Should I copy and paste what has already been said about twist rates and different rounds/cartridges/bullets?
Should I copy and paste the discussion about aftermarket stock availability?
They are differences between the rifles that might negatively affect the enjoyment, effectiveness, or utility of the rifle, depending on what the owner/operator wants.
Which is why I suggested, at the very beginning, that the OP do some reasearch to better understand what the differences are and how they might (or might not) affect him, then make an informed decision.
Maybe you should, it would look better for your argument than another
"im right and you are wrong, and thats just how it is" post.
You are making this into a discussion that has NO bearing on the OP's question. Are you stuck in a world where everyone NEEDS the ability to shoot 77 grain .224 bullets? Where a modern sporting rifle MUST be able to stand up to the same combat conditions our Army's issued duty weapons do? A world where milspec automatically adds years and thousands of rounds to a rifles service life? A world where a commercial quality rifle CANNOT be reliable and is guaranteed to fail in moments of need?
You tell the OP to do some research and make his own decisions, then imply to him which decisions he should not make because they "aren't milspec"
Not that they aren't strong enough, or that they won't do what the OP needs them to do, no...."they aren't milspec".
Yet nothing he has said implies that he needs what benefits milspec does bring to the table.
Why should he spend that extra money for milspec?
I will agree with other posts, paying extra for most "milspec" features is a waste of money for most people, yet for most people (civilians) who have milspec guns, its all about "peace of mind".....which for most is really another way of saying "not going to be needed but nice to talk about with your buddies"
I've seen you banging the milspec gavel in enough other threads to feel that you have more of a happy, glowy feeling for the term than a working knowledge of its benefits (and the actual value of those benefits to people other than yourself) over commercial parts.
FYI the gun I'm building right now is going to be "milspec", its going to cost more than the one I'm building that isn't "milspec", That extra cost is 99.9% sure to be a waste of money, and I fully acknowledge that it doesn't need to be "milspec" for what I'm using it for, its just "peace of mind" and I'm going to brag about it to my buddies, I'm sure. Its going to cost a lot, and do nothing significantly better than my other rifles, other than look prettier, I guarantee it. It won't have a single Windham part in it.
Doesn't mean my RR rifle isn't perfectly fine for what it does, and it doesn't mean I'm not perfectly happy with a Windham BCG in another rifle I have. (also not milspec, also perfectly happy with it)
If the OP is REALLY interested in the differences, there are many sources of information regarding what the "milspec" features actually are.
Hint: you aren't ever going to have a "military-specification" rifle, unless you are in the "military".
http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=493
http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2259&cid=4
"Here’s the deal, and it’s very simple:
Only rifles made for the U.S. military are MilSpec. For more than 50 years and through numerous iterations, experimental models and improved variations, the U.S. military has developed a detailed list of specifications for its service rifle. These “military specifications” are iron-clad.
MilSpec criteria include every aspect of the rifle, from the materials it’s made from to the treatment of those materials, the dimensions of components made from those materials, testing of these parts, wear and durability, accuracy, service life—every excruciating detail is specified.
Finally, and most importantly, a MilSpec rifle is approved by a U.S. government inspector. The inspection process assures that all rifles bought on a government contract meet the MilSpec and a related criteria called “military standard” or MilStd.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I present you with the first piece of irrefutable evidence in the case of the falsely advertised AR. A manufacturer cannot claim that its AR is “MilSpec.” By definition, a MilSpec rifle must be tested and inspected by the government.
If that’s not proof enough, consider this: There’s no such thing as a civilian-legal MilSpec rifle. A MilSpec rifle is a rifle made to fulfill a government contract and, as of now, there are only three such “animals” walking around: the M16A4, which has a three-round burst-fire selector; the M4, which also is equipped with a three-round burst-fire selector; and the M4A1, which is a fully automatic rifle. These are all classified as machine guns and no civilian transfers can take place for any machine gun manufactured after 1986. You cannot legally own a MilSpec AR."
