What parts need replacing in my sport 2 to bring it up to snuff ?

Please don't take this the wrong way but you are better off leaving your Sport 2 as a plinker and start over. If you start to replace everything on the Sport 2 you are going to almost buy a new rifle + the tools to make the changes.

Shoot the snot out of the rifle you have and use it as a base line to choose your next rifle or build.

Off the top of my head...

1. The Buffer Tube
2. The Buffer
3. The Buffer Spring
4. The Upper Receiver
5. The fore end
6. The barrel
7. The muzzle device
8. The trigger group
9. The lower receiver
10. The magazine catch
11. The springs & detents
12. The bolt
13. The bolt carrier
14. The gas block, preferably adjustable.
15. The external protective coating
16. The lower receiver
17. The charging handle
18. Optic: Aimpoint or ACOG

There are a few more parts, but I can't think of them right now.

__________________
-John

What is it you plan to do with your rifle that you think it's not up to snuff for?

Sport is a fine rifle. The only thing i'd suggest replacing to significantly improve the rifle would be a trigger. And that's what I'd suggest for any AR.

What do you mean by "up to snuff"? The bolt, BCG, trigger, and buffer are the same as the rest of the S&W line. Your Sport barrel was treated with a salt nitride bath for corrosion protection vs. chrome lining in some of the other rifles. Many of S&W's rifles have a 1:9 twist, just like your Sport.

If you wanted a "mil-spec" rifle, you bought the wrong one though. But do you think "yotes" are going to know the difference? I haven't had a hog refuse to die yet because my rifle had a semi auto bolt carrier...

The only two items that will really make a difference are the barrel and trigger. Everything else is milspec and up to "snuff." If you had to id freeloat the barrel which would mean a new hand guard, gas block and front sight.

No it isn't. Most of the gun is not "milspec". Right off the top of my head the bolt is a semi-auto not a full auto bolt, tube is mil spec in dimensions but not material 6061 aluminum, twist of the barrel is 1/9 which I think you are alluding to.

Freefloating the barrel will only help if the OP is shooting with a sling or on a bench rest where the pressure on the barrel is effecting the barrel and as a result the groups. 90% of AR shooter, IHMO will not see significant differences in their groups after free floating unless they are shooting supported from a sling at long ranges. You have to be shooting at a long range 200+ yards and be able to shoot quality groups at those ranges. People make a bigger deal out of free floating than it really is. Parts companies fuel this which helps drive sales as people like the OP are told they have to swap out parts to make their rifle "top tier".

None of this makes it a bad rifle it just makes it what it is. A decent budget rifle, it is my understanding the 2s are better than the first version, but it is not "milspec". IMHO

Most of us do not need anything more than the Sport 2 with a few changes but lets be accurate about its details. Again my advice to the OP is to keep the rifle with modest changes like maybe a ACT QMS trigger or Geissele 2 Stage G2S. I find that the trigger is the #1 $$$ to groups change you can make on most ARs. Most of the rest is cosmetic and more for show than anything else.

I couldn't stop laughing at this post. Classic.

__________________
Still carrying my S&W 642

I think most folks with the Sport who end up buying a free float handguard aren't doing so for better accuracy. From what I usually read, it's mostly about putting a longer handguard on a carbine gas system and replacing the A2 sight with a folding sight. And of course for attachment points to mount more stuff.

I agree with your sentiments about a trigger. I always find curious the long lists I see of "upgrades" with every possible piece of Magpul plastic and tactical doodads, yet noticeably absent is any mention of a trigger. IMO, a trigger would be one of the first purchases rather than a missing afterthought.

Lower recievers on the Sport line are a completely different animal from the regular M&P15 line. That's not to say they are not adequate for commercial use, they in fact are. You can make certain modifications to the Sport to make it a real nice shooter, IE triggers, optics, grips, etc, to suit your intended application. But a "top tier" rifle it will never be. That said, I personally don't give much creedance to the whole "tier" classifications as it has been hijacked by the range ninjas for the most part.

Please clarify what is so different with the M&P Sport lower?
All I can think of is the integrated trigger guard, but there are some real expensive lowers that have it, so . . . .

I just put a jp silent captured spring in my MOE MID and must say, quite nice.. If you look carefully, you'll find them a bit cheaper, but not to say still crazy expensive.. Comparing them to other gun parts that are overpriced that add minimal benefits other than coolness, I do feel the benefits are worth the money. Makes it more pleasant to shoot (not to say the AR isn't already extremely pleasant), but it takes out the springy feeling (twangy feeling and the roughness of the spring) making it smoother and softer feeling as well as taking out the "cheese grater" sound that I personally don't have an issue with. Asides from that, I just have an Aimpoint and at the moment calling it good. As mentioned above, the coyotes won't notice.

Mil-spec lower receivers do not have an integral trigger guard. Mil-spec is also a term that gets flung around rather loosely. I don't know if they are forged or cast lowers, there are a handful of companies that forge receivers for AR's. That said, I'm not hating on the Sports. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Sport rifles. They are very capable. I have a friend who bought one and it's a good shooter.

The M&P Sport II is manufactured on a forged upper and lower receiver constructed of 7075 T6 aluminum.

There does appear to be some differences among the M&P15 lineup. For example, the M&P15 MOE states this --

Official Smith & Wesson/Magpul® Co-Branded, Forged Lower Design
- Similar Characteristics to the Original Billet Design
- Flared Magwell for Improved Magazine Insertion
- Forward Serrated Edge of Magwell for Increased Weapon Control
- Integrated Trigger Guard Design for improved ergonomics and use with a gloved finger without having to manipulate the trigger guard out of the way prior to usage
- Finger shelf for increased ergonomic indexing of trigger finger, located on both sides for right and left handed shooting
- Sharp design lines adding to the aesthetics of the lower receiver

My Sport (I) has only had a scope, mounts and extended charging handle. All I think it needs now is a trigger and maybe a bipod and Harris RotaPod to secure it to the,yes, the stock handguard.
Then it will be up to snuff for me.
Jim

If you want a mil-spec AR your better off just buying another one. As has been noted if you really want to install upgraded and mil-spec parts to make it the level of something like a BCM, you will end up replacing everything (and how much of an advantage that gets you is highly dependent on your needs).

While it's fun to tinker around with your AR and put on new parts, unless you are an armorer (or have the requisite knowledge) and have the proper tools to work on your AR it should really only be used as a range toy (which may or may not be fine with you depending on what your intended use is). I know a lot of people will disagree with that but it is a little more complicated than just snapping on new parts.

That said, unless the configuration of the rifle is actually holding you back performance wise you would probably be better off taking the money you were planning on spending on parts and buy ammo with it instead.

Option 1: Sell the Sport and buy the rifle you wanted in the first place. It will end up being cheaper.

Option 2: Keep the Sport and buy the rifle with the specifications you wanted in the first place.

Customizing your rifle is one thing, we all do it at one degree or other but you are wanting a top tier rifle at a budget rifle price, That won't happen. Either way, either via piece by piece, or buying the rifle out right, you are going to be spending top tier money.

Needless to say I'm 100% ignorant to the AR and should have worded my OP differently. I'm not replacing anything on my sport just wanted to know the good and the bad. Will be adding a scope though for the range and that's about it. I bought this rifle because it had a price I couldn't pass up. I owned a 6920 for 3 years and the Sport shoots just as well from what I can remember. Also I have no plans on selling this rifle or building an AR. I am buying another AR soon which will be a Troy or Daniel Defense which my dealer has a ton of, or least he did two weeks ago. Glad some of you got a kick out of my question but it did lead to some good information, thanks

Some of it is going to depend on the individual rifle. Usually, the trigger gets the biggest complaints. Depending on what you want to spend, you can start fairly inexpensively and get good result doing a 15 minute trigger job or going with an ALG or similarly priced unit.

Out of the box, S&W does a pretty good job as far as accuracy and function. Ergonomics is a personal thing. If you want to stick with the stock configuration but get a better feel, Magpul may be the way to go.

It really depends on what you main goal for the rifle is. Home Defense and Close Quarter shooting is very different from longer range.

If you are leaning toward the first two I mentioned, a scope may not be the best choice. A compromise rifle would have something like a 1-4 power scope. Not as quick as iron sights or a red dot but won't limit you on close up stuff and most longer and intermediate shooting.

There are so many options and "mission specific" accessories, your main objective needs to be narrowed down first.

Hey Road Glide. I was just poking fun.

Honestly, don't get hung up on "milspecs". As civilians, we can exceed the milspec. Use the milspec as a baseline. As for top tier, I'll give you my honest opinion. I recovered from Black Rifle disease. The AR-15 is built upon standardized dimensions. Milspec sets the minimum component construction specs. If you ever build one, you'll understand how simple it is to assemble one.

You'll also realize how the small assembly details can screw one up. The true worth of a "top tier" rifle from a reputable manufacturer is the attention to detail, quality control, and care of assembly. That's truly where the money goes.

__________________
-John

What does a super fancy modded out AR do?
It shoots a small bullet really fast.
Funny, my all stock 500$ dpms does the same thing......

It depends on how and where you are shooting those little bullets. I would say that 90%+ of the quality of any shooting is going to be the Indian not the arrow but there are differences between cheaper low end rifles and higher end ones.

JaPes has it right in that attention to detail makes a lot of the difference between rifles. Quality of materials also comes into play. Ergos are subjective so one mans trash is another mans treasure.

I personally look and see the difference in price between a higher end rifle and a base model is not big enough for me to get the base model. These days I only own 2 AR15s. A slightly modified Colt 6920 and a BCM 14.5" ELW Mid Length Keymod. Both are basically as much rifle as I need.

If the goal is just plinking a few hundred rounds once a month on a square range from a rest then just about any rifle will do. When it moves beyond that there are rifles for just about every task. The real trick is to know the difference between need and want.

Absolute blasphemy sir, mil-spec is the absolute highest level of top tier, anything that is not 100% mil-spec is rubbish.

The one thing I learned about mil spec is that its product is
usualy the one offered by the lowest bidder.
Jim

Was looking to modify my Sport but decided against it. I wanted a bolt rifle in .556 and now I'm building my first AR that is basically going to be a straight pull bolt rifle (non gas). I'm going with an AR Stoner side charge upper receiver and have just about everything I need except for the gas block. The gas block is going to be used to cover the gas port but was thinking of going with an adjustable version incase if I want to go semi-auto later. Like everyone is saying the AR platform can be whatever you want.

First, let say this about the Sport II, it is a fine rifle and I enjoy mine. I have a POF Purtian piston that if it is not top tier, it doesn't miss by much and they both shot a whole lot better than I can.
A couple of things I did do to my Sport II was add a Magpul front hand guard, a Magpul stock and a Magpul grip, all in FDE. I did change The charging handle to a Bravo Company and BCG to a Nc WMD both of which I had from a previous rifle that had very few rounds through it. These things I did because I wanted to,not because the rifle needed them.
Mil spec is a miss used term anymore. The Sport is not, nor is it intended to be "Mil spec". The "enhancements" I added was done simply because I had some parts from the M&P I traded for the POF and I happen to like the Magpul stock, grip and front hand guard.

Mil Spec in actually, is the MINIMIUM requirements allowed to be used for a product and must meet or exceed those requirements to be accepted.

Lowest bidder doesn't always have the better equipment, just a lower price. I want quality, durability and dependability. NOT something that's short lived and expendable in the short run that barely makes the grade.

Then we get into name brands and "It's gotta be good, because it's an XXXX". That theory goes out the window now a days due to the bean counters, costs, profit margins and the CEO wants his bonus check along with the investors. They want production going out the door and that's where "Quality Control" gets nudged/pushed to the wayside and the employee could care less as long as they make his/her quota, keep the foreman off their "6" (being it's so easy to replace an employee), keep their job and get that paycheck.

__________________
THIS WE'LL DEFEND ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

With the exception of the members who are with law enforcement and the military, none of us can possess a truly mil spec rifle since this specification is written for select fire rifles. You can buy rifles with certain mil spec compliant parts and testing but not the whole enchilada. I have four Colt AR's but even they are not truly mil spec.

And unless you have some unique version all you are missing is the selector and the barrel length. Neither of which effect quality or function. There were no cost savings in material, or build, which is what matters

I am saving up for a Colt 6940.

Solid rifle.

The Sport II is a fine $600 rifle, good enough for me as it came out of the box. I just put a sling on mine and a carry handle I had laying around because I like the old school sights. But the Magpul sights are fine too.

I fired it the other day to get a zero and to check function. Everything A-OK so far.

Rather than spend money on stuff the rifle doesn't need I'll buy ammo and practice with it more.

I'm sorry, smithman, but your post has been determined to be entirely too reasonable.

(I only added a light and sling myself.)

__________________
642-1, M&P15 TS

Oh yeah? But does it do it as cool???? That's what matters most, it's why the phrase 'tacticool' was invented

__________________
Rod
M&P 22A, 40c, 15A, 15-22

Anyone who knows the difference between a mil-spec trigger and Geissele or Wilson Combat, understands just how poorly mil-spec can compare to other designs.

True but the triggers were ment for two different things. Not taking either side but for military applications they don't need WC or Geissele

Wison Combat makes an excellent duty trigger. Not just talking about bench toys.

But if the point is that in military engagements rifles are often used to fire in a general direction rather than actually taking aim, thus a consistent pull absent excessive creep and stacking is of less benefit, then I agree. But then we're back to explaining that mil-spec is of lesser performance and are better options for the consumer market.

This. My Sport mil spec trigger is pretty good, but my Colt mil spec was horrid.

__________________
Still carrying my S&W 642

I'll give up my Lula when they pry it from my cold dead hands.

__________________
642-1, M&P15 TS

Mil Spec triggers are a **** shoot. My Colt actually had the best off all my factory AR's, my M&P 15A was the worst. My Core 15 is right there with my Colt. Now upper to lower slop, my Colt was by far the sloppiest of any AR I own. But they all function every time.

__________________
Rod
M&P 22A, 40c, 15A, 15-22

Empty Magazines. They tend to go empty pretty quick! And lots of ammo to fill them up......

My MID's trigger is pretty decent compared to my brother's old Colt and his duty Colt as well as his Anderson Arms.. The Colts triggers are definitely better than the AA's.. Can anybody enlighten me of the differences/benefits of the WC trigger? I've thought about one before, but really not sure of the benefits nor looked into them..

Any possibility that Colt has looser tolerances on the fit to ensure function on the field as well as easy breakdown out there?

__________________
Isaiah 43:1-3

I shoot a lot of hunting rifles, and just could never get used to the terrible trigger in my MP15. It felt like I was yanking on a gate latch, and I wanted it for hunting.

I put a Geissele trigger in it and it shoots like a dream for me now. I didn't want to add the expense, but it's done and well worth it.

HC

__________________
GO NAVY!

I've never gave a second thought to all my other guns not being mil-spec. Should I be worried?

Absolutely not. If they put a ban on 'military style firearms', I'm sure "mil-spec" wording will get thrown around by the gun illiterate and make it into the bill.

All depends on what you built the rifle for. If you put a longer, heavier barrel on it,a good trigger, a good optic and a few choice goodies it'll run groups that a $500 DPMS won't. If you're building a standard battle rifle clone,to punch paper or targets and only shooting relatively short distance, then spending a huge amount of money doesn't seem worth it to me.

__________________
1st smiles,lies.Last,gunfire.

I have a Geissele SSA now in my .300blk and it's an awesome trigger, however, I can honestly say I can't tell a whole lot of difference between it and my RRA National Match I put in my Colt. The RRA is half the price too.

__________________
Still carrying my S&W 642

I personally find the Geissele to be more consistent and predictable. The SSA is not a match trigger but is a 2 stage combat trigger which is designed to be a hard use improvement over the standard 7lb GI trigger. It still has a little creep to it. IMHO.

RRAs are also good right out of the box. As you shoot them they show even less creep but with harder use they have a rep of losing their second stage. When your RRA trigger has so little creep and a heavy break it is because you are about to loose your second stage. There is not enough sear engagement. Once it goes you have single stage trigger.

The SSA does not have this issue but it has a little creep in it. The high level of durability and consistency is worth the extra money. IMHO YMMV.

OP, shoot it for a while and any mods you "need" to do will become apparent.

I had planned leaving my Sport stock, but after several range trips I had to replace the hand guard and A2 front sight with a rail. I couldn't get my support hand far enough forward so suit me. I like 15" rails so I can get my hand out there.

Save enough for effective rail covers also.