Black Rifles for idiots (like me)

[Slamfire]

The most common brands in Highpower are Armalite, Bushmaster and Rock River.

I have thousands of rounds through these brands and have not had a problem.

Colt rifles are rather rare. Colt has ignored this market and it does not make economic sense to spent 25% more for a Colt and then throw half the parts away.

I have a Armalite M4 copy, I like it.

 

[iyaoyas98]

Beware the that where it

That honestly made me laugh....

 

[iyaoyas98]

 

[BUGUDY]

I have a Doublestar upper that has over 1k rounds thru it. Never had any problems. I got mine from J&T. They are very good people to deal with.

 

[nalioth]

I had a M16A2 to use over in Iraq. I learned how "reliable" it was very quickly. No "buddy's buddy who knew another buddy's buddy who had it happen to their buddy's buddy" knowledge here.

As an armorer in the Marine Corps I quickly learned that 99.99% of weapons malfunctions were due to operator error. Out of the hundreds of thousands of M16A2s I laid hands on during my time in I can honestly say only a few had legitimate problems. I suspect your issues with the platform are no different.

I am sorry I failed your standards, but I don't think it was me.

I don't believe any other weapon systems needs to be cleaned at least twice a day to begin approaching 100% functionality (you are aware that there are reported instances of our guys over in the middle east actually cleaning their weapons mid-firefight to get them back running, right?)

Your statement just shines more light on how ill-suited the AR platform is for actual combat.

You guys can have'em. I don't like them or recommend them.

 

[dom1104]

hmm.

Alot of these black rifles get silly. Dont look to the military, or the special forces etc.

You arent them. You are just a joe blow that will shoot it for fun.

Get something decent. Stag, Rock River, CMMG.

It will be fine. Seriously. For you to NEED a rifle that will run thousands upon thousands of rounds problem free, you gotta be rich to afford the ammo.

My AR cost 650 bucks, +200 for a 22lr kit <so I can actually shoot it>.

Has it failed in several hundred 223 and several thousand 22lr? nope. not even once.

Is that good enough for me? Yep. Is it good enough for the military or the black rifle elitests? no idea. But that doesnt matter because its good enough for me.

If I have to defend my home with it will it function well enough to fend off an attacker? Yep.

 

[Hatterasguy]

IMHO if I was going to build a decent AR for a reasonable price I would buy this upper:
http://www.dsarms.com/DSA-ZM4-Forged-7075T6-A3-AR15-Upper-Receiver---DSZM4CBU/productinfo/DSZM4CBU/

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=153707080

I'd buy an LMT lower, than probably spring for a milspec bolt and carrier.

Hell of a lot cheaper than a Colt and probably will perform about the same.

 

[Zip06]

Lots of opinions; here's mine. Determine your need and purpose first. If you are going to shoot less than 100 rounds a month then consider the Stag in your favorite configuration. If you are serious about shooting look to the top tier AR platforms.

 

[GunsBeerFreedom]

This could easily be a very long thread. Instead, I recommend looking at the Saiga .223 rifle. Best of both worlds.

Beat you to it friend

 

[inherentical]

I am sorry I failed your standards, but I don't think it was me.

It's ok, not everyone is cut out to be a Marine.

 

[rskent]

Nalioth
Thank you for your service to our country. I live in Florida, not Iraq. I think I will hang with my DI gun. It is simple to operate and maintain.
It has been 100% reliable for quite a while. I am on my third barrel. I don’t have a full auto, so running cooler is not an issue. As far as being
easier to clean, what so is hard about cleaning an AR? I am obviously missing something.
Steve

 

[stchman]

I am not dissing DI ARs. If you are going to spend the time and money to get a new AR, make it a piston AR.

 

[mshootnit]

With a name like "Bushmaster" how the hell can you go wrong?

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

as much as I'd like the AK, I think given the fact that a NICE Ak is running about the same as a pretty nice .223/5.56, I couldn't justify not going with the latter.

I don't understand that sentence. If by ".223/5.56", you mean AR style, then you are saying that you can NOT justify going with an AR style (the latter). Which means you want an AK style... right?

 

[christcorp]

I don't understand that sentence. If by ".223/5.56", you mean AR style, then you are saying that you can NOT justify going with an AR style (the latter). Which means you want an AK style... right?

I think he's saying that a nice AK variant costs the same as an AR, and therefor you should buy the AR. The problems with these opinions are 1) You assume that an AR is better than an AK. 2) You assume that the cheapest AR (olympic arms or similar @ $700 once you include shipping, FFL, or local tax) is somehow equal or better than an AK variant, even though almost no AK variant costs $700 normally. That would have to be a very unique AK variant to cost that much. And 3) If you are into the .223 vs 7.62x39 argument, then you have to concede that there are a lot of AK variants such as the AK-102, Galil, and the TRUE RUSSIAN ORIGINAL AK "Saiga"; that are all available in the .223/5.56 caliber. I shot the M-16 for 20+ years. From the 70's through almost 2000. It's a fine gun. I like the caliber. But for a decent AR variant, it's going to cost you right at $1000. For a decent AK variant, it's going to cost you right around $500. To buy an AK variant in the .223/5.56 caliber, will cost around the $600 range. Unless of course you buy a true Saiga, which hasn't been "HYPED" up in marketing, is being sold as a "Sporter Rifle"; and can easily be converted back to whatever level of AK you want. Those cost around $350-$400. In other words, the AR's are nice, but they aren't worth $500-$600 more. Unless you want the cheapest version possible, and that is still about $100-$200 more. Yes, I can find AK's that cost $1000, $2000, or even $3000. But these are unique. They aren't normal. Just like I can find AR's in that price range too; but that's not normal either. Truth is; a NORMAL AK variant, middle of the road normal quality, will cost around $500. A NORMAL AR variant, middle of the road normal quality, will cost around $1000. There are exceptions. The Olympic Arms is around $700; and the Saiga's are around $400. The difference here is that the saiga is actually a better quality rifle than the AK variants, and the Olympic Arms is pretty much the bottom feeder.

 

[kwelz]

Buy quality. That is the only advice I have for you. Colt, BCM, LMT, Daniel Defense, etc.

 

[christcorp]

Buy quality. That is the only advice I have for you. Colt, BCM, LMT, Daniel Defense, etc.

So, are you saying that ONLY AR platform rifles are "Quality" weapons? I think there's a few people here that would put their Yugoslavian, Saiga, Norinco, FEG, Dragunov, etc... AK platform up against your AR platform for quality. I guess each person has to define "Quality" for themselves. Is it the best and hardest metal??? Is it the machinery that it was built on??? For me; Quality is a weapon with the reputation that it will fire every time and any time I need it to. No matter what the circumstances. While there are no weapons out there that have 100% reliability and have NEVER missed; I still but many of the AK platform rifles in the "Very High Quality" category.

 

[Boba Fett]

I am not dissing DI ARs. If you are going to spend the time and money to get a new AR, make it a piston AR.

I wouldn't do this at this time. I say at this time because the piston AR is relatively new. It is unstandardized (each company seems to come out with their own ideas and systems) and does not have as much history of use.

This means that the swap and go interchangeability of parts and high availability of parts are not there for the piston guns yet. This also means that the overall cost of ownership for a piston will likely be higher since you will probably have to buy certain parts from the manufacturer if they break/wear out.

Because there is not as much history of use, the potential failure points are not as well documented or even known at this time.


Here is an excellent overview with some good considerations concerning the DI vs Piston AR rifles:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6auXTiqNtEo

Watch the whole video and come to your own opinion with the information provided. nutnfancy is LT Colonel in the Air Force. He provides excellent reviews and tons of info and "what if" and "consider when buying" points. He seems to be unbiased in his reviews and presents both sides fairly.


Now, before the shouting starts, I'm not against Piston AR rifles. I think they may be a great improvement to the AR platform. However they are not completely without issues. For example, the area where the gas exits the piston system gets very dirty and very very hot...that would be up near your front sight and rail equipment like a flashlight and such. Is that better than the chamber getting hot and fowled? Not sure, but as I said the Piston AR hasn't been around long enough for us to really make that call.


As to the OP, you'll have to make the call on whether you want a rifle that has higher / more quality control (e.g. more mag particle tests done). Colt is supposed to be very good in that area, but you pay the price for it. I have a Rock River Arms rifle and am very very happy with it. Purchased it at a gun show for $800 and it has functioned flawlessly and accurately. Many of the other brands mentioned are also going to be very good.

One of the advantages of the AR platform is the ability to interchange and replace parts. You can spend as much or a little as you want on the AR and the parts and accessories depending on the quality you're comfortable with. This is again one of the main reasons I'm staying away from the piston AR types for the time being. I like the options, availability, and price choices with my DI AR.

 

[kwelz]

So, are you saying that ONLY AR platform rifles are "Quality" weapons?

Not at all. My fault for not reading all the threads close enough. A lot of people were suggesting various AR brands and I should have been more specific saying I was suggesting those. There are a number of good AKs out there, although I am not as familiar with those since I am just recently really considering getting into the AK market.

 

[Fremmer]

The OP stated that he wants a rifle that can switch from irons to optics. That suggests an AR platform.

I don't have near as much experience with these rifles as others do, but I'll offer a couple of observations:

1. Get an AR with a removeable carry handle. It is worth the extra $75.00 or so. That way you can take it to the range on the day you get it, and shoot it with the irons. Later, you can save some cash and mount an optic on it, simply by removing that carry handle.

2. As a beginner, I'd prefer to buy a gun that is allready put together. I know that you can save money by buying separate upper and lower, but it is nice to see the complete gun before you buy.

3. The Doublestars look like fine guns. I've never used one. The reviews on them seem pretty favorable, though. And you can't beat the price on Buds for one.

4. That said, if you have the cash, buy the Colt. Because they seem to have really good quality control. I don't read much about Colts failing at training schools where hundreds of rounds are fired in a short period of time.

I don't have much cash (heck, I don't have any right now!). If I were buying one, I'd probably get the Doublestar and 500 rounds of ammo for it. Take it to the range and shoot the heck out of it. Have some fun. Then add your optic or other accessories later.

Any helpful suggestions on what barrel length, etc. He should get? Anyone know of a good deal right now that you could point him to?

 

[Tirod]

Since the OP asked about the AR, ok.

The major malfunction in DOD is a command culture that says "clean the AR to boot camp inspection standards." The Ordnance Department says, "LUBE the AR to keep it running." Most three gun contenders, carbine instructors, and experienced real world users LUBE the AR. They don't scrape carbon off the bolt tail, jack with scraping the gas tube, etc. Just lube it.

The second myth I'd like to blow up is the use of an AK for any tactical purpose. For what the OP might like to do, it's great. Shoot it on the rare weekend, and try to keep it from rusting in the closet. Again, LUBE it. No weapon stays rust free sitting for months dry - except in a military climate and humidity controlled arms room. Yes, they have dehumidifiers, and yes, they are sealed.

The AK is what it is, and is NOT the choice for tactical use, civilian or military - when they get to research what's best. There is no safety readily available to operate one handed - required for police and tac team use. Weapons in a public area will be safed, weapons used by the military under the Rules of Engagement may be required to be safed, and military weapons will be safed when brought into a green zone. Users are constantly required to operate a safety because the situation changes by location and time.

AK's don't have bolt hold backs, you will load a magazine against a closed bolt, and then charge it against the pressure of the magazine spring. An AR loads from the open bolt, has a left hand bolt release, and is in operation twice as fast. IT WILL STILL HAVE THE SAFETY ON IF NECESSARY. The AK will NOT, and a negligent discharge is an immediate possiblity.

On the range, an AK with the typical controlled circumstances is a nice fun carbine. On the street or in home defense, not so much.

The OP asked about the AR's available, not the AK. CMMG has bargain bin AR's available for $599 to your FFL. I handled three last week at a gun show, there were differences in the furniture, but all were good clean and guaranteed operating M4 style carbines. I saw no visible defects - most buyers report they can't. Give them a look over.

 

[nalioth]

The OP stated that he wants a rifle that can switch from irons to optics. That suggests an AR platform.

This doesn't exclude the Kalashnikov platform.

 

[Boba Fett]

This doesn't exclude the Kalashnikov platform.

If you want accuracy, I'd say it tends to.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0


And again, nutnfancy offers a good look at both:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN-T_zeTdTM

Nutnfancy tackling the often controversial issue of the AK-47 versus AR-15 rifle systems. The bottom line is, a quality example of either gun can serve your law enforcement, military, and "civilian sheepdog" requirements admirably. However many factors and considerations should come into play when selecting your choice. When properly maintained and lubricated, the AR-15 is very reliable contrary to many internet, forum, and magazine myths.

However it does not rise to the absolute, carefree ruggedness and reliability of the AK design. Whether packed in mud, neglected for cleaning, or just plain thrashed upon, the AK shrugs it all off and continues to shuck rounds with pleasing and life-saving regularity. It is better than the AR-15 system in that regard. It also features a lightning quick and easy fieldstrip. However the AK design has many flaws which include: poorer ergonomics (like its munchkin length of pull), shorter sight radius and inferior sights, heavier magazines and ammunition, difficulty in mounting optics (less variety in application too), slower operational controls, and more recoil.

But many accept these shortcomings to gain the increase in stopping power of the larger .30 caliber round. As shown in the video, this 7.62x39mm round pretty much dies after 300 yards but within its range, it hits hard and defeats obstacles much better than the smaller 5.56x45mm offering. However the AR-15 can easily be had in either a 6.5 SPC or Grendel chambering which nullifies this advantage (and the AK can be had in the 5.45x39mm load which has similar ballistics to the 5.56). Both systems enjoy adequate firepower, multitudes of accessory options, good service record (AK has better reliability record however), and similar value (subject to change). I respect the reliability, simplicity, ruggedness, and shooting fun of the AK design.

For a "mud gun," it still reigns supreme. However in terms of ergonomics, its amazing versatility, the lighter weight of mags and ammo, superior accuracy, and the longer range capabilities (especially with 77 gr loads), the AR-15 is a more capable weapons system.

 

[nalioth]

Boba Fett, the context was "easily switches from optics to irons".

Nothing in that sentence has anything to do with accuracy.

We all know the AK can't keep up with the AR at longer ranges.

 

[smoothdraw]

There's a lot to learn with AR-15. There are so many variation, so many product offerings, so much technology. You really need to dig deep to understand what your intended use for your rifle. What is your priority. What is your budget. And prepare yourself already that once you get into the AR-15 game, you will not going to only have 1 rifle.

AK is also a very good gun. It is the number 1 assault rifle in our history. It is not something you'll want in precision shooting or 3 gun competition but for everything else it is hard to beat.