feduncan
Member
How does the S&W M&P 15 stack up against the Colt M4 Carbine?
S&W M&P vs COLT M4 CARBINE
- Thread starter feduncan
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I would not say these are comparable other than being of the same platform. You get what you pay for and the quality of all AR rifles is not the same. There are many opinions on this topic but this one is mine, shared by some but clearly not by all. I would not say the M&P AR is in the same class as the Colt. Taurus does not compare to Smith & Wesson revolvers and the S&W AR does not compare to a Colt.
Lets all be respectful as we disagree on this topic.
Best wishes to my fellow forum members!
Lets all be respectful as we disagree on this topic.
Best wishes to my fellow forum members!
rockquarry
Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 8,493
- Reaction score
- 10,417
I've never had an S&W AR15 facsimile; they may shoot and function very well and may be just as accurate or more accurate than a Colt. However, if you ever have resale in mind, the Colt likely have more appeal and may be much easier to sell or trade. Also, the Colt will probably retain value better than an S&W or some other copy. Certainly, opinions vary on this.
We ran Colts & M&P15s along side each other in what several "other" brands termed abusive use. The S&Ws ran right along with the Colts and has, by far, the better warranty and service in the very few instances it may be needed. It's service with a smile, not a sneer.
Unless it's changed, the Colt warranty is if you break it, you get to keep all the pieces, no extra charge. They've only recently started being reasonable about replacement part costs. The reason doesn't extend across the board on parts. In some cases, you're paying for the name, not the part.
As previously noted, the Sport/Sport II is not the same as the M&P15. It's an item designed, built and sold at a price point.
Unless it's changed, the Colt warranty is if you break it, you get to keep all the pieces, no extra charge. They've only recently started being reasonable about replacement part costs. The reason doesn't extend across the board on parts. In some cases, you're paying for the name, not the part.
As previously noted, the Sport/Sport II is not the same as the M&P15. It's an item designed, built and sold at a price point.
cd228
Member
Both are fairly good rifles. I've carried Colt for work and shot S&W for fun and used both COLT and S&W parts for builds. BLUFF: If you are buying it as a duty weapon, used for high round count classes or dedicated fighting rifle I'd recommend the Colt. If you want a range toy, or a fun shooter that could be used for self defense in a pinch, The Smith would be fine.
The Colt will probably cost more and be a little harder to get. The Colt will most likely have a higher resale value (no guarantees). Colt 6920 series rifles have chrome lined 4150 barrels while the S&Ws could have a melonited 4140 barrel (depending on model). While I would expect a longer life span from the Colt barrel due to the metallurgy, that may or may not prove to be the case in your experience (ammo used, firing schedule, maintenance regime all factor in). Colt has been the "Gold Standard" for ARs for a number of years and has provided service rifles for various federal agencies.
The Smith sport series has proven to be very reliable. The late Pat Rogers from EAG tactical, notorious for being hard on rifles, commented many times on how the M&P Sport models made it through his high round count classes. While Rogers recommended Colt and then BCM, he was impressed by the M&P and that impressed me too.
The Colt will probably cost more and be a little harder to get. The Colt will most likely have a higher resale value (no guarantees). Colt 6920 series rifles have chrome lined 4150 barrels while the S&Ws could have a melonited 4140 barrel (depending on model). While I would expect a longer life span from the Colt barrel due to the metallurgy, that may or may not prove to be the case in your experience (ammo used, firing schedule, maintenance regime all factor in). Colt has been the "Gold Standard" for ARs for a number of years and has provided service rifles for various federal agencies.
The Smith sport series has proven to be very reliable. The late Pat Rogers from EAG tactical, notorious for being hard on rifles, commented many times on how the M&P Sport models made it through his high round count classes. While Rogers recommended Colt and then BCM, he was impressed by the M&P and that impressed me too.
Last edited:
vonn
US Veteran
A military grade m4 colt built to military specs is not the same as any of the very many civilian models made by many manufacturers. Civilian models are more than adequate for use but not necessarily combat level. ( Strictly my opinion after a one year torture test
I performed years ago)
I performed years ago)
We have 6920s and a M&P Sport.
The Smith is a surprisingly good value for the money. For $500 you get a M4 type AR that shoots just fine, is essentially as accurate as the 6920 with bulk grade ammo, and is mil-spec enough that you can change out parts at will. The trigger on the Sport, at least on a sample of one, is cleaner than on my 6920.
I think the difference will show up if you run thousands of rounds. The Colt is subjected to higher specs and more testing than the Smith. That's why it costs almost twice as much.
Most ARs sold are shot little, if at all. If you plan on popping a few rounds, get the Smith. If you use it for competition, duty, or to save your life, I'd spring for the Colt (or another rifle in its price and spec range, such as SOLGW or BCM). These and a few others are the $1000 more or less range. You get a lot of rifle in this price range.
There are many ARs in the $500 range. If I were buying an AR in the $500 range, it would definitely be the Smith.
Indeed, I know somebody who bought a 6920 last year. Shot it a little and when Colt stopped sending rifles and prices went up, he parked it in the safe and got the Smith for range duties. Totally satisfied he is.
The Smith is a surprisingly good value for the money. For $500 you get a M4 type AR that shoots just fine, is essentially as accurate as the 6920 with bulk grade ammo, and is mil-spec enough that you can change out parts at will. The trigger on the Sport, at least on a sample of one, is cleaner than on my 6920.
I think the difference will show up if you run thousands of rounds. The Colt is subjected to higher specs and more testing than the Smith. That's why it costs almost twice as much.
Most ARs sold are shot little, if at all. If you plan on popping a few rounds, get the Smith. If you use it for competition, duty, or to save your life, I'd spring for the Colt (or another rifle in its price and spec range, such as SOLGW or BCM). These and a few others are the $1000 more or less range. You get a lot of rifle in this price range.
There are many ARs in the $500 range. If I were buying an AR in the $500 range, it would definitely be the Smith.
Indeed, I know somebody who bought a 6920 last year. Shot it a little and when Colt stopped sending rifles and prices went up, he parked it in the safe and got the Smith for range duties. Totally satisfied he is.
Last edited:
the Ar-15 Junkie
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2018
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 32
What is $400.00 dollars cheaper about a Smith vs the Colt?
Lets start with the Smith barrel. My guess is Smith has less than $20 dollars manufacturing cost in the barrel. It comes with a 1/9 twist which is only really optimized for 55 grain bullets. NO chrome lining. NO government profile. Why does the lack of the government profile even matter, just cosmetics? If a Carbine doesn’t have the Government profile it doesn’t really look like a true carbine in my opinion. I have to wonder though how much $$$ Smith saves when machining a million barrels over 10 years and not having to do the extra machine work on that many barrels, and, it does add to the overall weight. Speaking of weight, that OR Optic Ready gas block is HEAVY, then add that to the non-government profile barrel and the thrill of your cheap quality AR can sub for a barbell lol. And every Smith I removed the barrel nut from was not really tight at all lol.
On ever Smith I have owned the A2 FSB was canted a few degrees from the factory, some more so than others. But most people will never notice. They are first time owners, not precision shooters, and most just throw a red dot on and never notice it. I had one example so canted a drop in piston kit would not even line up enough to function.
For the extra $400 dollars with Colt you get the lighter more aesthetically pleasing government profile barrel, chrome lined, 1/7 twist with A2 front sight blocks properly timed. And the barrel nut properly torqued.
OK take a look at your castle nut staking. WOW, what a joke, every Smith I have seen has the poorest excuse of castle nut staking possible, a joke. Looks like someone took a rusty old flat blade screwdriver they found on the side of the road and made a scratch on the castle nut. Go look at yours and see if any displaced metal exists and if it does is it even on the correct side of the notch? I pointed this out to a salesman the other day at a dealership and he lol when he saw it.
For the extra $400.00 with Colt you get a properly staked castle nut done by a machine that looks perfect.
Now go look at your buffer. See around the outer edge all chewed up from the buffer slamming into the buffer retainer? Some worse than others. I had 2 that were so bad, basically cosmetic yes, so after replacing the buffers I removed the buffer retainer all together and don’t even use it. I had one almost break from being bent. Took the opportunity to fix the crappy castle nut staking at the same time I removed the buffer retainers.
For the extra $400.00 with Colt you don’t have this problem as Colts are built to true military design specifications and the buffer doesn’t impact the buffer retainer when the gun is cycling. AND with Colt you get an H buffer, not a Carbine buffer like Smith provides.
Now, look at your bolt, does it say MP on it? What does that mean? Does it means your Smith bolt has been Magnetic Particle tested? Probably not, Smith does batch testing where they test only a few examples out of every hundred or so that comes off the assembly line.
For the extra $400.00 with Colt you get a MP tested bolt as Colt tests every single one.
Look at the crappy Parkerizing on the Smith BCG and Crappy staking on the carrier key.
For the extra $400.00 with Colt you get a true mill spec parkerized BCG and properly staked Gas key.
I could go on and on about gas tube dimension specs, pin and trigger holes, flash hiders not properly torqued ect, ect.
Now you wonder if a Smith gives you the thrill of a cheap quality AR, its the Colt that gives you thrill of a Quality AR at a bargain price.
There are actually some things about the Smiths I like. The machining of the mag wells are perfect. Every magazine I use snap in and drop put perfectly. The mill spec triggers work great for what they are. I even buy Smith AR lower parts kits for other guns I assemble because they are great quality for the price.
And everything on these Smiths I mentioned above are mostly fixable.
But these Smiths are indeed cheap, and in the long run, it’s a bargain to pay the extra $400.00 for the Colt, or unfortunately it once was when Colts were still available.
I currently own as of writing this 7 Smiths, 2 with Osprey Piston Kits, I enjoy them all.
But yes, Smiths are what they are , pretty much cheap. But I still love mine.
https://i.imgur.com/lxCguoD.jpg
Last edited:
I agree with Junkie above on the price differential. When the 6920 was $900, you were paying a $400 difference and getting much more rifle. Sure, for $900 you can walk out with a budget AR, a red dot, some Pmags, and ammo. On the other hand, if you're going to have that rifle for decades, how much really is $400 more over that period?
I made that decision 2 years ago. After shooting 20" AR for ages, I wanted an M4 type. I skipped the budget lines and bought 6920. I thought it was worth the extra $400.
I made that decision 2 years ago. After shooting 20" AR for ages, I wanted an M4 type. I skipped the budget lines and bought 6920. I thought it was worth the extra $400.
The M&P15 barrels have hard chrome bores/chambers. 1/9 works fine up to 75 grains, depending upon velocity & length. Accuracy superior to 1/7 below those weights by independent tests. Not having grenade launchers, most people can do without the mounting cut.
4140 does machine a wee bit easier than 4150, however the only time the alloy makes a difference is if you're doing endless mag dumps. The chrome lining is about 2-3 times harder than the base metal in either case.
The AR was most likely the last item purchased under the ancient "cost plus ten" standard for government contracts. That is, builders cost plus ten percent profit. There's also the factor that the originator was Fairchild Industries, a manufacturer of aircraft and aircraft parts and that the design was new.
So, you have an original source with both a habit and inclination to OCD inspection and tracking of parts being rewarded for jacking up costs. I'll also note that with modern machinery, materials and practices, the obsessive testing is of much less utility than back 60 years ago. There's also 60 odd years experience with the design, and MP inspected bolts seem to crack locking lugs just like the ones that aren't with enough use.
My apologies for straying from the OPs needs. But, we beat both types without mercy, using specific rifles for training purposes at extremely high round counts and saw no significant difference in breakage, or excessive wear. OTOH, a brand X, Y & Z examples needed replacement of barrel, BCG and entire trigger group parts at the end of a CQB cycle.
Last edited:
OP
feduncan
Member
Thanks for the input guys. I hope I'll be able to find a Colt. I don't know how long it'll be before they are more available though.
FE Duncan
FE Duncan
AManWearingAHat
Member
I would say smith and colt are not in the same league. Smith and Wesson AR's are generally a littler lower end on the features and finish than a colt would be.
THAT SAID, I firmly believe and will until I shuffle off this planet that Colt's era of being top dog in the AR-15 market has long eclipsed. There is nothing special about them anymore and they're not worth the premium to have a Pony on it. Daniel Defense, LMT, Noveske, Bravo Company, KAC, all make significantly better rifles.
THAT SAID, I firmly believe and will until I shuffle off this planet that Colt's era of being top dog in the AR-15 market has long eclipsed. There is nothing special about them anymore and they're not worth the premium to have a Pony on it. Daniel Defense, LMT, Noveske, Bravo Company, KAC, all make significantly better rifles.
the Ar-15 Junkie
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2018
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 32
Arms Unlimited
Clyde Armory
All in stock ready to ship.
I think the Smith Sport 2 is a good beater gun, good to learn the AR platform on, how to work on, modify, maintain, I have several. I would recommend it as a beginner gun.
Last edited:
sgtsandman
US Veteran
The members above have pretty much covered it. In simpler terms, think of it this way.
If you are going to use it for home defense, range shooting, and/or hunting, a S&W will serve you just fine.
If you are going to be using it to make a living on an every day basis, then get the Colt or another higher end AR.
If you are going to use it for home defense, range shooting, and/or hunting, a S&W will serve you just fine.
If you are going to be using it to make a living on an every day basis, then get the Colt or another higher end AR.
How do you know?
old tanker
Member
Yes, a year in the jungle or a year in the sandbox put a real premium on reliability under all environmental conditions. It also makes a difference if you are mounted or dismounted. I am not 100% certain a 7-3/4 pound M4 is better than a 6-1/2 pound M16A1 if the prime mover has to walk everywhere they go with everything on their back.
Bump fire mag dump on sunny day range toys, cheap is fine.
sgtsandman
US Veteran
The M4 has the advantage of a shorter barrel, which is useful for room clearing and when getting in and out of vehicles. Outside of that, the M16A1 has the advantage of lighter weight, some what better accuracy due to the full length barrel especially at longer ranges, and longer barrel life because of the rifle length gas system over the carbine length gas system. Assuming they share a 1:7 twist barrel.
cd228
Member
I carried both an M16A2 (with round hand guards) and an M4 during a 15 month tour in Iraq (not by choice, I changed duty positions). The M16 got hung up exiting a vehicle on several occasions and it's lack of optics made it slower to come on target. Additionally, it's lack of an IR laser, light (or the ability to easily mount one) and it's lack of an optic was also a noticeable during night missions. So, I for one would have gladly swapped the M16A2 for an M4 with m68 and a PEQ-4, Yes it would have been heavier, but It would have been more effective. Also, I found the adjustable stock M4 easier to shoot while wearing body armor due the length of stock vs the length of my arm (ymmv) Yes, you could put a rail, light, laser and optic (via goose neck) on the M16A2, but it would have weighted more than the M4 with similar equipment.
Yes, a 20 inch barrel provides better performance with M855 on paper, but that could have been nullified by the Angle of attack issue identified with the M855. Of course that issue was fixed with the 855A1. So the M16A2 really provided no advantage except a lighter weight, and that didn't necessarily translate into effects on a target.
That said, if I wanted a simple rifle to shoot paper targets using iron sights in broad daylights, the M16A2 would be an excellent choice. When I shot my personal 20" AR (BCM upper, STAG Lower) after that tour I was amazed how light it felt compared to my duty M4.
FWIW a COLT AR15A4 (20" with detachable carry handle and round hand guards) lists as 7.7 pounds
A COLT M16A1 reissue (20" with fixed carry handle an triangle guards ) lists at 6.37 pounds
A COLT 6920 SOCOM (14.5" SOCOM barrel (heavy) with KAC RAS and MATECH rear sight) lists at 6.95pounds. So you are have a fraction of pound difference between the two.
Last edited:
If you only have a S&W AR then you can't' say to Sailors and Equestrians from the East side of the Pond...... let's take a few Ponies out to the barn and shoot them! 
Last edited:
LostintheOzone
US Veteran
I don't think Colt plans to re-enter the civilian market, at least not anytime soon. Prices on used ones are going up well over the cost of a new one when you could get one. As soon as Colt announced no more being available to dealers they were all gone in a few days. The market is saturated with $500 AR's and many saw the Colt as overpriced, which it wasn't.
Good luck finding one.
