Old thread, but not a bad one.
As someone that uses milspec tools and parts on a regular basis (active duty), being "milspec" doesn't necessarily mean "better."
For example, a milspec magazine is crap. Milspec mags are made of thin aluminium and are very easy to dent or break. I've personally broken more than one. The plastic (yes, plastic!) Magpul pmags are far better than milspec magazines.
The M4 buttstock is also crap. It's difficult to have a proper cheek weld on it. The civilian LMT SOPMOD stock, as one example, is far better.
The trigger, or fire control group, of a milspec AR is really crap. It's heavy and full of creep. Many civilian ARs have far better feeling triggers.
I'm not arguing with Bart's post, but I shake my head when I see people buying milspec on the assumption that it's "better."
Most of the failures that happen in an AR are related to lack of lubrication, bad magazines, or a part that has failed in the bolt carrier group.
A Lewis Machine & Tool or BCM bolt carrier group is shot peened, magnetic partical inspected, and has a properly staked carrier key. You can save money buying a Bushmaster, Stag Arms, Rock River Arms, etc. and swapping out the bolt carrier group for an LMT or BCM.
An LMT or BCM bolt carrier group costs about $130.
Sure, a Bushmaster, Stag Arms, Rock River Arms, etc. dosen't have 4150 barrel steel, but who's going to say a 4140 chrome lined barrel is not up to shooting thousands of rounds? You could also have a match grade barrel and a match grade trigger if you choose which, while not milspec, will be a whole lot more enjoyable to shoot.
Why limit yourself to what we're stuck with in the military?
).
