Another AR Suggestion Thread

[MrCleanOK]

Maybe I'm doing myself a diservice by ignoring that option, but honestly I just want a gun I can shoot right out of the box. I know that's going to cost a bit more, but I'm willing to pay for the convenience.

In about 10 minutes I was able to go on two websites (gandrtactical.com and bravocompanyusa.com) and spec the parts for a rifle that is aesthetically identical to the S&W you are looking at, for the same price, with higher build quality in the upper receiver group (where it counts). The only "assembly" you would have to do is actually simpler that what is required for basic cleaning.

You are doing yourself a disservice by only considering complete rifles. You can get more options, and a better price by doing something as simple as buying the complete upper and lower receivers separately, and pinning the two together.

 

[mdauben]

I think you're going about your specs the wrong way. You've listed aesthetic features, with nothing related to performance of the gun.

Well, I would certainly like all the accuracy, reliability and quality I can get for the money, but I assumed that was just a given (does anyone not want those things in a gun?) and didn't come right out and say that. Is there some other "performance" spec I should consider, too?

Aside from that, I don't consider any of the features I listed "aesthetic". I want the folding sights because I want to mount an optic (without needing an elevated mount to clear fixed sights), but have the sights for backup. I want the collapsible stock for easier storage and transport, and to "fit" the gun to me as well as possible. I want the quad rail because I want to be able to mount accessories like vertical grips, lights, etc. Sure, none of these are key to the functioning of the gun as a gun, but they are necessary for the gun to function the way I want it to.

I think this piece by THR Moderator Bartholomew Roberts is a good start - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=243382 - decide, very specifically, what you want the rifle to do. Then work on the aesthetics.

See, the problem is, I've never owned an AR before and I'm in no way an AR expert. So, most of that is right over my head. I don't know what some of those things even are, others I don't know how much the effect reliability and accuracy so I can't really make an informed decision about them. I don't want to disrespect your advice, but honestly, I'm not a gear head and I'm just not interested in all that stuff. All I would like to know is if a particular gun goes boom reliably and accurately.

Despite any arm chair fantasies I may have, realistically this is going to be a recreational gun that will mostly be used at the local range. I'm not an LEO. I don't honestly think I'm going to ever use this gun in a true SD situation, and I doubt I'll ever actually enter a "run and gun" tactical competition.

I'm not trying to make an argument for the simple sake of it, just pointing out what you mentioned. DI v. piston can be considered part of your reliability and/or ease of maintenance in terms of keeping the rifle reliable..

I've read lots of arguments for each system and there are plenty of people who feel strongly about one or the other. After all that reading I just decided I don't believe either system has a overwhelming advantage over the other, so I just don't care which my final rifle is.

Not sure why you don't see prices on the site. But your best bet for a BCM the way you like it is this.
http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin...&key=MID-750-C

Probably becuase I was looking at the actual BCM website, not the one you linked to. Its not a bad starting point, but again if I equip that gun the way I want, its going to cost about the same as the Ruger and more than the Smith (plus its got that ugly fixed fore sight. Yeah, I'll admit that's just an aesthetic judgment, but I really hate those sights). Is the quality, accuracy and reliability of the gun significantly better than the Ruger or Smith?

Thanks again everyone for the suggestions and information.

 

[Tirod]

There are two issues with requirements that need further examination. The first is "I don't want to assemble a rifle." Given the "worst case" example is actually having all the little parts on a table in front of you, I have no argument with it. I have done that, it's not rocket science, but assembled guns can be had for the same money. There's not much to be saved - EXCEPT when someone suggests just buying a complete upper and lower to pin together. That is an 11% difference in price to do something everyone does when cleaning the weapon - nearly every time. The upper/lower pins are what make the AR unique among many rifles, and other than some Colt owners with the screwed together type, almost everyone bumps the pins for disassembly.

On the other hand, most companies won't give you a complete rifle warranty if shipped as two separate subassemblies. That's what paying the tax nets as an offset.

The second issue is what was said before, most of the requirements are for enhancements that don't affect the actual functioning of the rifle. The perspective of what is needed implies tacticool looks are more important than quality of construction, and that's borne out in the top two choices - they are considered recreational shooter guns, not top level combat rated. The absence of the Colt tilts it even more.

Shooters define the job to be done by specifying What range, what target? Once the median and maximum range to the target, and what that target will be is specified, then the features that support it are chosen by priority to do the job. It's no different than picking which pair of pliers are needed - the amount of leverage, size of the part, and how much damage can be tolerated all factor in. Watchmakers don't use water pump pliers, and pipe fitters generally need something robust.

Define what range, what target, then caliber, barrel length, upper, furniture, and trigger, in that specific order, fall into place. If it's a non duty gun, then it takes a unique and special issue to mandate a quad rail; and even on those, it's an institutional compromise. They are an expensive light mount, that's all, and won'' improve accuracy beyond the barrels natural tendency. They just preserve what it has from sling or hand tension moving the point of impact. It cannot make a 2MOA milspec barrel shoot better than what it does - if that was the case, we'd all buy $599 guns, add freefloats and target triggers, and shoot National Match to the championship. Doesn't really happen.

There are some basic assumptions reflected in the requirements listed that won't bear out if expectations are any indicator. Better guns can be had for less. More research leading to a new decision on what are the top candidates will likely be more satisfying in the long run.

 

[10mmGlock]

Out of your original choices, I like the MP15T. I have two of them and can say they both perform flawlessly.

 

[browneu]

I have to ask the question since I don't have any experience with a lo pro gas black.

Isn't the standard front sight base more reliable than a lo pro gas block? That's at least my understanding which is why many shave off the sight to create their own lo profile gas block.

Something you may want to consider if you don't like the looks of the sight. I believe there are plenty of people that will be willing to do it for you then you can attach a folding front sight to your rail.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk

 

[mdauben]

On the other hand, most companies won't give you a complete rifle warranty if shipped as two separate subassemblies. That's what paying the tax nets as an offset.

Honestly, this is reason enough for me to totally ignore the option of putting a rifle together myself, even if it is just two pieces. While I am hardly rolling in money, and extra $100 for a complete rifle isn't a hardship, particularly if it gets me a warranty.

The perspective of what is needed implies tacticool looks are more important than quality of construction,

No. Forgive me for the originally unwritten assumption that quality of construction was important (which I have since corrected at least twice in this thread). I didn't think it was necessary to specify that I don't want a piece of junk. The specific optional items I wanted were for articulatable purposes beyond mere "tacticool" and in no way invalidate reliability, accuracy or quality. Just because they may not be important to you please do not disparage my desire for them.

and that's borne out in the top two choices - they are considered recreational shooter guns, not top level combat rated. The absence of the Colt tilts it even more.

So what? I want a recreational shooter. I'm not an LEO, serious Combat Competition shooter, or soldier of fortune. I don't expect to need to defend myself from foreign invasion, civil unrest or zombie hoards. The absence of the Colt was simply that I had not seen a model set up like I wanted for them. As soon as one of the earlier posters pointed on out, I immediately said I was adding it for consideration.

Define what range, what target, then caliber, barrel length, upper, furniture, and trigger, in that specific order, fall into place.

100-200 yards, paper, 5.56, 16 inch, flat top, as in OP, one that works.

Better guns can be had for less.

People keep saying that, but I'm not seeing it. I'd love to spend less for more, but so far no one has offered an example set up like I want, that costs significantly less than my original choices.

I think I have at this point mostly dismissed the Ruger from further consideration. I don't think there is actually anything wrong with the rifle, but if nothing else it looks like the Smith is pretty comparable in quality for around $300-400 less. So, the Smith M&P 15T and Colt Sporter are the current front runners.

I hate to come across as one of those people who asks for an opinion and then dismisses everyone who disagrees with me, but most of the suggestions and opinions so far just don't address my stated requirements. I do appreciate everyone who took the time to reply.

 

[kwelz]

The BCM is a far better gun than either the S&W or the Ruger. And I would take the Smith over the Ruger as well. In the end it is your choice but I suggest two things.

1: Wait if you have to and save to get the best possible gun.
2: Use that time to also educate yourself better on the AR platform. I highly reccoment m4carbine.net

 

[mdauben]

The BCM is a far better gun than either the S&W or the Ruger.

Well, according to the BCM website, they are so backlogged they are not accepting new orders, so that is a strike against them as it kind of puts a kink in any immediate buying plans.

1: Wait if you have to and save to get the best possible gun.

Well, I was prepared to go out and drop $1400-1500 this week, so I hope I don't need to save up any more to get a good gun. If so, I'll settle for a "cheap" $1500 rifle.

2: Use that time to also educate yourself better on the AR platform. I highly reccoment m4carbine.net

I can understand that some people may be facinated by all this, but is it really necessary to get a degree in AR-ology just to buy a gun to punch holes in paper with?

 

[kwelz]

The link I put up earlier has them available.

One of the reasons it is important to educate yourself so much on the AR platform is the high level of junk available on the market passing it off as high quality stuff.

For instance the Ruger rifle you have mentioned has a number of issues you won't find from reading a spec sheet. Like all piston designs it suffers from carrier tilt. Uses proprietary parts and has to much of the weight towards the front end. This doesn't mean it is a terrible gun but it has a number of fleas that less expensive guns do not.

1400-1500 is plenty for a good gun. that is why I am saying don't buy something that isn't good for that amount of money. See if there is a DD dealer in your area. You can get a DD upper with a rail on it for around 800-850 and then a complete DD lower for another 400-450. Push the pins together and you have a complete gun. I am a huge DD fan and for that money you are going to get a CHF barrel as well as all the other things.

 

[TonyAngel]

mdauben, you're in the same boat that most are in when buying an AR for the first time. All you know is what you want without a clear path for getting there. As with all of us, you'd also like to spend as little as possible without getting a piece of crap rifle.

I can see the wisdom of buying a rifle with the quad rails already installed. Adding them later is a bit of a task. Very simple for some and more daunting for others. I wouldn't, however, worry too much about the flip up sights. Since you're getting a quad rail, adding flip ups is VERY simple and there are many models to choose from. I'd concentrate on the rifle and leave the flip ups as an afterthought.

As I mentioned before, I do like the stuff from Spike's and Bravo Company. If Spike's is backordered and you don't want to wait, I'd suggest sending Bravo Company an email.

Now, since you were ready to drop all of that money on a Ruger and you apparently want the good stuff, if I were in your shoes, I'd be looking at the Daniel Defense V5. That is a first rate rifle all the way. I've built plenty of ARs and I've never had my hands on anything made by Daniel Defense that wasn't first rate. Just go over to their website and look around. I'm a fan of the mid length gas models, just because they shoot more smoothly.

I tinker a lot with ARs. I've built many for myself and others. The AR that I shoot now is a parts gun, but if I were to splurge and get myself an AR, I think it would be a Daniel Defense. If I wanted to go hog nuts and really treat myself, it would be a Noveske.

Have you shot many ARs with quad rails? If not, beware. Not all quad rails are created equally. Some of them are downright fat, unweildly and uncomfortable. I really like the Daniel Defense rails. They tend to be slim and more comfortable while maintaining rigidity.

 

[mdauben]

The link I put up earlier has them available.

The one I saw on the BCM website that was closest to what I want (BMC RECCE-16) I can't find on the website you posted (of course, I can't find much of anything on that website. They may sell good guns but their website sucks.)

For instance the Ruger rifle you have mentioned has a number of issues you won't find from reading a spec sheet. Like all piston designs it suffers from carrier tilt. Uses proprietary parts and has to much of the weight towards the front end.

I was aware of all these things as I didn't just pick the two guns in the OP by their pictures.

A lot of DI proponents keep pointing to the problem of "carrier tilt" but all the hands on reviews of the Ruger I have seen indicate it isn't actually a problem, at least not unless you shoot thousands of rounds a year through the gun. Not being a competition shooter, thats not something I anticipate. The propriatary parts is a concern, but I just don't see it as a huge one. Since I don't own any ARs or 1911s, all the guns I own are built out of "propriatary parts" and its never really been an issue. The weight forward is the only thing I thought might be an issue, but I was witholding judgement on that till I could handle the one down at the FLGS and see what I thought. I've heard some people actually list it as a benefit in holding the rifle steady on target.

The AR that I shoot now is a parts gun, but if I were to splurge and get myself an AR, I think it would be a Daniel Defense.

I took a look at their website, and they do have one or two guns that would work for me, but like BMC they have everything listed as out-of-stock. I suppose they may have guns available from local dealers, but I can't seem to find anything like a dealer's list on their website.

Thanks again for more input!

 

[blackDdefense]

Try the LMT. Their STD16 is a very realiable weapon. Shot many round through the 5.56 and the .308 with zero problems. There quality is like DD...second to none.

 

[JustinJ]

Check out Rock River's website. I'm not sure what the price would come out to for your desired configuration but it's definitely available. They have many different models that can easily be configured as you wish. I'm not sure what lead times are.

PWS also has a rifle similar to what you are looking for but for about $100 more. I've never shot one but their long stroke piston system looks like a good idea to me.

Another option is the Sig516. You should be able to find one for under $1300. They lack the flip sights but a set of magpul can be had for under $100. The Sig also comes with a red dot that ain't no aimpoint but should be more than sufficient for your purposes.

 

[kwelz]

JustinJ none of those guns are in the league of any of the others being discussed.

 

[JustinJ]

kewlz, do you have person experience with a substantial number of each of the guns i suggested to base such an opinion on?

Not to mention the OP is looking for a recreational gun. I'm trying to help him find what he wants, not what i want.

 

[kwelz]

Rock river for sure. Sig is new but they have fallen into the same pitfalls as most other companies. A simple read of the specs on each rifle shows you all you need to know.

 

[TonyAngel]

mdauben, have you actually picked up the phone or searched for anything. I know that buying something from Bravo Company isn't hard. I and many others have actually done it. That's why I suggested emailing them. They offer different configurations.

As for the Daniel Defense, I don't know what to say.... It took me all of 15 seconds to find it in stock at Midwest Hunters Outlet for around $1150. Do some searching and make some phone calls. The last time I was in my local cop shop, they had two DDs on the wall. They aren't unobtanium.

 

[JustinJ]

Where are specs available for the Sig or PWS that show their parts are below the standard of others? Not to mention the DEA awarded a five year contract to RRA so they can't be that bad. Again, he's looking for a plinker, not a rifle to invade Poland with.

 

[kwelz]

Sig: 516 Another heavy Piston driven system trying to capitalize on the misinformation about DI being somehow unreliable. So they throw and extra pound on the end of the barrel, charge a few hundred extra and call it a day.

400: Not near as bad. But still overpriced for what you are getting. You would be better off with a DD or BCM middy.

PWS: See above about the 516.


As for the RRA contract. they one a small portion of a large contract. And those rifled were NOT the same as you would buy in your LGS. The problems with RRA rifles are well documented. But boy dont' they have nice Fit and Finish.

 

[JustinJ]

"Sig: 516 Another heavy Piston driven system trying to capitalize on the misinformation about DI being somehow unreliable. So they throw and extra pound on the end of the barrel, charge a few hundred extra and call it a day."

You originally criticized their specs. The above arguement is just a position on piston vs di. How can a having a piston make those not in the "league of any of the others being discussed" when the ruger is?

What is the "400"?

 

[ugaarguy]

See, the problem is, I've never owned an AR before and I'm in no way an AR expert. So, most of that is right over my head. I don't know what some of those things even are, others I don't know how much the effect reliability and accuracy so I can't really make an informed decision about them. I don't want to disrespect your advice, but honestly, I'm not a gear head and I'm just not interested in all that stuff. All I would like to know is if a particular gun goes boom reliably and accurately.

He put a legend in there right above the list. Re-read carefully.

For an easy to follow shorthand, I've set up the following reference system (reflecting only my own opinions):
* Most likely will not make a difference for all but the most demanding shooters who put their rifles to hard use.
** Unlikely to make a difference for the vast majority of recreational shooters, may see occasional issues among those who train frequently.
*** Known to effect reliability for all users, though it may still not be an issue if you don't shoot that much.

Despite any arm chair fantasies I may have, realistically this is going to be a recreational gun that will mostly be used at the local range. I'm not an LEO. I don't honestly think I'm going to ever use this gun in a true SD situation, and I doubt I'll ever actually enter a "run and gun" tactical competition.

If that's the case, darn near any AR-15 will. If you want increased accuracy, you're going to have to trade away some durability. Hard chromed bbls are the most durable, but you'll give up a little accuracy. Unlined bbls, machined to equal tolerances as a chrome lined bbl, are mechanically more accurate, but have nowhere near the durability. Ferritic Nitrocarburizing (AKA Tennifer, Melonite) greatly increases bbl life, without the accuracy loss of chrome lining.

Outside of the bbl, you need to make sure everything else is assembled correctly. S&W's assembly is just as good as the top tier manufacturers. They do use 4140 steel in their bbls. which isn't as good as Mil-B-11595E certified 4150. Spikes, BCM, DD, LMT, Noveske, and Colt are the only companies I know of that use actual Mil-B-11595E certified 4150 steel. PSA's FN sourced hammer forged barrels (not all their bbls) should also be Mil-B-11595E.

Based on what you want I'd get M&P-15T. You'll slightly sacrifice durability, but gain accuracy with the T's T/C Arms manufactured 1:8 twist 5R rifled bbl which has been Melonited inside & out. The Troy Industries quad rail and sights are also top grade parts.

I want the folding sights because I want to mount an optic (without needing an elevated mount to clear fixed sights), but have the sights for backup

The elevated mounts aren't to clear the sights on AR-15s. You have to run extra high rings (or a similar height mount) because there is no drop at comb on AR-15 as there is with other rifles.

 

[john5036]

The buying an upper and lower separately and then assembling is hardly an inconvenience. This is something you shouldn't be afraid of at all. You are going to have to learn how to do all that if you are going to clean that sucker anyways.

As a prospective AR owner, I promise you that's the least of your forthcoming education.

 

[JustinJ]

"Unlined bbls, machined to equal tolerances as a chrome lined bbl, are mechanically more accurate, but have nowhere near the reliability."

How does chrome lining a barrel make the AR more reliable? I can see more durability but not reliability.

 

[ugaarguy]

How does chrome lining a barrel make the AR more reliable? I can see more durability but not reliability.

Brain fart on my end. Was thinking durability, but typed reliability. It's fixed now.

 

[mdauben]

I found that SW model on numerous sites for under a grand.

Just a little follow up on this issue. I just found out that S&W recently made some changes to the 15T which resulted in a several hundred dollar drop in price. At least two of the changes were the replacement of the expensive metal Troy folding sights with cheaper plastic ones, and the replacement of the chrome lined barrel with an unlined one. The model in my FLGS is the old model, that's why it so much more expensive than you were seeing at on-line retailers who were selling the new model.

Something to be aware of if you are buying a 15T.