Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Black Rifle Forum' started by WayaX, Nov 12, 2012.
No,but i have to admit that I've only fired 300 rounds through it.
This really cuts right to the point. Of course Big Bird if people actually were to follow your advice, it might cause internet gun forums to become irrelevant, perish the thought!
Big Bird is right.
When I bought my AR, I asked the young man who is an Iraq war veteran, what the closest AR to what he was issued in Iraq was that I could buy as a civilian. He handed me a Colt LE6920. That was all I needed to know. I'm happy with it for that reason alone. So far I haven't found any reason to not be happy with it.
I am a Doublestar fan, yes they have a commercial receiver extension, and come with 1x9 twist barrels, but they are great rifles. I am disabled and on a limited budget, a $400 difference in price is huge, and $400 buys allot of ammo. I gave up trying to change any net commandos minds about the Doublestar a longtime ago. JT Rifles provides parts for allot of companies, I believe LMT, and Wilson are on that list, many people want to believe that their rifle is completley made by the name on the side, but the fact of the matter is allot of them contract out parts.
I hate to tell everyone that believes their rifle is Milspec, unless it is full auto, its not Milspec. The firearms protection act of 85 notes that select fire rifles may not be sold on the Commercial market, all rifles availible to civilians are commercial.
Is every milspec rifle F/A?
$400 buys 1k rounds. That's not a lot. It'll take much more than that to see the differences in quality. I don't know what you mean by internet commando but there are guys here that shoot 1k+ in a day or two on a regular basis. They tend to be the ones who have seen how big of a deal that difference can become.
Some may never see the difference at that's cool. Everyone has their own priorities. If the quality isn't needed and money can be saved go for it. However, there usually isn't a big enough difference in price to make that compromise in quality worth it. A weeks worth of ammunition isn't worth a lifetime of compromise.
I dont think every FA rifle is "Milspec" but to be considered "Milspec" it has to be select fire. I know that everyone accepts that companies like Colt produce a Milspec rifle, the term has become generic for parts that go through the proper tests, and are the correct size. Preople that are shooting 1,000 rounds are not on internet forums asking what rifle to buy, they are your average shooter (like me). who maybe shoots 100rds a weekend. If I could afford to shoot 1000rds everytime I went to the range I wouldnt own a DS, but I am also honest with myself about what my rifle is primarily going to do, and thats put holes in paper.
Nor is the barrel length. Colt doesn't produce a milspec civilian rifle. It uses some milspec parts and that makes economic sense for them. Some of those parts provide no benefit to single rate fire.
Our M4s were not select fire but came from Colt. Would the mil procure firearms that didn't meet the standards the they put out? Maybe? I don't know.
Unfortunately you're probably correct about the average shooter. Nothing wrong w/ that but it doesn't do much to prove "just as good" as. I'm not saying you're making that claim but many do.
My thing w/ Colt doesn't have to do w/ milspec, it's the consistent quality and great price.
There seems to be a lot of egos on the line.
My first exposure to the M16 (M16A1) was in basic training 30+ years ago. Back then, I had a tough time dealing with those sights sitting far above the barrel and I was lucky to qualify.
For many years, in the back of my mind, there were inherently inferior design issues with the M16 series. There is no need to go into details since I expect we all heard and read the stories about the Air Force buying the early "self cleaning" version and the tweaks made afterward.
Distain for the M16 design evolved into greater familiarity with the design and experience with its capabilities lead me to be very comfortable with what was final version I used in the Army, the M16A2.
The reason I decided on getting the M4 was not that it was especially a good rifle; I went with it because I am very comfortable with it. I think a lot of veterans may feel the same way.
I have not yet read the MILSPEC details on the M4 and I am sure most will find it a bit dry anyway. If all it means to me is that parts are going to fit when I buy them, it is a good enough reason to accept it.
As to the experience a manufacturer has in building rifles, it is only as good as what the current workers know on that particular project. I do not know that the workers at Colt are any better than the newer companies out there. Also, with the addition of CNC, maybe the skilled machinist is less of a factor. Still, I have not checked into who in the M4 community used what technology to build.
The issue that was critical to me was value and reliability. To me, value is enhanced due to the level of testing and maintenance of a standard that is defined clearly.
Back in the 1960s and 1970s, I knew many muscle car enthusiasts that would have their engines balanced and blueprinted. When I found out this was done to ensure the engines were at the proper specifications they were designed to have, I was very disappointed in the American car manufacturers. Even into the 1980s, Ford 5.0L pistons could mismatch as much as 20%.
Anyway, the concept of building to SPEC is a good thing to me, though, it is true that innovations are tough to roll in as with systems that follow "spiral development." The reality I have seen with spiral development is that developers will give us a couple features we did not want to counter falling short on requirements.
There are several ways a company can show they maintain quality standards. I know many of us will go by statements made by famous people or others on the web, When working with the federal government, assurances have to be formalized. When a company wants to demonstrate they meet quality standards, a common practice to for them to seek certification from a standards organization. One example is that in 2001, Colt succeeded in obtaining an ISO 9000 certification. Basically, ISO 9000 certification proves that Colt has defined standards they prove they meet and are periodically audited to maintain the certification.
ISO 9000 standards have been updated over the years and certification involves a significant commitment on the part of the business.
Perhaps the other manufacturers out there have achieved the same quality standards and maybe they exceed them. I just do not know and I have not researched it. Colt may not be the best, but they are a known as opposed to an unknown. Meeting the standard means they say what they do and prove it. You may hate me for it, but at that point, I looked no further. Good enough is good enough.
I wouldnt say a DS is better than a Colt, or DD. I would say as far as budget production, commercial, rifles go, they are very well made, and hard to beat for your "average" shooter.
Good deal, sounds like you found the right AR for you. That's what matters.
I've had 2 double stars. For a budget "not milspec" rifle, they're one of the best. Dpms doesn't even come close.
I agree, I also have had 2, my current M4 HBAR, and a 20" A3, I had to sell the 20" a while ago, but I am going to try and replace it this year with a 20 A2.
I think they're starting to make a move towards a milspec gun. I saw their cold hammer forged barrels at knob creek MG shoot back in oct.
I am going to order my A2 Rifle with a Milspec barrel, I am a purist at heart and I love the A1 and A2 rifles, I setup my M4 with the carry handle, but its just not the same, besides the nuts that holt it on are uncomfortable when using a 2pt sling. Plus that way I have the M4 to tinker with and the A2 will stay stock.
It takes a lot of maturity to look at it like that.
I thought about that reading a stupid thread that got stickied, and it dawned on me that the father who adheres to a budget so his kids can have more or better, is a fine, upstanding person.
Thank You Rooster
I've been trying to figure out why you are so defensive. Is it that we're feeling left behind as things change. Is it a little taste of how we're not the young stud we used to be?
I'm assuming the stickied thread we speak of is the one created by Surf. We could definitely benefit from that thread.
If the purchase of a luxury item like an AR is a financial burden maybe we shouldn't be purchasing an AR to begin with. Priorities...
I just don't understand why we keep trying to discredit good solid information/advise.
I have a Daniel Defense m4v3 not a high round count yet, but my other rifle (wolf19r custom, yes its was built by me) upper is a Daniel Defense mid length and it has eaten everything I have put in front of it. All of the cheap Russian steel case, cheapo Walmart, , 5.56 Federal, monarch, misc ammo academy friends shot through it, American Eagle, .223 of all sorts ,and .22 with a conversion, its always been flawless with the exception of 2 miss fires on bad ammo. Its been run dirty, clean, wet, dry, etc and its still asks for more. I have full faith in a Daniel Defense Rifles and products. I have not heard bad stuff about Colt or Bushmaster, I've shot RRA that were beat up and still shot. I like several of Colts rifles and almost bought a 6920 but I think it boils down to shooter preference, price range, and whats available in each area. If you like the way a Colt, DS, DD, Spikes, Bushy, etc feels and its in your budget buy it and have fun with it.