COLT and Quality

[FredL]

I've taken a shine to COLT ARs, and have recently renewed my interest in them. I've had a COLT AR for years and decided to buy another. I mentioned elsewhere on a Facebook AR group the OEM2 deal you can get and a guy tore into COLT and said they are not "quality" rifles. Is this the common consensus about COLT ARs? He claimed FN now makes most of them for the US Government because their quality is so much better than COLT. Is this true?

[Mrgunsngear]

I've taken a shine to COLT ARs, and have recently renewed my interest in them. I've had a COLT AR for years and decided to buy another. I mentioned elsewhere on a Facebook AR group the OEM2 deal you can get and a guy tore into COLT and said they are not "quality" rifles. Is this the common consensus about COLT ARs? He claimed FN now makes most of them for the US Government because their quality is so much better than COLT. Is this true?

In terms of specs and function---Colt makes great AR-15s. In terms of innovation, fit/finish, etc.... Colt isn't great. Just depends what you want out of it.

[FredL]

In terms of specs and function---Colt makes great AR-15s. In terms of innovation, fit/finish, etc.... Colt isn't great. Just depends what you want out of it.

Thanks, and hey, big fan of your work on YouTube and have learned a lot, just watched your video on how to built out a COLT OEM2 this morning. I guess I don't know enough about all these issues but the comments took me by surprise a bit. So, it's more about "fit and finish" (which doesn't matter in the end really) and so forth and the fact that Colt is not a "boutique" AR builder/maker.

[MistWolf]

Colt has many years of experience developing and refining the AR family of weapons. They have the port diameter, spring rates, reciprocating mass, clearances, barrel making and manufacturing processes right. However, they don't spend many resources protecting the finish of their war rifles.

A word about fit & finish. Fit and finish is specified and important to function. Parts must fit together correctly with the proper clearance. Finish is important so parts that come in contact with each other do so without excessive friction. As far as I can tell, the fit & finish of my Colts is within allowable limits. Of course that means they had crunchy-ticky triggers, but grease and accelerated dry fire took care of that problem. What this means is, most people complaining about fit & finish only look at cosmetics without knowing how fit & finish actually affects function.

[Doc Safari]

Colt has many years of experience developing and refining the AR family of weapons. They have the port diameter, spring rates, reciprocating mass, clearances, barrel making and manufacturing processes right. However, they don't spend many resources protecting the finish of their war rifles.

A word about fit & finish. Fit and finish is specified and important to function. Parts must fit together correctly with the proper clearance. Finish is important so parts that come in contact with each other do so without excessive friction. As far as I can tell, the fit & finish of my Colts is within allowable limits. Of course that means they had crunchy-ticky triggers, but graze and accelerated dry fire took care of that problem. What this means is, most people complaining about fit & finish only look at cosmetics without knowing how fit & finish actual affect function.

I concur with all of this.

I'll just add:

Colts are very accurate. I used to be a BCM fanboy, but when I put two different Colts alongside two different BCM's, the Colts were clearly more accurate.
Colts seem to hold their value better. Hold onto a Colt for ten years and it may appreciate in value, especially if it's a discontinued model, or Colt changes the serial number prefix, or something. Other brands may or may not even be worth what you paid for them unless there is something truly special about a particular one. Every time I've sold or traded an AR, the first thing out of the other person's mouth it seems is, "Is it a Colt?"

The bad: Colt makes a huge volume of rifles. Sometimes they forget small things, like staking a bolt carrier key or something. It goes with the territory that you should look yours over thoroughly. Sometimes a Colt will have little scuffs or other cosmetic issues that another brand might not. I bought a NIB Colt and the mag catch had fine rust spots on it right from the factory. Since the rest of the rifle was perfect and unblemished, I'm guessing that part was allowed to get some pitting on it in the parts bin and Colt installed it anyway. It doesn't affect function, but some people may wince at minor cosmetic issues like this.

[arptsprt]

Good post. And I concur as well. Over the past 10 years or so, I have become a Colt junkie. This includes 5 OEM factory rifles (3 6920 one being a "restricted" rollmark, 1 6960 CCU, 2018 M4A1 SOCOM). I also bought 3 Colt complete M4 lowers from Brownells. One has a custom built Colt SOCOM upper ordered from Grant on it, and one is awaiting a stamp to SBR it, and the other lower is a spare. I also have a Colt M4 lower from several years ago that has been an 11.5 SBR with a LOT of rounds through it.


I have to say that my experience with Colt quality and reliability has been excellent. I have never had any significant issues with things like missed staking etc... For most, I think the "fit and finish" issues are actually cosmetic issues as stated. For the most part, cosmetics have been great for me too. A few minor handling marks on a couple rifles (including the new M4A1 SOCOM I dropped $1500 on) but that matters for about two range outings and they blend right in with the others I put on them.

Sure, there are more desirable features and options out there now from other manufacturers. I have other AR makes and models including mid-length with full rails etc. But I always seem to find myself enamored by the Colts and they have always been accurate and reliable which is the most important. And they are proven.

I'll just add:

Colts are very accurate. I used to be a BCM fanboy, but when I put two different Colts alongside two different BCM's, the Colts were clearly more accurate.
Colts seem to hold their value better. Hold onto a Colt for ten years and it may appreciate in value, especially if it's a discontinued model, or Colt changes the serial number prefix, or something. Other brands may or may not even be worth what you paid for them unless there is something truly special about a particular one. Every time I've sold or traded an AR, the first thing out of the other person's mouth it seems is, "Is it a Colt?"

The bad: Colt makes a huge volume of rifles. Sometimes they forget small things, like staking a bolt carrier key or something. It goes with the territory that you should look yours over thoroughly. Sometimes a Colt will have little scuffs or other cosmetic issues that another brand might not. I bought a NIB Colt and the mag catch had fine rust spots on it right from the factory. Since the rest of the rifle was perfect and unblemished, I'm guessing that part was allowed to get some pitting on it in the parts bin and Colt installed it anyway. It doesn't affect function, but some people may wince at minor cosmetic issues like this.

[Stickman]

A word about fit & finish.

1. Fit and finish is specified and important to function.

2. Parts must fit together correctly with the proper clearance.

3. Finish is important so parts that come in contact with each other do so without excessive friction.

As far as I can tell, the fit & finish of my Colts is within allowable limits. Of course that means they had crunchy-ticky triggers, but grease and accelerated dry fire took care of that problem. What this means is, most people complaining about fit & finish only look at cosmetics without knowing how fit & finish actually affects function.

I'm not sure where you are going with the above, because you are correct only on a highly slanted scale.

1. Fit and finish is regards to function is not what people are crying about on the internet. They use the terms without even a generic understanding, and instead apply to to coloring, as well as dents and scratches.

2. I'm not sure what parts you are envisioning here, are you talking about upper to lower fit, because the allowable gap is massive. Guys crying and whining because their takedown pins are hard to push out, or they have detected a wobble between upper and lower have no idea that milspec is a very generous term, and so are the measurements that go along with it for unimportant things like these.

2 (cont). If you are talking about internal parts, Colt has zero issues, and never really has in any capacity I'm aware of. Every company has had a minor issue here or there, but Colt has always had extremely solid internals. You just don't hear much if any crying over that.

3. Finish? You've got to be kidding, because once again, the functional finishes and treatments are something Colt has had down pat for a very long time. That doesn't mean Joe Blow may not open his Colt AR box and find a transfer of a material on his anodizing, or even that an external part had a dent, but that has nothing to do with functionality of the weapon. Colt has made their money since the 70s by building weapons similar to that of the combat troop. If you think for a minute that actual issued weapons would meet the arfcom clown squads of "blem" warrior standards, you would have to be addled more than a little.

It is easy to tell who served in the gun carrying military and who did not when threads like this pop up. Crunchy-ticky triggers? Like the ones that come on the military weapons? Again, I have to shake my head with most of this. While everyone wants a wonderful trigger, it doesn't work that way when you get assigned a weapon, and unlike the internet, you don't get to swap in parts to make it the way you want.

[MistWolf]

I'm not sure where you are going with the above, because you are correct only on a highly slanted scale.

1. Fit and finish is regards to function is not what people are crying about on the internet. They use the terms without even a generic understanding, and instead apply to to coloring, as well as dents and scratches.

2. I'm not sure what parts you are envisioning here, are you talking about upper to lower fit, because the allowable gap is massive. Guys crying and whining because their takedown pins are hard to push out, or they have detected a wobble between upper and lower have no idea that milspec is a very generous term, and so are the measurements that go along with it for unimportant things like these.

2 (cont). If you are talking about internal parts, Colt has zero issues, and never really has in any capacity I'm aware of. Every company has had a minor issue here or there, but Colt has always had extremely solid internals. You just don't hear much if any crying over that.

3. Finish? You've got to be kidding, because once again, the functional finishes and treatments are something Colt has had down pat for a very long time. That doesn't mean Joe Blow may not open his Colt AR box and find a transfer of a material on his anodizing, or even that an external part had a dent, but that has nothing to do with functionality of the weapon. Colt has made their money since the 70s by building weapons similar to that of the combat troop. If you think for a minute that actual issued weapons would meet the arfcom clown squads of "blem" warrior standards, you would have to be addled more than a little.

It is easy to tell who served in the gun carrying military and who did not when threads like this pop up. Crunchy-ticky triggers? Like the ones that come on the military weapons? Again, I have to shake my head with most of this. While everyone wants a wonderful trigger, it doesn't work that way when you get assigned a weapon, and unlike the internet, you don't get to swap in parts to make it the way you want.

Where I was going with the above was to explain that folks complaining about fit & finish usually mean "cosmetics" and have no idea what fit & finish is. I agree with your post here. It expands my point nicely. I've personally owned three or four Colts and have shot others. My father and several of his shooting buddies had Colt SP1s back in the day. I bought my first AR back in the 90s. I've never had the impression Colt ARs were sloppy, poorly finished or carelessly assembled. Quite the opposite. In fact, I've always felt the AR had better fit & finish than the Beloved Garand, a rifle I have the greatest respect for.

When I go into a gunshop and look at a variety of ARs side by side, I don't find that any other brand of AR has better cosmetics than the Colt next to it. Usually I like the finish of Colt ARs better. There are some "economy" brand ARs that to me, look flat out ugly. All my Colts have been free of blemishes, except the new M4A1 SOCOM. It has four small gouges in the barrel under the handguard and yes, they bother the hell out of my CDO. No, I'm not gonna do anything about the gouges. I'm gonna configure the rifle like a USAF M4 and shoot it a lot.

All of my Colt ARs but the one I bought in the 90s had crunchy-ticky triggers. Mine were horribly gritty and unpredictable. In a private conversation, Ken Hackathorn explained to me this was a common problem with the commercial Colt AR trigger. But my triggers smoothed up surprisingly well with just a bit of grease and some proper dry fire. All my Colts still have the trigger they came from the factory with and I'm a trigger snob. This isn't a complaint, it's just my honest evaluation. I don't know what a military AR trigger feels like. I haven't shot a military issue AR since Air Force Basic in the early 80s. To be fair, nearly every brand of standard AR trigger I've tried is crunch-ticky. It's the nature of the beast.

My first AR carbine was a PSA kit I bought five to ten years ago. It functioned well and I liked it a lot. I've assembled a few other ARs since then, one using nothing but premium parts. But it was a real eye opener when I completely disassembled and reassembled my first Colt 6920. There were several small details that one could only appreciated by taking the rifle apart and putting it together again. Parts just fit together better than anything else I've worked with so far.

When I shot my first 6920, my reaction was "So this is how an M4 should feel." It felt right. It felt even better when I swapped out the 16" barrel for a Colt 14.5" pinned SOCOM barrel.

I know I got a little long winded here, but I hope this clears up that I am in no way bashing Colt. Colt has become my preferred AR.

(PS- This is why I'm afraid to try a KAC. I don't think my pocketbook could stand it!)

I think what mistwolf is trying to say is that people say “fit and finish” when they mean “appearance and feelings”.

Fit and finish are both functional and specd in the TDP which colt adhers to.

Its the same thing you guys said... at least it looks like it to me.

I feel like educated people want to say “fit and finish doesnt matter” when we should be correcting people using the incorrect term.

Yes.

[Arik]

Colt has many years of experience developing and refining the AR family of weapons. They have the port diameter, spring rates, reciprocating mass, clearances, barrel making and manufacturing processes right. However, they don't spend many resources protecting the finish of their war rifles.

A word about fit & finish. Fit and finish is specified and important to function. Parts must fit together correctly with the proper clearance. Finish is important so parts that come in contact with each other do so without excessive friction. As far as I can tell, the fit & finish of my Colts is within allowable limits. Of course that means they had crunchy-ticky triggers, but grease and accelerated dry fire took care of that problem. What this means is, most people complaining about fit & finish only look at cosmetics without knowing how fit & finish actually affects function.

That's not what majority mean when they talk about fit and finish. It's mostly about superficial stuff. does the brand new firearm have any handling marks maybe a little scratches or scuffs mark. Why is there a visible gap between the upper and the lower. many people believe that should not be visible and believe it effects function because its a por fit.

Sometimes you read a person's complaints and wonder if they actually took a magnifying glass to the outside of the firearm

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[scooter22]

Perhaps their “fit and finish” isn’t the best. I honestly don’t care about that.

As for FN making mil rifles, that has nothing to do with quality. It’s a function of he lowest bidder. Colt still makes mil rifles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk