G&R Tactical
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Which is more reliable?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    14
    Feedback Score
    0

    Which is more reliable?

    Which is the more reliable AR? top cocker or SP-1? Thank you.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    936
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    I don't believe the method of retracting the bolt carrier does anything at all to affect reliability.
    Last edited by mack7.62; 06-29-19 at 07:23.
    “The Trump Doctrine is ‘We’re America, Bitch.’ That’s the Trump Doctrine.”

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    1,189
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mack7.62 View Post
    I don't believe the method of retracting the bolt carrier does anything at all to affect reliability.
    I have to agree. The top-charging handle on the Armalite AR-15 and AR-10 were cumbersome. In 1959, ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 to Colt due to financial difficulties, and limitations in terms of manpower and production capacity. Shortly after acquiring the rights, Colt made some modifications to the design. I believe that the reason why Colt redesigned the charging method was to make it more accessible and less cumbersome to use. It had nothing to do with reliability. Reliability lies more with the operating system (gas blowback, BCG, and buffer system). Additionally, proper maintenance and good ammo can almost assure good reliability from any weapon.
    Last edited by Renegade04; 07-01-19 at 07:00.
    "A Bad Day At The Range Is Better Than A Great Day Working"

    USMC Force Recon 1978-1984
    US Air Force Res. 1995-2004 (Air Transportation)
    M16/AR15 shooter since 1978, gun collector and AR builder since 2004
    Oath Keeper member
    III% United Patriots member

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    SWMT
    Posts
    7,226
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    I keep hearing that Colt moved the charging handle on the AR-15 due to complaints from the Army about the charging handle heating up.

    I think it's sort of interesting that none of the military users of the AR-10 appear to have had similar complaints about that rifle.
    " Political tags — such as [...], communist, democrat, [...], fascist, liberal, conservative, [...] — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort. "
    - Robert Heinlein -

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,291
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MountainRaven View Post
    I keep hearing that Colt moved the charging handle on the AR-15 due to complaints from the Army about the charging handle heating up.

    I think it's sort of interesting that none of the military users of the AR-10 appear to have had similar complaints about that rifle.
    That's what I had always heard too, and that the primary reason for the carry handle was to protect the top mounted charging handle and it's utility as a way to carry the rifle was just a convenient side effect. When the charging handle was moved to it's current location, they simply kept the carry handle upper receiver design until coming up with the flattop decades later.

    Odd thing though, looking at pics of some very old Armalite AR-10 prototypes in a book I have, the carry handle actually seems to have predated the top charging handle, suggesting that perhaps the original intent of the carry handle really was as a carry handle after all.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    525
    Feedback Score
    0
    The handle may have had several sources. With the utterly straight stock, it was necessary to raise the sights or there would be no way for the firer to look thru' them. Coincidentally, the carrying handle was needed, since the magazine is at the center of balance. We usually hooked our thumb thru' the the handle and around the handguard ahead of the magwell.
    That said, the handle helped make the older ARs nice to handle...I don't own any flattops. How do ya' carry one?
    The 'heat' issue is what I've heard; did the finger reciprocate with the BCG? Presume the finger's travel slot remained open to debris?
    Moon

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    14
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MountainRaven View Post
    I keep hearing that Colt moved the charging handle on the AR-15 due to complaints from the Army about the charging handle heating up.

    I think it's sort of interesting that none of the military users of the AR-10 appear to have had similar complaints about that rifle.
    Whether 10,000 rounds or one round, I clean my weaponry after every firing session. Also. My 1980 WV DNR safe hunting instructor told us the SP-1 AR-15 is not recommended because of reliability issues. Therefore, I'm with top cocker as more reliable than SP-1, too. This from a whom a guy considers a stock M&P 15 Sport 2 as a D grade rifle, also.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    525
    Feedback Score
    0
    Due respect, Rodan, but your hunting instructor was hopelessly wedded to his Winchester thuty-thuty.
    Can we not restart the whole AR-unreliability thing? All my Colts have run 100%, including the one the Gummint was kind enough to give me in 1970. I never had to run thru' the jungle with mine, but I did shoot the hell out of it; never one failure. Never was trained to download two, and have never done so. Many here would attest to the same.
    No personal experience with the S&W; if yours misbehaves, send it to Smith or move on.
    Best,
    Moon

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    1,189
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodan1957 View Post
    Whether 10,000 rounds or one round, I clean my weaponry after every firing session. Also. My 1980 WV DNR safe hunting instructor told us the SP-1 AR-15 is not recommended because of reliability issues. Therefore, I'm with top cocker as more reliable than SP-1, too. This from a whom a guy considers a stock M&P 15 Sport 2 as a D grade rifle, also.
    Pure poppycock. This instructor was an idiot and certainly severely uneducated in regard to the SP1 and the AR-15 platform in general. I have a feeling he heard stories of the M16s jamming early on in Vietnam. As many know, this was attributed to the weapons not being cleaned as the soldiers had no clue that the weapons needed to cleaned, especially in the jungle environment. Less malfunctions occurred after they starting cleaning them. There has NEVER been an issue with the SP1 jamming unless it was associated with the ammo being used.
    "A Bad Day At The Range Is Better Than A Great Day Working"

    USMC Force Recon 1978-1984
    US Air Force Res. 1995-2004 (Air Transportation)
    M16/AR15 shooter since 1978, gun collector and AR builder since 2004
    Oath Keeper member
    III% United Patriots member

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,477
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodan1957 View Post
    Whether 10,000 rounds or one round, I clean my weaponry after every firing session. Also. My 1980 WV DNR safe hunting instructor told us the SP-1 AR-15 is not recommended because of reliability issues. Therefore, I'm with top cocker as more reliable than SP-1, too. This from a whom a guy considers a stock M&P 15 Sport 2 as a D grade rifle, also.
    My first AR was 1980 SP-1...sweet rifle and totally reliable. Wish I had kept it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •