PSA levels of quality

[Casefull]

There is nothing wrong with psa stuff. Some guys have to justify their expenditures by questioning the quality of less expensive ways of purchasing ar rifles.

 

[USAF_Vet]

The only PSA product I have is a basic LPK I used in my AR pistol. It's round count is fairly low, though, so not experiencing any failure is nothing to brag about, I suppose.

I have used some fairly low end components for most of my builds, with Aero Precision being the highest end component and that's just a receiver set. I have a BCM upper and kit coming, but not because I'm some fan boy, but because it was the on my thing in stock at a decent price (being a blem).

I think for most shooters, brand preference is often about justifying the price they paid.

 

[Warp]

The only PSA product I have is a basic LPK I used in my AR pistol. It's round count is fairly low, though, so not experiencing any failure is nothing to brag about, I suppose.

I have used some fairly low end components for most of my builds, with Aero Precision being the highest end component and that's just a receiver set. I have a BCM upper and kit coming, but not because I'm some fan boy, but because it was the on my thing in stock at a decent price (being a blem).

I think for most shooters, brand preference is often about justifying the price they paid.

I think for many people, statements like this are often about justifying buying the cheapest thing they can find, regardless of earned reputation or track record. PTAC rifles and Taurus handguns for everybody lol

 

[USAF_Vet]

Yeah, maybe so. But I don't complain about the cheap parts in an AR if they fail (which they haven't). But sure as the sun rises, some people complain to anyone who will listen if their high end gun breaks, and are the same ones who just love to say "told you so" when low end stuff breaks. Point is I can spend the same amount of money and wind up with three guns I got to enjoy building and tinkering with, for about the same price as something like a Daniel Defense.

More guns, the enjoyment of time spent tinkering with them, and spend the same amount spread over months or years doing so... That's a win in my book.

 

[Warp]

To each their own, I would dislike and quickly sell a gun I had to tinker with...I just want it to work right up front and continue to work, exactly how I want, with nothing to do but shoot it or in the case of a rifle decide on the light/optic/sling method I prefer. But I won't buy a Daniel Defense because they are too expensive for me lol

 

[Casefull]

I think for most shooters, brand preference is often about justifying the price they paid.

Well said. It is fun to find quality components and put together a rifle that works well and is as accurate as much more expensive ar rifles. Anyone can plunk down the money and buy quality for a price.

 

[USAF_Vet]

To each their own, I would dislike and quickly sell a gun I had to tinker with...I just want it to work right up front and continue to work, exactly how I want, with nothing to do but shoot it or in the case of a rifle decide on the light/optic/sling method I prefer. But I won't buy a Daniel Defense because they are too expensive for me lol

Had? No. Chose to tinker with. I choose to replace barrels and hand guards and gas blocks and hammers and springs and dust covers, etc. I've never had any parts fail and require replacement. Tinkering is NOT repairing. Tinkering is enjoying a hobby of swapping out this part for that, to have a truely custom and unique rifle that shoots just the same as any off the shelf one.

I buy inexpensive base parts then replace as I choose as either upgrades or ergonomic preferences or because I want to and it looks cool. It's accessorizing appearance, with an occasional improvement for function. Neither are necessary, but I still enjoy it.

If I didn't want a modular rifle, I would have purchased an AK.

 

[M1key]

LOL. And I for another love to tinker...Cain't hep it...


M