Smith and Colt differences...
- Thread starter 4506SHOOTER
- Start date
MPDC
Member
The Armalite Division of the Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation, Costa Mesa, CA was established in 1954 for the sole purpose of developing military firearms using the latest in plastics and non-ferrous materials. It's team of Eugene M. Stoner - key designer, Robert Fremont - prototype manufacturing supervisor, and L. James Sullivan - who oversaw drafting work had been they key developers of the AR-15.
Prior to the AR-15, Armalite had developed:
AR-1 - 7.62 NATO parasniper rifle, extremely lightweight, using Mauser-type bolt action; only prototypes built in 1954
AR-3 - 7.62 NATO self-loader using aluminum receiver, fiberglass stock, and multiple lug locking system similar to the one later incorporated into the AR-10
AR-5 - .22 Hornet survival rifle developed for US Air Force and officially designated the MA-1
AR-7 - .22 long rifle self-loader, receiver and barrel store in plastic stock. (1959-1960)
AR-9 - 12 gauge self-loading shotgun with aluminum barrel and receiver (5lbs) 1955
AR-10 - 7.62 NATO auto-loader, aluminum receivers, led to AR-15 design
The AR-15, designed around slightly enlarged version of the .222 case firing a 55gr projectile at 3300fps, and weighing in at 6.7lbs, took some of the best features from earlier designs:
•locking system similar to Johnson Automatic Rifle
•gas system from Swedish Ljungman AG42B
•in-line stock to help with manageability during auto fire
•hinged upper/lower from FN-FAL
•rear sight in carry handle like British EM2
•ejector port cover from MP44
So confusing. Don't they (Armalite) also call their 9mm pistol an AR-24?
Now back to Colts and Smiths.
crracer_712
Member
I think Remington does have the contract, but I don't think it's the M4 they will be making. But I could be wrong. I was thinking they came up with a new wiz bang rifle to try.
crracer_712
Member
I have the LE6920 Colt and the M&P 15a. Both seem well built and function as intended. One small thing I like about the colt, and it can be added to the smith is the front sling mount.
The smith is mounted to the front sight (the sights are the same, colt could have put one there as well), but the colt has some adapter that puts the sling point on the side.
The Colts seem to be coming with the new buttstock from Super Stoc, kinda like the MOE, but a little different. Locks in place and feels like part of the rifle. Unlike the retail version of the Super Stoc, the one that Colt supplies cannot accomodate both MilSpec and Commercial tubes, but that really doesn't matter since it fits the tube it comes on....
I believe the Smith has a smaller hand guard, Colt being a bit taller. Both are lined with a metal heat shield.
Both have play between the upper and lowers, Colt possibly having a bit more. My Colt was more than my Smith, but I got a great deal on my Smith. I've seen Colts advertised on the net for 995, but seldom in stock. I got mine at wally world, they sell them for 1097.
Smith comes with a 30 round Pmag, Colt comes with 2 2 round metal mags and a 4 piece steel cleaning rod, couple of brushes and a steel patch holder (never saw one in steel before).
As mentioned, the Colt is a 1:7 twist, so that would allow the use of heavier weighted bullets which might be of use to you if you can use the 223 round to hunt deer with (I cannot where I live). Otherwise either is going to shoot the cheap 55 grains ammo fine.
The smith is mounted to the front sight (the sights are the same, colt could have put one there as well), but the colt has some adapter that puts the sling point on the side.
The Colts seem to be coming with the new buttstock from Super Stoc, kinda like the MOE, but a little different. Locks in place and feels like part of the rifle. Unlike the retail version of the Super Stoc, the one that Colt supplies cannot accomodate both MilSpec and Commercial tubes, but that really doesn't matter since it fits the tube it comes on....
I believe the Smith has a smaller hand guard, Colt being a bit taller. Both are lined with a metal heat shield.
Both have play between the upper and lowers, Colt possibly having a bit more. My Colt was more than my Smith, but I got a great deal on my Smith. I've seen Colts advertised on the net for 995, but seldom in stock. I got mine at wally world, they sell them for 1097.
Smith comes with a 30 round Pmag, Colt comes with 2 2 round metal mags and a 4 piece steel cleaning rod, couple of brushes and a steel patch holder (never saw one in steel before).
As mentioned, the Colt is a 1:7 twist, so that would allow the use of heavier weighted bullets which might be of use to you if you can use the 223 round to hunt deer with (I cannot where I live). Otherwise either is going to shoot the cheap 55 grains ammo fine.
Jayhawkhuntclub
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Messages
- 740
- Reaction score
- 318
The Colt is an Armalite clone then right? It's an AR15; not a CO15.
*After reading further, it looks like I was beat to the punch. Oh well.
Last edited:
Honestly when I took them out to shoot, My Sport, My Dads AR15A3 Hbar and my friends Bushmaster Patrol sumthin, I wanted to do an honest comparison, the Sport and Bushmasters both were new and the Colt was used, but the barrels all looked good. I used the same Federal XM193 5.56x45 ammo in them and had any of them outshot the Sport I would say so but they did not. They all functioned fine, no problems anywhere, I wasnt using optics I was just using the Iron's that came on the rifle and I sighted them in before I did the comparison. In doing this I thought it would take the shooters ability out of the picture and bring it to just what the rifle was capable of. The rifles are all very capable for home and personal defense. But when it comes to shooting a Prairie Dog at 250 yards only the sport was there. Honestly any of the three would make a fine Coyote rifle at 250 but the P Dog is less than 1/8 of a target and it requires optics.
This is all my opinion and doesnt matter but thanks
This is all my opinion and doesnt matter but thanks
I found this interesting, Armalite sold the rights to Colt in 1959. Colt then registered the name "Ar-15" for the civilian M16. Colt first issued the M16 to the U.S.A.F.. In 1963 the U.S. Army started testing the rifle(XM16A1) with the first appearance of the F.A. So technically and legally Colt was the first "AR-15" and first U.S. issued sport. Just my p.o.v.
Last edited:
ccracer712 Here he site but it will not load. U.S. Army places order for 24,000 M4A1 carbines with Remington | Military Times GearScout
It is for 24,000 M-4 contract number is W56HZV12d0056. remingtons press release is on April 24 2012.
It is for 24,000 M-4 contract number is W56HZV12d0056. remingtons press release is on April 24 2012.
draw your own conclusions
NEW Comparison Chart of Commercial M4 Pattern Carbines - M4Carbine.net Forums
NEW Comparison Chart of Commercial M4 Pattern Carbines - M4Carbine.net Forums
crracer_712
Member
That's a pretty good price savings. I'd like to see the Remington model and hope it's not just a relabeled Bushmaster.
Andrew911tt
Member
I do not doubt that bushmaster will be part of the military contract being under the same roof. But all parts have to meet a certain spec and level of quality so time will tell how it affects civilian prduction. Maybe they will have seperate production lines. Maybe bushy build both theres and remmy for the civilian market .
We all should have noticed that with colt knowing that there military contract being gone they have expanded the SA revolver and 1911 line. Maybe they will get off there rear adjust pricing and build the old .22lr pistol line again and what AR's they can sell. They may have to scamble to stay in the black long term. Lots of other choices today for quality 1911's, AR's and SA revolver.
We all should have noticed that with colt knowing that there military contract being gone they have expanded the SA revolver and 1911 line. Maybe they will get off there rear adjust pricing and build the old .22lr pistol line again and what AR's they can sell. They may have to scamble to stay in the black long term. Lots of other choices today for quality 1911's, AR's and SA revolver.
Well here it is under both bushy and remmy banners the ACR. Kinda FN look'n to me. Go to the specs section and watch the videos.Remington Defense
Last edited:
Matt I wish you no disrespect but anything from M4rgery is so biased that I give it no weight nor will I waste my time to look at it. This is all my opinion but when I went there when I first bought my S&W, I left with the opinion from them that I was gutter trash. I have since come to the conclusion that they and AR15.nuts have to be that way to justify the expenditure of 2 to 3 times the cost of my rifle for theirs. I am sure they are fine rifles. Personally I have never seen a Noveske or a BCM or any other rifles that they compare against. I have seen Colts, Bushmasters, DPMS and M&P15's. I have also seen homebuilts but none using the very expensive uppers that they talk about. I have seen alot of AR pattern rifles, but out here in Middle America where we hunt and use our rifles no one can justify the expense when they can buy something else for less money that does exactly the same job. Have a good day.
Splittiebus66
Member
Lol on a funny note here, robS the guy who made the infamous chart got himself banned over there.
crracer_712
Member
That Adaptive Combat Rifle is the rifle I was thinking the contract was awarded too, but apparently not. I'm thinking they are having the military test it, but it is pricey. Most I see at gun shows around around 2 to 2.5 grand. Very cool rifles.
crracer_712
Member
It's a completely different animal than the AR-15. It may very well have something to it that isn't visible in the pictures that do what the FA or dust cover were thought to do. Or perhaps it was just designed in a way that either of those features were never going to be an option or need.
Similar threads
