The new chart is out... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : The new chart is out...


Burns
06-10-2011, 09:12
The new M4 chart is out.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

ScrappyDoo
06-10-2011, 09:31
Am I not understanding it, it looked like it has 10 brands and thats it?

JBnTX
06-10-2011, 09:40
...and thus the wailing and whining begins again!

:popcorn:


The majority of the "information" contained in that, and the previous chart,
is absolutely worthless because the average AR-15 owner will never fire enough
rounds through his rifle to ever be able to tell any difference.







.

Burns
06-10-2011, 09:45
He requested info from every major manufacturer. Some complied, some didn't, and some he is still waiting on. SOME of those who didn't respond, it is pretty obvious why. According to Rob_S at the M4 site:

Olympic refused.
DPMS has not responded.
S&W has not responded.
RRA is pending.
Armalite has not responded.

I can understand why Olympic refused :tongueout:

BBJones
06-10-2011, 10:51
The new M4 chart is out.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html


Link to the thread so people know what they are looking at and the methodology.

http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=82739

cyrsequipment
06-10-2011, 11:07
“For more details Olympic Arms welcomes all inquiries made directly to the manufacturer at 800-228-3471”.

I'm not sold on using the "chart" for what some people use it for. And I'm not going ot down Olympic, but that comment (I'm sure that they asked to have it in the chart) is BEYOND stupid... If they really welcomed all inquiries, they would have answered the freaking questions...

boomhower
06-10-2011, 14:57
“For more details Olympic Arms welcomes all inquiries made directly to the manufacturer at 800-228-3471”.

I'm not sold on using the "chart" for what some people use it for. And I'm not going ot down Olympic, but that comment (I'm sure that they asked to have it in the chart) is BEYOND stupid... If they really welcomed all inquiries, they would have answered the freaking questions...

I think that's the point and why he put that on the chart.

surf
06-10-2011, 15:54
Am I not understanding it, it looked like it has 10 brands and thats it?You can guarantee that all manufacturers on the old chart were asked to participate and update current information. You can also bet that there were a good number of newer makers asked to participate also. The makers not listed on the chart did not wish to participate. We can draw whatever conclusions from that on our own. Personally it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why certain makers didn't want to be on the new "Chart" or why past manufacturers listed on the Chart wished to be excluded.

surf
06-10-2011, 15:57
I will also say that there were a ton of Spikes people who claimed that Rob S. had some type of vendetta against Spikes and was in collusion with the M4C site to purposely exclude them. Many stated that he would be run off of M4C if he ever included Spikes. Well there they are, lets see what happens, but I already know whats gonna happen. Nothing.

fuzzy03cls
06-10-2011, 17:38
As much as I hate the chart, you have to be impressed that all these manufacturers seem to be building decent quailty AR's to spec(who ever decides that). And look at spikes, right up there & only $$800.

A good sign over the mess of a few years ago when they were all over the place in parts & quailty.

Gunnut 45/454
06-10-2011, 18:15
Well since you can't even discuss any AR that doesn't meet their MIL SPEC dream requirements on M4.net If you do they will suspend you ASAP ! The closest "Mil Spec" Comercial AR you can buy is a Colt! Everyone else is a Posser! And your paying for the Name! :wavey:

mvician
06-10-2011, 19:12
...and thus the wailing and whining begins again!

:popcorn:


The majority of the "information" contained in that, and the previous chart,
is absolutely worthless because the average AR-15 owner will never fire enough
rounds through his rifle to ever be able to tell any difference.




In YOUR opinion.

mvician
06-10-2011, 19:14
Well since you can't even discuss any AR that doesn't meet their MIL SPEC dream requirements on M4.net If you do they will suspend you ASAP ! The closest "Mil Spec" Comercial AR you can buy is a Colt! Everyone else is a Posser! And your paying for the Name! :wavey:


:upeyes:

Captains1911
06-10-2011, 19:31
...and thus the wailing and whining begins again!

:popcorn:


The majority of the "information" contained in that, and the previous chart,
is absolutely worthless because the average AR-15 owner will never fire enough
rounds through his rifle to ever be able to tell any difference.

.

Anybody else sense the hypocrisy here?

G21FAN
06-10-2011, 19:42
He requested info from every major manufacturer. Some complied, some didn't, and some he is still waiting on. SOME of those who didn't respond, it is pretty obvious why. According to Rob_S at the M4 site:

Olympic refused.
DPMS has not responded.
S&W has not responded.
RRA is pending.
Armalite has not responded.

I can understand why Olympic refused :tongueout:

Olympic just didn't want the others to look bad esp for the price....

mjkeat
06-10-2011, 20:58
...and thus the wailing and whining begins again!

:popcorn:


The majority of the "information" contained in that, and the previous chart,
is absolutely worthless because the average AR-15 owner will never fire enough
rounds through his rifle to ever be able to tell any difference.
.


Well since you can't even discuss any AR that doesn't meet their MIL SPEC dream requirements on M4.net If you do they will suspend you ASAP ! The closest "Mil Spec" Comercial AR you can buy is a Colt! Everyone else is a Posser! And your paying for the Name! :wavey:


Olympic just didn't want the others to look bad esp for the price....


Oh Lord :freak:

With all the available information I can't believe there are people like this out there.

G21FAN
06-10-2011, 21:02
Oh Lord :freak:

With all the available information I can't believe there are people like this out there.

Don't know about the others but I was being sarcastic....

Some take the AR/M4 crap too seriously.

mjkeat
06-10-2011, 21:13
Don't know about the others but I was being sarcastic....

Some take the AR/M4 crap too seriously.

I appologize for not catching that even after reading your post a couple times w/ that on my mind.

G21FAN
06-10-2011, 21:15
I appologize for not catching that even after reading your post a couple times w/ that on my mind.

NP, all is good!:thumbsup:

MistoGators
06-10-2011, 22:24
Am I not understanding it, it looked like it has 10 brands and thats it?
That's because some companies (like Bushmaster, DPMS, and Olympic Arms) want nothing to do with it. That should tell you something about those companies.

mvician
06-10-2011, 23:47
I can't wait to see the barfcom "chart"


The main reason for this being pushed now is the community wanting something that is actually ACCURATE and useful.

the collection of data by the community, for the community, without an individual having the means to control the effort.



http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=539315

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 06:54
I can't wait to see the barfcom "chart"




http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=539315

I read through that thread as well. That place has their heads up countless manufacturers butts, they'll never give an accurate account of data. It'll be full of sponsor, personal, and trend bias. They might as well not even waste their time. Its an insult to the creator of this chart (non biased) and to arfcom members.

djegators
06-11-2011, 07:06
Amazing how a collection of information can be so controversial. If you don't think its useful, then ignore it. If you do, then use it your advantage, because it would be very time consuming to attempt to collect that info yourself.

As for m4carbine.net, you can discuss any brand AR you like, as long as you are making technical, fact-based posts, and not facebook/twitter type posts. Oh, and if you make silly statements about "as good as" or "good enough" you can expect some heat. As with any board, if you work within the parameters they set forth, all are welcome.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 07:17
That's because some companies (like Bushmaster, DPMS, and Olympic Arms) want nothing to do with it. That should tell you something about those companies.

Yep! They are classier Companies that choose not to get in the 4 year olds' pissing fight. People will buy them anyway.

brisk21
06-11-2011, 07:47
Yep! They are classier Companies that choose not to get in the 4 year olds' pissing fight. People will buy them anyway.

No. They just don't want people to know why consumers shouldnt buy their rifles.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 07:57
No. They just don't want people to know why consumers shouldnt buy their rifles.

Since no one here will be engaged in combat operations with their personal rifle, there is no realistic difference except for price and name.

I have owned LMT, Colt, Bushmaster, RRA, and BCM AR piddle shooters and they are all the same design and for the most part work well for the average AR owner.

I say most part because even Daniel Defense, Noveske, and LMTs put lemons out.

Just like handguns, Glock is no better than a SIG Which is no better than a H&K Which is no better then a S&W which is no better than Beretta.

Yall come up with an handgun chart. Or a M1a chart. Or better yet an AK chart.

BBJones
06-11-2011, 08:47
Since no one here will be engaged in combat operations with their personal rifle, there is no realistic difference except for price and name.

I have owned LMT, Colt, Bushmaster, RRA, and BCM AR piddle shooters and they are all the same design and for the most part work well for the average AR owner.

I say most part because even Daniel Defense, Noveske, and LMTs put lemons out.

Just like handguns, Glock is no better than a SIG Which is no better than a H&K Which is no better then a S&W which is no better than Beretta.

Yall come up with an handgun chart. Or a M1a chart. Or better yet an AK chart.

So much wrong with this post.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 08:50
So much wrong with this post.

Enlighten me.

M&P15T
06-11-2011, 09:11
So much wrong with this post.

Enlighten me.

He'll quote The Chart!:rofl::rofl:

Keep in mind that you're treading on thin ice here with some folks. There are some here that can't seem to comprehend that most AR owners aren't too concerned with having top-line stuff since they won't use and abuse their weapon like those in the Military do.

I will counter my own observation with the idea that getting something very good, mil-spec, really isn't that much more.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 09:20
He'll quote The Chart!:rofl::rofl:

Keep in mind that you're treading on thin ice here with some folks. There are some here that can't seem to comprehend that most AR owners aren't too concerned with having top-line stuff since they won't use and abuse their weapon like those in the Military do.

I will counter my own observation with the idea that getting something very good, mil-spec, really isn't that much more.

My point. Showing the mindless fanboy mentality and unable to think for themselves without a chart and looking for approval from the other equally stunted fanboys who will not admit they do have a "shunned" brand AR instead of a "top chart" brand they want.

The top of the line gun and gear queers will never use their stuff, because they will have a coronary if their $900 dollar rifle plate carrier gets dusty or their AR has a powder flake on it.

I do appreciate the Mil-Spec quality if I decide on one, but I also know that I'm not gonna abuse the gun and enjoy it without paying a couple of house payment for it.

M&P15T
06-11-2011, 09:25
My point. Showing the mindless fanboy mentality and unable to think for themselves without a chart and looking for approval from the other equally stunted fanboys who will not admit they do have a "shunned" brand AR instead of a "top chart" brand they want.

The top of the line gun and gear queers will never use their stuff, because they will have a coronary if their $900 dollar rifle plate carrier gets dusty or their AR has a powder flake on it.

I do appreciate the Mil-Spec quality if I decide on one, but I also know that I'm not gonna abuse the gun and enjoy it without paying a couple of house payment for it.

Easy, easy, they go to training classes to learn skills they'll never use, so they need those top-tier ARs.:supergrin:

Relax training guys, I'm just funnin' with ya, I want to get to a class myself one day.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 09:31
Easy, easy, they go to training classes to learn skills they'll never use, so they need those top-tier ARs.:supergrin:

Relax training guys, I'm just funnin' with ya, I want to get to a class myself one day.

Would love to do one myself!

I'll never knock on someone traing to better himself!!

Should offer medicine, Farming and animal food processing, Herbology, long and short term shelter building, Water processing, and Long range land navigation.

That would be a SHTF class

M&P15T
06-11-2011, 09:39
Would love to do one myself!

I'll never knock on someone traing to better himself!!

Should offer medicine, Farming and animal food processing, Herbology, long and short term shelter building, Water processing, and Long range land navigation.

That would be a SHTF class

I was referring to the AR/Carbine courses that teach tactical stuff to civilians. I myself do not live within a high enough threat level to feel the need to learn mad AR combat skillz as a necessity, but think it would be very fun to go and play tacticool ninja for a few days.

Gunnut 45/454
06-11-2011, 09:42
G21FAN
My point exactly! Why do we need Gov Spec for AR to be good to go? What makes the Gov Spec so great? So all other Commercially made firearms are crap cause they are not Gov Spec'd!! I mean really think about it - the Chart is used to determine whether an AR is any good! Unless it meets all the Gov Spec'd it is deemed not able to perform/shoot/and will fall aprt in your hands! I own two AR's one that is the standard for which that chart is about one the isn't included and is dispized by those that created that chart! They have both functioned and shoot everytime I pull the trigger! For the average Joe who's not an Operator what more do you need?:whistling: Beside 90% of the Operators are Government employees and will be issued Military weapons!
The others are Merc's and who care what they use!:whistling:

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 09:49
I was referring to the AR/Carbine courses that teach tactical stuff to civilians. I myself do not live within a high enough threat level to feel the need to learn mad AR combat skillz as a necessity, but think it would be very fun to go and play tacticool ninja for a few days.

Yeah I knew what you were refering to. I would like that myself!

I am so ugly the zombies would just bypass me!

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 09:54
G21FAN
My point exactly! Why do we need Gov Spec for AR to be good to go? What makes the Gov Spec so great? So all other Commercially made firearms are crap cause they are not Gov Spec'd!! I mean really think about it - the Chart is used to determine wether an AR is any good! Unless it meets all the Gov Spec'd it is deemed not able to perform/shoot/and will fall aprt in your hands! I own two AR's one that is the standard for which that chart is about one the isn't included and is dispized by those that created that chart! They have both functioned and shoot everytime I pull the trigger! For the average Joe who's not an Operator what more do you need?:whistling:

Absolutely! Take the Glocks, they aren't US Mil-Spec but the glockfoamers insist they are the only choice possible that is reliable.

I love my 2gen 17 except for the hump and my Colts, SIGs, etc....

M&P15T
06-11-2011, 10:13
G21FAN
My point exactly! Why do we need Gov Spec for AR to be good to go? What makes the Gov Spec so great? So all other Commercially made firearms are crap cause they are not Gov Spec'd!! I mean really think about it - the Chart is used to determine wether an AR is any good! Unless it meets all the Gov Spec'd it is deemed not able to perform/shoot/and will fall aprt in your hands! I own two AR's one that is the standard for which that chart is about one the isn't included and is dispized by those that created that chart! They have both functioned and shoot everytime I pull the trigger! For the average Joe who's not an Operator what more do you need?:whistling:

Absolutely! Take the Glocks, they aren't US Mil-Spec but the glockfoamers insist they are the only choice possible that is reliable.

I love my 2gen 17 except for the hump and my Colts, SIGs, etc....

Exactly. My M&P15T is missing a few tick-marks on the "mil-spec" chart, but it runs with 100% reliability and is more accurate than I am. I can understand those that shoot competitively, or those that are in the military and run thousands and thousands of rounds through their ARs needing mil-spec. But everyone else buys it for peace of mind, or just because the like to have the best quality, not that they'll ever need it.

Also, there are manufacturing techniques that are as good or better than those described as "mil-spec", but because they aren't "mil-spec", they don't get the chart tick-mark.

Burns
06-11-2011, 10:45
The chart is a useful resource.

I should have read/studied more before buying my Stag; it is a rifle that I enjoy, and would recommend to others, but for the same price I could have bought a rifle manufactured to set common standards. The most important standard to me (and this varies from person to person) is a 1 in 7 twist.

With a 1 in 7 twist I can fire basically any .223 or 5.56 ammo without worrying too much about stabilization, including 75 or 77 grain OTM. I still like my Stag, but I prefer a 1 and 7 twist, which is available on plenty of rifles (including Spike's or BCM), for a price no more (or a bit more) than my Stag rifle. A 1 in 7 is now available in the "Plus Package" with Stag for a reason, it is a valuable feature to some users.

Bolts break, as do other parts. Why would anyone want less than the best they can get for equal cash?

I'm unwilling to spend serious cash for a 1911 with no MIM parts, but I do crave 1911's. Also, my 1911 will not be my go-to gun, and I can live with a slight decrease in quality and a slightly higher rate of potential parts breakage. But, some guys want the best, and I don't criticize them for spending their coin on a top-shelf 1911.

Just because your rifle doesn't shine on the chart, doesn't mean it sucks, just as my Stag absolutely does not suck. But for those who are attempting to learn about desirable features in an M4-style rifle, it is a useful tool. I have no idea what will happen politically over the next 10+ years effecting parts availability for my rifle, which is my go-to long gun. I want the best, most proven and reliable parts I can get for equal $, or a few bucks more.

The problem occurs when those who own "first-tier" rifles rip on those who own DPMS or Oly, attempting to make their asses hurt, or when Oly/DPMS owners get post-purchase stress having determined that their carbine isn't GTG, according to a chart, general opinion, or actual parts failure. Then, people get defensive.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 11:19
^^^ Good post^^^

I myself like the A1 or A2 with A1 LW barrel profiles. I like my rifles light, and am happy with the 1/12 twist because 55 grn ball and SPs are all I shoot anyway. Wanting to do an A5 setup w/ LW barrel or an A2 GI contour barrel.

Would really like to get an M&P 15 but they only come in carbine varients.

M&P15T
06-11-2011, 11:24
Would really like to get an M&P 15 but they only come in carbine varients.

Hold on there pardnor, they come in 20"/rifle stock versions too.

glock031
06-11-2011, 11:25
It's kinda of funny to see some of these boys run over to m4c and put down glocktalk in general. Yet thier post counts over there are under 20 post but are much higher here. Don't worry you'll be accepted by the BCM pimps and shills if you buy what you're instructed to buy. :upeyes:

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 11:26
Hold on there pardnor, they come in 20"/rifle stock versions too.

I didn't realize that, gotta get out more often.

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 13:10
This is why the folks really knowledgeable about the AR15 platform and its proper use avoid this site like the plague. And I wouldn't be surprised if the couple that do stop by on occasion where seriously considering not doing so anymore.

The chart is a very viable tool we should all consider when purchasing an AR. Its also a tool that has helped the consumer by causing manufacturers to step up their game.

If this chart wasn't such a great tool why do companies such as DPMS refuse to take part? I'm sure most here can connect the dots.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 13:19
This is why the folks really knowledgeable about the AR15 platform and its proper use avoid this site like the plague. And I wouldn't be surprised if the couple that do stop by on occasion where seriously considering not doing so anymore.

The chart is a very viable tool we should all consider when purchasing an AR. Its also a tool that has helped the consumer by causing manufacturers to step up their game.

If this chart wasn't such a great tool why do companies such as DPMS refuse to take part? I'm sure most here can connect the dots.

Being knowledgeable doesn't have to coincide with snobbish fanboyism and boorish behavior torward those who choose other brands and it working just as fine as the "list".

mvician
06-11-2011, 13:50
Being knowledgeable doesn't have to coincide with snobbish fanboyism and boorish behavior torward those who choose other brands and it working just as fine as the "list".


It is a two way street. I've seen it happen both ways.

Choose whatever you want. Your "M4" may work as well as another, for your application. Just remember, the "chart" is a comparison of mil-spec features found on commercial production M4 style rifles. Nothing more, nothing less.

TexasPOff
06-11-2011, 15:12
Well looks like most of them are playing on a pretty even field now. I may get struck down by some of the AR"ophiles" but seems like just about any one of these manufacturers would be a GTG. With things seemingly more even, now customer service and price point become the ace in the hole for companies. I can give a thumbs up for Spike's and for Stag. I have dealt with thier Customer services and both were outstanding. TXPO

glock031
06-11-2011, 15:32
This is why the folks really knowledgeable about the AR15 platform and its proper use avoid this site like the plague. And I wouldn't be surprised if the couple that do stop by on occasion where seriously considering not doing so anymore.

The chart is a very viable tool we should all consider when purchasing an AR. Its also a tool that has helped the consumer by causing manufacturers to step up their game.

If this chart wasn't such a great tool why do companies such as DPMS refuse to take part? I'm sure most here can connect the dots.

Not many poster bragging about their DPMS around here that i've noticed.

I have nothing against this chart, although he shoulda put the colt website there like he did with the others. At least one could view and read about the sp6920 if nothing more.

I've been reading this site for a few years now. It's been nearly dead at least that long. It's the snobbish regulars that have created any and all outcomes of this site. All they do is high five each other and show up for flamings. As for the so called knowlegable people if they are arrogant and snobbish such as the few that frequent here who the hell cares what they have to say. I'm not the only one here that feels this way. To blame your view of problems about this site on infrequent posters is rather stupid! :steamed:

ftw13
06-11-2011, 15:37
the point of the chart is to save people from buying questionable quality when you can buy top notch rifles for the same price or even less. it is to educate the uneducated buyer. why buy bushmaster when you can get a spikes,etc. for less? you may not need the features buy why go without them?

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 15:40
What makes Bushmaster lesser quality than Spikes?

I have owned them and they were just a good as my LMT and BCM.

Some have more options I like over the other Kool-ade brands.

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 15:50
Being knowledgeable doesn't have to coincide with snobbish fanboyism and boorish behavior torward those who choose other brands and it working just as fine as the "list".

So why do people, such as you, like to point the "snoob", "fanboy" finger at people who are knowledgeable enough to know the value of milspec rifles?

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 15:58
Your'e reading me wrong. Not everybody who is knowledgable are snobbish.

I was saying that because one is knowlegable doesnt mean they have to be boorish about it. And a lot of those "list" people do display such behavior.

and ARFTARDS is one of the 2 worst places that give gun owners, esp black rifles owners a bad rep.

About 2 years ago I was looking thru their site and after about 2 hrs of reading decided not to join and have never been back.

I wasn't implying that every chart user is snobbish.

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 16:01
Not many poster bragging about their DPMS around here that i've noticed.

I have nothing against this chart, although he shoulda put the colt website there like he did with the others. At least one could view and read about the sp6920 if nothing more.

I've been reading this site for a few years now. It's been nearly dead at least that long. It's the snobbish regulars that have created any and all outcomes of this site. All they do is high five each other and show up for flamings. As for the so called knowlegable people if they are arrogant and snobbish such as the few that frequent here who the hell cares what they have to say. I'm not the only one here that feels this way. To blame your view of problems about this site on infrequent posters is rather stupid! :steamed:

The reason you don't hear a lot of people bragging about their DPMS is the same reason they refused to be part of this list.

I care about what they have to say. I don't always agree w/ the 3 I'm speaking of but w/o them Id be up a creek. Hell Id probably still be blind to the value that comes w/ buying quality.

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 16:10
Your'e reading me wrong. Not everybody who is knowledgable are snobbish.

I was saying that because one is knowlegable doesnt mean they have to be boorish about it. And a lot of those "list" people do display such behavior.

and ARFTARDS is one of the 2 worst places that give gun owners, esp black rifles owners a bad rep.

About 2 years ago I was looking thru their site and after about 2 hrs of reading decided not to join and have never been back.

I wasn't implying that every chart user is snobbish.

I agree w/ you.

I will say that M4C (I imagine that is the 2nd place youre refering to) is a great place to learn. Know your lane and only good will come.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 16:28
Both do have good info when you can wade thru the retarded crap and pick out the good posters. Like anywhere else but seems more so there. Gamers joining up maybe?

mvician
06-11-2011, 16:37
What makes Bushmaster lesser quality than Spikes?

The Spikes LE series uses milspec steel for the bolt, carrier, and barrel along with HPT and MPI testing. Does Bushmaster?

I have owned them and they were just a good as my LMT and BCM.

And what is "just as good as" besides they go "bang" when you pull the trigger?

Some have more options I like over the other Kool-ade brands.

Yes some other brands have more options you may like over the your so called Kool Ade brands, but the "chart" is a comparison of commercially manufactured M4 type rifles. It does not include every style/type of AR there is.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 16:43
Yes some other brands have more options you may like over the your so called Kool Ade brands, but the "chart" is a comparison of commercially manufactured M4 type rifles. It does not include every style/type of AR there is.

1. Why does Mil-Spec steel shoot better or more reliably than regular gun steel? Put together properly either will do the job. Just because the military specs a test doesn't make it any better than what the builder does when developed/built.


2. Just as accurate, reliable, durable, and looks the same.

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 16:45
Both do have good info when you can wade thru the retarded crap and pick out the good posters. Like anywhere else but seems more so there. Gamers joining up maybe?

True.

Possibly, and I imagine thats why they can seem abrasive at times.

Put together properly brings up another point. Proper assembly makes a difference in the 4 departments you mentioned. I tend to see a huge variation from certain manufacturers to others when it comes to improper assembly.

Last this is a debate I dont think will ever end.

Randolph da man
06-11-2011, 17:12
What makes Bushmaster lesser quality than Spikes?

I have owned them and they were just a good as my LMT and BCM.

Some have more options I like over the other Kool-ade brands.



Im going to assign you some homework.
please stay in your lane until you've done it.
based on most of your post, you're pretty green about AR/M4's.

read about: TDP & NSN.

understand mil-spec = minimum standards. If a manufacturer cannot even met the minimum, why waste $$ on them ?

mvician
06-11-2011, 17:35
1. Why does Mil-Spec steel shoot better or more reliably than regular gun steel?

Where has anyone said milspec barrels shoot better?


2. Just as accurate, reliable, durable, and looks the same.


the above in blue seems to be what those that don't understand go by.

If you are asking to learn, fine. If you are just asking just to be an :eric: then anything that anyone tries to explain to you is just wasted.



.

chivvalry
06-11-2011, 18:26
Very glad to see spikes on the list. Great rifles.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 19:09
the above in blue seems to be what those that don't understand go by.

If you are asking to learn, fine. If you are just asking just to be an :eric: then anything that anyone tries to explain to you is just wasted.



.

No, Im serious, I want to know. Lets hear why mil spec is so good for the $$$.

M&P15T
06-11-2011, 19:12
I have owned LMT, Colt, Bushmaster, RRA, and BCM AR piddle shooters and they are all the same design and for the most part work well for the average AR owner.

G21FAN, Im going to assign you some homework.
please stay in your lane until you've done it.
based on most of your post, you're pretty green about AR/M4's.

read about: TDP & NSN.

understand mil-spec = minimum standards. If a manufacturer cannot even met the minimum, why waste $$ on them ?

And I've got some homework for you Randolph......read the entire thread before you start with the insults and telling people to "stay in their lane." This isn't your web-site, people can say whatever they want to, and don't have to do home work or run it by you first.

Knock off the condecending crap, if you don't have something nice (or at least a positive addition to the conversation) to say, then how about you just skip posting all together.

mvician
06-11-2011, 19:53
No, Im serious, I want to know. Lets hear why mil spec is so good for the $$$.


:cool:

This is as pertains to commercially produced M4 type rifles. Applies to others as well. This is a link to the EOF (Explanation of Features) by rob_s, creator of "the chart".

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA#gid=2



.

Randolph da man
06-11-2011, 19:57
And I've got some homework for you Randolph......read the entire thread before you start with the insults and telling people to "stay in their lane." This isn't your web-site, people can say whatever they want to, and don't have to do home work or run it by you first.

Knock off the condecending crap, if you don't have something nice (or at least a positive addition to the conversation) to say, then how about you just skip posting all together.


the irony is overwhelming :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I did read the entire thread, thats why I posted what I did.
I assume you are trying to attract attention to your ignorance. (ignorance=uneducated, not stupid [look them up in on www.dictionary.com])
good job. :wavey:
your ignorance is overwhelming, even for here.
you should do as I suggested he do, you can fondle your Spikes while doing so, its all good to me, I dont care. :tongueout:
understand what the TDP and NSN are, you better hurry while you can still edit your post :yawn:

12131
06-11-2011, 20:36
Gee, another pissing match over ARs. What a shock. :shakehead:
Wonder how long this thread will last.:upeyes:

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 20:46
I don't know but I am going to get Burger King.

JBnTX
06-11-2011, 20:58
Gee, another pissing match over ARs. What a shock. :shakehead:
Wonder how long this thread will last.:upeyes:


That's all that chart is good for!
Starting an argument, that's all!

There are plenty of reasons a company would not want to participate
in such nonsense. The least of the reasons is they have something to
hide or have an inferior product.

Any number of legal reasons or just not seeing a requirement to "compete"
with other brands that just might be owned by the same company that
owns them.

Ever wonder why Taco Bell doesn't compete with Pizza Hut?

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 21:01
And it isn't a pissing match of brands, started out on the subject of snobbery about the brands.

And mil-spec snobbery has yet to prove why the snobbery is warranted.

Dont care about the brand, had Noveske all the way to DPMS and Oly, all were reliable and accurate and durable.

Reb 56
06-11-2011, 21:02
What about Larue were they contacted and refused to respond ? In my opinion they build some of the best AR's around. Maybe I just don't understand the concept of the chart.Is it limited to M4 clones only?

StevieJ
06-11-2011, 21:04
.....

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 21:06
^^^As good an answer as any^^^

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 21:14
That's all that chart is good for!
Starting an argument, that's all!

There are plenty of reasons a company would not want to participate
in such nonsense. The least of the reasons is they have something to
hide or have an inferior product.

Any number of legal reasons or just not seeing a requirement to "compete"
with other brands that just might be owned by the same company that
owns them.

Ever wonder why Taco Bell doesn't compete with Pizza Hut?

Do you know the reasons behind the list or are you just upset?

TB and PHut = Apples and Oranges.

Commercially available M4 style ARs = Apples to Apples.

Ive contacted Oly, DPMS, BM and Double Star w/o receiving a response. What other conclusions can one draw from such avoidance?

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 21:16
What's tacos and pizzas have to do with this? :dunno:

Singlestack Wonder
06-11-2011, 21:24
One torture test for an M4 on the "Chart".....

https://danieldefense.com/TortureTest

mvician
06-11-2011, 21:47
What about Larue were they contacted and refused to respond ? In my opinion they build some of the best AR's around. Maybe I just don't understand the concept of the chart.Is it limited to M4 clones only?



Yes it is. That's why it is called

Comparison Chart of Major Brands of M4-Pattern Carbines

NeverMore1701
06-11-2011, 21:57
Oh yeah, THIS is why I stopped coming to the Black Rifle forum.

Oh well, at least I get to shoot my Noveske more during the summer months.

JBnTX
06-11-2011, 22:00
What's tacos and pizzas have to do with this? :dunno:


It's an analogy. (Look up what it means.)
Pizza Hut and Taco Bell are owned by the same company.

Did any of you stop to think that there just may be legal reasons
for a manufacturer to NOT want to be on that list?

You can't just automatically assume they have something to hide
or have an inferior product.

In reality the term "mil-spec" doesn't mean diddly squat.

There's no such thing as a "mil-spec" civilian AR-15 type rifle.
Never has been and probably never will be.

G21FAN
06-11-2011, 22:01
It's an analogy. (Look up what it means.)
Pizza Hut and Taco Bell are owned by the same company.

Did any of you stop to think that there just may be legal reasons
for a manufacturer to NOT want to be on that list?

You can't just automatically assume they have something to hide
or have an inferior product.

In reality the term "mil-spec" doesn't mean diddly squat.

Only just means more $$$ for the product.

jing1117
06-11-2011, 22:15
:cool:

This is as pertains to commercially produced M4 type rifles. Applies to others as well. This is a link to the EOF (Explanation of Features) by rob_s, creator of "the chart".

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA#gid=2



.

The new M4 chart is out.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

Thanks for the information guys. Its nice to know which companies are trying to adhere to the standards. As long as the data in the chart is accurate it is going to be helpful to someone that is planning on making a purchase. Sometimes it just boils down to a persons budget when they make a purchase or brand preference.

MistoGators
06-11-2011, 22:57
The point of the chart is to educate. Nothing more, nothing less.
At the same time, why would you settle for a Bushmaster or DPMS when you can build a BCM or get a Spike's for around the same price (or cheaper)?

mjkeat
06-11-2011, 23:00
Thanks for the information guys. Its nice to know which companies are trying to adhere to the standards. As long as the data in the chart is accurate it is going to be helpful to someone that is planning on making a purchase. Sometimes it just boils down to a persons budget when they make a purchase or brand preference.

The info used is straight from the manufacturer.

The cool thing is you can find ARs that surpass these standards for less than ones from manufacturers playing politician (ducking and dodging the questions).

djegators
06-11-2011, 23:31
Only just means more $$$ for the product.


You have said this more than once...do you have evidence of this? Reality is, you can put together a top quality rifle that meets or beats TPD for about the same money as you can a commercial grade run of the mill rifle.

The only snobbery I am seeing here today is from the "anti-charters."

Burns
06-11-2011, 23:31
I would like to add that my Mosin is also 100% mil-spec.

M&P15T
06-12-2011, 07:11
the irony is overwhelming :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I did read the entire thread, thats why I posted what I did.
I assume you are trying to attract attention to your ignorance. (ignorance=uneducated, not stupid [look them up in on www.dictionary.com] (http://www.dictionary.com]))
good job. :wavey:
your ignorance is overwhelming, even for here.
you should do as I suggested he do, you can fondle your Spikes while doing so, its all good to me, I dont care. :tongueout:
understand what the TDP and NSN are, you better hurry while you can still edit your post :yawn:

What ignorance are you referring to? On what topic? And if you had read the entire thread, you would have seen where G21FAN had owned several ARs, he's hardly a noob that you need to educate. All I was saying was that you're being rude, trying to prove something to yourself by being condescending to others. Please stop trying to be the AR Yoda. No one is interested in what you have to say because of how you say it. Go join the AR GATE forum, maybe you can prove yourself to yourself there.

You may think you know ARs, but what you don't know is people, and how to interact with them.

Eurodriver
06-12-2011, 07:37
And it isn't a pissing match of brands, started out on the subject of snobbery about the brands.

And mil-spec snobbery has yet to prove why the snobbery is warranted.

Dont care about the brand, DPMS and Oly, all were reliable and accurate and durable.

Durable eh?

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d13/drshame/BrokenBolt.jpg?t=1255360507

http://www.ar15barrels.com/tech/broken-bolt.jpg

A few points:

Mil-spec doesn't mean lowest bidder, it doesn't mean its ****, it doesn't mean any of that. Milspec is an adherence to a standard. The standard being the TDP. Barrel and bolt steel, HP/MPI, 1:7 twist, h-buffers, etc. Anyone who thinks milspec is lowest bidder crap is an uneducated idiot. Period.

If a rifle is not "milspec", meaning they are not adhering to the same standards that has worked for the M16 rifle for 40 years....what standards ARE they using?

DPMS will work for any AR owner just fine if you go to the range and put a box or two of ammo through it before hunting season. No one can, nor should, argue that. However, no one should argue that a DPMS would handle large amounts of fire in a training environment either. They're just not built for that, it should be evidenced by their lack of gas key and castle nut staking alone.

Lastly, why the hell would anyone spend $1000 on a Bushmaster XM15-E2S when they could buy a complete LMT Defender 2000 Lower for $350 and a BCM upper for $650?

I hope to not actually see a poster who says that Bushmaster is better quality than BCM. If its not, why wouldn't you get the best?

M&P15T
06-12-2011, 07:44
Durable eh?

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d13/drshame/BrokenBolt.jpg?t=1255360507

http://www.ar15barrels.com/tech/broken-bolt.jpg

A few points:

Mil-spec doesn't mean lowest bidder, it doesn't mean its ****, it doesn't mean any of that. Milspec is an adherence to a standard. The standard being the TDP. Barrel and bolt steel, HP/MPI, 1:7 twist, h-buffers, etc. Anyone who thinks milspec is lowest bidder crap is an IDIOT. Period.

DPMS will work for any AR owner just fine if you go to the range and put a box or two of ammo through it before hunting season. No one can, nor should, argue that. However, no one should argue that a DPMS would handle large amounts of fire in a training environment either. They're just not built for that, it should be evidenced by their lack of gas key and castle nut staking alone.

Lastly, why the hell would anyone spend $1000 on a Bushmaster XM15-E2S when they could buy a complete LMT Defender 2000 Lower for $350 and a BCM upper for $650?

I hope to not actually see a poster who says that Bushmaster is better quality than BCM. If its not, why wouldn't you get the best?

You have excellent points. For the same (or a little more) money, one can get a mil-spec AR for the price of a non-milspec, which is really the reason for the existence of The Chart. What some here are trying to say is that many recreational shooters just don't care to educate themselves on ARs before making their purchase, and don't shoot enough for mil-spec to matter. Yes, there are tons of great ARs out there that are milspec, but those manufacturers don't mass-market themselves like Bushmaster and others, so they're small-time players in the market.

Most shooters will be happy with a Bushmaster, DPMS, yadda-yadda, because they don't run them that hard and don't care/know about milspec.

djegators
06-12-2011, 07:49
I agree, I have long said to people that if your goal is to have cool rifle, shoot a few boxes of ammo a year, and want to show it to your buddies at cookouts, then pick out whatever rifle catches your eye....if you want something to run hard day in, day out, then buy the stuff that SMEs buy.

M&P15T
06-12-2011, 08:03
I agree, I have long said to people that if your goal is to have cool rifle, shoot a few boxes of ammo a year, and want to show it to your buddies at cookouts, then pick out whatever rifle catches your eye....if you want something to run hard day in, day out, then buy the stuff that SMEs buy.

Think of the numbers involved. There's about 80 million civilian gun owners in this country. If 1/8 of them own an AR, that's about 10 million civilian AR owners. If my numbers are a bit off, there is absolutely no doubt that someone will correct me, so let's just roll with that last number for now.

Of the 10 or so million AR owners in this country, how many of them really get out shooting that much, say once a month or more? I don't have any hard facts, but I'd guess around 1 in 10 or 1 in 12. I think the vast majority of AR owners (and firearms owners in general) shoot very little, like 1-2 times a year.

So everyone here needs to take a deep breath and consider that mass-produced, non-milspec ARs are fine for the vast majority of shooters. They'll never get run long or hard enough for their weaknesses to become apparent. If CEOs from companies like DPMS and Bushmaster were to read this thread, they'd laugh their friggin' heads off all the way to the bank.

And for those of you here that represent the small group of AR owners that are true enthusiasts. Those who absolutely need to tell everyone else what they should buy, and exactly why, to the point where you just can't stop yourself from being concescending while you do it.....you know, the true AR nerds. Sit down and pour yourselves a nice, cool, tall glass of shut the **** up. Some of us have lives outside of shooting ARs, and are completely tired of listening to 5 or 6 AR nerds ruin this forum.

djegators
06-12-2011, 08:07
There are a LOT of threads here and on other boards where people ASK what AR to buy, most of these by people who know little or nothing about the subject, yet you criticize those who provide facts and opinions when asked to provide them...I guess you hate Consumer Reports a lot.

mjkeat
06-12-2011, 08:28
If CEOs from companies like DPMS and Bushmaster were to read this thread, they'd laugh their friggin' heads off all the way to the bank.


Yeah because of the ill informed and thick headed who keep buying their product contrary to the large amounts of negative info and proof available to the consumer.


"Need" is a good point. Most don't need a quality AR for the few boxes of ammo they send down range each year. But why spend as much or more for less?

Id rather have more than I need than be stranded at the range w/ a broken firearm because I asked a little to much of it.

M&P15T
06-12-2011, 08:30
There are a LOT of threads here and on other boards where people ASK what AR to buy, most of these by people who know little or nothing about the subject, yet you criticize those who provide facts and opinions when asked to provide them...I guess you hate Consumer Reports a lot.

No, I absolutely do not criticize people when they answer asked questions, that's the entire reason for forms like this, and purchasing aids like The Chart. What is really starting to grind my gears is a select few posters here who get rude and condescending when people express their opinions on topics, instead of simply having a normal, point-for-point discussion. And it's the AR nerds here that are the culprits, and they are the reason why this forum sucks.

There's a small group here who think that if you aren't Military, LEO or gone to a training course, you should not voice an opinion on any topics here, and it's getting very tiresome. These same schmucks are the same ones who just can't figure out that the VAST MAJORITY of AR owners aren't like them, and won't listen to any views from non-nerdoidal AR owners. Non-nerd AR owners come here for a few threads looking for good converstaion, get absolutely lambasted by the AR nerds, and then leave for friendlier forums with lower nasty-nerd quotients.

M&P15T
06-12-2011, 08:31
Yeah because of the ill informed and thick headed who keep buying their product contrary to the large amounts of negative info and proof available to the consumer.


"Need" is a good point. Most don't need a quality AR for the few boxes of ammo they send down range each year. But why spend as much or more for less?

Id rather have more than I need than be stranded at the range w/ a broken firearm because I asked a little to much of it.

You're right.

djegators
06-12-2011, 08:35
No, I absolutely do not criticize people when they answer asked questions, that's the entire reason for forms like this, and purchasing aids like The Chart. What is really starting to grind my gears is a select few posters here who get rude and condescending when people express their opinions on topics, instead of simply having a normal, point-for-point discussion. And it's the AR nerds here that are the culprits, and they are the reason why this forum sucks.

There's a small group here who think that if you aren't Military, LEO or gone to a training course, you should not voice an opinion on any topics here, and it's getting very tiresome. These same schmucks are the same ones who just can't figure out that the VASR MAJORITY of AR owners aren't like them, and won't listen to any views from non-nerdoidal AR owners.


Now that you are narrowing down your animosity to the very small group it should be targeted at, perhaps we can get back to business. Most of this thread has consisted of bashing many posters as a whole, and posting a lot of "just as good" or "good enough" opinion on ARs, which is ironic because as you say, the chart represents a collection of facts, nothing more, nothing less. I tend to ignore the condescending posters on BOTH sides of this issue.

M&P15T
06-12-2011, 08:41
Now that you are narrowing down your animosity to the very small group it should be targeted at, perhaps we can get back to business. Most of this thread has consisted of bashing many posters as a whole, and posting a lot of "just as good" or "good enough" opinion on ARs, which is ironic because as you say, the chart represents a collection of facts, nothing more, nothing less. I tend to ignore the condescending posters on BOTH sides of this issue.

There's really no issue. The Chart is a great buying tool. And there absolutely is "good enough", it's just different for everyone. I think G21FAN is just trying to say that not everyone needs milspec, and people can disagree with helpful facts instead of condescending crap.

Gunnut 45/454
06-12-2011, 10:21
glock031


"Not many poster bragging about their DPMS around here that i've noticed. "


Well then let me be the first! My other AR that I stated was dispised by the M4 crowd and can't be discussed over there with out being banned or suspended from the forum.
It's a 16" DPMS Carbine HBAR A2 with an AT lower! Total price for the gun $700 and some change! Brand new upper on the used AT lower! It is very accurate, totally reliable and has went bang every time! Now what more can one ask for! The Chamber didn't need to be reamed as they claim all DPMS rifles do, it has the Covetted M4 feed ramps, Nor was the FSB canted like they claim all DPMS rifles are, it is a 1:9" which is blastfomy-got to have a 1:7" , cant take them to a Carbine class cause they will fail the first round etc.:rofl:

djegators
06-12-2011, 10:28
I like you Gunnut, but there is a whole lot of hyperbole in that post...the kind that we rail against in GTPI.

Eurodriver
06-12-2011, 11:12
Another thing I'd like to point out is that the mentality at M4C is based around the idea that the weapon will be needed on a 2 way range.

No one here would advocate bringing a Kia to a drag racing event, which is why they don't tolerate bringing a DPMS to a gunfight.

Durden
06-12-2011, 11:33
The HK 416 that was allegedly used by SEAL Team Six has made this chart moot.

If you don't have a HK 416, your rifle could very well malfunction or self-detonate at the worst possible time.

/sarc/

glock031
06-12-2011, 12:05
Another thing I'd like to point out is that the mentality at M4C is based around the idea that the weapon will be needed on a 2 way range.

No one here would advocate bringing a Kia to a drag racing event, which is why they don't tolerate bringing a DPMS to a gunfight.

Good point.
But naming their forum "AR General Discussion" seems to undermind their intentions if infact they want to be the "M4 Combat ready disussion" forum.

Darkangel1846
06-12-2011, 12:27
That's because some companies (like Bushmaster, DPMS, and Olympic Arms) want nothing to do with it. That should tell you something about those companies.

Thats the whole point it doesn't tell you anything about those companies, so it means nothing.:wavey:

joecoastie
06-12-2011, 15:59
Im going to assign you some homework.
please stay in your lane until you've done it.
based on most of your post, you're pretty green about AR/M4's.

read about: TDP & NSN.

understand mil-spec = minimum standards. If a manufacturer cannot even met the minimum, why waste $$ on them ?

I get what you're saying, but just because something has an NSN doesn't mean its the absolute best. Lots of things have them, for instance 7310011331784 is the NSN for a corn dog fryer. 6510012549639 is for tampons. Most the time if something has a NSN it means that item probably isn't a piece of crap. But even that is iffy, the hand tools that you get through the stock system are total crap and you are usually better off buying something off the shelf at Home Depot.

rich52us
06-12-2011, 17:48
I'm a hobbyist. I go to and participate in tactical carbine matches and drills and paractice with handguns as well. I don't plan on my firearms being offensive weapons, but I will use them to defend my family and myself if the need arises. I want my firearms to be as durable and trouble free as possible, just like many other products I purchase.

When I plan on purchasing products such as a car, power tool, major appliance, electronics, etc. I try to do some research to determine which brands and models may best suit my needs, and will be the most reliable, trouble free, and cost effective over time. I use the internet and other sources to do this and usually have to go to many sites to get the information I need.

To me, mil-spec seems to be a standard the government came up with based on years of experience, testing and research. I believe the purpose is to put a quality product in the hands of our military that will be less likely to fail them at a critical moment if properly maintained. For instance, testing of bolts is intended to discover flaws that may cause a critical failure. Proper stakeing is so that a screw doesn't back out and cause a jam at a critical moment. The information in "the chart" consolidates a lot of quality control and other information in one place.

I hope I'm never in a situation where a failure of my firearm will have dire consequences. But the standards in the chart can help me buy a better product at a more reasonable price, one that will last longer and need replacement parts only when scheduled for maintenance, and not upon breakage. I therefore used the original chart as a kind of guideline in determining what AR style rifle to purchase.

Personally, I thank the author of "the chart" for all the time and effort he put in to publishing the original chart, and now this follow-up. I believe he only intended it as an aid to consumers on all levels. I believe he gave all the manufacturerd an oportunity to participate if they wanted to. If the manufactureres want the consumers to know what they use to put their products together, they participate. I don't understand the animosity and acrimony that "the chart" stirs up. Buy whatever brand of AR you choose and be happy with it. If you feel the information on "the chart" is of value, use it in your decision, if not, don't.

Gunnut 45/454
06-12-2011, 20:32
djegators
No hyperboil! Thats what been said over there about DPMS rifles and others! Like I said If it is one of there covetted Chart rifles thats the crap you here!

Eurodriver
And I've seen pics of the Chart rifles do the same thing and your point is? Parts break ! Do you have the round count on that bolt? Link to the original thread? I'd like to read that one!

surf
06-12-2011, 21:11
This is why the folks really knowledgeable about the AR15 platform and its proper use avoid this site like the plague. And I wouldn't be surprised if the couple that do stop by on occasion where seriously considering not doing so anymore.
Lots of truth here.

Not to lump myself into any category of knowledgeable persons but I find myself visiting less, posting less and have considered moving on completely. I have a genuine interest in helping new shooters or people who may be new to this platform to become educated owners and help better this hobby / sport etc... The sad thing is that there are those who post here who are doing no justice to this concept. Also the flat out spite or hate for other sites with a preponderance of industry / shooting professionals is overwhelming and the amount of sheer ignorance on this weapon in this forum is also overwhelming at times and this thread is a prime example of some members who don't know what they don't know, or refusing to learn out of pure spite.

The chart is what it is, to use or not use.

Most acknowledge that for a plinker there are many suitable choices that are not on the list that will give the owner a lifetime of pleasure.

Most will say that there are a few not on the list that can be suitable for self defense / duty use, but when your life is on the line, there are better choices for the same or perhaps less cost.

The majority of parts / testing procedures that meets Mil-Spec standards costs a company more money to produce that product. So what does that say about a company who charges as much or even more money for a product that uses lower quality parts and doesn't have the same quality of testing procedures? Who cares if you don't run your rifle hard enough for that to matter, but why spend more with a company that is just sticking it to their customers by having a much greater profit margin for lower quality parts and lower testing standards? That just sounds like stupidity to me. This has absolutely nothing to do with snobbery either, just pure common sense.

Rifle costs and quality of materials aside, some companies flat out suck with their customer service and being known for rifles having basic "issues" out of the box which could have been easily solved from the manufacturer standpoint during manufacture or quality control process.

While attempting to replicate or exceed Mil-Spec or TDP standards does not guarantee anything, it does show a commitment by a company to attempt to put out a high quality product and there is a huge likelihood that their product is indeed assembled better and will be a better performer over its lifespan. Anyone with a lick of knowledge about this weapon system understands the critical area's that can fail basically leaving you with a club. Not WILL fail but can fail. So any manufacturer that attempts to follow these standards are showing an attention to detail that can save the user their money or their life. This attention to detail generally equates to a company having their **** together as a company itself and that is the type of companies that I wish to support with my hard earned dollars.

I will also use the car example. A Kia and a Corvette will both get you from A to Z. But if they both cost the same or if the Kia costs more, I know which one I am buying every single time. PT Barnum understood the fool and his money concept all too well. Don't support the companies that would attempt to do the same to you.

pleaforwar
06-12-2011, 22:23
Couldn't have said it better Surf.

mixflip
06-13-2011, 02:04
Surf, you Da kine...

I mean, da man!!! Well said.

J. Parker
06-13-2011, 09:08
Lots of truth here.

Not to lump myself into any category of knowledgeable persons but I find myself visiting less, posting less and have considered moving on completely. I have a genuine interest in helping new shooters or people who may be new to this platform to become educated owners and help better this hobby / sport etc... The sad thing is that there are those who post here who are doing no justice to this concept. Also the flat out spite or hate for other sites with a preponderance of industry / shooting professionals is overwhelming and the amount of sheer ignorance on this weapon in this forum is also overwhelming at times and this thread is a prime example of some members who don't know what they don't know, or refusing to learn out of pure spite.

The chart is what it is, to use or not use.

Most acknowledge that for a plinker there are many suitable choices that are not on the list that will give the owner a lifetime of pleasure.

Most will say that there are a few not on the list that can be suitable for self defense / duty use, but when your life is on the line, there are better choices for the same or perhaps less cost.

The majority of parts / testing procedures that meets Mil-Spec standards costs a company more money to produce that product. So what does that say about a company who charges as much or even more money for a product that uses lower quality parts and doesn't have the same quality of testing procedures? Who cares if you don't run your rifle hard enough for that to matter, but why spend more with a company that is just sticking it to their customers by having a much greater profit margin for lower quality parts and lower testing standards? That just sounds like stupidity to me. This has absolutely nothing to do with snobbery either, just pure common sense.

Rifle costs and quality of materials aside, some companies flat out suck with their customer service and being known for rifles having basic "issues" out of the box which could have been easily solved from the manufacturer standpoint during manufacture or quality control process.

While attempting to replicate or exceed Mil-Spec or TDP standards does not guarantee anything, it does show a commitment by a company to attempt to put out a high quality product and there is a huge likelihood that their product is indeed assembled better and will be a better performer over its lifespan. Anyone with a lick of knowledge about this weapon system understands the critical area's that can fail basically leaving you with a club. Not WILL fail but can fail. So any manufacturer that attempts to follow these standards are showing an attention to detail that can save the user their money or their life. This attention to detail generally equates to a company having their **** together as a company itself and that is the type of companies that I wish to support with my hard earned dollars.

I will also use the car example. A Kia and a Corvette will both get you from A to Z. But if they both cost the same or if the Kia costs more, I know which one I am buying every single time. PT Barnum understood the fool and his money concept all too well. Don't support the companies that would attempt to do the same to you.

There's alot more to GlockTalk than just the Black Rifle Forum. Check out some other sections. You might enjoy yourself more.:dunno: Personally, I find GlockTalk helpful AND entertaining.:supergrin:

Gunnut 45/454
06-13-2011, 10:09
Surf
Agreed if thats the standard you use to buy an AR, Thats fine for you! Good info and if people choose to buy according to the chart more power to them! But since a vast majority of AR ouwers are not have not and will not use there arms for "DUTY" it's an exspense they don't have to incur to enjoy the AR platform! As we have seen over the years if a company produces a crap AR they usually don't last long as the market takes care of them!:supergrin: Cause if I'm going to use a "Duty" rifle the government going to issue it anyway!

Chuck TX
06-13-2011, 10:25
Yay! Time for people who don't shoot more than few times a year to get upset again because their rifle didn't rank well on the mil-spec comparison chart.

I still can't understand why someone satisfied with their rifle, for THEIR uses, seems to believe that's all everyone else needs. As if it were unfathomable that others may require a higher standard for their applications or want more for their money.

Oh yeah, THIS is why I stopped coming to the Black Rifle forum.

Oh well, at least I get to shoot my Noveske more during the summer months.

Yep. Too many folks arguing emotion rather than science and math. Happens with all firearms, but it's tenfold with AR's.

M&P15T
06-13-2011, 10:32
Yay! Time for people who don't shoot more than few times a year to get upset again because their rifle didn't rank well on the mil-spec comparison chart.

I still can't understand why someone satisfied with their rifle, for THEIR uses, seems to believe that's all everyone else needs. As if it were unfathomable that others may require a higher standard for their applications or want more for their money.

Your observation works the same both ways. I think it's difficult for some AR aficionados to understand that most AR owners don't need mil-spec. They should get it, since usually it doesn't cost much more, but they really don't need it.

ARs are just another example in which purchase decisions need to be based on knowing what's out there and what's what.

mixflip
06-13-2011, 12:04
I think some folks are missing the point. Yes lower end AR's are perfectly fine for the majority of enthusiasts. What is odd or funny or hard to understand is why would anyone choose between 2 guns that are the same price...but choose the one with lower quality parts or less features?

"key word...for the same price!!!!"

So let me wrap my brain around this... some guys here thinks its wise for me to spend $900 on an AR that doesnt have 4150CMV steel, no M4 feed ramps, 1/9 twist rate, commercial spec parts and parts batch tested?

Yes there are AR's out there that come with less and you pay more for it...I think that is the real issue here. Not gun snobery.

chivvalry
06-13-2011, 12:38
I think some folks are missing the point. Yes lower end AR's are perfectly fine for the majority of enthusiasts. What is odd or funny or hard to understand is why would anyone choose between 2 guns that are the same price...but choose the one with lower quality parts or less features?

"key word...for the same price!!!!"

So let me wrap my brain around this... some guys here thinks its wise for me to spend $900 on an AR that doesnt have 4150CMV steel, no M4 feed ramps, 1/9 twist rate, commercial spec parts and parts batch tested?

Yes there are AR's out there that come with less and you pay more for it...I think that is the real issue here. Not gun snobery.

...winning... :cool:


"Oh bother," said Pooh as he slapped another magazine into his AR-15.

pag23
06-13-2011, 12:47
Surf and a few others have some excellents points and posts on the forum. I like the chart as it gives a side by side comparison for the buyer. Some like LMT some like BCM, etc......
I personally bought a newer version Bushmaster Carbon 15. I like it but I only go shooting with it every couple of months (1 jam on steel ammo-never again). Now that being said, I have done some additional research and really have come to like BCM. I purchased a few of their products and are very happy with them and their customer service. I plan on buying some more of their products in the future.

jsykes
06-13-2011, 19:04
I understand what you're saying surf, but one thing that goes hand in hand with that and that most people seem to overlook is that just because a company does not MP test every single bolt or barrel, etc, does not mean the part is inferior.

Much of the "mil-spec" standard has to do with testing, not necessarily the actual quality of the part. A company can easily make a part as good as or better than those in "mil-spec" rifles, but if they do not test every single one or follow the military testing procedure, its not on the list as "mil-spec."

This is the one danger in the chart and why some might not want to participate. The fact that someone does not meet the "mil-spec" standard gives the impression of an inferior product. While some may be, there may be others that are equal, or even superior, and that can get lost in the chart.

I'm not defending any particular brand or even discounting the chart, I'm just saying that the entire story is not told by a chart. Looking at a chart and calling that your research is just as irresponsible as not doing any research because there is so much more to the story than just whether your gun is "mil-spec" or not.

While I'll give you the fact that companies trying to adhere to "mil-spec" generally produce a quality weapon, there are other companies out there that might not adhere to the specific "mil-spec" standards that can still produce high quality weapons as well.

The danger of the chart is that it implies that its the gospel of buying an AR and those that follow it blindly tend to look down on those that dont. Wow, that sounds like a religion, no wonder there are constantly arguments over it. ;)

Feanor
06-13-2011, 20:44
That's because some companies (like Bushmaster, DPMS, and Olympic Arms) want nothing to do with it. That should tell you something about those companies.

You omitted S&W.:cool:

vafish
06-13-2011, 20:48
I will also use the car example. A Kia and a Corvette will both get you from A to Z. But if they both cost the same or if the Kia costs more, I know which one I am buying every single time. PT Barnum understood the fool and his money concept all too well. Don't support the companies that would attempt to do the same to you.

Using that logic and the chart then you shouldn't buy anything but a Spikes Tactical. It has all the boxes checked and is over $300 less then Colt of BCM.

If Spikes can do the same thing for $300 less why should anyone support Colt, BCM, or Noveske? Aren't they just playing us for fools and charging and extra $300 for the same thing?

My one big gripe about the chart is that it is based solely on a survey sent to a manufacturer. How do we know that Colt, BCM, or Spikes aren't lying to us?

I mean I could make a VaFish M4 and tell you that it meets all those specs, other then a few obvious ones like staking and extractor inserts how would you know?

Even if you want documentation you don't think I can come up with an image of a piece of paper that says at some point I bought some material that meets the specifications?

You pick up a bolt that has MPT stamped on it how do you know it's not some pot metal piece of crap from China?

When is someone going to start cutting these things up and doing an analysis of the metal?

mixflip
06-13-2011, 21:58
I also noticed that some companies offset the lack of mil-spec specifications by offering "lifetime warranties".

While others have a documented history of incredible customer service yet they still dont publicly offer a "lifetime warranty" for some reason?

Sometimes that lifetime warranty can be what makes the difference between 2 guns that are the same in price and quality.

CAcop
06-13-2011, 22:43
Using that logic and the chart then you shouldn't buy anything but a Spikes Tactical. It has all the boxes checked and is over $300 less then Colt of BCM.

If Spikes can do the same thing for $300 less why should anyone support Colt, BCM, or Noveske? Aren't they just playing us for fools and charging and extra $300 for the same thing?

My one big gripe about the chart is that it is based solely on a survey sent to a manufacturer. How do we know that Colt, BCM, or Spikes aren't lying to us?

I mean I could make a VaFish M4 and tell you that it meets all those specs, other then a few obvious ones like staking and extractor inserts how would you know?

Even if you want documentation you don't think I can come up with an image of a piece of paper that says at some point I bought some material that meets the specifications?

You pick up a bolt that has MPT stamped on it how do you know it's not some pot metal piece of crap from China?

When is someone going to start cutting these things up and doing an analysis of the metal?

This is one the issues I see with following the chart too closely or holding it up as the be all, end all. If it were paired with factory tours by Rob or independent testing of materials or sampling of various makers by going to the local gunstore and tearing apart the guns without tipping off the makers.

Rob likes to say trust but verify but are we getting good verification?

It's one thing to look at the BCG and see MPT on the bolt or staked screws or has an auto bolt vs full auto. Its another to look over the shoulder of the guy at the factory putting it together or watching the testing.

G21FAN
06-13-2011, 22:57
Durable eh?

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d13/drshame/BrokenBolt.jpg?t=1255360507

http://www.ar15barrels.com/tech/broken-bolt.jpg

A few points:

Mil-spec doesn't mean lowest bidder, it doesn't mean its ****, it doesn't mean any of that. Milspec is an adherence to a standard. The standard being the TDP. Barrel and bolt steel, HP/MPI, 1:7 twist, h-buffers, etc. Anyone who thinks milspec is lowest bidder crap is an uneducated idiot. Period.

If a rifle is not "milspec", meaning they are not adhering to the same standards that has worked for the M16 rifle for 40 years....what standards ARE they using?

DPMS will work for any AR owner just fine if you go to the range and put a box or two of ammo through it before hunting season. No one can, nor should, argue that. However, no one should argue that a DPMS would handle large amounts of fire in a training environment either. They're just not built for that, it should be evidenced by their lack of gas key and castle nut staking alone.

Lastly, why the hell would anyone spend $1000 on a Bushmaster XM15-E2S when they could buy a complete LMT Defender 2000 Lower for $350 and a BCM upper for $650?

I hope to not actually see a poster who says that Bushmaster is better quality than BCM. If its not, why wouldn't you get the best?

First, I am not a "average" recreational shooter. I have put quite a few rounds down range, with LMT, BCM, OLY and DPMS. Bushmaster as well. That isnt any bolt out of my rifles. Once when I didnt pay for ammo, I (and 3 others) put about 3000 rounds each downrange in DPMS A2 rifles w/ Gov't profile barrels. Not once did they malf in any way with the M-193 we were issued. My first was an OLY Plinker. Still running tru and reliable thousands of rounds later.

Point I was making in this thread is the snobbery when one supposively owns a "chart" gun. It is really rearing it's ugly head, both here and the other forums and it turns away potential first time buyers who just may become a powerfull ally in the fight for our rights.

Mil-Spec doesn't mean better, but sure does mean $$$ for some gun makers.

marvin
06-14-2011, 09:04
since when has a goverment standard been a good thing. i have a hard time thinking that the spec's that the goverment wants are the best. i mean over all they screw everything else up, so why should this be any different when it comes to rifles.

DerekMK23
06-14-2011, 10:02
Well since you can't even discuss any AR that doesn't meet their MIL SPEC dream requirements on M4.net If you do they will suspend you ASAP ! The closest "Mil Spec" Comercial AR you can buy is a Colt! Everyone else is a Posser! And your paying for the Name! :wavey:
I agreed I was banned for life for calling a Marine a Devil Dog, what a joke of a forum and what close minded people to not accept other points of view on firearms. M4 is the furthest thing from information anyone can recieve.

DerekMK23
06-14-2011, 10:07
Yay! Time for people who don't shoot more than few times a year to get upset again because their rifle didn't rank well on the mil-spec comparison chart.

I still can't understand why someone satisfied with their rifle, for THEIR uses, seems to believe that's all everyone else needs. As if it were unfathomable that others may require a higher standard for their applications or want more for their money.



Yep. Too many folks arguing emotion rather than science and math. Happens with all firearms, but it's tenfold with AR's.

+1 smartest thing I have read yet!

pleaforwar
06-14-2011, 11:24
I agreed I was banned for life for calling a Marine a Devil Dog, what a joke of a forum and what close minded people to not accept other points of view on firearms. M4 is the furthest thing from information anyone can recieve.

That's because DD is typically used when addressing someone junior to you, and when they screwed up.

I never saw someone junior refer to a senior as DD. They'd likely get smoked for it.

The only time DD is used with spirit nowadays is when celebrating something Corps related. Or the occasional Gunny who referred to EVERYONE (junior) as DD.

From my own experience, take it or leave it.

Gunnut 45/454
06-14-2011, 11:46
rich52us
Mil-Spec is a standard used to be able to sell a product to the Government under a certain contract! In the case of the M16/M4 contract the TDP! Thats all it is nothing more nothing less! Dosen't mean the product are better then normal commercial grade parts just that it meets the contracted spec's! I don't know or have ever heard of any firearm manufacture making substandard parts for firearms! Good way to catch a lawsuit and be put out of business! Have bad parts been sold -yep. Will Milspec parts fail yep seen it all the time in the Aircraft repair industry . I can't count the number of bad Mil-Spec parts that I seen bad right from the factory in 24 years in the USAF!:whistling:

mjkeat
06-14-2011, 11:54
rich52us
Mil-Spec is a standard used to be able to sell a product to the Government under a certain contract! In the case of the M16/M4 contract the TDP! Thats all it is nothing more nothing less! Dosen't mean the product are better then normal commercial grade parts just that it meets the contracted spec's! I don't know or have ever heard of any firearm manufacture making substandard parts for firearms! Good way to catch a lawsuit and be put out of business! Have bad parts been sold -yep. Will Milspec parts fail yep seen it all the time in the Aircraft repair industry . I can't count the number of bad Mil-Spec parts that I seen bad right from the factory in 24 years in the USAF!:whistling:

What is your experience w/ failures of commercial grade M4s/AR15s as compared to mil-spec M4s/AR15s? Have you found one is more prone to failure than the other?

Gunnut 45/454
06-14-2011, 12:10
mjkeat
Nope both of my Commercial grade AR's have been just a good as my Gov issued M16/M4's that I have used! In fact the only firearms I had break were my Win 45 LC '94 and a Marlin 357 mag '94. The Win I broke the carrier with a heavy loading! And the Marlin I had the loading gate screw broke! :)

Big A
06-14-2011, 12:25
It's amazing how worked up some people get over something on the internet...

All the chart shows is which companies do or do not produce an AR-15 that meets or exceeds the standards put forth by the US military for a service rifle.

If you want a rifle that meets these standards then reference the chart and go find one for the best deal that you can. If you don't want a mil-spec rifle or it simply doesn't matter to you then by which ever rifle meets your needs and go shoot the darned thing...

Was that really so hard for you guys to understand?

Now, to those of you that have used this weapon in combat or simply have far more knowledge than most of us about the weapon (Surf, Plea For War, etc). Please do not give up on this sub-forum. There are many of us here like myself that seek your advice because of your first hand knowledge. I myself own both a Stag Model 1 and an M&P-15X and while they meet my needs they might not suit some one else's. But that's what makes America great, the ability to choose how to as well as what to spend our hard earned money on.

mjkeat
06-14-2011, 12:36
mjkeat
Nope both of my Commercial grade AR's have been just a good as my Gov issued M16/M4's that I have used! In fact the only firearms I had break were my Win 45 LC '94 and a Marlin 357 mag '94. The Win I broke the carrier with a heavy loading! And the Marlin I had the loading gate screw broke! :)

Thank you.

CAcop
06-14-2011, 12:38
As for Mil-spec I take it with a grain of salt. We have Colts in our rack at work that have had broken bolts and barrels that have loosened up from the upper. We are talking about Colt 6920s with the only changes being adding slings and lights. Some may claim that the bolts are because of a carbine gas system with a 16" barrel but I have a hard time believing 1.6" is going to shear off locking lugs within 10,000 rounds.

I do take more stock in reading about Filthy 14 or Vuurwapen's experiments or Mike Pannone playing with the rifles or my PDs usage of Colts.

To be honest I think as long as the rifle is not absolute garbage and you can get it to work most users would be fine with it. Even those who take their rifles to the next level or more I think they would do just fine with them. The key is to make sure it works and then stay on top of it.

Just like any other gun.

Now am I going to go out and by an Olympic Arms? Not unless it is just a fun gun to shoot steel cased ammo at tin cans to see how long it lasts. Would I buy a BCM with all kinds of rails and accessories? Probably not unless it meet my needs.

Am I going to trash talk anyone for buying either of those rifles? No. It is their money and they get to do with it as they please. I hope it brings them joy.

CAcop
06-14-2011, 12:43
It's amazing how worked up some people get over something on the internet...

All the chart shows is which companies do or do not produce an AR-15 that meets or exceeds the standards put forth by the US military for a service rifle.

If you want a rifle that meets these standards then reference the chart and go find one for the best deal that you can. If you don't want a mil-spec rifle or it simply doesn't matter to you then by which ever rifle meets your needs and go shoot the darned thing...

Was that really so hard for you guys to understand?

Now, to those of you that have used this weapon in combat or simply have far more knowledge than most of us about the weapon (Surf, Plea For War, etc). Please do not give up on this sub-forum. There are many of us here like myself that seek your advice because of your first hand knowledge. I myself own both a Stag Model 1 and an M&P-15X and while they meet my needs they might not suit some one else's. But that's what makes America great, the ability to choose how to as well as what to spend our hard earned money on.

The way I read the chart it is just checking boxes to see if they meet milspec. Exceeding it would be a completely different debate. What would exceed milspec? Are there better steels? Are there better ways of testing steels? Is it possible to have a better buffer? Are midlength gas sysytems better than carbine (milspec)? What about NFA barrels? What about 18" or longer barrls?

I could go on for pages.

DerekMK23
06-14-2011, 13:01
That's because DD is typically used when addressing someone junior to you, and when they screwed up.

I never saw someone junior refer to a senior as DD. They'd likely get smoked for it.

The only time DD is used with spirit nowadays is when celebrating something Corps related. Or the occasional Gunny who referred to EVERYONE (junior) as DD.

From my own experience, take it or leave it.

Yeah well it was a joke taken too seriously, they need to lighten up.

G21FAN
06-14-2011, 13:04
Yeah well it was a joke taken too seriously, they need to lighten up.

Thats why I never joined or even go over there after reading a few minutes.

Arftards too.

M&P15T
06-14-2011, 13:28
After all this nashing of teeth and much consternation, my hope is that something positive can come out of it.

It seems to me like there are two basic types of posters in this forum. One is a poster that has professional experience with ARs, and the other is those for whom ARs are a hobby. I would like to see those posters that have professional experience stop telling those that enjoy ARs as a hobby that they don't know what they're talking about. These two different groups are offering observations and opinions from two very different view-points, neither one is right or wrong, or more valid than the other.

There are plenty of hobbyist AR shooters that have purchased and enjoyed ARs for years, putting thousands of rounds down range, and our experiences (and opinions), while different, are no less valid. Military/LEO users and civilian users use their ARs in very different ways, and I'm tired of certain "Pro AR" posters here being nasty with us civilian shooters because our wants, needs, opinions and observations are different from theirs.

Just let it go guys.

chivvalry
06-14-2011, 13:30
"Girls, girls, you're both pretty!"

M&P15T
06-14-2011, 13:52
"Girls, girls, you're both pretty!"

No ****!! Right?

12131
06-14-2011, 13:55
"Girls, girls, you're both pretty!"
That about sums up the thread. :rofl:

CAcop
06-14-2011, 13:58
"Girls, girls, you're both pretty!"

Mary Anne vs. Ginger.

The true answer is of course both.

chivvalry
06-14-2011, 14:05
Mary Anne vs. Ginger.

The true answer is of course both.

Yowsers....

http://s3.hubimg.com/u/515154_f260.jpg

rob_s
06-14-2011, 14:33
Ah, the internets, home of the "more equal".

Military Specifications are not about "lowest bidder", they are about lowest QUALIFIED bidder and encompass both performance and prescriptive specifications. If you do not know what all of this means, you should probably be doing more reading and less typing.

The military specification is certainly not the pinnacle of AR design today, yet in spite of this how many makers actually meet it? If the standard is low, and you can't even meet the standard...

I also see a lot of extrapolation going on here. "I don't shoot but 200 rounds a year so why do I need 'mil-spec'?" Good question. But if that's the case, and you're happy with your purchase, why do you care what it says on some Chart on the internets?

The flipside of all this, of course, is those other similarly lacking in self-confidence who only buy the "best" so that they can say they bought the best. They then trot out the Chart and use it to bash everyone else over the head, all the while their "best" AR is collecting dust in the safe. But blaming the Chart for this is like blaming the gun for the murder.

The Chart is a collection of facts. The new Chart goes even further in that it is a collection of facts from the mouths of the manufacturers directly. There is a new E of F coming to go with it, but most who wail and gnash teeth won't be bothered to read the E of F to educate themselves. They are too busy looking for reasons to get offended.

M&P15T
06-14-2011, 14:35
Ah, the internets, home of the "more equal".

Military Specifications are not about "lowest bidder", they are about lowest QUALIFIED bidder and encompass both performance and prescriptive specifications. If you do not know what all of this means, you should probably be doing more reading and less typing.

The military specification is certainly not the pinnacle of AR design today, yet in spite of this how many makers actually meet it? If the standard is low, and you can't even meet the standard...

I also see a lot of extrapolation going on here. "I don't shoot but 200 rounds a year so why do I need 'mil-spec'?" Good question. But if that's the case, and you're happy with your purchase, why do you care what it says on some Chart on the internets?

The flipside of all this, of course, is those other similarly lacking in self-confidence who only buy the "best" so that they can say they bought the best. They then trot out the Chart and use it to bash everyone else over the head, all the while their "best" AR is collecting dust in the safe. But blaming the Chart for this is like blaming the gun for the murder.

The Chart is a collection of facts. The new Chart goes even further in that it is a collection of facts from the mouths of the manufacturers directly. There is a new E of F coming to go with it, but most who wail and gnash teeth won't be bothered to read the E of F to educate themselves. They are too busy looking for reasons to get offended.

Well I wasn't offended, but I am NOW!!!:rofl::rofl:

Nestor
06-14-2011, 15:03
Reading this thread is just plain funny experience.
How
Obvious
Grossly
Wholly
Astonishing
Stupid
Hate
...can be.
Lighten up people :)
We all have a choice.
You made yours I will make mine, but my birdie won't fall off nor I will be any less manly if You did pick up a different rifle than me.
Wonderful world of the operators :rofl:

surf
06-14-2011, 17:18
There's alot more to GlockTalk than just the Black Rifle Forum. Check out some other sections. You might enjoy yourself more.:dunno: Personally, I find GlockTalk helpful AND entertaining.:supergrin:Thanks I do visit other area's, but I was mostly speaking about the Black Rifle Forum. There are a few really knowledgeable posters attempting to give good factual information and then there are others who are so slighted by other forums or even been wrongly criticized perhaps for their rifle choices that they often let emotion rule over reason. This particular sub forum here at GT is pretty much looked at as a joke in the AR / M4 world. Again there are some very knowledgeable posters.

Surf
Agreed if thats the standard you use to buy an AR, Thats fine for you! Good info and if people choose to buy according to the chart more power to them! But since a vast majority of AR ouwers are not have not and will not use there arms for "DUTY" it's an exspense they don't have to incur to enjoy the AR platform! As we have seen over the years if a company produces a crap AR they usually don't last long as the market takes care of them!:supergrin: Cause if I'm going to use a "Duty" rifle the government going to issue it anyway!It doesn't matter what ones use is for this weapon. As I stated before there are many fine examples of rifles suitable for various uses that are not included on the chart. The chart is what it is. Nothing more, nothing less. Take info from it, or use it for toilet paper. It is not the end all be all for information.

I understand what you're saying surf, but one thing that goes hand in hand with that and that most people seem to overlook is that just because a company does not MP test every single bolt or barrel, etc, does not mean the part is inferior. Lack of testing does not automatically mean less reliability. However there is no doubt that individually testing each and every part stands a much greater chance of finding bad parts, as opposed to only testing one or two out of an entire batch of parts. No it doesn't but some type of testing does insure a given amount of reliability. Also by testing all parts, if one part is found that may mean that the entire batch can be further scrutinized.

Much of the "mil-spec" standard has to do with testing, not necessarily the actual quality of the part. A company can easily make a part as good as or better than those in "mil-spec" rifles, but if they do not test every single one or follow the military testing procedure, its not on the list as "mil-spec."Mil-Spec standards may also designate a minimal grade of steel / aluminum as an example that would be considered much higher quality / durability. Even if a company produces a product with better quality materials also does not necessarily mean that the end product will be as high of quality. Maybe the raw materials were GTG, but perhaps the forging process etc, was lacking. This is where the redundancy of the testing comes into play to find this out. You do realize that a true Mil-Spec production line such as Colt or FN can be completely shut down if only 1 part is found to be out of spec until all items on that production line / batch can be verified as correct. Also NOTHING is truly Mil-Spec unless if it is actually part of a Gov contract for production and certified as Mil-Spec.

This is the one danger in the chart and why some might not want to participate. The fact that someone does not meet the "mil-spec" standard gives the impression of an inferior product. While some may be, there may be others that are equal, or even superior, and that can get lost in the chart. Not necessarily true. Daniel Defense and Noveske as an example use a barrel steel that is not truly Mil-Spec, but may rather meet or exceed the standard. This is generally accepted as accurate amongst industry professionals. This goes along with verification or vetting of a product amongst the industry. Mil-Spec is not the end all be all and most knowledgeable people understand this.

I'm not defending any particular brand or even discounting the chart, I'm just saying that the entire story is not told by a chart. Looking at a chart and calling that your research is just as irresponsible as not doing any research because there is so much more to the story than just whether your gun is "mil-spec" or not.Of course the entire story is not told by the chart. How could it be? No one, not even the author has ever made such claims. It merely provides a base for any owner to work from. As has been mentioned, trust but verify. The chart is only a starting point, not the holy grail.

While I'll give you the fact that companies trying to adhere to "mil-spec" generally produce a quality weapon, there are other companies out there that might not adhere to the specific "mil-spec" standards that can still produce high quality weapons as well.See above. There are at least 2 of the best rifle manufactures mentioned above that would already be out of the Mil Spec standards but are easily considered two of the top makers in the industry. There are others. Your interpreting the chart and my comments to be incorrect. In my original post I said there are many other fine rifles that are not listed anywhere on the chart.

The danger of the chart is that it implies that its the gospel of buying an AR and those that follow it blindly tend to look down on those that dont. Wow, that sounds like a religion, no wonder there are constantly arguments over it. ;)Where does it imply that it is the gospel of buying an AR? It is what it is. If your not smart enough as a consumer to do your homework then shame on you. It is only a resource to use, not a religion. It really seems like the naysayers of the chart try to paint it as that. The author and individual like myself will only call it a resource. Glass half full, or glass half empty. Use it how you will. I never said any more or any less.

Using that logic and the chart then you shouldn't buy anything but a Spikes Tactical. It has all the boxes checked and is over $300 less then Colt of BCM.

If Spikes can do the same thing for $300 less why should anyone support Colt, BCM, or Noveske? Aren't they just playing us for fools and charging and extra $300 for the same thing?There are many many users who may be relegated to purchasing and using a certain manufacturer for their own uses. Right or wrong, this is often the case as it is for myself. Yes I do own many other brands of rifles, but many people don't own several rifles and if they own only one, it may be dictated by their employer.

My one big gripe about the chart is that it is based solely on a survey sent to a manufacturer. How do we know that Colt, BCM, or Spikes aren't lying to us?

I mean I could make a VaFish M4 and tell you that it meets all those specs, other then a few obvious ones like staking and extractor inserts how would you know?

Even if you want documentation you don't think I can come up with an image of a piece of paper that says at some point I bought some material that meets the specifications?

You pick up a bolt that has MPT stamped on it how do you know it's not some pot metal piece of crap from China?

When is someone going to start cutting these things up and doing an analysis of the metal?As has been mentioned trust but verify. Many of the testing standards and procedures are standardized or assessed by an outside entity. Look at the paperwork submitted by Spikes on their independent analysis of their procedures. Can it be faked? Sure. Will it be likely to go un-noticed as time goes on? Not likely.

This is one the issues I see with following the chart too closely or holding it up as the be all, end all. If it were paired with factory tours by Rob or independent testing of materials or sampling of various makers by going to the local gunstore and tearing apart the guns without tipping off the makers.

Rob likes to say trust but verify but are we getting good verification?

It's one thing to look at the BCG and see MPT on the bolt or staked screws or has an auto bolt vs full auto. Its another to look over the shoulder of the guy at the factory putting it together or watching the testing.Look more into the topic of independent verification of testing procedures. Yes you also have to go off of a manufacturers reputation. Again the Chart is only the start to the learning or verification process. And yes the chart should be making you ask your own questions about validity from any manufacturer. It isn't meant to be a resource that is blindly followed.

since when has a goverment standard been a good thing. i have a hard time thinking that the spec's that the goverment wants are the best. i mean over all they screw everything else up, so why should this be any different when it comes to rifles.It is not necessarily a good thing depending on what we are talking about. It doesn't matter what the government says about this weapon. Any person who truly knows this weapon system, will be able to tell you what are the weak links in the chain and what should be done to help the longevity / reliability of the weapon in regards to these critical areas. On the good side, is the the Gov has at least been able to acknowledge what these areas are and what materials / processes need to be done to help address these potential critical areas. However we need to understand that Mil-Spec is only the minimal Governmental standards and yes there are ways to go beyond that.

The issue here are those companies who clearly use lower quality materials and have lower quality testing standards and lower quality control standards who cannot AT THE LEAST meet the Governments minimal standards. Bottom line if the Gov's standards suck, what does that say about companies who clearly can't even live up to that?

I agreed I was banned for life for calling a Marine a Devil Dog, what a joke of a forum and what close minded people to not accept other points of view on firearms. M4 is the furthest thing from information anyone can recieve.I am quite sure it goes beyond a simple Devil Dog comment. Probably much more ensued.

rich52us
Mil-Spec is a standard used to be able to sell a product to the Government under a certain contract! In the case of the M16/M4 contract the TDP! Thats all it is nothing more nothing less! Dosen't mean the product are better then normal commercial grade parts just that it meets the contracted spec's! I don't know or have ever heard of any firearm manufacture making substandard parts for firearms! Good way to catch a lawsuit and be put out of business! Have bad parts been sold -yep. Will Milspec parts fail yep seen it all the time in the Aircraft repair industry . I can't count the number of bad Mil-Spec parts that I seen bad right from the factory in 24 years in the USAF!:whistling:rich52us you are more correct then the above statement.

Gunnut, what is your idea of substandard parts? What is your idea of what is considered correct or incorrect assembly of such parts? Bottom line is that there is no standard in the firearms industry which is why certain companies such as Oly, Hesse etc, got away with murder as there was no standard to judge them by. At least the Mil Spec standard has identified a combination of parts, minimum quality, procedures for testing, assembly and quality control that has a known recipe for reliability and success. Of course this doesn't mean that every single sample rolling of the assembly line is absolutely not going to fail. That would be stupid of those who might think that. Of course Mil-Spec parts will fail, all parts will fail. However at least meeting a certain minimal standard helps to ensure that there is a higher probability for durability and reliability.

The way I read the chart it is just checking boxes to see if they meet milspec. Exceeding it would be a completely different debate. What would exceed milspec? Are there better steels? Are there better ways of testing steels? Is it possible to have a better buffer? Are midlength gas sysytems better than carbine (milspec)? What about NFA barrels? What about 18" or longer barrls?

I could go on for pages.Yes there are better steels, better materials, better processes for testing etc, etc.... Again Mil Spec is ONLY A MINIMAL standard by the Government. Again read above, there are manufacturers considered tops on the spectrum who may do it better. I really can't get over how many people think the items on the Chart ARE THE PINNACLE of perfection. They are only the minimal standards set forth in the Govs TDP. Again if a company cannot even meet that standard then that is sad. It isn't hard to do.

If you could go on for pages, by all means pick up where the chart leaves off or go in a completely different direction and research those topics and post up your findings as a resource that we can all benefit from. I will be eagerly awaiting that. How soon do you think you can have that info available? Keep me updated please.

djegators
06-14-2011, 17:26
Thanks for your efforts here surf, I do appreciate your knowledge and experience. Seems a lot of this will go unnoticed by the "as good as" crowd, who now use their position of being anti-charters as a position of moral superiority as they attempt to shout down those who do want to use as many facts as possible about specs and features when purchasing and building ARs. And thanks to rob s for his hours of hard work to help all of us be more informed.

mixflip
06-14-2011, 20:31
This particular sub forum here at GT is pretty much looked at as a joke in the AR / M4 world.

:wow:

mjkeat
06-14-2011, 20:45
Thanks for your efforts here surf, I do appreciate your knowledge and experience. Seems a lot of this will go unnoticed by the "as good as" crowd, who now use their position of being anti-charters as a position of moral superiority as they attempt to shout down those who do want to use as many facts as possible about specs and features when purchasing and building ARs. And thanks to rob s for his hours of hard work to help all of us be more informed.

Yes, thank you surf for putting all this in easily understandable terms.

pleaforwar
06-14-2011, 20:48
:wow:

I wouldn't take it personally Mix, he didn't say "I think this forum is a joke." Surf is VERY professional with his responses here, and I personally respect that. There have been times I wanted to slam the keyboard here, yet he has always kept his cool.

That being said, consider this; how often do you see guys like USMC03, Rob_S, and Mr. Murphy post here? Not very often.

Now if someone out of the regular posters here feel that they have the background that rivals guys like Surf and the aforementioned gentlemen, come on out and add some input. I haven't seen it.

Look, there is a clear separation between recreational shooters and SME's. I know it, you know it, we all know it. The odd thing here is that many shooters here who shoot for fun not only discount these guy's knowledge, but even go as far as to insult them, which is what I suspect to be the underlying cause for Surf's statement.

CAcop
06-14-2011, 20:59
If you could go on for pages, by all means pick up where the chart leaves off or go in a completely different direction and research those topics and post up your findings as a resource that we can all benefit from. I will be eagerly awaiting that. How soon do you think you can have that info available? Keep me updated please.

I meant I could ask questions for pages and others certainly could debate it for pages.

As for creating a superchart that would be a book. To be honest the way to do it would be to have it broken up in parts with multiple authors. Each one taking a manufacturer.

My take on the chart is that it has limited value. Once you step outside the M4 like rifles that are reviewed it loses relavence. Could a maker put all it's efforts into the most milspec model then cheap out the rest? I guess my job has created a distrust of people when politics, sex, or money are involved. And there is money to be made selling milspec rifles to people.

J. Parker
06-14-2011, 21:06
Thanks I do visit other area's, but I was mostly speaking about the Black Rifle Forum. There are a few really knowledgeable posters attempting to give good factual information and then there are others who are so slighted by other forums or even been wrongly criticized perhaps for their rifle choices that they often let emotion rule over reason. This particular sub forum here at GT is pretty much looked at as a joke in the AR / M4 world. Again there are some very knowledgeable posters.

It doesn't matter what ones use is for this weapon. As I stated before there are many fine examples of rifles suitable for various uses that are not included on the chart. The chart is what it is. Nothing more, nothing less. Take info from it, or use it for toilet paper. It is not the end all be all for information.

Lack of testing does not automatically mean less reliability. However there is no doubt that individually testing each and every part stands a much greater chance of finding bad parts, as opposed to only testing one or two out of an entire batch of parts. No it doesn't but some type of testing does insure a given amount of reliability. Also by testing all parts, if one part is found that may mean that the entire batch can be further scrutinized.

Mil-Spec standards may also designate a minimal grade of steel / aluminum as an example that would be considered much higher quality / durability. Even if a company produces a product with better quality materials also does not necessarily mean that the end product will be as high of quality. Maybe the raw materials were GTG, but perhaps the forging process etc, was lacking. This is where the redundancy of the testing comes into play to find this out. You do realize that a true Mil-Spec production line such as Colt or FN can be completely shut down if only 1 part is found to be out of spec until all items on that production line / batch can be verified as correct. Also NOTHING is truly Mil-Spec unless if it is actually part of a Gov contract for production and certified as Mil-Spec.

Not necessarily true. Daniel Defense and Noveske as an example use a barrel steel that is not truly Mil-Spec, but may rather meet or exceed the standard. This is generally accepted as accurate amongst industry professionals. This goes along with verification or vetting of a product amongst the industry. Mil-Spec is not the end all be all and most knowledgeable people understand this.

Of course the entire story is not told by the chart. How could it be? No one, not even the author has ever made such claims. It merely provides a base for any owner to work from. As has been mentioned, trust but verify. The chart is only a starting point, not the holy grail.

See above. There are at least 2 of the best rifle manufactures mentioned above that would already be out of the Mil Spec standards but are easily considered two of the top makers in the industry. There are others. Your interpreting the chart and my comments to be incorrect. In my original post I said there are many other fine rifles that are not listed anywhere on the chart.

Where does it imply that it is the gospel of buying an AR? It is what it is. If your not smart enough as a consumer to do your homework then shame on you. It is only a resource to use, not a religion. It really seems like the naysayers of the chart try to paint it as that. The author and individual like myself will only call it a resource. Glass half full, or glass half empty. Use it how you will. I never said any more or any less.

There are many many users who may be relegated to purchasing and using a certain manufacturer for their own uses. Right or wrong, this is often the case as it is for myself. Yes I do own many other brands of rifles, but many people don't own several rifles and if they own only one, it may be dictated by their employer.

As has been mentioned trust but verify. Many of the testing standards and procedures are standardized or assessed by an outside entity. Look at the paperwork submitted by Spikes on their independent analysis of their procedures. Can it be faked? Sure. Will it be likely to go un-noticed as time goes on? Not likely.

Look more into the topic of independent verification of testing procedures. Yes you also have to go off of a manufacturers reputation. Again the Chart is only the start to the learning or verification process. And yes the chart should be making you ask your own questions about validity from any manufacturer. It isn't meant to be a resource that is blindly followed.

It is not necessarily a good thing depending on what we are talking about. It doesn't matter what the government says about this weapon. Any person who truly knows this weapon system, will be able to tell you what are the weak links in the chain and what should be done to help the longevity / reliability of the weapon in regards to these critical areas. On the good side, is the the Gov has at least been able to acknowledge what these areas are and what materials / processes need to be done to help address these potential critical areas. However we need to understand that Mil-Spec is only the minimal Governmental standards and yes there are ways to go beyond that.

The issue here are those companies who clearly use lower quality materials and have lower quality testing standards and lower quality control standards who cannot AT THE LEAST meet the Governments minimal standards. Bottom line if the Gov's standards suck, what does that say about companies who clearly can't even live up to that?

I am quite sure it goes beyond a simple Devil Dog comment. Probably much more ensued.

rich52us you are more correct then the above statement.

Gunnut, what is your idea of substandard parts? What is your idea of what is considered correct or incorrect assembly of such parts? Bottom line is that there is no standard in the firearms industry which is why certain companies such as Oly, Hesse etc, got away with murder as there was no standard to judge them by. At least the Mil Spec standard has identified a combination of parts, minimum quality, procedures for testing, assembly and quality control that has a known recipe for reliability and success. Of course this doesn't mean that every single sample rolling of the assembly line is absolutely not going to fail. That would be stupid of those who might think that. Of course Mil-Spec parts will fail, all parts will fail. However at least meeting a certain minimal standard helps to ensure that there is a higher probability for durability and reliability.

Yes there are better steels, better materials, better processes for testing etc, etc.... Again Mil Spec is ONLY A MINIMAL standard by the Government. Again read above, there are manufacturers considered tops on the spectrum who may do it better. I really can't get over how many people think the items on the Chart ARE THE PINNACLE of perfection. They are only the minimal standards set forth in the Govs TDP. Again if a company cannot even meet that standard then that is sad. It isn't hard to do.

If you could go on for pages, by all means pick up where the chart leaves off or go in a completely different direction and research those topics and post up your findings as a resource that we can all benefit from. I will be eagerly awaiting that. How soon do you think you can have that info available? Keep me updated please.

Well, my friend, if we're a joke then I suggest you move on and don't let the door hit you in the arsh.............

glock031
06-14-2011, 22:21
Sorry but if i were seeking expert advice i wouldn't look for it in a "discussion group" on the internet. Sometimes hobbyist would just like to discuss without being insulted for thier lack of expertise' and scrutinized.

My vote goes to scrappy for forum leader....:)

surf
06-14-2011, 22:56
:wow:There are many fine people here my friend, you being one of them. Unfortunately as is usually the case, it is the minority or the bad apples the spoil the bunch.

I wouldn't take it personally Mix, he didn't say "I think this forum is a joke." Surf is VERY professional with his responses here, and I personally respect that. There have been times I wanted to slam the keyboard here, yet he has always kept his cool.pleaforwar is exactly correct and his own real world experiences and other SME's should be wanted on this forum. Rather it seems that the jackassery in certain members wants to keep their own little status quo as a sanctuary to air their grievances.

I don't feel the need to get upset or come off as negative because I was banned from some website, or that other websites are full of snobs, or that I want to be spiteful because someone thinks my weapon is crap. If we truly want to further this sport / hobby etc, then we need to be rational about our exchange of information without getting personal or pissy about it. Nothing wrong with hobbyists interacting with industry professionals as everyone benefits from glimpsing each others shooting world. This is what myself and some others here try to bring to this site.

Well, my friend, if we're a joke then I suggest you move on and don't let the door hit you in the arsh.............As pleaforwar mentions, if I truly thought this forum was a joke I wouldn't be here trying to contribute to this community in a rational manner attempting to relay accurate information. I also wouldn't go as far as assuming that you are my friend either, or that you could suggest any course of action that I might chose to take.

J. Parker
06-14-2011, 23:11
There are many fine people here my friend, you being one of them. Unfortunately as is usually the case, it is the minority or the bad apples the spoil the bunch.

pleaforwar is exactly correct and his own real world experiences and other SME's should be wanted on this forum. Rather it seems that the jackassery in certain members wants to keep their own little status quo as a sanctuary to air their grievances.

I don't feel the need to get upset or come off as negative because I was banned from some website, or that other websites are full of snobs, or that I want to be spiteful because someone thinks my weapon is crap. If we truly want to further this sport / hobby etc, then we need to be rational about our exchange of information without getting personal or pissy about it. Nothing wrong with hobbyists interacting with industry professionals as everyone benefits from glimpsing each others shooting world. This is what myself and some others here try to bring to this site.

As pleaforwar mentions, if I truly thought this forum was a joke I wouldn't be here trying to contribute to this community in a rational manner attempting to relay accurate information. I also wouldn't go as far as assuming that you are my friend either, or that you could suggest any course of action that I might chose to take.

Dude....you said this "sub-forum" was a joke. Whatever. The facts are this.....GlockTalk and the AR-15.com web are MEGA websites. Frankly, the M4 forum is really insignificant and most "peasants" like myself could care less about it entirely. I've been over to the m4 forum and they talk about a high end this and a high end that. I DON'T CARE! I have many guns and an AR-15 just happens to be one of them. My house gun is a Sig_Sauer and my flippin' backup is a lowly Glock. MY AR IS RECREATIONAL! Excuse me but I'm going to move on to another "sub-forum"............

glock031
06-15-2011, 00:04
Rob S. I'm pretty sure your monitering this thread. Wouldn't it be fair to link Colt to Colt MFG website. All the rest are linked to thier websites. It is the small things like this that make some question the authors brand loyalty. Maybe you don't care what others think i don't know. But wouldn't you agree it would be the fair thing to do?

Im certain you know that the colt mfg website has pics and a write up about the sp6920 and also sells sp6920 uppers and bcg's.

surf
06-15-2011, 00:11
This particular sub forum here at GT is pretty much looked at as a joke in the AR / M4 world. Again there are some very knowledgeable posters.

Dude....you said this "sub-forum" was a joke. Whatever. The facts are this.....GlockTalk and the AR-15.com web are MEGA websites. Frankly, the M4 forum is really insignificant and most "peasants" like myself could care less about it entirely. I've been over to the m4 forum and they talk about a high end this and a high end that. I DON'T CARE! I have many guns and an AR-15 just happens to be one of them. My house gun is a Sig_Sauer and my flippin' backup is a lowly Glock. MY AR IS RECREATIONAL! Excuse me but I'm going to move on to another "sub-forum"............Dude, I didn't say that I considered it a joke, or I wouldn't be participating. I did say that others in the AR/M4 world look at this sub forum in a particular light. Myself and others who happen to work in this industry are attempting to dispel that notion about this forum. You ever wonder why the M4 sub forum here is insignificant? Exactly, as their are some asinine members who are continually posting erroneous crap. There is no reason for it to be that way and for this particular sub forum to be the bastard step child of the Black Rifle World. Some of us are actually trying to make a difference here, are you? Either your a part of the solution or your a part of the problem. So if your not going to be any more of a contributor than you have graced us with so far and help solve the problem then go ahead and take yourself elsewhere.

Sorry everyone but that is about as keyboard smashing as I get.:supergrin:

J. Parker
06-15-2011, 00:25
Dude, I didn't say that I considered it a joke, or I wouldn't be participating. I did say that others in the AR/M4 world look at this sub forum in a particular light. Myself and others who happen to work in this industry are attempting to dispel that notion about this forum. You ever wonder why the M4 sub forum here is insignificant? Exactly, as their are some asinine members who are continually posting erroneous crap. There is no reason for it to be that way and for this particular sub forum to be the bastard step child of the Black Rifle World. Some of us are actually trying to make a difference here, are you? Either your a part of the solution or your a part of the problem. So if your not going to be any more of a contributor than you have graced us with so far and help solve the problem then go ahead and take yourself elsewhere.

Sorry everyone but that is about as keyboard smashing as I get.:supergrin:

My friend....the problem is the "keyboard commandos" are gettin' to ya. Yer a good man.....hang in there.......and be a GT member forever.:wavey:

mixflip
06-15-2011, 02:03
Surf...keep up the great flow of info. When I come to the blackrifle sub-forum I always look forward to the intelligence of a select few who respond and you are one of them bro.

The only reason why I posted the "eye's popping" icon was because I didnt know that the rest of the internet gun forums looked at GT/blackrifle sub-forum the way you mentioned?

I hang out at lightfighter and M4C and a few others but 99% of my time there is reading and not posting lol. I wish more of the "enthusiast" level guys would do the same. (note to all...I consider myself enthusiast level also even though I carry a gun/guns for a living).

Ignore the negative and keep the knowledge flowing my way braddah

rob_s
06-15-2011, 04:35
Rob S. I'm pretty sure your monitering this thread. Wouldn't it be fair to link Colt to Colt MFG website. All the rest are linked to thier websites. It is the small things like this that make some question the authors brand loyalty. Maybe you don't care what others think i don't know. But wouldn't you agree it would be the fair thing to do?

Im certain you know that the colt mfg website has pics and a write up about the sp6920 and also sells sp6920 uppers and bcg's.

If this is the kind of thing people are going to obsess over...

djegators
06-15-2011, 05:46
Sorry but if i were seeking expert advice i wouldn't look for it in a "discussion group" on the internet. Sometimes hobbyist would just like to discuss without being insulted for thier lack of expertise' and scrutinized.

My vote goes to scrappy for forum leader....:)

So you think it is better for people to seek advice from non-experts? This really makes no sense. There are a-holes on every forum, but to suggest that all you get on m4c is ridicule for not being an expert is simply hyperbole, not reality. Guess its better here, where the general theme is to insult those who do attempt to provide good info...yeah, that's an improvement.

G21FAN
06-15-2011, 07:30
Sorry I had been away, working away from comp a while.

All on the chart are good carbines. Prob rifles too. I have not argued that, just against the snobbery and saying I can see no measureable difference between chart and non-chart guns. I have owned and still own a number of them and I have been hard on them, and never had reliability or accuracy issues from them. Now MY personal preferance is chrome lined bores and chambers.

What is the difference between the Colt, Noveske, LMT, BCM, and Armalite rifles? Is one better than another?

rob_s
06-15-2011, 09:27
What is the difference between the Colt, Noveske, LMT, BCM, and Armalite rifles? Is one better than another?

the irony of this question, in a thread about a resource wherein you can find the answer, is killing me.

:rofl:

G21FAN
06-15-2011, 09:36
:supergrin:the irony of this question, in a thread about a resource wherein you can find the answer, is killing me.

:rofl:

glock031
06-15-2011, 10:16
If this is the kind of thing people are going to obsess over...

Maybe

Nevermine it's linked now. :)

BBJones
06-15-2011, 10:29
Maybe

I'd question why it was left out in the first place. :whistling: Was there a cease and desist order on your previous chart?


I am not going to speak for Rob, but I thought the reason the first one was pulled was because a certain un-named manufacturor took the file and modified it to include their company in it. Then use it for marketing purposes. I would link to a discussion of it, but it was mentioned on a certain forum that seems to cause some controversy here.

glock031
06-15-2011, 10:39
I am not going to speak for Rob, but I thought the reason the first one was pulled was because a certain un-named manufacturor took the file and modified it to include their company in it. Then use it for marketing purposes. I would link to a discussion of it, but it was mentioned on a certain forum that seems to cause some controversy here.


I'm referring to colt mfg's website. All the other names on the chart are linked to thier websites except colt. Just wondering why the difference with colt. They have the sp6920 pics, specs and some available parts such as sp6920 uppers, bcg's and ch listed on thier website for sale to the public.

Nevermine it's linked now. :)

BBJones
06-15-2011, 12:19
I'm referring to colt mfg's website. All the other names on the chart are linked to thier websites except colt. Just wondering why the difference with colt. They have the sp6920 pics, specs and some available parts such as sp6920 uppers, bcg's and ch listed on thier website for sale to the public.

Nevermine it's linked now. :)

I didn't mean why the Colt link was pulled. I was talking about why the first chart was taken offline. A company modified it and used it for their own advertising was what I thought the primary reason was.

ghostman1960
06-15-2011, 14:14
http://i823.photobucket.com/albums/zz159/ghostman1961/butthurt.jpg

Durden
06-15-2011, 15:12
http://i823.photobucket.com/albums/zz159/ghostman1961/butthurt.jpg

I demand this be made a sticky.

I at least request it, firmly.

Please?

Anytime I reference the fact that I'm not fond of the attributes of the 5.56 in the context of being a general use infantry rifle cartridge, I get pummeled by most (some articulate a well-reasoned rebuttal while many just cling to/tug emotional and sentimental apron strings), but if I ever feel like being subjected to raw hatred and bring the topic up again, I will distribute this form at the beginning of the thread.

djegators
06-15-2011, 17:02
http://i823.photobucket.com/albums/zz159/ghostman1961/butthurt.jpg


Now that is great!

rob_s
06-16-2011, 05:45
I didn't mean why the Colt link was pulled. I was talking about why the first chart was taken offline. A company modified it and used it for their own advertising was what I thought the primary reason was.

I am not going to speak for Rob, but I thought the reason the first one was pulled was because a certain un-named manufacturor took the file and modified it to include their company in it. Then use it for marketing purposes. I would link to a discussion of it, but it was mentioned on a certain forum that seems to cause some controversy here.

That was mostly just a coincidence. While what you describe DID happen, and it was the catalyst for me to delve more deeply into the topics, no one manufacturer's scummy actions caused me to take down the old one. I mostly wanted some time to pass between old and new hoping that it would mitigate some of the wailing and gnashing of teeth. I had previously thought the effort was successful and then I saw this thread.

:rofl:

chivvalry
06-16-2011, 06:52
That was mostly just a coincidence. While what you describe DID happen, and it was the catalyst for me to delve more deeply into the topics, no one manufacturer's scummy actions caused me to take down the old one. I mostly wanted some time to pass between old and new hoping that it would mitigate some of the wailing and gnashing of teeth. I had previously thought the effort was successful and then I saw this thread.

:rofl:

For what it's worth many of us "less vocal" folks out here really appreciate the chart and the back up detailed explanations of the criteria used to create it. It was very helpful to me to understand the nuances and get more educated about the differences between a "good" rifle/carbine and a "great" rifle/carbine. It also helped me to understand what I was actually getting for my money when looking at the differences between inexpensive vs. expensive weapons.

Thanks very much for your work. It is greatly appreciated by at least some folks! (...and frankly, I find some of the wailing and gnashing of teeth amusing... it certainly demonstrates passion!)

ColdBlooded
06-16-2011, 07:16
That was mostly just a coincidence. While what you describe DID happen, and it was the catalyst for me to delve more deeply into the topics, no one manufacturer's scummy actions caused me to take down the old one. I mostly wanted some time to pass between old and new hoping that it would mitigate some of the wailing and gnashing of teeth. I had previously thought the effort was successful and then I saw this thread.

:rofl:

I appreciate your work.

rob_s
06-17-2011, 05:45
Thanks guys. I know that most people appreciate the Chart for what it is. I know this because I get emails about it almost weekly, sometimes daily. The ones from LEOs that say "our dept. was going to buy X but thanks to the information int he Chart I was able to show them why we should buy Y" are especially gratifying. I also know that most of the kvetching is simply the vocal minority.

NeverMore1701
06-17-2011, 08:44
Thanks guys. I know that most people appreciate the Chart for what it is. I know this because I get emails about it almost weekly, sometimes daily. The ones from LEOs that say "our dept. was going to buy X but thanks to the information int he Chart I was able to show them why we should buy Y" are especially gratifying. I also know that most of the kvetching is simply the vocal minority.

Not only the minority, but also the people who's opinions matter least, because the likelihood of any of them actually using their ARs for anything even resembling serious use is very close to zero.

Good job on the chart, BTW, the first one was very useful in educating myself on black rifles.

Javelin
07-15-2011, 10:22
After reading this post you can simply break down the thread into the "haves" and "have nots". I have seen some pretty lame comments in here. Having owned Armalite, DPMS, etc there is no way I am going to be able to stomach some of the bull that folks here claim are on par with colt or noveske. That is complete misinformation to folks really looking for answers.

Those of you one or two cheapie AR owners stop playtending and know some of us on this site aren't new to this and own what we comment about.

It really makes this site look like a bunch of morons live here when you do.

RMTactical
07-15-2011, 10:43
Interesting to note how some of these manufacturers have changed over the years to conform closer to mil spec...

TxGun
07-15-2011, 10:44
LOL. Develop an objective data set, try your best to continually refine it, publish it as a tool for people to use if they choose to...and yet some respond as if their world would be better without the information. Amazing.

gunslinger3
07-15-2011, 12:09
I refuse to be swayed from my opinions by facts. :tongueout:

Thanks for the chart Rob. The first one helped me make an informed decision. DD

Tommato
07-18-2011, 07:00
As a newbie to the AR, and in the process of building my first, I have been reading as much as I can from all sources - internet forums, books, magazines. What I am finding is, for the most part, the more experienced users/authors are very consistent in their appraisals of quality and superior function. It seems to me that, overall, quality in the AR world has generally improved across the board the past few years. However, there are some relative newcomers (such as Plum Crazy lowers) that I wouldn't trust in an AR that I might be using for SD.

I frequent M4carbine.net, and have spent a lot of time reading the many resources there - VERY educational. What I have learned is that, for probably less money than a non-MIL SPEC gun, I can get a rifle/carbine that is MIL-SPEC, has an A+ reputation, and is available just the way I want it. THAT makes the research valuable for me.

There seem to be 2 camps of people who run afoul of the posters on such forums - those who purchased a lower quality gun (perhaps based on a friend or LGS recommendation) and have pride of ownership, and those that haven't done much reading or research ("Search is your friend"). From my POV, even as a newbie, I think such criticism is warranted. I say that coming from a desire to use an AR for SD, and not just a plinker. I think the plinker crowd should avoid serious AR forums if they really don't care about all of the MIL-SPEC and AR details - and certainly not get upset if their brand of AR has a less than stellar reputation. Just move on.

The current and ex-miiltary guys and experienced LEOs/civilian AR shooters I find in the various forums have helped me a lot - and I really appreciate their POV.

Tommato

Javelin
07-18-2011, 08:05
Interesting to note how some of these manufacturers have changed over the years to conform closer to mil spec...

It is quite a different contrast then when "the list" was first comprised. I wonder if there is some type of underlying factor in all of it?

Jack Black
07-18-2011, 15:40
As a newbie to the AR, and in the process of building my first, I have been reading as much as I can from all sources - internet forums, books, magazines. What I am finding is, for the most part, the more experienced users/authors are very consistent in their appraisals of quality and superior function. It seems to me that, overall, quality in the AR world has generally improved across the board the past few years. However, there are some relative newcomers (such as Plum Crazy lowers) that I wouldn't trust in an AR that I might be using for SD.

I frequent M4carbine.net, and have spent a lot of time reading the many resources there - VERY educational. What I have learned is that, for probably less money than a non-MIL SPEC gun, I can get a rifle/carbine that is MIL-SPEC, has an A+ reputation, and is available just the way I want it. THAT makes the research valuable for me.

There seem to be 2 camps of people who run afoul of the posters on such forums - those who purchased a lower quality gun (perhaps based on a friend or LGS recommendation) and have pride of ownership, and those that haven't done much reading or research ("Search is your friend"). From my POV, even as a newbie, I think such criticism is warranted. I say that coming from a desire to use an AR for SD, and not just a plinker. I think the plinker crowd should avoid serious AR forums if they really don't care about all of the MIL-SPEC and AR details - and certainly not get upset if their brand of AR has a less than stellar reputation. Just move on.

The current and ex-miiltary guys and experienced LEOs/civilian AR shooters I find in the various forums have helped me a lot - and I really appreciate their POV.

Tommato
Spot on.

BossGodfrey
07-22-2011, 20:20
Here's my take, I like guns period. Good quality guns, one thing a lot of AR- 15 fanboys don't realize is this, most makers buy parts from the same source. In 1997 I worked for advanced ordnance on mason ave in Daytona beach FL. I made many thousands of bolts and bolt carriers, my neighbor, worked 50 ft away making the upper receivers. The parts were shipped out to COLT, BUSHMASTER, OLY, DPMS, and FN. Every shift I had the order sheet for the batch. The parts were many times out of spec, why because it cost money to change cutters on a CNC machine. On all three shifts I would guess about 30-40 percent of all bolts, and bolt carriers made on my machine were way out of spec. Guess what, only one company would raise hell after they inspected every part we shipped. FN ! If it was an order for FN we knew the **** had to be straight! The rest of them, not a problem. Take a close look on the side of your carry handle if you have one, if you see a small raised symbol that looks like and A over an O, I know who made it. There's a good chance your 2000.00 rifle has the same parts as the 800.00. I know my RRA entry tac did! Just food for thought ! I think we should all just be thankful we can even buy such sweet looking works of art !

pleaforwar
07-22-2011, 22:44
Here's my take, I like guns period. Good quality guns, one thing a lot of AR- 15 fanboys don't realize is this, most makers buy parts from the same source. In 1997 I worked for advanced ordnance on mason ave in Daytona beach FL. I made many thousands of bolts and bolt carriers, my neighbor, worked 50 ft away making the upper receivers. The parts were shipped out to COLT, BUSHMASTER, OLY, DPMS, and FN. Every shift I had the order sheet for the batch. The parts were many times out of spec, why because it cost money to change cutters on a CNC machine. On all three shifts I would guess about 30-40 percent of all bolts, and bolt carriers made on my machine were way out of spec. Guess what, only one company would raise hell after they inspected every part we shipped. FN ! If it was an order for FN we knew the **** had to be straight! The rest of them, not a problem. Take a close look on the side of your carry handle if you have one, if you see a small raised symbol that looks like and A over an O, I know who made it. There's a good chance your 2000.00 rifle has the same parts as the 800.00. I know my RRA entry tac did! Just food for thought ! I think we should all just be thankful we can even buy such sweet looking works of art !


Sounds great, but it's 2011, not 1997. New companies have emerged since then. Customers are demanding higher quality. Flannel is no longer the cool look. The Gin Blossoms are no longer in the top 10. Times change....

Just sayin'.

CAcop
07-22-2011, 23:41
I think there are two classes of AR shooters/purchasers:

1. Hobbyists
2. Enthusiasts

Hobbyists are just people who want to have a good time at the range. Do they care if it is the most accurate? The closest to mil-spec? Middy vs. carbine debaters?

Enthusiasts are into the details of the weapons. Are they going to go down to the local gunstore and buy whatever AR is on sale? Will they settle for a non chrome lined barrel? Will they go home with without a flat top?

I also think some sites on the web are enthusiast sites and others are hobbyist sites. I think both approaches are fine as long as you understand where you and your weapon fit in. Or you could even be someone in both camps. I probably would if I lived in a free state. I would probably have a pimpy BCM and a Smith sporter. Completely different weapons and I would use them comletely differently.

Minnow
07-22-2011, 23:43
The Ar community is a little gay sometimes. I've never seen any other gun community bicker so much about rubber o rings, fastener staking, and the validity of MPI testing.
The pipsqueak round itself along with the wannabe's and industry agenda driven mantra are the main sources of all this drama. Hell, even the AK community will embrace a lowly WASR and can still appreciate a better copy.

carloglock19
07-23-2011, 13:06
Maybe I should have looked at the chart prior to purchasing a S&W, now I have a worthless POS rifle coming to my FFL in a few weeks. :cool:

cowboy1964
07-23-2011, 13:11
The pipsqueak round itself

Uh huh.

5.56x45:
http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/uploads/556_NATO_75_BTHP_WC_T2_4website.jpg

7.62x39
http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/uploads/8078-762x39-123-GR-VMAX-gel.jpg

Minnow
07-23-2011, 13:20
Uh huh.

5.56x45:
http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/uploads/556_NATO_75_BTHP_WC_T2_4website.jpg



Always compensating, wishing it was a 7.62x51. :tongueout:

You don't even see near the amount of bickering between owners of the larger caliber AR's such as 6.5, 6.8, etc.

BEER
07-23-2011, 18:30
i've got a stag and a noveske, the stag was my first ar because i wanted one, the noveske was bought because i got tired of catching hell about my stag.

you know which rifle i'm gonna grab if the s ever really h's the f? my marlin 336. you know why? because i've personally put over 8k rounds through it on the range, on the property, in the woods, and into real breathing targets. i know this weapon, i know what i'm capable of with this weapon, and this weapon has proven itself firsthand.

you could take the very best aspects of every ar ever built, combine them with the top of the line accessories and throw it in the hands of the average joe and it's going to do no more than putting a pair of air jordans on a paraplegic. 90% of you are concentrating more on the wrench than the mechanic holding it.

i'm glad this thread popped up though, i almost forgot i'm almost out of "the chart".
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/SCOWL1313/0723111826.jpg

carloglock19
07-23-2011, 19:04
i've got a stag and a noveske, the stag was my first ar because i wanted one, the noveske was bought because i got tired of catching hell about my stag.

you know which rifle i'm gonna grab if the s ever really h's the f? my marlin 336. you know why? because i've personally put over 8k rounds through it on the range, on the property, in the woods, and into real breathing targets. i know this weapon, i know what i'm capable of with this weapon, and this weapon has proven itself firsthand.

you could take the very best aspects of every ar ever built, combine them with the top of the line accessories and throw it in the hands of the average joe and it's going to do no more than putting a pair of air jordans on a paraplegic. 90% of you are concentrating more on the wrench than the mechanic holding it.

i'm glad this thread popped up though, i almost forgot i'm almost out of "the chart".
i'm glad this thread came up, it reminds me i need to buy more "the chart".
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/SCOWL1313/0723111826.jpg
:agree:

bmoore
07-23-2011, 19:25
The Ar community is a little gay sometimes. I've never seen any other gun community bicker so much about rubber o rings, fastener staking, and the validity of MPI testing.
The pipsqueak round itself along with the wannabe's and industry agenda driven mantra are the main sources of all this drama. Hell, even the AK community will embrace a lowly WASR and can still appreciate a better copy.

A ray of shining light. AR's this AR's that, Mil spec, M4 feed ramps, 4150 steel, H buffer, dogs and cats living together, DPMS sucks, Bushmaster sucks, yada yada yada. If I ever need a rifle I will leave my DPMS, Palmetto and Smith in the safe. My M1A scout will pick up where they leave off.