Build an AR15 similar to a USGI M-4 carbine?

[scooter123]

for me part of the enjoyment of an AR is in the build, so I've never purchased an assembled rifle. Heck, I haven't even purchased an assembled upper. That said, I don't think it's possible to assemble an AR from parts for the money that some models like the M&P 15 Sport sell for. Basically, there are some real bargains out there.

Note, just an example on a 300 Blackout I'm slowly putting together. Started with a Spikes lower for 75 bucks at a local gun show. Then add a CMMG Lower Builders Kit for 30 bucks from Midway. Then add on 53 bucks for a DMPS Mil Spec Buffer Tube Kit, 75 bucks for a Magpul Stock, and 9 bucks for a polymer Magpul trigger guard. So, we are up to something like 240 bucks. Wait, need a trigger and I really like the Timney Single Stage trigger that's 230 bucks at Brownells. So total for the lower will come in at about 470 dollars and that doesn't include the shipping for parts I couldn't source locally.

So, just the lower is approaching the cost for what one of the complete budget rifles sell for. Yeah, I know, I could throw in a basic 30 dollar Mil Spec trigger and save about 200 dollars on that lower but that points out the problem with building your own. That is that it's darned difficult to NOT use the components that you prefer to use and use a vastly inferior component instead. On a positive note, those higher component costs means that my finished rifle will be exactly they way I like my rifles to be equipped.

 

[JaPes]

I'm wanting a 16" barrel semi-auto AR carbine similar in appearance and quality to a military issue M-4 and I'm wanting to build it myself to keep costs down. Several guys tell me the Palmetto State Armory premium products are pretty decent stuff at a great price. I plan on buying an assembled upper receiver and barrel but does anyone know if building a GOOD quality AR is any cheaper than just buying one? I think Colt's are pretty cheap right now and if I could build a good rifle similar to Colt quality for less money I would probably attempt it.

1. Good for you. Building an AR is fun. It lets you build exactly what you want, and that's a double edged sword.

2. Everyone starts out building an AR with the intention of keeping the cost down, but the cost eventually creeps upward. Why? You end up buying better parts.

3. Military spec is a minimum standard to build to, no less no more. As civilians, we can build to better spec.

4. If you're going to build the lower to save $$$, might as well build the upper too. It's not difficult. The tools cost a bit extra, but if you even think you'll build more AR's the tools are worth it.

IMO, at this time there are good deals to be had on factory complete AR-15's. Sounds like you really want a Colt. Buy a Colt or you won't be 100% happy.

 

[Biggfoot44]

All depends on the OP's interpetation of "similar" . Could include :

1. Parts kit from usual suspects of popular priced suppliers , with an M4 profile bbl of either pinned extended flash hider or 16in bbl. ( Lowest $ )

2. Just buy a complete 6920 ( medium $, closest authenticity )

3. Buy parts or complete rifle from high end boutique mfg. ( Open ended how much $ to spend , potentially "beter" than milspec ).

 

[eb07]

If you want to get a super reliable buy it once for heavy use such as competition or carbine courses, or as a patrol rifle:


Bravo Company


Here is a good deal on a Colt:

COLT

Wanna spend some coin on a manufacturer that goes above and beyond the TDP and milspec?

Daniel Defense

Want a good hobbiest rifle that will last you a lifetime:

Spikes Tactical

Palmetto Armory

By the time you finish the build you will be in it for 7-900 bucks+ anyway so you should just grab a Colt 6920. The are around 8-850 bucks which is almost the same as the Spikes or Palmetto and be done with it. You will have what you want and you can go enjoy it.

 

[JimC]

My BCM 14.5" M4 carbine upper on BM registered SBR lower.



The original config. when it was registered was an 11.5" that I built using a BM upper and BM 11.5" 1-7 twist HB.

 

[Mainsail]

A USGI M4 has a 14.5 inch barrel, not a 16". You can get a 14.5 barrel and have a 1.5" flash hider permanently attached if you want to be as accurat as you legally can without going the SBR route.

This is a fact often overlooked. If you go with the 16" barrel and the carbine length hand-guard (and gas system) it won't look right and you won't be able to mount a bayonet- there will be too long of a barrel out in front of the hand-guard and bayonet lug. You can correct that in two ways; have the flash hider pinned/welded, OR go with a mid-length hand-guard and gas system. I did the mid-length on mine, so the length of barrel sticking out in front of the hand-guard is the same as the military's configuration (that we can't do without building a SBR).

 

[gordondewolf]

Not a "bad thing", but it does sound like you are more into a Brand Name. That being the case, you won't be satisfied with a rifle built from several different maker's parts. I'd suggest that you just spend the money for a Colt and have something you will be satisfied with over time. I have a Bushmaster and a Colt Sp1. They both shoot exactly the same.

In case I ruffled your feathers with the brand name comment, let me clarify that many years ago I had an 1911A1 made by the AR Corp. It was a decent .45, but I was never satisfied with it. Eventually I found a 1943 production Colt 1911A1, sold off the AR and never looked back. That being true even though the AR was bought new, and the Colt was a reimported surplus pistol that required a new barrel to make serviceable.

 

[gregintenn]

Somehow I've ended up with a pile of ARs even though I'm not real fond of them in general. I've found that my son's budget build rifle will shoot with one I built which I've invested 2-3 times the money in versus his.

I've bought cheap parts, name brand parts, and have one name brand complete rifle. I've found a $40 blemished Anderson or PSA receiver does the same as a $300 milled flavor of the month receiver.

I can see no real difference in the fit, finish, or function of any of these. They all shoot tiny groups with good ammunition, and all function 100% of the time.

If I were really worried about accuracy, I'd spend my money on a good trigger and barrel. A bolt control group from a reputable manufacturer would be worthwhile too I suppose. Other than that, I subscribe to the opinion that "parts is parts".

 

[eb07]

Except if you buy it to run a carbine class or competition....


I have personally seen it. But take it from Pat Rogers who runs EAG Tactical: E.A.G. Tactical



Here is his take. I have this saved to share with new people getting into carbine classes or 3 gun. Sometimes it's better hearing it from someone who sees it daily as a profession is better than hearing it from a random internet guy :

What Parts Break in a Carbine Course? Thread summaries are on pages 48-49 - AR15.COM

What we see go down at class falls into these catagories.

Wear items
Specifically, extractors and extractor springs.
Bolt rings
Buffer springs

Parts guns
Parts ain't parts. If you get your stuff from gun shows and garage sales, don't expect quality
I had a guy in a recent class bragging on T1 that he built his carbine for $400 and "it is just as good as..." That feternoon it wouldn't ectract. The extractor was worn snooth and then re park'd; the extractot spring was flat (no joke) and the insert was just crumbs.
We replaced it all.
On T3 his bolt broke in half.

Hobby guns
Generally ok, but non MPI bolts may not last (we see less problems with breaking lately) and some of the new guns may not work at all. These should not have to be shot in- they should work out of the box.
Chambers are often 223, no matter what is marked on the barrel. When the gun gets hot, extraction slows down.

Worn out guns
Parts wear. Sometimes the guns are just plain shot out- more often, military guns.

Think MEAL
Magazines- serviceable mags
Extractor- serviceable
Ammunition- quality ammo, not garbage
Lube- generous lubrication

If you have that, most of the guns- even some of the very low end guns- might do well for a class or more.

On the other hand, some of the companies make absolutely great guns. They will last a long time.

 

[Farmer17]

Pallmetto State Armory has a fathers day sale on their Freedom M4 Melonite carbine kit for $389 shipped and I could pick up an Anderson blem lower for $45. Would that be fairly close to Government Issue quality?

 

[BudMan5]

I have an M&P 15 and it's a great rifle. Truth is the US military M4 is manufactured by the lowest bidder, so pretty much any carbine you pick up will be equal in quality. If you want the best though you are going to have to part with some serious coin. Palmetto State is good, Rainier Arms is outstanding,and of course there are the big name guys......oh, and you might think about posting here......

Firearms & Knives - Other Brands

Sorry but that is a very wrong misconception of the Internet. I am often amazed that people believe that the Department of Defense would attempt to buy cheap inferior equipment for the soldiers, sailors.Marines, and airman of America's armed services.

Your sentence should have read, "the M4 carbined should be manufactured to the very exacting high quality military specification as required in the military contract. It is awarded to the lowest bidder who can manufacture to that very stringent and exacting quality".

a 'mil-spec' AR15 is often also identifies as a Tier 1 level rifle or carbine. While the S&W M&P is an excellent weapon it hardly meets mil-spec or Tier 1 status.

Here's a chart that show which manufacturers actually conform to the military specification of the M16/M4 rifle/carbine:

or this one:

Sorry, that misconception is often repeated and always wrong

Bud
1SG
Infantry
USA (ret)

 

[Badquaker]

I don't build my AR's to save money. I build them to get exactly what I want. My last three builds have run about $1200 a piece. Barrels, triggers, and BCG's are the heart of your experience, and can can siphon money out of your wallet faster than rented girlfriend. I am lucky ( unless you ask my wife ) in that Primary Arms is only about 30 minutes from my home. When my son asked me to build him an AR for his birthday, I picked all the parts up at noon and had a completed rifle that evening. I test shot it the next day, and he picked it up that weekend. It's never missed a beat, shoots under 1 moa with my ammo, and has killed a mess of hogs. He likes it.

 

[pjpjr]

Sorry but that is a very wrong misconception of the Internet. I am often amazed that people believe that the Department of Defense would attempt to buy cheap inferior equipment for the soldiers, sailors.Marines, and airman of America's armed services.

Your sentence should have read, "the M4 carbined should be manufactured to the very exacting high quality military specification as required in the military contract. It is awarded to the lowest bidder who can manufacture to that very stringent and exacting quality".

a 'mil-spec' AR15 is often also identifies as a Tier 1 level rifle or carbine. While the S&W M&P is an excellent weapon it hardly meets mil-spec or Tier 1 status.

Here's a chart that show which manufacturers actually conform to the military specification of the M16/M4 rifle/carbine:

or this one:

Sorry, that misconception is often repeated and always wrong

Bud
1SG
Infantry
USA (ret)

BudMan5 has it right on all accounts. Pay attention to what he has offered up here and you will not go wrong!!

 

[LVSteve]

I think the Stag I have is a kind of M4gery. Must get around to shooting it some day.

I don't get the demand for the military style barrel as it makes the gun heavier than it needs to be for 95% of civilian use. Unless you are in the habit of running tactical courses and/or indulge in multiple mag dumps with a Slidefire, it's probably unnecessary.

I also don't get the perceived cool factor of a bayonet lug. Then again I never saw the attraction of fuzzy dice, either.

 

[Hapworth]

I am all for The Chart -- it was a great help to me when I was first trying to figure this stuff out, and remains useful, but bear in mind it is out of date and no longer being maintained or updated by the man who made it.

Things do and likely have changed for various builders since The Chart's heyday...

 

[BudMan5]

I am all for The Chart -- it was a great help to me when I was first trying to figure this stuff out, and remains useful, but bear in mind it is out of date and no longer being maintained or updated by the man who made it.

Things do and likely have changed for various builders since The Chart's heyday...

But, the military specification remains the same. I was using the chart to demonstrate that very few manufacturers build to military specification.

FN is now the manufacturer of record of the M4 and has also started building the M$ (civilian version) for the civilian market.
Here is the Army's fact page on the M4:

PEO Soldier | Equipment Portfolio

By the way, the USMC no longer issues the M4 except to specific job positions like vehicle operators,. Their standardized weapon is the M16A4

 

[BudMan5]

I am all for The Chart -- it was a great help to me when I was first trying to figure this stuff out, and remains useful, but bear in mind it is out of date and no longer being maintained or updated by the man who made it.

Things do and likely have changed for various builders since The Chart's heyday...

But, the military specification remains the same. I was using the chart to demonstrate that very few manufacturers build to military specification.

FN is now the manufacturer of record of the M4 and has also started building the M$ (civilian version) for the civilian market.
Here is the Army's fact page on the M4:

PEO Soldier | Equipment Portfolio

By the way, the USMC no longer issues the M4 except to specific job positions like vehicle operators,. Their standardized weapon is the M16A4

 

[Hapworth]

But, the military specification remains the same. I was using the chart to demonstrate that very few manufacturers build to military specification.

Understood, but that's also my point: since The Chart is years out of date, it can't adequately be used to determine who's building to TDP and who isn't; some of those manufacturers may have upped their game in response to consumer demand for TDP equivalence, while others may have slacked off as sometimes happens.