Questions About Home Built AR's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey, everyone thanks for the info. I have done some more looking around and started to price parts. I would like to get your opinions and ranking of the companies I have been looking at: Palmetto State Armory, Rainier Arms and Spikes Tactical. And if anybody has good info on the quality of the PSA lpk's and the Rainier Arms Select series barrels I would love to hear it. Again, thanks for all the info.
 
I would like to get your opinions and ranking of the companies I have been looking at: Palmetto State Armory, Rainier Arms and Spikes Tactical. And if anybody has good info on the quality of the PSA lpk's and the Rainier Arms Select series barrels I would love to hear it.

I have an AR built from a PSA stripped lower and PSA lower buildkit, with a Spikes M4 LE complete carbine upper. I couldn't be more pleased with the whole set-up. The upper to lower fit is nice and tight, and reliability has been 100% for me.

The PSA lower parts are all very nicely finished, and their standard trigger, while not patricularly light, is smoother and crisper than any standard AR trigger I've ever encountered. It's obvious they really did their homework and got the small stuff right. The word is that some of the earlier PSA stripped lowers had a "soft" anodized finish, but they have supposedly switched suppliers and this is no loger an issue.

My Spikes upper (mine is 16" carbine with the 9" Spikes BAR rail) is just flat-out awesome. The quality easily stacks up to anything from Colt or BCM. The finish on everything is just flawless, and operation is very smooth. I think the Spikes ST-T2 buffer has a lot to do with it. The BAR rail is heavy, but I like a little weight at the front of a rifle, so it doesn't bother me. Still balances well.
 
I've heard that Stag makes parts for just about everybody.

Also, building an AR has one significant upside -- You can buy the parts piecemeal and keep the per item cost below the financial radar of your wife! :)
 
I am personally somewhat disappointed that the class warfare continues in the AR market after all these years. It basically just shows people are buying more guns than ammo.

What is wrong with that for civilians? Essentially none of us will ever be in a firefight with an AR.

Manufacturing is not a mystery to anyone with even a few minutes of actual mfg experience. People seem to be implying that a vendor can either put out all good products or all cheap products. Why would anyone assume something so stupid?

Maybe, but with a manufacturer like Colt one knows that all products are to at least a minimum standard. Is that essential for a civilian gun? Nope, but i like having the best my money can buy and knowing my grandkids will be shooting my guns.
 
I've heard that Stag makes parts for just about everybody.

Also, building an AR has one significant upside -- You can buy the parts piecemeal and keep the per item cost below the financial radar of your wife! :)
Just like sneaking a Cadillac out of the factory in your lunch box :)
 
Cheap isn't always bad and sometimes good enough it good enough. I built a full size AR15 using all used Colt parts but the stripped lower receiver for less than $400.

I built them less than $500 as well and less that $600 with good quality parts. In fact I think I've built 7 ARs altogether under $700 using various parts and all have functioned well.

The reason a home built gun might cost more than a factory made one is that the home builder often gets caught up in the parts game. He has to have a target trigger because he read about it online and thinks its necessary. He has to have Mapul stuff because that's what is popular now. He has to have high end sights because that's was high speed, low drag operators use. He has to have all the gimmicks and foo-foo stuff because that's what those cool instructors at the big shooting schools have and recommend (and get compensated for).

One can build a simple basic AR15 for a pretty good price. Most people however don't like simple and basic. Ask the guy at my shooting club with the decked out Tier 1 carbine I beat in competition with my A1 CAR parts gun. His optic alone cost more than my gun, ammo and magazines put together. ;)
 
My "cheap" AR has yet to jam or not feed and I shot these two targets with it. 100 yds., Prvi Partisan 55 gr. and open sights:
P1010002.gif

The target on the right was after I took measures to slightly tighten the lower/upper mating. First three shots are left most dirctly above the bull. Was getting dark and I had to walk to the target to see the holes. Back to the bench and the last three shots are the right most.
Not bad for a $500 +/- AR, eh?

35W
 
Cheap isn't always bad and sometimes good enough it good enough. I built a full size AR15 using all used Colt parts but the stripped lower receiver for less than $400.

I built them less than $500 as well and less that $600 with good quality parts. In fact I think I've built 7 ARs altogether under $700 using various parts and all have functioned well.

The reason a home built gun might cost more than a factory made one is that the home builder often gets caught up in the parts game. He has to have a target trigger because he read about it online and thinks its necessary. He has to have Mapul stuff because that's what is popular now. He has to have high end sights because that's was high speed, low drag operators use. He has to have all the gimmicks and foo-foo stuff because that's what those cool instructors at the big shooting schools have and recommend (and get compensated for).

One can build a simple basic AR15 for a pretty good price. Most people however don't like simple and basic. Ask the guy at my shooting club with the decked out Tier 1 carbine I beat in competition with my A1 CAR parts gun. His optic alone cost more than my gun, ammo and magazines put together. ;)
mac66

Great post and I concur. I have built 3 AR's for under $450(for my three son's) and my personal AR for $650. I put mine together because I wanted something different. Not long after I assembled it, Bushy introduced their Magpul version; but at over twice the cost. YMMV

My personal AR; Magpul forend and UBR(bought both on clearance for a significant discount); DSA upper; Spikes BCG and DPMS lower. Similar rifle from Bushmaster has a MSRP $1499

dsarifle2.jpg


dsarifle3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Rainier Arms deals Stag. I haven't used Stag or Rainier's barrels and I'm not sure who makes the barrels for them. That might be more important. I've seen the barrels and they look okay, but hey, it is a barrel. If they are contracted out through a good maker, I'd say go for it. Reason I bring up Rainier, is that you can't make a bad choice if you just want a shooter. Everything they sell is good for that.

The barrel is easily the single most important part of an AR. It determines the accuracy, weight, purpose (is it a short handy M4 or long heavy varmint rifle) and then some. If you just want a shooter, just for fun, the Stag barrels and the White Oak they carry (I've heard good stuff about White Oak by the way) should be fine. If you want a tough military grade rifle, look at the LMT or Noveske barrels. Noveske makes one out of SAW blanks, that is tough. If you want accuracy, the stainless ones usually work out better, but they don't last as long as the chromed bores. The groups open up faster, but start out tighter than chrome bores. Trade offs. Cut rifling is better but more expensive, if you want a tack driver, get cut rifling. A decent stainless barrel of whatever length you want should yield a good shooter. Your rifling rate is very important too. Get a 1/9, and forget about using the 77SMK's. 1/8 is the most common, but I prefer 1/7. I shoot 62gr. and higher usually. It will do 55's, but not as well as the 1/8 or 1/9. If you plan on using cheap ammo, surplus stuff, it usually is 55gr., so go with the 1/8 or 1/9, if you load or want the heavier, higher BC rounds, get the 1/7. Varmint shooters like 1/9 and sometimes even slower, 1/10 and up, but they also use 40gr. bullets.

A .750" stainless barrel will give you good accuracy and not too much weight. If you want a varmint or longer barrel, I'd get it heavier under the handguards. If you flute it, well, you have more options (and more cost). The M4 profile does nothing except for looks unless you plan on mounting a masterkey or grenade launcher, but they are common enough to sometimes be cheaper now.

You can actually splurge on a barrel and build junk around it and get a very accurate rifle. Sub MOA. On the other hand, you can build a top notch rifle, best parts available, and use a junk barrel and it will shoot six inch groups if lucky (saying you are stellar). That is how important barrel selection is on an AR.

The rest of the stuff should just be well made, either mil spec or better, and focused on reliability. The trigger, to me, is important, but some aren't so picky. I consider it to be right behind the barrel in selecting parts actually, since I select a trigger that will go well with the barrel.

The absolute best barrel you could get would be to go to Satern's site and see if they have an AR barrel already in stock that suits your needs (I have one on special order, have for a couple of months already, and it could be a year or more until I have it). Expect $400, but expect sub-moa. My Grendel is superb.

If you just want the shooter, and White Oak or Stag make a good one for half that, say $200 or so, that might not be a bad deal. Rainier also has a discount table. It has parts where someone buys a rifle, but wants them to change out one part for another I think. Good deals by the door, they always change. You can ask if they have a good barrel in there, they are new and there are always a few in there. Last time I was in there, they had a Noveske for $200, and a heavy White Oak (for about the same I think).
 
I like my plain Jane got it complete new. The only extras i put a set of trijcon night sites on it.. ($85.00) Simple for a simple person, plus all of the other stuff just gets to heavy to tote around, unless it has a trailer hitch attached.
I did get a good deal when i bought it five years ago. NIB Armalite AR10A4 with the night sights. Shipped to a FFL for $826.90 total.
 
Strykervet, thanks for the post. You spoke pretty highly of cut rifling barrels. Daniel Defense has cut rifling barrels for $205. Do you, or anyone else, know anything about these barrels? I just don't understand why their cut rifling barrels are cheaper, unless they are really lacking somewhere else. Stryker, I also agree with you about the trigger. Do you have an opinion on who makes the best stock trigger? Thanks again everyone, really appreciate the feedback.
 
What is wrong with that for civilians? Essentially none of us will ever be in a firefight with an AR.

absolutely nothing is wrong with buying guns and not shooting them. if you want to just collect them, be my guest. there are dozens of reasons to do this from saving them for your grandkids to investing. of course, you don't even need a reason other than because you just felt like buying one. maybe you just don't like shooting. or don't have a place to shoot. nobody here has a problem with that.


the problem starts when people who buy guns but don't shoot them (other than a couple 3-round groups from a bench) proudly proclaim that whatever brand they bought has never had a jam (after 20 rounds from the bench), then start throwing opinions out about this brand being better than that brand, with utterly nonsensical assumptions

believe it or not, I'm more or less OK with that. I understand people are excited about their toys and want to talk about them, and share their opinions to everyone else. I also understand we have a lot of young people on this site who are not old enough to buy their own guns, but are nevertheless excited about them. and that's a good thing because we'll need their votes 20 years from now, even if their opinions aren't worth much today.

what I'm not OK with, is that it inevitably devolves into how a $1k rifle or $2k rifle (they've never even handled) isn't any better than their $500 rifle (that they've owned for 12 hours) and the insinuation that anyone who says otherwise is doing so because they're a snob, not because they actually have some experience with both guns.
 
Maybe, but with a manufacturer like Colt one knows that all products are to at least a minimum standard

no, that's kind of my point. Some of colt's rifles like their 6920 are almost the same standard as the M4 mil-spec (except for the obvious lack of full-auto and short barrel), but their other AR15s like their match target and sporter models may not be held to any spec.
 
no, that's kind of my point. Some of colt's rifles like their 6920 are almost the same standard as the M4 mil-spec (except for the obvious lack of full-auto and short barrel), but their other AR15s like their match target and sporter models may not be held to any spec.

Colt makes some configurations that by design aren't technically mil spec because the design has never been in use by the military. However, it has been my understanding that Colts sporter line is built to same standards as the Mil & LE marked guns. When looking for Colt parts i've never seen ones differentiated as being Mil or Sporter. In fact its also been reported that they are doing away with the the Mil & LE line altogether so all guns will be just Colt. Either way i went with a Mil & LE marked gun for the collector value.

the problem starts when people who buy guns but don't shoot them (other than a couple 3-round groups from a bench) proudly proclaim that whatever brand they bought has never had a jam (after 20 rounds from the bench), then start throwing opinions out about this brand being better than that brand, with utterly nonsensical assumptions

That's fair. However, one need not to have ever had a bolt fail to know that HPT/MPI is better than not. One interesting thing i've found is that my Colt 6720 tends to dump significantly less gas in my face with my can than my bushy and RR barreled upper which makes me wonder how many ARs out there are overgassed.

And for the record, i do shoot my guns though not as much as i'd like. :)
 
Maybe, but with a manufacturer like Colt one knows that all products are to at least a minimum standard.

Internet folklore.

Colt doesn't even punch the platter forgings, they buy them out and machine them in house.

Let's not forget that they developed the TDP, so what they make to their standard is what has become military standard. They negotiate contract details to their advantage - entirely the reason that hammerforged nitrided barrels aren't used in the American military. They are in Europe and have been for over 35 years.

MILSPEC is a taxpayer umbrella of protection to shield us from getting soaked by unscrupulous bidders on contracts, a danger that we've been dealing with since before the Constitution was written. People look for ways to cheat the government. In Colt's case, they willingly support keeping the status quo where it makes them profit, and diligently oppose measures that would cost them money, just like any other For Profit Corporation on Wall Street.

The only ones who don't get that are consumers. The Great Herd of Uneducated who line up to be fleeced.

As a matter of credibiity, I've been working retail over 35 years, spent two years in an honest to American factory job working a 100 ton press brake, and at a local Defense Contractor, in meetings directly with plant personnel and military/industrial reps.

Case in point: Halogen headlights, which were banned in the US for a decade after they appeared in Europe. Why? The DOT Headlamp Advisory Board decided they weren't good enough for us. Philips, Sylvania, and Wagner were the Board then. And once they could ramp up production, then they "accepted" their use.

Those $8.99 bulbs on the peghook are actually discounted to $2.50 - still leaving profit - if you can find someone who buck the MSRP line in the sand and keep getting them. Competition is extremely restricted, and the retailers aren't going out of their way to help. After all, they make MONEY on them.

Stop with the anointing of manufacturers and justification of their pricing scheme. The Colt retailers really have no reason to get around their good profits by cutting off their supply. It's a bit naive to keep carrying their water for them when the reality is they can make junk, too, even on contract. That's EXACTLY why FN got a bid and supplied us. Colt got complacent and the fat cats needed to toe the line.
 
Internet folklore.

Colt doesn't even punch the platter forgings, they buy them out and machine them in house.

Citation? Regardless, contracted items are specified to certain standards such as Mil Spec. That's why there is a contract. The letters C-O-L-T aren't what make the 6920 a good rifle. Its the standards to which the components are manufactured and assembled.

Let's not forget that they developed the TDP, so what they make to their standard is what has become military standard. They negotiate contract details to their advantage - entirely the reason that hammerforged nitrided barrels aren't used in the American military. They are in Europe and have been for over 35 years.

Nobody said other methods can't be better than milspec but as i said, milspec assures a minimum standard that many others do not meet. So what if Colt and other military contrators negotiate contract details. Given that it is a negotiation the other party, in this case the US military, does not agree to terms unless they are sufficient for an intended purpose as in HPT/MPI testing.

MILSPEC is a taxpayer umbrella of protection to shield us from getting soaked by unscrupulous bidders on contracts, a danger that we've been dealing with since before the Constitution was written. People look for ways to cheat the government. In Colt's case, they willingly support keeping the status quo where it makes them profit, and diligently oppose measures that would cost them money, just like any other For Profit Corporation on Wall Street.

How is that cheating? If Colt and their customer agreed to a set of standards that Colt is meeting where is the foul? If said customer wants a better device they can always renogotiate. Again, there are other developments that may exceed mil spec but many that claim to often don't as well. And then there are materials and methods used that are simply below milspec because they save money such as nonchrome lined barrels, improper staking or HPT/MPI testing. Some companies also do HPT/MPI or just MPI testing of batch samples instead of each bolt made.

Stop with the anointing of manufacturers and justification of their pricing scheme.

Colt LE Mil rifles, which are available to the public, sell for the same price as guns made to lower standards such as RR, Bushmaster, Stag, etc. Other makers that build to nearly milspec are for the most part more expensive than current Colt pricing. So why would Colt's pricing need justification?

"It's a bit naive to keep carrying their water for them when the reality is they can make junk, too, even on contract" and then "MILSPEC is a taxpayer umbrella of protection to shield us from getting soaked by unscrupulous bidders on contracts"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top