but wait, aren't COLTS the best thing since sliced bread?


PDA






againstthagrane
November 20, 2009, 04:45 AM
i laughed when i read this.

colt has the most ardent fanboys. try this article on for size, fellers.:neener::neener::neener:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/11/20/colt-ar-15-kaboom/

If you enjoyed reading about "but wait, aren't COLTS the best thing since sliced bread?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RockyMtnTactical
November 20, 2009, 04:52 AM
I don't know the details of this failure but it could be ammo related for all I know.

Nothing is perfect, and everything breaks... eventually...

Oro
November 20, 2009, 04:52 AM
Because no one has ever seen a mis-loaded round? Factory or re-load?

Seems like waiting for all the facts would be more prudent than spouting off against a brand or other shooting fans.

SpeedAKL
November 20, 2009, 09:36 AM
All rifles can break, Colts included...

RonE
November 20, 2009, 09:51 AM
The firearm blog failed to mention what ammunition was being used and what the conditions were, was the barrel plugged with mud for example.

Any firearm can break, just use it improperly and of course, there are manufacturing defects.

You don't have to send the rifle to Colt, I can tell you what happened........bad ammo or barrel obstruction.......Do you think Colt or any other manufacturer will report back that there seems to be a manufacturing problem?

Robert
November 20, 2009, 10:02 AM
but wait, aren't COLTS the best thing since sliced bread?
And to answer the question. Yes.

dom1104
November 20, 2009, 10:12 AM
It was factory XM193.

There was no barrel obstruction that the operator was aware of. It happened on the second round fired from the prone position by a 325 lb man with a beard.

He went back to his truck, grabbed a Sig 556 and finished the magpul carbine course.

DeepSouth
November 20, 2009, 10:18 AM
Makes you wonder what it would have looked like if it weren't a Colt, probably wouldn't have been able to find enough pieces to take a pic of.:neener::D

Tirod
November 20, 2009, 10:19 AM
Various other forums have already brought out the shooter was using XM193 rounds. The X designates the ammunition as not meeting milspec standards - military reject.

It's not about the brand of weapon - using military reject ammo has it's potential problems. This stuff has been documented to have these results lately. This is another. Bad ammo in any gun is bad news. Good ammo in even a homebuilt AR parts assembly won't do that.

I'd like to ask the Tier One users - if the only good weapons are built to milspec, WHY SHOOT REJECT AMMO? It's NOT Tier One milspec, and much more dangerous in use than a cheaper AR shooting good ammo.

I'd like to see a ban on this lots use at carbine classes and ranges. Instructors just need to make the decision that some shooters can't. Not everyone is in the loop.

Put the wrong set of components together in a cartridge, any gun will kaboom, regardless of the maker.

CleverNickname
November 20, 2009, 10:22 AM
Just because Toyota Colt makes a higher quality car gun than Yugo or Lada DPMS or Olympic doesn't mean it won't ever have problems, just that it's less likely.

longdayjake
November 20, 2009, 10:46 AM
Shoulda bought a Colt!!!! Oh wait... he did!!!! The thing that gets me with posts like this is that because its a colt the colt lovers are blaming the ammunition. If it was another maker they would all have said thats what you get for not buying a colt. Aside from broken parts like extractors, bolts, or ejectors, my bet is that anything that will cause any brand AR to explode like this will cause all brands to explode in such a way.

Tirod
November 20, 2009, 10:46 AM
The maker in question has to document and test that they make parts to government standards.

That has a lot to do with reliability, and whether those standards actually apply. Also, the company has to make a profit on the bid contract. They don't go any further out of their way than to ensure they meet contract conditions.

Interpreting that as a guarantee of quality is up to the individual. I see it as government oversight the taxpayer gets their moneys worth. The maker meets a minimum standard.

The government also buys mostly inexpensive cars for motor pool use - very few Mercedes Benz's. The public does not assume a Focus is equivalent, but on gun forums, similar misconceptions seem to abound. The Tier One builders list is trotted out, and all because they were contract suppliers. Notably absent from that list is GM Saginaw and FN, who is now also supplying the SCAR.

Colt builds a contract rifle to military spec, and their customer service department handles things when they don't. It's not necessarily the acme of supreme quality some would like it to be. It's just been good business management on their part.

Uncle Mike
November 20, 2009, 10:56 AM
Just because Toyota Colt makes a higher quality car gun than Yugo or Lada DPMS or Olympic doesn't mean it won't ever have problems, just that it's less likel

Not directed towards you Clevernickname but....Colt makes a better 'quality' AR than DPMS, Bushmaster, Olympic....!???! Right!

Every manufacturer has their good stuff and their junk. Colt indeed makes a fine AR, but to say they(Colt) is the bestest or betterest is pure nonsense! lol

Chevy Trucks are crap....I saw one on the side of the road once....yea, it was hooking up to that crapped out Toyota...so which one is junk? I mean they're both on the side of the road, right?

A Colt exploded...now they are ALL junk...I'm not buying it! lol
Probably ammo related...most people will say they were using factory ammo......

Water-Man
November 20, 2009, 10:56 AM
Colt is the gold standard of AR's. There are only two or three others in the same league.

Tirod
November 20, 2009, 11:18 AM
Colt is a supplier to government standards, just like Bushmaster, FN, and GM Saginaw.

Gold standard doesn't exist - there is no milspec for that. If anything, SIG is regarded as making the highest quality assault rifles for a nations Army. I don't see the Swiss bending over backwards to buy Colts because of a demonstrated superiority.

Nations buy a specified firearm to a contract standard and accept the lowest reasonable bid. All things considered, Colt was the cheapest. That has nothing to do with a superior level of quality, just a documented level of consistent adherence to standard.

Many smaller makers can achieve higher levels of quality in their product, and do so. They can easily take the government minimums and improve the material quality, fabrication, and tighten tolerances to make a better, higher quality part. Noveske does that with barrels everyday. But, it's not milspec, because that standard is based on old technology and bureaucracy, not the quest for the highest quality. Just a minimum.

Government standards mean M4's shoot to 2 MOA. That's run of the mil on the open market. Milspec also means 6-8 pound creepy triggers, another low point. Milspec currently accepts 3000 round barrel life. And milspec means that Colt's just meet minimum standards, just like toilet seats.

If there is a gold standard, please specify where it is spelled out. The nature of the competitive bidding process pretty much eliminates any one offering it.

Water-Man
November 20, 2009, 11:41 AM
Comparison Chart of Major AR brands at M4Carbine.net

kwelz
November 20, 2009, 11:46 AM
It was factory XM193.
That could be the problem right there. Reject ammo isn't your best option usually people.

Colt is a supplier to government standards, just like Bushmaster, FN,......

Bushmaster since when?

You are half corrrect. the TDP is just a minimum. The problem is that almost no companies out there even MEET that minimum much less exceed it.

atlanticfire
November 20, 2009, 11:48 AM
I don't buy into the Colt thing. I've handled hundreds of ARs, colt is just another player in the game. Nothing great about them.

rossiscratch
November 20, 2009, 11:50 AM
Colt is a supplier to government standards, just like Bushmaster, FN, and GM Saginaw.

Gold standard doesn't exist - there is no milspec for that. If anything, SIG is regarded as making the highest quality assault rifles for a nations Army. I don't see the Swiss bending over backwards to buy Colts because of a demonstrated superiority.

Nations buy a specified firearm to a contract standard and accept the lowest reasonable bid. All things considered, Colt was the cheapest. That has nothing to do with a superior level of quality, just a documented level of consistent adherence to standard.

Many smaller makers can achieve higher levels of quality in their product, and do so. They can easily take the government minimums and improve the material quality, fabrication, and tighten tolerances to make a better, higher quality part. Noveske does that with barrels everyday. But, it's not milspec, because that standard is based on old technology and bureaucracy, not the quest for the highest quality. Just a minimum.

Government standards mean M4's shoot to 2 MOA. That's run of the mil on the open market. Milspec also means 6-8 pound creepy triggers, another low point. Milspec currently accepts 3000 round barrel life. And milspec means that Colt's just meet minimum standards, just like toilet seats.

If there is a gold standard, please specify where it is spelled out. The nature of the competitive bidding process pretty much eliminates any one offering it.
Interesting how all that works out isn't it.

TexasRifleman
November 20, 2009, 11:56 AM
colt has the most ardent fanboys. try this article on for size, fellers.

Huh, a piece of machinery has failed. Wow, that's never happened before.

Guess we should all sell our rifles just in case.

I'm willing to bet you can find a failure in just about every machine ever made by man. Does that mean they all have a design flaw or are not well built?

Guess I'm not really sure what the point is here.

It was factory XM193.

That doesn't say much. There is no SAAMI spec for that load. The load may or may not meet the NATO specs for M193, but there is no requirement for it to do so.

It could be the rifle, it could be the ammo, it could be an obstruction in the barrel, it could be MANY things.

Kentucky
November 20, 2009, 12:10 PM
I don't buy into the Colt thing. I've handled hundreds of ARs, colt is just another player in the game. Nothing great about them.

Yeah, because you can tell everything you need to know about a rifle by handling it. Do you even realize how ignorant that sounded?

Avenger29
November 20, 2009, 12:34 PM
It's quite obvious that some of you just can't wait to get on the Colt bashing FAILtrain when this is clearly an ammunition issue that would have affected your own pet brand equally. Typically, issues like this in an AR cause the magazine to blow out, but sometimes stuff like this happens.

kBooms happen. Guns break. Deal with it.

Tirod
November 20, 2009, 01:44 PM
You are half corrrect. the TDP is just a minimum. The problem is that almost no companies out there even MEET that minimum much less exceed it.

So, all those FN's in service don't meet the TDP and aren't milspec?

I'm not here to bash Colt, and haven't been. And, yes, it is kinda suspect that Colt owns the TDP and very few others can bid the contract. Of course, there aren't that many players in the game who could tool up to build one, bid the cheapest, and have the propietary data they control.

I heard this same worship when the subject of replacing the 1911 came up. The M9 is due for it's 25th anniversary in service. There are very few .45's on the job these days, and they are just milspec, too. But there are a lot of quality 1911 makers out there - Wilson, Kimber, etc. Using the same reasoning, they make substandard crap useless in combat.

Go float that on a 1911 forum.

Colt makes weapons to military standards - as I pointed out, milspec isn't your best buy on the market. Lots of makers are out there with better stuff. Even Colt plays with the configuration to be competitive - they only have loyalty to staying in business.

If it means paying FN for rights to the TDP on the SCAR, or going out of business, they will. Optimizing shareholder value always trumps the fanbase of flavoraid drinkers. It's all about business, not reciprocal loyalty. They sold us down the river before.

kwelz
November 20, 2009, 01:55 PM
So, all those FN's in service don't meet the TDP and aren't milspec?


At what point did I mention FN? I was referring to the normal AR market where there are only a couple companies that bother to make a product that meet even those minimum specs.

Colt held the TDP because that is how these systems work. there is nothing "suspect" about it. The time ran out and the .gov now holds the rights to the TDP which means other companies can choose to bid on it if they wish. And if they can produce a firearm that meets those specs then more power to them. The problem is that they choose not to.

There is a common misconception that people don't like certain brands because they are not Colt. The brand doesn't really matter to most people as long s the company makes a quality product. I would buy a DPMS if they made a quality product and would not buy Colt if they produced crap. But that is not the case.

Lots of makers are out there with better stuff.

Yes they do. BCM, Noveske, KAC, but they all also at least meet the minimum specs set forth. Once again this is something other brands don't seem capable of.

Water-Man
November 20, 2009, 02:45 PM
Tirod...You asked for info on Colt and I gave it to you. Now why don't you go read it and learn something!

SlamFire1
November 20, 2009, 03:13 PM
There is a common misconception that people don't like certain brands because they are not Colt. The brand doesn't really matter to most people as long s the company makes a quality product.

Brands matter. Image matters. There are people out there who are so brand conscious that their self image is based on a brand.
Rolex watches, bottled water http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Bottled_water_brands
(Perrier is one), you pick the product, and there are people who exist for the brand.

kwelz
November 20, 2009, 03:20 PM
Very true Slamfire. I think I could have stated my point better. Brand matters because that company has done something to earn the reputation they have. Other companies can do the same thing but they have not. That was more of my point.

Texpatriate
November 20, 2009, 05:12 PM
So, all those FN's in service don't meet the TDP and aren't milspec?

The TDP is for the M4. FN does not make M4's, they make M16's. Totally different set of standards. Both are AR-15 platform rifles, but their designs are significantly different.

Rapier
November 20, 2009, 06:29 PM
Well. I can only hope that everyone on the internets reads this, takes it to heart, sells off their old Colts and the price of new Colts plummets.

Especially in time for January when I want to buy mine. :D

Who knows, they might even be as cheap as WASR's! Or Mosins!

Tirod
November 20, 2009, 09:40 PM
http://www.americanmachinist.com/304/Issue/Article/False/8041/Issue

Beyond most of our familiarity - how Colt machines barrels, etc by exactly what machine and process. They do not hammer forge barrels. They do work hard at cutting costs, which is the primary way you can keep bidding a contract and winning it.

Since Colt is interested in making parts as cheaply as possible and still meeting quality guidelines imposed by the government to prevent cheating the taxpayer, I'm not convinced that adhering to mispec is all that noble. And just because they designed a technical data package, isn't it a list of just exactly what materials and machine operations they so diligently pursue to reduce costs and maintain a minimum level of performance?

Those terms - milspec, and TDP, are not the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. More like the GAO's continuing certification nobody's getting cheated. If there is anything about military contracts, graft, corruption, and outright thievery has the bulk of the history, from pocketing BIA funds that should have fed starving Indians, to the Truman Commission exposing military acquisitions in WWII. Read about the millions of your dollars thrown away in Iraq? Responsible people in jail awaiting trial?

Colt doesn't do this for free. They are in it for the money. Perspectives are reversed if Colt is making the gold standard highest quality firearm ever. Perhaps turning the viewscope around the other way will help. There are no perfect firearms, and government spec versions are usually minimum standard - not the best.

Colt doesn't hammer forge barrels. Maybe they know they aren't in it for the long run - or the shareholders dividend is more important.

Z-Michigan
November 20, 2009, 10:01 PM
This isn't the first kaboom with XM193. Wait and see what the cause is determined to be, but all the Colt bashing and worship is just silly. (FYI I don't own a Colt or plan to buy one, nor would I reject one if offered to me at a good price.)

kwelz
November 20, 2009, 10:14 PM
Actually if you were in the know at all Tirod, you would know that Colt has announced they are switching to Hammer forged barrels like they have been using from Colt Canada

Caeser2001
November 21, 2009, 10:03 AM
I don't buy into the Colt thing. I've handled hundreds of ARs, colt is just another player in the game. Nothing great about them.

it's not the part you can really see or feel that makes a colt a colt, it's the quality of the materials that meet the tdp set by the govn't for a soldier to carry in the field. had he had a rifle that didn't meet or exceed the tdp it could ended up a whole lot worse.

So, all those FN's in service don't meet the TDP and aren't milspec?

actually they do, other wise they wouldn't have a contract for the m16's they make, however colt holds the exclusive contract for m4's, as lmt has the contract for mk18 uppers.

McBuck
November 21, 2009, 10:22 AM
I've never seen amything like that before...


























































from a Mini-14 :D

wishin
November 21, 2009, 11:53 AM
I liken Colt to Cadillac. Why drive a Caddy when a Chevy does the same thing for a lesser price. Lasts just as long, goes just as fast and reliability is comparable. However, the resale value is higher, as is with the Colt.

As for Milspec, the great benefit to Joe Civilian is presumed interchangeability between different makers of the same product.

Tirod
November 21, 2009, 10:19 PM
Thank you Azizza, you help make my point. Colt would rather use older less efficient methods of mass production until the cost benefit ratio is shown to work better.

Hammer forged barrels have been out for thirty years, are more accurate, and don't have to be lapped in because they don't have cut tooling or smeared button marks internally. Barrel life has been known to be superior for decades, with much higher round counts.

It admits that what they have been doing isn't the best. Not even as good as a foreign maker. Which reminds me, HK was hammer forging barrels in the '70's. Glad to see Colt catching up. Maybe they will move up from building Chevy's to something better.

ps, I didn't start this as a Colt bashing session, but if others are going to point out the problem areas, perhaps we could just start that as a thread. This was about an kaboom likely caused by known substandard ammunition.

mljdeckard
November 21, 2009, 10:27 PM
All machines fail eventually. I do however think that the difference between Colt and say, DPMS is GREATLY exaggerated in both directions. I think that the vast majority of shooters could go their whole lives with ANY AR with the brand names ground off and do all of their training, practicing, fighting and hunting, and never know the difference.

If a Colt is a Toyota, a DPMS might be a Mazda. Most people won't ever know the difference.

taliv
November 21, 2009, 10:42 PM
Colt would rather use older less efficient methods of mass production until the cost benefit ratio is shown to work better.

*sigh* you mean, the US Military? when the army wants to pay for HF barrels, i'm sure colt would oblige them.


It admits that what they have been doing isn't the best.

and despite the fact that every colt fanboy on the internet knows this is a fact, and has readily admitted it for years and in fact stated such in this very thread.... you still act as if it is a revelation to us all. hello? are you even listening? Colt is complying with a specification. it's that simple.

atlanticfire
November 21, 2009, 11:48 PM
Ok, so I made a mistake in my comment. I handled hundreds and shoot dozens. Including colts and full autos. Still not impressed! Just another AR. . . . .I'm not a person who buys into name brands.

againstthagrane
November 22, 2009, 04:08 AM
it is hilarious that all of the fan-boys are blaming the ammo, but if it was an olympic or DPMS they would be harping on about "that's what you get for buying a so and so branded AR."

to me, colt fans are the same kind of people who buy those stupid ed hardy t-shirts just because everyone is doing it.

colt= more overrated than creed and nickelback put together.

Tirod
November 22, 2009, 08:45 PM
I agree - military specifications may have a lot to do with the choice of barrel making.

As for every fanboy admitting Colt just makes things to spec, statements like "the gold standard" pop up which can be interpreted as undue adulation. I don't find some Colt enthusiasts in touch with the reality of the subject - but maybe that is just a come on.

One thing is for sure, as long as Colts demand a premium on the market, I suspect it will be because of undue appreciation beyond their actual worth. I could mention a few other makers with fans equally loyal and similarly appreciated. If anything, their behavior is the public perception of the marque - which is unfortunate.

They seem to love pointing out the kabooms.

kwelz
November 22, 2009, 08:56 PM
They command a premium because they actually build them right. Unlike DPMS, Bushmaster, Oly, Etc. And the price difference between Colt and most other branks is minimal right now.

taliv
November 22, 2009, 08:59 PM
As for every fanboy admitting Colt just makes things to spec, statements like "the gold standard" pop up which can be interpreted as undue adulation. I don't find some Colt enthusiasts in touch with the reality of the subject - but maybe that is just a come on.

I've no idea what you're trying to say here. interpret it however you like, but the "gold standard" just indicates money is fixed to a quantity of gold. much like "mil-spec", it's just a definition. it doesn't imply (of itself) that a particular currency is worth more or less than any other currency. just like 'mil-spec' doesn't imply something is better or worse than any other standard.

the rub of course, is your lack of some competing standard. perhaps if you were to propose some alternative standard, we could have a meaningful discussion. until you do, we are left with nothing better to do but argue about the reputation of brand names, a few of which are better than the spec, but most of which are not.

TexasRifleman
November 22, 2009, 09:03 PM
As for every fanboy admitting Colt just makes things to spec, statements like "the gold standard" pop up which can be interpreted as undue adulation. I don't find some Colt enthusiasts in touch with the reality of the subject - but maybe that is just a come on.

No, it's people like you that twist things around to make it sound bad. Because of the specs talked about earlier the Colt is, like it or not, the "reference standard". If it bugs you to use the term "gold standard" fine, but it's the same thing.

The Colt is the reference point since it is as close to the published standard as you can buy. Some are better than the standard, many are worse, but Colt is the reference point. That's all that means. It's not "adulation" as you put it, it's a simple fact.

You are really twisted up over this for some reason, why is that?

At the end of the day kabooms like this are nearly always ammo related, no matter what manufacturer made the rifle.

RP88
November 22, 2009, 09:37 PM
Colt is a gold-standard M4-style gun. The only thing to bash about it is that you can now find almost the same thing from 2-3 other makers for a bit cheaper and without loose handguards if you're lucky, or build your own to the same standard and save about $300. Either way, the only thing to bash Colt for is the fact that they are running themselves into the ground like idiots at the rate they're going. No innovation or anything, horrible customer service from what I was told, snobbishness and bias for contracting that will soon run out on them once technology and/or their consumers moves away from the AR platform, and a noted disregard for the civilian market, etc. But, their ARs are well worth the money.

I'm definitely agreeing with the notion that one should not use reject ammo. That seems like the culprit here.

mgregg85
November 22, 2009, 09:43 PM
colt has the most ardent fanboys.

I've gotta disagree with that, H&K fanboys are far worse.

knights_armorer
November 22, 2009, 10:58 PM
ive personally seem more than 1 carrier split just like that from excessive headspacing.

careful with the reamer smitty!

dondavis3
November 22, 2009, 11:14 PM
All rifles can break, Colts included...

But why are you even posting this?

Why the problem with Colts?

I have never posted something that was just trying to run down some brand or another - I just don't get this kind of post.

zt77
November 22, 2009, 11:52 PM
Everyone knows colt doesn't make the absolute best ar on the market :rolleyes:

They do make ar's that comply with a good standard-milspec.
milspec may not mean mean #1 quality + #1 accuracy but it does mean it works good, shoots good, and will last a certain minimum number of rounds.

when you get down to it, there are a few brands that meet and a few that exceed the qualities of colts ar-15. what does that mean?
nothing, just that colt isn't the only good ar-15 on the market but they are a good ar-15.

mljdeckard
November 22, 2009, 11:57 PM
It means it USUALLY works good, shoots good, and will PROBABLY last a certain number of rounds. I've seen military issued rifles have about every failure (ok, not THIS failure,) you can imagine from old reconditioned A1s to fresh FNs. Mil-spec isn't something to strive for in manufacturing excellence.

Going back to the car analogy, it doesn't mean to say, "This car is good for 100,000 miles, but THIS car is good for 200,000 miles", if most drivers drive less than 20,000 in their lifetime.

vanfunk
November 23, 2009, 07:50 AM
Quote:
As for every fanboy admitting Colt just makes things to spec, statements like "the gold standard" pop up which can be interpreted as undue adulation. I don't find some Colt enthusiasts in touch with the reality of the subject - but maybe that is just a come on.

I've no idea what you're trying to say here. interpret it however you like, but the "gold standard" just indicates money is fixed to a quantity of gold. much like "mil-spec", it's just a definition. it doesn't imply (of itself) that a particular currency is worth more or less than any other currency. just like 'mil-spec' doesn't imply something is better or worse than any other standard.

the rub of course, is your lack of some competing standard. perhaps if you were to propose some alternative standard, we could have a meaningful discussion. until you do, we are left with nothing better to do but argue about the reputation of brand names, a few of which are better than the spec, but most of which are not.

Taliv, you have absolutely nailed it; the sentiment simply cannot be improved upon. It is all so much impotent saber-rattling until the above suggestion is followed.

vanfunk

SlamFire1
November 23, 2009, 11:30 AM
Is everybody 100% certain that Commerical Colts are 100% milspec?

(Except for the full auto feature)

Unless someone is inspecting their processes and production lines, how do you know that commerical parts are made by the same materials and processes as the military product line?

They might have two different production lines. (In fact I heard that 20 years ago from the Rock Island Arsenal Item manager)

Avenger29
November 23, 2009, 12:31 PM
Is everybody 100% certain that Commerical Colts are 100% milspec?

(Except for the full auto feature)

Unless someone is inspecting their processes and production lines, how do you know that commerical parts are made by the same materials and processes as the military product line?

They might have two different production lines. (In fact I heard that 20 years ago from the Rock Island Arsenal Item manager)

From the research I've been doing, Colt uses milspec parts across the board in at least their LE rifles (which are civilian legal)

Their target style rifles may be made on a different line. Likely so, in fact, and by nature of the requirements of fitting stuff for accuracy, etc). I don't know much about the target rifles Colt makes.

Colt doesn't make a big profit on their .mil rifles. Yes, some profit, not a big profit. I've read that the typical shipment is 800 M4s. If lower quality civilian parts got mixed in, then that entire batch of rifles is rejected and Colt eats the loss. They have a .mil quality control inspecter on site, apparently. So it's easier for them to have .mil and the LE series rifles use the same parts (minus full auto) rather than run the risk of rejection.

I think after the rifles clear the factory, then they are sent to a .mil arsenal facility for further inspection and entering into the .mil system.

againstthagrane
November 23, 2009, 09:18 PM
I've gotta disagree with that, H&K fanboys are far worse.

no way, how many times have you seen a "which AR should i buy?" thread that's dominated with BS like "colt is the only REAL ar" or "get a colt, the rest are trash" or "olympic and DPMS are crap"? too many.

i never see "which pistol should i buy" threads dominated with "HKs are the only real pistols" or "glock and sig are trash"

while HK fans do defend their products they don't trash other products with the same fervor as colt fans.

i almost forgot the 1911 threads..."the only 1911 is a colt...etc." you get the point.

colt fans are the worst in the firearms world. hk fans are pretty bad but at least they don't trash other brands.

knights_armorer
November 23, 2009, 09:35 PM
i think this was a headspace issue, and if so, mil-spec or not, colt or not, the bolt will fail.

If you enjoyed reading about "but wait, aren't COLTS the best thing since sliced bread?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!