School Me On ARs...

[dom1104]

hey Dscottdennison... you can stop your test.

Others have done it. ad nauseum.

The cheap guns fail.

Instructors, people who see tens of thousands of rounds go down range, are in COMPLETE agreement.

Although, I hate to tell you not to have fun testing and shooting stuff, because.. .heck thats fun.

So test away.

 

[dscottdennison]

Thank you for verifying my point. Screwing on a barrel DOES NOT build the quality AR, but that is all model1sales does. Other than that, its a few pieces of forged aluminum. THE SAME forged aluminum.

Oh, believe me, it is coming.

In the mean time, please explain to me why you all think any of them are better than the other? This is why I am not a salesman... I am not a liar.

 

[dscottdennison]

hey Dscottdennison... you can stop your test.

Others have done it. ad nauseum.

The cheap guns fail.

Instructors, people who see tens of thousands of rounds go down range, are in COMPLETE agreement.

Although, I hate to tell you not to have fun testing and shooting stuff, because.. .heck thats fun.

So test away.

I am guessing you mean cheaply purchased. I am talking about "inexpensively" built. Everything purchased as cheaply as possible, and assembled. No paying for some gunsmith at colt's salary. I will agree that the $500 DPMS will not stay with a $1000 name brand. That is what a lot of you don't understand that I am saying, I guess.

I bet you would all be surprised to know just how much of the parts for 90% of makers come from the same places as well.

 

[dscottdennison]

judging by mt posts? which exactly are you referring to? all this coming from a guy who let someone take his rifle and walk away at the range.

These types of posts... HAHAHA.

and yes, the guy who was at a public range who let the range officer take his gun from the line... HAHAHA.

You just make this better and better.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

The military doesn't buy from the lowest bidder. If that was true, we'd be issuing our soldiers Olympic Arms and Deltron kit rifles. Instead, Colt is one of the few companies that have contracts with the US military using the specified Technical Data Package, something commercial manufacturers do not have access to (and something most people are unaware exists). This includes even companies like Noveske. Ever see what we pay for a toilet seat or B2 bomber? Low bidder is about the furthest thing from the truth when it comes to defense spending

And for some actual data, we can refer to this for starters:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spr...akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

Now, if you can address and refute the differences in parts and materials outlined in that spreadsheet of allegedly identical firearms, we can move forward in the discussion. Being an engineer, you're well aware that these differences aren't cosmetic. It took a lot of folks prodding companies for years to get exacting details on these rifles' individual components. Somehow I doubt you can dismiss all that hard work with a magic wand.

After addressing that, we can address the opinions of firearms trainers and armorers formed from the experience of witnessing hundreds of students sling thousands of rounds downrange in a training course day in and day out for years and what rifles tend to puke the most.

Then, we can scour the Internet for threads started over the problems of a company's product and see which companies generate the most complains on improper construction or parts failures, such as improper staking of key components, overgassed porting, incorrect buffer weights for reliable operation, and out of spec parts like receiver extensions.

 

[proven]

what makes this better is all of the ignorant posts you made in the "black rifle" thread are now showing up here. you made a statement that you simply can't back up, and now you try and turn this into an argument about how you know more than most of the experts in the industry and everyone just overpays.

find yourself a new soapbox.

 

[dscottdennison]

what makes this better is all of the ignorant posts you made in the "black rifle" thread are now showing up here. you made a statement that you simply can't back up, and now you try and turn this into an argument about how you know more than most of the experts in the industry and everyone just overpays.

find yourself a new soapbox.

And just what is that statement that I cannot back up? I am making the same statements here actually... "a forged piece of 7075 is a forged piece of 7075"

 

[Cesiumsponge]

Also I don't want to give the impression that I said plinker or cheap guns are worthless, if that was how it came across. I have no problems with range toys. I used to own Bushmaster. The most entertaining firearm I own is a Mateba autorevolver. Simply I've found the "buy once, cry once" mantra less headache overall for a hard-use gun, especially since I do do training and the last thing I want to do is fight a rifle and waste my/class/instructor's time with something that isn't as reliable as a higher quality build. Considering many shooters don't sling that volume of lead, they assume its all the same and its a giant conspiracy because such problematic don't manifest under a rifle that receives minimal use and frequent cleanings.

 

[dscottdennison]

Cesiumsponge:

So that table outlines purchased assembled rifles and their MSRP... I didn't read the rest of your post, because I can probably get the gist.

Steel bolts, forged 7075 upper and lower, properly staked everything, chrome lining, treatment processes, etc... I don't see anything out of the ordinary...

 

[Cesiumsponge]

I bet you would all be surprised to know just how much of the parts for 90% of makers come from the same places as well.

Companies like Daniel Defense make a majority of their products in-house. They're actually opening up a new metal finishing plant to do anodizing and phosphating. There is no problem using vendors to do your work because it is a product based on your prints, not your competition. I work in aerospace and deal with Boeing subcontracting their work in a multi-tier fashion. Very few companies do everything un-house due to the expense or certain manufacturing processes. In some sees, the hefty regulations with things like metal coatings.

There are about a dozen forging houses that make the upper and lower receivers for the AR industry given the specialized manufacturing process of forging. However a forging is a rough, unfinished process. The company that sells the firearm still needs to machine it to completion. A rough blank is a far cry from claiming the finished products are all the same. This isn't a revelation. In fact it is well known. As an example, I am friends with the owner of the shop that does grind work for Olympic Arms. Because Olympic Arms has a history of spotty QA or specs doesn't mean my friend is responsible. He simply makes it to the specs of a paying customer.

Courtesy of Robb Jensen from M4C

A (splintered) = Anchor Harvey Aluminum

AF = Alcoa Forge

C AF = Colt Alco Forge

C MB = Colt / Mueller Brass

Cardinal (stylized) = Cardinal Forge

CH = Colt Harvey Aluminum

CK = Colt / Kaiser Aluminum

Circle/Crooshairs w/"AR" = ArmaLite

CM = Colt / Martin Marietta

D (stylized) = Diemaco

DK = Diemaco / Kaiser Aluminum

E = Emco

EK = EMCO/Kaiser

E MB = EMCO/Mueller Brass

F keyhole = FNMI / Cerro Forge

FA = FNMI / Anchor Harvey

FK = FNMI / Kaiser Aluminum

FM = FN/Martin Marietta

FMB = FNMI / Mueller Brass

Keyhole = Cerro Forge

L = Lewis Machine & Tool

LK = LAR / Kaiser Aluminum

LM = LAR / Martin Marietta

M (under diamond) = Mueller Industries

PA = Capco / Anchor Harvey

PM = Capco / Martin Marietta

 

[dscottdennison]

Companies like Daniel Defense make a majority of their products in-house. They're actually opening up a new metal finishing plant to do anodizing and phosphating. There is no problem using vendors to do your work because it is a product based on your prints, not your competition. I work in aerospace and deal with Boeing subcontracting their work in a multi-tier fashion. Very few companies do everything un-house due to the expense or certain manufacturing processes. In some sees, the hefty regulations with things like metal coatings.

There are about a dozen forging houses that make the upper and lower receivers for the AR industry given the specialized manufacturing process of forging. However a forging is a rough, unfinished process. The company that sells the firearm still needs to machine it to completion. A rough blank is a far cry from claiming the finished product is all the same. This isn't a revelation. In fact it is well known. Courtesy of Robb Jensen from M4C

You are literally making the exact same point I am trying to make. This is so freakin frustrating.

Yes, I am a mechanical engineer in the aerospace and defense industry. It is also frustrating that I cannot say much more than that to you people.

Seriously, do I just come off like I am trying to be offensive or something? To me, it seems like we are making the same point, yet I feel like we are arguing. And proven has his panties all in a bunch.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Cesiumsponge is exactly spot on in addressing your comment -

I bet you would all be surprised to know just how much of the parts for 90% of makers come from the same places as well.

An unfinished part outsourced, finished in-house and assembled by talented labor is NOT the same as another company getting that same part from the same source and slapping it on without the same attention in finishing.

Seriously, do I just come off like I am trying to be offensive or something?

Yes, in fact you do.

 

[dscottdennison]

same metal... this is where the strength/durability/rigidity/ etc etc lies.

I've yet to see one that is machined so badly that it will not work...

that is all that I have EVER compared so far. I don't even know what to say anymore...

Quote:
Originally Posted by dscottdennison
Seriously, do I just come off like I am trying to be offensive or something?

Yes, in fact you do.

In cases like this, Bullfrog, GOOD!

 

[jim243]

This is getting stupid, Cesium the only reason Colt had a lock on the market is because of the patient rights they bought from Armilite back in the 60's, Colt AR's are nothing but junk and as to the DOD purchasing from the lowest bidder, you need to go back to school and learn that is what the LAW calls for, a min of three bids are required and the contracts have to go to the lowest bidder (by law).

I hear this garbage about Mil-Spec one more time and will throw up. Military specifications are something I can not say without getting into trouble. Give me a commercial grade product every time. I do not need junk (CXXX), that's what the military buys. You want highgrade explosives, look to mining companies not the Army. You want highgrade weapons, look to the Air Force not the Army. You want decent food, look to the Navy not the Army.

You think Colt makes their own parts? HA HA HA HA you are something other than smart.

dscottdennison, let them wast their money on LOGOs, I am sure they buy their girlfriends and wifes $500.00 pair of shoes as well.

Save your money and let them waste their's.
Jim

 

[dscottdennison]

Thanks for stepping in to take the internet commando hate, Jim. I am so frustrated... I am done.

 

[proven]

dcottdennison- the statement that you can build a rifle comparable to 6920 for $600 is pure nonsense. that's not to say that you can't build a nice rifle. and my panties are sufficiently unbunched, thanks. your the one, who seems to think you know more than everyone else out there. and yet arguments like yours have been proven faulty time and again. your arrogance is astounding.


jim243- colt ars are noting but junk? what pre-school did you just graduate from?

 

[Cesiumsponge]

Yes, I am a mechanical engineer in the aerospace and defense industry. It is also frustrating that I cannot say much more than that to you people.

Seriously, do I just come off like I am trying to be offensive or something? To me, it seems like we are making the same point, yet I feel like we are arguing. And proven has his panties all in a bunch.

I have no idea, maybe there's just too much cross chatter and words have lost all meaning. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_satiation ) I work in aerospace as well. We're in an ISO and AS audit for the next tewo weeks so I have time here to amuse myself. I think everyone is debating a slightly different point. jim243, I have shelves of MIL specs here too. To make me seem mysterious, I too will say I cannot disclose the nature of these specs either.

Apparently the discussion has gotten to the point of personal insults instead of discussing the matter because that avenue is exhausted. Colt has devolved from "overpriced logo" to "junk". Also reading comprehension has vanished. No one claimed Colt makes everything in-house. In fact, dscottdennison and I pointed out the opposite on the in-house fallacy which is atypical in manufacturing. Of all the components, no one ever complains about receivers. I mentioned earlier on typical problems seen in incorrectly machined or assembled rifles. There was a Spikes thread just earlier on receiver extension issues.

 

[dscottdennison]

your the one, who seems to think you know more than everyone else out there. and yet arguments like yours have been proven faulty time and again.

I am certainly not trying to say that I know more than everyone else out there, and you clearly don't even know what my argument is...

I have shelves of MIL specs here too. To make me seem mysterious, I too will say I cannot disclose the nature of these specs either.

Nothing mysterious... just frustrated that I cannot use the evidence I have at hand to prove some things. I can't take a dump without access badge-ing about 3 times. Sounds like you know about that.

So, said in the best possible passive aggressive way by Cesium, this is done.

 

[proven]

I am certainly not trying to say that I know more than everyone else out there,

that exactly how you come across.

you clearly don't even know what my argument is...

i know exactly what it is, and simply doesn't hold water. you tried preaching it in the black rifle thread, and now your trying it here.

 

[dscottdennison]

... and you still haven't told me how this piece of aluminum alloy is different than this same aluminum alloy... and how that doesn't hold water... or how that's coming across like I know more than everyone else...

 

[proven]

it's already been pointed out to you...specs and tolerances. for other parts, you can throw in testing. one lower reciever isn't necessarily the same as another. plain and simple.

Screwing on a barrel DOES NOT build the quality AR, but that is all model1sales does. Other than that, its a few pieces of forged aluminum. THE SAME forged aluminum.

it's been shown time and again parts are not just parts.

anyone can read your posts regarding how you think people overpay for ars that aren't any better than your model1sales stuff. your mention of "you get what you pay for" is a bs salesman line etc. your arrogance is pretty clear.


when you show me a rifle that you built for $5-600 that kept up with the likes of the "filthy 14" or the lmt over on m4c that recently went 10k rounds with out cleaning...you let me know.

cheers.

 

[dscottdennison]

Come on over (jk, you can't). I can show you more than a few.

Again, I guess it is not clear that I am not so much bashing the "better" brands as much as saying that if you think anything else out there that is the same specs is "inferior" somehow, you are incorrect. Some assembly required.

 

[Jeff22]

quality control

To take this discussion back on track --

I've seen dozens of discussions like this on various firearms related forums over the years.

"Just as good as" is NOT "as good"

If you're shopping for an AR-15, you need to buy a gun where the gas key is properly staked to the bolt carrier group. If you are going to use the pre-existing iron sights, you need a gun that has the proper height front sight tower for the barrel length of your particular weapon. If you plan to fit an after market stock, you probably need a gun that has a GI spec receiver extension. The .223 Remington chamber is tighter than a 5.56mm spec chamber, and so if you plan to use reloads or military spec ammo then you need a 5.56 mm chamber on your gun. Select the rate of rifling twist appropriate to the weight of bullet that you are shooting.

If you are planning to use your rifle for duty use as a cop, or serious rifle competition, or if you attend training classes where you might shoot 1200 rns in 3 days, then you need quality equipment.

If you are a more casual user, then one of the cheaper guns might still give you good service.

All of the M-16s I used in my military service were made by Colt or FN.

I have four AR-15 type rifles. All Colt. An SP1 I bought in 1977. An A2 I bought in 1990. A 6430 9mm carbine I bought in 1992. An A3 I bought in 2007 (in preparation for taking a rifle class with Pat Rogers of EAG tactical) .

I also have a S&W M&P 15-22 I use for cheap practice, as well as an Atchisson .22 converter I bought back in about 1982 that I had tuned by John Norrell.

If I buy another AR-15, it will probably come from Bravo Company. They're a local vendor for me, and have good quality control and good customer service.

There are lots of choices around. If you buy a gun from a tier 1 or tier 2 manufacturer you'll probably be happy with it.

 

[dscottdennison]

and all of that is easy for well under $1,000.... that's all I'm saying.

 

[diesel]

new to black guns

hi guys;
i have a question is a panther ar a good starter ar? i am a ak47 kind of guy but i wanted to get into the ar platform.
i purchased a dpms panther a-15.
the rifle will only be used for plinking around on the farm or for the few stray coyotes we have
a little input would be nice
thanks Don