Comparing a colt 6920 to a Palmetto build your own kit

IMHO, The Colt LE6940 is the gold standard.

There's no question you can build a fine AR from the PSA kit. And it will definitely be cheaper.

OTOH, the Colt comes with a warranty. and if you ever sell/trade it the Colt name insures that it will hold it's value.

I would buy the Colt, no question. But that's me. You need to decide if you want just a shooter, with little resale value, or if you are willing to spend a little more for both a good shooter and a good investment.

What do you want to do with the rifle?

Personally, I don’t have use for a 6920, nor a comparable PSA kit. But I can say, given a few inexpensive, easily sourced upgrades to the PSA kit, most guys who buy these rifles would be lying to say they can tell a difference between the PSA and the Colt for function, durability, and reliability.

But some guys do have use for a mil-spec carbine - so - what do you wanna do with the rifle?

PSA is the value leader. Fit and finish may be nicer on the Colt and the Colt May have higher end components, but the PSA will last you as long as you take care of it. In fact even if yo7 abuse it, it’ll be ok based on the torture tests.

What kind of person are you? If name brands matter go Colt. Otherwise PSA is the way to go.

Once you get bored with it (see: next week), and start changing parts, the Colt will lose some of its value. Going with PSA or similar will allow you to save a little money, money which will be used next week

I first got into AR's when Colt had a monopoly. Over the past 30 years, however, AR's have become a commodity. As long as the parts follow the military specification, one brand is as good as another. If you want to pay a premium for a name, fine. I just don't think that you will necessarily be getting a better gun because of the name.

Colt's not a bad choice if one is going to leave it alone, meaning not change parts out. There is value in the name on the secondary market, however, now that the AR15 is in vogue people understand that there are a lot of manufacturers that have value. Colt gets value attributed to them because of their testing of parts, does that mean that no other manufacturers test parts? No, there are plenty out there that do their own testing.

Personally, I don't see the point in 2018 to buy a Colt, as there are much better options in my mind out there for function and form. But I'm sure this thread will be joined by those that think that paying $200 more for a Colt is worth it. As for me, I don't.

If you go with Palmetto, I would personally stick with their more premium offerings for a little bit more. Not that their 'Freedom' line isn't good, I just like the specs on their more premium offerings better.

Personally, I would look for 1:7 or 1:8 Twist, melonited 4150 barrel (mid-length gas), with a Carpenter bolt that's been MPI'd with MagPul furniture and a freefloat rail.

If you just want a few “in case”, I’d suggest spending the extra money...to buy 2 PSA lowers and a nice PSA upper.

For under $200/ea you can get their Magpul lowers with enhanced triggers, add a pair of $10 spring kits to get you under 4 lbs. pull weight, then add a $300 upper as described above and complete with an unbranded NiB Toolcraft BCG included. $700, one complete rifle, and one serialized complete lower. Adding a set of AIM Sport sights for $30 will still get you in under the price of the Colt and you can double your money on the lower if a panic ensues later or finish it off and have a pair.

Why buy a Colt when I can buy 4 PSA kits with receivers for the same $?
I like PSA's philosophy:

"Our wasn't to maximize profit our goal was to maximize freedom."


It's deals like the that are causing other major high dollar AR brands to lower their prices to compete with PSA.

Better ammo than surplus should eek out the 1-2moa you’re after from either of these rifles.

I am told I’m an AR guy (by folks who forget how many more leverguns, revolvers, and bolt guns I have), and I really can’t say I have a use for the mil-spec 16” carbine. They sell well because they are cheap, but as @badkarmamib mentioned above - most of those guys lose interest in them quickly as the novelty of going semi-rattletrap and burning ammo for the sake of making noise wears off. I’m not a parts or brand snob when it comes to AR’s - but I am a bit of a barrel snob. A cheap PSA kit OR the colt (or enter your preferred brand of low cost, mil-spec carbine here), converted to free float, given a proper barrel and a proper trigger, and a little TLC and if you didn’t see sub-moa groups with 100% reliability, it’s not the rifle.

What Colt does right which some might say is wrong in other brands: they run a heavy buffer, and a dang-good extractor spring. Very inexpensive parts which can be added to any AR. Everything else is really the same. I wouldn’t pay $200 extra just for $45 in improved parts.

IT's interesting that people will admit that the Colt 6920 is the "gold standard," but they'll also say most shooters can't tell the difference between it and a much cheaper kit gun. I've handled a few PSA carbines, but I don't have specific experience with them. I have, however, owned a number of cheaper-brand ARs and kit builds (Rock River, Aero Precision, Olympic, Model 1, Spike's), and I can seriously see differences in quality compared to my Colt or LMT ARs. Of all the other brands I've owned, Spike's was the best of the lot and likely on par with the Colt. The others all had one problem or another all the time. I'm not sure where PSA falls on the spectrum, but I'd go with the admitted gold standard if I were looking for a serious defensive carbine.

I'd point you toward PSA. You can get the freedom rifle (16" carbine) for $349 shipped almost anyday in a few different colors if you like. Sometimes you can actually snag it for $299. (Talking separate upper and lower). Oh, and PSA has a lifetime warranty... I think colt ends after a couple years.

The colt is nice but so is the psa. Read reviews and sift out the snobs... you'll get a good picture.

Like everyone else has said, it depends what you want to do with it. If it's just a plinker, there's nothing wrong with a $299 PSA kit, and a Colt's not really going to do anything that it won't for $500 more.

A Colt's an easy way to get a duty-grade gun out of the box without messing with anything, but if you don't need a duty-grade gun or you're fine messing with things, there's better options available.

If you're just plinking, I suppose a PSA will be fine. If you actually plan on taking high round count classes and training, using it for duty and home defense, Colt.

My agency issued me a Bushmaster because at the time a captain was over the firearms program and thought they were great guns. Once I got on our SWAT team I bought a 6920 and handed the Bushmaster back.

We've improved our equipment and now SWAT and patrol are issued SOLGW rifles, just configured differently.

This forum is not the best place to ask this question if you are considering a duty/service grade carbine made for fighting. Nothing against the membership here, but this crowd is mostly older and recreational shooting oriented. Which is awesome because the knowledge base for many other firearms related topics is available where a more specialized forum will be more limited in scope.

At any given time with a bit of searching you can find all sorts of threads where a member here has decided they are a qualified armorer, and built a rifle themselves from cheap parts. You will notice that a lot of these are trouble shooting threads. This phenomenon is conveniently ignored (cognitive dissonance perhaps?) by the home build fans.

Rather than argue with this crowd, I will suggest a few alternative sources of information. For starters check out M4Carbine.net, a lot of current and former .mil users, plus a lot of industry professionals from experienced armorers, instructors, and manufacturer employees. For AR/M4 knowledge of what works, or doesn’t work look for posts by member: Iraqgunz. He runs Semper Paratus Arms and teaches armorer classes, and has some close associations with SIONICS Weapon Systems. He will probably not have a lot of kind things to say about QA/QC at PSA... you can also find videos of him on YouTube his name is Will Larson.

Also watch this podcast:

Very informative. Warning salty language in video.

The 6920 is, in my opinion, the easy button of AR’s. They’ve got a track record for reliability, their barrels are accurate to be non free floated and chrome lined, and they have a reputation for getting things like gas port diameter right. I’d get the 6920, myself.

Colt doesn't warrant their guns for steel cased ammo, or at least they didn't a couple of years ago when I was looking at them. I like blasting thru thousands of rounds of cheapo steel ammo so I skipped the Colt and went with Spikes. I don't want a snoooty finnicky battle rife --- I want it to eat what I feed it. Now that gun has been parted out into a couple others. PSA, bear creek and others have such ridiculously cheap deals that you may as well jump on the $200 complete upper packages just to see if you like it.

Some people really do covet their Colts or whichever brand their favorite “former operator” is shilling for. Me, I’d go to war with what I have and I’d make sure it ran well ahead of time, but hey, I’m just an old recreational shooter as is typical of this forum with no serious wartime experience using genuine battle rifles.

Lots of straw man arguments against other brands or sample of one or look what happened when a guy with no experience assembled a rifle from bargain parts but that doesn’t lead us to facts. I used to rib Glock owners with the fact that Gaston Glock’s manufacturing experience previous to firearms was making plastic coat hangers. It wasn’t personal but they took it hard despite plenty of evidence that Glock made a very reliable pistol.

Heck Sig stepped into the AR arena and was awarded a bigger share of the DEA contract than Colt. RRA’s share of that same contract was nearly as big as Colt’s and unlike Colt they didn’t need a do over (all 3 submitted Colt rifles broke during testing and new samples were submitted for replacement).

That’s going back some 15 years and during that time plenty of manufacturers have stepped up to supply excellent ARs, some at a much better price point. Some build a reputation then lose it and others continue to solidify their hold. Whatever you chose buy 2 because my favorite trainer says “1 is none and 2 is 1”.

minutemen1776 said:

IT's interesting that people will admit that the Colt 6920 is the "gold standard," but they'll also say most shooters can't tell the difference between it and a much cheaper kit gun. I've handled a few PSA carbines, but I don't have specific experience with them. I have, however, owned a number of cheaper-brand ARs and kit builds (Rock River, Aero Precision, Olympic, Model 1, Spike's), and I can seriously see differences in quality compared to my Colt or LMT ARs. Of all the other brands I've owned, Spike's was the best of the lot and likely on par with the Colt. The others all had one problem or another all the time. I'm not sure where PSA falls on the spectrum, but I'd go with the admitted gold standard if I were looking for a serious defensive carbine.

Click to expand...

I put a lot of rounds through a PSA 16" middy and I liked it a lot. But the first range session I had with a Colt 6920, I found I liked it better. It shoots more consistently. Recoil was smoother, felt right and was quicker to get back on target. Ejection was more consistent. It wasn't just one Colt. Every Colt I've shot, I noticed the same thing.

I tore down a 6920 to clean out all the factory preservative and swap the barrel and RE. The parts fit together better on the Colt than they did on my PSA. The PSA needed work done to the feed ramps and the extractor spring replaced before it would run right. However, once the problems were ironed out, it never gave any more trouble. It just didn't didn't feel as good as the Colt when shooting it. I think spring quality has a lot to do with it.

Subjective, yes. For me, the price difference is worth it to go from a PSA to a Colt. I don't mind swapping out the barrel or changing the upper to a free float tube. I can get more money parting out a Colt than I can selling it whole.

If you do get an AR that gives you trouble, don't worry. They're easy to trouble-shoot if you know what you're doing and the solution is usually simple. The good thing about ARs is that once you get one sorted out, they stay sorted out.

As one of the older, recreational shooters on this here forum, who happens to also be a military veteran with a lot of time behind a Colt M16 A2, I can say that I would take my PSA M16 A2 clone into battle tomorrow.

minutemen1776 said:

IT's interesting that people will admit that the Colt 6920 is the "gold standard," but they'll also say most shooters can't tell the difference between it and a much cheaper kit gun. I've handled a few PSA carbines, but I don't have specific experience with them. I have, however, owned a number of cheaper-brand ARs and kit builds (Rock River, Aero Precision, Olympic, Model 1, Spike's), and I can seriously see differences in quality compared to my Colt or LMT ARs. Of all the other brands I've owned, Spike's was the best of the lot and likely on par with the Colt. The others all had one problem or another all the time. I'm not sure where PSA falls on the spectrum, but I'd go with the admitted gold standard if I were looking for a serious defensive carbine.

Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on what you’ve noticed with respect to the “differences in quality”? Not saying it’s the case with your statement, but I have interacted with people who say that they can tell a difference between X and Y, but do not provide specifics, leading me to question whether the claim is legitimate or just unsubstantiated rhetoric.

I say this as someone who owns or has carried rifles and/or builds assembled from the following: Colt, FN, Bushmaster, Rock River, PSA, Aero Precision, and Anderson. I have found that any substantial differences are generally with respect to fit/finish with Aero being exemplary, followed by Rock River, FN, Colt, and then Bushmaster/PSA/Anderson. I have found that when a rifle is assembled correctly and with parts in spec, the reliability is generally the same across the board. Colt has a proven track record in the military, law enforcement, and civilian sectors. The confidence inspired by its track record as well as its resale value are factors that would sway me towards Colt if everything else was even.

Colt assembly is often not as neat as what a meticulous individual assembler can do. I'll give you an example -- the bolt catch pin. Anyone who's assembled an AR-15 knows that it's tricky to drive that pin in without marring the lower receiver. The assemblers at Colt traditionally haven't seemed to care. They drive that pin in willy-nilly and then put a dab of black paint to cover the nick in the lower receiver. In fact collectors have come to see that dab of black paint as a sign that a Colt gun is still in its pristine original condition. In the case of a transferable M16, this could add hundreds of dollars to the market value.

giggitygiggity said:

Can you elaborate on what you’ve noticed with respect to the “differences in quality”?

Click to expand...

That's a fair question. Here's a bit of my experience with various brands. Of course, all this involves a sample size of just one or two rifles, so your mileage may vary.

Aero Precision: I had high hopes for AP. I loved the finish on the ones I looked at locally, and I got a deal on a midlength carbine from Brownells in mid-2016. True to expectations, mine had an excellent finish, in fact one of the nicest finishes I've ever seen on an AR. Unfortunately, the the plastic handguards were molded poorly, producing sharp edges that needed to be lightly sanded. That's no big deal, especially since many will only replace the basic handguard anyway. Unfortunately, the upper had a canted front sight, which I'd only seen before on AKs. Even with optics, the barrel was poor. Groups from a rest with the AP were larger than standing offhand groups from my other rifles.

Model 1/Olympic: Many years ago, when I was just getting into ARs and there weren't nearly as many manufacturers on the scene, I built two rifles using Model 1 kits on Olympic lowers. The pin holes on both lowers were apparently out of spec, because I consistently had issues with walking pins. One rifle also had a defective trigger return spring. The other had a chipped firing pin. Neither would run steel-cased ammo until I replaced the BCGs with new ones from Daniel Defense. One positive was that the E.R. Shaw barrels used by Model 1 were pretty accurate.

Rock River: This was also a while back. I recall that it was generally OK, but I also periodically had stoppages. I remember the aggravation, but I seriously cannot recall the specific issue.

Spike's: I had two of these. Both were superb, and I should have kept them, but I downsized a number of years ago and both Spike's rifles went out my door.

CMMG (not mentioned previously): This one was a dedicated 9mm carbine. It was phenomenally accurate. However, I had quality issues with both the trigger return and bolt hold open springs. The receiver extension (buffer tube) was also out of spec and did not properly capture the buffer retainer pin even when fully screwed into the lower receiver. Unfortunately, I learned this when the retainer pin came loose during a range session and jammed my BCG half in and half out of the receiver extension. That was a fun fix!

Colt/LMT/BCM: Not a single problem with any of these brands, EVER.