AR-15 ''Tiers'' (brands)

[Girodin]

I have never understood how or why people get upset at the chart. It is a source of information stating what features are standard on various makes. That can be valuable information. It is of course important to understand the how and why of those features. Some may not need or want them depending on their use.

Hating a spread sheet of info strikes me as very very odd unless you have a reason to not want the information disseminated.

 

[RP88]

Easy to whine and say stuff like that. If you KNOW it put it out for everyone to see.

Put up or shut up.

Typical snobbery. Despite defending the purpose of the chart multiple times, it boils down to this against me: I'm all of a sudden against it because I see it as a tad out of date or possibly inaccurate for two models/mfgrs. Take yourself elsewhere.

A simply look on DPMS' and CMMG's site is proof enough, I'd say. CMMG has said directly and lists that their barrel steel is milspec. they list it as "milspec certified 4150 CMV". Pretty much the same thing as 11595E last time I checked; when the whole issue of "milspec barrel steel" first came up during the birth of the chart, there was a crapstorm over it, and a lot of the makers listed or were listed as using "4150 CMV" or something to that extent (LMT being the exception with "M249"). There's one good example.

Hating a spread sheet of info strikes me as very very odd unless you have a reason to not want the information disseminated.

Some people don't like hearing how their gun that they didn't pay top-dollar for, but still walked away with a terrific gun at a great price, isn't good enough to survive the rigors of combat. They see the all-blue columns by Colt, BCM, DD, LMT, and Noveske and think to themselves: "well, I still think my DPMS can hold up, blah blah blah...I still wouldn't hesitate to take it to a carbine class, etc." Basically your typical d***-measuring contest, and you came out the loser, but try to flip it and say its bigger when you measure it in metric.

The main thing the chart shows is minimum quality control. A Colt, etc. was made in a way to guarantee that it is as close to 100% quality as possible.

Does a batch-tested barrel or bolt mean less quality? Usually not. It just wasn't individually tested, but came from a batch where everything seemed fine to where the manufacturers trusted to put it into a rifle.

Now, proper staking of the gas key, shot-peening, the spring insert, and barrel steel DO make a huge, undeniable difference, depending on what the gun is meant for, as those pretty much set the bar for what the gun is going to be able to do.

 

[gyvel]

I take it that this chart doesn't evaluate companies that just make lowers, such as Kaiser Defense?

 

[Dr.Rob]

Back before the M-4 and 'the chart' people USED to say "ABCD"

Armalite, Bushmaster, Colt, DPMS. Anything else on the market was shady.

Now that everybody and his brother in law makes an AR it is important to have SOME sort of side by side comparison. I'm not saying you can't tell a Noveske from a Hesse, but I certainly appreciate the side by side looks at Charles Daly, Smith and Wesson, Rock River and others. Para Ordnance is now shipping an AR and so is Ruger how do they stack up?

Not all AR's are created equal. Meaning if you want a varminter or a dedicated high power match rifle or utility carbine you need to compare apples to apples. That chart was designed to compare other rifles TO THE COLT which had all the proprietary features of the M4. It's weighted at the start.

 

[strambo]

The problem with "M4-type" AR's is they all look the same (the same as the military M4 made by Colt) Well, I get one issued, I don't really know what makes it "milspec", I know it is gas operated, 1/7 twist, 5.56, magazine fed with a max effective range of...etc. blah, blah.

This does me no good in trying to replicate that for myself with a personally owned AR. A Hesse "M4" looks like an Oly, looks like a Colt 6520. I would expect any private AR I own to either be able to perform like my issue M4...OR...I want to know exactly where, why, and how it is different (better or worse).

"The Chart" along with lots of research did that for me. I know exactly what I bought, how it differs from the TDP and what it's potential weaknesses and advantages are.

Without the chart or similar info (especially the feature descriptions), I would have thought RRA or Bushmaster the equivalent of Colt minus a premium for name brand. The main difference being extras like rails etc.

There is nothing wrong with any AR, depends on value, features and intended use. Why buy a $2500 Knight's when an Oly would do all you want it to? Or an $1800 Noveske SPR type to plink prairie dogs when a RRA varmit model would do it as good (maybe better?) for 1/2 the price?

That OLY might not let you get your $'s worth out of a 5 day carbine course though (but hey, it might)...but that isn't to say it would fail putting 2 in the chest of a home intruder...

Being able to withstand the heat and beating of high round counts in short amounts of time, isn't the same as being able to provide reliable service for years and years at a typical user sedate rate of fire of a couple hundred (if that) a month.

 

[MarineOne]

I realize this might be old info, but I keep reading that "any" M16 part in an AR makes that AR a "machine gun" per the BATFE. This is supposed to include the BCG, safety selector, hammer, trigger, and disconnector. Is this still valid info or is it just a crock?


I'm going to be rebuilding my Bushmaster next year and most of the parts I'm going to use will be as close to mil-spec as possible, and I really don't want the Feds to knock down my house just to get through the front door.




Kris

 

[strambo]

The M16 BCG making it a "machinegun" is a crock. The lower receiver parts are a whole 'nuther matter. I don't know if they all are verboten, but I wouldn't mess with any of them. No need to anyway.

Really, the barrel, BCG, buffer/spring, good quality receiver extension and staking the castle nut would make it GTG. check the receiver for M4 ramps or not and get the correct barrel to go with it, or get ramps in your upper receiver.

Might be easier/more cost effective to just sell the upper and put that $$ towards a BCM (or similar quality) upper. Put on a different stock if you want and stake the castle nut if it concerns you (it's really easy, took me 5 mins).

 

[RP88]

I take it that this chart doesn't evaluate companies that just make lowers, such as Kaiser Defense?

No. It mainly pertains to the upper if anything, unless they also build the rest of the actual lower (stock, extension, staking, etc.). It also pertains to companies that build a whole firearm. There are also other models out there that are just plain new and no one has the time or money to figure out where they stand. Some companies also do not like to disclose information on how they build a gun. I'm pretty sure a lot of them know Rob_s because they got an e-mail from him asking by now, or at least have heard about his chart by now, and I can bet that a lot of them would like to remain as secretive as possible in order to hide any shortcuts that would show up on it.

 

[strambo]

It's kinda like the home fitness equipment field. My dad burns through typical home use quality stair steppers etc...because he actually uses them! The typical consumer buys something, uses it for 2 weeks, it collects dust, then sell it years later at a garage sale.

So...higher quality equipment is advertised as "Health Cub Quality" or something like that, and is built more robust to take much more frequent use and costs twice as much. On the outside, they look pretty much the same though.

 

[frankd4]

Rock river

I have a Colt and two Rock Rivers the Rock rivers shoot Titer groups at a hundred yards and are a lot more forgiving about dirt they do not get jammed up over not being cleaned. It’s all about what you can afford you don’t have to spend a lot of money to get a decent AR, I recently picked up a Spike for a truck gun lots of bang for the buck. Get what works for you forget charts or what people whom are getting paid write in gunrags.

 

[RedAlert]

I find the chart to be an interesting reference for comparison. The explanation section is nicely informative and includes URL links to allow further research into each specific topic/part.

A casual look at the chart and the information it contains easily shows which manufacturers would be on my short list IF I were to need a weapon to sustain high round count or severe service. It ALSO shows which companies that make a recreational suitable firearm as well.

Common sense says there is a difference between the two and I don't need to spend the money on the Colt, when another maker makes a suitable firearm to fit my recreational needs.

Thanks for the chart and it was refreshing to read some sane comments amongst so many posters here who find it necessary to trash someone else's work just to have something to say. As one poster said: If you find something wrong; notify the author of the chart. Don't just cast crap or whine.

Ralph

 

[Evenflo76]

The chart is fairly accurate, although it is comparing commercially available M4gery's to what the troops carry.

It is not very useful if you want to purchase a Govt 20" A2 or 24" Bull barreled varmint rig.

Ar-15 is a very general term...

 

[usmc1371]

I looked at the chart befor I bought my first AR, lots of good info about specs and features for people who don't know much about ar's. I learned that a M4 stile was not going to be the best for me cause I wanted a rifle for shooting long range sage rats and coyotes. I asked around on lots of shooting sites and varmint sites to find out what I needed to know about the rifles built for what I was actuly going to use it for. Ended up buying a Les Baer super varmint .204 and haven't looked back. It is simply an amazing rifle, yes it cost more than a RRA or Colt but it does what it said it would. Puts 5 shots in Less than .5 moa 100% reliablity.

The only two rifles I have ever seen actuly blow up were both AR's, one was a bushy with hand loads, the other was a M16A2 with the same rounds every other mairne shoots. I am pretty sure that M16 said Colt on it. Just because I have seen a BM and colt self destruct wouldn't keep me form owning eathier one of them. IMHO if the rifle you spend your money on makes you happy then just enjoy it.

 

[mboylan]

Just a feature comparison chart. It really doesn't address quality of manufacture. Several of the uppers from companies listed will have more accurate barrels than Colt. Many of the extra features on the Colt are available at extra cost from the other manufacturers.

Example: The Noveske is going to have much better fit and finish than the Colt. It will be more accurate. It will be as reliable or more. It will also cost much much more.

So this really doesn't break things up into tiers. It just compares what is closest to a 16" Colt.

BTW: Sabre looks like second tier on this chart. They make some high performance 3-gun competition ARs with $2000+ price tags.

 

[smoketheresfire]

Just a feature comparison chart. It really doesn't address quality. Several of the uppers from companies listed will have more accurate barrels than Colt.

Example: The Noveske is going to have much better fit and finish than the Colt. It will be more accurate. It will also cost much much more.

So this really doesn't break things up into tiers.

You're right, but those features often lead to better reliability. As far as accuracy goes Noveske has a much better chrome lined barrel than any of the other competition (I think it's a Pac-Nor). As far as tier 2 ar's, Rock River has the Wylde chamber which supposedly makes their guns a bit more accurate than the competition. Still not 100% sold on the Wylde though.

 

[dom1104]

I built my AR using info from the chart, so far I am really happy with it.

I dont see how more information could be a bad thing.....

 

[longdayjake]

The Irony is that a RRA, DPMS, etc upgraded to the same specs as a Colt or BCM would cost about the same or even more. And this is without MP Testing, Shot peening, etc. It isn't that these companies CAN'T make a better gun. It is that they won't.

This is mostly true. The problem I see with the chart is that it is comparing an apple to an orange that looks like an apple. It would make more sense to me if they took all the makers and tried to get as close as possible to milspec with them and then compared the prices. Also, I disagree with their evaluation of properly staked gas key. I have owned 3 of the lower end AR's that were all properly staked. Maybe I just got lucky. I guess if your desire in a gun is to get it to be a colt then buy a colt. If your desire is to have something practical to shoot tight groups with then the last thing you want is a stock Colt. Not to say colt is not good quality, but the chart is unfair to other companies that make a totally different and in some ways a better rifle in a similar looking package. As was mentioned earlier, m16 bolt carriers are unimportant in semi auto packages. Barrel steel is unimportant in total reliability but can affect accuracy and longjevity. Long story short, mil spec is probably the worst barrel for accuracy and the best for shooting 50,000 bullets before needing a new barrel. That isn't to say that they cant shoot well, but a good varmint barrel will outshoot them by a lot. The buffer matters, but it doesn't have to be mil spec H buffer to be 100% reliable. Then there is the staked castle nut which is helpful, but plenty of companies use other methods like locktite to permanantly fix the stock. I personally prefer dealing with locktite when changing a stock.

Rock River has the Wylde chamber which supposedly makes their guns a bit more accurate than the competition. Still not 100% sold on the Wylde though.

Im sold on it simply because my brass seems to last longer before I have to trim the necks. Also, my RRA is more accurate out of the box than any other stock AR I have owned or shot. That may just be a luck thing because I was one of those crazy people that wanted a chrome lined barrel. That said, I have shot AR's that were more accurate, but they were built to be. All in all it comes down to what you really want from your rifle. If you want a rifle that is limited in accuracy, but maxed out in reliability buy a stock colt. If you want a rifle that is extremely accurate or in a different caliber you may have to look somewhere else.