality assembly process. Whereas a manufacturer who understands the correct pates to use, as well as the correct testing and correct criteria for passing said testing, likely understands and adheres to proper assembly (which is actually demonstrated by the two staking items on the chart).
Also, I don't have the link because I'm on my phone, but there was a thread here that showed that properly made bolts and barrels, when tested properly, would have around a 3% rejection rate, whereas the same parts made from inferior materials, if held to the same standard of testing would be around 30% failure rate. Surprisingly the manufacturers using inferior materials only batch test, if they test at all. While this isn't hard, factual numbers about actual failures, simple logic should help you extrapolate some pretty accurate numbers of faulty parts put out by companies on the right of the chart.
CaptainDooley
11-02-10, 19:57
I smell a teenager that thinks he is smarter then he is.
Naw, as many times as he's said "Chaos Theory", I'd assume he's a sophomore in college (they're the worst in undergrad) or a new graduate student that's taking his first advanced math course and thought he could come on here and school a bunch of "dumb trigger pullers". Sad thing for him is, anyone can go on any forum, and some of us that wound up here aren't trigger pullers, but are more in "Mensa Members" category...
Ok, I have been so amused by a lot of the comments I have seen here. First, I long preferred the M1/M14 type action, so when I first came here, not too long ago, I had two AR type rifles and was looking for a piston gun. My reasoning was I wanted something new but always like the piston system better (personal preference, not because I feel DI is inferior). The obvious choice at the time was the Stag, but when I looked at "the chart" and it put a lot in perspective. My first experience was with a colt m16 which I learned to shoot Marine Corps ROTC. My first AR that I owned was a Sabre Defence. I wanted an A2 rifle for high power so I built it with a cheap lower and a BM Target upper. Even then I could tell the difference. The Sabre Defence was just smoother in its cycle and balance, but I attributed it to the BM being new and an A2 vs M4gery. But then I read the chart and it reinforced what I knew in my gut, that the Sabre was just better. The BM met my needs, I score well in NRA Highpower without mods, but an SHTF rifle it is not. It would make a good loner to a neighbor in such a situation, but I wouldn't trust MY life with it when I could go with my Sabre. Then I decided to go with the LMT MRP, mostly because I find lately I tinker more than I shoot so I wanted something I could modify to meet my needs at whatever moment. The first time I took it out, I could tell it was crafted from a different timber. The point I'm trying to make, is that I'm a rifle man. I know quality when I see it. and while I can't vouch for all the brands on the left, I can vouch for a few, and they definitely are made better than those on the right. An I believe it is because the follow the QC guidelines stated. I feel complete confidence in taking my LMT or Sabre into a firefight. During the craziness of the last couple years, many so called high quality brands tarnished their reputations by trying to get guns out the door. This is well known, Sig, DPMS, olympic, even Colt (with their handguns only) are names that come up often. Did they fix and address those problems, yes (sig can be a pain). But what if you bought your rifle today and the SHTF tomorrow. There won't be a customer service rep to help you. I haven't heard of one issue with the rifles on the left.
seacoastnh,
I don't know if you are intentionally stirring the shit pot or if it's because you don't know any better. One thing I can say is when I read your posts and those of dieselgeek I actually regret starting this thread.
My reason for starting it was to read some first hand reports from those who have AR's from some of the manufacturers listed above as well as other lessen known or recognized brands.
Unfortunately there are still many who think that all AR's are the same and that parts are parts. Fortunately there are enough people that have the knowledge and experience to know what a bunch of crap that really is.
Also let me state that I almost never reference the "chart" nor do I care about the "chart". I base my opinions on my exeprience or that of other(s) whom I know to be competent and educated people.
Some people will not listen to any amount of reason and that's too bad. Another issue is that we have people buying AR's who have no clue as to how it works, it's history or anything else and certainly never carried one in a combat situation. This thread also proves something that has been stated numerous times. People hate to be told they're wrong or that they made a bad choice. And that instead of purchasing an AR for serious purposes it is used for punching paper or impressing friends.
Because let's face it. If YOU truly cared about the quality of your weapon and the potential consequences of it failing NO ONE in their right mind would buy a PIECE OF SHIT. I know that saying this is going to hurt some peoples feelings, but I don't care.
Something that would really, really make me happy would be if I could log-in to this site and never read another bad thing about any of the so-called "lesser brands". But, I have no control over that. The only one who does is the manufacturer. And they have no need to improve because they are consistently rewarded by those who are uneducated and continue to fork money over for their products.
In closing let me say this. I was actually a big hater of the M16. I thought is was a POS and not worthy. Then I started to learn about the weapon and how certain changes were made that deviated from it's original design, which in turn led to problems. I also started to learn that problems with the weapon were most often due to improper maintenance, crap ammo, shitty magazines and bad training practices.
I can now firmly say that I am one of it's largest proponents and I know from first hand experience that if the weapon is MADE CORRECTLY, and you do your job then the weapon will perform as it should.
That is my question, is it one failure in five million or is it one in a hundred?
Not just for BCM, but for all the manufacturers.
One more thing. A STAFF member asked that this thread get back on track and post relevant information pertaining to the spirit of this thread. Please, listen to that advice and let's do so before more people get nuked.
"Rob_S I believe the posters that follow you comprehended my post, perhaps your view was obscured by your visor."
"Now here is the point, the best parts do not necessarily yield the best product."
"There are countless variables in manufacturing that affect the end result. The only way to know the quality of a part or complete weapon is to know the failure rate and causes of the failure at different time intervals."
Seacoast
Your personal attacks are out of line. They make it difficult to take what you have to say seriously.
You can not make a quality weapon or any other widget w/o quality parts. Obviously the way the widget/weapon is made has a large effect on the sucess of the item. If you buy a product from a company it only makes sense that you would buy from the company who uses quality parts that are properly manufactured and properly tested. The company that spends the time and effort to use the good stuff will be the company I choose to buy from.
What kind if AR do you own? My first was a Colt. I sold it and bought a BushMaster. Sold that one too. The Bushy gave me more than ten years of great service. The only real issue I had was a result of BM being Lazy and not staking the endplate at all. I have seen this same issue on a total of three Bushmaster carbines. When the stock spins and the buffer is no longer in the ext. because the buffer retaining pin and spring are missing you have a show stopping catostrophic failure. You now have an expensive club.
I have guns from LMT and BCM. I sold the BM because I wanted a flat top. I properly staked the endplate and BCG before selling the gun. It is still running well for my friend/co-worker who carries it at work.
Proper assembly of those parts during manufacturing is crucial to a reliable weapon, but if Bushmaster/RRA, etc. settles for lower quality steel and batch testing instead of testing everything, do you think they're inclined to put the parts together as well as Colt/BCM, who goes the extra mile in parts quality and testing?
Well said.
jklaughrey
11-02-10, 21:34
Not to argue but some members are 3 gun and comp shooters. In fact most on here that are members are either active, retired/prior service or in a LE capacity. This is why we collectively take issue with sub par parts and sub par attitudes regarding the info we freely give out only to have it thrown in our face. It was but a mere bit ago you joined and asked for help. We gave it freely. Please don't attempt to chastise or demean those that help you. And so what if some folks are just range shooters, if they buy quality their grandchildren can use the weapon as well when they are adults.
LAST WARNING- KEEP THIS ON TOPIC.
In my first post I said the following:
I don't think we disagree on what is necessary for a good manufacturing process.
Rob_S has consistently stated this very thing, from the very beginning. But you, from your position of ignorance continue to ignore when people point this out. If you actually stopped trolling and read this forum, you'd understand that.
I merely claim that the chart can't quantify quality.
I do qualitative analysis for a living. Your above statement is the height of ignorance and illogic. (As well as being a snarky little rhetorical trap) The best you can hope for is data points that indicate the correlation of whatever qualitative characteristics one is looking for. And Rob_S has provided that in narrative fashion, which you obstinately continue to ignore, despite several people pointing it out for you. (Are you lazy, stupid or both? And could you provide quantitative data as to why are are/are not?)
Your qualitative characteristic of "working out of the box" is also bullshit. The dude who made a functioning paper M1911 can also claim it "worked out of the box" but that won't get him through a pistol class, now will it?
My quantitative sample for Bushmasters occurred when I was assigned to the Department of State's Poppy Eradication Program last year. We had 150 Bushmaster "M4s", of which 1/3d were inoperative at any one time, and all of which had documented failures at one time or another, mainly with gas keys shooting loose, but we also experienced a high incidence of bad FSBs (I could pry get the number from our armorer, who I see from time to time, but I have other shit to do, frankly).
I've never seen such a high rate of failure in any other AR rifle/carbine, with the great majority of my experience being in Colt and FN military issued weapons. In fact, the only other consistent malfunctions I've seen were easily traced to bad magazines or a piss-poor refurb program of worn out guns.
When I bought my first AR it was easy. Buy a Colt or buy junk.
I've been away from semi-autos for about a decade and man have things changed in the AR world.
I found the chart and this forum to be helpful. There is a absolute shit ton of AR stuff out there these days and it was nice to have the chart to reference. It didn't take but a minute or two and I knew where to look first.
Thanks
My first AR was an Olympic Arms MFR, i bought it from a friend/co-worker in the mid 90's for $800.00. During the Assault weapon ban I worked for a pawn shop in the Texas Panhandle and it was rare to see an AR come through. I had the chance to hold an Armalite at the time, a guy wanted to sell for a few thousand. My friend got the Oly from a gun show and the seller really played it up. He had my friend believing Oly's were better then Colt's Because Olympic Arms built all their own parts. I used to take it to the range every other week and kept it for about 8 years. I had the occasional mis-feed but it did pretty good at putting holes in paper. I had a cheap AR scope on it and remember getting pretty good groups out of it at 100 yards. I also loved taking it apart and cleaning it and so i am the first to say it came apart easy because nothing was stacked and how it stayed together i will never know. It had an A2 stock and a collapsible stock and i could never decide which i liked better so i changed it every other day. I also remember how easy the take down pins pushed out, i could pull the upper in a second. I sold the Oly around 2003 when i lost my job and decided i would rather eat. I didn't get much for it and i missed having it. A couple years ago i was walking through Gander Mountain when i walked by the gun section and something caught my eye. I saw a Bushmaster with the Texas State seal on it and not sure why but i had to have it. It was used at a decent price and looked in good condition. I took it to the range it shot good and having not shot in a few years i had some decent groups. I had never really heard about other manufacturers and didn't remember seeing much else at Gander. I wish i knew then what i know now thanks to this site. I have swapped out a few things so far and upgraded here and there. The plan is to get a new upper as soon as i can afford one. I don't think mine were better then what is out there it is just what i have experience with and i hope to expand my experience.
coyote hunter
11-02-10, 23:20
My Bushmaster is better because.
A) It was FREE!
B) It has never malfunctioned (I'm going to leave it at that, but I will admit it is far from a combat weapon)
C) It's more fun than no AR
D) It makes coyotes, bunny rabbits (and as soon as they show up, zombies) go to sleep for good
I got my rifle before I knew just about anything of a quality AR
My next one will be better because of what I have learned here.
"Good things come to those who shoot straight"- Great Uncle Albert
Why was my post of my bcg deleted.
He said bushmaster. It was obvious he was speaking to me by saying "make it work". Don't know why you're denying it.
Also my statements are off my first hand knowledge.
http://tapa.tk/mu/414366d5-4569-08a0.jpg
Wow... your Bushmaster BCG was staked much better than mine. On the BCG that was in my BM carbine one whole side looked like the one up top and to the left in your picture. The other side looked like the top right or maybe slightly better. The contact was certainly questionable all around.
In comparison my BCM BCG almost looks like artwork. Nice and uniform.
On the note of the chart and quality control. It almost sounds like the argument is that because no manufactures provide any such data we can't know it. It's almost like you think theres a vast cover up to keep people from hearing about the left of chart failures. I can assure you that if and when one of those manufacturers fail it won't take 5 years for the issue to come to light on the internet. I mean, we are talking about the internet here.
However, that said, until someone publishes an independent study on which guns they've seen fail in classes and why we'll probably never have a large enough sample size to satisfy your criteria. What we can do is the same thing historians do - interpret data based on probability. For example if we have 5 historical accounts of a certain mythological defensive walls thickness and three sources say 6 meters, another says 9 meters, and yet another says 4 1/2 meters then there is a greater probability that the wall was actually 6 meters in thickness. Another thing that we can take from all 5 accounts is that the wall was really thick and probably served its purpose.
By using the chart to know the quality of the parts that go into a gun and time spent reading range reports, class reports, and military reports of different weapons and accessories it's easy to form conclusions based on the same form of probability. Can new information surface and change the common held beliefs about history? Yes, of course, but they're relatively rare these days. Likewise the knowledge of the AR platform has gotten to be something along the lines of "vast" and it is unlikely we'll be seeing breakthroughs that blow the current testing procedure out of the water anytime soon. Therefore, to believe that we can't know something because we weren't there or can't put numbers on it is patently false - it's similar to saying the Holocaust didn't happen, Christ wasn't at least a man on Earth at some point, or that dinosaurs are an evolutionist conspiracy and that the rest of the world is covering it all up.
So in this same manner laymen like myself can begin to form opinions and understand the short comings of different AR manufacturers without devoting the rest of our lives to a new career in the hopes of figuring it all out. Instead of arguing till the cows come home about what a spreadsheet does or doesn't say we'd all be much better off verifying and collaborating sources. It shouldn't take long to figure out who's "been there done that." In a similar fashion many manufacturers would probably be ecstatic to show off their quality control checks and the like; even if they don't want to disclose the exact number of guns that have failed over the last quarter, or two, or three. Such a "show & tell" could be rather illuminating.
I would like to say how shocked I was at how little I actually knew about the platform before I found this site. The one thing I did have before seeing the light was faith in my issued rifle and the training to keep it running and effective, but that's about it.
Some of the SMEs on here were really helpful in a thread about my bushy upper/RRA lower that I bought during the panic 2 yrs ago. For the amount of shooting I do, it was serving my needs just fine; but I simply wanted something more, in the hopes of attending a class sometime down the road and making a habit of shooting more to stay proficient. I sold the upper to my dad, who probably won't break it out of the safe until the next time I fly home to go shooting with him, plus he has the skill set and tools to work on it if he needs to.
I appreciate the knowledge available here, and plan to apply it to my next purchase.
Oh, and with all that being said, I probably put about 1,000rds through it. No failures except for a bad magazine that wasn't feeding right. I think the spring just wasn't strong enough when I loaded it up to capacity. (Brownell's 20rd)
All I can say is I am a Vietnam era vet. Did I serve in Vietnam...no. I was just post Vietnam. I trained with the old M16 that probably had seen wartime service. I qualified Expert. Our biggest concern was crappy ammo. Cases and cases of ammo some with the bullet dislodged. Some with the bullet seated in too far. The M16 I fired was capable of making pop-up silhouette target hits at 300 meters with iron sights. If I did my part, the weapon did it's part. There was no burst switch. It was either selective fire or full auto.
When it was clear that Obama was going to become president, I contacted my best friends dad(ret. Army Col. FFL) to obtain an M4 style rifle for me. I asked for a different brand and after waiting about 6 months in the week I moved from Alabama back home to Arizona, he had obtained a Del-Ton. I didn't know anything about this site at that time.
After starting to follow this site, I started finding out about staking, HPT, alloys,... and the like.
Ultimately, all my weapons are SHTF weapons. I don't have wads of cash to spend. For the weapons I own I want to be able to carry most of the spare parts I need in case I need to bug-out at some point. And I want extreme reliability. I have settled on a good 870 shotgun, a good AR variant, and a Glock. I also have a Wilson Combat KZ. I have moved away from .45 to .9mm due to the ability to carry more ammo.
For this site, I have nothing but kudos. It has been truly eye opening.
At some point, I would like a middy BCM and put the Del-Ton upper out to pasture. With age comes clarity and wisdom.
Well said. I have a S&W and while it has been fun, it has not been without it's own issues. I have corrected a lot of them using this site. Is it a "Left side of the Chart" gun? No, but since I didn't know of the chart and do now I will plan my next purchases accordingly. In the mean time, I will continue to correct issues on my M&P15 as they arise. So far, nothing major. But knowledge is key.
I'm not an operator, nor will I see combat with my gun, but in the event of a SHTF scenario, I don't want to worry about reliability. That said, to each their own. If a Del-ton, DPMS, BM, etc fits your needs, then so be it, I won't insult you (nor should others). Just understand there will be issues, perhaps more so than a top-tier weapon would otherwise have. And using a weapon more prone to issues in a high-risk environment is a recipe for the obvious. This board seems to be populated with folks that either use their weapons in combat or LEO environment (or both), and as such NEED a higher quality weapon, therfore the chart.
I'll choose to heed the advice of others on this forum and stick to the left side, even if I'm not planning to use my weapon in a fire fight. :D
.... I don't want to worry about reliability. That said, to each their own. If a Del-ton, DPMS, BM, etc fits your needs, then so be it, I won't insult you (nor should others). .... :D
=====================================
From what I've seen, (with maybe a few exceptions,) I think the attitude of the person that has a "right side" (of the Chart) gun makes all the difference in the world.
If a "right sider" comes in and makes an honest post questioning something about a "right sided" gun, he gets treated with respect. Versus the guy that comes in and arrogantly makes a "review" that he has shot 60 rounds through his new "right sided" gun and it is as good as a Colt, ...he might get beat up a little.
.
First of all. Best. Thread. Title. Ever.
Second, I think Paul Howe is probably the only person in the world who can say that DPMS produced a quality gun and can actually be believed without question.
As for the chart, I wish I read it and came on this site before I ever looked at my first AR.
Does the MOACKS work on an LMT MWS in .308? I have one and checked the staking. It is there, but doesn't seem as pronounced as some of the .223/5.56 pics show. I haven't shot this thing yet, but I would rather not if there is a question.
When I attended the GPS Defense 3 Day SPR Course we also used DPMS guns and they worked without a hitch. They also had custom barrels, triggers, etc....
They also weren't being pounded as the course if designed for accurate shooting not pouring rounds down range. I have no doubt that they were probably carefully assembled as well.
First of all. Best. Thread. Title. Ever.
Second, I think Paul Howe is probably the only person in the world who can say that DPMS produced a quality gun and can actually be believed without question.
As for the chart, I wish I read it and came on this site before I ever looked at my first AR.
I was looking forward to getting a lot of positive info to help me with a simple decision. Buy or build. Now all I know is I don't give a damn about a chart or no chart. I was hoping for people input with the mistakes they made and how they defend those choices, wrong or right. You know, what forums are here for. All I ended up with was about 7 guys saying they probably would have bought something else. That helped.
But I also got a pissing match. Really? A pissing match!?!
I don't give a damn about who likes who on the forum or who drank whatever koolaid. All my time was spent reading people insulting other people. I want opinions on cheap versus expensive because...I'm on a budget!!!! and all I learned was that, for the most part, I would be embarrassed to introduce some of you to my wife and kids. Now you should understand why some of us are stuck with the guy's at the store or the gun writers. You kids can't get over your spite for each other. You remind me of my first wife for god's sake! Thanks for making me leave this forum. Been here three weeks and it has been a total shame. It's always the same people too. Everywhere you go on this whole site! I guess my time can definitely be wasted elsewhere.
To those of you who attempted to answer this forum...thank you for your efforts and hope to see you out on the range some day.
Give it some time. There is lots of good info. Take what you can use and run with it.
Are you ok? Did you post in the right forum? I'm not sure what your issue is.
I was looking forward to getting a lot of positive info to help me with a simple decision. Buy or build. Now all I know is I don't give a damn about a chart or no chart. I was hoping for people input with the mistakes they made and how they defend those choices, wrong or right. You know, what forums are here for. All I ended up with was about 7 guys saying they probably would have bought something else. That helped.
But I also got a pissing match. Really? A pissing match!?!
I don't give a damn about who likes who on the forum or who drank whatever koolaid. All my time was spent reading people insulting other people. I want opinions on cheap versus expensive because...I'm on a budget!!!! and all I learned was that, for the most part, I would be embarrassed to introduce some of you to my wife and kids. Now you should understand why some of us are stuck with the guy's at the store or the gun writers. You kids can't get over your spite for each other. You remind me of my first wife for god's sake! Thanks for making me leave this forum. Been here three weeks and it has been a total shame. It's always the same people too. Everywhere you go on this whole site! I guess my time can definitely be wasted elsewhere.
To those of you who attempted to answer this forum...thank you for your efforts and hope to see you out on the range some day.
jklaughrey
11-08-10, 21:37
Looks to me like he had another account earlier and then might have been banned and made another to post his eulogy.
RogerinTPA
11-08-10, 21:44
I was looking forward to getting a lot of positive info to help me with a simple decision. Buy or build. Now all I know is I don't give a damn about a chart or no chart. I was hoping for people input with the mistakes they made and how they defend those choices, wrong or right. You know, what forums are here for. All I ended up with was about 7 guys saying they probably would have bought something else. That helped.
But I also got a pissing match. Really? A pissing match!?!
I don't give a damn about who likes who on the forum or who drank whatever koolaid. All my time was spent reading people insulting other people. I want opinions on cheap versus expensive because...I'm on a budget!!!! and all I learned was that, for the most part, I would be embarrassed to introduce some of you to my wife and kids. Now you should understand why some of us are stuck with the guy's at the store or the gun writers. You kids can't get over your spite for each other. You remind me of my first wife for god's sake! Thanks for making me leave this forum. Been here three weeks and it has been a total shame. It's always the same people too. Everywhere you go on this whole site! I guess my time can definitely be wasted elsewhere.
To those of you who attempted to answer this forum...thank you for your efforts and hope to see you out on the range some day.
Dude chill, please. This is your first post so who did you get into a pissing match with? You haven't stated what weapon you have and you are ready to punch out.:rolleyes: If you are the proud owner of one of this thread's named weapons, read the following stickies:
Oh No! I bought a BM/RRA/Stag before I knew better HERE (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=75568)
Knowledge Based Threads:HERE (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=7009)
Fix your weapon, then come on back and tell us about it.;)
When I attended the GPS Defense 3 Day SPR Course we also used DPMS guns and they worked without a hitch. They also had custom barrels, triggers, etc....
They also weren't being pounded as the course if designed for accurate shooting not pouring rounds down range. I have no doubt that they were probably carefully assembled as well.
Were these guns assembled by DPMS though?
Ok, you'd be the other person I'd believe that statement from. But being that I know you, if you said it to my face, I'd also ask you if you lost your mind.
That I don't know. I do know that they were good accurate guns though.
Were these guns assembled by DPMS though?
Ok, you'd be the other person I'd believe that statement from. But being that I know you, if you said it to my face, I'd also ask you if you lost your mind.
Looks to me like he had another account earlier and then might have been banned and made another to post his eulogy.
You Doc get a Gold Star. That has to be the same guy who was acting nasty earlier and was banned.
I was looking forward to getting a lot of positive info to help me with a simple decision. Buy or build. Now all I know is I don't give a damn about a chart or no chart. I was hoping for people input with the mistakes they made and how they defend those choices, wrong or right. You know, what forums are here for. All I ended up with was about 7 guys saying they probably would have bought something else. That helped.
But I also got a pissing match. Really? A pissing match!?!
I don't give a damn about who likes who on the forum or who drank whatever koolaid. All my time was spent reading people insulting other people. I want opinions on cheap versus expensive because...I'm on a budget!!!! and all I learned was that, for the most part, I would be embarrassed to introduce some of you to my wife and kids. Now you should understand why some of us are stuck with the guy's at the store or the gun writers. You kids can't get over your spite for each other. You remind me of my first wife for god's sake! Thanks for making me leave this forum. Been here three weeks and it has been a total shame. It's always the same people too. Everywhere you go on this whole site! I guess my time can definitely be wasted elsewhere.
To those of you who attempted to answer this forum...thank you for your efforts and hope to see you out on the range some day.
I understand your point and that's why I left the "chaos theory" bullshit discussion alone after a bit as it was counter to the intent of this thread and counter to the intent of the site. Understand that the person stirring that pot admitted that he was upset that he was called an "idjit" and decided to "piss in everyone's cereal" to entertain himself as a result. It's unfortunate that so many members chose to take the bait rather than just let him stew in his own piss.
I also understand your point about budget. Everyone is on a budget of some sort, no matter how rich or how poor. and sometimes those that "bought the best" are the worst kind of know-it-alls and self-righteous pricks, and often only bought the best so they could talk down to other people. These types will use the Chart for no other purpose than stoking their own egos.
However, if you're going to let one thread with one idjit starting an internet pissing match over one backhanded insult steer you away from one of the most informative sites on the AR platform and actual use thereof, then I'm not sure I understand why you're here at all.
From the sound of your post you were missing the irony and sarcasm in the thread title and were only looking to have a pre-determined opinion validated. I suspect that the sequence of events went something like this.
you decided you want an AR
you went to the store and saw the prices
you decided that the cheapest one looked exactly like the most expensive
you went online looking for someone to tell you that the cheap guns were worth every penny
you got confronted with an opposite reality
you saw the title of this thread and thought "aha! this is the one that will validate my opinion!"
you were confronted with the same painful reality
If you really do want an AR,and you really are on a budget, look at the Spike's Tactical M4LE for $800. It is the best $800 AR on the market and it is miles better even than some $900 and $1000 ARs as well. If you actually want the best, 86 your preconceived notions and the attitude that goes with it, define your needs, use the Chart and other resources on this site to learn about the platform and the whys along with the hows, and buy the best basic carbine thatyou can find and GO SHOOT THE GUN.
You Doc get a Gold Star. That has to be the same guy who was acting nasty earlier and was banned.
Yep, the post was way to personal to come out of left field from a new poster like that.
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 10:14
usmcvet and mac556
It is your highly tuned law enforcement mind. I looked at his post count and it did not make sense.
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 10:25
More like bullshit meter coupled with Spidey senses. My Inspector Callahan mind isn't turned on till half a pot later.
I can see why some people will get butt hurt with this thread, and I know alot of you guys say the chart is end all and I believe it is information to help people make a more informed decision. but I am with alot of people that say why can't I have a rifle that works all the time without breaking the bank, lets face it sometimes you want a BMW but get a Buick instead, cause that is what you could afford and maybe you want a new colt but you can afford bushmaster. and I am not saying that any of the brands in this thread are the holy grail of Ar-15's. I would like to see video, or pictures, or something that shows hard proof that these are just craptastic pretty much put your money where your mouth is. lets get a plain-jane no thrills upper and just shoot the crap out of it! And then log it via you-tube, pictures, logs blah blah blah just my two cents.
CaptainDooley
11-09-10, 15:19
I can see why some people will get butt hurt with this thread, and I know alot of you guys say the chart is end all and I believe it is information to help people make a more informed decision. but I am with alot of people that say why can't I have a rifle that works all the time without breaking the bank, lets face it sometimes you want a BMW but get a Buick instead, cause that is what you could afford and maybe you want a new colt but you can afford bushmaster. and I am not saying that any of the brands in this thread are the holy grail of Ar-15's. I would like to see video, or pictures, or something that shows hard proof that these are just craptastic pretty much put your money where your mouth is. lets get a plain-jane no thrills upper and just shoot the crap out of it! And then log it via you-tube, pictures, logs blah blah blah just my two cents.
The problem is, I don't see a big enough price difference to not get the better rifle. Hell, the prices places charge around here for a stock carbine Bushmaster is more expensive than what I can find a 6920 online for.
The problem is, I don't see a big enough price difference to not get the better rifle. Hell, the prices places charge around here for a stock carbine Bushmaster is more expensive than what I can find a 6920 online for.
I live in Florida and will second that. Though that appears to be changing a little.
jeepnut,
Your post is so wrong in so many ways. I have said this at least 100 times and many people don't seem to get it. The price difference is NOT A FACTOR. Your analogy of buying a BMW or Buick is totally crap. One reason is that there is a huge difference in price between the two.
When discussing the AR we are literally talking about a few hundred dollars at most between a good AR (Colt 6920, DD or BCM) and a marginal performer like BM or DPMS. In fact the biggest issue is that people in this day and age have no patience. They live in the age of I want an instant meal and I don't want to wait. Unless someone can legitimately articulate why they need to have RIGHT NOW it's all a bunch of crap.
As for your proof....all you have to do is read the posts from this site. We have seen it time and time again. Help, my xxxx won't extract. Help, my xxxx won't cycle, etc...etc....
I can see why some people will get butt hurt with this thread, and I know alot of you guys say the chart is end all and I believe it is information to help people make a more informed decision. but I am with alot of people that say why can't I have a rifle that works all the time without breaking the bank, lets face it sometimes you want a BMW but get a Buick instead, cause that is what you could afford and maybe you want a new colt but you can afford bushmaster. and I am not saying that any of the brands in this thread are the holy grail of Ar-15's. I would like to see video, or pictures, or something that shows hard proof that these are just craptastic pretty much put your money where your mouth is. lets get a plain-jane no thrills upper and just shoot the crap out of it! And then log it via you-tube, pictures, logs blah blah blah just my two cents.
I can see why some people will get butt hurt with this thread, and I know alot of you guys say the chart is end all and I believe it is information to help people make a more informed decision. but I am with alot of people that say why can't I have a rifle that works all the time without breaking the bank, lets face it sometimes you want a BMW but get a Buick instead, cause that is what you could afford and maybe you want a new colt but you can afford bushmaster. and I am not saying that any of the brands in this thread are the holy grail of Ar-15's. I would like to see video, or pictures, or something that shows hard proof that these are just craptastic pretty much put your money where your mouth is. lets get a plain-jane no thrills upper and just shoot the crap out of it! And then log it via you-tube, pictures, logs blah blah blah just my two cents.
If you look around you can get a better gun for the same or even less money.
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 17:00
I swear people if they just would read objectively, any half intelligent person could understand the basic premise and concept of M4C. And what we are about!
Last time I checked Bushmaster prices around here and with the prices BCM's can be had for right now cost isn't even a factor.
The current BCM sale prices are excellent.
I put about 80 rounds down my BCM 16" middy over the weekend. Night and day difference between how that gun ran and an off the shelf Bushmaster. I'm sure the battle comp helped too but there was no unpleasant gas burning my eyes out with the BCM either.
If people could shoot the two back to back Bushmaster would go out of Business. Even with the compensator the price isn't that much different.
jeepnut,
Your post is so wrong in so many ways. I have said this at least 100 times and many people don't seem to get it. The price difference is NOT A FACTOR. Your analogy of buying a BMW or Buick is totally crap. One reason is that there is a huge difference in price between the two.
When discussing the AR we are literally talking about a few hundred dollars at most between a good AR (Colt 6920, DD or BCM) and a marginal performer like BM or DPMS. In fact the biggest issue is that people in this day and age have no patience. They live in the age of I want an instant meal and I don't want to wait. Unless someone can legitimately articulate why they need to have RIGHT NOW it's all a bunch of crap.
As for your proof....all you have to do is read the posts from this site. We have seen it time and time again. Help, my xxxx won't extract. Help, my xxxx won't cycle, etc...etc....
Maybe I am wrong, but something someone says is a small picture on the forums. and there are things even you don't know on the variables, as it's the internet and then you see people like nutnfancy on youtube that give hard evidence, and proof of brand X like a RRA or even the dreadful BM, and for some people all the local gun shop has is a DPMS or a BM, and I remember a just awhile ago you could not even get a black rifle and if you found one they were way over price. so as I said put your money where your mouth is! And yeah BMW does cost alot more than a Buick cause thoses are cars. but a DD M4 Carbine, v2 cost $1537.00, a Bushmaster MOE M4-Type Carbine cost $1295.00 a dpms AP4 Panther cost $949.00, a cmmg 16" M4 Carbine cost $1075.95. and yeah it's not all about cost but some people have a budget and want the most bang for the buck, maybe i'm wrong maybe you have a shot all these brands and ran them hard? I know I haven't and I know for my first AR-15 all i could afford was a DPMS lower with a model 1 sales upper and I had save every penny!(when I was 19) and you know what I shot the crap out of that gun and it worked! and as with everything there is a learning curve and I was lucky enough to have someone that was there to help me when My extractor failed, or when after I finally shot the barrel out taught me that it was time for a new BCG and told me what barrel, and explained in detail why it was important, I kept that rifle till just two years ago sold it for $700 to a friend, and it's still chugging along. maybe your luckier than some, and got the best rifle out there, good for you. as some other people have said and I agree it's pissing contest. I think people should help new AR-15 owners instead of dogging on there first black rifle, when my friend ask me whats the best rifle I can get for the money I tell them BCM if they are on a budget, I always tell them to buy a stripped lower and show them how it works and suggest what I know will work for their rifle and when they say "I don't want to spend that much on a stock!" I go okay you can always get a better stock later. I don't know what you do for your friends or people you introduce to shooting, but I would hope you would be a positive and helpful influence. in stead of saying you need top tier X period! SO why do people buy those brands cause some people don't want to break the bank for there first black rifle.
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 17:30
NUTNFANCY, that guy is a joke IMO!
Here READ!
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=49814&highlight=nutnfancy
[QUOTE=jklaughrey;810069]NUTNFANCY, that guy is a joke IMO!
Here READ!
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=49814&highlight=nutnfancy[/QUOTE
think what you may. he does do one thing alot of people don't. he goes out and he shoots, and does more than just bench shooting. which I think is where you can find the faults of any rifle or gear is out in the field. which he does and I give him kiddos for that
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 17:53
He shoots yeah, 60-100 and then calls it good and reliable. Sometimes he reviews without even shooting the weapon. He is a low end gear mall ninja. 100 rounds does not make a qualified vetting of a weapon for duty type use.
Really read it will open your eyes. If not well your as useless as that windbag.
:rolleyes:
You know what I really hate about this thread?
How people who've been on this forum for only a short time, and contribute very little, turn around and tell those that have been here from the beginning & have contributed immensely to the forum, how the forum should be conducted, how to act, and demand we answer every question, immediately, in the manner they want, and generally be treated as they feel they should, you know what .....F U! Don't like it leave!
Don't like the answers your receiving, quit asking the questions. Demanding video proof! really, your gonna ask for that? We got video of JFK getting shot, and we can't figure out who did it.
I've seen enough BM shit the bed, trying to get zeroed, that I know they are crap. I've talked to armorers, instructors and other SME, who've all reported the same, that's proof enough for me.
Interestingly enough, video of an individual example of one gun from one manufacture, is proof enough for you that it's "just as good as", but multiple first hand accounts of those same manufactures not running, is not good enough to prove they are crap?
I challenge you to show me, where any of the recognized subject matter experts, has declared every single gun that has rolled off any manufactures line, will never run or be reliable. Nor, have they declared the manufactures like Colt, BCM, and DD, have never let a bad gun out the door.
Whats been said, over and over again, is that there are certain manufacturing and assembly processes, parts quality, materials, etc etc, that are more likely to produce a quality, reliable, durable weapon.
That the odds of getting a reliable gun from certain manufactures is much much greater, then it is with others.
There's probably more BM/DPMS/Oly/etc that run then that don't, same with Colt.
I bet there's more of them that don't run, then that don't run from Colt, though.
"my xxxxx has been great and I run it hard" well, gimme a definition of that, and show me video proof! That sword cuts both ways, bud.
Don't like it here? I'm sure there's any number of boards that will hold your hand, coddle you, and tell you how great you are, go find it, and knock yourself out.
Bob
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 18:54
HAHAHAHA, I do so love your rants...at times. I still find it interesting that he demanded proof of a video, because that comedy act NUTNFANCY can run a camera and spout off gibberish about low end crap. If I wanted a video of Colt/DD/Noveske/BCM, I just watch one of LAV's vids or something from Magpul.
SW-Shooter
11-09-10, 18:57
I purchased a DPMS for my son when he was 8 and when I didn't know better. Thanks to this site I know the error of my ways. When he starts to mature I will trade his plinker for a "fighting" rifle.
From what I've gathered DPMS has its role. I appreciate the wealth of knowledge here but you'll never hear me say I'd use it as a primary HD weapon, although I'm sure it would be fine.
I've built several AR's using quality parts and the peace of mind speaks louder than the words I could type.
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 19:00
piece of mind speaks louder than the words I could type.
This right here is the #1 reason not to skimp. Trusting your rifle to never fail you, your family, your brethren.
HAHAHAHA, I do so love your rants...at times. I still find it interesting that he demanded proof of a video, because that comedy act NUTNFANCY can run a camera and spout off gibberish about low end crap. If I wanted a video of Colt/DD/Noveske/BCM, I just watch one of LAV's vids or something from Magpul.
I don't need video proof, I've been watching Colts run and run and run, since 1986.
Theres a difference between a better gun and a better choice.
Sorry for the rant.
Bob
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 19:23
No problems, I have been running my dad's Colt since about 85 and my own since 90. Well the ones the military/LE supplied me with. Now my own since 04.
:rolleyes:
You know what I really hate about this thread?
How people who've been on this forum for only a short time, and contribute very little, turn around and tell those that have been here from the beginning & have contributed immensely to the forum, how the forum should be conducted, how to act, and demand we answer every question, immediately, in the manner they want, and generally be treated as they feel they should, you know what .....F U! Don't like it leave!
Don't like the answers your receiving, quit asking the questions. Demanding video proof! really, your gonna ask for that? We got video of JFK getting shot, and we can't figure out who did it.
I've seen enough BM shit the bed, trying to get zeroed, that I know they are crap. I've talked to armorers, instructors and other SME, who've all reported the same, that's proof enough for me.
Interestingly enough, video of an individual example of one gun from one manufacture, is proof enough for you that it's "just as good as", but multiple first hand accounts of those same manufactures not running, is not good enough to prove they are crap?
I challenge you to show me, where any of the recognized subject matter experts, has declared every single gun that has rolled off any manufactures line, will never run or be reliable. Nor, have they declared the manufactures like Colt, BCM, and DD, have never let a bad gun out the door.
Whats been said, over and over again, is that there are certain manufacturing and assembly processes, parts quality, materials, etc etc, that are more likely to produce a quality, reliable, durable weapon.
That the odds of getting a reliable gun from certain manufactures is much much greater, then it is with others.
There's probably more BM/DPMS/Oly/etc that run then that don't, same with Colt.
I bet there's more of them that don't run, then that don't run from Colt, though.
"my xxxxx has been great and I run it hard" well, gimme a definition of that, and show me video proof! That sword cuts both ways, bud.
Don't like it here? I'm sure there's any number of boards that will hold your hand, coddle you, and tell you how great you are, go find it, and knock yourself out.
Bob
coddle me? oh yeah dude I need to have my milk and my ass powdered? i am just saying not every one is going to buy a a top tier gun for their first. and more over it's going to serve them well as they won't shoot the damn thing more than twice a year and maybe put 400rds down the pipe, I hit the range, and the woods as often as I can and run my guns in a real-world scenarios, run gun moving around getting your heart rate up, would I do that with my okie-dokie Model 1? no I have learned I do it with my rifles that I build with parts I know that work! yeah I'm new forums and you may think I was born yesterday; but I have been staying up all night jack-wagon! as I said I let people buy what they want I will give my humble opinion and if they want a model 1 then let them get a model 1 and when it goes wrong and they ask for your help then help them learn, but I have had alot of friend that want a AR like my go to gun, I tell them the money I put in it and they think it's crazy to have a rifle thats pushing 2k (eotech, trigger, stocks, barrel, bolt)
but I tell them get a lower or a BCM cause of they bang for the buck but you can bring a horse to water but you can't make them drink you just have to give people the info to make a better decision, it does not mean they will listen you just have to wait for them to come to the conclusion they made a mistake. thats how I was taught, even though the guy that turned me on to black rifles tried to tell me get the colt I was like I can never afford that. ( again I was 19) but model 1 and a strip lower I could do back then. Now I know better and I will just save my pennies to buy what I really want and not whats in stock at the store.
I would like to apologize for the irritation shown in my post yesterday. I was not involved in a pissing match; I was disappointed in the fact that others were pissing at each other, making me feel like I was waisting my time. I am one of those people who is under the gun (please pardon the pun) and I need to make a decision on an Ar type rifle quickly for defense of my property. I do the heavy lifting when it comes to research myself but I feel that I cannot rely on the gun store pro's and weekend wanna-a-be warriors. Magazine writers have let me down as well over the years.
When it comes to handguns, no problem. I consider myself above average in their usage and I can almost tell a good one from a bad one by looking at them. It took over 40 yrs to attain that type of skill. Now I am in a situation where a pistol/revolver is not the best option. Distances preclude the use of a shotgun as well.
Hopefully you'll understand that in my position, I need the info that could save me from buying the DPMS that some call a jam-a-matic and why Oly Arms is really that bad. My experience in the handgun world is pretty much the exact opposite of what you talk about in this forum.
For example...My Oly Arms Gov't Model has well over 10,000 rounds through it and it with 6 failure to feeds due to bad ammo. My Colt Gold Cup was sent back to the factory twice and I still couldn't get that gun to group. It is now a pretty paperweight. It isn't good for anything else. I have had great success with Taurus and Para but I can't stand Springfield or Ruger. My S&W' you'll have to pry from my cold, dead hands. However, these are based on my own experiences and I'll be willing to bet that many of you out there would think I'm nuts with my choices.
So please understand why I got fed up with the personal attacks between members. When I want that I watch MSNBC (those suckers are brutal). Please feel free to tell why a particular product isn't good or why it is. I need to learn.
Again, I apologize for the tone on my last post. Thanks.
Okay!! I just found this thread. What did I miss? :sarcastic:
By the way, cool chart. I wouldn't use it as a bible though. More like a concordance.
With all the issues with what could be a good or bad AR, should a guy take the step to build his own Frankenstein rifle using the best of all components? The seems it would effectivly end the arguement about which is best. Also would allow for bypassing mil spec if needed or wanted.
Well speaking as someone new to the forum, I can explain the frustration on some people's part. I keep seeing this and other threads in the recent posts and click to see if there is in fact a good testimonial or story about a brand "x" AR that would be interesting...
Like almost every other related post (and it seems an forum on the internet) it is just a bunch of arguing.
For those of you posting simple testimonials, thanks. There is a TON of good information on this site.
And just my opinion after being here for a while the tile of this post should just be changed to "Post that you like your crappy AR so we can tell you you are stupid"
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 20:07
Frankengun are typically a hodge-podge of less that desirable parts slapped together by some Bubba Fudd drinking a clear liquid out of a Mason jar.
Mating a BCM upper with a DD lower or vice versa of reputable manufacturer's isn't a Frankengun but a properly built rifle using parts of excellent quality.
Bride of Frankenstein weapon then. Pick one of each of the most highly rated parts (according to the chart) and put it together. Doing research now and looks to be affordable as well as doable. The equip that you have to get, you should have anyway. Viable? It seems to kill the bad rifle arguement if you can put one together right.
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 20:17
Go with a BCM upper for 385 + BCG =520 and then a Blem BCM lower complete for 280. Then all you need is a rear sight, MBUS 40, mags 10-15 a piece and hand guards 20-30.
All in all around 850-900ish minus ammo.
Isn't a bushy/dpms aroun 800.00?
Good call, I'll still do a bit of shopping but definite possibility. I like the idea of the seperate upper and lower purchase, get the skil and teaining I need and then move on to building stuff. I know I won't as for any opinion on 6.85 spc vs 6.5 Grendel. That would be suicide!
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 20:26
I know he had a sale on Magpul Moe full BCM rifles for under a 1000.00. There is a thread here about them.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=65212
fivefivesix
11-09-10, 20:27
i built a complete daniel defense rifle with all dd parts with a total at 896. i had the m4 stock if i include that total would be 996 and thats taxs and shipping
bcg 158
upper 150
lower 130
barrel 228
150 ezcar 7.0
80 lpk
http://i834.photobucket.com/albums/zz266/mkIII1022/SU1HMDAxMTctMjAxMDEwMjItMTYyMC5qcGc.jpg
i really see no reason to buy anything less. its too easy to get a good quality rifle granted i did trade 3 pmags for the rear sight and front grip
Did I just read that? A $1000+ Bushmaster?
I am buying a BCM lightweight middy upper this weekend, and will have a touch over $900 in it when I'm done, including BUIS.
Yeah. If you spend that for a Bushy, you screwed up big time. It's not necessarily terminal.
I love R. Moran's rant. Pissy little bitches coming on here for free advice and then getting all pussy hurt when they don't like it or don't like the way it's presented. Sorry dey got dere widdow feewings hurt...
Looks good fivefivesix...but I wouldn't pay $100 for an m4 stock. :sarcastic:
fivefivesix
11-09-10, 20:35
[QUOTE=120mm;810268]Did I just read that? A $1000+ Bushmaster?
I am buying a BCM lightweight middy upper this weekend, and will have a touch over $900 in it when I'm done, including BUIS.
thats why i had to post my build tally
fivefivesix
11-09-10, 20:37
Looks good fivefivesix...but I wouldn't pay $100 for an m4 stock. :sarcastic:
thanks bro, yeah i got hosed but i need it and it came with the buffer and re
jklaughrey
11-09-10, 20:38
If you pay that much, you need a bitch slap bad.
Well, that's not as bad then, if you got a complete stock kit.
fivefivesix
11-09-10, 20:43
i just checked and it is that bad. ds arms now is selling them for 50 complete.
Jeepnut,
The info is all here on this forum. People get tired of new guys coming and demanding answer's, w/o using the search function.
There are notions on the board, that the majority of us know/believe/accept as true,non-negotiable, etc etc. That gives this forum a bad rap amongst others.
Someone then comes in, and starts the same argument all over again, an argument that's long been laid to rest, by recognized sme's, not some schmo w/ a high post count on zombie forums.
So when posts like yours, and others in this thread and other threads continuously show up, by new guys, it get monotonous. Longtime posters get aggravated and into pissing contests, because we continuously have to rehash the same old tired arguments about "just as good as", when its been shown & proven that its not.
If someone feels that due to how he/she intends to use the gun, that a DPMS, Bushmaster, Oly arms, etc etc is a better CHOICE that's fine, and its been discussed here. But, that does not make it a better GUN.
The title of the threads, indicates posters should demonstrate that their guns of the listed manufacturers is better then anything else. The complete lack of that, should be a clue.
If you have lurked here for awhile, done alot of searching, and still have a question, no one is pissed at that, and they are more then happy to discuss it and help you out. The mere fact that this forum is up and running is proof or that.
Come in here and your first post is "what kind of AR should I buy" or "you guys are a bunch of elitist haters, and your just buying a name" , your gonna get your feeling hurt.
Bob
Jeepnut,
The info is all here on this forum. People get tired of new guys coming and demanding answer's, w/o using the search function.
There are notions on the board, that the majority of us know/believe/accept as true,non-negotiable, etc etc. That gives this forum a bad rap amongst others.
Someone then comes in, and starts the same argument all over again, an argument that's long been laid to rest, by recognized sme's, not some schmo w/ a high post count on zombie forums.
So when posts like yours, and others in this thread and other threads continuously show up, by new guys, it get monotonous. Longtime posters get aggravated and into pissing contests, because we continuously have to rehash the same old tired arguments about "just as good as", when its been shown & proven that its not.
If someone feels that due to how he/she intends to use the gun, that a DPMS, Bushmaster, Oly arms, etc etc is a better CHOICE that's fine, and its been discussed here. But, that does not make it a better GUN.
The title of the threads, indicates posters should demonstrate that their guns of the listed manufacturers is better then anything else. The complete lack of that, should be a clue.
If you have lurked here for awhile, done alot of searching, and still have a question, no one is pissed at that, and they are more then happy to discuss it and help you out. The mere fact that this forum is up and running is proof or that.
Come in here and your first post is "what kind of AR should I buy" or "you guys are a bunch of elitist haters, and your just buying a name" , your gonna get your feeling hurt.
Bob
Fair enough sir. and I do agree with "what kind of ar should I buy" and I apologize for any rudeness. With deals like BCM and other high quality vender's you can build a awesome DI AR-15 for great price as long as the buyer does his homework.
FYI- When I was in Iraq I had 500 BM's under my care and use. Another company I was helping out had DPMS carbines. So yeah you could say that I have seen them get used pretty hard. I also saw the issues as they developed. The shortcomings have been well discussed and pointed out.
Honestly I am to the point where I am going to quit telling people anything and I am going to just tell them to go for it and see what happens.
Or maybe I will start highly recommending BM, Delton, Oly, etc...and maybe it will have a reverse effect.
Maybe I am wrong, but something someone says is a small picture on the forums. and there are things even you don't know on the variables, as it's the internet and then you see people like nutnfancy on youtube that give hard evidence, and proof of brand X like a RRA or even the dreadful BM, and for some people all the local gun shop has is a DPMS or a BM, and I remember a just awhile ago you could not even get a black rifle and if you found one they were way over price. so as I said put your money where your mouth is! And yeah BMW does cost alot more than a Buick cause thoses are cars. but a DD M4 Carbine, v2 cost $1537.00, a Bushmaster MOE M4-Type Carbine cost $1295.00 a dpms AP4 Panther cost $949.00, a cmmg 16" M4 Carbine cost $1075.95. and yeah it's not all about cost but some people have a budget and want the most bang for the buck, maybe i'm wrong maybe you have a shot all these brands and ran them hard? I know I haven't and I know for my first AR-15 all i could afford was a DPMS lower with a model 1 sales upper and I had save every penny!(when I was 19) and you know what I shot the crap out of that gun and it worked! and as with everything there is a learning curve and I was lucky enough to have someone that was there to help me when My extractor failed, or when after I finally shot the barrel out taught me that it was time for a new BCG and told me what barrel, and explained in detail why it was important, I kept that rifle till just two years ago sold it for $700 to a friend, and it's still chugging along. maybe your luckier than some, and got the best rifle out there, good for you. as some other people have said and I agree it's pissing contest. I think people should help new AR-15 owners instead of dogging on there first black rifle, when my friend ask me whats the best rifle I can get for the money I tell them BCM if they are on a budget, I always tell them to buy a stripped lower and show them how it works and suggest what I know will work for their rifle and when they say "I don't want to spend that much on a stock!" I go okay you can always get a better stock later. I don't know what you do for your friends or people you introduce to shooting, but I would hope you would be a positive and helpful influence. in stead of saying you need top tier X period! SO why do people buy those brands cause some people don't want to break the bank for there first black rifle.
FYI- When I was in Iraq I had 500 BM's under my care and use. Another company I was helping out had DPMS carbines. So yeah you could say that I have seen them get used pretty hard. I also saw the issues as they developed. The shortcomings have been well discussed and pointed out.
Honestly I am to the point where I am going to quit telling people anything and I am going to just tell them to go for it and see what happens.
Or maybe I will start highly recommending BM, Delton, Oly, etc...and maybe it will have a reverse effect.
I had no clue these companies even had military contracts I thought FNH and Colt were the big suppliers of M16's and M4's. and I know double star had a deal with the Boarder patrol. Thank you for the info
I had no clue these companies even had military contracts I thought FNH and Colt were the big suppliers of M16's and M4's. and I know double star had a deal with the Boarder patrol. Thank you for the info
They don't have DOD contracts, they have contracts with private military contractors that in turn have DOD contracts.
I guess I should have specified what I meant by companies. I am a contractor not a military member.
I had no clue these companies even had military contracts I thought FNH and Colt were the big suppliers of M16's and M4's. and I know double star had a deal with the Boarder patrol. Thank you for the info
i just checked and it is that bad. ds arms now is selling them for 50 complete.
Yeah, and for that same $100 they are selling a complete MOE furniture kit (stock, grip, handguards, RE/buffer/spring/etc, and maybe even the trigger guard as well).
The true cost of your rifle must take into account many more factors than the base cost of the rifle on the day you bought it. Add a few thousand rounds of ammunition and then think about how silly it is to be looking to save money on the rifle cost by buying on the low-end. Never could understand that logic... You will spend many times more on ammunition than you will on a rifle... or you ought to... so buy a good one and shoot it a lot.
I have a 16" Rock River that I like. Admittedly, I bought it before I knew better. The gas key was not staked properly but that was only 10 minutes with a hammer and punch. The castle nut wasn’t staked at all but that wasn’t a hindrance because I immediately replaced the stock with a VLTOR.
Is it as good as Colt, BCM, etc? No.
What I like about it is with the 1:9 barrel it’s very accurate with most 55g FMJ loads, which is what I shoot the most of. Occasionally, it’s gratifying to shoot tiny groups off the bench. It’s been 100% reliable. No malfunctions or issues in slightly over 4,000 rounds.
I also have a LMT Defender and a BCM upper on a Spikes lower that would be more appropriate for defensive applications.
The true cost of your rifle must take into account many more factors than the base cost of the rifle on the day you bought it. Add a few thousand rounds of ammunition and then think about how silly it is to be looking to save money on the rifle cost by buying on the low-end. Never could understand that logic... You will spend many times more on ammunition than you will on a rifle... or you ought to... so buy a good one and shoot it a lot.
This is probably the best post of the thread.
Now instead of telling all the Delton, CMMG, DPMS, Bushmaster guys their rifle sucks, we should be helping them to improve the reliability of their rifle. After all, selling a rifle because the bolt carrier or castle nut wasn't staked seems pretty extreme. If the bolt holds up to 500 rounds, chances are it wasn't cracked and magnetic particle inspection wouldn't have found anything anyway. The odds of all the lugs cracking off at one time is incredibly low, almost non-existant, so there is another not so major issue. Is the chamber too tight would be an important one, but again not necessarily cause to sell the rifle.
I'm with the "Grumpy MSG" on this one. So you don't like the bolt and carrier on a particular AR rifle, just how long does it take to replace a bolt and carrier? This could go on and on. Constructive criticism, not just criticism, is more beneficial...I'm thinking. Just me.
coyote hunter
11-17-10, 15:43
I'm with the "Grumpy MSG" on this one. So you don't like the bolt and carrier on a particular AR rifle, just how long does it take to replace a bolt and carrier? This could go on and on. Constructive criticism, not just criticism, is more beneficial...I'm thinking. Just me.
From my experience here, that is what the owners of DPMS,BM,RRA...etc. are getting. When I got my AR, most everyone I talked to said BM was a fine way to go. So I was happy with it, still am.
When I made my first appearance on here, I was directed to the threads that taught me about staking, and many other potential flaws of my new beauty. Now I've learned where problems might show, and I am most definitely more educated about modern AR manufacturers.
Also, the idea of "how long does it take to replace the bolt and carrier?" has little to do with time, it’s mostly about quality, and a little to do with price. Buying a $1000 BM off the shelf, and then throwing a $130 BCG from BCM puts you just a few dollars shy of the whole BCM rifle. Why not get the better gun?
I wish I knew that BCM was a higher quality rifle. When I got my BM I thought BCM was still just making uppers. (I was a teeny bit blind to all the different manufacturers at the time)
I guess what I'm trying to say is, as a Bushmaster owner I have received no negative comments, insults or anything of the sort. Just suggestions.
Also, the idea of "how long does it take to replace the bolt and carrier?" has little to do with time, it’s mostly about quality, and a little to do with price. Buying a $1000 BM off the shelf, and then throwing a $130 BCG from BCM puts you just a few dollars shy of the whole BCM rifle. Why not get the better gun?
Think that my point was missed. Let's say that some poor unfortunate and misled shooter purchased one of those horrible RRA rifles. Then, the "misled" shooter came to this site and learned that the major thing, just as an example, that is really wrong with the gun is the bolt and carrier assembly. Now, rather than go and purchase an entirely new rifle for $900, plus or minus, why not replace the offending part(s) and save a few dollars? Like the old saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the wash water." :D
coyote hunter
11-17-10, 15:58
Think that my point was missed. Let's say that some poor unfortunate and misled shooter purchased one of those horrible RRA rifles. Then, the "misled" shooter came to this site and learned that the major thing, just as an example, that is really wrong with the gun is the bolt and carrier assembly. Now, rather than go and purchase an entirely new rifle for $900, plus or minus, why not replace the offending part(s) and save a few dollars? Like the old saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the wash water." :D
Alright, I get what your saying.
But I think I could be catagorized as a "misled" shooter, and im not chomping at the bit to sell my gun, but you bet if I get an offer that would put a HUGE dent in a BCM, im going to sell:cool:
well, shuck's folks... :)
i threw a 20'' apex m16 pencil barrel on a dsa A3 upper, and a cheap aluminum free floating handguard , single rail gas block' n' an a DD 1.5 buis.
plum crazy lower n' a old A1 stock. super light ! but b4 i knew any better, i bought a BCM bolt carrier group' auto carrier at that !
silly thing shoots like gang busters !!
hasen't failed yet. seems to be pretty reliable. guess i did good with the bcm bcg.
peabody
Neither of the 2 ARs I own are 'upper tier'/left-side-of-the-chart rifles. For what I use them for, they are just fine. I am learning to tinker on them, and as relatively inexpensive rifles, I don't mind if I goof up something....kinda like owning an AMC Gremlin and working on the engine (not saying that I have done this, but, you know, just sayin'....). I will own, or more likely build, a 'better' AR some day, but for now, I really don't need to.
I understand and very much appreciate the reason for The Chart, and look to it often as I tinker and upgrade; really no different than what I do when I read Consumer Reports or go to CNET when I shop for a new widget. I understand that my rifles are not as quality as some others (but are better than some), as I am an informed consumer and made my purchases with knowledge afore.
Think that my point was missed. Let's say that some poor unfortunate and misled shooter purchased one of those horrible RRA rifles. Then, the "misled" shooter came to this site and learned that the major thing, just as an example, that is really wrong with the gun is the bolt and carrier assembly. Now, rather than go and purchase an entirely new rifle for $900, plus or minus, why not replace the offending part(s) and save a few dollars? Like the old saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the wash water." :D
There's a bunch of threads that say exactly that. Just because you haven't read them, doesn't mean they are not there. In fact, there is at least one stickied at the top of the forum.
Besides coming to a guy's house, grabbing the scruff of his neck, and forcing him to read it, how do you suggest we "force" him to "not throw the baby out with the was water."
In reality, I think a bunch of the folks you describe realize that replacing the BCG is NOT enough to make their lower tier AR as reliable as they'd like. Because just replacing the BCG is not.
And once they get done paying for all the upgrades necessary, they realize that selling their lower tier gun and buying a new one is CHEAPER!!!!!!
richdkim77
11-19-10, 18:47
There's a bunch of threads that say exactly that. Just because you haven't read them, doesn't mean they are not there. In fact, there is at least one stickied at the top of the forum.
Besides coming to a guy's house, grabbing the scruff of his neck, and forcing him to read it, how do you suggest we "force" him to "not throw the baby out with the was water."
In reality, I think a bunch of the folks you describe realize that replacing the BCG is NOT enough to make their lower tier AR as reliable as they'd like. Because just replacing the BCG is not.
And once they get done paying for all the upgrades necessary, they realize that selling their lower tier gun and buying a new one is CHEAPER!!!!!!
I can relate to this first hand. By the time I rebuilt my Bushmaster with LMT / BCM parts, I was within a few hundred dollars of buying just an entirely new rifle. In hindsight, I should have sold the Bushy from the start, and purchased what I wanted in the first place.
My Oly is better than anything else because it was assembled by a Hero (SSG Hawes,Sniper, awarded Silver Star during Battle of Gowerdesh) who sold it to my Wife, who presented it to me when I returned from Overseas. It then was used to build my skill set from 10-400 yards.
Way I figure it that means more than whoever made the parts.
We aren't talking about an emotional attachment. We are talking about functional technical aspects.
My Oly is better than anything else because it was assembled by a Hero (SSG Hawes,Sniper, awarded Silver Star during Battle of Gowerdesh) who sold it to my Wife, who presented it to me when I returned from Overseas. It then was used to build my skill set from 10-400 yards.
Way I figure it that means more than whoever made the parts.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v399/tradja/thread_direction.gif
:p
I'll give the original intent of this thread a shot.
In 2006, I bought my first AR for $525. It was a well-worn parts rifle from my local pawn shop. It featured a PWA preban lower, unknown LPK, and a 16" A1 upper marked with Martin Marietta forge marks. The semi-auto carrier was not staked at all. The extractor spring insert was blue and very beat up.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v399/tradja/Guns%202010/AR.jpg
It had frequent failures to feed with the Wolf steel case ammo I was feeding it. With the few boxes of brass-cased ammo I fed it, it ran well.
I mostly got to practice FTF and FTE drills with it until I sold the stripped preban lower for $475 to a guy in CT, leaving me with a complete rifle kit less stripped lower, and only $50 down from my original outlay.
I bought a new Stag lower receiver for $89 and my local semi-retired FFL/gunsmith spent an enjoyable evening teaching me how to install the LPK. The resulting build ran a few boxes of brass ammo well, and surprisingly, seemed to run Wolf better than the old build, which I do not understand since it was the same BCG and upper. I meant to keep it, but 2 years later, I just sold it for $500.
So yes, I bought a cheap parts rifle that lacked most of the features on The Chart. However, it was a great learning experience that ended up being relatively profitable, and I was able to identify the attributes that I wanted on my "good" rifle. I have been very happy with the LMT lower and BCM middy upper I had purchased since (with research from this site and The Chart) and had no further need for the A1 Stag build.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v399/tradja/Guns%202010/AR.jpg[/img]
It had frequent failures to feed with the Wolf steel case ammo I was feeding it. With the few boxes of brass-cased ammo I fed it, it ran well.
I mostly got to practice FTF and FTE drills with it until I sold the stripped preban lower for $475 to a guy in CT, leaving me with a complete rifle kit less stripped lower, and only $50 down from my original outlay.
I bought a new Stag lower receiver for $89 and my local semi-retired FFL/gunsmith spent an enjoyable evening teaching me how to install the LPK. The resulting build ran a few boxes of brass ammo well, and surprisingly, seemed to run Wolf better than the old build, which I do not understand since it was the same BCG and upper. I meant to keep it, but 2 years later, I just sold it for $500.
So yes, I bought a cheap parts rifle that lacked most of the features on The Chart. However, it was a great learning experience that ended up being relatively profitable, and I was able to identify the attributes that I wanted on my "good" rifle. I have been very happy with the LMT lower and BCM middy upper I had purchased since (with research from this site and The Chart) and had no further need for the A1 Stag build.
This is precisely what cheap guns are good for. The problem is, you have to get them cheap, or there is really no reason to waste the money.
I've owned a bunch of $500 ARs prior to seeing the light, and after selling them, am really not out a bunch of money. However, I wouldn't depend on them for anything serious.
But there is a difference in buying a $500 plinker and knowing so, and spending $1000 on a Bushmaster and thinking you have something good there.
But there is a difference in buying a $500 plinker and knowing so, and spending $1000 on a Bushmaster and thinking you have something good there.
...and this is exactly what I was happy to avoid. Selling the $500 AR this week provided some interesting observations in this regard.
The classified ad ran in Saturday's paper. Saturday morning, I got a call before breakfast asking about the rifle. He was disappointed that it was an A1 16". He was looking for a varmint/coyote gun and spent much of the conversation trying to convince himself that it could be one.
The next caller was also looking for a varmint/coyote gun, but once we met up FTF, the excitement of having an AR in his hands clearly got the best of him and, after a weak lowball attempt that I politely brushed away, he bought it anyway, intending to sell off the upper and put a varmint upper on it. Never mind that it has a 4-position stock and a decent but not precision trigger. I observed the allure of the EBR -- it didn't really suit his needs, but he HAD to have an AR. Perhaps anyAR.
The rest of this week, I have received more than a dozen calls about the AR. Even when I politely explain that it is gone, they want to know all about it. Even my neighbor did, who works at a big box bubba store. He really seemed disappointed that a $500 AR got away under his nose.
When presenting their reason for seeking an AR, most of the callers produced some vague anti-POTUS slogans, but the idea of fighting with an AR, at least absent a benchrest, seemed quite foreign to them and in any event inferior to a .308 or .30-06.
I had 350rds of Wolf 55gr for sale as well. Just this afternoon before turkey, I met up with an older gentleman (former USAF and LEO, and a reloader) who bought the Wolf ammo for his Oly despite being disappointed that my $500 AR was gone. During our discussion, I mentioned selling this gear and ammo to fund further classes:
"Oh, like competition classes? Like IPSC?"
"Not exactly. Defensive shooting classes."
"???"
"How to fight with a rifle."
"Sniper shooting?"
"No. The ones I've been to are mostly about home and self defense and running the rifle efficiently."
"Oh, you mean that survivalist stuff."
:D
I'm not really sure what survivalists are into. Probably DPMS. Or SKS.
Commenting that I seemed to know a little more about the platform than your average central Oregon rockchuck blaster, he sincerely asked me about his son's plans to:
-- purchase a .50 Beowulf upper, a round developed and currently employed by SOCOM because the Taliban routinely shake off multiple .223 (sic) hits.
-- replace his Bushy's buffer spring with an unspecified pneumatic gizmo. Apparently the sprooinnngg really bothers his son. I replied that I had never tried such a device, but it seemed to me to be fixing something that isn't really broken.
My point, such as it is, is that this week with my $500 AR ad, I've seen that the allure of $500 ARs is strong here in Bubbaville Oregon. As I type this, there are legions of bubbas lined up in the snow in the dark to snatch up whatever doorbuster AR is offered at the bubba box store. (ok, I just checked the flier for the first time. They have Federal Bulk Pack .22LR for $12.88. I'm there.)
Will the $599 doorbuster blast coyotes? I bet it will.
Will it look cool to your B-I-L on the tailgate of your Chevy next Labor Day out at the cinder pit? Yes.
Can you accessorize it like a grown-up Lego set with gonzo bolt-ons? Sure. I went through this phase too.
And that is all that many AR owners seem to require of their rifles. For these entirely legitimate purposes, I would argue, "right Chart" rifles are as good as anything else.
I'm really not trying to be any kind of snob, or certainly a koolaid drinker. I have a very modest LMT/BCM/EoTech rig that currently sports a 2 point sling handcrafted from a seatbelt out of a '85 Datsun. My post probably appears to disparage bubbas, but that is not my intent or the point. As a result of fiddling around with my $525 pawnshop AR for 2 years, I'd discovered that I really wanted a rig suitable for as many classes as I can afford to attend. That identified purpose simply led me to a different rifle than those with other goals.
ETA: I wonder what kind and number of callers I would have gotten if I had a 6920 or Noveske in my ad, for an appropriate price?
There's a bunch of threads that say exactly that. Just because you haven't read them, doesn't mean they are not there. In fact, there is at least one stickied at the top of the forum.
Besides coming to a guy's house, grabbing the scruff of his neck, and forcing him to read it, how do you suggest we "force" him to "not throw the baby out with the was water."
In reality, I think a bunch of the folks you describe realize that replacing the BCG is NOT enough to make their lower tier AR as reliable as they'd like. Because just replacing the BCG is not.
And once they get done paying for all the upgrades necessary, they realize that selling their lower tier gun and buying a new one is CHEAPER!!!!!!
Very sorry that I didn't read all of the ten zillion posts on this topic. I'll try to do better in the future. However, at my age I can't promise. I do find all of these posts particularly interesting since I am, most likely, the first person on this board to fire the weapon which was to become the M-16. We thought that the USAF had lost its mind since it was such a departure from the Garand, the M14, and/or the M1 Carbine, etc.
It's very interesting to read everyone's opinion on what is the best rifle on the market. However, much of it seems to be based on theory rather than statistical data. Statements like "the RRA or the Stag rifles suck" really don't "git 'er done." Or, a statement like "one of my friends owns a XYZ rifle and it's a piece of crap," doesn't give one anything of value. One needs much more statistical data to make a reasonable judgment.
If someone would like to do a research project that would really be of high value, why not try to gather the "failure rate" data from the various manufacturers? All of them seem to offer a "lifetime warranty," so they should know how many returns there have been, and what the failure was. Then, it's simple to work out a percentage for the failure rate of the different components. That would really be valuable information. If that has already been done, sorry that I missed it, again.
Just my thoughts, but whether or not a particular company has staked the key properly, or has built certain components from a certain grade of steel is extremely interesting, and useful, but it may, in fact, bear little relation to what is actually happening out where the "rubber meets the road." Actually, one of the most highly respected builders of complete M-16 bolts, as used my Les Bauer and others custom builders, is Young Manufacturing. Here is their take on staking the bolt key. Guess they have an opinion, too. Who knows?
"Staking the gas key on the AR-15 and M-16 carrier.
There has been a lot of talk about the pros and cons of staking the gas key on the carrier. Here is our opinion and why Young Manufacturing will not stake keys. We have been making carriers since 1991. The US Mil Spec. assembly drawing requires the carrier key to be staked. Contrary to some popular opinions staking does not “SEAL” the gas key. Staking keeps the screws from backing out Period. If you do not properly torque the screws to 56 inch pounds you will be staking a screw that is loose or one that is over torqued and prone to breakage. We have seen plenty of staked screws that are loose or broken. The Mil Spec. also calls for the gas key bottom surface to be “SEALED” with Permatex gasket sealer. Something no one does to our knowledge. Here is our procedure for installing a gas key. First clean the oil from the gas key and the mating surface on the carrier. Then clean the oil from the screw threads. We use break cleaner for this. Next use a very light coating of Permatex high strength thread locker gel on the bottom of the key. PN 27010. This is much easier to use than the Permatex gasket sealer. It comes in a plastic twist dispenser. Make sure you don’t use so much that it squishes into the gas port hole. The cure rate is 60 minutes. Next coat the screw threads with the same gel. Install the key and torque the screws to 56 inch pounds. Should you decide to remove the key for some reason don’t use the old screws when you put the key back on! You will most likely break them during installation or when you fire the rifle. Go to the local hardware store and buy new 10-32 x ¼” SHCS. If you feel the need to stake the screws spend the money and get one of the staking tools from Brownell that uses a screw type system to swedge the material into the top of the screw. Don’t use a hammer and a punch! You can stretch the thread on the screw and now you have a loose screw that will eventually break if the gun even fires. We will not warrantee a carrier with a staked key no matter who staked it. You will be charged for a new key and any labor required to remove broken screws.
Good Shooting!
Daniel H Young
President"
P.S. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm not taking sides, and I'm not attacking anyone else's opinion. Granted, as a Vietnam era C-130 pilot the M-16 was not my official combat weapon. Our issued weapon was a revolver or pistol (the 1911 rules) and forget the Beretta. However, note that I would never go into any armed intervention with only one weapon, or even two, if I were given the choice. Sounds reasonable to me for one to be well prepared whenever he or she is playing the game of "you bet your butt." I'm much like the current advertisement on television, where the guy lays down his dozen or so personal weapons. Yes, a reliable rifle would be my first choice, then a grenade (or sixty), a pistol, a "Rambo" knife, and, finally, some really good running shoes...if all else fails. Trying to keep things a tad light, here.
Whatever floats one's boat is fine with me. Each to his own. "Carry on. But, I will not be in the area all day." ;-)
"Very sorry that I didn't read all of the ten zillion posts on this topic. I'll try to do better in the future. However, at my age I can't promise. I do find all of these posts particularly interesting since I am, most likely, the first person on this board to fire the weapon which was to become the M-16. We thought that the USAF had lost its mind since it was such a departure from the Garand, the M14, and/or the M1 Carbine, etc."
Just because you shot the weapon that became the M16 doesn't mean you know much about it. If you were to speak about flying a C130 in Vietnam I am sure many of us would be interested in what you had to say.
The reason many people come here is to learn about the M4. No one is here to make you read or belive anything. Not many will want to listen to your foolish statements either.
If someone would like to do a research project that would really be of high value, why not try to gather the "failure rate" data from the various manufacturers? All of them seem to offer a "lifetime warranty," so they should know how many returns there have been, and what the failure was.
This statement shows your limited comprehension of the subject matter.
Although I’m sure companies keep statistics on what percentage of guns are returned, I can’t imagine them releasing accurate info of the type you are asking for. Also, not everyone that has a failure or issue, sends the gun back to the manufacturer.
A better method would be to get opinions from professional trainers that see many different brands on a weekly basis. That would be statistical data one could use.
This statement shows your limited comprehension of the subject matter.
Although I’m sure companies keep statistics on what percentage of guns are returned, I can’t imagine them releasing accurate info of the type you are asking for. Also, not everyone that has a failure or issue, sends the gun back to the manufacturer.
A better method would be to get opinions from professional trainers that see many different brands on a weekly basis. That would be statistical data one could use.
In your opinion, I have limited comprehension of the subject matter. I had hoped that the responders would attack the message and not the messenger, but forget that. Like many people in society some "assume" this and that about another person. I've made not such judgment about others because it lacks relevance.
In your limited comprehension of the subject matter, if any manufacturer of AR rifles had a very good failure rate, they should be pleased to have it posted. Only those with poor statistics would or should be hesitant.
Don Robison
11-27-10, 17:58
I had hoped that the responders would attack the message and not the messenger, but forget that.
It might help your position if you told people what your credentials are other than just shooting it before it was the M16. There are a lot of people who have shot prototypes that don't know squat about the system they are shooting. I'm not picking on you; just giving some friendly advice.
"Very sorry that I didn't read all of the ten zillion posts on this topic. I'll try to do better in the future. However, at my age I can't promise. I do find all of these posts particularly interesting since I am, most likely, the first person on this board to fire the weapon which was to become the M-16. We thought that the USAF had lost its mind since it was such a departure from the Garand, the M14, and/or the M1 Carbine, etc."
Just because you shot the weapon that became the M16 doesn't mean you know much about it. If you were to speak about flying a C130 in Vietnam I am sure many of us would be interested in what you had to say.
The reason many people come here is to learn about the M4. No one is here to make you read or belive anything. Not many will want to listen to your foolish statements either.
Just as I imagined, you attack the messenger and not the message. And, it doesn't matter that I flew the C-130 during Vietnam any more than it matters that anyone else served in a particular theater. We did what we did. But, any intelligent person looks around and learns regardless of what they were doing in a particular action. And, if anyone is interested in a particular thing, they probably have spent hours researching pertinent information.
What's the point of your statement "Not many will want to listen to your foolish statements either?" Tell me why I should listen to your opinion, in that case? Where college did you attend? Again, there's nothing to be gained in slamming people.
I have just noted that others here have made the comment that they wouldn't want to rely on a particular brand of weapon/rifle for their survival. My point was why one should rely on a single weapon for their survival. Perhaps I went the long way around to make the point. As I said in my previous post, it doesn't prove or solve anything by attacking another person. I'll be pleased to match intelligence with you if that's what you are implying by your "foolish" remarks statement.
I wasn't bragging that I was one of the first people to shoot the AR, just showing how long I have been interested in the particular weapons system. Read my message again if I failed to make the point. And, I was trying to make the point that I am still interested in learning more. Visiting this board is not my only resource for the AR, nor has it been for years and years, even though it is a very good one. "Every person is my superior in that I may learn from them."
In addition, I was, and am, simply trying to make the point that it would help to have actual statistical data to evaluate any company that makes the M-4, etc., before writing them off completely. That's whether one can get such data, or not. But, if a particular company were to have a very small failure rate of their components, they should not be hesitant to share such info with prospective customers. It would be really great for sales. If some companies were to respond, while others did not respond to a questionnaire, that should be of interest, too. It seems that this would be useful information for everyone on this board. The M-4 is a "version" of the M-16 or AR platform, so the data should cut both ways. :big_boss:
You came across as arrogant and looking for a fight. Looks like the second assumption was right on. Arguing with you is not something I am interested in Doing. I went to Norwich University. Where did you go to school?
It's very interesting to read everyone's opinion on what is the best rifle on the market. However, much of it seems to be based on theory rather than statistical data. Statements like "the RRA or the Stag rifles suck" really don't "git 'er done." Or, a statement like "one of my friends owns a XYZ rifle and it's a piece of crap," doesn't give one anything of value. One needs much more statistical data to make a reasonable judgment.
Please research the forum as well as you can and look for less aggressive posts and threads on this matter. The statistical data is out there and glowing like the sun. First off, the well educated users on this forum will not say RRA, Stag, S&W M&P, Bushmaster and so on and so on "suck".
The more informed members will explain to you the use of improper barrel steel (4140 vs 4150), wrong front sight sizes (F marked), poor carrier key staking (no matter what Young manufacturing says), no castle nut staking, shrouded or non shrouded bolt carriers, M-16/ AR-15 bolt carriers, out of spec chambers, wrong twist rate, and poor small parts quality control.
These issues, or combinations of, cause the above mentioned brands to be less reliable than brands that are equal to or better than the TDP such as Colt, DD and BCM. I am not a rich man by any means so if I am going to invest $1000 of my hard earned money into a rifle, I want the best rifle for my money. Sure I can get a DPMS for $800 but after I fix broken parts and replace shot out barrels, I will have spent well over the extra $200 a BCM costs.
Buy ONCE Cry ONCE is my motto. My children are young and I know that my grand kids will enjoy my ARs.
You came across as arrogant and looking for a fight. Looks like the second assumption was right on. Arguing with you is not something I am interested in Doing. I went to Norwich University. Where did you go to school?
Nope. Don't have time for fighting, and that's your opinion, of course. As for school, I finished Louisiana Tech University, USAF UPT, Brooks Institute of Photography, East Texas State University, and Northwestern State University. But, that is not important in the realm of these things. You asked. One must know what they say about assumptions... :laugh:
It was not my intention to argue with anyone, as I said several times in my previous messages. There is no "attitude" in the message that you just responded to...that's your "assumption." I'm simply saying, and it has been said before on this forum, that statistical data is what one really needs in order to evaluate anything fairly and objectively, not subjective comments. And, I was simply trying to suggest ways that such data might be acquired. How can one argue with that? Beats me. :sad:
I was just hoping that someone on this forum had the contacts that would enable them to gather such important information, either from the manufacturers or the trainers, and put up a "chart" which shows the "failure rate" of the various companies that make M-4's. And, what the various failures might be. One never knows until they ask, or try. It might be tough to get really relevant information for evaluation. Everyone knows that it depends upon usage of the weapon before the failure happened. If Xyz company's weapons normally failed after 100,000 rounds that's a pertinent statistic. However, if the same company had a great number of weapons failed after only 3,000 rounds of use, that would be even more important, too, it seems. Perhaps that's too simplistic for consideration, don't know. Not trying to be argumentative, or show an attitude in any way. Just trying to present something for further consideration and thought. :confused:
Someone, trying to be helpful, and I appreciate that, suggested that one should list their accomplishments behind their names. In theory that would be really great. But, it would be too easy for anyone to simply make up impressive credentials. I'm just trying to ask common sense pertinent questions, and gain relevant information. Guess I should be like the "little red hen." :rolleyes:
:rolleyes: Great(sigh)
Its been brought up before, probably in this thread. The overwhelming opinion for industry types and other sme's is that no manufacturer is going to release that info, good or bad, period.
Its been asked in duty pistol discussions. Most manufacturers have the PD sign non disclosure agreements, so no one knows why one gun failed and another passed.
I believe one poster, even contacted Ruger(?), and was told, that info is not available.
I suppose if you did a bit more reading around here, you might have figured that out.
What we do have, as noted previously, is a large amount of "anecdotal" evidence, that starts to become very convincing.
When multiple well known instructors report the same brands continuing to give poor performance, class to class, and the same brands, continue to give superior performance over the long term, cops call that a clue.
One could also then "assume" that certain materials, manufacturing & assembly processes , and test procedures used by the consistently superior performing guns have something to do with it, and therefore, other guns made the same way, could reasonably be expected to perform in a similar fashion.
But what do I know, I only have 12 years of schoolin......all the way to the sixth grade.
Bob
:rolleyes: Great(sigh)
Its been brought up before, probably in this thread. The overwhelming opinion for industry types and other sme's is that no manufacturer is going to release that info, good or bad, period.
Its been asked in duty pistol discussions. Most manufacturers have the PD sign non disclosure agreements, so no one knows why one gun failed and another passed.
I believe one poster, even contacted Ruger(?), and was told, that info is not available.
I suppose if you did a bit more reading around here, you might have figured that out.
What we do have, as noted previously, is a large amount of "anecdotal" evidence, that starts to become very convincing.
When multiple well known instructors report the same brands continuing to give poor performance, class to class, and the same brands, continue to give superior performance over the long term, cops call that a clue.
One could also then "assume" that certain materials, manufacturing & assembly processes , and test procedures used by the consistently superior performing guns have something to do with it, and therefore, other guns made the same way, could reasonably be expected to perform in a similar fashion.
But what do I know, I only have 12 years of schoolin......all the way to the sixth grade.
Bob
That's alright Bob, I finished the third grade seven times. But, I did finish "shade school university" out on the farm as a kid. Much more pertinent to one's life.
Anyhow, forgive me for being a bit lazy. Perhaps my suggestion should have been, "Would someone gather all of the anecdotal evidence on this forum and put it together in a chart for me?" LOL Man, have you tried to read all of the posts here? I'm so old I might not finish reading 'em all, but I'm trying. But, you caught me, I just tried to cheat and get the info without doing too much WORK. Work is a four-letter word in my personal dictionary.... That's why I elected to fly in the military rather than "WALK"...another one of those four-letter words.
Dang, I catch on quick, just show me seven or eight times...
Thanks for your thoughts. I figgered em out after I dug up my ole lexicon to give me "sum hep." LOL Man, I've stirred up a hornet's nest. Ya don't have to know a dang thing about anything in particular to know the importance and relevance of doing research, the gathering of relevant and pertinent information, and the evaluation thereof. For me, I kinda go with something that I read on a billboard one time, "Can't is only found in the dictionary of fools." So, I keep on foolin' around...not taking "can't be done" as an answer. Sometimes I "Can't hardly." ;)
: What we do have, as noted previously, is a large amount of "anecdotal" evidence, that starts to become very convincing.
When multiple well known instructors report the same brands continuing to give poor performance, class to class, and the same brands, continue to give superior performance over the long term, cops call that a clue.
Us researchers call that "qualitative data". Individually, it is an anecdote, with limited utility. But if you collect enough anecdotes that coincide with a set of variables, you can triangulate your way to a pretty damned precise set of data.
One could also then "assume" that certain materials, manufacturing & assembly processes , and test procedures used by the consistently superior performing guns have something to do with it, and therefore, other guns made the same way, could reasonably be expected to perform in a similar fashion.
The Young Manufacturing guy is a ****ing moron. Just because it is possible to improperly stake a gas key, and some people don't understand what it's for, doesn't mean you don't do it as a safety measure. His "logic" in that statement is just wrong.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.