lower tier ar15s

[halfded]

Throughout my perusing here and other sites, I've seen a lot of talk about the ar15 "tier system" of quality and which brands are the "it" brands to have for duty, carbine courses, etc.

In particular, I hear about whether or not a rifle will stand up to a carbine course. I've never taken a carbine course, but have seen some videos and have the basic idea of what goes on there.

I guess what I'm looking to find out is this:

What part of carbine courses is so rough on the rifle?

What would happen if I took my Del-ton kit rifle to one of these courses?

My rifle is just a fun rifle until it has to be otherwise (however unlikely that may be), should I even bother with these upgrades? If so, which ones?

BTW, I have seen "THE CHART" and understand what distinguishes a "upper tier" rifle from a "lower tier" rifle.

 

[tju1973]

My opinion is that a good BCG with properly staked gas key is pretty important..and an upper that is "in spec" should be fine. I have seen Olys--heck even Vulcans run a course fine, and also I have seen Colt's bite the dust. Proper maintenance, lube, and knowing your weapon usually trump out a "superior" make in the end..Just my opinion...

 

[Tirod]

The chart has nothing to do with a tier system. It basically compares M4's to the Technical Data Package put together by Colt as their response to the military specifications demanded in the contract. If a carbine has the feature, it gets an X, if not, no X.

Chrome lined barrels are good example to explore. The military requires it, largely because chrome lining the barrel helped it resist throat erosion in full auto fire. A sport or hunting application doesn't need it, millions of rifles have been built without for centuries. Chroming the bore also means the barrel has to be rifled oversized and plated back, which does not lead to a high precision barrel. Military specs also address that, about 2MOA is all that is required.

So, a hammerforged barrel that has been nitrided is in no way milspec - but users are experiencing the real life results that they can be more accurate and more resistant to full auto fire than chromed. Put that carbine on the chart, it looks like a poorly made gun if the casual observer doesn't understand what the feature is and where it ranks relative to others. Milspec is a nice baseline, but it is by no means the top tier technique.

If someone is buying carbine, choosing one with the largest number of milspec check offs would result in one more likely to complete an intensive course of fire - given good magazines and good ammo. Mags and ammo are the two major causes of stoppages and will take down a carbine regardless of how well it was built.

Because life marches on, continuing technical advances will obsolete some chart features, just as those features obsoleted previous ones. Understand what they are there for, then make an informed decision whether you need it.

I'm building an AR, and any chart feature I don't have will either be a result of not needing it, or moving to a more advanced part. I don't need someone else's approval of what constitutes top tier, it's a game of justification for spending money and propping up their ego all too often.

 

[GIJOEL]

In my experience the AR-15/M-16 no matter how ugly, no matter how old and crusty, when properly maintained and put togather correctly are VERY reliable. In the army most of the problems I have seen are caused by bad maintinance, or m-4 buffer spring in m-16 or visa versa. The BGC are rarely to blame (in the army) but a cheap one with a poorly secured gas key would certainly be a problem, however, I have seen quite a few rifles with uppers that are worn enough to alow the BCG to be inserted with the bolt installed 180 degrees the wrong way.

 

[longdayjake]

Please ignore the chart when it comes to choosing a rifle for purchases. There are rifles out there that are much better than colt because they offer things that colt does not. Tirod explained it pretty well. I am working on a different chart that shows how many options the various makers offer rather than comparing one maker to the rest. It may be worth checking out just to see how many different options are out there that "the chart" ignores.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tVfRTTpKqw-w_5jVuw-45Kg&output=html

 

[halfded]

So it's usually the sustained, rapid fire that can be a parts killer?

 

[longdayjake]

So it's usually the sustained, rapid fire that can be a parts killer?

Well no, it is usually a lube burner. Once all your lube is gone you can run into issues. As long as your gas keys are staked well you should be just fine if you keep your gun lubed well. Good mags are important as bad ones can really cause some reliability issues.

 

[halfded]

Ohhh.. I see

Heat=loss of lube=friction=broke stuff.

Gotcha. Don't think I"ll have any problems there. My rifle spits oil like a rabid llama the first couple shots.

 

[Quentin]

...If someone is buying carbine, choosing one with the largest number of milspec check offs would result in one more likely to complete an intensive course of fire - given good magazines and good ammo. Mags and ammo are the two major causes of stoppages and will take down a carbine regardless of how well it was built.

Because life marches on, continuing technical advances will obsolete some chart features, just as those features obsoleted previous ones. Understand what they are there for, then make an informed decision whether you need it.

I'm building an AR, and any chart feature I don't have will either be a result of not needing it, or moving to a more advanced part. I don't need someone else's approval of what constitutes top tier, it's a game of justification for spending money and propping up their ego all too often.

Well said Tirod, I couldn't agree more. No doubt there are many midlength ARs and piston ARs that perform well when they have to - but you won't find them on the M4 Chart. That doesn't mean the chart is obsolete, there's plenty to learn from it and when I built my AR, using it gave me a better rifle. We all should be on top of our game when buying or building an AR and do it well. Then it doesn't matter what others think.

Getting back to "lower tier", I do think it's smart to avoid going too cheap. Have a clear plan for your rifle and buy/build using acceptable components. You want the rifle to be reliable and have a long life.

 

[DMK]

What part of carbine courses is so rough on the rifle?

There's no evil spell on a carbine course that kills rifles. It is the fact that you are shooting 1-2k in a matter of a few days, with few breaks. You can replicate this heavy use on a static range just as easily.

Like any machine, heat is likely the #1 killer, either directly or indirectly. Heat changes the clearances of parts and affects parts fit (parts that should fit tightly may loosen, parts that should be loose may fit tighter). Heat evaporates lube and what doesn't evaporate, may break down so that it is less effective. The lack of lube will cause additional friction, which will contribute to even higher temperatures, as well as galling, where parts try to weld themselves together, then tear apart again. Extreme heat can also weaken parts.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

BTW, I have seen "THE CHART" and understand what distinguishes a "upper tier" rifle from a "lower tier" rifle.

The chart has nothing to do with a tier system. It basically compares M4's to the Technical Data Package put together by Colt as their response to the military specifications demanded in the contract. If a carbine has the feature, it gets an X, if not, no X.

Right, the chart ONLY pertains to M4 and not to any other variant of AR15. So if you aren't looking for an M4(forgery), then the chart is meaningless. Just because a company puts certain components on their M4 does not mean that they put those same components on all of their AR15s.

Even for the M4s, the chart has issues, not because it is inaccurate, but because manufacturers are apt to use different components from time to time. In comparing M4s in an AR15 armorer's course to the chart, we found several discrepancies, but as noted, not because the chart was wrong. The same make of 2 M4s in the class differed from one another in at least a couple of features and both differed slightly from the chart.

 

[RP88]

What part of carbine courses is so rough on the rifle?

usually it's the whole "1500 rounds within 24 hours" thing that is rough on them. It's rough on any gun, really.

A proper BCG, chrome-lined bore, and staked extension are true musts. Packing an extra BCG is also smart just in case.

I've heard that S&W ARs have been surviving carbine courses just fine.

And yes, don't go by the chart with the faith that it is infallible. The chart changes constantly not only because manufacturers update or degrade their quality, but also because several parts of the chart itself along with various conspiracy theories and conflicting experiences (remember: Rob_s compiles data that he pulls a lot from OTHER people's guns and word-of-mouth at times, along with what manufacturers are willing to disclose to him) are still subject to considerable debate.

to name a few:
-CMMG's gas keys and barrel steel
-RRA's gas keys and stake jobs
-DPMS's chamber specs
-Noveske bolts: which one now comes standard?

There are probably more.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

It really just depends. I have seen "lower tier" AR15's run through carbine courses just fine and I have seen Colts choke on every other round. There is no sure thing. Almost just as important as having a good brand it seems is good maintenance and keeping the gun well oiled.

 

[Zerodefect]

There is just something wrong with expecting a rifle like the AR to cost less than the average pistol.

No need to break the bank but a quality Ar is going to cost somthing. The cheaper ones really cut corners. "The chart" and "milspec" were obsolete long ago. AR's that can't go way above and beyond old milspec have no right in my safe or defending my life, in my opinion.

I don't get why 9 out of 10 AR topics are " How to build one cheap and junky?" instead of "how to build an Ar right?".

 

[halfded]

There is just something wrong with expecting a rifle like the AR to cost less than the average pistol.

I'm not expecting it to cost less than an average (whatever your definition may be) pistol. But I'm also not going to spend 2k on a rifle either. I don't live anywhere near a war zone, my rifle is a range toy unless the "zombies" come.

The cheaper ones really cut corners.

Where? And to what effect? That's the question posed here. Not how to build a "cheap" rifle. I've already done that! It runs great!

I don't get why 9 out of 10 AR topics are " How to build one cheap and junky?" instead of "how to build an Ar right?".

I don't think cheap and junky necessarily go together. Building an ar right to me means it functions properly to the user's intention. If I can build a bottom of the barrel rifle for $500 from scrap parts and it shoots what I ask of it at the range, I've built it "right".

Not everyone has a lot of money to drop on a rifle (or anything else) all at once. Some just don't want to. I could have gotten an Aimpoint but I don't need one so I got a knockoff. Works just as good for what I need it to do and cost about 1/5th the price.

If you use your rifle for duty or self defense then by all means I recommend the best money can buy. But if you're a regular guy that wants to have fun at the range and a little piece of mind for the end of days, I think an entry level rifle fits the bill perfectly.

But then again I carry a Taurus every day.

 

[RP88]

Where? And to what effect?

buying and using surplus or used, scrapped parts from other makers
buying, refurbishing, and using discounted rejected and maybe out-of-spec parts (i.e. the Century method)
lack of proof-testing on important parts
lack of proper staking of high-risk parts like the end plate and gas key
lower-grade materials to make parts out of, or lower-grade parts in general
bulk-buying lowest-common-denominator parts
finishing/coating
steel springs? Hah! These silicate blend springs can hold up.
shot-wadded buffers
improper heat-treating
welding

there is a whole topic about it. It was pretty eye-opening.

 

[Jaybird78]

Do you NEED to buy a Colt? NO But you can if you want.

The best reasoning I can come up with is the chart shows "mil-spec" features. Some are important and some are not to the end user. Mil-spec means it meets a MINIMUM STANDARD. This may or may not be important to you.

TRY your best to use QUALITY components, QUALITY costs $$$. You need to define your requirements first. Do you want a SHTF carbine or a one-hole match grade shooter. Your final decision will dictate what brand parts/rifle you should buy.

FWIW I own a Armalite HBAR 20" and a BCM Gov 16" middy. Have fun picking out your bang stick.

 

[taliv]

usually it's the whole "1500 rounds within 24 hours" thing that is rough on them. It's rough on any gun, really.

not really. most of the classes I go to spend about 1200 rnds in 3 full days, with plenty of breaks for hydrating and reloading magazines.

3 days is 24 hrs. 1200 / 24 = 50. So... that's really an average of 50 rounds per hour.

That's less than 1 round per minute.


and yet... many of the guns that go down, do so on the first day.

I'm trying to remember, but I think the fastest I've fired in a class has been on the "non-standard response" drill, which involves 7 rnds as fast as you can pull the trigger. Yeah, 7. woohoo. So, a second and a half of firing... 4 or 5 times, with a minute break in between.

running guns 'hard' isn't really THAT hard. face it. some of the cheap guns (and magazines) are just crap.

I'm confident of this because the remedial action that gets the guns running again often involves
> replacing crappy extractors and extractor springs
> putting the carrier key back on
> realigning the gas block after it comes loose
> reaming out the chamber because of shoddy work
> replacing crappy magazines

those problems ALL exist because of it's cheaper to manufacture crap than to do it right

 

[kwelz]

Taliv hit the nail on the head. Companies find it is easier to produce cheap **** and then replace it when (not if) it breaks. You would be shocked a the number of ARs I have seen Damaged in shipping. And every one of them is from one of the often defended "budget" companies. Not from companies to the left on the chart.

Let me reiterate here. These companies produce ARs that are damaged in the normal process of riding in a padded box from point A to point B. And I am supposed to rely on them to possibly save my life? No. Not gonna happen!.

If there was some huge price difference I could understand why people would argue about this. But when you can get a BCM for about the same money as a DPMS or RRA I just don't get it.

 

[RP88]

you can build/assemble one, but you can't buy a complete one for under a four-digit numbers. I haven't even seen a complete BCM gun with warranty and all.

I pretty much agree with buying quality. I did the best I could when BCM and everyone else was out of stock on everything and ended up doing so pretty well.

You would be shocked a the number of ARs I have seen Damaged in shipping. And every one of them is from one of the often defended "budget" companies. Not from companies to the left on the chart.

Who was it?

Anyway, the only point I'm making is that most of the chart does make a good gun. With a swap of a BCG or maybe a proper extension staking they can be made even better. Just because something like, say, a Charles Daly or S&W or Sabre doesn't make a full milspec gun does not mean that they are crap. Would I want a milspec gun for a class or life-or-death role? Yes. But can something else that at least is proofed in the proper and most crucial areas work and last just as long? Of course. But would something with a K-Mart BCG, unstaked extension, out-of-spec chamber, crap-molded stock, etc. be something that I'd depend on? Nope.

 

[longdayjake]

Taliv,

I have personally seen the gas block moving on rifles. Usually that isn't a component issue but rather an assembly issue. All the loose ones I have seen were tightened down and went back into action. Do you experience bad gas blocks often?

Second, how often do you need to put gas keys back on? I ask because thats one that I still haven't come into contact with. I figured that would be something that people would have figured out to check on before they started any kind of course.

Changing topics, today I went out with 3 other guys and there were 4 different brands of AR's. We had a Ruger, DPMS, Bushmaster, and my RRA. We shot about 400 rounds through each of them but one that became inoperable. Can you guess which one and why?

It was the RUGER. Why? Wolf ammo. Extractor tore off the rim and nobody had a rod to push out the casing. The ruger was easily $500 more than any of the other rifles but using cheap ammo ended my friend's day. One guy was having feeding issues until I lent him one of my mags. Lesson? Your rifle can cost you $2000-$3000 but it can be worthless as a weapon if you don't use quality ammo and mags.

 

[kwelz]

The worst I saw busted up in that way were DPMS. Broken stocks, castle nut coming loose or never tightened in the first place, even had one with a broken tab forearm. Cheap materials makes for a toy, not a weapon. I also had some RRA and BM with issue. Want to know which two companies I sold that didn't have problems? LMT and Colt. I am not saying they are perfect but I am saying that I never had a single one come back and I can't say the same for the other companies.


Grant had complete BCM ARs for a while, not sure if they are still available, and it is possible to get a complete AR for under 1K. S&W sells a couple models in that range, and while not perfect, they are much better than your normal RRA, BM, or DPMS. Heck Colts have been hovering around 1100 - 1200! But I feel BCM and DD are better deals right now for the same quality of weapon.

Finally I fail to see the significance of 400 rounds through a gun. For most serious shooters that is the start to a day at the range. Then again if that is all you are doing then you are probably fine with any of the brands you mentioned. If you ever think you will need this gun to save your life though, you need to look at a better gun and some training.

 

[longdayjake]

Finally I fail to see the significance of 400 rounds through a gun. For most serious shooters that is the start to a day at the range.

I guess "serious shooter" holds different meanings for different people. The only reason I put my gun through a whole 400 rounds was because I was trying to keep up with the guys that I came with. For me 200 rounds can last me an entire day depending on what type of shooting I am doing. There isn't a person that knows me that doesn't think that I am a "serious shooter." Pulling the trigger as fast as you can at a target 25 yards away does not make one a "serious shooter." What makes someone a "serious shooter?"

not really. most of the classes I go to spend about 1200 rnds in 3 full days, with plenty of breaks for hydrating and reloading magazines.

3 days is 24 hrs. 1200 / 24 = 50. So... that's really an average of 50 rounds per hour.

That's less than 1 round per minute.

Try telling Taliv he isn't a serious shooter because he only shoots 400 rounds a day.

 

[taliv]

Usually that isn't a component issue but rather an assembly issue. All the loose ones I have seen were tightened down and went back into action. Do you experience bad gas blocks often?

i don't claim to be any sort of expert. i attend classes (1 or 2 per year if i'm lucky). I don't run them.

still, i have witnessed a couple in person, and there have been a couple posts here in the past few months involving bad gas blocks, iirc. I also think it's a component issue, since some mfgs try to put a giant block of aluminum out there instead of a little bit of steel. But yeah, when they come off in the first 100 rnds, it's usually an assembly issue.

 

[kwelz]

Taliv is a serious shooter. He has attended a number of classes. He didn't shoot 400 rounds per day. He shoot 400 Rounds per day multiple days in a row, and I bet almost none of it was done while standing behind a bench.

And for the record, someone dumping rounds downrange is to me the opposite of a serious shooter. Multiple targets, fast switching, moving while shooting, etc, etc. This is what I am referring to mainly.