Looking to get into AR's

Which AR?

  • Colt 6920/6940

    Votes: 31 27.4%

  • S&W M&P 15

    Votes: 20 17.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 35 31.0%

  • Custom Build

    Votes: 27 23.9%
  • Total voters
    113
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
wow! thats a hechuva deal right there!

how much did those get up to during the big craze a few years back?
 
I've sold dozens myself. Not a single DPMS has come back.
Click to expand...

And I would sell dozens to a single customer in a single day (Wholesale) And almost even order I fulfilled had calls back to me to complain.

wow! thats a hechuva deal right there!

how much did those get up to during the big craze a few years back?
Click to expand...

Yeah Hard to beat, especially since you can customize it at order. And Grant is a good guy to deal with.

I know my local shop was selling 6920s at $1699 until very recently.
 
On the other end of the spectrum are the Lothar Walther barrels that Noveske (generally regarded as one of the absolute best ARs made) uses. These are *gasp* NOT mil-spec.
Click to expand...
They're actually Noveske bbls. made with his steel, on his tooling, and on his time at Pac-Nor http://www.defensereview.com/novesk...ecce-carbine-john-noveske-interview-part-one/. They actually exceed mil spec, and that's the whole point. Mil Spec is the minimum requirement to ensure that a rifle made by the lowest bidder will function reliably under combat conditions. Even a match rifle still needs to be assembled properly to run reliably. That's kind of the whole point: There are properly assembled rifles in just about every price point.
 
ugaarguy said:
They're actually Noveske bbls. made with his steel, on his tooling, and on his time at Pac-Nor http://www.defensereview.com/novesk...ecce-carbine-john-noveske-interview-part-one/. They actually exceed mil spec, and that's the whole point. Mil Spec is the minimum requirement to ensure that a rifle made by the lowest bidder will function reliably under combat conditions. Even a match rifle still needs to be assembled properly to run reliably. That's kind of the whole point: There are properly assembled rifles in just about every price point.
Click to expand...

Pac-Nor. I knew it was one of the premium barrel makers. Still, no such thing really as exceeding mil-spec. It's either spec or it isn't. They are better than mil-spec, but still not mil-spec. Which is my point.

What irks me about threads like this is going with a lower cost option (compared to "mil-spec") is always referred to as "cutting corners" even when that option has no effect on the function or reliability of the rifle. "Cutting corners" implies that the design is compromised by shoddy material or workmanship. Something can be less expensive than mil-spec and still be nowhere near shoddy, and in some cases the mil-spec has nothing to do with function or reliability.
 
Cutting corners:
-park the barrel before you slap the front sight on
-no M4 ramps, they cost nothing and are helpful, why not?
-chinese extractors made out of pot metal
-weak extractor springs
-nappy chambers, dull barrel reamers/tools
-triggers that wear out or fail (this is an easy one!)
-crooked front sight
-floppy carriers and upper recievers
-forgeting to stake the gas key, or staking it poorly
-weak trigger springs
-weak hammer springs
-hammer that split in half!!!!
(I'll let the bolt ears snapping off slide, the bolt has a tough job to do and even a good bolt can fail eventually)


And so much more.
 
Zerodefect
Member



Join Date: March 28, 2009
Posts: 2,679 Cutting corners:
-park the barrel before you slap the front sight on
-no M4 ramps, they cost nothing and are helpful, why not?
-chinese extractors made out of pot metal
-weak extractor springs
-nappy chambers, dull barrel reamers/tools
-triggers that wear out or fail (this is an easy one!)
-crooked front sight
-floppy carriers and upper recievers
-forgeting to stake the gas key, or staking it poorly
-weak trigger springs
-weak hammer springs
-hammer that split in half!!!!
(I'll let the bolt ears snapping off slide, the bolt has a tough job to do and even a good bolt can fail eventually)


And so much more.
Click to expand...

That sounds like gun show junk more than non-milspec. I agree, some commercial stuff is bad. I personally will only get milspec parts. Milspec is more than just tacticool. Milspec is quality control, materials, fit and finish, etc, etc. IMHO the material specs are more important than any thing else. That gives you most of you strength.
 
havent i recently seen a number of colts, bcm, and other chart toppers with several of those listed by zerodefect?
 
helotaxi said:
...What irks me about threads like this is going with a lower cost option (compared to "mil-spec") is always referred to as "cutting corners" even when that option has no effect on the function or reliability of the rifle...
Click to expand...

You've missed the entire point of what some of us are trying to convey...

There are "lower cost options" that follow the TDP (mil-spec as you say). Why wouldn't you purchase one of these rifles for the same price?
 
First I have heard of it. Care to elaborate?
Click to expand...

well, not counting anything ive seen before the month of august, probably a dozen , give or take a few. heres a few i remember. i will link them when i get home if you want.

one of them is a colt on this board that wont extract right (pretty sure you posted in the thread????)

another one on another board is a ddm4 that was hanging up every other round. latest on this one is that now with premium ammo and lubed like crazy he is getting only 2-3 mis-feeds per magazine (said he guessed he was just spoiled by his, get ready,, bushmaster,,, lol )

another one is a dd upper and barrel with a bcm bcg, that stops almost every round. he was told to try other mags and has tried Magpul, C-products, USGI, and colt mags (among others he said) and it destroys every round that wont feed (almost every one)

i also saw a colt with finish and fit that was awful, looked like someone took a die grinder to it, then park-finished over it and sent it out that way, but that was more than a month ago.

(problems i had with my colt 6700 not withstanding)
 
More pics to cheer this tattered thread up a bit.:D

Colt 6920. I'll be cutting it down to 14.5", adding a PWS 556 flash hider compensator, chopping the front sight off, and adding a 13.2" Larue FF rail soon. (I hope)
DSC02186.jpg


With 18" BCM Mk12 SPR upper and 5-20 50mm Trijicon Green Triangle scope:
DSC02190.jpg
 
Loving that SPR Zero.. How do you like the optic at longer ranges. I use a couple of the 1-4s but am curious as to how they do further out.
 
I like it out to ranges that 5.56 is effective for. 0-600y, no scope is faster. It is exactly like a giant heavy ACOG with a ton more magnification. The recticle is so bright that I can aim the rifle 1x with my eye off the scope and still see the triangle with the wrong eye. Just like an ACOG shooting 1x.

Beyond 800y it starts to suck. Run's out of elevation adjustment and I would ratrher have a crosshair. Perfect for 5.56 SPRs and regular range 6.8SPC shooting and hunting, not for precision target competition. I actually shot three gun with that setup as a joke, but actually did well.

Not for .308, 6mmbr, 6.5mm, or better long range shooting IMO, but perfect for regular combat ranges an SPR sees and hunting. Big ACOG is the best description I got with a narrow range of specialized uses much like the ACOG.
 
ya, they are all compatible now.

the only things that were not compatible between colts and all the others a few years ago were a few pins, but you could get parts and pins in either size. was never a big deal for me (i had the 0.154" small pin colt)

EDIT: i had the large pin colt, i think they were 0.174" vs the 0.154" everyone else uses.
 
That pick above is a 2010 Colt 6920. That's the same lower attached to the BCM upper in the second pick.

Colts are all standard pins now.

The only Colt thing I really don't like, that everyone else likes, is the staked castle nut holding on the buffertube. I'd rather it wasn't staked so I could remove it easier. I've never had the buffer tube fall off before. But I guess someone that isn't into trying different stocks and sling mounts would rather have it staked and worry free.
 
The only Colt thing I really don't like, that everyone else likes, is the staked castle nut holding on the buffertube.
Click to expand...
That's not a Colt thing. That's an M4 TDP thing, and most (if not all) of the top tier makers do it.
I'd rather it wasn't staked so I could remove it easier. I've never had the buffer tube fall off before.
Click to expand...
There's a reason it's in the TDP.
But I guess someone that isn't into trying different stocks and sling mounts would rather have it staked and worry free.
Click to expand...
Break the castle nut loose once, and don't restake it until you settle on something you plan to use long term - but you already figured that out. :D
 
I went the BCM route.

I am looking to get another mid-length upper now from BCM. I'll probably do one of their blem lowers to save a couple bucks and use it as a back up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
First AR
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
kwelz
K
P
  • Locked
Is the LE6940 That much Better than the LE6920?
Replies
15
Views
12K
kwelz
K
H
  • Locked
Commercial or Mil-spec AR?
Replies
9
Views
571
hawkeye10
H
S
  • Locked
Any experience with Daniel Defense ARs?
Replies
5
Views
890
Z-Michigan
Z
R
  • Locked
Looking for first AR
Replies
8
Views
731
az_imuth
az_imuth
Back
Top