"TOP Tier" AR15
- Thread starter Archangel14
- Start date
- Status
Quentin
Member
Archangel14, you might want to look at Rob Sloyer's old M4 Compatibility Chart to get a more thorough answer. It's getting hard to find but but a nice article showing images and explaining it is linked below.
The M4 Chart is from about 2009 so some brands may be better today but it still illustrates how close civilian "M4geries" come to the Colt M4 Technical Data Package. About 14 different brands were compared as to about 21 TDP specifications and ranked by how well they adhered to the specs. The Tier 1 M4s were Colt, BCM, Daniel Defense, Noveske and LMT. Next came the "Tier 2" models which were missing some features and consisted of S&W, Charles Daly, ArmaLite, CMMG and maybe Stag. Those in the next group were missing even more features, RRA, Bushmaster, then Olympia and DPMS bringing up the rear. (DPMS at the time only got 3 things right!) Even worse ARs can be found like Vulcan/Hesse/Blackthorne but they weren't included. Again, there may be improvements in the lower tier rifles today.
Anyway, you might want to peruse the article below and compare brands you like to the Tier 1 M4s. (You'll have to dig up their specs if they even provide such a thing.) Are these specifications important? Yes they are. Are they important to you? Only you can answer that.
http://www.03designgroup.com/reviews/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&gid=5
The M4 Chart is from about 2009 so some brands may be better today but it still illustrates how close civilian "M4geries" come to the Colt M4 Technical Data Package. About 14 different brands were compared as to about 21 TDP specifications and ranked by how well they adhered to the specs. The Tier 1 M4s were Colt, BCM, Daniel Defense, Noveske and LMT. Next came the "Tier 2" models which were missing some features and consisted of S&W, Charles Daly, ArmaLite, CMMG and maybe Stag. Those in the next group were missing even more features, RRA, Bushmaster, then Olympia and DPMS bringing up the rear. (DPMS at the time only got 3 things right!) Even worse ARs can be found like Vulcan/Hesse/Blackthorne but they weren't included. Again, there may be improvements in the lower tier rifles today.
Anyway, you might want to peruse the article below and compare brands you like to the Tier 1 M4s. (You'll have to dig up their specs if they even provide such a thing.) Are these specifications important? Yes they are. Are they important to you? Only you can answer that.
http://www.03designgroup.com/reviews/bcm-complete-ar15-upper-and-lower-receivers
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&gid=5
Last edited:
mljdeckard
Member
Most rifles will work just fine for most people in most circumstances most of the time. You have to run an AR pretty hard to reveal any difference in performance.
Having said that, All machines fail eventually. There are some things that a manufacturer can do to make sure they last longer than the rest, just like cars. Some of these solutions are very cost effective, some aren't worth it. (To me, anyway.) I THINK, the Law of Diminishing Returns starts at a Colt 6920. You can pay more, but the return you will get won't be proportional.
There are a few higher-end features I like, particularly Noveske's double chrome-lined barrels. But they aren't necessarily worth the extra expense.
Having said that, All machines fail eventually. There are some things that a manufacturer can do to make sure they last longer than the rest, just like cars. Some of these solutions are very cost effective, some aren't worth it. (To me, anyway.) I THINK, the Law of Diminishing Returns starts at a Colt 6920. You can pay more, but the return you will get won't be proportional.
There are a few higher-end features I like, particularly Noveske's double chrome-lined barrels. But they aren't necessarily worth the extra expense.
Infidel4life11
Member
I like what you guys are getting at, but here is where we all "miss" the points. Mil-Spec is the standard set forth by Military because centuries of war have taught us what stands up to the abuse war, Mil-Spec= reliability. If you meet or exceed that, IMO, thats a good weapon. Jim bob milling crap in his garage and writing mil-spec on it doesn't make it mil-spec. I said "they put a more into they're product" meaning the same thing you guys said about better steel used, coatings, better quality parts, etc. I'm sorry I keep it "KISS" next time I'll type it all out. Your ave Soldier is only allowed skill level 1 maintenance on their weapons ie: cleaning, they can not take out the trigger group, remove the extractor from the bolt, or replace springs that is an armor's job. Yes the most of us do these things or tell our armors to do it for us. As Americans we expect great QC and CS from the companies we give our money to. Yes QC can assist you receiving a good weapon however if your company cuts corners in manufacturing and doesn't use quality parts (the steels, coatings, etc we talked about) you just got a quality inspeced piece of crap. CS doesn't get you a good weapon it gets you a good company, I need a weapon that runs and not CS vs. a weapon that doesn't run and needing CS. Mr. Mustard, Tony and Archangel I enjoy you guys we've been on many threads together so with all thats been said here, what makes a rifle top tier: Quality of materials used, the expertise used in manufacturing and assembling, no corners cut, I'll even go as far as the QC involved in the process and great CS to call and tell them their weapon is still up and running. I'm not a brand person but if you put a Bravo, Daniel Defense, Noveske, Sig Sauer, or Knights up against a DPMS, Olympic, model1sales, Carbon15 or Mohawk shot for shot, DPMS, Olympic, model1sales, Carbon15 or Mohawk are going to lose. Yes I agree your ave. person doesn't need a top tier weapon, those of us that live by guns do. I heart you guys
Last edited:
If you see a Colt malfunctioning "all the time" what exactly is happening?
I'm just curious.
What ammo, what magazines what circumstances?
I'm just curious.
What ammo, what magazines what circumstances?
Top Tier (and common enough): Colt, Bravo Company Manufacturing (BCM), Daniel Defense (DD), Noveske.
S&W, Stag, PSA, RRA...not top tier. They might be what you want, they might represent great value, they might be better for you and your intended uses...but if you want to talk about which ones are better, ignoring price...it's one of those first four. (and some others make good stuff, but we'll leave it at those four for simplicity sake at this point)
I'd be curious in finding out what your friend is doing wrong, or suggesting he get the rifle properly checked out by somebody competent if he isn't doing anything wrong, because something is wrong there. What ammo? Magazines? Cleaning schedule? Bolt wet/slick, or dry? What kind of problems does he have?
S&W, Stag, PSA, RRA...not top tier. They might be what you want, they might represent great value, they might be better for you and your intended uses...but if you want to talk about which ones are better, ignoring price...it's one of those first four. (and some others make good stuff, but we'll leave it at those four for simplicity sake at this point)
I'd be curious in finding out what your friend is doing wrong, or suggesting he get the rifle properly checked out by somebody competent if he isn't doing anything wrong, because something is wrong there. What ammo? Magazines? Cleaning schedule? Bolt wet/slick, or dry? What kind of problems does he have?
Last edited:
Infidel4life11
Member
Not that I could ever afford it but I would consider LaRue tactical to be top tier, I've seen their OBR's run..........AMAZING
justice06rr
Member
Just throwing my 2cents in the mix, although i'm no expert;
There is a clear difference between Top-tier brands like Noveske, Mid-tier like Smith&Wesson, and Bottom-tier like DPMS.
If you compare and physically hold all 3 side-by-side, you will know. You get what you pay for. This is not to say that the lower end brands are crap; the top tier brands are just way more superior and proven. I would relate this scenario to cars: a BMW and a Hyundai will do the same exact thing and get you from point A to B. But there is no doubt that BMW is a superior and higher quality vehicle.
If you really have the cheddar, go buy a top tier rifle like Colt, BCM, DD, or Noveske. If you are a budget conscious shooter ,then a S&W/Stag/PSA should serve you fine.
There is a clear difference between Top-tier brands like Noveske, Mid-tier like Smith&Wesson, and Bottom-tier like DPMS.
If you compare and physically hold all 3 side-by-side, you will know. You get what you pay for. This is not to say that the lower end brands are crap; the top tier brands are just way more superior and proven. I would relate this scenario to cars: a BMW and a Hyundai will do the same exact thing and get you from point A to B. But there is no doubt that BMW is a superior and higher quality vehicle.
If you really have the cheddar, go buy a top tier rifle like Colt, BCM, DD, or Noveske. If you are a budget conscious shooter ,then a S&W/Stag/PSA should serve you fine.
Last edited:
Infidel4life11
Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_4CskJJxvY&feature=plcp
A look at Bravo Company
A look at Bravo Company
Last edited:
plateshooter
Member
Agree 100%
meanmrmustard
Member
I don't agree. I think holding and shooting (accuracy comparison aside) they feel the same. But, look deeper: field strip them and you'll see where the cost savings were made. I see your point, but I think it's more than skin deep. I don't consider Colt top, but more of a company resting on laurels. There are others in its price range making rifles as good, if not better. BCM, DD, LaRue. I like their stuff, but whoa nelly, I'm not paying that much when a Smith runs as good.
Ps: I'll give you two gold stars for not using vehicle metaphors
Last edited:
meanmrmustard
Member
Oh man, you ain't kiddin. Coworker got a big bonus check last fall, bought the PredatAR 556 18". Let me shoot it! However, it was 45 degrees in late November and windy as hell. The chattering was drowned out by accurate awesomeness and howling gales. I'd call it top tier, in that it's been 100% reliable so far, is accurate, his wife took her first deer with it during our states doe extension season. Boucoup money though.
I don't think he is being argumentative. Lots of people going through the same dilemma lately. Now that the mid-tier brands are offering totally mil-spec options they are wondering why pay an extra 3...4...5 hundred for supposed "top tier" brands. Back even just 5 years ago...the reasons were a bit more obvious (although not necessarily more pertinent).
The only reason I can think of, for the OP's purpose, is resale value. Since he phrased it as "invest in" an AR. If he decides to sell it 10 years from now, a Colt will fetch more cash than a S&W or Stag. But it seems most agree, for plinking and general SD/HD use, a mid-tier will suffice.
One other comment: about the carbine classes and observations of which brands fail, it stands to reason that people who drop big bucks on top tier also know what they are doing when it comes to cleaning and maintenance. A lot of people who run the cheaper brands are probably less experienced, which could artificially skew the rate of malfunctions. But in the end I agree with the sentiment to just buy what you want. Chances are, it will be completely adequate for your intended purposes.
meanmrmustard
Member
Melonite coating has, by means of reviews here and elsewhere, have proved quite resilient to wear, and accuracy potential from treated barrels, IME, was greater than chrome lined.
SpentCasing
Member
Colt doesnt use CHF barrels as it isnt milspec (it is for Diameco/Colt Canada though). PSA uses CHF barrels from FN. Id much rather have the CHF FN barrel on a hard use gun. FN also owns a proprietary alloy they call "machine gun steel" used for the 240 Bravos that they use on their barrels.
Welding Rod
Member
I will add that the budget conscious are also more likely to skimp on the quality of their magazines and the quality of their ammo.
OP - Just keep in mind that as someone else posted above, "top teir" brand name doesn't necessary make the gun more desireable for your purpose. The model variation is huge factor.
For example I have 3 BCM Govt 20s and my lowly 20" RRAs with non-milspec heavy barrels shoot groups have the size. The BCMs were built for reliability when not well maintained and light weight, and the RRAs were built to be accurate. The RRAs chambers don't stretch the brass much compared to the BCMs. Since I sometimes handload my match ammo, I like this. Apples and Oranges.
I maintain all of them reasonably well and have never had a malfunction that wasn't due to a bad magazine. Well actually that isn't true... I found my BCMs can choke on S&B 55 grain 223 ammo. Evidently the S&B doesn't produce enough pressure reliably cycle their actions. The BCMs are 100% with 556 though. The RRAs have ate anything I have fed them, 223 or 556, and chuck the brass into a nice neat pile.
henschman
Member
I would also define "top tier" ARs as being those that meet or exceed the mil specs. The chart that Quentin posted gives a good run-down of what that means. As he said, some mfg's have upped their standards since that was written, and there are new mfg's on the market that weren't around back then who meet or exceed the mil specs, like PSA.
Infidel4life11
Member
I'll be getting one of those PSA's 14.7" CHF uppers soon you can not beat their price
Smokin Gator
Member
No mention of the JP rifles? What about them? Mark
No...I don't see how you get that. I'm pretty sure that he is saying the rate of malfunctions could be affected by the wallet size/credit limit (as you put it, or just willingness to spend money on guns and stuff, whatever) because a lot of less expensive stuff (guns, magazines, ammo, etc) are less reliable. It is a solid theory. I agree that there is indeed a chance that people who buy less expensive guns are more likely to put less expensive ammo through them while using less expensive magazines than are people that buy more expensive guns.
Quentin
Member
That's an excellent point and no doubt contributes to the reliability issues often linked to "bargain barrel" ARs. Also likely with low price rifles, low end upgrades and unnecessary ninja crap tend to further degrade reliability. Lastly, it stands to reason people buying at the low end are novices and tend to add user error into the mix.
- Status
