Most durable AR 15?

[rcmodel]

Last test results I found had these results:
M4- 882 jams, 1 jam every 68 rounds, again using heavy lubrication. In addition all 10 of the M4 barrels needed to be replaced, and a number of their parts were replaced during the test.
HK416- 233 jams, 1 jam every 257 rounds, 3.77x more reliable than the M4.
SCAR (556)- 226 jams, 1 jam every 265 rounds, 3.85x more reliable than the M4
XM8- 127 jams, I jam every 472 rounds, 6.95x more reliable than the M4.
BSW

I don't know what test that is supposed to be.
But it is total BS.

I have owned a Colt SP1 Carbine since 1972.
And to this day, it has never jammed once every 68 rounds when I was shooting up the floor sweepings I dropped under my reloading bench!!

I could count the number of times it has jammed with military ammo in nearly 50 years on less then one finger. Which finger? Never mind.

I carried Colt M16's in the service in 1969-70.
The one and only time one failed to work was due to a LC-68, 5.56 round with no flash hole in the case.

I'm pretty sure the Colt M-4's today are way more reliable then the Colt M-16's were in 1969!

rc

 

[Oglee]

rcmodel, that was the '07 dust test. IMO it was a flawed test, rifles only got cleaned every 600 rounds and they lubed them according to how the TM said which means a minimal amount of lubrication, each rifle was subjected to 30 minutes of extreme dusting then fired 120 rounds, re dusted, then another 120 until they got to 600, at that point they cleaned them and relubed them.

 

[Warp]

rcmodel, that was the '07 dust test. IMO it was a flawed test, rifles only got cleaned every 600 rounds and they lubed them according to how the TM said which means a minimal amount of lubrication, each rifle was subjected to 30 minutes of extreme dusting then fired 120 rounds, re dusted, then another 120 until they got to 600, at that point they cleaned them and relubed them.

And when they used more lube, they got fewer malfunctions. Imagine that.

 

[d2wing]

I saw that site too. That is a commercial site. It is not a direct source and doesn't show the same results as DOD. I can't say if it's info is correct or not.
I wonder want he will say about the most recent competition that shows the M4A1 on top. Maybe he will say it's rigged and maybe so. After all the lies this administration says about just about anything including changing military leaders to yes men it is hard to say.
I did see the test videos on the site another poster showed and the Colt 6920 was really impressive in the dirt tests. The only place the AK beat the Colt was on the trigger group filled with dirt.
I not an expert but all the rifles in the test were darn good weapons.

 

[Warp]

I saw that site too. That is a commercial site. It is not a direct source and doesn't show the same results as DOD. I can't say if it's info is correct or not.
I wonder want he will say about the most recent competition that shows the M4A1 on top. Maybe he will say it's rigged and maybe so. After all the lies this administration says about just about anything including changing military leaders to yes men it is hard to say.
I did see the test videos on the site another poster showed and the Colt 6920 was really impressive in the dirt tests. The only place the AK beat the Colt was on the trigger group filled with dirt.
I not an expert but all the rifles in the test were darn good weapons.

I like this one, too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6cwh4IxXSc

 

[nwilliams]

Can you quantify what is "vastly better" about Daniel Defense than Colt?

I'll put in my 2¢ here.

Customer service.

I won't say that Colt's CS is all together bad, it's better than a lot of companies in fact but based on my personal experience the CS at Daniel Defense is absolutely fantastic.

I had an incident a while back with my DDM4, I used some bad ammo and had a squib round, I then shot another round and it back fired and destroyed the barrel in my gun and caused the magazine to explode. See links below....
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=525310&highlight=daniel
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=532367&highlight=daniel
It had nothing to do with the anything DD did, I used bad ammo. I contacted them and told them what happened and in the end it all turned out to be my fault for using crappy ammo but instead of telling me I'm an idiot and to shove off they instead sent me a complete new upper at no cost and even paid shipping. I guarantee you Colt would not have been so generous. Also the people I talked to a DD were extremely professional and polite.

 

[SkinnyGrey]

Between a Noveske and a Colt?

 

[Warp]

Between a Noveske and a Colt?

What?

 

[mljdeckard]

The singlemost feature I can think of that would make a long-term difference in durability would be Noveske's barrels. They are cut from SAW barrel blanks and double chrome-lined.

 

[SkinnyGrey]

What?

Sorry, I meant to ask which would you get, and why?

 

[Warp]

Sorry, I meant to ask which would you get, and why?

The Colt, they set the standard and are both more affordable and easier to find than the Noveske.

Hopefully some day I'll have both, and more.

 

[meanmrmustard]

I won't say that Colt's CS is all together bad

Then I will. It sucks.

If the Colt is properly built from the get-go, you'll likely never need their CS. Hopefully.

 

[MistWolf]

IMO, Colt doesn't belong on that list. They are only in use by the govt because they are the low bidder...

They may be the lowest bidder, but they still have to deliver a rifle built to the standard. If they cannot, they will lose the contract regardless of how low the price is they quoted

 

[MachIVshooter]

The only place the AK beat the Colt was on the trigger group filled with dirt

I could see that. There's a heck of a lot more room in the AK's receiver, and a simpler FCG.