Building a Colt AR15 equal?

Palmetto State Armory.

And JSE Surplus.

http://www.jsesurplus.com/?utm_sour...tm_campaign=JSE+Barrel+Deals&utm_medium=email

Just buy a Colt Trooper. $734 at buds, but have sen as low as $699. PSA and others can get you something similar for a little less money, but you are not getting the same quality milspec lower parts, reciever extension, BCG ect. Even if the colt is a little more it is still worth it IMO, based on resale value alone. The Trooper is 6920 with a free float Centurion rail and is the best AR15 deal going IMO. The Colt OEM are good deals as well

I just got an LE6920 w/ carry handle on Gunbroker for 699. Came with two Colt mags, cleaning kit, sling, and some other stuff I haven't opened yet.

"Equal" to Colt is in the eye of the beholder. Your other options for full milspec in a civilian M-forgery are LMT, BCM, and FN. All much more expensive, and it's up in the air whether you're actually getting full milspec or not, since no one is holding their feet to the fire. With Colt, their civilian, LE, and military assembly lines are all the same. So the bolt you get in an LE6920 is from the exact same bin that they pull bolts from that go into contract weapons.

My standard advice right now is to buy a BCM mid length upper and build an Anderson lower with a high quality LPK and A5 stock kit. That's going to give you the absolute latest and greatest for an AR15 carbine that is second to none. You could stack that rifle up against ANYTHING in any carbine class in the nation and not find any shortcomings. You can do even better if you're willing to build the upper yourself.

Everready73 said:

but you are not getting the same quality milspec lower parts, reciever extension, BCG ect.

Click to expand...

I can't stand this argument. Unless your LPK has these, it's not "milspec":



As for bolt carriers, Colt was pretty much the last to the party with using M16 carriers. Other manufacturers use "milspec" C158 for bolts, or even stronger 9130 steel bolts. And these days, unless you specifically search out a commercial diameter receiver extension, you'd be hard pressed to find one that isn't "milspec" 7075. Colt was also a Johnny-come-lately in getting on board with mid length gas.

Colt makes a decent rifle, and they're more competitive in the market today than in years past, but you're still paying a couple hundred more for the pony rollmark. As to whether or not that will help resale value, just depends on the buyer. I certainly wouldn't pay more for a used Colt carbine as I would another make of known quality. The company rested on it's laurels for too long and wound up getting surpassed by numerous other manufacturers in many capacities.

You can order parts that meet government standards, and hope they actually do. Even cheap companies like Del Ton are doing 7075-t6 receivers, and milspec bolts. The only milspec part I find difficult to get (thats non NFA) is the receiver extensions. I see many 'Milspec diameter', so you can assume its probably not the right metal, or thread making process. Since you bring up Colt, its worth noting theres are reason GM Hydromatic, and FN have their names on lots of M16's.

Parts list to build an AR I trust as much as a Colt-
- Faxon Gunner profile barrel with matched bolt. 16" middy for a standard carbine. 11.5" or 14.5" for a shorty, depending on what suppressor I decide to use.
- Colt, PSA or LRB lower. I have hands on experience with all three and they have been good.
- Colt, PSA or VLTOR MUR upper receiver. I have hands on experience with all three.
- Low profile set screw or pinned gas block.
- Colt lower parts kit. Upgrades: Battle Arms Short throw Ambi Safety, Geissele SSA trigger.
- Standard parked carrier. If I had to pick one by brand, Colt is what comes to mind first, but there are others that would work just as well.
- Standard milspec RE made of 7075. Upgrade: Magpul Enhanced SR25/M110 RE with A5 buffer and rifle spring.
- Magpul Slimline buttstock, pistol grip & handguard. Upgrade: Troy MLok carbon fiber free float tube.
- Standard charging handle. Upgrade: Geissele Airborne charging handle.
- Aimpoint Micro.
- Colt extractor spring.

I could deviate from many of the parts specified and still feel good about the AR. There are many fine barrel makers other than Faxon, for example. But the one thing I won't deviate from is the choice of a Colt extractor spring. I've seen the extractor springs from other makers start failing within 1000 rounds. I don't know how much the above list of parts would cost, but that's where I'd start

Redfisher60 said:

What parts or completed uppers and lowers could you use to build an equal to the Colt 6920?

Can you beat the current prices, equal them, or build better for the same $ ?

Click to expand...

For a build "equal" to a Colt 6920, you would be getting carbine gas, a FSB, uncomfortable butt stock and grip, mil-spec trigger, A2 birdcage and plastic hand guards. Ideally, you'd want to improve on that. Buying a completed upper from PSA would get you the same function but for cheaper. There are also about a thousand ways to get something better for the price, or even a little over.

When it comes to the question of, can Colt be beat on price point without sacrifice of function, the answer has always been less. The real question is, do you want to buy a completed upper/lower or build from parts?

A good quality carbine build will usually run around $800 complete.

You might be able to build one yourself for a little less but still have to question whether it is worth it. What you get when you pay for The Pony is more experience building hard use rifles than anyone else in the biz. Knowing everything has been put together right and has been examined and tested by people who really know and understand the design is worth a little money to some people, myself included.

Sorry. I used to roll my eyes at the Colt Kool Aid drinkers like they were the very worst. Then on impulse I bought a 6920. Now I guess I am a Colt Kool Aid drinker. Don't think there is a better fighting carbine available at the price anywhere. You can find parts equal to or better than the Colt and maybe even assemble them for less, but if you believe a rifle is more than the sum of its parts then experience matters and Colt has more than anybody. That is why people buy Colts.

That Trooper looks sick.

I don't think there is much evidence in the modern AR market that a Colt is going to out-perform a variety of other brands' offerings at shooting way more than is normal for an average gun owner, or being 100% capable of being pushed into a self-defense role. You could of made that argument a couple of decades ago when the handful of AR companies made lots (or all) of their own parts, to varying standards and qualities, and you conveniently forget all the oddball stuff Colt did that wasn't mil-spec either. But these days, I don't see it and the #1 reason is because it isn't there.

There is plenty of evidence however that a variety of other brands are beating Colt on price with the same returns in shooting ability, are offering features that the Colt 6920 doesn't offer, and sometimes both.

Sticking to the second question asked though, I don't see how anyone could say "no" without being a serious Colt fanboy.

MachIVshooter said:

I can't stand this argument. Unless your LPK has these, it's not "milspec":

View attachment 764013

As for bolt carriers, Colt was pretty much the last to the party with using M16 carriers. Other manufacturers use "milspec" C158 for bolts, or even stronger 9130 steel bolts. And these days, unless you specifically search out a commercial diameter receiver extension, you'd be hard pressed to find one that isn't "milspec" 7075. Colt was also a Johnny-come-lately in getting on board with mid length gas.

Colt makes a decent rifle, and they're more competitive in the market today than in years past, but you're still paying a couple hundred more for the pony rollmark. As to whether or not that will help resale value, just depends on the buyer. I certainly wouldn't pay more for a used Colt carbine as I would another make of known quality. The company rested on it's laurels for too long and wound up getting surpassed by numerous other manufacturers in many capacities.

Click to expand...

I have read about numerous issues with the PSA lower parts kits. I have a gun from PSA. I dont think it is a bad option, but if a colt isnt much more money i would choose the colt every time. The QC is not as good at psa. I had to file one of the takedown pins to fit and the parts finish was not as good as other kits i have used. I have heard about this on multiple other forums as well.

As far as the reciever extension goes you are wrong. You need to be careful when buying them from PSA. Many of their RE are 6061 and still "milspec dimension" If it doesnt say t is 7075 in the description it isnt. This has 7075 http://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-str-lower-build-kit-black.html this one doesnt http://palmettostatearmory.com/palm...ower-build-kit-flat-dark-earth-516445631.html
This has been confirmed by their rep on TOS

I do agree that Colt rested on their reputation and has very little innovation. The CCU would have been cool years ago, but they are coming down in price and are making it a harder choice to pick PSA over them. If you look for the right stuff at PSA (fn barrels, correct lower parts) you can build a quality reliable gun. I have done it. Colt is still better though

Good grief, how many times do we have to go through this?

1. You can't build an AR for less than you can buy one of comparable quality. Building an LE6920 from parts would cost you way more than a complete rifle. What you CAN do is sacrifice in some less critical areas, like the lower receiver, to save money, while spending more money on premium features, like FF rails, A5 REs, nickel this and that, etc. If a custom AR is what you want, building it from scratch is cheaper than retrofitting a plane jane model.

2. Colt is not overpriced. In the realm of truly milspec ARs, Colt comes in well under the competition, which is LMT, FN, and BCM. I cannot even begin to understand why people bitch and moan about an 800 dollar 6920 when FN is selling the same thing for 1500, and then in the same sentence praise PSA for offering a somewhat milspec AR for 10% less.

3. A semi auto trigger group DOES NOT in any way make milspec irrelevant. This is a purely philosophical nitpick put forward by people who don't have a clue what they're talking about. You can make a semi auto trigger to the same QC standards as a full auto one. Food for thought. There are many deadly serious government organizations and private security companies who opt for semi auto triggers, for one reason or another, and that slight deviation from the specs doesn't make the rifle any less of a rifle from a practical perspective. An LE6920 used by a SWAT team is every bit as good as an M4, in every way that counts. A few little dimensional differences don't mean crap.

This is all moot anyways, because the most important part is the BCG, and you absolutely can have a 100% genuine milspec BCG. You can even have a 100% genuine milspec barrel if you're willing to pay the tax or pin and weld, however, we who are more practical and pragmatically minded are perfectly happy with a barrel that is 1.5'' longer than milspec. Also of great importance are your springs, and last I checked there was no legal difference between the springs in an M4 and those in an AR15. Also keep in mind that most people change out the trigger anyways, and rightfully so, thus making the SA vs. FA thing even more meaningless.

4. The greater part of milspec is quality control. Meeting the basic requirements for dimension and materials is only the tip of the iceberg, and it's pretty much a gimme. If you have a functional, safe AR15, chances are you're meeting those basic requirements. So basically when value branded ARs claim to be milspec what they're really claiming is something along the lines of "it's an ar15, and we generally believe it's safe." It's like selling ice cream by bragging it's made out of milk and creme. Completely meaningless. If you want an exercise in futility, get the complete list of milspec requirements, then call up PSA, Anderson, DTI, DPMS, Bushmaster, et al and try to get them to tell you which items they adhere to. In the unlikely event you get someone who actually knows, it's always entertaining to listen to them squirm and beat around the bush.

Colt's QC is pretty tight right now. No other builder has the experience making hard use rifle that Colt does. Every single rifle that leaves their factory is inspected. Other manufactures may do that, but I doubt if many of them are putting out $700 carbines either. They may not have a lot of innovation, they don't have to. People who buy Colts aren't looking for the latest and greatest, they are looking for something proven, something that has been there and done that. No other AR manufacture has the laurels to rest on that Colt does in that respect.

So if you want to build a rifle of the quality of a Colt, you have to do more than find components equal to or better than the Colt's, you also have to find someone who can put them together as well as Colt and test them as well as Colt. I am guessing very few people have that knowledge and experience.

I've never built an AR and I know that if it was going to be my first/only AR, I wouldn't bother until I had something of known quality from a company with an established reputation, like Colt. Your results may vary.

I wanted a Colt equal on all three of my ARs, so I used all Colt parts & had Colt assemble 'em.

Infinitely simpler that way.
Denis

Why would anyone build a 6920? Just buy one.

Builds are about handpicking each part you want, to get a modern rifle. I suppose you could use a BCM barrel, BCM bolt carrier group, and get the rest of the parts from Brownells and you'd be just as good as a 6920. If you want a relic, just buy the real deal.

Everready73 said:

The QC is not as good at psa. I had to file one of the takedown pins to fit

Click to expand...

So you put a micrometer to it and verified that it was over .2500"? Ever consider the hole in the lower is what was out of spec? (far more likely)

Everready73 said:

If you look for the right stuff at PSA (fn barrels, correct lower parts) you can build a quality reliable gun. I have done it. Colt is still better though

Click to expand...

I'm not calling the statement untrue, but something tells me you have no way to quantify it. None of the manufacturers, including Colt and PSA, are particularly loose-lipped about their equipment, processes, QC practices, etc.

grampajack said:

Good grief, how many times do we have to go through this?

1. You can't build an AR for less than you can buy one of comparable quality.

Click to expand...

Not true. At the very least, you save the 10% FET by building.

grampajack said:

2. Colt is not overpriced. In the realm of truly milspec ARs, Colt comes in well under the competition, which is LMT, FN, and BCM. I cannot even begin to understand why people bitch and moan about an 800 dollar 6920 when FN is selling the same thing for 1500, and then in the same sentence praise PSA for offering a somewhat milspec AR for 10% less.

Click to expand...

10% less? Have you been watching prices? You can put a PSA carbine together for well under $400.

grampajack said:

3. A semi auto trigger group DOES NOT in any way make milspec irrelevant. This is a purely philosophical nitpick put forward by people who don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Click to expand...

Do you really want to pick that fight with me?

The truth is rather the opposite, in that people who cling to the "must be milspec" dogma don't understand that "milspec" is a uniformity standard, and being other than can easily be (and often is) superior. I'll take a not-"milspec" 9310 bolt over a C158 bolt every time. It's stronger and more wear resistant. All the free float parts and low pro gas blocks everyone uses? Yeah, not "milspec". Are you getting the point?

grampajack said:

The greater part of milspec is quality control. Meeting the basic requirements for dimension and materials is only the tip of the iceberg, and it's pretty much a gimme.

Click to expand...

No, it's the whole iceberg where individual machine parts are concerned; QC here means it either meets the dimensions and mechanical properties specified, or it doesn't. "Milspec" is also an improperly and over-used term. Notice how I always put it in quotations? There's a reason for that.

MTMilitiaman said:

No other builder has the experience making hard use rifle that Colt does.

Click to expand...

Patently false statement. You are aware that not only are many of our M16s and M4s made by FN, but that they also produce our machine guns, yes? And though none of us know the exact reasons, Colt did not win the latest contracts for new M4s[/QUOTE]

Or better yet, just buy a Colt 6720. You lose nothing but weight.

I've owned pony rifles for around 22yrs, owning a handful and servicing or upgrading a few dozen in my shop. I have yet to figure out what so many folks consider so special about them. I've also built a lot of rifles which would run smoother and shoot straighter than any rack 6920 I've ever seen, AND be nicer on brass, for the same or less money.

If I really thought I needed a bomb proof rifle I could brag about to my friends while pointing at the markings on the receiver, it would be a Larue, FN, or DD. Not a Colt.

Throw an H2 buffer into any Ruger AR556, DPMS, S&W M&P-15, Bushmaster, etc, then spend 30min rubbing some TLC on the extractor and you'll have a rifle as reliable and accurate as a 6920.

They are not bad rifles, and I enjoy mine, but they aren't what the fanboy's would have us believe them to be.

I tried the pins in 2 other lowers an they didn't fit.

As far as quality control goes I believe it can be somewhat quantified. I have read of way more issues with PSA than Colt. Way more. Canted front site bases, out of spec parts, the list goes on. I am not a PSA hater or a Colt fanboy, but if you think PSA quality is as good as Colt's you are wrong. I am going to stay out of it. To each his own

If you want "equal to" a 6920, just buy one. Equality is in the eye of the beholder, you could have a custom rig that won Camp Perry and someone will snicker that it's not a [fill in brand of their favorite rifle]. Colt, S&W, spikes, PSA, RRA, Aero, FN and a zillion others all put their roll marks on components from the same couple foundries. Get whatever is on sale on slickguns - they will all outshoot you.

MachIVshooter said:

So you put a micrometer to it and verified that it was over .2500"? Ever consider the hole in the lower is what was out of spec? (far more likely)



I'm not calling the statement untrue, but something tells me you have no way to quantify it. None of the manufacturers, including Colt and PSA, are particularly loose-lipped about their equipment, processes, QC practices, etc.



Not true. At the very least, you save the 10% FET by building.



10% less? Have you been watching prices? You can put a PSA carbine together for well under $400.



Do you really want to pick that fight with me?

The truth is rather the opposite, in that people who cling to the "must be milspec" dogma don't understand that "milspec" is a uniformity standard, and being other than can easily be (and often is) superior. I'll take a not-"milspec" 9310 bolt over a C158 bolt every time. It's stronger and more wear resistant. All the free float parts and low pro gas blocks everyone uses? Yeah, not "milspec". Are you getting the point?



No, it's the whole iceberg where individual machine parts are concerned; QC here means it either meets the dimensions and mechanical properties specified, or it doesn't. "Milspec" is also an improperly and over-used term. Notice how I always put it in quotations? There's a reason for that.



Patently false statement. You are aware that not only are many of our M16s and M4s made by FN, but that they also produce our machine guns, yes? And though none of us know the exact reasons, Colt did not win the latest contracts for new M4s

Click to expand...

http://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-16-m4-premium-carbine.html

$750 for their premium M-forgery, which is the only thing they make that could even be considered halfway milspec. That's $50 more than I just paid for a 6920, and my 6920 came with a carry handle, two magazines, and a cleaning kit. In what universe is the PSA a better deal, even if the quality is on par (and let me assure you it is not)??? Now I realize the price of Colts has come down in recent months, but even if they were still going for 800, I would gladly pay the extra 50 bucks for the Colt over the PSA.

Milspec isn't a dogma, it's a basic set of parameters for quality control. Failure to meet, and preferably exceed, those parameters will result in spotty quality, mainly in the form of premature bolt breakage, extractor failure, etc. I would rather have a properly made and tested 158 bolt over a 9310 one that didn't go through testing and inspection individually. Just because you lengthen the barrel by a few centimeters or change the location of the gas port does not in any way negate the vast majority of the milspec parameters.

The dogma is rather coming from people who parrot "there's no such thing as a civilian milspec AR15." While this is technically true, it's also irrelevant. It is entirely possible, and necessary, that a civilian AR15 be of milspec quality. Again, and don't just brush over this, there are thousands of serious professionals out there using semi automatic AR15s with 16'' barrels. It is extremely easy to apply the milspec requirements to semi auto AR15s, just like they can be modified to apply to a Mk18 and still keep all their relevancy in terms of basic quality control.

Even with the tax, you still can't build an AR for less than you can buy a complete one, all things being equal. Don't ask me why, that's just how it is.

Now on an anecdotal level, I've built and worked on a few ARs over the years. I cringe whenever I see value brand parts because there's always something. They just don't go together right, and often don't work right. I've also seen the quality plummet in recent years. Most of the stuff I'm seeing now is pure garbage.

Everready73 said:

I am not a PSA hater or a Colt fanboy, but if you think PSA quality is as good as Colt's you are wrong.

Click to expand...

As I have said to other people, just do some stuff with your Colt that my PSA is capable of doing, on video for everyone to see, and I'll believe you. I'll make my own showing you wrong, or I'll admit that your right. None of this "Most of the stuff I'm seeing now is pure garbage" like grampajack, but some real and tangible evidence.

Everyone talks Colt up in some way or form but never shows anything to back up their opinion. I wonder why... It can't be as simple as they don't do anything special, can it?

grampajack said:

http://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-16-m4-premium-carbine.html

$750 for their premium M-forgery, which is the only thing they make that could even be considered halfway milspec. That's $50 more than I just paid for a 6920, and my 6920 came with a carry handle, two magazines, and a cleaning kit. In what universe is the PSA a better deal, even if the quality is on par (and let me assure you it is not)??? Now I realize the price of Colts has come down in recent months, but even if they were still going for 800, I would gladly pay the extra 50 bucks for the Colt over the PSA.

Click to expand...

The question was which parts or completed upper/lowers would be equal to a Colt 6920, not which complete rifle would be equal.