34 Ways to Cut Corners on Manufacturing an AR15

[rayman]

I guess Jake doesn't like the Colts.

 

[cat9x]

yeah Colt has such a horrible reputation in the AR world, maybe the Govt. should reconsider and issue DPMS rifles

 

[gvnwst]

IIRC, the goverment uses FN m16s

 

[longdayjake]

you guys are funny.

 

[gvnwst]

Thanks

 

[SHvar]

I recently reviewed.

The list of 34.
If you were to remove the numbers of features realistically found in all manufacturers, remove the assumptions of being made by trained monkeys, the brand snobbery comments, and make the list real, the list is now down to 10 differences. Starting with 10 we can reduce that to barrel steel, shot peened bolts, magnetic tested bolts, and pin size differences, milspec and commercial carbine stocks, and heavy or standard buffers, also some improperly staked gas keys among all manufacturers.
Of course there are also companies that still make recievers from plastic, but I dont count them in the comparison, those are just airsoft guns that shoot bullets.

 

[cat9x]

FN and Colt

 

[RyanM]

If you want real, verifiable differences, here's a different chart, as well as how a few different manufacturers stack up.

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

That chart was pretty helpful. Ended up with a CMMG upper and lower, with an LMT BCG. Staked the end plate myself, bought an H2 buffer, and got a KAC RAS (also do have some double heat shield handguards floating around). Now the absolute only non-milspec thing about this rifle is the lack of high pressure testing on the barrel, and I'm not really worried about that, as long as it's been MPIed.

 

[ugaarguy]

IIRC, the goverment uses FN m16s

Colt still has the sole source supplier contract on M4s though.

 

[Diamondback6]

RyanM, isn't that the one mentioned in one of the recent Guns & Ammo annuals? I was just about to mention it, think it was in the Personal Defense volume.

----------------
Now playing: Visual Music, James Hannigan and Andrew Sega - Races/Battles
via FoxyTunes

 

[ugaarguy]

Rob_S is also a member here. He keeps the most current update of the chart posted here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&hl=en

 

[waterhouse]

Ive never seen a BCG on any manufacturer yet that was not properly staked.

also some improperly staked gas keys among all manufacturers.

You've never seen it, but you know it occurs among all manufacturers?

and make the list real, the list is now down to 10 differences. Starting with 10 we can reduce that to barrel steel, shot peened bolts, magnetic tested bolts, and pin size differences, milspec and commercial carbine stocks, and heavy or standard buffers, also some improperly staked gas keys among all manufacturers.

OK, so to you there are 10 real, actual differences that actually matter. Looking at the chart, it appears that Colt has 9 of the 10 (Colt has the different pin size). How many does DPMS have?

I'm not knocking DPMS. I own one, and I've been happy with it. I also own a Colt and a Noveske and a Bushmaster and a couple of Frankenguns that I pieced together. The point is that there are real, verifiable differences. I can say with certainty that neither my Bushmaster nor the DPMS had properly staked carriers from the factory. My DPMS does not have a chrome lined barrel. The Colt does, and their staking job was done correctly.

In fact many of the 34 subjects I have never heard of or seen actually present any manufacturers AR.

The fact that you have never heard of them or seen them doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[vanfunk]

IIRC, the goverment uses FN m16s

Contrary to widely popular (mis)belief, Colt continues to produce M16A4 rifles for the US Armed Services, in addition the previously mentioned sole-source contract for M4's (through next year, anyway). Colt never "lost" the contract, as many have been lead to believe.

vanfunk

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The list of 34.
If you were to remove the numbers of features realistically found in all manufacturers, remove the assumptions of being made by trained monkeys, the brand snobbery comments, and make the list real, the list is now down to 10 differences.

First of all, I wonder how it is that you have never seen an improperly staked gas key? I've got three bolt carriers right now and not one of them is properly staked (though two are staked improperly), so it isn't as if it is uncommon.

Second, while you may not believe several of the elements that you eliminated from the list make a difference, they do in fact make a difference. Sometimes people have to learn the hard way, I know I've learned more than my fair share of lessons that way myself.

Just read back through this thread for some examples of things you have discounted - we have someone discussing snapped gas key screws because the manufacturer substituted gas screw keys from a much cheaper metal. We have a bolt catch made out of pot metal. On top of this, there are examples I have personally seen such as cheaper, steel springs that lose temper in heat and stop performing as designed (when your buffer spring stops working, so does your rifle). There is the receiver endplate that wasn't staked on because it was made of a quality of metal that staking it would cause it to crack. Instead the manufacturer had red loctited it into place.

I could go on; but there are actually a substantial number of areas where you can substitute a cheaper metal or plastic part and it has the potential to affect function.

As for "being made by trained monkeys", let me tell you a gun show story from 1990. I was working a gun show as an employee for an FFL. A guy walks up to the table wanting to sell a PWA 16" carbine. I ask if I may take a look at the internals of the rifle. The seller says "yes.". I punch the lower takedown pin and shotgun the upper. The buffer retaining pin shoots into low orbit past my face as the buffer and buffer spring snake out into the lower. I gently hand the rifle back in this condition to the seller and state I am not interested. The seller is then mad at me because *I* broke his rifle. Perhaps the trained monkeys is a bit sarcastic; but it isn't too far off the mark. I have owned several Bushmasters and my favorite rifle was originally 100% Bushmaster. As much as I like their rifles, for a very long time now they have produced rifles that consistently have overtorqued barrels and require excessive windage to zero. They also like to bury the front sight base pins in the barrel making them a pain to remove. These are all assembly issues that aren't present when you buy a Noveske or MSTN (as a point of comparison). The knowledge and training of the guy putting the rifle together does make a difference and quality people cost more than guys with some basic machining knowledge.

As to "brand snobbery", since I didn't actually mention any brand by name in the original list, I am not sure how you arrived at that conclusion.

However, I would be the first to admit that I am not the be-all, end-all for AR knowledge. I am not even at the door to that place. I do have some experience with them as I purchased my first one some 20 years ago in 1989. While in college, I started working for a very small class 2 manufacturer building ARs (both normal and NFA) out of Nesard parts kits and whoever's lowers we could buy cheapest - so I know a thing or two about cost-cutting (and I'm very sorry to anyone who bought one of these rifles - it wasn't done out of malice; but out of ignorance because we thought we knew everything we needed to know about ARs at the time.)

Since then I've been a fairly active shooter (1,000 rounds per month at my peak) who tries to work in a formal training class at least once a year. My ARs typically will see round counts of 700+ rounds per day at least once or twice a year and with suppressors and other gear they tend to take a decent beating in terms of heat and backpressure, so I know what works for me and what doesn't work for me. I know a lot of what doesn't work for me still works fine for 95% of the people who own ARs; but that doesn't make it any more useful to me.

So now you know my background and can better evaluate the information I am sharing with you. Would you like to share your background with us so we can do the same?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Just thought I would mention a couple of additions to the list:

35. Use a cheaper, softer aluminium for the upper and lower receivers than the military specified 7075-T6 aluminium.

At least one manufacturer out there makes a big deal about their uppers being "CNC Machined from SOLID BILLET" with "many areas reinforced heavier than GI spec". What they don't mention is that the aluminium they use is a cheaper, easier to machine aluminium and not the 7075-T6 used in GI weapons (which may explain why it was necessary to reinforce some areas). However, they sell these receivers as premium, custom receivers and ask premium custom prices (roughly twice what a 7075-T6 forged receiver from Bravo Company runs).

36. Use a cheaper steel than Carpenter 158 for the bolt.

If you pay attention, many manufacturers do not discuss whether their bolts are made out of Carpenter 158 steel (the same as an M4). Companies that do manufacture bolts out of 158 will often mention it in their product literature (and the price will usually be a clue since they tend to be more expensive to manufacture).

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying Carpenter 158 steel is an absolute necessity in an AR; but again, if you are paying Colt LE6920 prices, you should expect better or comparable parts and a cheaper bolt made out of 4140 is not in that category (although it will likely last longer than 95% of shooters will ever need).

 

[mp5a3]

How does cold hammer forged barrels compare ? Like on the new Bravo Company uppers ?

http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/BCM-BFH-16-Mid-Length-Upper-Receiver-Group-p/bcm-urg-mid-16 bfh.htm

I have one on my MP5, and when you could buy them, they were around $1000 (Just for the barrel)