High end AR (KAC etc) vs Budget AR/Home Build Looking for FACTS

[cundiff5535]

Whats up M4 peeps! Today I had a very interesting discussion on AR/M4's with a few friends and family members who I respect a lot. I am not going to name drop here but, one is a firearms instructor who spent time over seas teaching Afghans and the likes very basic firearms training. He is super qualified and knows ballistics as well as the AR platform well. The other is a former LEO and much more known in the training sector, I would say his specialty is the AR platform.

First, I have always been of the belief that you get what you pay for when it comes to almost anything. As far as AR/M4's go, I have always been taught that the Bolt and Barrel are the two most important items.. Yes trigger can also assist in accuracy, but just in terms of functionality, any milspec trigger will do. This has served me well when building my own rifles as well as shooting with friends and taking AR15.

Recently I acquired a Kac SR15 as well as BCM Jack... For me, they are the two nicest rifles in my collection... I really do love them both. I dont need to get into detail about what Stoner did with the Mod 2 or what features the Kac and Jack have. What I do want to get into the weeds on is are these rifles that much better than a DPMS, Palmetto, or even a budget build using an Andersen? We all have opinions on why things are better or what makes them better, but I am looking for straight facts.

Secondly, the instructor who is more a basic shooting teacher told me I was crazy to think that one AR is far superior to the other... esp if I am running the gun with a dot and precision accuracy was not the ultimate goal. He mentioned a standard AR vs Kac and does not believe that the upgrades in Kac are necessary and doesn't see the justification of price. I can argue about tested reliability but he is very passionate that Colt M4 rifles are being ran in by the military with all standard components. If thats accurate, a real life war situation should be the ultimate test. Its a solid point... He has said he is under the impression that some units do run Knights, but its not the majority.

Third, the other trainer who specializes in the AR argued that his opinion was that the budget rifles just didnt hold up and there are many more failures in classes that he has seen. He didnt give a lot of facts as the conversation kept being pushed by the other basic firearms instructor (he can tend to do this).

I brought up barrel life, longevity of bolts, etc on the higher end products... but that point would not be conceded as I was told that is such a oddity that again, its not worth the money.

Last thing I would like thoughts on... I was being told I was wrong in the situation so some of you may know. Training with your rifle... Instructor #1 says shooting a full class with any rifle... is going to ruin it, cause fire cracking and destroy the chamber. Once that happens it doesnt matter if the rifle is 3K or $300, they are going to shoot equally as bad. He insisted that taking a highend gun to a training class if crazy to him as its then wasted.

I personally am not aware of the typical life of a barrel but, I do remember hearing 7K or so before it starts to go. If that is true, does that last point ring true?

Anyway, looking for some factual info vs just opinionated BS that I can get from peeps talking over the other forums.

Cheers!

[mack7.62]

Look up Filthy 14.

Nevermind here it is.

http://www.slip2000.com/blog/s-w-a-t...ine-filthy-14/

The parts is parts people have always been wrong IMO.

[cundiff5535]

Great read and article!

One thing I am curious on (and its mentioned in the article) is "mil-spec"... If a product reads mil-spec, are they saying its not to actual spec, or that the part maybe to spec just the quality of material being used is not? Any thought or opinion?

[ucrt]

.

I think mil-spec to a majority of manufacturers is them picking from the mil-spec buffet and generally refers only to the "fit" and/or outside appearance of the parts. They'll meet a spec or 2 and claim them all.
But that's just my 2 cents...

.

[Renegade04]

Great read and article!

One thing I am curious on (and its mentioned in the article) is "mil-spec"... If a product reads mil-spec, are they saying its not to actual spec, or that the part maybe to spec just the quality of material being used is not? Any thought or opinion?

Mil-spec can be referred to in a couple ways. For some parts, they are made to mil-spec dimensions like a lot of buffer tubes are. Many of these are 6061 aluminum, not 7075-T6. They are also turned/threaded differently than true mil-spec buffer tubes. Mil-spec is often used to describe an AR-15 fire control group. They are not, in fact, mil-spec since they are semi-automatic fire control groups. They may be made from the same material, but are not truly mil-spec in construction. Lower receivers are sometimes referred to as being mil-spec. Semi-automatic AR-15 7075-T6 forged aluminum lower receivers are no truly mil-spec as they are not designed and machined for full-automatic fire control group parts (including auto-sear). Being 7075-T6 aluminum does equate to them being made from mil-spec material and many mil-spec lower parts can be used with them. Upper receivers can fall into question as well. If they are not machined the same as a true mil-spec upper receiver in that they have the area machined that allows for the clearance of an auto-sear, then they are not truly mil-spec although they are often referred to as being mil-spec because they are made from 7075-T6 aluminum and have the proper hardcoat anodizing as the actual mil-spec receivers. Barrels are another issue. A barrel may be made from the same material as a real mil-spec barrel, but that does not make it actually a mil-spec barrel. For example, a 16" M4 type barrel (like on the Colt LE6920) is not mil-spec by design because of the length, but is made from mil-spec material. You will also find some 14.5" M4 type barrels that are mil-spec in design, but are not made from mil-spec material. Buyer need to be aware of what they are buying. If buyers are concerned about only buying mil-spec products, they need to educate themselves on what is and what is not actually mil-spec.

You will find that, for many vendors, mil-spec is a marketing phrase. It is up to the buyer, as I said, to ascertain what is truly mil-spec.

[Firefly]

Per high end vs low end ARs:

It’s like this....fat girls and fit girls. Both do about the same thing but which would you rather take to the bush or the mountains?

[Renegade04]

Per high end vs low end ARs:

It’s like this....fat girls and fit girls. Both do about the same thing but which would you rather take to the bush or the mountains?

The way I see this high-end vs. low-end issue is, you have to have the right tool for the job. For a range toy or a simple HD AR, most any AR will do. For serious competition and SHTF situations, you need good quality components in an AR that are going to withstand the use/abuse and function reliably. Does a person need to spend over $2K for a good quality AR? Not really, but they need to know what the quality of the parts are. Will a cheaper AR do everything a $2k+ AR would do? Maybe, but for how long. No AR is impervious to breakage, not even a Colt, KAC, BCM, etc.. In essence, it all boils down to what a person is willing to spend to attain the quality, accuracy, durability, and reliability that they need/want. They need to know what quality parts are and what parts are of vital importance. They need to assess just what the purpose of the AR is and how much usage it will get and what it may be subject to in the future. My SHTF carbine is stout and fully dependable. I have others that are that way as well should I need a back-up. Many of my good quality ARs are builds I did. I have factory models like my BCM Jack Carbine, BCM Mid-16 Mod 2, Colt LE6920, and Sabre Defence XR-15 to name a few. I also have some builds that are between the $3K-$4K mark. These are special purpose rifles.

[cundiff5535]

The way I see this high-end vs. low-end issue is, you have to have the right tool for the job. For a range toy or a simple HD AR, most any AR will do. For serious competition and SHTF situations, you need good quality components in an AR that are going to withstand the use/abuse and function reliably. Does a person need to spend over $2K for a good quality AR? Not really, but they need to know what the quality of the parts are. Will a cheaper AR do everything a $2k+ AR would do? Maybe, but for how long. No AR is impervious to breakage, not even a Colt, KAC, BCM, etc.. In essence, it all boils down to what a person is willing to spend to attain the quality, accuracy, durability, and reliability that they need/want. They need to know what quality parts are and what parts are of vital importance. They need to assess just what the purpose of the AR is and how much usage it will get and what it may be subject to in the future. My SHTF carbine is stout and fully dependable. I have others that are that way as well should I need a back-up. Many of my good quality ARs are builds I did. I have factory models like my BCM Jack Carbine, BCM Mid-16 Mod 2, Colt LE6920, and Sabre Defence XR-15 to name a few. I also have some builds that are between the $3K-$4K mark. These are special purpose rifles.

I very much agree with you here. The convo earlier was very frustrating... and in all honesty, one that I may not walk down.

[Renegade04]

I very much agree with you here. The convo earlier was very frustrating... and in all honesty, one that I may not walk down.

Unfortunately, you are going to get varying opinions from people with varying experiences and knowledge, some of which is limited and biased. There are some who think they are subject matter experts, but are quite the opposite. The sad part is that you have to wade through their rhetoric and search for better info elsewhere. Personally, I am far from a subject matter expert on all things AR related, but I do have a vast amount of knowledge that I have accumulated over the past 40 years of experiences and practical application with the AR platform. Of course, having just over 80 builds (in 14 years) under my belt helps.

[MegademiC]

IMO, ‘mil-spec’ rifles from good manufactures are a minimum for hard/serious use guns.
Bcm, colt, DD, etc.

Cheaper guns, your chances of breakage, malfunctions, incorrect assembly go up to where I wont buy it(everyone has their own line in the sand).

Stuff like KAC, I view as a luxury. Ill be buying one in the next year or so, but from what Ive researched, they run smooth, and have small tweaks to enhance reliability and longevity, and are very accurate.

Kac isnt really that expensive once you factor in rail, sights, muzzle device, and stocks

Edit a class will not ruin a rifle.