Build a complete AR-15 (including rear sight and magazine) for $386.21 shipped.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've seen bargain sales that could beat those prices already.

As for "quality," there's no possible way to measure it based on price. A blem lower sold for $49 with a roll mark on it that normally commands another $100 retail should be example enough.

It has to be said again - makers produce parts, the ones that are spot onto the specs are sold for a premium, the ones that are a tad larger or smaller, which might have only a cosmetic blemish, etc are sold, too. Companies are not in the business to scrap parts just because of a tool mark on them. If that batch got a rougher surface because the feed rate for the tooling was marginal, no, they do not dump them in the scrap bin. They sell them.

Functionally they may have better material and near perfect machining on the critical surfaces, but they don't meet the aesthetic approval of AR snobs. So they get discounted.

Anyone who wants an education in "quality" or "fit and finish" should collect Mausers from the late twenties thru 1945. The early ones are polished masterpieces of the gunsmith arts, the latter, right up to the last day of the war, are much more reliable and have better accuracy - as many owners and collectors attest. Yet they are definitely the least favored in looks - which have nothing to due with function.

That's why we here of lesser priced 1911's which function, and the high rollers requiring return visits for more tuning because they are so finicky and unreliable.

"Quality" is just a internet double dog dare thrown around on boards to impress those new to the hobby and preserve the self image of others who think paying more money deserves more respect.
 
Tirod is spot on..I would only add to that, how many companies do you think are producing these parts? There aren't fifty companies forging receivers.. there are like three. A long as your happy with the machine work than it's fine. Same with bcgs. Maybe more than three but same concept..
 
It looks like a plastic lower to me. The hand guard probably doesn't have a heat shield and most likely the BCG isn't stacked.
 
Aaand the upper just went up in price by about 25%, from $229 to $279.
So much for that.
 
As for "quality," there's no possible way to measure it based on price.
Click to expand...

I agree to a point, but a complete upper with BCG that can be sold at $230 shipped is mighty suspect, IMO. That's significantly below even the PSA PTAC price point. What kind of BCG and barrel come that cheap?
 
Stock up for the next scare and you could buy yourself a nice car with a few thousand dollars invested! Now if only I had a few grand to blow!
 
Stock up for the next scare and you could buy yourself a nice car with a few thousand dollars invested!
Click to expand...

I think we are unlikely to see a run on ARs like the '13 panic any time soon. One, the number of ARs sold/built since then is staggering (saturated market, hence the current prices) and, perhaps more importantly, even with the collective American heart bleeding over Newtown, they still couldn't get a single gun control law passed at the Federal level. The people just didn't want it, and they didn't have the house to ram it through.

In short, if you dropped $4k to build 10 of these, I think at best you would maybe double your money if a gun grabbing Democrat takes the presidency and we lose one of the houses of congress. While buying guns is fun, there are much better long term investment options.
 
Tirod said:
As for "quality," there's no possible way to measure it based on price
Click to expand...

My comment about quality wasn't based on price

Anyone who wants an education in "quality" or "fit and finish" should collect Mausers from the late twenties thru 1945
Click to expand...

Are you talking about "fit & finish" as required by the specs, or are you talking cosmetics? Cosmetics do not determine quality
 
These two statements...

As for "quality," there's no possible way to measure it based on price.
Click to expand...

and

It has to be said again - makers produce parts, the ones that are spot onto the specs are sold for a premium, the ones that are a tad larger or smaller, which might have only a cosmetic blemish, etc are sold, too.
Click to expand...

...directly contradict one another.

You are saying that the in-spec parts sell for a premium, and the out-of-spec parts simply sell. By that logic, the price can be a good indicator of quality. After all, "why is it so cheap?"

If you produce a part that is out of spec, be it for dimensional issues, surface hardness inconsistencies, inclusions, fissures, etc., then that part is not what I would consider "quality." In fact, I would call them rejects. They still get sold, though, just as you've pointed out. The buyers/resellers of those parts happen to be the same bargain bin players that come up every few weeks.

Parts having any of those qualities can cause huge issues for the owner/shooter. Depending on what is being asked of the gun in question, it can either result in a ruined shooting range trip, or it can result in bodily harm or even loss of life.

I've said this before on this board and I'll say it again. A lot of people look for the cheapest AR, as their first military type rifle, with the intention of it being nothing more than a paper puncher. When they get it, they realize how user-friendly, accurate, and useful they really can be. They decide that it is their best choice for emergency use, but unfortunately they went out and bought the cheapest, most questionable firearm possible.

If someone new to gun ownership told me they have $386 and they want to buy a gun for protection, I would recommend a number of firearms before this piecemeal deal. For those with more experience, I would shake my head and ask then what they're thinking.

They may wind up with a gun that runs 20k rounds with no issues, or it may shear a bolt lug in the first 50 rounds. We don't get to make that choice. That decision was made by the company selling the bargain bin parts build.

Call it snobbery if you will, but I don't suggest, recommend, condone, or applaud purchases that could not end well for those who may call upon them. If they insist on an AR, I figure their lives are worth the $800 ballpark.
 
"If that batch got a rougher surface because the feed rate for the tooling was marginal, no, they do not dump them in the scrap bin. They sell them."

Name any other mass-produced consumer item (especially those involving stuff capable of bodily harm) where this is the case. "Get-cher blem come-alongs, here" (okay, bad example; Harbor Fright already does that :evil:). The sad truth is that the only thing gun owners are more than cheap, is desperate, and will ravenously hunt down anything resembling a good deal if it means some pennies can be wisely pinched (even if the pounds be foolishly spent in the first place ;))

To be brutally honest, I'll go one further; can anyone name any other firearms platform, where manufacturer blems are so heavily marketed instead of scrapped? I'll occasionally see blem 80% frame castings for 1911s, but not slides, barrels, trigger parts, or safeties.

It seems like every single part of an AR15 is regularly available as a blemish. There's a couple logical explanations, I'll bet several are true to a degree;
-High demand (now followed by low demand) encouraged makers to pump stuff out as quickly as possible, knowing quality didn't matter very much to customers who still snapped up discounted blems
-The AR15 is intrinsically harder to make parts for correctly (not buying this one a single iota, since it's rather the opposite that's true)
-The AR15 is intrinsically more expensive to make parts for, and manufacturers have to reap profit from even blems to stay afloat (not buying this, since AR15's are exceedingly --perhaps scandalously-- cheap to produce, as we are now clearly seeing)
-The Banic 2013 showed makers that the only thing gunnies like more than gratification is horse-trading, so giving them the illusion of a "deal" on parts labeled "blem" works as effectively as any other discount marketing (how often do we hear "I can't even tell what the blem is, and they won't say" ;))
-AR15 parts require a lot of, honestly, needless test procedures to make mil-spec, which the makers can wholly avoid by designating some allotment of parts "non-spec blems." A further set of parts are blemmed as part of the testing process (like they mis-stamp the MPI letters or put a hardness-check dimple in the wrong spot) and get to be written off. Parts made as simply as most civilian-marketed gun items would not do these checks, and hence could not pass/fail/be blemmed in the process.

TCB
 
I'm not so sure these tests could really be called "needless", at least in some cases. I'm a QA manager for a company that makes process piping for nuclear power plants and NASA and similar applications where failure could be catastrophic and we do a lot of this kind of NDE...you'd be surprised what you find sometimes. Even the most expensive alloys have flaws sometimes, and workmanship issues are constant. The tests are planned to improve reliability to the highest practical degree (within reason) as a failure could literally get somebody killed. Does a guy shooting cans in a gravel pit need all this QC? Probably not, but if you want your gun to be as reliable as reasonably possible and are willing to pay for it it's good to have that option, especially if you might really need said gun to work really badly. Put another way, almost any product is never made to be the absolute best that it could possibly be, but rather is made "good enough" for its particular application. In my industry piping is made to many different classes of temperature and pressure capabilities; in the case of military weapons the government (in conjunction with Colt and other manufacturers I would guess) have set the standards that they have determined produce the best chance of making a rifle that is reliable enough to hold up in combat. For the guy in the pit, yes, a lot of this testing is needless, for a guy rappelling from a Blackhawk or trapped behind a patrol car it could very well be vital.
 
Last edited:
Without knowledge of what "blem" will cause a product to fail and become a "blem" I would have a hard time buying sight unseen. I've bought blems before but they were things like stocks and I knew what was wrong with them when I bought them. For example I bought a stock that was stained too dark. I actually like the darker look at it gave me a rare example of the rifle I put it on. But buying main parts that are blemished and where they don't say what the fault is doesn't seem like a smart thing to do to me. Probably there wouldn't be any problems. But with my luck I'd get the one that would blow the receiver in half on the first shot. I actually generally have good luck buying guns but not with health issues and buying a blem can certainly lead to health issues and that is not my idea of a good risk to take. Just one man's opinion I guess. But I'd rather buy a gun with a full warranty on it just in case and one that doesn't have any seconds where it counts. That's why I would prefer buying something like the M&P Sport 15. It is less likely to have a catastrophic failure IMO. But of course nothing is ever for certain. It's just that I would rather pay the extra money to get a rifle that's less likely to blow apart when loaded and fired.
 
in the case of military weapons the government (in conjunction with Colt and other manufacturers I would guess) have set the standards that they have determined produce the best chance of making a rifle that is reliable enough to hold up in combat.
Click to expand...
You're spot on. Colt and other manufacturers build rifles to the standard contracted. As of 2009 the M4 had demonstrated reliability of over 3600 mean rounds between stoppage. That's actually very reliable. Ref - http://www.peosoldier.army.mil/docs/WeaponsReliabilityInformationPaper-Oct 09.pdf.
 
boricua9mm said:
...I've said this before on this board and I'll say it again. A lot of people look for the cheapest AR, as their first military type rifle, with the intention of it being nothing more than a paper puncher. When they get it, they realize how user-friendly, accurate, and useful they really can be. They decide that it is their best choice for emergency use, but unfortunately they went out and bought the cheapest, most questionable firearm possible.

If someone new to gun ownership told me they have $386 and they want to buy a gun for protection, I would recommend a number of firearms before this piecemeal deal. For those with more experience, I would shake my head and ask then what they're thinking.

They may wind up with a gun that runs 20k rounds with no issues, or it may shear a bolt lug in the first 50 rounds. We don't get to make that choice. That decision was made by the company selling the bargain bin parts build.

Call it snobbery if you will, but I don't suggest, recommend, condone, or applaud purchases that could not end well for those who may call upon them. If they insist on an AR, I figure their lives are worth the $800 ballpark.
Click to expand...

Interesting how you're are suggesting that a low-priced AR will have a higher probability of being less reliable than a more expensive model -- all with absolutely zero proof. I also found your magical "$800 ballpark" number to be quite interesting.

In the end your comments have nothing to do with snobbery. They seem to be a product of ignorance of product quality and its relationship to pricing.
 
barnbwt said:
It seems like every single part of an AR15 is regularly available as a blemish. There's a couple logical explanations, I'll bet several are true to a degree;
-High demand (now followed by low demand) encouraged makers to pump stuff out as quickly as possible, knowing quality didn't matter very much to customers who still snapped up discounted blems
-The AR15 is intrinsically harder to make parts for correctly (not buying this one a single iota, since it's rather the opposite that's true)
-The AR15 is intrinsically more expensive to make parts for, and manufacturers have to reap profit from even blems to stay afloat (not buying this, since AR15's are exceedingly --perhaps scandalously-- cheap to produce, as we are now clearly seeing)
-The Banic 2013 showed makers that the only thing gunnies like more than gratification is horse-trading, so giving them the illusion of a "deal" on parts labeled "blem" works as effectively as any other discount marketing (how often do we hear "I can't even tell what the blem is, and they won't say" )
-AR15 parts require a lot of, honestly, needless test procedures to make mil-spec, which the makers can wholly avoid by designating some allotment of parts "non-spec blems." A further set of parts are blemmed as part of the testing process (like they mis-stamp the MPI letters or put a hardness-check dimple in the wrong spot) and get to be written off. Parts made as simply as most civilian-marketed gun items would not do these checks, and hence could not pass/fail/be blemmed in the process.

TCB
Click to expand...


I think "blem" AR parts are a way to spur sales more than anything. It's amusing to see that some believe that such parts could actually impact the performance of the firearm.

It's like the salesperson at Sears trying to sell the washing machine for $500.00 based upon a COGS of say $300.00

It's not selling to the current batch of customers so he gives it a few whacks with a mallet and blows it out as a "blem" for $400.00 He and Sears moved the product, they still made money and there was a material reason for the discount other than "it wouldn't sell" which might harm the product's market reputation.

Best of all the washer is still priced at $500.00 for those willing and able to pay. If another batch of bargain hunters come out who don't mind a few functionally inconsequential dings, out comes the mallet again.

Two things are for certain. First, AR15 parts aren't difficult to produce with respect to other gun parts. Second, some are desperately trying to hang onto the silly fable of "you get what you pay for."
 
Last edited:
"You get what you pay for, buy a Colt".... says every AR15 thread ever.

I'd be interested if the parts were workable at that price. It'd just be a range toy anyways
 
Interesting how you're are suggesting that a low-priced AR will have a higher probability of being less reliable than a more expensive model -- all with absolutely zero proof. I also found your magical "$800 ballpark" number to be quite interesting.

In the end your comments have nothing to do with snobbery. They seem to be a product of ignorance of product quality and its relationship to pricing.
Click to expand...

The simple fact is that Quality Costs more money.

This applies to most everything (emphasis on most) in general. There is a reason why products made from Titanium or Carbon Fiber are more expensive than lesser materials.

A BCM barrel will be more expensive and higher quality than a lower-end DPMS barrel, and a Billet Lower will be more durable than a polymer lower. A Glock will be more durable than a Hipoint. Those are pretty easy to understand, No?

Now for a casual shooter, some of these things may not matter. But if you want a quality product that you may take with you to combat or use to defend your life, its best to obtain a firearm that is known for quality.


As far as the original topic of the thread, I doubt you can get a "quality" AR15 for $299...
 
justice06rr said:
The simple fact is that Quality Costs more money.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. While there can be some differences in the definition of "quality", the belief that "quality" (be it "higher" or "acceptable") necessarily costs more is simply not true.

justice06rr said:
This applies to most everything (emphasis on most) in general. There is a reason why products made from Titanium or Carbon Fiber are more expensive than lesser materials.
Click to expand...

A product made from titanium is not necessarily higher quality than one made from say aluminum. It's simply different.

justice06rr said:
A BCM barrel will be more expensive and higher quality than a lower-end DPMS barrel, and a Billet Lower will be more durable than a polymer lower. A Glock will be more durable than a Hipoint. Those are pretty easy to understand, No?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. That DPMS might well be a more accurately made product (per its design) than the BCM per its design. But you say, the design tolerances of the BCM barrel are far tighter! Once again you're trying to compare apples to oranges and those tighter specs might not make the gun perform any better. As far as durability, I suspect the Hi-Point would last every bit as long as the Glock. I also suspect that the Glock is cheaper for Glock to produce than the High-Point is for HP. How would you explain that?

justice06rr said:
Now for a casual shooter, some of these things may not matter. But if you want a quality product that you may take with you to combat or use to defend your life, its best to obtain a firearm that is known for quality.
Click to expand...

What does "known for quality" mean? Someone here equates that to costing $800.00 or more per unit. Does it mean a company meeting their design specs? I just covered that above. Having reams of test data? I personally would prefer a firearm U had run plenty of rounds through over anything else.

Just look at those that preferred/prefer the AK platform over the AR platform for combat. The AK is an extremely cheap product to produce with extremely loose tolerances. It's also been considered a world class, high quality instrument for killing for over 60 years.

justice06rr said:
As far as the original topic of the thread, I doubt you can get a "quality" AR15 for $299...
Click to expand...

That wasn't the topic of the thread.

I honestly don't know how much a "quality" AR-15 could be profitably built and sold for if the demand was really high -- particularly if it could be built overseas? Compared to other durable consumer products I suspect the price would be closer to $199.95/unit. Because I don't see them being shipped by the container from Taiwan anytime soon, and because I don't see the volume ever really being that huge (compared to other durable consumer products and not other guns), my best guess is the price will bottom around $299.95/unit.
 
Last edited:
These threads always go in circles because no one defines the terms they are arguing about. It's like debating the existence of God or whether Justice was served; everyone has a different definition of God and Justice so no one can agree on anything. I've read this entire thread and I still have no idea what a "quality" AR-15 is.

We should ask falsifiable questions. For example is it possible to consistently buy a one MOA AR-15 that'll fire 1000 rounds without malfunction for $400. If we agreed on the term "quality" then we could probably make some progress.
 
Interesting how you're are suggesting that a low-priced AR will have a higher probability of being less reliable than a more expensive model -- all with absolutely zero proof. I also found your magical "$800 ballpark" number to be quite interesting.

In the end your comments have nothing to do with snobbery. They seem to be a product of ignorance of product quality and its relationship to pricing.
Click to expand...

Put your money where your mouth is. Go outfit your family with $386 AR15s, then go test them hard, just as they should be, before putting them into service.

AR parts manufacturers, as well as these "assemblers" are able to provide such a cheap product because they are, in fact, cutting corners. There is a reason why, say, an M-Faux built to Military Specs does not cost $386.

The $800 ballpark does not come out of thin air. It is approximately what it would cost to put together an excellent quality Mil-Spec rifle.

The notion that "parts is parts" has long since been dis-proven. Yes, there are a handful of people who make the small parts for the AR15 pattern rifle. These parts are built to the specifications that are dictated by the purchaser. Those that do not meet the specs of a company like Colt wind up getting sold to manufacturer who isn't as picky when it comes to the details.

I've been around long enough to have seen broken hammers, snapped safeties and sheared extension tubes from bargain bin parts. There is a reason for the specs. If you choose to close your eyes, then your aforementioned ignorance is all on you.
 
One day I hope we can have an AR15 thread that doesn't turn into a pissing contest and pointless arguments that deal more with word usage than actually useful opinions/experiences/data.

Of course a $1000 AR will most likely be better than a $400 AR... But let's fight about it!!! Maybe I want to build a $400 AR for fun...
 
This offer includes a lower made by Tennessee Arms. I have 4 of the TA lowers and 2 are currently mounted on uppers. The other 2 are future projects. The TA lowers are made of polymer. I cannot attest for the rest of the parts but if you want a light weight and strong lower I don't think you can go wrong with TA. I also have a 308 lower coming as soon as they are done with their R&D.
kwg

http://tnarmsco.com/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Cavalry Arms A1 rear sight?
Replies
3
Views
665
DMK
DMK
R
  • Locked
AR-15 6.8 SPC build and magazines
Replies
20
Views
3K
Safety First
S
U
  • Locked
AR-MPR AR-15 build complete (links to HD videos)
Replies
0
Views
490
UltimateReloader
U
G
  • Locked
Replacing Aperture on AR-15 Rear Sight
Replies
1
Views
504
DMK
DMK
U
  • Locked
Interactive AR-15 build and reloading adventure - you're invited!
Replies
2
Views
500
UltimateReloader
U
Back
Top