Build a complete AR-15 (including rear sight and magazine) for $386.21 shipped.

[Skylerbone]

HK, the point being (intentionally) missed by some responders is that the OP stated one can build a "quality" rifle for $386.21 shipped. Nowhere in this thread, not one single responder has offered proof of doing so. So, barring a response or two from real people with real evidence, what we are left with are fringe arguments about what constitutes "quality", mil spec, fit & finish, etc.

I'm not asking whether a $386 build looks as nice as a Noveske or meets spec like a Colt, I'm asking if anyone has actually pieced together a rifle that functions, what if any problems they encountered in the build, if the rifle ran and how many rounds they put down range without issue.

Lacking any such evidence I stand by my previous thought on this thread; it is a link to an inexpensive build which is as yet unproven in operation and should NOT be described as a "quality" AR. Please, please, please, someone answer that for us; have you personally built a "quality" AR for $386.21 (or in that ballpark) and tell us what makes it worthwhile. No evidence, no sale, not when kits with a proven reputation are available for a few dollars more.

 

[jad0110]

Quote:
Perfect quality isn't much more thanks to the free BCG group in this:
http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/BCM-1...g-mid-16lw.htm
It's amazing that you can get such a quality upper for that price.

Agreed. I'm running that upper on my carbine and have had great results with it.

For me, "mil spec" is just that, a rather nebulous term when it comes to rifles Joe Schmo civilian can acquire. I do however look for certain features in an AR to be relied upon to defend myself if need be (not so much in a plinker), and I'm willing to pay more for them. For example, all things being equal I'm willing to pay more for a bolt that has passed an MPI test than one that hasn't. I'm wiling to pay more for a Bolt Carrier that has a staked gas key, or a gas key that has otherwise been affixed in some manner that offers similar "staying" properties to a staked key (if the key comes unstaked, you have a single shot rifle ... ask me how I now this).

Looking at the description of the upper assembly in the OP, I'm not certain if those features (among others) are present.

Therefore, were I building a "fun" gun that would never be relied upon for serious purposes, I'd probably be fine with it. Otherwise, I'd look elsewhere. With the prices these days, I think I could build a pretty nice AR that I'd have no issue defending myself with for $650, using the BCM upper linked above.

 

[Tommygunn]

... if the key comes unstaked, you have a single shot rifle ... ask me how I now this

I am surprised you would not have a "no shot" rifle, since if the gaskey is loose it may not even align right with the gastube and thus not come forward into full battery upon firing.
Otherwise, yes, a loose gas key can allow pressure to escape and thus inhibit functioning of the rifle.
Either is bad but not coming to battery could damage the parts ....

 

[jad0110]

^^^ Now that I think about it, as I continued to test/evaluate the problem, it did turn into a no shot rifle. Annoying enough as it were, but it could have happened at a much worse time.

 

[Blade First]

"I'm not asking whether a $386 build looks as nice as a Noveske or meets spec like a Colt, I'm asking if anyone has actually pieced together a rifle that functions, what if any problems they encountered in the build, if the rifle ran and how many rounds they put down range without issue." -- Skylerbone

I'm sorry...who exactly are you? And what, exactly, is your level of expertise?

You ask good questions, but you apparently have no data to challenge the idea that a functional and reliable AR can be built at a specific price point, much less that said AR would function for decades.

I expect you want someone who has actually built a "spec" AR at greater than that price point to help you "prove" your contention. Good luck calling those of us who actually build ARs as liars.

This isn't about *nicety*...it's about *functionality*. If you don't have testing data to provide us, please keep your speculation to yourself.

Instead, may I suggest that you get off your butt and do some legitimate research instead of parroting what you find on-line..you'll likely be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Skylerbone]

Blade First, your assessment of me as a know nothing parrot is really a stretch and far from THR. I asked a question, do any of you who support the OP's contention, have so much as a wiff of experience with the build in question? Or, as a concession, has anyone built an AR at a similar price point?

So to be clear, we've had a discussion on definitions that proved nothing, a discussion on what constitutes mil spec most of which was unrelated to the OP, a smattering of ad hominem, and still no one who has stepped up and claimed to have built a fully functional sub-$400 AR they considered to be, by any reasonable definition, a quality rifle.

As for getting off my butt and researching, well, that's the sort of thing that lead me here, to a community of (I thought) likeminded enthusiasts who with their collective experience might share a few tips and links. That very process was set in motion when I read this thread. So again, I ask, has anyone purchased the linked build, assembled it and fired it?

 

[Aragon]

HK, the point being (intentionally) missed by some responders is that the OP stated one can build a "quality" rifle for $386.21 shipped...

Actually this is what I said:

"Build a complete AR-15 (including rear sight and magazine) for $386.21 shipped.
I saw this on Reddit and thought others might enjoy it. A high quality $299.95 AR should be available by summer if things stay calm."

That's a direct quote from posting #1 of this thread.

 

[Aragon]

HK, the point being (intentionally) missed by some responders is that the OP stated one can build a "quality" rifle for $386.21 shipped. Nowhere in this thread, not one single responder has offered proof of doing so. So, barring a response or two from real people with real evidence, what we are left with are fringe arguments about what constitutes "quality", mil spec, fit & finish, etc.

I'm not asking whether a $386 build looks as nice as a Noveske or meets spec like a Colt, I'm asking if anyone has actually pieced together a rifle that functions, what if any problems they encountered in the build, if the rifle ran and how many rounds they put down range without issue.

Lacking any such evidence I stand by my previous thought on this thread; it is a link to an inexpensive build which is as yet unproven in operation and should NOT be described as a "quality" AR. Please, please, please, someone answer that for us; have you personally built a "quality" AR for $386.21 (or in that ballpark) and tell us what makes it worthwhile. No evidence, no sale, not when kits with a proven reputation are available for a few dollars more.

Actually the onus is on you to prove your absurd theory that an AR needs to cost at least XYZ for it to be deemed a quality firearm. You sound like one of those $800.00 threshold individuals. If it didn't cost at least $800.00 (or whatever) then it cannot be of high quality. Absolutely absurd.

 

[Bezoar]

just a note, fancy doesnt always mean better.

people tell me i would never get an accurate shot from a savage axis with the original non adjustable trigger. yet somehow first magazine out of the box shot under and inch in group.

a small block v8 with racing cam shaft and polished cylinders and stainless steel headers can really do wonders,, unless you only have a honda civic.

 

[Skylerbone]

Tying me in with other claims still, still, still doesn't answer my simple question. The onus is on no one to prove anything, perhaps if you were less of a skeptic and cynic you might see my inquiry for its face value. As far as I'm concerned, this has been a waste of time. Thank my lucky stars I didn't ask more questions this week about the magazine capacity of some new pistol, I can only imagine the ink some people could spill on that query.

 

[Cee Zee]

If you aren't arguing the merit of the specific item mentioned: wait for it: you're wasting your ink and driving away anyone who might have an interest in the actual topic

We don't use ink on the net and how exactly is what you just said relevant to the "specific item mentioned"? And it seems to me that you' might drive away people as well with your speculation about quality. Unless I see a quote about personal experience or some proven point I pretty much ignore what was said.

To me accuracy is 1/4 to 1/2 moa not found in a AK

It isn't found in your average Ar either. You might build one to shoot that well but it won't be cheap. Yes some things do require money. Just not all things.

Actually the onus is on you to prove your absurd theory that an AR needs to cost at least XYZ for it to be deemed a quality firearm. You sound like one of those $800.00 threshold individuals. If it didn't cost at least $800.00 (or whatever) then it cannot be of high quality. Absolutely absurd.

What he said. ^^^ Generally the people who want to scream that something needs to cost a certain amount to be good are people who have spent the amount they mention on something and they assume they couldn't possibly be wrong about what it took to get quality. If they have experience with a product offered at a specific price let's hear it. Better still if they have experience with a product sold at a specific price not being quality I want to hear that. But assumptions about whether something is quality or not based solely on the price are not helpful.

Tying me in with other claims still, still, still doesn't answer my simple question. The onus is on no one to prove anything, perhaps if you were less of a skeptic and cynic you might see my inquiry for its face value. As far as I'm concerned, this has been a waste of time. Thank my lucky stars I didn't ask more questions this week about the magazine capacity of some new pistol, I can only imagine the ink some people could spill on that query.

And this is relevant to the "specific item mentioned"? I don't know if a rifle built with the parts mentioned in the OP will make for a decent AR or not. I'd like to find out. You seem intent on proving that they won't without any actual proof.

...should NOT be described as a "quality" AR. Please, please, please, someone answer that for us; have you personally built a "quality" AR for $386.21 (or in that ballpark) and tell us what makes it worthwhile. No evidence, no sale, not when kits with a proven reputation are available for a few dollars more.

How do you know it "isn't" a quality AR? No evidence, no sale. "Quality" is a subjective term and it means something different to pretty much everyone. I don't think anyone is going to assume that you get a .25 MOA rifle at those prices but some people may have experience with the various parts. But the noise level is so high here it's hard to find out. I happen to believe that the precept that things can be bought that are well built and don't cost a lot is very much germane to the issue here. But that you want to blather on about being off topic. It's more on topic than generalizations and guesstimations which is what I see from you.

 

[boricua9mm]

LOL!! Do you really think the US Gov't (particularly the military) procures goods and services as inexpensively as possible? Really? Again, LOL!

I happen to know for a fact, direct from a retired Federal Firearms Instructor working with the Bureau of Prisons, that the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, Florida has consistently paid $600 for Colt AR carbines and 9mm Subguns over the past 15 years. This number is, and should be, consistent nationwide. The numbers at present are closer to $1k, but that new rifle includes an Aimpoint and a KAC RAS. I know this because this person is an immediate relative of mine.

I also happen to know, through prior work with an FFL in the years before and after the AWB, that you CANNOT and never have been able to procure them for less than what the Federal Gov't is buying them for.

They are getting a better price than anyone else inside our borders, period. That's one part of Gov't contract procurement. The other part of Gov't procurement is that the item in question must meet a precedent or standard that has been established, especially in cases where lives are on the line. This is why $386 frankenguns do not adorn the armories of our Government.

Building a Mil-Spec AR (minus FCG and the 3rd hole) isn't witchcraft. The materials and testing methods are well known. Some makers, such as Spike's Tactical, have actually produced Certification forms for their parts and components for the public eye, and have done so years ago.

Yes, you can build an AR for $386, or so it seems, but throwing the words "High Quality" isn't just going to roll off the shoulders of those who know better. We could outline a multitude of reasons why that $386 carbine would be lacking in quality.

If you intend to shoot a box of ammo every now and then and throw it in the closet, I'm sure that $386 carbine will last for at least 2 generations. If you find that it shoots accurately, and you are convinced that accuracy is the sole measure of quality, then I'm sure you'll be tickled pink.

To me, it makes no sense to pursue a military pattern rifle and then through out all of the decades of lessons learned in an intense, anger-filled race to the bottom. Unless, of course, it's the image and not the performance that you're after.

 

[Cee Zee]

We could outline a multitude of reasons why that $386 carbine would be lacking in quality.

Instead of just saying you could outline those reasons could you please outline a few? I'd really like to know and to know what the source is for your information. I'm not saying what you're saying isn't true. I'd just like to know what it is that you seem to know. I don't plan on buying a bargain basement AR but I would like to know this information anyway. I've seen my share of jam-o-matic AR's especially in lower priced guns but any particular reference you have would be appreciated. I could mention brands but I don't want to step on anyone's toes. Most of those brands don't even fall into the rock bottom price category anymore. But I think about the S&W M&P 15 Sport and wonder if there's something specific about it that should cause me to avoid buying one. I've seen a lot of postive reviews of that gun but that's something an established gun maker put together or at least oversaw the production of it. I still wonder if there are specific areas that might be of concern in a AR that has been priced very low. Again I'm not arguing with your conclusion. I just want more details.

 

[Skylerbone]

And this is relevant to the "specific item mentioned"? I don't know if a rifle built with the parts mentioned in the OP will make for a decent AR or not. I'd like to find out. You seem intent on proving that they won't without any actual proof.

Cee Zee, where is it that you find me attempting to prove the specified rifle won't be decent? Is it because I asked for any and all input by any and all with experience with that rifle kit or its components? I've read plenty of your responses to those seeking information about specific rifles, so why is my question deemed unworthy?

How do you know it "isn't" a quality AR?

Well...I don't know...and that's why I asked if someone could provide a bit of evidence. If you found someone claiming that Yugo makes a quality car, and you were in the market for a car, would you simply take their word for it or would you ask how their Yugo runs? Would you? Would that seem more reasonable than telling a guy asking that question that no further qualification of the statement is necessary and that he must prove the opposite or bug off?

My final thought is my previous thought; the OP is a link to an inexpensive AR kit. Caveat emptor.

 

[Thermactor]

Instead of just saying you could outline those reasons could you please outline a few? I'd really like to know and to know what the source is for your information. I'm not saying what you're saying isn't true. I'd just like to know what it is that you seem to know. I don't plan on buying a bargain basement AR but I would like to know this information anyway. I've seen my share of jam-o-matic AR's especially in lower priced guns but any particular reference you have would be appreciated. I could mention brands but I don't want to step on anyone's toes. Most of those brands don't even fall into the rock bottom price category anymore. But I think about the S&W M&P 15 Sport and wonder if there's something specific about it that should cause me to avoid buying one. I've seen a lot of postive reviews of that gun but that's something an established gun maker put together or at least oversaw the production of it. I still wonder if there are specific areas that might be of concern in a AR that has been priced very low. Again I'm not arguing with your conclusion. I just want more details.

Why are you even comparing the M&P to the $400 frankensale AR? The M&P is a much more expensive weapon, isn't it? $729 at Gander Mountain, for example. Then the Colt LE6920 costs, what... $850, 900 if you look hard enough, if you want to really make the gun into an investment with resale value should you ever need to sell.

 

[Aragon]

...To me, it makes no sense to pursue a military pattern rifle and then through out all of the decades of lessons learned in an intense, anger-filled race to the bottom. Unless, of course, it's the image and not the performance that you're after.

Your comment is nonsense. There is no "race to the bottom", no matter how much you would like to sell others on your belief that there is. I definitely think there is a "race to the top" in terms of value compared to yesterday in order to spur sales.

Two things are happening right now what are undeniable. First, in general, small arms sales are slowing in the US. That's not to say they are slow, but they are definitely well down from historical highs. This has heightened competition and necessarily driven prices down.

Second, like the IBM/MS/microcomputer miracle of decades past, the AR platform rifle has become a commodity welcoming a plethora of manufacturers and small assemblers into the market with few/light barriers to entry.

Prices are reflecting this reality more and more. (If US gun laws allowed open importation of AR's from Taiwan and China, I have no doubt that a high quality $299.95 AR would either be available now in the US or it would be within 6 months if things remain calm.)

These two factors are seriously driving down prices on AR platform rifles. Some don't seem able to understand this, or they don't want to understand it -- particularly with spectacularly high prices being realized for ARs not all that long ago.

At the height of the gun buying craze (I remember $300 stripped lowers) people did ask on various forums when prices would return to "normal" -- when would a Colt AR be $800-900.00 again? Most were attacked and told "NEVER!" This has since been proven to be wrong.

Now that lower prices on ARs are clearly being realized, these very same people are attacking the quality of these lower priced ARs. They have no proof mind you, only a belief that they MUST be of inferior quality in order to be sold for such a modest price. Just look at their misuse of the term "mil-spec".

If things remain "calm" in the US, gun prices will continue to drop -- particularly if a Republican president is elected.

 

[HKGuns]

HK, the point being (intentionally) missed by some responders is that the OP stated one can build a "quality" rifle for $386.21 shipped. Nowhere in this thread, not one single responder has offered proof of doing so. So, barring a response or two from real people with real evidence, what we are left with are fringe arguments about what constitutes "quality", mil spec, fit & finish, etc.

I'm not asking whether a $386 build looks as nice as a Noveske or meets spec like a Colt, I'm asking if anyone has actually pieced together a rifle that functions, what if any problems they encountered in the build, if the rifle ran and how many rounds they put down range without issue.

Lacking any such evidence I stand by my previous thought on this thread; it is a link to an inexpensive build which is as yet unproven in operation and should NOT be described as a "quality" AR. Please, please, please, someone answer that for us; have you personally built a "quality" AR for $386.21 (or in that ballpark) and tell us what makes it worthwhile. No evidence, no sale, not when kits with a proven reputation are available for a few dollars more.

I agree and don't see how anyone can with any honesty think you're actually getting a ton of quality for that amount of money. Will it work? Sure, but it certainly isn't something you would go to war with or bet your life on and to argue otherwise is pretty much clueless as you appear to suggest.

 

[Aragon]

I agree and don't see how anyone can with any honesty think you're actually getting a ton of quality for that amount of money. Will it work? Sure, but it certainly isn't something you would go to war with or bet your life on and to argue otherwise is pretty much clueless as you appear to suggest.

What exactly does a "ton of quality" equate to in an AR? That the gun is accurate and precise if the user does their job? That it's reliable and maintainable? What else exactly?

Do you equate a "ton of quality" to aesthetics and/or the name of a specific builder?

 

[Aragon]

Someone on the original reddit thread built an AR using that parts list. I asked him for a field report. Let's see what he has to say...

http://www.reddit.com/r/gundeals/comments/2ukuo9/build_a_complete_ar15_including_rear_sight_and/

 

[barnbwt]

"I agree and don't see how anyone can with any honesty think you're actually getting a ton of quality for that amount of money. Will it work? Sure, but it certainly isn't something you would go to war with or bet your life on and to argue otherwise is pretty much clueless as you appear to suggest."
Devil's Advocate, how would you expect the gun to be deficient exactly, based on price? Barrel failure, bolt failure, extraction issues, failure to feed, early wear, carbon buildup, inaccuracy, trigger failure? Which and why should be expected based on price only?

I have a theory that after 60 years of applied America Capitalism, the AR is not only cheaper to produce than an AK, but markedly cheaper. Like less than 300$.

TCB

 

[Skylerbone]

From that reddit review:

When PTAC first rolled on scene, their bores looked like sponges. They were pitted and gross and terribly inaccurate. Now, though, their bores seem fine. I have built 6 of these $500 ARs and have not ever had a single issue with any of them. They're not chrome lined or cold hammer forged, but for like 95% of shooters, that won't matter.

And thank you Aragon for asking and posting, that's the sort of no-nonsense description I was looking for. I have 3 small children so as a single father I don't make it a point to troll threads, there simply isn't time in my day or any real desire to do so.

When I think of quality, I'm focused on issues first; did the upper and lower match up, were holes drilled in the correct locations or was a file necessary, was the buffer correct, was the magwell tight, etc. and finally was it click or boom. All other points, looks, match grade accuracy, special coatings, are secondary.

From the review posted, the builder/end user was satisfied with the rifle's performance and I am satisfied with his real world testing so for me, the question has been answered.

 

[Aragon]

Best to read the entire posting and not cherry pick parts.


"Hmm. Well, I don't personally own a "high dollar" AR, so my comparison might be a little off, but here is what we will compare:

AR-15 1 - "MIL-SPEC" (i.e. standard furniture), PTAC upper with 16" mid length 1:9" phosphate barrel, 8620 BCG with Carpenter 158 bolt, A2 flash hider, Tennessee Arms Co lower, PTAC lower build kit, TRS-25 red dot.

AR-15 2 - 18" fluted stainless steel 416r barrel, mid length gas system, .223 Wylde chamber with 1:8" twist, NiB BCG, Aero Precision upper and lower, Anderson LPK with CMC 3.5 lb single stage trigger, 15" ALG M-LOK rail, MOE stock, Nikon Buckmaster 3-9x40 scope.

AR 1 is a beater rifle. Probably spent under $500 on it complete with optic.

AR 2, well I don't know the exact cost right now but the build cost me easily over twice what AR 1 cost me.

What they both do well—shoot. Neither rifle has any problems cycling various types of ammo including both steel and brass cased rounds.

Obviously AR 2 is much more accurate, especially evident at 300-500 yards. However, AR 1 easily makes 7" groups at 100 yards with the TRS-25 (unmagnified optic) which is well within the "MIL-SPEC" and "minute-of-bad-guy."

When PTAC first rolled on scene, their bores looked like sponges. They were pitted and gross and terribly inaccurate. Now, though, their bores seem fine. I have built 6 of these $500 ARs and have not ever had a single issue with any of them. They're not chrome lined or cold hammer forged, but for like 95% of shooters, that won't matter.

I've shot my friend's Daniel Defense AR and it felt really nice and looked gorgeous, but it was also more than twice the cost of AR 1. If you plan on having your life depend on your rifle, splurge a little and get the pricier stuff. If you want an "innawoods" rifle to beat on and toss around and plink with, these PTAC builds are totally fine.

I don't know if there's really any more information I can give you. That's basically like my first ever gun review so I don't exactly know what to include."

Ref: http://www.reddit.com/r/gundeals/comments/2ukuo9/build_a_complete_ar15_including_rear_sight_and/

 

[Davek1977]

just a note, fancy doesnt always mean better.

people tell me i would never get an accurate shot from a savage axis with the original non adjustable trigger. yet somehow first magazine out of the box shot under and inch in group.

Then I'd reevaluate who I was taking advice from, because most people who shoot or have shot an Axis knows they are budget rifles, with crappy stocks and nonadjustable triggers, that are capable of extreme accuracy in many cases. Then again, one may find a finely fitted stock and a nice trigger to be "fancer" AND "better" for their purposes. Just because something is "good enough" doesn't mean some people won't want something a bit more refined. A rifle's accuracy is only one factor some consider when selecting a firearm.

 

[rdhood]

I also found your magical "$800 ballpark" number to be quite interesting.

The $800 ballpark does not come out of thin air. It is approximately what it would cost to put together an excellent quality Mil-Spec rifle.

Personally, I agree with the $800 ballpark. I have put together a couple of what I would consider to be bare-minimum quality ARs. That means FN barrels, carpenter 158 bolt, a rear sight, PSA LBK, anyone's $60 lower. Mine came in at $625 and $675. Add a $100ish basic red dot, and you get right to the $800 ballpark.

There are lots and lots and lots of cheaper guns out there. Like the 1911's, there is a sample in every price range. My fav handgun is an RIA 1911. The thing is rock solid, and I have pumped a LOT of ammo through it to know. I looked at the issue of MIM parts in these guns, and evaluated their pros and cons, replaced some of them and lived with the result. I did the same when choosing parts for my ARs. There is no $250 upper complete with BCG that is going to be close to the quality that would be acceptable for me. I'll spend another $150 for the FN barrel and milspec BCG.

None of this speaks to reliability. I doubt anyone has done any tests on ultra cheap ARs vs. better quality. I'll bet a few carbine-class instructors could advise us a bit on that, if we could find a few that are truly objective and have maybe even kept notes of failures in their classes. Dumping out a case of ammo doing drills one weekend would certainly be a proper test.

 

[cottswald]

Your comment is nonsense. There is no "race to the bottom", no matter how much you would like to sell others on your belief that there is. I definitely think there is a "race to the top" in terms of value compared to yesterday in order to spur sales.

Two things are happening right now what are undeniable. First, in general, small arms sales are slowing in the US. That's not to say they are slow, but they are definitely well down from historical highs. This has heightened competition and necessarily driven prices down.

Second, like the IBM/MS/microcomputer miracle of decades past, the AR platform rifle has become a commodity welcoming a plethora of manufacturers and small assemblers into the market with few/light barriers to entry.

Prices are reflecting this reality more and more. (If US gun laws allowed open importation of AR's from Taiwan and China, I have no doubt that a high quality $299.95 AR would either be available now in the US or it would be within 6 months if things remain calm.)

These two factors are seriously driving down prices on AR platform rifles. Some don't seem able to understand this, or they don't want to understand it -- particularly with spectacularly high prices being realized for ARs not all that long ago.

At the height of the gun buying craze (I remember $300 stripped lowers) people did ask on various forums when prices would return to "normal" -- when would a Colt AR be $800-900.00 again? Most were attacked and told "NEVER!" This has since been proven to be wrong.

Now that lower prices on ARs are clearly being realized, these very same people are attacking the quality of these lower priced ARs. They have no proof mind you, only a belief that they MUST be of inferior quality in order to be sold for such a modest price. Just look at their misuse of the term "mil-spec".

If things remain "calm" in the US, gun prices will continue to drop -- particularly if a Republican president is elected.

Capitalism at its best. Not a bad assessment.

If I weren't such an AR noob, I'd go for it. No doubt others will, their results may or may not match those already given. Only one way to find out. Don't know why anyone would want to discourage such an endeavor, especially when the outcome is speculative at best (not withstanding some good supporting evidence both for and against).

If more people try it and the end result is good, better, or best, many more will follow and the market will respond accordingly. The end result would lead to more law abiding Americans being able to afford and enjoy their 2nd Amendment rights. JMHO