AR 15-America's Rifle-question

[CAJUNLAWYER]

What makes a top tier AR vs a middle and low tier AR??? Serious question.
I mean the parts are pretty much the same but different makers. What makes a carefully assembled AR using good parts one at a time by Terd Ferguson gunsmith at law any less desirable than one assembled by minimally skilled assembly line workers at one of the "name brand" assemblers. I mean there really isn't any real gunsmithing involved-just putting together parts with minimal fitting.
I mean let's not forget that the ones used by the "real operators" are sourced out to the lowest bidder to begin with.
I mean I have a nice AR made by a shop in Mississippi that I don't know is still in business but these boys are machinists and have put together a nice looking well fitted product that goes bang every time I pull the trigger and puts the holes where I aim. Chrome plated barrel and chamber with a wylde chamber. It is tight, doesn't rattle when shaken and nothingvfalls off. So what am I missing by not owning a $2,000 XP1000 gold edition assembly line weapon by COLT or Daniel Defense ow whomever

 

[hittman77]

Some folks are into the high end ARs just like some have to spend $2000 on a 1911 when, for me at least, an entry level unit works and performs much the same.

Guess its a personal preference thing. For me, my favorite and most highly valued ARs are a mid 70s Colt SP1 and an Armalite AR 180.

And I don't think you're missing anything.

 

[Sevens]

I'm not a black rifle guy but the first thing that is helpful to understand with a question like this is the law of diminishing returns. An extremely easy example for many folks is the 1911 pistol. Rock Island or the Ruger SR-1911 are fine running and shooting pistols and they are (kind of) nearly (almost) as good as a Wilson, Baer or Brown and you can get them at one-third to one-fifth the price of the Wilson, Baer or Brown.

But if you are not at all familiar with what you get from a Wilson, Baer or Brown, then you might never "get it" when it comes to where all the extra money goes. And there's nothing wrong with that, most folks can go their whole 70-90 years on this globe without a high-buck 1911 and that's absolutely fine, but these same folks are obnoxious and clueless when they cross that line and try to tell other folks that the Wilson, Baer and Brown "aren't worth it."

The first place an AR goes up in money is with the fire control parts, basically the trigger and all the parts that make it work. Then it's the BCG. Then it's the barrel. Then it's the sights and all the accessories. When you begin to add up all these bits here and there, this is where the price tag climbs.

A $2,000 AR-15 makes very little sense for a first time AR buyer in my opinion. Likewise, I think it's silly for a first time 1911 owner to purchase a Wilson. I wouldn't steer a first time car buyer to an $80,000 Mercedes either, but everyone finds their way I suppose.

 

[Ματθιας]

It's the roll marks.

You're not missing anything IMO. I can build one sourcing quality parts online and auction sites for about $500-$600 and will do the same thing as a $2000 new build.

 

[andy52]

Accessories are the biggest difference. A plain jane AR-15 will do everything most people need. Next step up would be a high end barrel which could cost as much as half the price of a entry level AR, then a good drop in trigger another 150 and up, the list goes on and on. Bottom line will these things make for a better AR depends on what your looking for they will improve the overall performance but if your looking for a AR to defend yourself with don't waste your money just buy more ammo..

 

[Doug M.]

There have been some very hard lessons learned over the years regarding quality under significant to hard use. When Pat Rogers was alive, he had a lot of data and photos resulting the volume of shooting done in classes. (I did the math once, I figure 500K rounds minimum downrange every year for over 20 years, but that might be low.) He showed a LOT of broken/failed rifles that resulted from relatively moderate levels of shooting (a 3 day class was 1300-1500 rounds total).

The devil is in the details and consistent quality is a big issue. Some of the problem areas that I recall were the chamber (not actually cut for 5.56X45, but .223, even though marked 5.56) (went to a Dean Caputo class run 2 days before a Pat class in 2008, and darned near every rifle there had to be opened up with a Ned Christiansen chamber reamer). Proper staking of parts that needed to be staked (carrier key IIRC is a real problem area) was often lacking.

Pat said in his later years that the quality of rifles brought to classes had improved as a result of getting the word out. Understand that this is highly contextual. There were not guns for show, but for fighting as a cop or military member, or personal defense. Consistent top quality was not an option - it was a mandate. This colored his perspective.

I learned a lot from Pat, obviously. I also learned from some of the stuff that happened at classes. I spent a day at one next to a guy who had a franken gun that simply was not reliable, even though most people would consider the suppliers reputable. It was frustrating for the shooter, and for everyone around him. He eventually took one of Pat's loaner BCM carbines - and the change in learning etc. was huge. A quality carbine should easily go 10,000 round or more without cleaning or any real attention - just lube. I am sure that you can with a little google time find a couple of articles about the progress of "Filthy Fourteen" (the rack number on that rifle) it went somewhere over 40,000 rounds with only lube and a little PM.

I don't shoot as I did then, as I am retired from LE. My BCM duty rifle has only 5-8000 rounds through it. That's nothing for a hard use shooter. If you are not using it that way (and most folks don't), you will see what Pat and other saw. I don't think I ever had a malfunction (a stoppage in the feed cycle is a malfunction - jam goes on toast) that was not set up for training purposes. I stayed with good rifles; good mags (mostly PMags) and good ammo (almost always Black Hills), and run the rifle WET. Dirty does not matter - dry is fatal. Remember MEAL: Magazine, Extractor, Ammo, Lube.

I have spent a lot of money on the rifles, mags, ammo (not much on Lube - I use SLIP products most) and optics/mounts (Aimpoint in a Larue Mount - period). It was a matter of priorities. If I had to use the rifle for real, it might only be a few rounds, but those rounds HAD to go where they needed to go. I don't waste time and money on boats or golf. I also used to be hard about fitness training, AND I AM ALIVE TODAY AS A RESULT. (I had some health issues resulting from genetic stuff in 2008, and survived what most would not have because of my lifestyle, and the nature of those issues is progressive, but I do not show the deterioration that almost all do for the same reasons. Most of my activities are optional - exercise is not.)

If you are not looking at the issue the way I did as I learned from mentors, you likely will not come to the same conclusion. That's fine.

 

[SweetMK]

I normally do not even look at a gun unless it is pristine,, but,,
I was attracted to this "zombie killer" truck gun at a gun show,,

It came with a 22LR adapter, a dozen beat up 5.56 magazines, site adjustment tool, broken shell extractor,, and a half dozen other attachments,,

I paid less than what four bulk packs of 22LR cost these days,,

I have no fear of scratching the gun, or taking it appart.

(The Zombie Killer engraving on the other side is even better than the right side!! )

This is truly the perfect first AR,,

And, best of all, it shoots great with either 5.56, or 22LR ammo!!

 

[Steve912]

Difference in quality and precision of parts fit, maybe thirty years ago.

Nowadays "top tier" just means someone paid more than they needed to,
and got nothing but a brand name for it.

Even clutz outfits with no prior experience in firearms, successfully
turn out competent ARs these days. None of the data is hard
to get.

 

[Jessie]

I’m no pro and have owned and shot several varieties of the AR. They’ve all functioned as designed and many have been very accurate.
My only thought as to manufacture is durability. If it’s only a range gun, most any will work fine. Shoot the heck out of it, get it dirty and depend on it for your life takes more convincing.
It reminds me of something a marine mechanic told me...” Buy a Mercury if you want to get there first, buy a Johnson if you want to get back “
I will say that there is no reason an “off brand” AR won’t perform the same as a big brand name.
I just won’t know until it’s proved itself.

 

[.357magger]

I think it's an excellent question, but doesn't have a simplistic answer.

The variable is a) perceived value and b) human beings.

I only own one AR, a tried and true Stag Arms Model 2 that, as long as it's lubed, eats what it's fed and is more than accurate enough for any SD or sporting use. Have previously owned Colt 6920s and this Stag runs just as well as they did.

Doesn't measure up to someone else's idea or standards? Don't care. Don't have to.

 

[pistolpete10]

I'm not an AR fan but I do have a couple. One a Rock River 20", the other has a Ruger lower and a Rock River 16" upper. Both shoot good. Not the cheapest but way under the high dollar stuff. I wouldn't know the difference.

 

[H Richard]

I am not an AR fan, but about 2 years ago saw the "need" for a SHTF rifle. I found a DPMS stock AR (flat top) for under $600, added a 2-7 Vortex scope and a sling. Acquired a dozen mags. Acquired 500 rds of 50 gr ball, and loaded up 500 rds of 50 gr HP. Both rounds shoot to POA and group about 1" at 100 yds. The trigger is a little gritty, but I can handle it. I see no reason to spend any more.

Now, If I was still shooting competition, and wanted an AR to shoot out to 600 yds it would have a lot more bells and whistles, similar to the Rem 700's I shoot for Prairie Dogs.

 

[Golphin]

I enjoy shooting the AR's and have built a few. I have built several in 223 and also 300 BO and a 450 Bushmaster. I use the Anderson lowers for them most times and have used different chrome lined barrels. The biggest upgrades I use on mine are triggers and optics. All the ones I have shoot very accurate and are reliable using my reloads. Parts are easy enough to change if needed or wanted so I don't buy high priced AR's .

 

[Muss Muggins]

I think we have a winner. Buy the rifle you like. You'll be fine . . .

 

[Class III]

I've got at least six AR's sitting in the rifle safe. I've owned probably another dozen over the last 25+ years. Yeah, the Daniel Defense is a true cloverleaf shooter at 100 yards. But the Olympic Arms Ultra Match I put together as my first AR back in 1992 will almost match the DD. As far as dollar investment goes, I have $200 in 1992 Dollars in the home built Oly, equivalent to about $373 in 2020 Dollars. The DD I bought Used/Un-fired three years ago. Seller needed cash and I had $500 on me. His loss, my gain.

As others have said, buy magazines, lots of them. They are the most breakage prone part of the AR platform. Buy a reloading press and lots of components. I'm sitting on about 80 magazines, mostly 30 round PMAGS, some 20 round PMAGS, 2 60 round PMAG drums and the rest being a mix of 20 and 30 round military mags. Honestly, I prefer the 20 round mags as I can still shoot from the prone position with the 20 round mags.

Loaded ammo, about 20K rounds with enough components to reload another 10K rounds.

Yeah, I KIND of like the AR platform.

Class III

 

[double-dipper]

Cajunlawyer, Its nice to give advise to a Lawyer, for me its usually the other way around. To answer your question its all about the receiver and barrel and trigger. As with 1911's you have machined, forged or stamped. You're a smart guy so you will get it. "Ed Brown vrs. Rock Island" I just built a ar15 it about 95% all Wilson Combat. I started with machined matching upper and lower and a 20" Wilson Combat match grade SS barrel. For comparison I own a Smith &Wesson M&P ar15. The S&W feels like a "toy" compared to the Wilson Combat. Sure as others have mentioned you can get a "low end" AR and they are good shooters, but like most AR guys you will be upgrading and changing out trigger, barrel handguards. I say ether buy or build a quality AR that you would be happy with.

 

[Buick]

If they are assembled competently there is no functional difference.

 

[Skeptic 9c]

Back in the 1970s the US Army had heavy use M16A1s in the basic training posts. According to the guys at post maintenance, they had more rifles from General Motors with fewer problems than any other brand. The biggest problems were Drill Sergeants exceeding their levels of maintenance and just pesky gun abuse.
Geoff
Who notes that was a long time ago and far away.

 

[Art Doc]

I think that when I bought mine only one manufacturer produced them.

 

[KSDeputy]

All of mine are Colt. I felt they were the best, and have never had any type of problem with any of them.