Which "Black" Rifle???

"better" is relative. relative in that if you want a hard use, stake your life on it gun, there are much better options than rock river. realtive in that if you enjoy high power competition, there are much better options than colt.

to my knowledge the chart was a resource for comparing m4 type ar carbines when considering them for hard use. for plinking and precision trips to the range, the chart is irrelevant.

iirc, it was also complied in a way as to be ever changing and updated as new info became available and mfrs started changing things (for better or worse). not all mfrs will release info regarding the specs the chart covers. some can be verified by close inspection of the firearm, some cannot. rob sloyers character is neither here nor there, when considering it, as it's content has been confirmed over and over again, at least back when i payed attention to it.

You know if I was to go by that chart then it looks like the DD rifle is pretty much right on line with Colt, which makes me wonder why they are more expensive. I mean I have a Colt, a Bushmaster, and a DD rifle and I can say that the machining is 1000X better on the DD rifle IMO, but other than that it looks like they are using the exact same stuff and I can get a Colt cheaper. Hmmm...I didn't know that. Interesting chart.

LOL! Yup, been shooting Colts and actual "mil spec" rifles for just over 25 years now.

Trained SRT for L.E. duty.

I've spent a good deal of time looking at the "chart". Know why? As a former Mil. guy, L.E.O., Autoworker/machinist, I'm curious about this spec. sheet that is missing a HUGE number of manufacturers, and why it is so revered , by so many, none of whom have qualified their opinions.

From what I read, this Rob Sloyer guy is most unprofessional in a public forum; not an example to look to as reasonable or dependable. Guy is engaged in some sort of Forum wars about his spec sheet?

Take a look at that new movie "Branded"? Fits the narrow vision of the COLT/BCM/DD/LWRC/TROY/MI crowd. They make good guns, but so do A LOT of other AR builders.

You can gauge just how much of a knee-jerk (emotional) effect the "chart" has, when defenders of those brands start calling unknown people names, alluding to ignorance, lack of experience,etc.. False pride and overinflated ego is the cannon fodder on the battle-field. Good times. Keepin it respectful.

Click to expand...

I guess you've still not found time to read the M4 Chart's Explanation of Desirable Features so I'll help by providing a link.
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=html

In regard to Rob Sloyer it probably would be wise to not "start calling unknown people names, alluding to ignorance, lack of experience,etc.. False pride and overinflated ego is the cannon fodder on the battle-field..."

And if you want to add to the chart pertinent data from the other "...65% of the AR producers in the current U.S. market..." that would be appreciated by the rest of us M4gery buyers.

Some thread drift going on in here. The OP had three criteria.

1. Reliability
2. Capacity
3. Support

I'm going to point in two directions where I have direct experience. Capacity's going to be kind of moot, since all your .223s will be fairly standard with 30 round mags. 20-ish with .308

First direction. Consider the Sig 556. Mine currently has about 3000 rounds of wolf (filthy dirty commie trash) on it between cleanings. The last time I got it that dirty, the I literally scraped a carbon pancake off the end of the gas piston with a piece of brass. The 556 is great in that it's a combination of AK47 piston reliability with a barrel, cartridge, and fit that allows for great accuracy. I haven't shot premium ammo out of mine, but it'll shoot 1.5MOA all day long with bulk stuff. But your first consideration was reliability. Mine has been outstanding, and I just don't hear of reliability problems with the 556 platform.

Sig support: Hit or miss. It's that simple. Also, there's clearly not the same aftermarket available that's out there for the AR.

Unsolicited con: The sig is a brick. At my last carbine class, by the end of it, my deltoids were screaming. It is *not* a rifle you want to hold at low ready for hours.

The second direction: S&W
S&W has a reasonably broad line of ARs so that you can kind of pick the type/setup you want right off the shelf. ARs are pretty much ARs when it comes to reliability. Meaning, they're far more reliable than the intarwebs will imply. I run my ARs like an AK. I let them get dirty, muddy, covered in slime, goop, ice, etc... The reason I'm saying S&W is your second criteria. S&W has always taken GREAT care of me. Second only to (and god you don't know how much it pains me to say this) Glock in my experience with mfgr customer support.