AR Brand bashing!

[tonyspdx]

I have seen this chart before in other forums. It's a least 3-4 years old, but it has good info.

 

[kito109654]

Have any of you guys noticed the amount of AR brand bashing that is on the dedicated AR15 sites? There is a comprehensive AR brand comparison chart posted that has done nothing but create hate & discontent among AR15 owners. What should have been a useful tool for assisting in selecting a rifle has become a tool for brand bashing.

Here is the link:
<broken link removed>

Thoughts?

I'm missing the part where I'm supposed to be surprised. Can you find any consumer product of significant cost where this doesn't happen?

Just a thought. People are passionate when they put their money on the line.

 

[Trlsmn]

I personally feel the only difference between AR15's is the barrel and trigger, the rest, so long as it is to spec, will do very little for accuracy. JMHO

 

[itgoesboom]

I personally feel the only difference between AR15's is the barrel and trigger, the rest, so long as it is to spec, will do very little for accuracy. JMHO

That's the whole problem right there, finding out what is in spec, and what isn't. What steel is being used? Is the receiver extension in spec size wise? How about the bolt carrier group? Is it staked properly, or MPI'd?

All of those things are part of being "in spec", and the vast majority of rifles out there, aren't in spec.

The items on the chart aren't picked randomly, in most cases. Those are items that people who run their guns hard find fail most often when not built properly. Some of the items aren't specifically reliability related (such as parkerizing under the FSB), but are more an indication of cutting corners by a manufacturer.

The chart isn't really about telling people what AR rifle to purchase, it doesn't really address most purposes, say varmint hunting, or high power competitions. It's about hard use carbines.

It's not about accuracy, it's about reliability.

There are always quite a few people who get butt-hurt when they see the chart, and find out that their Bushmaster isn't top-of-the-line, but that's not Rob's fault. That's between Bushmaster and the consumer. The chart is simply about educating the consumer.

The funniest part to me is that it's not really any more expensive to purchase a high-quality AR-15, it just takes a bit more effort.

Buy what you want, for your purposes. If your happy with it, great.

 

[KENOC]

The funniest part to me is that it's not really any more expensive to purchase a high-quality AR-15, it just takes a bit more effort.

Buy what you want, for your purposes. If your happy with it, great.

Exactly! I am building a top of the line AR right now very inexpensively.
BCM mid length upper=$425
LMT-Bolt Carrier Group=$125
TKS Lower (billet)=$200
RB Precision LPK=$65
Mil Spec charging handle=$26
Handguard=$30
Total=$870...for a top of the line AR...why buy 3rd tier of questionable quality at that price when you can put together a quality piece of machinery for less?

 

[slohanz]

Exactly! I am building a top of the line AR right now very inexpensively.
BCM mid length upper=$425
LMT-Bolt Carrier Group=$125
TKS Lower (billet)=$200
RB Precision LPK=$65
Mil Spec charging handle=$26
Handguard=$30
Total=$870...for a top of the line AR...why buy 3rd tier of questionable quality at that price when you can put together a quality piece of machinery for less?

Don't forget your BUIS (front and rear) or some type of optics.

 

[itgoesboom]

Exactly! I am building a top of the line AR right now very inexpensively.
BCM mid length upper=$425
LMT-Bolt Carrier Group=$125
TKS Lower (billet)=$200
RB Precision LPK=$65
Mil Spec charging handle=$26
Handguard=$30
Total=$870...for a top of the line AR...why buy 3rd tier of questionable quality at that price when you can put together a quality piece of machinery for less?

Bingo!

I just did a similar setup, although it cost a bit more, with a few extra components.

BCM Middy Upper
LMT Full Auto Carrier Group
VLTOR E-MOD stock
DD Omega 9 free float
MBUS rear
Global Tactical lower with H2 Buffer
+ a few mags

$1,300, unfired off the EE.

That's not far off from what a lot of people are paying for a "higher end" RRA or Bushmaster, but worlds apart when it comes to quality.

 

[itgoesboom]

Don't forget your BUIS (front and rear) or some type of optics.

Back up sights aren't too expensive; LaRue's unit costs like $90, and is great quality. Magpul MBUS units are under $60. And these are things you may just end up having to purchase even if you do get a RRA, Bushy, or DPMS, as many of those don't come with rear sights.

 

[Iceberg]

I built my LMT M4 for $950:

Complete LMT Lower w/ SopMod: $350 (PDX Gunshow)
Complete LMT Upper w/ BCG: $550 (deliverd from weaponsparts.com)
NIB USGI MaTech BIUS: $50 (eBay)

Extras:
NIB USGI KAC RAS, VFG & Rail Covers: $150 (eBay)
NIB USGI Trijicon Reflex NSN: $300 (eBay)
3 new LMT 30 Rd magazines: $40 (gilbertsguns.com)

 

[Wenis]

I'm tired of people saying, it's the same as a Colt, without the name. These are usually people behind a counter selling you something. If you want quality, you're going to pay for it.

But on the other side of the coin, most of the LEOs I know carry Bushmaster in their trunks and put more rounds down range than many civilians.

 

[madcratebuilder]

I wonder if older Bushmasters are higher quality than late models. I have a pre-ban 16" H-Bar A1 that seems like it will go forever. I have run it extremely hard. I have even run it dry for hundreds of continuous rounds during a few shoots. It never malfunctions and never breaks. It seems bullet proof. It continues to run strong with thousands of rounds down the pipe. Would I buy a new Bushmaster? Probably not unless it is the carbon pistol. I have shot one of those recently without any malfunctions and it is very lightweight different sort of gun. Other than that the AR snobs got me scared of Bushmaster. It's funny considering I have one that has AK like reliability right now.

I think the older Bushmasters have a better fit and finish, can't tell you about reliability. I have two BM's and never had a problem with either one. IMHO 99% of AR problems are caused by the bugger hook on the trigger.

 

[The B]

the chart has been around, but it's constantly updated.

to say the chart is an attempt to bash manufacturers is like saying any ranking system exists only bash those lower on the scale. what do ranking systems exist for? why rank products? why do so many of you think ARs should be exempt from ranking order?

in any market, there are manufacturers that produce products of varying quality, and can be ranked according to their quality. this is why people will spend more money on a Kitchenaid mixer than a Sunbeam mixer. this is why people will spend more money on a Subaru than a Suzuki. this is why people will spend more money on a Glock than a Hi-point. this is why people will spend more on Fruit Loops than Malto-Meal Toasted O's. this is why people will spend more money on a Benchmade than a Gerber, and this is why people will spend more money on a Benchmade Black-line than a Benchmade Red-line, it's why contractors and professional carpenters will buy Dewalt benchtops instead of Ryobi.

why do you think ARs are different?

the chart lists those part specific specifications that lend themselves to higher degrees of reliability, durability, and usability than lesser methods. every line on the chart is an individual specification that can be done in a multitude of ways- there are better ways to do each of these, and the chart compares each part's specifications as close as it can to the military specification. Why the military specification? because the military has done extensive testing with the different variations of materials and methods, and chose those that last break less, last longest, and offer the soldier the widest usability based on their testing. contrary to the popular myth, the military does NOT select the lowest bidder in their weapons contracts. they chose the lowest bidder that meets ALL the requirements for a reliable, durable, usable system. any business man knows what this is- its THE standard for selecting a contractor for ANYTHING. if a contractor/vendor/supplier has a product that meets or exceeds ALL of your requirements for a given price, why would you select anyone more expensive? you don't, that's stupid.

nobody is claiming that the mil standard for parts materials, assembly and configuration are, individually, the "best." but they are a good starting point, because of the degree of testing they've received. the DoD has collected data from millions of weapons firing billions of rounds, and have implemented changes to the platform where deficiencies are discovered. its undeniable that TDP compliance offers a more reliable, more durable, and more usable system than the lower standards and exponentially lesser testing of most commercial manufacturers.

the only valid question in all of this is: are these features a benefit to you? if you were a contractor, you wouldn't buy a Ryobi chopsaw. they're "pieces of bubblegum" in the professional world. utter garbage. but in the non-professional world, they might be perfectly adequate for the home hobbyist... so there's a market for them.. so they sell.

only the man standing there with his wallet in his hand can answer that question. all the rest of this is pointless bickering.

 

[gunnoob75]

The only brand bashing I see, is people saying my BCM/LMT is as bad as their Olympic arms. Despite a chart, right there, showing the facts.

 

[itgoesboom]

The only brand bashing I see, is people saying my BCM/LMT is as bad as their Olympic arms. Despite a chart, right there, showing the facts.

Some people are simply idiots. You have a nice setup there.

 

[wichaka]

Great post bkb0000!

Most of my work over the last 20 years has been on 1911's. I can say that most being made now are pure junk. Cheap made parts, and not a whole lot of love being put into them, which why they get such a bad rap for being unreliable.

But, for the average shooter the one that stoes them in a safe, takes them out 3-4 times a year to shoot, them back in the safe they go...they will do that person just fine.
On the other jabd, for the hard core competition or high round count shooter, I would suggest a higher quality model.

The same for AR's. Most all will run fine for many rounds. How many really need an AR that's as tough as what the military needs? very few.

If you're the average shooter, most anything will work. If you competition shoot, a contractor, or in LE hi-end teams, you may want to think about something on the top end of the scale.

That's why there's so many guns on the scale from hi to low quality in every facet of firearms, so people have choices as to their needs and finances.

Look at anything we purchase...cars, computers, etc. There's a hi-low end in everything.

 

[WhyteCheddar]

Seems that failure rates of components would speak volumes about the perceived quality of specific manufacturers.
I might of missed it but didnt see that info on the chart.

 

[wichaka]

Unless every owner chimed in with problems, or not...the results would be skewed.

It's showing the best features to have, and which ones have them.