The S&W is also properly staked where it needs to be, and all the parts are standard AR-15 parts. When you get right down to the nitty-gritty, the only difference between co.,lt and S&W is the roll marks on the lower.
Newbie looking for first AR-15.. M&P15 vs. Colt 6920
- Thread starter lithnights
- Start date
- Status
The S&W is also properly staked where it needs to be, and all the parts are standard AR-15 parts. When you get right down to the nitty-gritty, the only difference between co.,lt and S&W is the roll marks on the lower.
If it's simply a matter of choosing between the Colt or MP15 Sport, I'd take the Colt. Not becuase the Smith is a bad weapon, but you are comparing two very different rifles that seem to have been designed for two very different purposes. The gap narrows a bit when comparing a higher end S&W to the same Colt.
Having said all that - I own a S&W MP15 MOE. It was a bit of an impulse buy, but it seems to be a well-made rifle, and I am pleased with it. I am also sure that one day I'll add a Colt 6920 (or other comparable 'milspec' rifle) to my collection.
Having said all that - I own a S&W MP15 MOE. It was a bit of an impulse buy, but it seems to be a well-made rifle, and I am pleased with it. I am also sure that one day I'll add a Colt 6920 (or other comparable 'milspec' rifle) to my collection.
I don't know what the OP's plans are, but I seriously doubt he'll put the rifle through combat-like stresses. I even suggested that he buy the gun he can afford and later, but the gun he wants. He could even completely change the Sport into a combat-ready system by simply building a new upper.
Okay, I'll qualify my 100% claim - I've put almost 4000 rounds through my S&W MOE, both steel (Tula) and brass from Federal, Priv, Hornady, Lake City, and PMC, 55gr, 62gr, and 75gr, hardball, soft-point, hollow point, tracer, and penetrator, at both the range, and in tactical carbine matches, with not a single failure of any kind. I once went 1500 rounds without cleaning it to see what would happen (I did oil the bolt at about the 800 round mark), and it ran just fine. I even emptied eight 30-round magazines as quickly as I could at least twice since owning the rifle, and one of those times was mixing brass/steel cartridges in a given magazine. I'd say that more than substantiates my "100%" claim.
The S&W is as much rifle as a Colt is.
I recently changed it to a M16 BCG/sprinco spring/H2 buffer, and haven't shot it yet in that configuration. I don't own a Sport, but there's certainly nothing wrong with the rifle. It's a well-made and reliable weapon at a price point that allows people to determine whether or not they have an affinity for the AR platform. In that vein, I am of the opinion that the Sport is a better choice than a Colt.
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
Get an AR, Any AR, shoot the heck out of it, find out what works, Get some training, shoot the heck out of it some more, get some more training, then buy or build what you need.
When you know what works for you and what doesn't, when you can hit what you aim at, then you will know what you need.
For me I like an old school AR with the built on carry handle and the old school sights.
When you know what works for you and what doesn't, when you can hit what you aim at, then you will know what you need.
For me I like an old school AR with the built on carry handle and the old school sights.
Attachments
DM~
Member
And to turn that around, it means absolutely nothing when posters claim the MP Sport doesn't have long term reliability without then explaining what PROOF they have that it isn't!
Most have never owned an MP Sport, but have all kinds of opinions about them...
DM
C-grunt
Member
I do think that S&W makes a good rifle and I think the Sport is probably one of the best deals if one is wanting an AR for target shooting. But thats not what the OP wants. If he were looking at one of their upper end models I would say he was making a good choice for his stated purpose which is self defense.
But the Sport was built to a price point, not built to proper military spec or above. The Sport has no dust cover which I believe should be on a defensive use gun. I dont really care about a forward assist but i do use it when i chamber check my rifles.
Also is every bolt and barrel tested and inspected by S&W on the Sport or are they batch tested? It would kinda suck if his bolt broke prematurely during a gunfight because it wasnt tested and inspected for cracks.
gunnysmith
Member
What if,The mods close this thread before it decays further.
That is the main difference between S&W and top tier. S&W uses 4140 barrel steel the top tier uses 4150 chf barrels. The top tier hp and mp tests every bolt and barrel. The sport is not even the same as the regular m&p. That is why they all have different price points. A sport is a fantastic weapon but it is a budget ar. If I had 750 to buy a gun and ammo because that was all I could afford the sport would be number one but if I have the money to spend I want everything done right not done to meet a certain price. The true m&p does come with a chrome lined barrel and bolt. Stag is good so is RRA and cmmg but they are all lacking on the materials and processing and testing of materials. So is a S&W going to perform without problems 99% of the time yes. Is it the same as a top tier no it's not.
AlexanderA
Member
Considering the modularity of the AR-15 platform, I think it might be better to get the exact parts that you want, and assemble it yourself, instead of buying a "name brand" gun already assembled. The assembly of an AR-15 is a really easy process. All you need is a barrel-nut wrench, maybe a set of receiver vise blocks, and some roll-pin punches.
lithnights
Member
No closing yet! I am still learning! : )
lithnights
Member
Originally I had no interest in building, then after reading posts, I got intrigued. But I think I'm back to buying. I figure I'd rather buy a rifle, shoot it, learn it, disassemble it etc. in an effort to begin to learn about the AR. Keep in mind, I know nothing about these now. It's sort of like me suggesting to people to just build a laptop from scratch, or rebuild their mower carburetor b/c it's not that hard. It's really not. But it does take patience/time/effort/tools. But how many people would actually do that if they never owned a laptop or mower? I doubt many. That's me with rifles. At least for now.. my next one I vow to build!
You only save a small amount of money by building a quality rifle and then there is no help or warranty if something should not work right plus after you buy the tools to build one it's the same as buying complete. If you plan to build using the cheapest parts you can find then that's different and you plan to build more than one. To save money though quality is going to be lost. I searched for over a month before buying the Daniel defense and no mid tier rifle I could find was the price difference enough to justify not getting a top tier rifle. All you have to do is read the spec sheets of the manufacturers and you will see the money difference. They tell you what materials are used and the process of testing if there is one. A craftsman ratchet is good quality comes with a lifetime warranty and will work flawlessly for most people who use it. Just because it meets those criteria does not mean it is the same quality as snap on tools and why you pay more for snap on. Not because of the name on it but because of what is behind the name.
I did that. It actually cost a little more to build the rifle the way I wanted it than the MOE I bout for $1150. The distinction is that with the S&W, I've spent close to $800 what I want it to be, and I still haven't replaced the barrel/handguard (an additional $400) - yet. When you add it up, I've got $1900 in the S&W so far, and $1400 in my Frankenrifle. Pretty soon, the only thing left of my original MOE will be the two receivers (I've replaced everything else), and at that point, I would probably stop calling it a S&W.
biggameballs
Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 380
Well if we really have an economic melt down guns and gold will be worth a lot more then cash. You said yourself you do well for yourself and can afford the colt. Just buy the colt. We're talking about a few hundred dollars here.
lithnights
Member
Or maybe buy both!! : )
lithnights
Member
Not to throw a wrench into this debate (because it sure has been interesting), I went down to my local gun shop to look around and hold a few. They did not have either the M&P or the 6920 in stock and said they are pretty backordered. He did have a Rock River LAR-15 tactical which he suggested, and was very high on. This was a little cheaper than the Colt, yet he said it was a great great rifle.
I don't have to buy from this shop but I'd like to try to since I can get a nice discount. Thus I'm considering the RR.
So, thoughts on the Rock River?
I don't have to buy from this shop but I'd like to try to since I can get a nice discount. Thus I'm considering the RR.
So, thoughts on the Rock River?
C-grunt
Member
I'd still buy the Colt. Or a BCM, Daniel Defense, or LMT.
thefamcnaj
Member
Not trying to be a downer on the situation at all here.
As a matter of fact I went throught the same thoughts as you, if, if ,if. So I bout an ar15 and put an arsenal sgl21 on order from my local gun shop. I've bought up more combat type pistols in the last year(glocks, hk's, SA xd's/xd(m)'s etc.) than you can think of. Cabinets full of premium SD ammo, and felt pretty good about it to be honest until I read a thread here on the thr. A recent tread (like in the last couple of days), can't remember the name of it. Sorry I can't provide the link.
Anyway it dealt with a declerations of "states of emergency". Typical shft stuff. Hurricane Katrina was the big one touched on in the thread. So was an f5 tornadoe in Kansas(I think it was.)
During those catostrophic times police/swat teams came in and confiscated law abiding citizens guns. Which got me to wondering, "if I'm doing the right thing spending all this money on weapons, inase fecal matter does or does not hit the fan."
If getting a rifle is what you want, I'd stay away from the m&p. My lgs told me s&w are using inferior parts in the m&p's and not droping the price to match the quality of the internals. I can't say if this is true or not, but I trust my local gun shop guy, he's a well respected buisness man in our little community. He will no longer carry the m&p rifle line.
I'd go with the colt between the two of those. At 1000 dollars how ever you have a few choices out there and for 200/300 more dollars you could get say a Daniel Defense or Bravo company. My best friend is all over the PSA ar 15's and they are great for the money. He has two and came if well under a grand.
I went with the sig m400 enhanced model. It was 975+tax or 990+tax. Sig rifles aren't well thought of by some but, I've been running mine hard since I've got it with no troubles at all. It's all the rifle I'll need.
As a matter of fact I went throught the same thoughts as you, if, if ,if. So I bout an ar15 and put an arsenal sgl21 on order from my local gun shop. I've bought up more combat type pistols in the last year(glocks, hk's, SA xd's/xd(m)'s etc.) than you can think of. Cabinets full of premium SD ammo, and felt pretty good about it to be honest until I read a thread here on the thr. A recent tread (like in the last couple of days), can't remember the name of it. Sorry I can't provide the link.
Anyway it dealt with a declerations of "states of emergency". Typical shft stuff. Hurricane Katrina was the big one touched on in the thread. So was an f5 tornadoe in Kansas(I think it was.)
During those catostrophic times police/swat teams came in and confiscated law abiding citizens guns. Which got me to wondering, "if I'm doing the right thing spending all this money on weapons, inase fecal matter does or does not hit the fan."
If getting a rifle is what you want, I'd stay away from the m&p. My lgs told me s&w are using inferior parts in the m&p's and not droping the price to match the quality of the internals. I can't say if this is true or not, but I trust my local gun shop guy, he's a well respected buisness man in our little community. He will no longer carry the m&p rifle line.
I'd go with the colt between the two of those. At 1000 dollars how ever you have a few choices out there and for 200/300 more dollars you could get say a Daniel Defense or Bravo company. My best friend is all over the PSA ar 15's and they are great for the money. He has two and came if well under a grand.
I went with the sig m400 enhanced model. It was 975+tax or 990+tax. Sig rifles aren't well thought of by some but, I've been running mine hard since I've got it with no troubles at all. It's all the rifle I'll need.
in stock items are always "great guns/great buys" from the dealer's perspective. They're in business to sell guns, and they have more incentives to move existing stock than to add more. As an unabashed capitalist, I've no issue with that, but it doesn't erase differences among brands.
As regards the commercially configured M4 platform (i.e. semi auto, 16" bbl), Colts are built to certain QA/QC and material standards (the TDP); S&W to somewhat lower standards, and RR (along with the other hobby brands) to even lower material and QA/QC standards. Those standards may or may not be relevant to you and your needs, and if the QA/QC and material standards are not of concern, and the elevated risk (real, if not always readily quantifiable) of a functional failure associated with adherence to lower standards is acceptable to you, there's not much reason to be picky about brands.
However, if you want a rifle suitable for potential hard use, the regular M&P 15's (not the Sport) are considered by some trainers and hard users to be the minimal entry level carbine, above which would be Colt, DD, LMT, BCM and Noveske. The M&P Sport is a lesser gun than the regular M&Ps, but I've heard nothing of S&W using inferior quality parts across the M&P line, and frankly do not trust that info. Other than the semi bolt carrier, the bbl steel and a few other items (none of which seem to show up as problematic in high-round count class AAR's) , S&W has consistently built a solid gun once they started making them pretty much all in house some years back.
My journey began with Bushmasters; 4 of them, actually, 2 of which had serious issues and none of which was assembled properly. I then migrated to a mix of Colts and BM's, then Colts and M&Ps, and now all Colts (save my M&P 15-22). While I would readily consider another non-Sport M&P, Colts have never been more affordable in recent memory than they are now, and Colts' the company is presently more consumer-friendly than has been true in many, many years. If someone wants a carbine suitable for hard use in a defensive role, I do not see any reason to step down to a BM, Windham, DPMS, RR, etc. in the current market when rifles made to higher standards are so readily affordable and available.
As regards the commercially configured M4 platform (i.e. semi auto, 16" bbl), Colts are built to certain QA/QC and material standards (the TDP); S&W to somewhat lower standards, and RR (along with the other hobby brands) to even lower material and QA/QC standards. Those standards may or may not be relevant to you and your needs, and if the QA/QC and material standards are not of concern, and the elevated risk (real, if not always readily quantifiable) of a functional failure associated with adherence to lower standards is acceptable to you, there's not much reason to be picky about brands.
However, if you want a rifle suitable for potential hard use, the regular M&P 15's (not the Sport) are considered by some trainers and hard users to be the minimal entry level carbine, above which would be Colt, DD, LMT, BCM and Noveske. The M&P Sport is a lesser gun than the regular M&Ps, but I've heard nothing of S&W using inferior quality parts across the M&P line, and frankly do not trust that info. Other than the semi bolt carrier, the bbl steel and a few other items (none of which seem to show up as problematic in high-round count class AAR's) , S&W has consistently built a solid gun once they started making them pretty much all in house some years back.
My journey began with Bushmasters; 4 of them, actually, 2 of which had serious issues and none of which was assembled properly. I then migrated to a mix of Colts and BM's, then Colts and M&Ps, and now all Colts (save my M&P 15-22). While I would readily consider another non-Sport M&P, Colts have never been more affordable in recent memory than they are now, and Colts' the company is presently more consumer-friendly than has been true in many, many years. If someone wants a carbine suitable for hard use in a defensive role, I do not see any reason to step down to a BM, Windham, DPMS, RR, etc. in the current market when rifles made to higher standards are so readily affordable and available.
Last edited:
lithnights
Member
Good stuff. Appreciate the in depth analysis.
lithnights
Member
Again, good in depth stuff.
If I do end up leaning towards the Colt, any idea where I can get one for a decent price? Somewhere that has them in stock?
lithnights
Member
Is the 6720 much different than the 6920?
The 6720 has a pencil barrel instead of a govt. Profile. As far as RRA goes some of their stuff is okay some is not. They are not big on testing parts and if you want a chromelined barrel you usually have to specify that on the order and pay extra. If has all the features the colt has it'll be right at the same price if it's a good bit cheaper it more than likely is not the same spec a the colt and your right back to where you were with the sport just for more money.
It's an improvement over the 6920 because they they used S&W parts.
(just pokin' the Colt fans in the ribs)
- Status