......
Printable View
......
I would take a BCM midlength over a Colt any day.
That said, I'd take a Colt any day.
Colts are very high quality, but it's hard to match BCM's attention to detail.
It's almost like BCM stuff is assembled by a bunch of Marine recruits deathly afraid that if they screw something up, they will spend a few hours getting smoked.
Tough call. I say go with the middy.
I like Grant's BCM package, and in many ways, it is going to be the superior rifle in terms of basic configuration; that said, if you don't already own a couple of 6920s, then this is a no-brainer decision to me. I would buy the Colt ... and then begin saving for the BCM.
AC
I'd say the only thing the 6920 has the edge on is brand recognition... and that's debatable.
Middy from Grant & BCM.
Question set one:
Do you plan on keeping it? Is this a lifetime purchase? Do you want the most bang for your buck? (Although the prices are nearly the same now, and with colt to soon be selling complete uppers this becomes nearly non-issue)
Question set two:
What is your turn-over rate on firearms? If you have just enough money in the bank for this rifle, will there be a time you need raise funds?
I believe that the pony is more recognizable and therefore may have better resale. For those "in the know" a BCM is its equal, has a better warranty, and from my understanding, not personal experience, BCM has excellent CS.
NOt saying colt does not, just saying I have not had to use them;)
I would say if it has to be a 16" barrel, go with the midlength.
I appreciate the underlying point that you're making here, but no ... it's simply not debatable at all. BCM's excellent reputation notwithstanding, there is no persuasive way to equate a little-known four year old small business to the gold standard of AR production around the world for the past 40+ years.
Please understand that I'm not challenging this statement to be unkind, but such a comparison serves neither company well. BCM builds an excellent rifle, no doubt, but even if they are still selling them 20 or 30 years from now, there will still be a quarter-million Colts out there in service for every BCM -- and even that is probably being conservative. The strong suit of BCM is that they have effectively equalled Colt's quality in a non-contracted, independently-produced rifle; not that they have beat the old master at its own game.
It's not that I think that aspiring to own a BCM is a bad thing -- far from it -- but I do believe that every serious student of the AR/M4 should own at least one genuine Colt while they can still be had. It's not just about resale value tomorrow; it's about truly understanding the baseline for these weapons today.
Already have a Colt? Then, by all means, the BCM is a wise investment that will serve you well.
AC
For me there is no question, I would get the BCM Middy from Grant. I have a 6920 on layaway at home and I am thinking of saving up the coin and getting the BCM from Grant instead of the 6920. I like the Colt and yes Colt makes good guns but the BCM adheres to the exact same standards as the Colt, it's a middy, and slightly cheaper. People are to caught up in the colt "history" bottom line if someone else had won the military contracts to produce the M4 and M16 we would be lauding the praises of that maker and not Colt. It should not be about history unless you are collecting, if you plan to use, and shoot the rifle then go for quality, price, and features not name. Rifles like the DDM4 have broken the mold by offering the same if not better standards than the prancing pony for the same money. If you most soldiers what brand rifle they like they would say the one that works because we dont have a choice because uncle sam made the choice for us. If we could choose our own weapons I suspect you would see far less Colts and more of a mix of weaponry, but since we are a uniformed service who has to use what we are issued we use the Colt. So stop quoting how many millions of them there have been made and understand that it was based upon contracts and manufacturing capacity and not because they are the end all be all best. Before someone says they won the contract because they were the best lest cut to the chase that military contracts are awarded to a LOT of companies who are NOT the best due to prices, manufacturing capacities, etc. Lets all stop drinking the Colt Koolaid and be honest brokers admitting that there are more and more carbines available which match or best the Colt.
FWIW I'd let the advantages of the Middy outweigh some potential future resale value on the Colt- but that is just me. I seldom buy a rifle with an eye towards what it will bring me if I am forced to sell it down the road- I look at the utility and enjoyment it will bring me while I possess it.
Colt first, then BCM Middy.
Colt first, then you can consider something else. Start with a standard, then work on a build up or make your own.
I believe you may be missing the point here. The difference isn't about history, per se; it is time invested in developing and refining the product, and experience in manufacturing it over the course of nearly a half-century. This has nothing to do with the Colt name, as we could just as easily be talking about Armalite or Cadillac Gage; the fact is that Colt bought the rights, they have the most time with the platform, and they have established the benchmark for this particular weapon system.
Again, I'm not sure that this observation is entirely on-point. I'm at 25 years of enlisted and officer service and counting -- to include more years on Bragg than most Soldiers ever put into the uniform -- so I'm well acquainted with the military contract process. The M-16/A1/A2 and M4 as produced by Colt (and others) are built to a defined set of standards, and it makes little difference whose name is rolled onto the receiver, so long as they are producing to that standard. The overwhelming majority of producers in the current AR market don't even know for certain what that standard is, much less attempt to match it point-for-point.Quote:
If you most soldiers what brand rifle they like they would say the one that works because we dont have a choice because uncle sam made the choice for us [snip] So stop quoting how many millions of them there have been made and understand that it was based upon contracts and manufacturing capacity and not because they are the end all be all best.
No one is saying that the platform hasn't evolved in the past 5-10 years, nor that there aren't other worthy contenders (I'm partial to Noveskes myself). We're simply acknowledging that Colt Defense developed the weapon that we now know as the M4 carbine, that they won the service contracts for it, that they have the most experience in manufacturing it, and that, in a market that is increasingly crowded by hobby-grade look-alikes, the LE6920 remains the measuring stick by which all of the others are judged. We look at Sabres and BCMs and we give them the nod of approval precisely because they compare so favorably quality-wise to the Colt original. Is that not at all instructive?
Look, none of this should even remotely be construed as anti-BCM. I'm actually 100% pro-BCM, and I definitely "get" the appeal of the mid-gas guns. All I've said here is that it makes a great deal of sense to invest in at least one Colt somewhere along the line, and 6920s haven't always been quite so easy to find as they are right now. Why or how that should strike some as controversial is absolutely beyond me.
No offense intended, but these kinds of remarks are inevitably made by those who don't own a Colt, and who want to feel better about buying something else.Quote:
Lets all stop drinking the Colt Koolaid ...
We can do better.
ATW,
AC
Life Member,
82d Airborne Division Association
Assuming that Colt can produce in the next 20 to 30 years the same amount of ARs that they have produced in the last ~50 (which would be an incredible stretch), your assertion would mean that there will only be 64 BCM rifles by the year 2040.
I think you may have the math wrong...
Oh jeez...
Normally I am on the pro-Colt side but this is a ridiculous statement...
I've owned both and would take a BCM over a 6920...They cost the same at the moment...If you were talking to a DPMS fanboy it would make sense.
The 6920 was useful to me only because I sold the lower for $850 during the post election craze. Beyond that, it provided nothing that the BCM didn't.
Where's the cheapest place to buy a 6920 now?
Spooky
I very much like the BCM product and have been using them to source some parts for a few recent builds. However, I gotta agree with the Chief on this one. The 6920's are darn near selling at LE pricing to anyone who wants one. Colt ramped up production so much, there is a huge imbalance in supply vs demand. I would get the 6920 while supply is high and demand is going down. I am quite sure this won't be status quo. This seems like no better of a time to get your hands on a 6920.
87GN,
You're likely right about the math -- I have no way of knowing how BCM might ramp up production, nor how things might taper off for Colt, but the point was simply intended to be that Hartford has an exponential advantage in terms of units fielded.
If so, then I'm guessing that it came across in some fashion other than that which was intended. I've no interest in elitist overtones because I might or might not own a Colt; I was simply making the observation that these comments are all-too-often made by people who don't have any first-hand experience from which to denigrate a company like Colt. I've no emotional investment either way, though I can see where this might not have been entirely clear. I'll take the hit on that.Quote:
Normally I am on the pro-Colt side but this is a ridiculous statement...
Well, at least we're back on topic. :)Quote:
The 6920 was useful to me only because I sold the lower for $850 during the post election craze. Beyond that, it provided nothing that the BCM didn't.
AC
I agree completely and run in to it all the time on TOS. I do think that some of the above comments (not by you) bordered on the ridiculous.
Like I said before, I'd take a Colt any time.
I do prefer BCM stuff but wouldn't have a problem with either.
You're right on resale, as my experience showed...However I think that in the proper circles BCM is just as desirable, if not more...
There was a good BCM v Colt thread on LF a week or so back...
http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a...61/m/340102183
I prefer the flexibility of a mid-length gas system and HG over a carbine length gas system/HG if the standard front sight base is being used. In my experience the barrel lengths I prefer with their associated duties are as follows-
10.0 to 12.5 for ease of transportation and concealability and isn't stupid long with a suppressor. In my opinon, the best if you have a high probability of having to fight from a civilian type vehicle.
14.5 carbine - only to replicate a work gun or dedicated training gun (5.45 for ex).
16 middie- for GP use. Properly set up it will do everything a longer or shorter barrel will do, just not quite as well as far as handiness (compared to 10.5 guns) or long distance terminal performance (compared to dedicated 20+" barrels).
18 intermediate for semi-precision/run and gun competitions. The heavier front-end helps reduce bounce and longer HG gives more flexibility in positioning as well as encouraging an extended grip. I can't say for sure if the intermediate gas makes much difference compared to a middie or rifle gas system on this barrel length, but it certainly doesn't seem to hurt me in any way.
If I could have only one, and I was not needing it to be readily deployed while driving, I would go with a 16" middie. I have a BCM middie and I like it quite a lot more than I did any 16" carbine, including Colts, thus the reason I own only one 16" carbine- a 5.45 S&W that I am seriously considering cutting down to 14.7 and pin/welding.
Then again, I also believe that optic choice will drive appreciable performance more than gas system alone.
I do not believe my opinon the be the final answer, just throwing my opinon out there with the rest.
You are right they established it but it is a defined standard, MPI testing and the such, certain grade steels etc. These standards are being met by Daniel Defense, BCM, and exceeded by Noveske, and others.
You made the same point I stated above that there are set standards which if met will produce a weapon of equal quality regardless of manufacturer, I agree that with the majority of companies (Bushmaster) not adhereing to these standards makes the Colt stand out but it is not 5-10 years ago when Colt was the only company producing rifles to the standard. The number of companies producing weapons to the same standard is growing seemingly daily.
Agreed but if others meet or at times exceed the standard why should colt remain so coveted, it is an eletist take on a subject to say because you established a standard that you are the best if others meet or exceed that standard. Heck Noveske makes weapons that exceed the Colt standard which should arguably make them the standard.
Again you say invest, if that wre a goal of the purchaser then I would agree with you BUT if having a weapon to shoot, take to classes, and use as intended is the goal then I think there are weapons that are better than the Colt. The Colt is a basic box stock weapon, most of us would spend hundreds of dollars on accessories Grips, stocks, BUIS, rails, etc. I 'll use the DDM4 as an example here comes with a good Magpul stock, pmags, enhanced triggerguard, great BUIS, excellent rail, and a VFG on top of these features it meets the same standards. So if I am not collecting then why would I buy the Colt over the DD?
This is a STUPID remark which again goes back for me to the Koolaid remark I made in my last post, so yes "we" can do better.
For what it's worth I am also a Lifetime member of the 82nd ABN DIV Assn. I have also served in two MOSs in the 82nd ABN DIV with over 11+ years in the DIV as well as 4 in 1st SFG(A), and I'm currently in Afghanistan with the 82nd, as if all of this means anything in this discussion, which it does not but since you felt compelled to bring it up.
No one was denigrating Colt, unless you consider my challanging their seprimacy was a denigration, They have set a standard but others have met and or exceeded that which goes back to answering the OPs post, it should have more to do with how he plans to use said weapon than our "feelings" about Colt. If he is collecting get the Colt, if he plans to shoot it a lot get the BCM the Middy aspect is more appealing to me than the Colt name especially when quality of both is virtually identical.
This is, to my mind, the core argument -- and it is certainly not a bad one. There are so many configuration possibilities these days from reputable vendors that it is easy to get overwhelmed. If a shooter knows for a fact that he is ready to invest in a mid-gas carbine, then there are several stellar vendors from which to choose, and BCM would certainly be at the top of my list. We're in agreement there, and I suspect, in most other aspects as well.
Now, if that same shooter is not quite sure what he's looking for, then I think the 6920 provides about as competent a starting point as one is likely to find. I'm not suggesting they are the end-all, be-all of carbines right now, but owning a Colt is desirable for any number of reasons, and they are readily available at the moment, which isn't always the case.
It is all-too-easy for shades of agreement to come across as discord, when in fact, that isn't the case at all. I was probably in error to carry a TOS-like inference from the Kool-Aid remark, and I'm fairly certain that you carried something out of my reply that wasn't intended. The fact is that we are actually of very much the same mindset (which is also the only reason I mentioned my All American background, since you feel enough of a connection to the Division to use it for an avatar). In a face-to-face, we would surely have both been nodding north-south; on the internet, it feels like a contentious debate. It isn't -- not at all.
AC
AC, agreed I know some things get out of hand on here I get my feathers ruffled especially when it seems that people reccomend Colt without a nod to what the user needs or their plans are. So I digress I probibly got to defensive, Colt makes a good Carbine no doubt I just wanted to make the point that they are not alone anymore as a top tier AR maker and there are may options available.
ATW
JP
I own both a Colt 6920 and a BCM middy upper (with F/A BCM BCG) on a Sun Devil lower. Besides the very tight mag well on the Sun Devil, I'll take the BCM over the Colt any day. The middy is much more pleasurable to shoot, has a longer sight radius, and it should be more durable.
I think that the Chart does some disservice in this regard.
There are things that Colt does, materials they use, manufacturing processes employed, that to my knowledge none of the other manufacturers are doing (yet?) and most have no plans to. These things to not appear on the Chart, probably wouldn't matter to most people, and consequently don't ever get brought up. Some people may find Daniel Defense's use of cold hammer forged barrels, or BCM's midlength gas system to be of more value than these other Colt-only features, but that's a personal choice.
If you think that any other manufacturer is doing EVERYTHING Colt does and the only differences are to improve on the Colt, you are wrong.
Personally, if I was going to buy just one carbine right now, I'd still buy the BCM. But don't get confused with a little bit of knowledge and think that the BCM is everything the Colt is but better. Better in some areas? Perhaps. Not as good in some areas? Yes. As-good-as in all areas and better in some? No.
What I'd really do if I was starting from scratch is buy a 6920, keep the complete lower and BCG, and install a BCM midlength upper receiver on it. I suspect I could get more for the unfired 6920 upper than the $475 BCM charges for their complete uppers.
Rob, please explain what Colt does that isn't listed on the chart that BCM doesn't do. I'd like some insight. Thanks in advance.
I was sure hoping for more than the process of making the receiver extension. He cites material of the bolt and gas key...what exactly are the differences between in material of BCM's and Colt's gas keys and bolts?
If you don't have one, get the Colt. Afterwards, get the Middy.
This is exactly why I don't get into this much. That's the typical response. It's generally not worth posting about because all of a sudden the guy that bought a BCM because of "X"s in a box instead of because they build a ****in-A good product starts feeling like he's a DPMS owner.
Whether or not YOU think it's of value, an extruded receiver extension is not as strong as a forged one. As I posted above, you may think a CHF barrel or a midlength gas system is more important, but that again is a judgment call on your part.
To the OP, buy the BCM middy.
I know this will not be of much value but I've really gotten turned on by BCM's middy. I've been doing some research, looking into my next M4, and there are several good carbines available today. But if I had the $$ right now I would have to go with the middy. It may cost more than some other very good carbines, but after tracking, somewhat, it's advantages, I feel the middy offers benefits to myself that I don't won't to pass up.
Just out of curiosity, do BCM, DD, Noveske, and LMT all have complete copies of the Colt M-4 TDP?
If not, how can they make a perfect copy of the Colt? Would it even be legal for them to do so, due to patent issues and whatnot?
I would go to a shop and handle a basic 16" M4 (to compare to the Colt) and a middie 16 as well (to compare to the BCM) if you can. base your decision on what feels right and you will be happy with either brand. I have a BCM middie along with an LMT 14.5 M4 and my father has a Colt, and I would carry either with confidence.