Various M4 makers and the features they offer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charts like this are stupid.

It's funny how some people see charts like this made up by one guy on the internet and all of a sudden it's an authority on AR15's...

Some of the stuff listed on that chart are straight up wrong and/or misleading too, although most of it is seemingly technically correct...

Some of the things listed mean something (like MPI'ed bolts, chrome lined barrels, etc...)... but...

A lot of the things listed on that chart mean absolutely nothing.

Seriously, does it matter if my AR is parked under the FSB? no.

Do the FSB pins need to be tapered? no.

Does it matter if I have M4 feedramps on my semi auto? no.

Do I need dual heat shields? no.

Is a 1/7 twist the optimal twist? Not to most.

Some will argue that high pressure testing will actually cause undo stress on the parts being tested...

Another thing to understand is that in some cases, not being milsepc can actually be better. One instance for example is that of LMT barrels, which are overbored. It's not milspec, but it makes for a much more accurate chrome lined barrel (better than Colt). Why isn't that on the chart?

Anyways, I could go on and on...
Click to expand...

Charts like this show people what the differences are between a mil-spec, TDP following weapon and one that is not.

The chart was NOT made by one guy. I and most of the staff/mods and members on M4C put this thing together. It might not be 100% perfect, but it IS the best thing out there to date to show the differences.

Nothing on this chart is misleading in any way. It is also NOT a personal preference chart. If you like your barrels to be 1/9 twist SS, then great and there is nothing wrong with that. The US govt does not believe this to be the best choice for a combat weapon.


C4
 
I have no agenda, I just like people to get what they want/need and hopefully get the best deal on top of it. For most people, CMMG, Sabre, Stag, S&W, and LMT make the better ones for the money. Many of these cost as much as a Bushmaster which I don't think is quite as good, yet Bushy gets a lot of business... Yet Bushmaster has some things on the list that Stag and LMT don't have... and people seem to believe that Bushy is great... that's not to say that Bushmaster hasn't put out a good weapon or two... But they don't make as good a weapon as LMT or CMT...

You're just more likely to get a better deal and a better rifle if you buy one of those that I listed as opposed to Bushmaster or DPMS...

I like quality, I do, I just believe that this list is possibly doing a disservice to some people by being misleading and not explaining the importance of the features that you feel are so important... It would mean more if it had an explaination. That way people could really decide which of these rifles they really should consider and why.
Click to expand...

People that want a TDP following, Mil-Spec weapon will find this chart VERY helpful. As I said, this chart was put together by a bunch of people that are heavily involved in this industry and do know exactly what they are talking about.

Without charts like this, all that people have to go on is internet BS and the marketing agenda of a manufacturer. Case in point, had a customer buy a Magpul CTR (mil-spec version) from me. He calls me up a couple days later and says that I must of sent him the commercial version of the CTR. I asked him who made his receiver extension? He advised that his weapon is mil-spec all the way. I then asked again who made the RE or the entire weapon. He again assured me that he bought a mil-spec weapon. On the third try I finally got out of him that it was a BM and the dealer that he bought it from told him that it was a mil-spec M4 just like the ones our Military carries.

Do you think this chart would have helped that guy out? You betcha!

I get a call like this almost every week where the consumer was mislead into believe that brand XYZ is the best quality out there.


C4
 
I like quality, I do, I just believe that this list is possibly doing a disservice to some people by being misleading and not explaining the importance of the features that you feel are so important.
Click to expand...
The chart is not stupid. If someone was to buy an AR based merely on this chart or one's like it then that would be stupid. They get what they deserve. The information is on this forum and others. Even google would turn up why some of these items are important and some are not. If someone can't do some basic research before plopping out a grand on the counter, then they are going to get the best rifle for them.

But I agree, some of these items are usually not important to 90% of AR owners. For example, I always disassemble my barrels and Gunkote them so park under the FSB is a non-issue for me. I don't care of the pins are tapered (I have to look up which way they get driven out anyway). I do care if the key screws are staked

However, for someone who wants an M4 as close as possible to what the military has, this is great info. Does that mean that it's not a good rifle if it's not "as close as possible to what the military has"? No.


BTW, Colt makes the M4 and always has. Why does it surprise anybody that the Colt rifle is closer to the M4 than any other and that all the other manufactures are playing catch up? All Colt has to do for a civie version is leave the automatic parts out and swap in a 16" barrel. The DOD already paid for R&D and production setup. All civilians buyers pay for is materials, marketing and a little extra labor. The rest is pure profit for Colt.
 
The list is innaccurate as far as the RRA Entry Tactical is concerned. Mine has M4 feedramps that are actually cut into the upper receiver, too, unless I'm mistaken as to what you're referring to. I think there may be a couple other things off on that, too, unless my rifle is just different than average.
 
The list is innaccurate as far as the RRA Entry Tactical is concerned. Mine has M4 feedramps that are actually cut into the upper receiver, too, unless I'm mistaken as to what you're referring to.
Click to expand...

I see about a dozen Rock River barrels and uppers a month through my shop for service work and I'm also a stocking Rock River dealer.

Recent Rock River rifles do have feedramps machined into the receiver and barrel extension vs. the dremeled ones that they have been doing for years.
However, these additional feedramps cuts are NOT the same as actual M4 feedramps.
You can verify this by removing the barrel from your receiver and installing it on a Colt, LMT or Stag receiver with proper M4 feedramps.

I have.
 
The gov't TDP isn't the end all of AR manufacturing (especially since the military has turned down a few improvements proposed by Colt), but it should be at least used as a starting point IMO. As already said some of the "milspec" just really isn't all that important to the function or longevity of a rifle. That said, the chart is nice to have. :)
 
RockyMtnTactical.... Still waiting for you to present your data so the Chart can be updated........

Or are you typical of the "It sucks for no other reason then I say so" crowd and have nothing of value to offer to present your "Charts are stupid" stance...
 
Email Stag if you want to know about that. The guy who made the chart has posted several times to me, googled for information, but he has yet to take it straight to the source to find out... He's given plenty of effort... much more than it would have taken to simply email Stag Arms... If he really wants to find out, he will.

I'm not asking him to take my word. I have told him one specific thing that was wrong with the chart (Among others), told him where to get the information... I'm not gonna hold his hand throughout the whole deal...

I'm done with this thread though. I've made my point. Some agree, some don't...

Stay safe.
 
RockyMtnTactical
Email Stag if you want to know about that. The guy who made the chart has posted several times to me, googled for information, but he has yet to take it straight to the source to find out... He's given plenty of effort... much more than it would have taken to simply email Stag Arms... If he really wants to find out, he will.

I'm not asking him to take my word. I have told him one specific thing that was wrong with the chart (Among others), told him where to get the information... I'm not gonna hold his hand throughout the whole deal...

I'm done with this thread though. I've made my point. Some agree, some don't...

Stay safe.
Click to expand...

Thank you.. that is exactly the response I expected from you.. all show.. no info....

Just wanted to verify....
 
As a Authorized SA dealer for many years, I am not aware of what "facts" you are talking about. We are also a SD, LMT and Colt dealer with the majority of these models sitting in our shop right now. I love to know what "facts" we are missing.



C4
 
Grant, please... you speak to SA enough. It will take you 20 seconds worth of time to ask them if they do special runs of 4150 barrels, etc... Why waste your time responding to me. I am amazed that you guys all want me to verify it but you're so scared to mention it to Stag... The source is where you should be getting your information anyways.
 
Grant, please... you speak to SA enough. It will take you 20 seconds worth of time to ask them if they do special runs of 4150 barrels, etc... Why waste your time responding to me. I am amazed that you guys all want me to verify it but you're so scared to mention it to Stag... The source is where you should be getting your information anyways.
Click to expand...

Special run??? To date, they have done ONE special run of 4150 barrels that were available to the public. That is it! There is no reason what so ever to put a special run that they do once every 2-3 years in the chart.

This chart is about what the consumer can buy off the rack, as is from the factory. Not stuff that can special ordered via a dealer.

Scared of Stag??? Not sure who that would be.

Sadly, going direct to most of the manufacturers is a waste of time. They will feed you more BS about what they do and don't do. The only way to really know who is using what steel is by destructive testing (which has been done on several of the weapons listed in the chart).


C4
 
I wonder if I put a chart together like this(got my information from top import mechanics) detailing the differences between a Honda automobile engine and a Yugo automobile engine if people would come on here saying how stupid and worthless the chart is. They could claim that their Yugo has been completely reliable and there is no reason to spend more money on a Honda. Some people just like to be difficult.
 
Let's bring this discussion back to the chart and improving it if you know of better information. If you don't care for the chart, then please just avoid the thread. If you feel some of these features are unimportant or unnecessary, then please start a separate thread to discuss that issue.
 
Well ive learned a lot. My Sherluk upper is crap! lol. Oh well, guess ill swap it for a Stag with the Bravo(BCM) Bolt carrier group. Who makes the Sherluk stuff anyway?
 
Nikon, that is a good question. It is often times very hard to pin down who is making what for small time manufacturers as they change parts often in order to get the best deal.



C4
 
Don't Tread On Me
Member


Join Date: July 19, 2004
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 2,213

LOL.


Means absolutely nothing? Well, the U.S. military and their decades of experience (centuries actually) and experts disagree with you. They dictate each and every little thing listed on that chart as part of their specification FOR A REASON. I used to question things like that as being silly, but it isn't silly simply because I was ignorant of the reasons why. Tiny differnces might mean nothing to you, but they might have caused a problem for some GI at some place at some time.
Click to expand...

With respect, this statement is ridiculous.

The Army does not have centuries of experience with the M4. They have a couple of decades.

This IS the same Army that screwed the Garand, the M14 and the M16 from the designers' specs, creating massive issues with each. The M14 was so bad it only lasted 7 years in primary service. They saw fit to dictate changes to Garand and Stoner, causing issues with each. One of the criteria the Army uses is "cost."

This chart IS useful as a reference, but "this is what the manual says" is not a valid argument unless backed up by a solid justification, and "The Army says so" is not it.

How's that world's greatest camouflage, the ACU pattern working out for the Army?
 
there's really no good reason to resurrect a 4 yr old thread to beat this horse some more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Tell me about the M4
Replies
3
Views
478
trapshooter
T
S
  • Locked
What is this Bushmaster M4 AR ?
Replies
9
Views
760
Omaha-BeenGlockin
O
B
  • Locked
Charles Daly M4-LE
Replies
18
Views
1K
Bailey Guns
B
S
  • Locked
M4 Cut
Replies
11
Views
1K
RockyMtnTactical
R
P
  • Locked
1991 Colt made M4?
Replies
18
Views
802
LensWork
L
Back
Top