Don't worry, my comment was not directed at you.
Let me put it this way... back when Armalite, Bushmaster, and Colt (the co-called "ABCs" of AR-15s) were pretty much the only AR platform rifle brands on the market, Bushmaster was considered a "relatively" decent rifle, since there wasn't much in the way of competition. Now that there are literally hundreds of brands, the only way they have been able to truly differentiate themselves is by promoting the quality of components, assembly, and quality control relative to others. This has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of ARs from many brands, but Bushmaster has largely ignored this competition and kept on going with their old ways of doing things, riding out the wave they created back in the 1990s in early 2000s. As a result, many brands have surpassed them to the point that, RELATIVE to the other brands, Bushmasters are now considered lower-to-mid "tier" rifles.
There are objective measures by which one can evaluate the rifles produced by each of these brands, in particular the Technical Data Package (TDP). The TDP outlines the bare minimum specifications and quality control measures that any M-4 produced must meet in order to meet the requirements of the government. The standards outlined in the TDP far exceed Bushmaster's standards, which is why there are so many Bushmaster rifles out there that exhibit problems.
The fact that some Bushmaster rifles perform fine does not change this fact. If anything, it says more about the AR platform than it says about Bushmaster, in that the AR is still functional even after so many corners have been cut. But does this mean that this is somehow OK? No.
There are many rifles out there from good companies that far exceed the performance of Bushmasters sold at the same price point. There is no good reason to buy a Bushmaster nowadays.



Reply With Quote

Bookmarks