Considering an AR-15, now ,,,,?

[30 cal slob]

i'll pass on what i heard first hand while training.

Get a Colt.

that is all, carry on.

 

[surjimmy]

I will be the first to tell you, I'm no expert(NOT EVEN CLOSE) and by reading you guys posts you know far more then me. I know every time I shoot my RR, and other people are shooting there AR's. They want to see mine and shoot it, afterwards they all say they wish they had one. When people are talking about AR's and ask me if I have one and what is it, when I say RR they reply you have the CADILLAC. Mine is the Entry Tactical M4, it will shoot 1in groups(3 shots) at 100 yards off a bench rest resting on my sleeping bag.

 

[sarduy]

CMMG full-size

 

[ftierson]

Originally posted by rob_s
To the OP:

The Chart is a good jumping off point. Yes, there are some minor errors in it, as there always will be with those makers that do not hold to any standard as they change vendors and features(both for the better and worse).

However, even if Olympic Arms all of a sudden started selling a chrome-lined barrel, it still wouldn't much matter as to the overall quality of the firearm.

In addition, The Chart is about the models referenced which are all "M4-pattern". If you're varmint hunting, or shooting NRA Hipower, or something to that effect then it's likely that none of the rifles listed will serve you very well.

It is impossible for anyone to suggest a rifle to you without first knowing what it is you want to do with it. Failing to do so negates the advice given and calls into question the motivations of the giver. Most people will have experience such that their sample size = 1, yet will feel confident in recommending their pet brand based on this insignificant sample size.

So, what do you want to do with it? Matches? Classes? Plinking? Hunting varmints? Hunting something bigger? Home defense? LE patrol? Contracting in Iraq? The list goes on and on.

Tell us more about your wants/needs and we can better help steer you towards what may work best for you. And no, "general purpose" is not an answer.

Well said...

I can't agree more...

Forrest

 

[Make It In Mass]

From The People's Republic Of Massachusetts

For an off-the-shelf AR-15, you can't go wrong with a S&W M&P 15FT, or a 15T if you live in a non-ban state. Great fit and finish, reliable and accurate. With the Eotech 512 sight, it is like having a radar guidance system, which is great if you wear glasses. Shoots all types of ammo, brass and steel cased. This rifle makes my shooting ability better than it actually is.

 

[Michael_C]

The S and W 15FT or 15T,,,are they a 'true' AR-15,,,,,mil-spec designed ?

That is ONE BAD lookin' machine,,,

thanks for the visual.

Michael

 

[Rifleman 173]

I have 1 Superior Arms M-4, 1 Stagg AR-15 and 2 Bushmasters. All of them are golden as far as I am concerned. Pick a manufacturer that you like, buy one and go practice with it. You simply can't lose out with most of the present day M-4/AR-15 makers that are out there.

 

[Tacbandit]

Hey, Michael C....I'll throw another one in the mix...New on the scene, but getting great reviews, and being used at top notch shooting schools...
Smith & Wesson M&P...You just missed out on $100, and $50 rebates...
Awesome gun, and it will definitely run with all of the above.

 

[Mainsail]

Mine is a CMMG upper on a RRA lower. 16" barrel, 1 in 7 twist, chrome lined barrel, RRA two stage match trigger, and a steak knife.

 

[firstg19]

I just bought a new Bushmaster m4/a3 patrolman rifle for around 1k last wednesday and after 100 rounds at the range this weekend, I am in love. As far as that chart goes, it has to be old or either not current for every model, b/c there are several things that it says my bushy does not have, that it does have. But I guess thats why they tell you to believe only half of what you read on the internet.

 

[rob_s]

Please enlighten us as to the features that your Bushmaster has that are not on The Chart. Post pictures too. And tell us what model BM you bought.

 

[firstg19]

well i cant get my picture to turn out without probably having to take the barrel off, but my feedramps look exactly like the m4-good picture on: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=306487

 

[rob_s]

That's it? What happened to "several"?

FWIW there's a newer version of the chart than what was posted here. For whatever reason BM calls them "M2" feedramps and they are listed on the new chart.

FWIW, all you need to do to get good feedramp pictures is pop out the BCG and turn the upper upside down.
(Charles Daly D-M4LE)

 

[Bartkowski]

I have only seen 3 LMT's for sale, and two of them were a little under $1000 whereas the colt's next to them were $1200-$1400. I ended up with an LMT and it has been a great gun, there customer service is pretty good too.

 

[Sagetown]

I've been looking also. The best for my money would probably be the Bushmaster, but I'd have to spend a little more, and get the Stag M4. It is more appealing to me.

 

[ugaarguy]

Sagetown if someone is charging you more for a Stag than a comparable Bushmaster they're ripping you off. Stag cost less (dealer cost) than Bushmaster, and a quick inspection shows the corners they cut. Stag apparently doesn't know how to machine an M4 feed ramp into the upper (not a problem if they weren't using M4 bbl extensions, but they are), doesn't know how to stake a gas key on a BCG, and doesn't know how to stake a buffer tube castle nut. Charles Daly, S&W, and Bushmaster ARs in the same or slightly higher price range are properly built. The Daly D4-LE (a little more money again) we had at the shop was an incredible value for the features & build quality.

 

[Sagetown]

ugaarguy: Quote: "The Daly D4-LE (a little more money again) we had at the shop was an incredible value for the features & build quality."

Thanks for the inside scoop. The Stag prices I've seen were on the WEB. See lots of Bushmasters at the gun shows. But as for the Daly guns, they're practically extinct around here. Dealer's seem to shun them for some reason. I'll have to check out the Daly D4-LE on their 'site'.

Here's what I like from the CD AR's

 

[blacksmithsc]

Man, I love my Stag Model 4. I got it on gunbroker.com for $805. Couldn't be happier and never had a problem.

 

[Cohibra45]

Michael C,

Please come back on and tell us what you need out of the rifle...Like Rob S said, you can't be helped if no one knows what your needs are for buying an AR!!!

 

[itgoesboom]

I don't know why people jump on Rob_S for the chart. Someone finally comes along, and shows what manufacturers are doing what, making research into what Carbine to purchase very eas, and people get pissy because their Carbines didn't do well.

I recently decided to upgrade my AR-15, which has now turned into purchasing an entirely new rifle.

I looked at the chart, I read about the different aspects, and why they are important. I asked questions, and got advice from those in the know, including Rob_S.

In the end, I purchased a LMT lower, a BCM 16" Midlength upper, and a LaRue BUIS.

I wanted a high-end carbine that would be able to withstand hard use, and something that would be suitable for home defense. For that, the chart was very valuable.

My next will likely be a varmint/target rifle. For that, many of the aspects of the chart won't be as critical, but some will.

It is interesting how emotional people get when their firearm of choice isn't considered top tier.

 

[basicblur]

I don't know why people jump on Rob_S for the chart.

I don't recall anybody "jumping" on him for his chart. Most posts I've read “jumping” on him probably think as I (yeah, that is a bit scary) and simply question the validity of selecting a weapon based solely on the chart. I don’t think anybody doesn’t find it interesting reading
BUT
Iff’n I recall, Rob S got a bit crappy bout the DEA article I posted regarding the tests of 11 ARs, and the eventual selection of RRA (after all but 2 makes had been eliminated). I think his quote was:
“Anyone that has ever spent more than 10 minutes involved in any aspect of LE "trials" (whether fed, state, or local) will quickly dismiss the use of any such trials in marketing by the alleged "winner" of same.”

Which could lead one to ask, who is jumping on whom here?
AND
Who is (your quote) “getting pissy because their Carbines didn’t do well”? (I know you meant in the chart, but I mean in the DEA tests).

Which do you think gives you a more realistic view of quality/durability of a weapon-the chart or something like the guns were subjected to in the DEA tests? (And I assume Colt was subjected to something similar by the military).

Fer myself, while the chart makes for interesting reading, I’d much rather read about filling ‘em with sand,, dunking ‘em in water, interchangeability of parts between guns, slinging ‘em about 15 feet onto concrete (on both sides), dropping ‘em on the barrel, butt, both sides, sights, etc without having ‘em malfunction-not that I plan to do any of that to my guns!

Hey, makes no difference to me-I didn’t buy my ARs based on the chart or DEA tests. I bought my RRA before the DEA article came out and I assume before the chart.
It’ just that I tend to lean towards real-world results as opposed to the theoretical quality of a gun based solely on a chart.

 

[rob_s]

I find it curious that you use the DEA test to justify your purchase, then say you bought your gun prior to the DEA test.

So, what was it that caused you to buy your RRA? What sort of research did you do? What sort of quantitative testing did you do?

and, since you keep beating the same tired drum (even though it evidently had nothing to do with your purchse), what do you really know about the DEA test? What do you know about the DEA RFP that preceded the test? What do you know about the people that conducted the tests? Do you even know if the model they tested is the same as yours? Do you know what other brands it was tested against?



There is no getting pissy. I don't have to defend the chart because the chart defends itself. It's not some thing that I created that I'm vested in, it's a collection of facts that are true to the best of my knowledge, and which are easy to get corrected if they are wrong.

 

[FlyinBryan]

delete

 

[ugaarguy]

as for the Daly guns, they're practically extinct around here. Dealer's seem to shun them for some reason.

Charles Daly / KBI had a horrible reputation with dealers because they imported some less than high quality guns in the 80s and 90s and had a bad customer service reputation until recently. The name alone scared my boss.

I told him the background: Michael Kassnar, president of Daly / KBI, got on the gun boards and started personally fixing the CS issues. Mr. Kassnar then went to ar15.com and m4carbine.net to ask the hardcore black rifle folks how to build an AR-15 right when he decided that CD would go into that market. Initial reports from m4carbine.net and ar15.com were that Mr. Kassnar had indeed delivered a top notch build quality rifle.

My boss decided to take an educated risk and order a couple CDD-15s. The build quality was there and the rifles sold pretty quickly. My got our second order of CDD-15 M4 style carbines in tonight. Again the build quality was great. Two of the rifles were in the early style packaging, which is a Doskocil hard case inside a cardboard sleeve. The early packaging had a few issues with rifles sliding and bunching up the padding inside the hardcase (we had a magazine floor plate fall victim to a muzzle strike on the first order - magazine was replaced in a couple days when they overnighted us a new one). Rifles sliding in transit in those basic plastic hard cases is pretty common, so it's not a CD thing only. Anyway, the third rifle that came in tonight was in the new cardboard carton package that looks to be pretty well thought out.

Your dealer doesn't have to order direct from CD either. Mr. Kassnar is a member here at THR - user name Charles Daly. Send him a PM and he can tell you all the distributors that carry his ARs.

I can't directly comment on the Daly DR-15 A2 style because M4 style ARs are what we've been ordering since they sell best for us. Bushmaster still builds a good A2 style rifle, as does Rock River. If the DR-15 is as nice as the DM4 rifles I've seen it'll be at least equal to RRA and BM in quality. Pricing should also be very competitive.

The big thing is to learn what purpose the various features of AR-15s actually serve. Then decide which ones are important to you and use "the chart", forums, and manufacturers web sites to see which models from which brands have the features you want.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

One thing to realize is that the "chart" doesn't even apply to many people. It doesn't tell the whole story. It's only real purpose is to tell which weapon is closest to the M4 used by the US military.

The M4 used by the military is a fine weapon, and although it is the standard to many, it is not the standard to all. Some of these standards are not reached by many of the manufacturers out there, others are exceeded by some.

Various manufacturers listed on the chart may rank lower in terms of being closer to "milspec", but may in fact exceed milspec in other areas (e.g. LMT barrels are more accurate than Colt barrels, but the chart doesn't make any mention of that). In many other cases, what is "milspec" is either worthless (e.g. tapered FSB pins, dual handguards, parkerizing under FSB, etc..) and/or personal preference (e.g. 1/7 twist rate, rear sight, etc...) and/or controversial (e.g. HPT, 4150 steel, M4 feedramps, buffer, buffer tube, etc...) as to how valuable it truly is.

Some of the features listed are important though, there is no doubt.

I'm not sure I have ever seen it be 100% correct and it has been circulating the web for some time now, although it is getting more correct lately. It is in need of constant updating, so that may play a part in why it is never 100% correct. The only problem is that you don't know if you are seeing the latest updated version or not.

Other things to realize is that if you have a 100% reliable carbine that ranks low on the chart, you obviously have a good one. No need fixin' what ain't broke. Although rare, I have seen Olympics outperform Colts in carbine courses. It happens.

Also, AR15's can be upgraded and brought up to the standard in most areas just by doing a little work of your own. Building your own AR15's also can make up the differences if you know what you are doing and or care to take the time and energy to do it. I don't believe I can buy a rifle off the shelf with as much QC inspection as I would give it.

For complete rifles, I rank Colt high on the quality list, but they are not first in my book. I would rank Noveske (1st) and LMT (close second) above them, personally. Even a Stag lower/LMT upper Hybrid can exceed (or at least match) Colt quality, and do it for less $$. That is my personal opinion based on the facts I know and my personal preferences though.

I've used parts from them all in my builds and other's builds.

YMMV.