I realize that each manufacturer has their strengths and weaknesses but for those of you that have had some experience which feature has had the most effect on improving the accuracy of a budget rifle. And no.......ya can't say all three.........
Couldn't agree more. But we're talking a rifle in the $500 range when the sky's the limit as when spending on an AR. Changes made to this type of gun should improve accuracy more than doing any of the three to high end Bravo Company rifle.
Finding the ammo that the guns loves. Every manufacturer does things just a bit different and every barrel is different. Experiment with brands and size of bullets until you find that perfect match. If possible, go back to the same store, check lot #s on the boxes and buy every box of the same lot number that shot so well in your rifle.
I agree. So far it's been Wolf Gold, PMC, American Eagle, 2 Hornady's, and Norma match. It HATED the American Eagle. Of the cheap stuff the Norma was the best with the groups leaning towards the 1" range at 100 yds with the PMC coming in second. The Hornady 556 did well with the 223 leaving some questions....need to shoot it again to make sure. I have a few more to try so the search isn't over yet, especially for a quality hunting/defense ammo.
The other day was my first time using a mil spec AR trigger. It's not horrible especially when shooting off the reset, but you have to concentrate otherwise it's seems very easy to throw a flyer.
Since we're talkin AR's here, why not save a bit more and get a better quality rifle in the first place? Personally I put my money on Colts.. but that's just me...
I agree, the money you would spend on a $500 rifle + adding a new barrel/trigger/FF handguard, you could have just bought a Colt 6920 for $700 and have a more reliable & accurate rifle.
There is nothing special about the 6920. Chromed lined barrel could help or hurt accuracy depending on how it was done. It does not have a free floating barrel which some think is conducive to accuracy. The trigger is a generic single stage so that's not anything to write home about. With this rifle, minimum, you would still have to throw at least another couple of hundred dollars to get a better trigger. This rifle's main good points seem to be the Magpul furniture.
But then again, buying a higher end rifle doesn't guarantee you a more accurate gun either. There are so many variables in both the components and how they interact with each other that it might also include the luck of the draw.
Wish it was that easy. I have a ruger american that will out shoot my x-bolt at 400 yds with the ammo it likes. More money doesn't necessarily mean better accuracy....just increases the odds some.
At least with the AR, I have multiple choices for a 1/4 of the cost of the x-bolt and 1/2 the cost of the ruger if this barrel/gun doesn't shoot the way I would like it too? I'll know soon.
How are you defining accuracy here? None of the parts listed would fix a bad shooter. And, an upgraded trigger wouldn't fix a problem with a bad barrel, and so on, etc..
From the list, I voted "trigger". While most "cheap" rifles will have "OK" triggers, some have the pull weight of 10 lbs or more - which makes it hard to get tight groups.
However, there is one thing that wasn't on the list that I would select first: The sight/scope.
If I had a choice between a great rifle with a mediocre sight/scope or a mediocre rifle with a great sight/scope - I would choose the latter for better accuracy.
From the list, I voted "trigger". While most "cheap" rifles will have "OK" triggers, some have the pull weight of 10 lbs or more - which makes it hard to get tight groups.
However, there is one thing that wasn't on the list that I would select first: The sight/scope.
If I had a choice between a great rifle with a mediocre sight/scope or a mediocre rifle with a great sight/scope - I would choose the latter for better accuracy.
For a gun I expect to shoot good groups I do all or don't bother. Though the cheapest trigger I run is an ALG ACT which is not light but not junk either.
If I want a rifle to shoot groups I sure am not buying anything Colt, especially a 6920.
Not sure what the point of contention is? I asked what guys have been doing to improve the accuracy of their budget AR's. I don't know why I would have to include my definition of accuracy for each type of firearm? There's always room for improvement in anything whether it comes through practice or buying a new part or two.
I go out west skiing and pay up to $200 a day to do a semi-controlled fall down a mountain. Buying budget AR to play around with doesn't seem like such a waste of money? I'll learn the platform and have some fun along the way.
Not sure what the point of contention is? I asked what guys have been doing to improve the accuracy of their budget AR's. I don't know why I would have to include my definition of accuracy for each type of firearm? There's always room for improvement in anything whether it comes through practice or buying a new part or two.
I go out west skiing and pay up to $200 a day to do a semi-controlled fall down a mountain. Buying budget AR to play around with doesn't seem like such a waste of money? I'll learn the platform and have some fun along the way.
I have no points of contention. I simply gave my input as if you want an accurate rifle, it's probably cheaper and more feasible to buy one right from the start instead of retrofitting a gun that was not made to be an accurate rifle from the first place.
If you want to practice your home gunsmithing skills by tinkering then by all means. It's a laudable endeavor. I used to tinker with my firearms until I got old and lazy. Now I just want to buy one correctly made by people that know what they're doing.
This is really not surprising. One thing that was going around for a while was that pencil barrels were not accurate - or some other "qualifier" when there really isn't a significant difference in many of these rifles at the ranges most of us will be shooting. Now for guys who are shooting 300 yards and out - yeah, then you might notice the difference and would want to invest more in your equipment. For the rest of us...not so much.
And the original question still goes unanswered. A co-worker of mine has been trying very hard to convince me that my life will be worlds better if I buy one of these for my new budget AR. https://www.larue.com/products/larue-tactical-mbt-2s-trigger/?mc_cid=4a674d08ab&mc_eid=a7fbe60859
I have no personal experience with this, but he's a geek who built his AR from scratch and swears this *transformed* the weapon.
And the original question still goes unanswered. A co-worker of mine has been trying very hard to convince me that my life will be worlds better if I buy one of these for my new budget AR. https://www.larue.com/products/larue-tactical-mbt-2s-trigger/?mc_cid=4a674d08ab&mc_eid=a7fbe60859
I have no personal experience with this, but he's a geek who built his AR from scratch and swears this *transformed* the weapon.
I realize that each manufacturer has their strengths and weaknesses but for those of you that have had some experience which feature has had the most effect on improving the accuracy of a budget rifle. And no.......ya can't say all three.........
Practice is a good answer. Trigger is a terrible answer. What improves mechanical accuracy is a quality barrel torqued up near max on a 7075 receiver.
If a trigger improves your accuracy, then practice is the proper answer. Better triggers mask poor technique, but there is no way to mask a mediocre barrel.
Great points. Most do not shoot often enough, or quality ammo to make up for the difference a barrel change would make. You are spot on with the trigger thoughts though. Practice makes perfect........
Practice is a good answer. Trigger is a terrible answer. What improves mechanical accuracy is a quality barrel torqued up near max on a 7075 receiver.
If a trigger improves your accuracy, then practice is the proper answer. Better triggers mask poor technique, but there is no way to mask a mediocre barrel.
The person who taught me to setup an AD said torque the barrel nut like crazy. He puts anti sieze on and torques by feel. Just watching I would say it is 75-100 ft lbs.
He told me the tighter the barrel nut the more accurate.
He turns out ARs that are very accurate so he must know something.
I started doing that torque three times then close to 100 w/anti-seize. You mentioned that some time ago, been doing it since and went back to my first build that was not done on at the time.
Just repeating what the person who taught me to setup ARs. Lots of torque. He told me the 35
ft-lb "suggestion" makes it so if you over torque and crack an upper receiver it is on you. I have an engineer that works for me that did crack an upper. That is too much torque.
But the armorer builds accurate ARs (the top of line use obermeyer blanks..for 223 the hardest blanks to get are 6R) and billet uppers. He torques the crap out of them.
If they say low torque on the barrel nut is best for accuracy, then yes.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Glock Talk
21M posts
185.2K members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to Glock firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, troubleshooting, accessories, classifieds, and more!