S&W, Ruger, Colt, which AR-15?

[Bullet Bob]

"I have the first generation of the M&P 15 Sport... nothing fancy and not milspec, but a fine rifle."

Was that the one without the forward assist? Man, I wish I would have bought one. By the time I found out about them (yeah, I'm a little slow) they had moved on to the Sport II with the forward assist. I sort of looked for one for a few years, but all I saw had been modified in one way or another, and that's not for me.

Now I've quit buying guns (if I tell myself that often enough maybe it will come true).

 

[Rastoff]

Daniel Defense, LMT, LWRCI, LaRue, Noveske, BCM, Colt, Ranier, KAC, and a few others (Sig, POF, HK, etc.) are what would be considered 100% milspec 'Professional/Operator Grade' rifles/carbines.

Yet, I'll bet none of them are really "mill spec" guns. That term gets thrown out a lot, but rarely is true. For example, if none of them have a BURST selection, are they really "mill spec"?

 

[Ackley1952]

Does this mean the term mil-spec is meaningless? I take it no improvements have been made since Eugene Stoner was a pup?

 

[Luger9x19]

Does this mean the term mil-spec is meaningless? I take it no improvements have been made since Eugene Stoner was a pup?

I wouldn't say meaningless. Mil-spec just means built to military specifications as to material, strength, durability and cost. Doesn't necessarily mean the best or most durable. Certainly something can be made better than Mil-spec.

 

[MCQUADE]

Colt 6920 or A4 rifle, Bravo Company (BCM), Barnes Precision, FN. All are gtg. I suggest building your own so that you have a working knowledge of the system.

 

[Ackley1952]

So those companies were awarded those contracts because they were the low bidder and the companies that weren't awarded the contract probably used better materials in their offerings??

 

[Luger9x19]

So those companies were awarded those contracts because they were the low bidder and the companies that weren't awarded the contract probably used better materials in their offerings??

I don't know all that goes into the military selecting a contractor. I am sure cost is a factor, but manufacturing capacity, ability to meet deadlines and consistency are likely a part of the equation.

Also, sometimes several vendors are chosen. Mil-spec helps to ensure that all vendors are meeting the same specification the military requires.

 

[cyphertext]

"I have the first generation of the M&P 15 Sport... nothing fancy and not milspec, but a fine rifle."

Was that the one without the forward assist? Man, I wish I would have bought one. By the time I found out about them (yeah, I'm a little slow) they had moved on to the Sport II with the forward assist. I sort of looked for one for a few years, but all I saw had been modified in one way or another, and that's not for me.

Now I've quit buying guns (if I tell myself that often enough maybe it will come true).

Yes sir, no forward assist, no ejection port cover, 1:8 twist 5R barrel... People bashed it left and right until enough of them got out in the wild and were put to use.

 

[cyphertext]

Does this mean the term mil-spec is meaningless? I take it no improvements have been made since Eugene Stoner was a pup?

When describing civilian rifles, yes, it is meaningless. If it weren't, Colt would be pushing the term hard, yet they admit that the civilian rifles are not "mil-spec"... If it isn't built for Uncle Sam and doesn't go through a final inspection by a DOD inspector, it isn't "mil-spec".


Quoted from American Rifleman | The MilSpec Definition
"Colt and FN are the only two government contract holders building the M4 and M4A1, which is the latest, most "tacti-cool" version of the AR. According to Colt, who ought to know, there is no such thing as a commercial AR that is MilSpec, even if most of the parts are identical to MilSpec parts being used in Colt's M4s and M4A1s that are delivered to the government.

Now if anyone has a vested interest in making you believe that their ARs are MilSpec, it would be Colt. After all, the M16 and M4 are built used Colt's Technical Data Package (TDP) which is a complex combination of know-how, proprietary techniques, fixtures and proprietary information that the historic manufacturer developed over decades of production. Even FN, their competitor, is required by contract to use Colt's TDP.

Yet Colt is the first to admit that their commercial ARs are not MilSpec! I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that you now have your second and final piece of conclusive evidence that there is no such thing as a MilSpec AR."

 

[cyphertext]

This is fun. We haven't had a "rabbit hole" thread for some time.

We haven't had much for threads in some time!

 

[GRT3031]

I have a Colt 6920 and a Frankengun A4 I put together with a Fulton Armory lower and a 20" Bushmaster contract overrun meant for the new Iraqi Army. I have a 2 stage RRA NM trigger in it. Iron sights off of a bag 5 rounds under an inch at 100 yards. 1/7 inch twist on both weapons. The safety on the commercial colt is manipulated too easily, wipes on and off like butter. I sent it in for repair, and their answer was to install an ambi- safety. That didn't solve the problem. Also, I zero'd the Colt using the irons and the 25M zero, then fired it at distance 100M, 200M, 250M, and 300M with 62 grain ball. The trajectories were the same as the book says. I would cherry pick a Colt, my experience is their QC is not that great. You'll find trigger pulls vary from heavy, creepy, gritty, to crisp.

I'd like a mid length with the longer sight radius. 1/7 is good for the 62 grain bullet weight, the 1/12 55 grain, the 1/9 supposed to work well with both the weights.....

Supposedly the 1/7 was developed to stabilize the longer tracer rounds, witch makes no sense considering the main round is 62 grain FMJ ball, but its the US Military, why would it make sense.

Will you mount some kind of optic on it?

I would give the FN a hard look.

Will you hunt anything with it? Pigs?

 

[Hapworth]

What has been your experience with the Expanse? How did you find it lacking?

No time on or for the Expanse -- I like and recommend firearms (and their components) that are known and proven; the 6920 is that, the Expanse is not.

 

[Riverboys]

I am no expert.
I own a Ruger and it does a fine job slaying the paper Zombies that frequent the areas I target shoot.
I was curious about twist rate so I checked the specs, for what its worth;

"The 1:8" twist rate stabilizes bullets from 35 to 77 grains, and the 5.56 NATO chamber allows the use of both 5.56 NATO and .223 Rem. Ammunition. M4 feed ramps provide improved operational reliability,"

I have a friend with the Smith and he likes it just fine.
As always, it may come down to price.

Let us know what you buy!

 

[louisq]

.

I don't think the OP implied "mil-spec... Considering that he asked about Colt, as well as S&W and Ruger, seems he is looking for value as well.

Spot on, thanks.

 

[louisq]

Just because you buy a DPMS stamped lower, doesn't mean you have a DPMS rifle

My posts aren't meant to say buy a Ford over a Chevy (even if we all know Ford is better), my posts are meant to give him a start with relation to what he's looking for.

Thanks but unless that's sarcasm, you lost me.

 

[louisq]

This is fun. We haven't had a "rabbit hole" thread for some time.

I've never purchased an AR in a fully built condition. I've always pieced them together. Mostly due to expense, but also due to wanting what I want. Even so, I've been around a lot of ARs and seen almost every manufacture in operation.

When it comes to S&W, Colt and Ruger, there is no difference in quality. They are all good, reliable guns. You'll pay more for a Colt, but I don't think you're really getting a better gun. This is debatable of course.

No one here is going to Afghanistan with a gun they're buying as a civilian. Even in the most difficult and demanding training and competitions, all of these guns will perform as intended.

My vote is for the S&W. Why? Because it's probably less expensive and has the best warranty; if you have a problem, they'll fix it and shipping is free.

That's my vote, but I've found that it's more important for a buyer to get the one that speaks to them. So, which is rising to the top for you louisq? By getting that one, there is less chance of buyer's remorse. It will be the one you want to fondle and thereby, will be the one you'll become most familiar with. This will make you a better shooter.

Then buy another one.

S&W after hours of reading opinions. If I were convinced the Colt or adding $500 would make for a better out of the box... Seemd like starting with a finished shootable base and growing from there is wise. And yes, I've experienced SW support. Amazing. Given the current state of business acumen.

 

[louisq]

FN 15® Patrol Carbine.

How is it an improvement? I can buy what I want. I just have no experience beyond Ruger rifles and a dozen revolvers and various 9mm arms. Remember we marched with 1903 Springfield's and our sisters bell bottoms. I can patch yer butt up in short order but no sense as a rifleman. So I'm here surrounded by experience. I'd like to build but it'd never get done. I'd like a base to grow on. But I'd like it to be reasonably battle ready.

(Original U.S. WWII Parris-Dunn Corp 1903 Mark I USN Training Rifle)

 

[Rastoff]

So those companies were awarded those contracts because they were the low bidder and the companies that weren't awarded the contract probably used better materials in their offerings??

No, this is not how the acquisition system works. People love to say that it goes to the lowest bidder, but it's far more complicated than that.

Seemd like starting with a finished shootable base and growing from there is wise.

It is indeed wise. I agree that just getting a gun and learning how to shoot it is a great way to get started. This way you're sure to have something that you can have fun with at the range right away. Then, later, if you want to explore the vagaries of building an AR, you can do that too.

 

[amazingflapjack]

I would choose a pistol caliber carbine with a foldable light weight stock.

 

[cyphertext]

FN 15® Patrol Carbine.

How is it an improvement? I can buy what I want. I just have no experience beyond Ruger rifles and a dozen revolvers and various 9mm arms. Remember we marched with 1903 Springfield's and our sisters bell bottoms. I can patch yer butt up in short order but no sense as a rifleman. So I'm here surrounded by experience. I'd like to build but it'd never get done. I'd like a base to grow on. But I'd like it to be reasonably battle ready.

(Original U.S. WWII Parris-Dunn Corp 1903 Mark I USN Training Rifle)

I just looked up the FN and it says for LE sales only...

My advice would be to decide what features you want, and buy as close to what you want out of the box. For example, if you want one with a free float rail system, don't buy a rifle with the standard fixed front sight... buy one with the rail system out of the box. If you know that you are going to put an optic on it and never shoot iron sights, consider an optics ready model that doesn't have sights. I wouldn't get wrapped around the axle about twist rates, barrel steel, etc., just know that Colt, BCM, FN will get you a rifle made comparable to what the troops carry, but for the same money, S&W, Ruger, or Springfield Armory will give you more features out of the box typically, or a basic model for considerably less.