Psa uppers

[26 Inf]

I would have to err on the side of caution. I wouldn't bet money that every rifle can pass a 5,000 round torture test.

They are/were passing them with ease at Battlefield Las Vegas, although the 2.0 MOA standard wasn't measured, and after a life of full auto mag dumps, probably would not be achieved.

[26 Inf]

What percentage of PSA carbines though? I don't doubt that any company can do that if they're choosing which gun to send to a YouTube reviewer. Entirely different story to be able to pick any and every random gun and that be true.

Again, Battlefield Vegas. Do you think those were cherry picked?

[26 Inf]

IMO, this a good summation:

Is there a "risk" involved with a less than top tier manufacturer? SURE. But, at least vet the rifle, and if issues come up, PSA will take care of it, more often than not. These rifles have a place. As truck/tractor/training/beater/back-up guns and for just blasting ammo to save wear on your go-to gun. They ARENT duty guns, or going to Iraq/AFGH. guns.

I think that some of y'all might be a tad perturbed that some of the lower cost rifles are dong what some of your much higher priced guns are doing.

I certainly wouldn't tell someone to buy a complete PSA rifle if they weren't going to shoot the rifle enough to verify reliability.

Most, not all of the folks posting on here asking questions about PSA uppers (in particular) have some inkling of how these firearms work, otherwise why are they putting one together rather than buying one?

If I buy a whole rifle, it isn't going to be a PSA, or a Colt for that matter. But for the person on a budget, I think PSA is a valid option. As long as they check it's reliability with what they intend to shoot.

In any event, if they become serious shooters they will leave the less serious weapons behind.

[BPDKar98k]

IMO, this a good summation:



I certainly wouldn't tell someone to buy a complete PSA rifle if they weren't going to shoot the rifle enough to verify reliability.

Most, not all of the folks posting on here asking questions about PSA uppers (in particular) have some inkling of how these firearms work, otherwise why are they putting one together rather than buying one?

If I buy a whole rifle, it isn't going to be a PSA, or a Colt for that matter. But for the person on a budget, I think PSA is a valid option. As long as they check it's reliability with what they intend to shoot.

In any event, if they become serious shooters they will leave the less serious weapons behind.

What's wrong with buying a complete Colt?

[Gatorgrizz27]

Absolutely a lot of guys will shoot 100 rounds their first year of ownership and maybe 300 rounds in their lifetime of ownership of that particular rifle, and if they have one or two failures during that time they will excuse it for some reason. For these people, PSA makes a lot of sense. Why spend more money for something that you won't appreciate or use or care about?

One time I was shooting with a guy whose DPMS was his 'baby'. Then he came over to warn me about a Federal XM855 that had hard primers. He was getting failures to fire, 3 out of 5 of his last rounds were bad. So I took one of them and put it in my rifle. BANG. There are people like that everywhere. cheapness is a disease and they will do any possible mental gymnastics to convince themselves what they spent money on is just as good

Example of mental gymnastics: They will tell you PSA has several levels or tiers of quality, and if you buy their top level, you actually get something good, and will even admit the bottom level stuff probably isn't good. Then in their next breath they will explain how they know matter of factly their PSA barrel was made by FN therefore it is top tier awesome because it was made by FN for PSA and there is no way that FN could make two things to different standards. Like, wait, but...didn't you just? Ah nevermind.

People have their own biases and will stick to them. Yeah, I tend to believe the FN stamp on my PSA barrel means it was made by them. I also think there’s a difference between cutting corners to hit a specific price point and a reputable company selling leftover inventory, possibly with reduced QC checks, at a reduced cost. Do you really think FN produces so many faulty barrels that they can keep up with PSA’s demand?

If I was reloading 9mm ammo, had a great reputation for quality, and one company that bought it from me wanted every round mic’d for OAL and checked with a chamber gauge, yeah I would price it differently than the same exact components assembled on the same exact machine being sold to someone who said they trusted my reputation or to check every 100th round.

Colt and BCM fans will excuse 2 MOA + accuracy, 7 lb gritty triggers, etc, because it’s “mil-spec”. I do think you’re paying for a more qualified, thorough assembly than you’ll get with PSA, but these things aren’t as fickle and precise as many people would have you believe.

I’ve built motorcycle race engines that turn 10k + RPM, and have two different piston sizes and 4 different main bearing sizes based on tolerances that are too small to control during machining. Certain motors had issues with seizing due to people over tightening the cam cap bolts by 2-3 ft-lbs. Torquing something within 10 ft-lbs and making sure it’s properly staked isn’t rocket science.

If you have zero interest in learning how AR’s work or being bake to assemble/maintain them, yeah I wouldn’t go with a PSA. If you’re willing to check and reassemble stuff, yes I think 19/20 will run as well as the “premium” guns.

[26 Inf]

What's wrong with buying a complete Colt?

Nothing at all. It's just that I have a safe full of AR's and have yet to buy one complete, I like to put them together.

As I've mentioned in another thread, I do have a 'completish Colt' that was two separate purchases, months apart, from Brownell's sales, it has a ToolCraft BCG and a Raptor CH. I also have a more complete LaRue, which contains all LaRue parts, which I put together from their Ultimate Upper kit and their lower receiver.

If I'm going to buy a complete rifle it will simply be something more refined.

[D_M]

They are/were passing them with ease at Battlefield Las Vegas, although the 2.0 MOA standard wasn't measured, and after a life of full auto mag dumps, probably would not be achieved.

No one said PSA can't make a rifle that doesn't fall apart, or at least, they shouldn't have. PSA has sent out unacceptable parts and it has been documented.

If you can't verify anything that you have, it doesn't matter if it's KAC or PSA.

[m4hk33]

No one said PSA can't make a rifle that doesn't fall apart, or at least, they shouldn't have. PSA has sent out unacceptable parts and it has been documented.

If you can't verify anything that you have, it doesn't matter if it's KAC or PSA.

I would honestly say that considering the PSA price point, it should not really come as a surprise that they sent out something that is considered unacceptable. I mean, when somebody purchases a PSA, they are buying the absolute cheapest AR on the market. you really do get what you are paying for. With that being said, in spite of their low levels of QC, they tend to put out a relatively solid product that would shoot most shooters fine, especially of they are familiar with that platform.

Would i grab my PSA over my Kac, no, of course not, but it is fun to take to the range to mess around with

[26 Inf]

No one said PSA can't make a rifle that doesn't fall apart, or at least, they shouldn't have. PSA has sent out unacceptable parts and it has been documented.

As have other companies that have a sterling reputations on this forum.

Something is always going to slip through, question is on what scale, and, do they make it right?

And again, if we are talking ten times the rifles produced, you would expect ten times the 'issues' that's just simple math and logic.

And, if by verifying you mean making sure it works, I totally agree. Although I don't think you need to do 2,000 rounds to verify it.

BTW, I don't think PSA has a retail distribution network outside the stores they have in SC. I'd be willing to bet that most on the folks associated with LGS's frequenting this site, would be stocking PSA's if PSA had a retail distribution network.

[jesuvuah]

I will throw in my 2 cents on this subject again.

I have owned many psa parts. I have never bought a complete rifle. I also have owned rifles from much more reputable companies (bcm, Colt, dd, lmt)

My experience, they are not equal, but the difference is much less then what many make it out to be.

I have received out of spec parts from psa. I have received uppers where something wasn't assembled properly. It was however, always taken care of.

I do believe their premium line with FN barrels are pretty good to go and a good value, and that has been my experience. I have no idea what FNs protocol is for making barrels, but I have lots of industrial experience. Most places I have worked for make "higher grade" and "lower grade" products on the same line. They were typically always set up for higher grade for all the lines of product. But if something didn't meet the high spec for some reason, it would go to the low grade line. So basically, if you were buying a lower grade spec, 99% of the time you were getting the higher spec, but you did get the occasional lower grade.

So..... I think if one wants to buy a psa, go for it. It has a greater chance of having an issue. If it has an issue, they will most likely take care of you. I personally would go over it completely before firing it.

Another alternative is, buy a bcm blemished upper receiver, a ballistic advantage barrel on sale(might as well have them pin a gas block on while you're at it),a toolcraft bcg, and whatever CH and hanguard\rail you want. You won't spend much more, probably a better upper, and you get the joy of building it.

Sent from my moto e5 (XT1920DL) using Tapatalk