Best to Worst AR15 list

[proven]

Hell for the price of one i can throw two good guns in my truck and if a part does break throw it away and grab another.

lloyd- some leos depend on their guns to work when in harms way. having a spare gun isn't practical and even if it were, in the time it takes you to grab the spare you could be dead.

by your logic, the military should drop the TDP and just issue 2 olys to every soldier.

[Joe Demko]

Does anybody keep track of how many "crap" Ar-15's complete a carbine course, or are we only hearing about the ones that the instructors remember breaking?

If 1000 guys with crap AR's take the course and two of their guns break, whereas only one of 1000 x-heavy guns breaks, that gives the crap guns twice the failure rate of the x-heavy brand. It also means that 998 guns, or 99.8% of the guns, completed the course. Now, if I tell you "****!!!! If you buy that crap gun you are doubling your chances that it'll fail when you need it!!!11!!" I am telling you the truth, but I am also spinning things by giving you only very partial information.
Do low end guns fail more? Possibly. I want to know how much more. You can keep telling me how great Mr. Rogers is (I don't know him except by reputation and he sounds like a heck of an instructor), but that only tells me how great Mr. Rogers is. It still doesn't give me any handle on how great or small the difference between the rifles is.

Edited to add: We saw a huge amount of exactly this kind of lying with numbers a couple years ago when the .gov tested the M-16 against several other rifles in a mock sandstorm. The AR-haters used the results to "prove" what a POS the M-16 is, even though the differences between rifles were tiny.

[Shooter88]

Using your argument that taking the advice of people in the know is irrelevant without in-depth statistical analysis, I should completely disregard the experience of every professional mechanic I've ever met and throw around the claim that cheap Chinese-made tools from Wal-mart are just as good as Snap-On until someone does a ten million dollar study on the quality of mechanics' tools.

Again, if it is a known fact that product X is made to inferior specs compared to product Y, how can you possibly think product X is going to work just as well as product Y?

[Lloyd Smale]

proven im not a law enforcement officer and never will be one. I will never again be a soldier and if I would have been issued a new rra dpms bushy or oly instead of some of the crap we got issued in the service i would have been in heaven. I still say alot more ars break in storys on the internet that guys use to justify there expensive ars that actuallly does happen in real life. Id also doubt if the avearge ar that a police dept purchase sees much more then a 1000 rounds in its lifetime.

[Joe Demko]

Again, if it is a known fact that product X is made to inferior specs compared to product Y, how can you possibly think product X is going to work just as well as product Y?

I never said anything of the kind. You are the one claiming it won't. Now show me the proof.

[proven]

lloyd- that of course depends on the dept. certain leos and swat members generally like to train on a regular basis and attend carbine courses and matches accordingly.

a rra or oly being better than what was issued to you back in the day doesn't negate the fact that those are built to current mil-spec. current mil-spec is a direct result of the experiences that were learned from early on in the m16/m4s history.

[proven]

joe- read post #100 at the end of page 4.

[Lloyd Smale]

id about be that theres not a police dept in the US that issues Noveske and i would seriously doubt if theres one that will allow a officer to carry his own personal ar in the field. I know for a fact your not going to be allowed to as a soldier so that kind of blows the arguement that a law enforcement officer is going to want a higher level gun. they use what the dept issues. Usually a colt or a bushmaster or stag.

[proven]

lloyd- i can't speak as to whether any depts. issue noveske, but plenty allow officers to procure their own patrol carbine. some depts only require you to have it approved by the dept armorer, others are a bit more strict in what they allow regarding both brand, and features. even the certain military units allow a bit more lateral movement from the standard issue weapon.

[rob_s]

i would seriously doubt if theres one that will allow a officer to carry his own personal ar in the field.

they use what the dept issues. Usually a colt or a bushmaster or stag.

What experience do you have that leads you to these conclusions?

[rob_s]

Claims sans testing are unsubtantiated claims. "x parts/rifles are better" is a non-starter unless you can define "better" and quantify how much better. The chart is your work, I know, and you_no doubt_have a huge emotional investment in it. Until there is data to quantify how much better "x" is than "no x" your chart remains a guide for how to spend more money.

No, better is better. Just because you refuse to understand what makes one thing better than another, or don't care to spend the money to have better, doesn't mean better isn't better.

Quit getting hung up on the Chart itself, read the explanation of features, and decide for yourself whether those features are for you or not. Buy, or don't buy, based on at least educating yourself first.

Determine your need.
Educate yourself on the product.
Find a product that meets your need.
Buy accordingly.

It really is just that simple.

[helz_mcfugly]

the LEO's here in my home town, who most of I went to school with and I also shoot with from time to time, get to choose their own carbine (of which they have to pay for and get approved or they get department issue if they are part of SWAT), shotgun (of which they have to pay for and get approved or get department issue), & sidearm (of which they get a department issue they get to sellect out of a few models and also get to carry their own if it is approved). but thats here on the first county outside Dallas county. I cant speak for other destricts.

[Joe Demko]

"Better is better" is meaningless in terms of real world performance until you quantify it.

[proven]

Determine your need.
Educate yourself on the product.
Find a product that meets your need.
Buy accordingly.

excellent advice, and not just regarding firearms.

unfortunately it seems as though some people don't bother to educate themselves, buy the first one that "looks nice", and is readily available and priced comfortably. then when someone points out that there are better options available, they feel insulted, get defensive and try their hardest to convince themselves and others that theirs is "just as good".

this too happens in other realms not pertaining to firearms.

[proven]

joe- have you read my post #100 yet? i find it very telling how you bring up "appeal to authority" to try and justify your argument, yet leave out very important aspects of the phrase.

as others have mentioned, "appeal to authority" is valid in many cases where there is no hard statistical data.

"Better is better" is meaningless in terms of real world performance until you quantify it.

actually in "real world performance" there is no need to quantify anything. if one thing performs better than another, most reasonable people would agree that it's better. plain and simple. take knives for example, there are so many aspects to a quality knife, that it's very hard to pinpoint what exactly in one blade makes it perform better than another. often it's a combination of several things. but if one blade performs cutting tests better than another, there's no mistaking who the winner is. you could argue until you're blue in the face about which particular detail made it better and again you'd have to conduct very long and expensive testing to prove it. but the simple fact is that one blade performed "better" than the other in the "real world".

now, knives are like firearms in that there is no "one" tool that performs every task to optimum levels. each blade is a compromise. some do very well in certain tasks and others outperform those in other tasks. this is why it's important for one to educate themselves on the product, what they need, and which product has the features that will allow it to perform to their criteria. this is where the chart really comes in to it's own. it's a compilation of features deemed necessary (by the military) for an m4 style fighting gun. these features are what the military has found to be necessary to allow the weapon to perform reliably (i.e BETTER than those without). if someone wants a reliable fighting m4 style weapon (for whatever reason), this is a valuable list of bare minimum features that should be included. if you educate yourself and find that some of the features are not vital to your criteria for said weapon, then by all means pass them up.

[helz_mcfugly]

Determine your need.
Educate yourself on the product.
Find a product that meets your need.
Buy accordingly.

couldnt have said it better.

proven. my guitar is better then yours by the way. >

[Inspector]

Quote:
Determine your need.
Educate yourself on the product.
Find a product that meets your need.
Buy accordingly.

couldnt have said it better.

proven. my guitar is better then yours by the way. >

My Tenor Sax is better than both of your guitars combined.

[helz_mcfugly]

im not sure he even plays. I was just kickin dirt around

[Joe Demko]

"Better" is a meaningless term until you can quantify it. I'm done responding until I start seeing some hard data. My ego isn't caught in a particular brand of gun nor in authorship of a chart. Put up or shut up.

[proven]

helz- i don't have a guitar, but if i did i'd still recognize two things-

1) it may not be the best, but it's what works for me.
2) spending a boatload of cash doesn't make my playing any better.

i like your tunes by the way

[helz_mcfugly]

TIDBIT OF DATA

Within the bolt, it's interesting to note a point of failure in the AR-15 system. The extractor springs in most AR15 bolt assemblies are fairly weak, and this can lead to various extraction-related failures. One of the few high points about Colt assemblies is their usage of higher strength extractor springs. You can tell the difference by looking at the inner plastic insert. "Normal" springs feature a blue plastic insert, Colt strong springs have a black insert.

[proven]

"Better" is a meaningless term until you can quantify it. I'm done responding until I start seeing some hard data. My ego isn't caught in a particular brand of gun nor in authorship of a chart. Put up or shut up.

not responding but i'll bet you're still reading.
your ego is caught up in the idea that somehow you're a scientist and know more than others with exponentially greater experience.

i didn't author the chart, and i could care less about brand. i am however smart enough to know that all things aren't equal and i'm man enough to admit when i don't have something as nice as someone else's.

i'll take the highroad and ignore your last sentence.

[helz_mcfugly]

proven, if you did want to get a guitar I recomend the {BC Rich "Helz McFugly" signiture series Bich}.
http://oork.com/ktwwy
they are only $800. plus I get royalties so buy two.
and thanks for listening to muh tunes. you have no idea hom much I miss that lifestyle, it was like a close friend dieing when I retired.

[Inspector]

I am completely satisfied with it. I did some research on the "properly staked gas key" syndrome.

I dismantled my gun. I compared photos of properly-staked gas keys off Google to the way mine is staked.

I immediately could see that there was an "attempt" by Bushmaster to stake the key, however the indentations did not extend into the two screws. I could have probably removed the screws, although I'm quite sure with a bit of effort as the metal was pinged up against the sides of the screw heads.

I ended up "staking" them myself to be a bit more like the way the photograph showed they should be.

Then that had me wondering, really, how poorly-made is my Bushmaster? When I thought about it, and considered what I use it for (mainly deer and black bear hunting with 62g Barnes X bullets), the gun is reliable enough for my needs.

Now, if I were on the front lines in Iraq, I may reconsider, but I hope I'm never on any front lines, unless it is in the band with my saxophone.

Check these:
http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/ar-talk...15-faqs-4.html
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=11971
http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum...read.php?t=410
http://www.ar15armory.com/forums/The...&mode=threaded

[ugaarguy]

"Better" is a meaningless term until you can quantify it. I'm done responding until I start seeing some hard data. My ego isn't caught in a particular brand of gun nor in authorship of a chart. Put up or shut up.

I'll play. The US Military has done extensive testing, development, and research on the M-16 / M-4 rifles and carbines. The Technical Data Package (TDP) states what the minimum requirements are for an M-16 or M-4 that will go into combat. The TDP is the minimum standard that the US Military will accept for a fighting rifle. If you want hard data make a public records request to see the numbers that lead them to put those standards in the TDP. I could care less what the numbers are; I trust that everything in the TDP is there for good reason, because if it wasn't needed they'd remove it and cut costs. Ball's in your court.