The AR-15 all famous m4 "Chart" that some swear by.
- Thread starter helz_mcfugly
- Start date
- Status
Joe Demko
Member
Failure rate matters.
What are the numbers for each?
Stats trump conjecture.
What are the numbers for each?
Stats trump conjecture.
Timradcliffe345
member
Having shot/carried military issued M4 through two tours of combat as Infantry and shot the civilian (LE) version Colt M4 (same damn thing)... This chart is based on Milspec which means nothing to me as Milspec is just standard GI Issue. And I hate to break it to anyone that thrives on this chart as it is outdated and many firearms manufacturers have upped their "standards" based on the .gov standard of what they feel a jamming jenny should look like.
But aside from all the BS other things such as Switchblock availability, monolithic rails, double chrome lined M249 barrel, failure rate, suppressability all count and are no where on that chart (yes I am pointing to Noveske).
I will say that Noveske is a much better rifle than the Colt M4. Of course you pay the money to have one too but its worth it IMO and this chart is missleading. But whatever. Colts are decent I just want more and now that I am out of the Military I get to choose my own firearm.
But aside from all the BS other things such as Switchblock availability, monolithic rails, double chrome lined M249 barrel, failure rate, suppressability all count and are no where on that chart (yes I am pointing to Noveske).
I will say that Noveske is a much better rifle than the Colt M4. Of course you pay the money to have one too but its worth it IMO and this chart is missleading. But whatever. Colts are decent I just want more and now that I am out of the Military I get to choose my own firearm.
Last edited:
By the same logic, you don't need a defensive gun at all. You'll probably never be in a combat situation, so you don't need it.
I don't know about "chart worshipping", but I'm generally agreeing with the things that the chart says are good and bad for a combat rifle (it's not a big deal for a range toy), I'm not a xy Bravo anything, but I may very well be in a combat situation some day. Why? Well, beyond the obvious potential for self-defense shared with every person on the face of the planet, I'm a LEO. I carry a patrol rifle. Any rifle of mine that I expect to receive hard use, or that may be used defensively, gets parts that, for the most part, meet the specs listed in the chart.
Mike
Tarvis
Member
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Accuracy is more dependent on the shooter and the rifle/ammo combination than who made the rifle. Grow up dude, you are far from enlightenment.
Which factor? I doubt there's any data out there on some of the features mentioned in The Chart, as they don't generate stats (parkerizing under FSB, for instance). Others do (bolt failure rates have been discussed quite a bit). I don't have the data in front of me, but if you're really interested, the search function should bring them up.
Mike
Timradcliffe345
member
Anyone know any dealers with 6920's in stock?
Jaybird78
Member
Yes....Yes...Yes.......but can these rifles outclass a Glock or super custom 1911.
Buy what you want....Ford vs. Chevy and Colt vs. Bushmaster
Yet again we regress to the childhood school yard.......and my dad can beat up your dad. 
Buy what you want....Ford vs. Chevy and Colt vs. Bushmaster
Yet again we regress to the childhood school yard.......and my dad can beat up your dad.
innerpiece
Member
agreed Jaybird.
Tim, on page 2 you said:
"For the record: I believe that the Colt 6920 is the rifle to beat when it comes to a fighting AR15 carbine. I want to run my carbines hard, that is why I go with a Colt. I have three other AR brands, the Colt is my GTG."
but a couple weeks back you were asking if they were even a "decent AR?!
"I am able to buy a NIB COlt 6920 for $1450, is that a fair price? I need to know soon whether or not I should push ahead with this. Is the 6920 a decent AR? Thanks."
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=409014
lol, anyway..
I dont care about that chart. it really dont mean anything to me.. as I dont have, nor intend, to get any of those rifles. it CERTAINLY does not apply to most folks, as its a mere few modles, and a couple brands.. accurate or not, if ya spout off with it on a conversation about anything other than one of the models represented, it has NO relevance... and that would kinda be "brand snobbish"
usefull or not, I dont know... but I do know its put into TOO many threads here at THR where it does NOT apply at all!
just my .02.
take it easy!
ip.
Tim, on page 2 you said:
"For the record: I believe that the Colt 6920 is the rifle to beat when it comes to a fighting AR15 carbine. I want to run my carbines hard, that is why I go with a Colt. I have three other AR brands, the Colt is my GTG."
but a couple weeks back you were asking if they were even a "decent AR?!
"I am able to buy a NIB COlt 6920 for $1450, is that a fair price? I need to know soon whether or not I should push ahead with this. Is the 6920 a decent AR? Thanks."
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=409014
lol, anyway..
I dont care about that chart. it really dont mean anything to me.. as I dont have, nor intend, to get any of those rifles. it CERTAINLY does not apply to most folks, as its a mere few modles, and a couple brands.. accurate or not, if ya spout off with it on a conversation about anything other than one of the models represented, it has NO relevance... and that would kinda be "brand snobbish"
usefull or not, I dont know... but I do know its put into TOO many threads here at THR where it does NOT apply at all!
just my .02.
take it easy!
ip.
Hey...I have a Bushie...Great gun ,never failed me.If all the "chart" BS has got you down...buy a SA M1A.Better accuracy than the Colt,more reliable than the Colt,....and....much more knockdown power than the Colt.
I guess I am just tired of all the Colt vs. Bushmaster BS!!!
I guess I am just tired of all the Colt vs. Bushmaster BS!!!
FlyinBryan
Member
tim.
to be honest, i have a hard time taking anything you say seriously.
i see you say things like this:
but just a couple of weeks back you were saying this:
then this was a reply by another member to your question about the colt.
does that sound familiar?
it should because this was your reply to someone elses question about a colt just a few days ago.
keep in mind there are only a couple of weeks from the beginning of this till now,,,, so come on man.
see what i mean?
i think its great to give advice to folks, but really man, shouldnt it be from experience? thats not the high road i came to expect.
on a side note, it does make me feel better about when you called my ar junk the other day.
to be honest, i have a hard time taking anything you say seriously.
i see you say things like this:
but just a couple of weeks back you were saying this:
then this was a reply by another member to your question about the colt.
does that sound familiar?
it should because this was your reply to someone elses question about a colt just a few days ago.
keep in mind there are only a couple of weeks from the beginning of this till now,,,, so come on man.
see what i mean?
i think its great to give advice to folks, but really man, shouldnt it be from experience? thats not the high road i came to expect.
on a side note, it does make me feel better about when you called my ar junk the other day.
Last edited:
FlyinBryan
Member
lol, innerpeace.
beat me to it, its become pretty obvious i guess.
beat me to it, its become pretty obvious i guess.
innerpiece
Member
yep..lol it is
just hopin the mods get as tired of it as the members who actually contribute are...
either way, oh well. ya cant see the light without the dark
ip.
just hopin the mods get as tired of it as the members who actually contribute are...
either way, oh well. ya cant see the light without the dark
ip.
FlyinBryan
Member
im pretty sure your definition of "accuracy" differs greatly from his.
lately hes shooting quarter inch 5 shot groups.
100 yard,,,,,, 5 shot groups,,,,,, the size of an M&M,,,,,, are beyond what the finest marksman can do with less than superb equipment.
trust me.
it matters.
jaholder1971
Member
Reading this list and watching those who take it as gospel has been entertaining.
The milspec standards were created by a bunch of ordnance officers who sat in a small room with an M16 and tried to figure out every possible way the rifle could fail and how to prevent it. There is nothing built by milspec that is guaranteed not to fail any more than a non-milspec is guaranteed to be a timebomb waiting to blow up.
I've yet to see any non-milspec bolt or barrel fail unless it was some sort of kaboom involved. This includes DCM across the course rifles that get up to 5,000-7,000 rounds/yr through them in all kind of locations and conditions. Is this combat conditions? No, but it's the closest example of hard use from non-milspec rifles.
I don't count kabooms, as every KB I've seen has been bad ammo and that will disassemble any rifle with extreme prejudice.
It's gonna take a lot of alcohol to convince me that the color of the extractor spring spacer means a damn thing.
I'd never have an M16 carrier on a civilian rifle, at least until there is some consistency in BATFE regulations.
A bolt carrier key should be staked IMHO. One probably won't come apart if torqued down well and red Loc Tite applied, but staking it leaves nothing to chance. With that said, that job's easily done yourself and it doesn't take much of a stake to guarantee that it ain't going anywhere.
I've never seen a loose FSB, period. Parkerizing under it is a red herring. I've seen plenty of M16's and M4's serving GI's in parts unknown missing most of the finish off the barrels and anodizing off the receivers yet the .gov didn't stop the war to refinish them.
Again, much ado about nothing, unless you're planning your own personal war and then I'd say you've got bigger issues to deal with.
The milspec standards were created by a bunch of ordnance officers who sat in a small room with an M16 and tried to figure out every possible way the rifle could fail and how to prevent it. There is nothing built by milspec that is guaranteed not to fail any more than a non-milspec is guaranteed to be a timebomb waiting to blow up.
I've yet to see any non-milspec bolt or barrel fail unless it was some sort of kaboom involved. This includes DCM across the course rifles that get up to 5,000-7,000 rounds/yr through them in all kind of locations and conditions. Is this combat conditions? No, but it's the closest example of hard use from non-milspec rifles.
I don't count kabooms, as every KB I've seen has been bad ammo and that will disassemble any rifle with extreme prejudice.
It's gonna take a lot of alcohol to convince me that the color of the extractor spring spacer means a damn thing.
I'd never have an M16 carrier on a civilian rifle, at least until there is some consistency in BATFE regulations.
A bolt carrier key should be staked IMHO. One probably won't come apart if torqued down well and red Loc Tite applied, but staking it leaves nothing to chance. With that said, that job's easily done yourself and it doesn't take much of a stake to guarantee that it ain't going anywhere.
I've never seen a loose FSB, period. Parkerizing under it is a red herring. I've seen plenty of M16's and M4's serving GI's in parts unknown missing most of the finish off the barrels and anodizing off the receivers yet the .gov didn't stop the war to refinish them.
Again, much ado about nothing, unless you're planning your own personal war and then I'd say you've got bigger issues to deal with.
Lonestar.45
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,077
I wish I would have run across that chart long before I started buying AR's. It should be required reading for any potential AR newbie. It would have saved me a ton of money. A lot of folks feel the same way. Like anything, take it with a grain of salt and do your own research, but I believe it is very helpful and cuts through a lot of the "buy ABC" and you can't go wrong nonsense.
Buy once cry once.
Buy once cry once.
Hey...I have a Bushie...Great gun ,never failed me.If all the "chart" BS has got you down...buy a SA M1A.Better accuracy than the Colt,more reliable than the Colt,....and....much more knockdown power than the Colt.
Oh
i forgot to add...about the same price as a COLT!
I guess I am just tired of all the Colt vs. Bushmaster BS!!!
Oh
i forgot to add...about the same price as a COLT!
I guess I am just tired of all the Colt vs. Bushmaster BS!!!
HorseSoldier
Member
I've seen two AR bolt failures, both complete seperations at the cam pin, that were not kB related. One was an Olympic bolt with an unknown (but likely pretty high) round count on it. The other was a Model 1 bolt that was bought new by a buddy of mine and that failed at less than 500 rounds.
All the various M4A1 bolt failures I've seen (in all cases I can think of, locking lugs sheared off at the extractor) have been ammo related.
A sample size of two failures isn't exactly statistically significant, but is meaningful enough to me personally that for a serious fighting rifle I'd limit myself to higher quality manufacturers for parts and components.
sublimaze41
Member
I want me one of dem SA M1A.... in 5.56
HorseSoldier
Member
It's not like who builds M4s and M16s for the US military is an unknowable mystery, and anyone who builds them for a .mil contract has to conform to the TDP for the weapon system in question. The chart only illustrates how close a given manufacturer comes to matching the TDP.
It is possible to produce a higher quality product than the TDP -- the LMT enhanced reliability bolt and bolt carrier seem like a good example of this.
It is also possible to cut corners to lower costs and produce a weapon that will not be as mechanically reliable or durable as a result. I'm not really sure how anyone can argue against that fact, unless they're letting their affinity for their personal AR or preferred manufacture color their thinking.
Many shooters who don't do anything but plinking may never see and real difference in performance. However, claiming there's no real difference in performance because a modest schedule of shooting doesn't reveal it is roughly on par with claiming your stock Honda Civic that gets you to work fine everyday is therefore suitable for police use in a protracted high speed freeway chase or that your Honda is ready to compete in NASCAR.
innerpiece
Member
model specifc.... even if the chart IS accurate.
model specific. thats it.....
model specific. thats it.....
innerpiece
Member
see what Egos do to conversation?!
Im right and yer not! you must be young, or dont own a gun. or I like my gun cause its the one I have, or the one I want to have.
mostly uneducated internet commandos who get threads closed or off topic.....
tho I kinda agree with Loomis, but he was also overly harsh, and he will learn overly open opinion is not welcom at THR. because we all wear tux's and callin people "stupidasses" more than once every 30 words will get yer post edited.
this thread will now self distruct..
5.4.3.2.1.
Im right and yer not! you must be young, or dont own a gun. or I like my gun cause its the one I have, or the one I want to have.
mostly uneducated internet commandos who get threads closed or off topic.....
tho I kinda agree with Loomis, but he was also overly harsh, and he will learn overly open opinion is not welcom at THR. because we all wear tux's
and callin people "stupidasses" more than once every 30 words will get yer post edited.this thread will now self distruct..
5.4.3.2.1.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
