What is wrong with "X" AR-15 manufacturer?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JWarren

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
4,632
Location
MS and LA
I'm just curious...


I see a lot of discussion of various AR manufacturers.

I have some-- yet not broad-based-- experience with AR's going back to the mid 1980's, but I've never really gotten a good answer to the question of some criticisms/favortisms.

I see a lot of criticism of Olympic ARs. Yet, my first AR was an Olympic. It ran perfectly until I sold it for an HK-91.

I really didn't find it any less reliable/functional or attactive than my friend's Colt.

Lately, I have seen a lot of critical comments about DPMS. I have one I built on a DPMS lower now. I also have a DPMS LR-308. I'm having a lot of trouble figuring why either of those are less than ideal in the AR world.


Same with Bushmaster (although I don't have any experience with those.)


So...


Could someone PLEASE tell exactly WHY some brands are preferred over others. From what I have seen, I'm not seeing a lot of difference in fit, finish, or manufacture in your "rack" AR's.

For instance...

I see a lot of postive comments about Stag AR's. Why exactly?

Please keep it to current production. It really doesn't help if Olympic made an AR two decades ago that had an out-of-spec lower. I'm really interested in the present conditions of the AR market.

Also, I am well aware that you can get a Novaske, LaRue, or whatever for a few grand that may show better performance. I'm really looking at the "standard" rather than a LaRue Stealth or what-not.

Thanks.


-- John
 
Last edited:
I urge caution when you start questioning people's religion. AR snobs are some of the most devout.

I'm not sure that there is much substance to the debate beyond the Ford vs. Chevy aspect.

My first ARs back in the mid 90s were Olympics. They ran fine and I never had a bit of trouble with them. That was also when ammo was cheap so they did get the piss shot out of them.

Since then, I have owned ARs from almost all of the big names. Now I have Colt 6920, 10.5 inch LMT MRP, and a 9mm SBR built on a DPMS lower. Even though the Colt and LMT are purported to be 'tier 1' guns, they are no more reliable than any of the 'lesser' ARs that I have experience with. My shooting buddy has a Model 1 kit built on a RRA lower. I doubt that it has jammed ten times in the 15,000 rounds or so that he has put through it since he built it several years back. It is every bit the gun that my Colt is.


I think that the logo has as much to do with it as anything.



Rob
 
Its called snobbery. Some people get too wrapped up in their Colt/LMT/Noveske/whatever love affair. A big consideration (even though they would never admit it) is bragging rights.

I have a Bushmaster, and it has worked fine for me. I'm not particularly brand loyal, it just happened to be in-stock at a fair price when I was looking for an AR.
 
The issue that I had was DPMS pivot pin does not fit Stag lower, and Bushmaster upper that I have.

Besides that, I don't see much different. It is something that I keep in mind.

-Pat
 
ar-15 dot com

If I were you I would do some more research on a site dedicated to the AR platform. AR15.com has tons of people and threads specifically directed at this topic.

It seems to me that on AR15.com most people like 4 main manufacturers. Colt, Bushmaster, RRA, and DPMS. I went with the rock river mostly because of those 4 brands it had the tightest tolerances and the most convincing reviews. But whatever gun you buy will probably be the one you will advocate for so it really doesnt matter what anyone else says.
 
If I were you I would do some more research on a site dedicated to the AR platform. AR15.com has tons of people and threads specifically directed at this topic.
Click to expand...


Oh, I hear what you are saying. I am on AR15.com a lot, and I see those threads.

Frankly, I really started this thread to see if the people making statements know WHY they say what they say.

I have long held the suspicion that a certain degree of criticism/favorites is nothing more than parroting others and having no real basis for having an opinion-- both here and on other boards.


-- John
 
The X means the rifle has the mil-spec part. Colt almost has the entire list X, while DPMS has only a few. The list only matters if you care if the rifle has military-spec parts.
 
Could someone PLEASE tell exactly WHY some brands are preferred over others. From what I have seen, I'm not seeing a lot of difference in fit, finish, or manufacture in your "rack" AR's.
Click to expand...
Disclaimer: I own AR-15s from LMT, DPMS, and Olympic; and I have owned a Colt.

I'll give the specific reasons I own each.

Colt SP1 - First AR. Price was right, and it was a pre-ban gun during the ban.

Olympic - bought the upper used, complete less BCG, for a steal of a price. I shot the upper on my Colt SP1 lower using an offset pin. Very accurate upper assembly. Recently a complete Oly lower came along at a very reasonable price so I bought it. The BCG for this rifle is being sourced in a round about way, more on that later.* Even if I factored in a new complete BCG I'd have less than $400 in this gun. For that money it's a keeper for a serviceable plinker AR. This one has an "A1.5" upper as I like to call it. A1 rear sight / carry handle, A2 style forward assist & brass deflector. Bbl is a 20" 1:9 heavy stainless with black finish. As I've said in previous threads on the subject I think of Oly as the Savage of the AR-15 world: Functional, not as pretty as the other guys, but the money is in the bbl (and I've never known of an Oly bbl that wasn't accurate).

DPMS - At the time I bought it I had the Colt SP1, and only the Oly lower. This is a 16", carbon steel, 1:9 twist, pencil bbl, flat top carbine. It fulfilled two desires at the time I bought. Those were, first, I wanted a really light pencil bbl carbine with at least a 1:9 twist, and, second, I could drop the Oly upper onto this lower and not fuss with an offset pin. This one came in on trade at work and the price was right on it as well.

LMT -
Preface: I'd grown dissatisfied with my SP1. The 1:12 bbl limited ammo choices, and the oversize pivot pin severely limited options on upper receiver upgrades. However, I refused to step down in quality if I traded it. When the chance to trade it and a used Camp Carbine for a new LMT Defender I went for it.

Why LMT? This rifle was attained for the sole purpose of being a primary defensive firearm. Knowing that the bolt undergone the HPT & MPI nondestructive testing which ensure the internal soundness of the unit is a big issue. Shot peening for stress relief is a safety net. HPT bbl is another safety net. The beefed up extractor parts, again, adds safety net. The chrome lined bbl that's more tolerant of being run dirty is another good just in case. Proper M4 feed ramps - another nice extra. Is it overkill? Possibly. However, when Murphy's law rears its ugly head I want every overkill safety net I can get to help minimize the ill effects; particularly in primary defensive weapon.

Beyond that there's the fit and finish of the rifle. A properly staked carrier key. Yes, you can fix it yourself on other rifles. But you should you have to? No way. If you're fixing it means it's an improperly done or totally ignored piece of work. The same for the staked castle nut on the receiver extension. I like it when things are done correctly. The rest of the rifle exhibits excellent fit & finish as well. I'm also a big fan of the SOPMOD stock. Stocks are a very personal thing in terms of what feels right and works for each shooter, but the SOPMOD suits me well.

I've also come to the realization that most of these extra margin of safety / insurance features revolve around the BCG. Any AR that is well built can gain most of these benefits by simply dropping in an LMT or Bravo Company BCG because the BCG, and bolt in particular, are the core or heart of the rifle. In fact I'll be doing just that with my DPMS carbine. The DPMS has a new LMT BCG on order for it. With the new BCG in place the DPMS will serve as backup to my LMT, and the Oly rifle will inherit the old DPMS bolt (yes I'll use the headspace gauges at work to check everything). For those of you who are interested in doing something similar go see your FFL - dealer cost on a new LMT complete BCG is only about $5 more than a new one from DPMS or Bushmaster, so your local dealer should take care of you.

In ideal conditions with good ammo, a clean well lubed rifle, and good mags no AR should have problems. When less than ideal circumstances arrive many of the features on top tier AR-15s simply help to make problems less likely to affect these guns.
 
Its called snobbery. Some people get too wrapped up in their Colt/LMT/Noveske/whatever love affair. A big consideration (even though they would never admit it) is bragging rights.
Click to expand...
Quite a sweeping statement, but the chart Telperion posted points out many of the differences between brands (I believe BR has a great thread in the stickies too about other differences). Just as there are differences in 1911's, there are differences in ar15s. Some important, some cosmetic or worthless, and some depend on if its a plinker or a defensive rifle. The reason I chose to not buy bushmaster has nothing to do with snobbery, I just found it lacking features I deemed necessary for my gun.

Short version, if you're buying you need to educate yourself on the differences and buy what you need.
 
The thing is, while that chart may mean something to those who will haul the rifle around in the sandbox or put many, many thousands through it, for most people it means almost nothing.
 
If there was ever proof that most internet forum-goers need things sanitized in a hierarchal fashion, that chart is it.

Hell, some of the wording on that chart doesn't even make sense. "Black extractor spring insert" for instance? No mention of 4-coil and 5-coil extractor springs, or of the insert's composition, just the color. It needs to be black. Then you get an "X." Sad, really.

The char(tm)(r) is almost, kinda sorta useful if you want to own as close as possible to a Mil-Spec M4. Any AR built for any other purpose will "score" poorly. For instance, most DCM rifles would be graded very poorly on Teh Charrt(tm)(r). It's also not necessary for a 100% reliable rifle. Chiefly because many items on the chart are band-aids for the carbine-length gas system. You can get the 5-coil extra-power extractor spring with stiffer black insert and crane O-ring along with an H buffer...or you could address the problem directly with a midlength gas system. That won't get you X's on The Chart(tm)(r), though.

And of course, 6 of the 10 "critical" items can be fixed by installing a $130 BCM BCG in even a modest AR. Three of the remaining 4 "critical" items relate to barrel construction, none of which are really critical on a semiauto gun. But they get you X's on The Char(tm)(r).
 
The last statement is probably accurate but even though some of us don't do dragging our rifles around in the sandbox or giving them the rough treatment that many in LE/Military will some of us want to know that our rifle/parts are made to the original standard or have testing behind them that builds confidence the rifle will perform as designed and intended.

For a range gun I would say any of the names here would be fine to own and use. I personally have never owned any Oly Arms products and wouldn't due to reports I have read. Oly does or at least did make some in the Short Action Magnums so I might try a barrel if I got the itch but their reputation would dissuade me. Since the OP asked for current "issues" not stuff from 20 years ago, there were a batch of specially marked AR lowers made by Olympic Arms for TROMIX that were marked for the .458 SOCOM caliber. If you go to the 458 Socom Forums you can read about several lowers that had out of spec hole locations as well as the horrible experience Tony Rumore of Tromix had with Olympic Arms.

If a lower (and even the upper receiver for that matter) is in spec and has all of the holes and openings in the right locations then I would say any lower should do. Finish and cosmetics might vary but from a "use" standpoint I would say in the end it doesn't matter. And yes, there are many in-spec lowers out their besides Colt, Noveske, LMT, etc. Bear in mind, for upper and lower receivers there are far FEWER "manufacturers" than brands. By that I mean most of the brands out there do not build them "in-house." They contract them to manufacturers like CMT. At this time I will also mention that CMT (Continental Machine & tool) is the manufacturer and Stag is their brand for retail. However CMT makes lowers & uppers for more than just Stag.

Barrel makes a difference, to me at least. Mil Spec is 4150 steel IIRC and the bore and chamber are chrome lined. Is this necessary? You decide for yourself. The reason it is mil spec is that the chrome lining helps prevent corrosion, makes it easier to clean (maybe not a reason for mil-spec but it is convenient) and it will last longer, especially for full-auto fire. Chrome lining in MOST cases will make the barrel a little less accurate. Noticeable at 50-100 yards? I doubt it. For me FN disproved the less accurate due to chrome lining saying by building the SPR bolt action .308 with a chrome lined bore that can shoot 1/2" groups at 100 yards. Barrel choice/quality will effect accuracy more than reliability. Magnetic Particle (MP) testing is done to ensure the steel does not have any weaknesses. Do you care? Maybe, maybe not.

Where you can/will see reliability issues is related more to the gas system. Gas block fitment and security to the barrel can/will effect accuracy and reliability. I prefer a steel gas block over aluminum for durability.

The "heart" of the rifle is the Bolt Carrier Group and here is where I will argue with most about where brand matters. The biggest issue in most cases with the BCG is the quality of and method used for staking the gas key to the carrier. If the gas key is not properly staked it is not a matter of IF you will have a problem but WHEN. Low volume shooters may never have an issue but when the gas key loosens the gun will malfunction. I want my bolts to be shot peened and MP tested. Shot peening increases the strength and the MP testing as stated above checks for strength issues in the steel. The extractor is also an area for breakage which will take a gun out of action so again having a shot peened extractor is a good thing. In addition the current "upgraded" bolts have a black extractor insert for reliability and a heat-treated, shot peened extractor spring. If you don't drink the Kool-aid so to speak I would still suggest a high-quality shot peend, MP inspected bolt with the extractor upgrades and a properly staked Bolt Carrier. And yes, if yours is not staked properly it can be fixed.

Lower parts kits many will say shouldn't matter, again I disagree. For the lower receiver I would say the most common non-spec part is the bolt catch. Many of the lesser quality kits/manufacturers have improperly hardened bolt catches and since it takes a decent beating it will fail if it is out of spec.

Carbine receiver extension tubes, mil-spec or non-mil-spec. I cannot see a difference other than some of the nice upgrade stocks like the Vltor and LMT/Crane stocks will only work on a mil-spec tube. Pat Rogers says the non-mil-spec tubes are weaker and I will accept his statement as valid. Maybe you don't need the strength, may be you do.

That covers most of the big stuff as I see it. If I was using my AR for home defense or any serious social occasion I want the best, I want it to work as if I were in the "sandbox." Your needs may be different. As long as you understand the differences and don't just assume we all drink the Kool-aid and make your choices accordingly only you can decide what you NEED. Like I said, many of these problems may never materialize on your gun, but for me the increased security that they won't happen by using the top of the line choices is for me reason enough to pay the difference.
 
I think the chart is "eye candy", but overall it is like a previous poster said "comparing ford to chevy". I like to think of it as comparing remington to savage, stevens, ruger, mossburg, Charles Daley, or XXX (insert rifle brand in the XXX's). I have never owned a colt, but carried one at work for the last 10 years. A good rifle, but I cannot tell the difference between it and my armalite with DPMS lower. I also have two RRA uppers on two Anvil Arms lowers that are excellent guns. All of these I would use in a tactical environment if I needed to. I actually converted my Armalite to a service weapon last week and carry it on duty now. I am sure each has it flaws and good points. One thing to notice about the chart is that they only compare certain models, but there are hunderds more that are not even considered and options that are not even looked at for those models. Take it for what it is worth...
 
Double Star produces some very decent AR rifles.
You have to like a company that sets up shop in a full auto friendly state like Kentucky!:)
standard.gif
 
it is the same with all guns, like your 1911 sucks unles it is a les baer or a wilson combat. If you own a Ruger P-series you and you family will probably die a violent death because it was not engineered my the mythical germans at H&K or even how some people believe a SA M1A will blow up in your face because it doesn't have a forged reciever like an LMT. Sometimes it is snobbery, sometimes it is just people doing a google search and reciting what they find. the difference is that some are mass produced and some are assembled more by hand. I love my bushmaster it works and it doesn't have all that crap hanging on it to make it heavy :what: Unless you are an operator or have too much money then I would just go lay hands on many at the gun shops and see which one YOU like better that fits in your budget
 
Short version, if you're buying you need to educate yourself on the differences and buy what you need.
Click to expand...

Thats the funny part... out of all the internet commandos that claim they have a "need" for this or that, how many will actually be carrying the weapon into a 3rd world craphole and engaging in a firefight?

*crickets chirping*

Yeah, thats what I thought. Lets drop the chest thumping and bravado, and admit that 99.999999% of AR owners have them as luxury toys, not because of any "need". If someone wants to spend a bunch of money on something because they WANT it, fantastic, thats their business and I can appreciate that. Its no different than a fast car, fancy boat, or plasma TV. But dont try to express some fictional "need".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
What AR-15 manufacturer?
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
ACBMWM3
A
L
  • Locked
Thoughts on DPMS ARs?
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
possum
P
C
  • Locked
Which Ar-15
Replies
1
Views
367
cmb3366
C
M
  • Locked
Why is an Olympic AR-15 Bad?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
139
Views
13K
Art Eatman
A
G
  • Locked
  • Poll
Need to choose an AR-15 format.
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
browningguy
B
Back
Top