Colt M4s

[Just Jim]

Just finnished reading a Guns and Ammo special summer edition Combat Tactics. It had a Mil Spec article that was very informative. In the article it described in detail why Colt M4s are better than all but the FN guns(under Colt LIC).

Seems the quality control test done on Colt guns are far better than most other guns and a chart they listed who does inspections and who doesn"t. After reading all the information I would like someone to tell me why anyone would buy any gun but a Colt.

jj

 

[Gord]

I'm not a SEAL operator. A $700 gun that will do everything I need it to do is good enough; no need to pay $1200+ for a gun that's "better" in ways I don't need. YMMV, and your money's your own to do with what you will, but there are plenty of people out there getting by just fine (on police forces, in three-gun matches and so on) with ARs not made by Colt or LMT.

You also really don't want to get your gospel from gun rags.

 

[W.E.G.]

Colt makes good product.

So do a lot of other companies.
... and a lot of it being stuff Colt does not make.

There is some junk out there too.
Knowledgeable folks aren't too likely to get burned.

Unlike the guy who posts, "I just picked up my most awesomest rifle off layaway!
Its an FN with a Hesse receiver..."

 

[nalioth]

Gun magazine writers tend to write nice things about companies that keep them in guns.

There are a few who 'tell it like it is', but publishers tend to frown on articles that make their advertisers look bad (even if it's the truth being written).

The internet has pulled up the bedclothes on this business arrangement, and has also enabled unbiased opinions on products of all kinds by "Joe User".

 

[Frog48]

Colt makes good products, but they are not the "be all and end all" in the AR game.

Lots of companies make AR's that will serve you well.

 

[strat81]

If the bolt breaks on an M4gery on a dedicated range gun, nothing bad happens. Pay $50-$100 for a new bolt and move on. Instead of paying big bucks for the Colt, you pay $800 for the initial rifle plus the money for the extra part.

And non-Colt parts aren't failing at an astronomical rate.

Colt M4s are fighting carbines. They are not bench rifles or varmint guns. Not everyone who buys an AR-15 needs or wants a fighting carbine.

If I told you that the Honda Accord is the greatest car in the world with impeccable quality, reliability, acceleration and handling, would you buy it even if you need a pickup truck to haul debris, tow a trailer, and drive on unpaved roads? Or, would you buy a pickup truck?

Different tools for different jobs, folks.

 

[TexasRifleman]

After reading all the information I would like someone to tell me why anyone would buy any gun but a Colt.

99% of the ARs out there are fine for 99% of the shooters.

There are people in that 1% that truly need the extra. If you do need it the Colts are great. If you can afford it, the Colts are great.

But, the Colt is going to cost you $300-400 more for the same rifle if not more, and if you can find someone with one in stock.

Read this thread by Bart Roberts, good information on all of this:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=243382&highlight=ar

 

[fastbolt]

I read the same article. Not the first time I've seen much of that material in print in commercial magazines, either.

Much of that information is available in Colt LE armorer classes, too. Nothing 'secret' about any of it.

It may remind some folks that "Mil-Spec" is sometimes more than just an advertising slogan or a model designation, though.

Anyway, most regular folks who buy 'AR-15 type' rifles/carbines won't ever need to have a firearm that will pass stringent Govt inspection & testing, or will be able to meet the demands of military service using actual 5.56 X 45mm NATO ammunition (50,750 - 52,000 psi, depending on the ammunition used) for extended periods in adverse environmental conditions.

Commercial grade variants produced of quality parts and manufacture will probably suit the desired needs of lots of ordinary consumers, while still letting them enjoy owning a 'military-pattern' rifle (where permitted by local law, of course).

The rising cost of ammunition is probably going to make it increasingly unlikely that the 'average' commercial owner would be testing the limits of the firearm's service life, anyway ... aside from normal small parts replacement as required, of course.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I'm not a SEAL operator.

Well, you're certainly in the minority here on the 'net.

 

[Just Jim]

After reading the exstensive test required on Colt rifles and seeing most of those test are not performed on other rifles I concern for quality. Sure I am not a gun fighter or anything close but I want a quality product to last a lifetime for that kind of money.

I would like to hand it down to someone who won't have to worry about bolt hardness or broken parts. To spend $700 on a gun with ? parts that may work or $1200 on something that has been fully tested with the best of parts seems odd when it comes to quality. Are you throwing away $700 when the gun fails when you really need it or is $500 more a good insurance policy for a gun you can trust? If you really needed it will it work??

jj

 

[TexasRifleman]

Are you throwing away $700 when the gun fails when you really need it or is $500 more a good insurance policy for a gun you can trust? If you really needed it will it work??

The thing is, with so many people making ARs, and so many people shooting them, if there was some high failure rate we'd all be hearing about it by now.

I've got a Bushmaster with 15,000+ rounds through it. There are probably folks here with many times that many rounds through.

The catastrophic failures are not happening, or at least not in any high enough rate to get anyone's attention.

The only AR I have ever seen actually have a serious failure was a Colt. Is that data? Nope, that's just one incident.

If there was real failure data out there we'd know it.

 

[Just Jim]

Well then let me ask, if Bushmaster is just as good for $700 then why are they not in service with the troops?? Seems we could save alot of money.

On failures the only thing I have seen fail is the split ring washers in the bolt. (I keep spares now)

jj

 

[taliv]

the folks looking to save $300 on a gun by claiming lower quality is good enough

are the same folks that doing don't take the time to educate themselves and acquire modern skills for using their 'weapon'

are the same folks who don't take the time to practice what few skills they have, preferring instead to spend their range time sitting behind a bench.

I wouldn't personally recommend anyone put themselves that far behind the curve, regardless of whether they're amatures or professionals.

Still, it's a free country and all fine with me, as long as everyone realizes this dysfunctional mentality prepares you for nothing more than a bit part as a redneck bad guy on the A-Team TV show.

Certainly, there are worse things you could aspire to than riding around in the back of a pickup, with a gun in one hand and the rollbars in the other, making scary frowny faces for your friends, but you'll have to forgive me for not putting much stock in the "I shot 100 rnds through my Oly and no jams!!" buy recommendation.

I'd encourage everyone to scroll back through a few years worth of "ar15 jamming", "fte/ftf", "extraction problems", etc threads in rifle country and count the number of times the cry for help was for a rifle that adheres to the standard.

 

[Joe Demko]

the folks looking to save $300 on a gun by claiming lower quality is good enough...

How you got all that out of people buying other than Colt/FN carbines is a puzzlement.

 

[taliv]

not very puzzling. you just have to watch people for a few years. it's not rocket science.

i didn't specify colt. i'm not even saying the choice is all that important. i'm just saying there are patterns of success and many components thereof. and I'll bet money that people who cut one corner are more likely to cut all of them.

they'll buy crappy ammo even after all their friends tell them not to. they'll put a $30 scope or red dot on there, even after everyone warns them not to. they buy the wrong mags. an airsoft sling. etc.

 

[Rosstradamus]

It may remind some folks that "Mil-Spec" is sometimes more than just an advertising slogan or a model designation, though.

That's why I paid $435 for my hammer and $640 for my toilet seat. They're mil-spec! Accept nothing less!

 

[TexasRifleman]

Well then let me ask, if Bushmaster is just as good for $700 then why are they not in service with the troops?? Seems we could save alot of money

Are you in the military? In your day to day use of the AR platform do you treat your weapon the way they do?

If not, will a weapon of a bit less quality fail if never subjected to that treatment?

It's an apples to orange comparison.

Any motorcycle helmet made will protect you if it's never hit.

Most of the common ARs will survive just about any civilian use they are put to. That they are not mil-spec doesn't mean they are not as good for their intended use.

If you are that 1% of civilians that needs an AR that is built for extreme usage, the Colt is there as well as a few other makers.

 

[Gord]

How you got all that out of people buying other than Colt/FN carbines is a puzzlement.

Pretty much. This means I need to buy a $1500 Kimber to have a real 1911, too, right?

Well then let me ask, if Bushmaster is just as good for $700 then why are they not in service with the troops?

No one is arguing that high-end ARs are above and beyond most of the domestic makes. The question is simply whether any given person wants or needs the bells and whistles afforded by a Colt or similar, when they generally aren't firing high-pressure milspec ammo all day every day in 120-degree dust with baddies shooting back at them.

If your purposes are served by a little Toyota pickup, there's no need to buy a crew-cab F350 XLT "just in case." If you're looking for a semi-sporty commuter car, you can buy a Miata instead of a Corvette. If you still want to - fine. But that's a personal choice, as with all things.

99% of the ARs out there will work for 99% of shooters 99% of the time. There are at least a couple hundred thousand of them in civilian hands out there, and I'm willing to bet that most aren't Colt/FN/LMT.

I'd actually postulate a reversal on taliv's logic - the guys who buy Colt ARs, HK USPs and FN supertac shotguns all hung with lasers and holosights are the ones who generally seem to think that they are buying skill, and therefore have no need to practice. See for yourself - the forums are full of stock and lightly tricked guns with wear marks plainly evident, and pristine, unfired guns with accessories that are worth three times as much as the guns themselves.

I don't need practice, my $2000 gun is infallible! Besides, it might get scratched or something...

 

[taliv]

99% of the ARs out there will work for 99% of shooters 99% of the time. There are at least a couple hundred thousand of them in civilian hands out there, and I'm willing to bet that most aren't Colt/FN/LMT.

yeah, on this we agree. most of the ARs out there can't get through 100 rounds without malfunctioning. oooh, sign me up for that.

 

[strat81]

most of the ARs out there can't get through 100 rounds without malfunctioning. oooh, sign me up for that.

Is this supposed to be sarcastic?
If yes, nevermind.
If not, then I think you're way off base.


ARs are like many other products: there are a wide range of products available for differing needs. It doesn't matter if it's pickup trucks, printers, copy machines, or chainsaws. Some models are rated for heavy-duty use (like the Colt) and some are not (like the Oly Plinker).

Why pay extra if you don't need the extra capability? I don't drive a 1-ton dually because I don't tow boats or trailers. I don't have a 4150 MPI HPT barrel because I'm not shooting full-auto.

 

[taliv]

sarcastic, of course, but not that far off base

 

[tepin]

Here is info worth reading:

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6642

 

[sarduy]

I'd actually postulate a reversal on taliv's logic - the guys who buy Colt ARs, HK USPs and FN supertac shotguns all hung with lasers and holosights are the ones who generally seem to think that they are buying skill, and therefore have no need to practice. See for yourself - the forums are full of stock and lightly tricked guns with wear marks plainly evident, and pristine, unfired guns with accessories that are worth three times as much as the guns themselves.

That is so true!

I'd actually postulate a reversal on taliv's logic - the guys who buy Colt ARs, HK USPs and FN supertac shotguns all hung with lasers and holosights are the ones who generally seem to think that they are buying skill

just because you buy a 50,000 dollar BMW doesn't mean you know how to drive!, it's the same with gun, i don't trick my guns a lot, but I DO shoot the hell out of them.

and pristine, unfired guns with accessories that are worth three times as much as the guns themselves.

all the extra money goes into ammo

 

[TexasRifleman]

sarcastic, of course, but not that far off base

Yeah, it's pretty far off base.

The ARs that foul consistently are, for the most part, "homemade" jobs using the cheapest parts kits around and put together by folks without the right skills or tools.

Although the assembly LOOKS Lego simple, it's not.

Factory ARs can and do run like sewing machines for the most part.

I've got 5 factory built and none of them have ever had a weapon related issue. Only my reloads have ever caused any problems.

Again, if factory built ARs regularly failed as often as 1 shot in 100 the makers would no longer be in business.

There is very little truth in your statement, and I think you know that.

It is kinda funny however, and that's the important part

 

[Just Jim]

Are you in the military? In your day to day use of the AR platform do you treat your weapon the way they do?

So then you are saying that if you want a tough as nails service gun then buy a Colt???? Are you saying that the other brands won't stand up to hard service??

jj