Bushmaster?

[jhs1969]

Ok, exactly what problems have you encountered with BM's. The reason I ask; I started my AR adventures in the late 80's through the late 90's. After a few years off I've gotten back into it big time.

I've seen the pics on the BC's and end plates. What I want to know is the actual failures and causes. Just a few years ago the BM was tauted as being the 'best', the closest to 'mil-spec' that was available.

I now own a BM M4, this is my 14th Bushy and after many thousands of rounds through these rifles I have never had a failure of any kind with BM, and I am being completely honest here. In comparision I have also owned six different Colt's and only one performed with 100% reliability. Four had occasional failures, all FTF if memory serves and one was a malfuncationing mess. Now the Colts I owned from this era (with maybe one exception) did not have chrome lined bores. Most were HB's.

My current plans are to stake the BC and end plate on my current BM and soon (Jan - Feb) aquire a Colt 6920.

This will give me two M4's, one for me (Colt) and one for my wife (BM). I would just like to here experiences from others.

My how time changes.

[BushmasterFanBoy]

My problems with BM so far:

rifle extractor inserts
weak extractor springs
no crane o-ring inserts
carbine buffer

These are actual issues that gave me trouble, not just nitpicking, but issues that resulted in real failures.

Other things that didn't fail before they were fixed by me, but came wrong from the factory:

No stock staking
no bolt carrier staking

Things I haven't fixed yet, but could be trouble points:

non MPI-inspected bolt
non high pressure tested bolt

These aren't just areas where Bushmaster differs from the mil-spec to produce an out of spec product, there are many more of those if you look here.

The items I listed are real trouble areas, not just preferential features. Bushmaster is not up to standards I'd expect, and my rifles were purchased years ago, before recent declines in quality control. I love my Bushmasters, but I acknowledge BM is not keeping up with their end of the bargain, mainly providing a reliable rifle that meets standards out of the box.

I used to think that BM was just "different" that they just used non F-marked FSB's and non-Milspec buffer tubes because those things didn't really make the gun work reliably. Yet, they didn't just cut cost on cosmetic features, they cut cost on internals as well, and those WILL affect reliability. I wouldn't buy from them again, but if you already have, don't fret, just do a complete check on the inards, maybe even swap out the whole BCG for a Bravo co. USA one.

ETA: If your rifle works 100%, I'd just do what I did: get a BCM bolt upgrade kit for around $5 and an H buffer as well as a new carbine action spring.

[Shihan]

Bushy has had lots of broken bolts.

[rob_s]

Just a few years ago the BM was tauted as being the 'best', the closest to 'mil-spec' that was available.

My how time changes.

While not what you asked for specifically, I think that the two statements above are interesting, and correct.

During the ban years, there was little else out there of any quality at all. You would often hear the "stick with ABC" line meaning Armalite, Bushmaster, and Colt. The only other options at the time were DPMS, Hesse, Olympic, etc. which virtually everyone (or at least everyone that wasn't making excuses for not having enough money to buy "ABC") agreed were pretty much junk.

In retrospect, I don't think that the ban era Bushmasters and Armalites were the equal of today's Colts, but I think that Colt QC had slipped enough to pretty much level the playing field to one degree or another.

Near the end of the ban, Rock River Arms jumped into the AR market and they were selling a rifle that, while generally not the quality of ABC was certainly a nice bridge between those brands and the junk brands. People started saying "ABC-R" and things of that nature.

At the end of the ban, LMT was bursting on the scene. People were already buying LMT uppers to install on their pre-ban lowers and there was a bit of a frenzy. Some just jumped on the bandwagon but others realized what they were getting; Colt quality at Bushmaster/Armalite prices. After the sunset, this same realization just continued.

Also after the sunset, you had many companies that used to just make parts (like CMT for example) start putting out their own "house brand (like Stag). While these guns may not have been, or be, the equal of a Colt or an LMT they actually sold for less than Armalite and Bushmaster but offered a level of quality at least equal to the "A and B".

Today my problem with Bushmaster is that they make no economic sense. They are a generally inferior product for a higher price. You can either pay the same amount as a Bushmaster and get a better gun, or you can pay less to get a gun of the same quality.

I'm a bit of a sucker in that I believe what the trainers tell me. Yes, I have seen BMs fail because of poorly staked keys or because a bolt sheared or because the receiver extension nut came loose, but ultimately I rely on the anecdotal stories of those that see far more rifles, and rounds downrange, in a weekend than I may fire in a year.

Frankly, if most people followed the suggestions here even a rifle of lesser quality than a Bushmaster would probably work just fine.

[GLOCKMASTER]

I have two BM's in for test and evaluation. I attempted to zero one rifle at 50 yards. I could only get it to within about 6 inches of zero before I ran out of front sight post. I was so disgusted with this that I have yet to take the second one out of the box at the range. However, I was not surprised by this considering BM's track record.

[Shihan]

I have two BM's in for test and evaluation. I attempted to zero one rifle at 50 yards. I could only get it to within about 6 inches of zero before I ran out of front sight post. I was so disgusted with this that I have yet to take the second one out of the box at the range. However, I was not surprised by this considering BM's track record.

If only they would use the correct FSB!

[C4IGrant]

One of the comments that struck me as funny was this one: "Just a few years ago the BM was tauted as being the 'best', the closest to 'mil-spec' that was available."

The only place that such a quote would be true is on forums like ARFCOM. On more professional based forums, you would not hear that.

BM does many things wrong (which eventually leads to issues). If you get a chance, look at the chart of AR's that Rob has put together. It shows you how the BM ranks against its competition in regards to following the TDP.

Another comment that caught my eye is this one: "I now own a BM M4, this is my 14th Bushy and after many thousands of rounds through these rifles I have never had a failure of any kind with BM, and I am being completely honest here."

First, ALL AR's malfunction. The simple fact is that the magazine is the weakest link in the setup. Even the SUPER reliable HK 416 malfunctions because it is tied to the poorly designed mag.
Second, if your not experiencing malfunctions with your AR, then I suggest that you shoot more and take some carbine training classes. I just about GURANTEE that you will see some sort of malfunction.

Let's wrap this up with a whole bunch of common sense. If you use the cheapest parts and do not assemble them correctly, you are going to get a poor quality AR. If you use quality parts and assemble them correctly, you are much more likely to get a reliable weapon.
Your particular BM may run forever and a Colt 6920 might die in the first 300rds. What you have to look at is the law of averages. If you look at BM as a whole, they are a un-reliable, poorly built AR.


C4

[GLOCKMASTER]

If only they would use the correct FSB!

That is only one of their many problems from my experience!!

[AR15barrels]

Bushy has had lots of broken bolts.

Like this:

[Shihan]

That is only one of their many problems from my experience!!

Yep they have a lot of problems but I was refering to your problem with the fronr sight. Im not sure if they are worth half of what they sell for.