You Have $1,200....Which AR Would You GET and WHY?

It's got a hammer forged barrel with double thick chrome lining. It doesn't have the goofy and needlessly heavy "govt profile" barrel. It's got middy gas, which is better on a 16" barrel. The barrel and bolt are made of the same materials and subjected to the same testing. Gas key is staked. The only thing that might be better on the Colt is the material the buffer tube is made of... maybe. Not exactly a common failure point on the AR. The PSA doesn't need a H2 buffer because it has the right gas system for its barrel length.

henschman said:

It's got a hammer forged barrel with double thick chrome lining. It doesn't have the goofy and needlessly heavy "govt profile" barrel. It's got middy gas, which is better on a 16" barrel. The barrel and bolt are made of the same materials and subjected to the same testing. Gas key is staked. The only thing that might be better on the Colt is the material the buffer tube is made of... maybe. Not exactly a common failure point on the AR. The PSA doesn't need a H2 buffer because it has the right gas system for its barrel length.

Click to expand...

The chrome lining on a Colt or similar barrel is plenty. Will not be a drawback to 99.999% of users (rough estimate).

The M4 profile barrel isn't exactly a 'bad' thing. You could save a tiny bit of weight with a lightweight barrel, but really, that is not a big deal at all.

Yes, the buffer tube material is different. That PSA is going to be with the inferior 6061, not 7075. I'll bet you that the buffer of the PSA kit is a carbine weight too, and not the H buffer the Colt will come with.

There is no H2 buffer involved.

BTW: I still think an H buffer is best, even for a mid length gas system on a 16". When I assembled my bid length I used...an H buffer. As do most people.

There's nothing WRONG with the PSA, but to claim it is a better rilfe than the Colt is just plain silly. You might have a strong personal reference for a different profile barrel, or a strong personal preference for a mid length gas system, but those are just that...personal preferences. However, things like 6061 vs 7075...one is demonstrably better than the other. The ONLY advantage to 6061 is...it's cheaper. Just an example.

I would go Stag and 1000 rds of 5.56.
Mags if you have any $ left over.....

Colt 6920. End of story. Depending on your need's I would consider a quality sling, weapon light and AIMPOINT PRO.

I still don't understand why people think the Colt carbine length rifles are the "end of story" when for the same or just a few more $ you can get a solid midlength AR with just as good (actually some better) parts. I am NOT a Colt hater, on the contrary. I just think in the long run midlength AR's are more reliable.

If your heart is set on it, buy it. You might find a good FFL dealer near you and do a transfer. That way you can buy from an internet source and get the best price. (Cheaper than Dirt, etc.....) I charge $25.00 for the transfers. In Georgia, if you already have a Concealed Weapons License, it's quick paper work, otherwise I call the FBI for clearance. Transfer prices can vary, but shouldn't be by much.

I only supported the OP's desire for a 6920 because he (she?) said that was on the wishlist. Generally, I've found that you should buy what you like and listen to your instincts. I also like midlengths for the advantages they have, but I'm not the guy who's buying the rifle. If the guy wants a 6920, that would be a solid choice that should work without hassle right out of the box.

OilyPablo said:

I still don't understand why people think the Colt carbine length rifles are the "end of story" when for the same or just a few more $ you can get a solid midlength AR with just as good (actually some better) parts. I am NOT a Colt hater, on the contrary. I just think in the long run midlength AR's are more reliable.

Click to expand...

Consider that:

I have not seen anything to indicate that a mid length gas system is more reliable.

The "long run" is something that the VAST majority of AR style rifles in private citizen's hands...well over 99% I'd say...will never even come close to.

These recommendations are virtually always to people who are completely new to this type of rifle, so assembling one from parts may not be the best way to start. Sure, it isn't very hard if you are a gun guy who has a set of punches already, and a vice on a workbench, etc...but then guys like that usually reach their own conclusion based on research, without having to start the 10 billionth thread out there asking the same question.

The Colt is simply never going to be a bad answer, or even a sub-par answer. Sending people out to assemble their own has more 'risk'.

I am definitely NOT recommending the OP assemble his own rifle. No way. I am saying buy something like a Daniel Defense.

OilyPablo said:

I am definitely NOT recommending the OP assemble his own rifle. No way. I am saying buy something like a Daniel Defense.

Click to expand...

That is definitely going to be over budget.

Great rifles...but no way you get a new one for $1,200.

Not true.... It's easy to find one used to lnib for that. Almost bought one nib for 1k last week because the guy needed to get rid of it but I wanted a mid length instead. Look around and you'll be surprised at what you can find

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

As I stated much earlier in this thread, yes a new DD will be over budget, but not that much - save for a month or two longer. Or sell a Glock.

Please explain your rationale for mid length gas not being better for a 16" barrel. There is no advantage to carbine length on that barrel length... only the disadvantages of harder recoil and more wear on the bolt and carrier. This is why they have to put heavier buffers in them, like I said. A H buffer isn't an "upgrade" per se... it is a workaround for a gas setup that has more dwell time than the specs call for.

Also, please explain what the upsides are to a <edited> barrel profile that is pencil profile on the chamber end and heavy profile on the muzzle end. How is that doing anything but adding needless weight and making the rifle handle worse?

A H buffer isn't an "upgrade" per se... it is a workaround for a gas setup that has more dwell time than the specs call for.

Click to expand...

I still like an H buffer on a midlegnth. To me the recoil impulse is preferable. That is what my Noveske has. Noveske uses an H buffer on their midlegnths. They do it for a reason. Noveske knows a thing or two about making an AR.

Now of course the more pertinent question might be carbine with H buffer vs midlegnth.

Like I said to the OP I'd get the Novekse upper I linked to on a built lower.

"I have not seen anything to indicate that a mid length gas system is more reliable."

Wouldn't that depend very heavily on the number of rounds through a rifle with that upper configuration and the load being fired? Not disagreeing with you necessarily.

"The "long run" is something that the VAST majority of AR style rifles in private citizen's [sic] hands...well over 99% I'd say...will never even come close to."

Therefore, building a rifle from "scratch" is just something that will [statistically speaking] never approximate the performance of your choice?

"These recommendations are virtually always to people who are completely new to this type of rifle, so assembling one from parts may not be the best way to start."

Addressing your generalization, what other way is there to "start" if you don't purchase assemblies...upper or lower or both. Or accumulate the parts for same?

"Sure, it isn't very hard if you are a gun guy who has a set of punches already, and a vice on a workbench, etc..."

I'd suggest that your "etc." covers the majority of specialty tools necessary to assemble lower and upper assemblies properly so as to assure no damage and proper function.

It also betrays your bias and naivete...in short, there is a majority of AR enthusiasts who are capable of building their own uppers and lowers. Don't assume that the "majority" of AR enthusiasts are without resources.

"...then guys like that usually reach their own conclusion based on research, without having to start the 10 billionth thread out there asking the same question."

Hyperbole aside, your speculation is nonsensical.

"The Colt is simply never going to be a bad answer, or even a sub-par answer. Sending people out to assemble their own has more 'risk'. "

Propaganda, plain and simple. The problems of Colt's in fulfilling military contracts are a matter of record. Further, we were discussing the relative merits of purchasing a "proven" Colt's model vs. any other option. Correct?

The train has left the station on the 16 inch mid vs carbine. Mid is just technically better. That's not saying that the carbine doesn't work fine however. The debate may still be open on the 14.5 inch barrels.

I agree that the Midlength is "just technically better" and by that, I mean in theory and on paper. In reality, there isn't any data/evidence to support the claims that the service life of a bolt or any other components is increased with a midlength over a carbine. The theory and the claims are there, but the hard data isn't. Maybe 10 years from now, enough people will have shot Middies to death so that there can be a good base for comparison, but we're just not there yet.

As for shooting "softer" that has always been a bit of a joke to me. I've never fired a properly built 5.56 carbine that had recoil that could be reasonably labeled as "harsh." In my own experience, I've compared my 6920 with factory H-Buffer, my Daniel Defense 14.5" Midlength with H-Buffer, and my BCM 16" Midlength with H-Buffer, and they all shoot soft. Any difference in felt recoil was negligible. One key point in this comparison is that all three of these guns are properly built carbines from quality outfits. If someone were to compare an overgassed DPMS carbine to a Midlength BCM/DD/etc., then the recoil might indeed feel softer. How smooth the bolt cycles can also alter perceptions of recoil, but that's getting into another thread topic altogether.

Properly built carbines run, and they run well. They are a well known and understood specification. It's interesting to note that when Daniel Defense teamed up with Vickers for his signature model, he chose a carbine length gas system. That guy has forgotten more about ARs than most of us will ever know, so his choice is a clue.

I only own 2 Middies right now and no carbines; the 6920 was traded off. That more has to do with the fact that I liked the overall setup of my middies. Might be picking up a PSA carbine build tomorrow though, so my money's actually where my mouth is.

I would and in fact just did get a Rock River NM A4. I wanted a rifle to shoot high power with. The M1 is too expensive. My other AR was a 16" barrel and I can no longer focus sharply on the front sight plus it would need different parts to make it a service rifle. Instead of buying new parts, I went with a new NM rifle.

I bought my M&P15 Sport for $723.xx out the door. I also bought some ammo and changed the pistol grip to a Magpul MOE+. I put a Weaver Kaspa scope on it and bought some reloading dies and what I needed to load a couple hundred rounds and get some ammo as I go from my LGS.

Actually, what I bought to make me happy at the moment, cost around $1200 bucks. I already had powder (CFE223). I bought 10 boxes @ 10 bucks for PMC 55gr, 1000 primers, dies @ $35, Bullets 200 @ $15 X2 (Hornady 55gr fmj-bt), 3 boxes of 50rd Remington @ $25ea, $189 scope, @ $20 bucks for pistol grip and an extra mag @ $14 bucks.

Future plans low profile gas block, free float rifle length, and a trigger.

The sport shoots great and the PMC brass reloads just fine. Some brass I used had crimps and I swagged them with my RCBS swagger and they were fine after that.

Been a fun gun and hit paper good enough for a good HD/SD/Plinker. My next gun will be more for long range.

Have fun in your search for what you want!

I just bought my AR Wednsday. Same budget and similar wants, and I got a S&W M&P Magpul midlength in FDE. The salesman recommended a 6920 Magpul for $10 more and I stayed with the Smith because I wanted a midlength, not for any scientific reason other than I find the handgaurd length more comfortable.

I am also building one on a budget for a plinker/trainer, its going to cost me about $900 all told and is NOT the gun I wanted...the Smith was so I bought it. If you (like me) prefer the Magpul furniture, and want a rifle built to a consistant standard for$1200, get the Colt or S&W, whichever you prefer.

Btw, the S&W comes with vols. 1 & 2 of art of Defensive Carbine in the box, if all else is equal

As for shooting "softer" that has always been a bit of a joke to me. I've never fired a properly built 5.56 carbine that had recoil that could be reasonably labeled as "harsh."

Click to expand...

Its more about a flat shooting (not trajectory) gun that is easier to make faster followups with than painful recoil. Something with running a comp.

Properly built carbines run, and they run well. They are a well known and understood specification. It's interesting to note that when Daniel Defense teamed up with Vickers for his signature model, he chose a carbine length gas system. That guy has forgotten more about ARs than most of us will ever know, so his choice is a clue.

Click to expand...

I don't want to put words in LAVs mouth and I'm sure if we searched around we could find where he talks about it. He likes to run a FSP and a surefire in front of it. It may be more about handguard length/hand placement than gas system per se.

Its more about a flat shooting (not trajectory) gun that is easier to make faster followups with than painful recoil. Something with running a comp.

Click to expand...

If "muzzle management" is the goal and we're turning to different gas systems and the latest and greatest compensator to achieve it, then this seems to fall into the realm of 3-Gun shooting more than anything else. On that note, it's likewise been hilarious to watch combat-oriented competition doctrines shift from 2 shots per target to "hose 'em down with rifle fire" per target. Funny what a couple Magpul videos can do to people.

I don't want to put words in LAVs mouth and I'm sure if we searched around we could find where he talks about it. He likes to run a FSP and a surefire in front of it. It may be more about handguard length/hand placement than gas system per se.

Click to expand...

If we're subscribing to the aforementioned "hose 'em down" theory, then sticking one's thumb in front of smoldering FSB seems to be a foolish tactic, gloves or not. Likewise, choosing such a setup doesn't jive with that particular mission parameter. Whatever the case may be, LAV would not select such a setup at the expense of reliability and durability; not when his name and reputation is on the line. This brings us back full circle to proper gas port diameters and correct, in-spec BCGs and buffers.

In the end, I think what we're honing in on is two different schools of thought in terms of defensive carbine deployment. This seems to directly influence the nuances of carbine setups these days.

LAV also didn't include high end triggers or polymer mags. It's not surprising. The USGI components worked well for him over decades. Why change a winning recipe is his thinking. There is nothing wrong with that. Part availability could also come into play on a "serious" gun in remote regions.

JoeMal said:

Not true.... It's easy to find one used to lnib for that. Almost bought one nib for 1k last week because the guy needed to get rid of it but I wanted a mid length instead. Look around and you'll be surprised at what you can find

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

Click to expand...

'


I said you could never find a new one at that price.

You say 'not ture, you can find a used one at that price'

So I guess I'll say it again...you will never find a new Daniel Defense (complete) rifle for $1,200


If we start tlaking about used rifles for the OP this thread gets 100x more complicated, and very different.

henschman said:

Please explain your rationale for mid length gas not being better for a 16" barrel. There is no advantage to carbine length on that barrel length... only the disadvantages of harder recoil and more wear on the bolt and carrier. This is why they have to put heavier buffers in them, like I said. A H buffer isn't an "upgrade" per se... it is a workaround for a gas setup that has more dwell time than the specs call for.

Also, please explain what the upsides are to a <edited> barrel profile that is pencil profile on the chamber end and heavy profile on the muzzle end. How is that doing anything but adding needless weight and making the rifle handle worse?

Click to expand...

Virtually nobody is going to put enough rounds through their rifle that any potential difference in wear between the two will matter.

We're talking >10,000 rounds, fired rapidly/harsly, here.