Are Colt ARs getting hard to find?

Most of the 3-gunner I have seen are running custom/home built rifles. Other than the sub-divisions requiring it (depending on who's rules we are using) none of them are running front sight bases and non-free-floated handgaurds either.

 

With PSA's shipping, the war would be over by the time the military got the guns.

 

Colts are dominating the matches in Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa, Syria, and Malaysia.

 

Other than my very first AR, I've never bought a rifle. I've always put the together using the parts that I wanted. Still, if I was to buy an entire rifle and wanted one of the best, I'd spend the bit extra and get a Bravo Company Rifle. I've had plenty of dealings with PSA and the like and they are a GREAT bang for the buck. I absolutely love them, but if I knew this AR was going to be the last AR I would ever get my hands on, it would be a BCM. With the BCM stuff, not even the smallest minor detail is over looked.

 

Naw, drones and smart weapons are probably getting more kills than any small arms. The M4 in theater is like being the revolver shooter at a USPSA match.

 

I remember a few years ago when you could put a new Colt 6920 on layaway at Walmart!

 

Support weapons definitely kill a lot of bad guys. But from my experience as well as talking with my buddies who are recently returning from deployments as Platoon Sergeants and seasoned SF ODA members, the good ole rifle is still putting tons of guys down for dirt naps.

 

Agreed.

I run a custom home built that cost me roughly 2 LE6920s to assemble before optic. I see newer shooters showing up with factory stock guns, but after a while a lot of parts are swapped out. I've only seen a couple guys in the past few years running irons, and the vast majority of guns I do see don't have fixed FSBs.

Here's a decent article that was written last year about 3Gun AR15s:

https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/the-top-ars-in-3-gun-competition-shooting-today/360637

This selection comes as no surprise:

 

I have Arma Lites and Windham they are my target and varmint guns they has out shot the Colts I also have a Anderson and a DPMS They are my play guns

 

Didn't Colt file for bankruptcy multiple times? If it happens once, it could be for a multitude of reasons. If you declare bankruptcy multiple times, perhaps a different business model should be explored...

A big reason Colt went under multiple times, in my opinion, is because they focus mostly on govt contracts and not so much on the civilian market. While govt contracts are great, you don't keep a firearms company afloat without paying a good amount of attention to the civilian market...

Are you suggesting that Colt ARs go for a similar cost as PSA ARs? Because that is absolutely not true in the slightest...

 

I probably wouldn't buy a new Colt, but they were the most likely to work right out of the box for years and years. I've never handled a Windham...maybe they finally got their stuff together. When they were Bushmaster, I sure got a lot of turds from them. And now that "Bushmaster" is owned and run by that Remington conglomerate, I trust them even less.

 

@American_Fusilier a very common reason given by Colt AR Fans is it’s higher cost is justified because it is higher quality (i.e mil-spec) than lower price commercial AR’s. In other words we are comparing Apples (Colt) to Oranges (PSA). So wouldn’t a more fair comparison be Colt since it is built for heavy duty (combat) to AR’s used in rough shooting competitions such as 3-Gun?

 

I have a recent Windham. It is a go to gun.

 

I see your point.

However, again comes in the question of "milspec". When I built my PSA rifle (I am obviously biased towards PSA), I used all "milspec" parts. So, rechnically my rifle is a "milspec" as well. I am not saying it's more reliable or dependable than a Colt AR. But in regards to non military rifles, companies that make commercial rifles don't have follow the protocols of milspec. Therefore you will have commercial rifles that will be tremendously worse than a Colt (say like the ATI Omni Maxx Hybrid of the DPMS orc) and tremendously better than a Colt (Daniel Defense, BCM, Lewis Machine and Tool, Knights Armament, POF, even FN etc).

In the end I suppose it's to each their own. I personally think Colts are way over priced for what you get, and there isn't anything a Colt can do that a BCM couldn't.

I don't have anything against Colt, besides their prices. But then again, there are a lot of super over priced guns out there... (like H&K for instance)

 

Seriously? Tremendously better?

While I am a huge fan of BCM parts and rifles, have you done a price check comparison lately? And looked at the current prices of DD, LMT, Noveske, et al?

I thought the thread was about complete rifles, and you're bringing up manufacturers whose rifles are going for $600 to $750 plus or more than a stock Colt 6920. Way overpriced for what you get? Nah ...

Little bit of hyperbole creeping into the thread, maybe?

 

"mil-spec" is so much more than "mil-spec" parts, so much more.

It would be interesting see all the places Colt cuts corners on the mil spec in their semi-auto guns commercial guns. Most of the lot acceptance testing probably gets skipped along with other testing no doubt.

None of my AR are mil-spec and I have no use for a mil spec gun. Most of my ARs are not even in 5.56x45 NATO.

 

Can some really call it a PSA or Colt rifle when someone just uses the receiver and builds their own from it? To really compare Colt to PSA I think one needs to buy a complete rifle from them then compare the two. Based on my PSA M4 I bought a complete upper and lower it is a 6 to 7 MOA at 10 shots rifle at 100 yds while my Colt and FN groups half that .

Mine are target rifles so I 'm not "running them hard" and in that sense while my PSA is minute of barn accuracy it hasn't failed yet function wise, but for long term use I trust Colt and FN more.

 

At that point in the conversation I wasn't talking about price. I was talking about the "milspec" argument everybody talks about with Colt.

Look, I don't care what rifle you use, or used. The fact is Colt's glory days are far behind them. Sure, they used to own the market, but they made stupid decisions, and they are now a shadow of their former self.

No hyperbole here, maybe just a bit of saltiness...

Not really. "Milspec" stands for military specifications, so something is either milspec or it's not. Again, keep in mind that "milspec" is just what the military thought was important and paid the lower bidder (Colt) to mass produce it. You could look at milspec as basically the lowest common denominator, the payment for entry if you will. Does it work? Yep! But, like I said before with commercial rifles, yes there are crap rifles out there, and yes, there are also rifles that are tremendously better than Colts. Again, yes, you'll pay a premium for them.

I think that depends. I built my PSA rifle using all PSA parts: lower build kit, upper/barrel, etc.

Rifle accuracy depends on a lot of different things. My PSA rifle will shoot 1.5 moa regularly. I think I can get that smaller when I have time to develop a handload for it.

I don't run my rifles hard either. The hardest my AR was ever run for was in a 4 day class, it was only about 650 rounds, but it was in the desert and I never cleaned it. It ran fine with no problems. Does that mean I'd want to take it into combat? No. But it's good enough for me.

 

You clearly have never read the Technical Data Package (TDP) for the M4 carbine and what those specifications require be done to meet military specifications for the M4. (I have only read small parts) It's not just material, dimensions, and finish. There are testing and inspection requirements. ie every bolt must be mag-particle inspected after being proof fired. A specified sample percentage of hammer and trigger casting have to be inspected for internal voids. Too many void the entire casting batch is rejected (those probably get turned into semi-auto hammers). Sample rifles have to come off the line at specified intervals for various endurance testing. So an and so forth. Even if you could get all the mil spec parts for and M4 in a pile on the table you would still not have a mil-spec gun unless it was assembly per the specification (torque, staking, etc) gone through all the inspection and testing required by the TDP before delivery.

Mil spec does not mean its the best but is sure means its gone through a very specific manufacturing, assembly and inspection process. Unless you have the full TDP and followed it ALL you don't have a mil spec rifle. And honestly it really doesn't matter to the civilian shooter no matter how hard core they want to be part of the boogaloo...

 

Well, ya know, for someone who doesn't care what rifle any of us use, or used, you've made an effort to talk all about your brand favorite and home-build, as well as attempting to denigrate Colt. All most of us were really talking about was availability of current Colt rifles and maybe whether they were still worthy complete rifles if one desired one. A couple of you just took the opportunity to run down Colt and push your own favorites long after the original question had been answered. Though it's been entertaining, as expected.​

 

4 pages spent arguing about "Mil-Spec". I feel as if I've transcended time back to 2004, and I've just logged on to ARFCOM. Some things never change.

 

I am the single most un-cool guy you will ever come across.....ever hear the song I was country when country wasn't cool.....well I had an AR LONG before they got cool. I saw the gun, spent the $1400 in 1980's money to get one and enjoyed it for about two decades before the people that think they are cool, and trend setters found the thing and turned it into a belly button.

 

Name one single company that has put out "better"...."higher quality"......or "did better" after being aquired by an investment company....then the double challenge is to name another gun, or even sporting company.

I hate these groups.....they are in it for short term profits.

If you come out with a product or buy a like products rights you generally have a long term goal with those products....PRODUCTS.....As we are talking AR, Colt bought the rights to that thinking it was going to be the next big thing....would it be the next big thing in a .30 or .22....they did not know yet, and from what I read they really thought it was going to be the .30.

None of that matters, they worked on the product because they wanted it to work....they knew it was going to be a long road that could bring fantastic rewards....but it was going to take time, money and lots of hard work by many people.

Investment companies do not have any other product than MONEY....it is all that matters, long term means nothing it is MONEY now and all else is to go out the window.

It is pretty interesting in the world of today....we don't worry about winchester buying out remington, buying out marlin, buying out colt.....bla bla bla.

It is what investment company......what bean counters are going to do to destroy the product, drive people away from product all for quick returns.

Post will likely get nuked, but it is not so much of what colt did to ruin themselves....or remington....or marlin....but what the investment company did to force....FORCE those companies to cut corners all in the name of more money.

 

Well if we set the mil-spec "feature" aside then is their any draw to the Colt AR offerings on the civilian market? As I see it the "mil-spec" claims is just about the only thing that makes a Colt desirable for most shooters in the current market. There is nothing unique or innovative in anything Colt is offering. The were only offering 556/223 guns and one 9mm when the stopped their commercial production and no features that could not be replicated at a lower cost somewhere else. Why would I want a Colt and pay their premium if not for the implied mil-spec?

 

No. But because of reasons other than "Mil-Spec". First off, you have to remember Colt is not the same company it was back then. Not in the least. I have a Colt 6920 and 6940 Monolith that I purchased new. Both were made by Colt Defense back in the early 2000's. (They both have the, "For Government And Law Enforcement Use Only", engravings on the magwell. Left over from the Clinton AWB).

Today it is a different company completely. Much like comparing the old Bushmaster, when it was founded, owned, and operated by successful Maine businessman Richard Dyke..... To the newer Cerberus / Freedom Group / Remington, "Bushmaster". They're the same in name only.

Colt has lost a lot of it's talented people since those days. Just as Bushmaster did. It is reflected in the quality of their guns. Both their AR-15's, as well as this "New Python", that has been plagued with operational issues.

It's almost like these cheap, made in China, Bell & Howell flashlights you see advertised on TV Infomercials. They have nothing to do with the famous Bell & Howell Corporation of the 50's and 60's. Of movie camera fame and fortune. They're just living off the fat and notoriety.... That has long since dried up.

Remember their famous advertising saying a few years back..... "If it's not a Colt, It's just a copy!". Well, sadly now, if it IS a Colt, it's little more than a copy. As always, what goes around, comes around.