Colt LE6920 or S&W M&P15 Mid

[grampajack]

My first thought on reading this post was "what are the specs on the M&P?"

I normally don't play the AR specs game, I don't care if my rifle's buffer tube is 6061 aluminum or 7075. But I'd care a lot more if I was dropping $1000 on a gun. With the Colt, there's some "paying for the pony", but you're also getting a legit military-grade rifle. With the M&P, I don't know what the specs are, but I'd be worried that I was buying a $700 gun and $200 of plastic and rubber furniture.

I'll never understand the whole "paying for the pony" myth. There are plenty of reasons to hate Colt, but the price of their guns isn't one of them. You can get an LE6920 for 900 bucks all day long, cheaper if you shop around for it. Other milspec M-Forgeries are going for 1500 and up. FNs are 1500, LMTs are 1600. Even an equivalent BCM is going to be 1200. And I don't think any of those people have anything on Colt in terms of quality. BCM has them on features, but the FN and LMT are for all intents and purposes identical. Seriously, if you scrubbed the FN and Colt of all their markings, I seriously doubt anyone would even be able to tell the difference between the two, yet the FN is 5-700 more.

 

[NWcityguy2]

I'll never understand the whole "paying for the pony" myth.

It's because, with everything that has been said in Colt's favor, a few notable (but obvious) things have been left out...

1. What kind of accuracy does an average Colt offer? I'm not talking about descriptions like "very good" or "excellent". I mean actual group sizes and actual distances.
2. How long will that accuracy last? Once again, not "a long time", but actual round counts.
3. How many rounds can a Colt go before parts replacement becomes necessary?
4. Is that better, worse or average for a similarly spec'd rifle?
5. What are the price of Colt replacement parts?
6. Does Colt offer modern performance features that have become common among ARs? (Quick answer, no)

I could probably think of a couple more if I tried. If those questions were answered, and placed in a list of other ARs where nobody could see the names but had to select a rifle based strictly on objective standards, it would not stand out. It would also cost more than some of the other AR options, but also less than some of the others. And, here is the important part, the price difference would be enough that a significant upgrade (free float, trigger, optic) could be added to a less expensive AR that would make it perform better than the Colt.

For people who shoot competitively, Colt is basically an after thought. The companies that have catered to these shooters, who actually have an objective means of measuring things that make them shoot better, have completely ignored and disregarded all of these Colt "pluses". And these guns are shot a lot, way more than your average Colt. And nothing they are doing is magic or secret. So perhaps when you and others have spoken about things that are already widely known on the internet, you haven't so much been proving the points you think you are, but just lecturing people out of the conversation with the same old things that get said every time.

Now, I don't personally have a strong preference between a Colt OEM or 6920 when compared to a S&W MOE. Personally, I don't see what value the M&P line brings to the table, over the basic Sport, for what they cost. Given the choices, I'd probably get the Colt OEM. But, given a full range of choices in the AR world, I wouldn't pick any of them. The reasons above are why I wouldn't pick the Colt.

 

[cdb1]

It's because, with everything that has been said in Colt's favor, a few notable (but obvious) things have been left out...

1. What kind of accuracy does an average Colt offer? I'm not talking about descriptions like "very good" or "excellent". I mean actual group sizes and actual distances.
2. How long will that accuracy last? Once again, not "a long time", but actual round counts.
3. How many rounds can a Colt go before parts replacement becomes necessary?
4. Is that better, worse or average for a similarly spec'd rifle?
5. What are the price of Colt replacement parts?
6. Does Colt offer modern performance features that have become common among ARs? (Quick answer, no)

I could probably think of a couple more if I tried. If those questions were answered, and placed in a list of other ARs where nobody could see the names but had to select a rifle based strictly on objective standards, it would not stand out. It would also cost more than some of the other AR options, but also less than some of the others. And, here is the important part, the price difference would be enough that a significant upgrade (free float, trigger, optic) could be added to a less expensive AR that would make it perform better than the Colt.

For people who shoot competitively, Colt is basically an after thought. The companies that have catered to these shooters, who actually have an objective means of measuring things that make them shoot better, have completely ignored and disregarded all of these Colt "pluses". And these guns are shot a lot, way more than your average Colt. And nothing they are doing is magic or secret. So perhaps when you and others have spoken about things that are already widely known on the internet, you haven't so much been proving the points you think you are, but just lecturing people out of the conversation with the same old things that get said every time.

Now, I don't personally have a strong preference between a Colt OEM or 6920 when compared to a S&W MOE. Personally, I don't see what value the M&P line brings to the table, over the basic Sport, for what they cost. Given the choices, I'd probably get the Colt OEM. But, given a full range of choices in the AR world, I wouldn't pick any of them. The reasons above are why I wouldn't pick the Colt.

Perfectly stated.

 

[Jackal]

It's because, with everything that has been said in Colt's favor, a few notable (but obvious) things have been left out...

1. What kind of accuracy does an average Colt offer? I'm not talking about descriptions like "very good" or "excellent". I mean actual group sizes and actual distances.
2. How long will that accuracy last? Once again, not "a long time", but actual round counts.
3. How many rounds can a Colt go before parts replacement becomes necessary?
4. Is that better, worse or average for a similarly spec'd rifle?
5. What are the price of Colt replacement parts?
6. Does Colt offer modern performance features that have become common among ARs? (Quick answer, no)

I could probably think of a couple more if I tried. If those questions were answered, and placed in a list of other ARs where nobody could see the names but had to select a rifle based strictly on objective standards, it would not stand out. It would also cost more than some of the other AR options, but also less than some of the others. And, here is the important part, the price difference would be enough that a significant upgrade (free float, trigger, optic) could be added to a less expensive AR that would make it perform better than the Colt.

For people who shoot competitively, Colt is basically an after thought. The companies that have catered to these shooters, who actually have an objective means of measuring things that make them shoot better, have completely ignored and disregarded all of these Colt "pluses". And these guns are shot a lot, way more than your average Colt. And nothing they are doing is magic or secret. So perhaps when you and others have spoken about things that are already widely known on the internet, you haven't so much been proving the points you think you are, but just lecturing people out of the conversation with the same old things that get said every time.

Now, I don't personally have a strong preference between a Colt OEM or 6920 when compared to a S&W MOE. Personally, I don't see what value the M&P line brings to the table, over the basic Sport, for what they cost. Given the choices, I'd probably get the Colt OEM. But, given a full range of choices in the AR world, I wouldn't pick any of them. The reasons above are why I wouldn't pick the Colt.

If someone is shooting for groups or whacking varmints at extended ranges, they likely arent looking at Colt in the first place. I'd imagine that most people interested in Colt are intending the rifle to be used for self defense, ranch use, putting hits on steel silhouettes out to 300m, general recreation, etc. For competition, target or varmint hunting, a Colt factory rifle would be far down my list. Then again, my personal taste in AR's isnt exactly M4 standard:

 

[NWcityguy2]

It's still an objective standard to measure a rifle by.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

I'll never understand the whole "paying for the pony" myth. There are plenty of reasons to hate Colt, but the price of their guns isn't one of them. You can get an LE6920 for 900 bucks all day long, cheaper if you shop around for it. Other milspec M-Forgeries are going for 1500 and up. FNs are 1500, LMTs are 1600. Even an equivalent BCM is going to be 1200. And I don't think any of those people have anything on Colt in terms of quality. BCM has them on features, but the FN and LMT are for all intents and purposes identical. Seriously, if you scrubbed the FN and Colt of all their markings, I seriously doubt anyone would even be able to tell the difference between the two, yet the FN is 5-700 more.

Because I don't see a ton of difference between a Colt and this. Not $200's worth.

http://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-16-m4-premium-carbine.html

If you are willing to put in the time and work, a rifle kit version of that and a lower can be had for around $600. What does Colt offer that's worth 50% more than that?

 

[grampajack]

It's because, with everything that has been said in Colt's favor, a few notable (but obvious) things have been left out...

1. What kind of accuracy does an average Colt offer? I'm not talking about descriptions like "very good" or "excellent". I mean actual group sizes and actual distances.
2. How long will that accuracy last? Once again, not "a long time", but actual round counts.
3. How many rounds can a Colt go before parts replacement becomes necessary?
4. Is that better, worse or average for a similarly spec'd rifle?
5. What are the price of Colt replacement parts?
6. Does Colt offer modern performance features that have become common among ARs? (Quick answer, no)

I could probably think of a couple more if I tried. If those questions were answered, and placed in a list of other ARs where nobody could see the names but had to select a rifle based strictly on objective standards, it would not stand out. It would also cost more than some of the other AR options, but also less than some of the others. And, here is the important part, the price difference would be enough that a significant upgrade (free float, trigger, optic) could be added to a less expensive AR that would make it perform better than the Colt.

For people who shoot competitively, Colt is basically an after thought. The companies that have catered to these shooters, who actually have an objective means of measuring things that make them shoot better, have completely ignored and disregarded all of these Colt "pluses". And these guns are shot a lot, way more than your average Colt. And nothing they are doing is magic or secret. So perhaps when you and others have spoken about things that are already widely known on the internet, you haven't so much been proving the points you think you are, but just lecturing people out of the conversation with the same old things that get said every time.

Now, I don't personally have a strong preference between a Colt OEM or 6920 when compared to a S&W MOE. Personally, I don't see what value the M&P line brings to the table, over the basic Sport, for what they cost. Given the choices, I'd probably get the Colt OEM. But, given a full range of choices in the AR world, I wouldn't pick any of them. The reasons above are why I wouldn't pick the Colt.

1. Between just over 1 MOA and 2 MOA, depending on barrel weight. Gov. profile tends towards just over 2 MOA, Hbar just over 1. No chrome lined barrel is going to give you better than that.
2. A chrome lined barrel will hold its groups for at least 10k rounds. After that you will see the groups open up gradually, but you won't see anything too wild until the 20k round mark.
3. Extractors tend to last about 3-6k rounds IIRC. Bolts last for 6-10k rounds. Barrels 10-20k rounds. Ejectors probably need replacing at some point. Everything else can go hundreds of thousands of rounds.
4. I'm not sure I understand the question. Any fully milspec rifle, or any rifle with a fully milspec bolt and barrel, will last just as long.
5. Colt replacement parts aren't that steep. Compared to the price of the ammo, the tiny premium on their replacement parts is negligible. More importantly, their replacement parts don't cost anymore than the same parts from other milspec suppliers, like LMT for example.
6. Until recently, I would say no. But as I just learned in this thread, Colt now makes a mid length with a long FF handguard. They also make a piston AR, and an AR that converts back and forth between 5.56 and 7.62. How much more modern do you want to get?

Another thing you're going to have to take into account is barrel length, ammunition, and rate of fire. If you go out with a Colt Mk18 and run it like the proverbial raped ape then you'll be very lucky to get 6k rounds out of it. Your extractor will wear out, the bolt will break, and the gas port will erode. But if you take a Colt M16 and treat it gently, I don't know. I've heard of M16s that lasted for decades and decades. If you kept a slow rate of fire it might last more or less indefinitely.

I can't believe I'm sitting here defending Colt. I think they're total creeps, just for different reasons. I would just far rather give my money to a patriotic outfit like BCM than an ATF pet like Colt. But it's hard to argue with the price if a milspec M-forgery is what you want...

 

[NWcityguy2]

So, now to look at those answers...

1. Between just over 1 MOA and 2 MOA, depending on barrel weight. Gov. profile tends towards just over 1 MOA. No chrome lined barrel is going to give you better than that.
Nothing Special in the AR world

2. A chrome lined barrel will hold its groups for at least 10k rounds. After that you will see the groups open up gradually, but you won't see anything too wild until the 20k round mark.
Nothing special in the AR world

3. Extractors tend to last about 3-6k rounds IIRC. Bolts last for 6-10k rounds. Barrels 10-20k rounds. Ejectors probably need replacing at some point. Everything else can go hundreds of thousands of rounds.
Nothing special in the AR world

4. I'm not sure I understand the question. Any fully milspec rifle, or any rifle with a fully milspec bolt and barrel, will last just as long.
Exactly

5. Colt replacement parts aren't that steep. Compared to the price of the ammo, the tiny premium on their replacement parts is negligible. More importantly, their replacement parts don't cost anymore than the same parts from other milspec suppliers, like LMT for example.
This is a bit of a dance around the question. List the prices, and they will come out to more than other equivalent options

6. Until recently, I would say no. But as I just learned in this thread, Colt now makes a mid length with a long FF handguard. They also make a piston AR, and an AR that converts back and forth between 5.56 and 7.62. How much more modern do you want to get?
The Colt CCU just barely hit the market and has no track record. As far as pistons go, they add to the performance of a gun? Could someone elaborate on that for me? And an expensive AR10/AR15 hybrid, what performance feature does that bring to the table for the cost of two separate rifles?

Okay. Now that we have looked at the answers. The Colt hasn't done anything to distance it from a less expensive option to buy up front, and will cost more to replace any parts with the same parts that were supplied with the rifle. That is why "paying for the pony" is not a myth.

 

[grampajack]

Dude... (THR badly needs a facepalm smiley)

You're way off in left field. Nothing special in the AR world? Okay...nobody said Colt was something "special." If you want something special go shell out 2500 for a KAC. Otherwise stop griping. They make a good milspec AR, which puts them ahead of 90% of ARs on the market. I'm not sure what you're wanting. To get better accuracy you have to go to a stainless barrel, and there are serious downsides to doing that. Colt has some of the best, most accurate chrome lined barrels out there.

Now the lifespan of the parts is something special in the AR world, thanks to the proliferation of shady fly by night companies out there. To get something that lasts as long as a Colt you're looking at hundreds more. Like I said, other fully milspec manufacturers charge a lot more, like FN, DD, and LMT. If you want to go cheaper than Colt then you won't be getting a fully milspec rifle, or even something on par with it. You'll be getting a substandard product that's good for plinking at the range and nothing else.

As far as cost of replacement parts, the complete BCGs go for just under 200, which in on par with other fully milspec BCGs like DD, BCM, and LMT. Actually, LMT charges more like 250 I think. You also don't have to replace them with Colt parts. You could use whatever parts you wanted. But if you're wanting full milspec they're going to be the same price, or more expensive.

And I did not say that pistons add to performance. I'm simply saying that Colt has options to compete with just about any other AR on the market. As for the middie having no track record, are you really that dense or are you just being argumentative for the sake of argument? It's not different than any of the their rifles except that it has a longer gas tube and a FF HG. Same bolts, same barrels, etc. Your assertion that Colt doesn't offer "modern performance features" is simply absurd. Seriously...

I still can't believe I'm actually defending Colt. I feel like I've been tricked into it.

And BTW, comparing an LE6920 to a 3 gun rifle just goes to show how little thought you're putting into your decisions. The average competition rifle has a stainless barrel, low mass (perhaps even aluminum) carrier, reduced power springs, lightweight receivers, etc. And they cost about 2-3k to build, before glass. Colt doesn't go after the 3 gun market because there are already people doing it, like JP.

Those comp rifles would be an unmitigated disaster if you tried to field them in combat. Colt's going after the military, police, and civilian self defense markets. They've gone after ranchers a little bit, but the M4 as it stands is already a good out of the box ranch rifle. Their trying to make good, reliable rifles for defensive purposes, not for competition or hunting.

 

[NWcityguy2]

As I said, you are lecturing people out of the conversation.

Edit: I missed this little gem.

If you want to go cheaper than Colt then you won't be getting a fully milspec rifle, or even something on par with it. You'll be getting a substandard product that's good for plinking at the range and nothing else.

I will put a rifle up that meets your definition of above to any test you want to personally perform yourself as well. In fact, I'll use the exact rifle I reviewed here 2 years ago. I want you to personally show me that what you are saying is genuine, and not just something you are repeating.

But please, I don't need another lecture type response, just a yes or no.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I've been interested in getting an AR for quite some time and narrowed my search to two that fit my budget...but can only afford one.

If you had to decide between a Colt LE6920MPS or S&W M&P15 Mid MOE which would you choose? Both seem to be well-respected and I like the Magpul furniture offered on both...which of the two would you pick and why? Is there really much difference between a carbine vs mid-length gas system?

Colt! I hate to side with the Colt snobs but it really is almost impossible to build an AR-15 of the quality of the 6920 for less than Colt is putting them out. I paid less than a grand for mine. When you consider the experience Colt has building hard-use rifles and the quality of the construction and materials, it is very hard to do better than the Colt without spending a lot of money. The Colt has the Vanadium Chrome-Moly steel barrels, the Carpenter steel bolt, a properly staked gas key, the magnetic particle inspection, the mil-spec diameter receiver extension...

I think it is worth it to go with the carbine length gas system to get the other advantages of the Colt. I have no doubt the S&W is a decent rifle, I am just not convinced the experience and materials that go into the S&W ARs is on par with that of the Colt.



Having read through these posts, let me just state that Mil-Spec is not the ultimate or pinnacle. It is a base layer. Mil-Spec means the parts on this piece of gear are "no worse than" a certain minimum level of quality.
What you pay for when you buy a Colt is more than the pony, it is the experience that comes from building these rifles for use under the most difficult circumstances imaginable. You may never have to make an amphibious landing in enemy held territory or bang around inside a Humvee with no air conditioner for a couple thousands hours with your rifle, but it is nice to know that your rifle can take it. Colt has learned some lessons the hard way. They still own the TPD for this rifle, IIRC. With the Colt, you know exactly what you are getting, and you know this is going to be held to a standard of quality control and craftsmanship that allows it to perform under adverse conditions. It is a rifle you can trust your rifle too, and many have. That is why people pay for the pony.

Yes, you can do better than a Colt, but it isn't easy to do on a budget.

 

[Jackal]

Funny thing is, 1 year ago, most of you guys wouldve been tripping over yourselfs to buy a brand new Colt rifle for $680.

 

[NWcityguy2]

Different rifles for different purposes guys

Some rifles can do two things, without suffering at all in either, for less than a Colt.

 

[grampajack]

As I said, you are lecturing people out of the conversation.

Edit: I missed this little gem.



I will put a rifle up that meets your definition of above to any test you want to personally perform yourself as well. In fact, I'll use the exact rifle I reviewed here 2 years ago. I want you to personally show me that what you are saying is genuine, and not just something you are repeating.

But please, I don't need another lecture type response, just a yes or no.

Congratulations, you got 6k rounds out of a 750 dollar AR. I would have been really pissed if I paid that much for one and had it break within 6k rounds.

But seriously, if you're going to rag on anyone, why not FN??? They charge 1500 dollars for what is for all intents and purposes a glorified 6920. And they don't even offer replacement parts. If something goes wrong with it after 10k rounds you would have to send it back to the factory. C'mon, be reasonable.

 

[NWcityguy2]

So... that's a no? Because I am willing to put my rifle through anything you are willing to put your Colt through, to see if your prior statement is correct or incorrect.

 

[cdb1]

"They make a good milspec AR, which puts them ahead of 90% of ARs on the market."

If you quit making claims like that maybe some of us wouldn't take as much issue with your posts.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

So... that's a no? Because I am willing to put my rifle through anything you are willing to put your Colt through, to see if your prior statement is correct or incorrect.

Chill. Do whatever you want with your rifle. You can't possibly do anything to it that hasn't been done over and over again on seven continents with a Colt, while being shot at. That is why people buy Colts-- it's been there, done that on a level your rifle can only fantasize about. Track records count. If you can't understand that, then this isn't really a conversation.

 

[grampajack]

So... that's a no? Because I am willing to put my rifle through anything you are willing to put your Colt through, to see if your prior statement is correct or incorrect.

First of all, what you're suggesting isn't even practical. I can't just step out in my backyard and pump out 6k rounds before this thread is dead and buried. Second of all, I don't own a Colt. I don't own any factory ARs and haven't for a long time. I can build a better AR for less money, as I've been advocating this entire time. Furthermore, my ARs have really spendy stainless barrels, and if I caught anyone rapid firing them that individual would be in need of a proctologist to remove my boot from his hindquarters.

But, if I did own a Colt I would have no problem putting it up against literally anything made by PSA. Wouldn't put it up against a BCM, though. I don't like making bets I don't know I can win.

I still don't get what you're trying to prove. Even if the PSA you're pushing is fully milspec, which I doubt it is, it's still a 750 dollar AR. We've already established that 6920s can be had for near that. Try your test with a value line PSA, and stretch it out to 10k rounds, and then we'll talk.

 

[NWcityguy2]

...Second of all, I don't own a Colt... ...But, if I did...

That is the problem with message boards, some times it takes a bit to get to the truth of the matter.

Try your test with a value line PSA, and stretch it out to 10k rounds, and then we'll talk.

I have already done that with a gun made with PSA parts (BCG,CH, LPK, Upper receiver, UPK), with the exception of a Green Mountain barrel. It was previosuly discussed here. What do you want to talk about?

 

[grampajack]

"They make a good milspec AR, which puts them ahead of 90% of ARs on the market."

If you quit making claims like that maybe some of us wouldn't take as much issue with your posts.

Yes, I made up that statistic, but 90% of all statistics are made up anyways so cut me some slack!

However, I imagine I'm pretty close. I'm not going to survey every AR one the market, even if it were possible to do so, but the VAST majority of them are less than fully milspec. That is, they are "milspec style," but they skip or abbreviate certain processes. If I had to estimate, I would say that ~90% of rifles are less than milspec quality, ~8% are milspec quality, and ~2% are greater than milspec quality, such as the KAC SR25 or LMT's enhanced series.

And of those ~2% that are greater than milspec, that also includes rifles that are used for hunting, competition, hanging on the wall, etc. Only a small fraction of them, like KAC, are going to be good for defensive purposes. I had mentioned JP earlier. They make really nice rifles, no doubt. But I would rather take a rusty machete into a firefight than a JP competition rifle. The low mass carriers alone are enough to kill the deal. It would be like taking a Corvette to an offroad race.

Seriously, go look on gunbroker or armslist. For every Colt or DD there are ten Andersons and PSAs for sale.

ETA: NWcityguy2, you're just being obtuse and you know it. I said from the very beginning that I do not like Colt. I advocated getting a BCM, or better yet, building. But your reasons for not liking Colt are beyond ridiculous.

 

[cdb1]

I was helping a customer with a scope one day. He was looking through a VX-6. A young man walked up, saw the scope and loudly proclaimed, "Leupold sucks, Vortex makes the best scope in the world". I said so is a Vortex Crossfire better than even a Schmidt & Bender? Yes said the young man. The customer then said, is a Crossfire better than Kahles? Yes said the young man.

Perception is reality.

 

[cdb1]

There are numerous people including a many members of this forum who don't make up statistics on the fly. Claims such as the one you made call in to question the validity of all your other claims. Why don't you quit before you dig yourself any deeper?

 

[grampajack]

There are numerous people including a many members of this forum who don't make up statistics on the fly. Claims such as the one you made call in to question the validity of all your other claims. Why don't you quit before you dig yourself any deeper?

Stop it. Seriously.

Go look on the internet gun sites. Tell me how many fully milspec rifles you see for sale compared to how many value line ARs you see for sale. I'll bet it's more than 90% value line, non-milspec ones.

That is the problem with message boards, some times it takes a bit to get to the truth of the matter.



I have already done that with a gun made with PSA parts (BCG,CH, LPK, Upper receiver, UPK), with the exception of a Green Mountain barrel. It was previosuly discussed here. What do you want to talk about?

You stated that was with a 20'' barrel. Bolt lifespans go up exponentially with barrel length increases. A Mk18 may go 6k rounds, an M4 may go 15k, and an M16 who knows. The Air Force had some of the original AR15 marked Colts that they kept until the mid 90s, and who knows how many rounds those bolts had on them. Like I said before, a properly made bolt might last forever on a 20'' rifle, or at least a really freaking long time.

Either you're intentionally being dishonest by not disclosing that it was a 20'' barrel, or you just don't know enough to know that you're being dishonest. Either way, I'm tired of going in circles with you. Believe what you want, but the people who put the most rounds downrange all call BS on everything you're saying. Find me one instructor who tells their students it's okay to come with a PSA (or Anderson etc.) to one of their carbine classes.

 

[mokin]

I didn't vote in the poll. I'm not sure what I'd do. I've been able to get to know three Colts up close and personal in my lifetime. One was a SP1, the other two were property of Uncle Sam (so was I at the time). I noticed a distinct drop in quality from the earliest Colt in my possession, to the latest. I eventually sold the SP1--during the Clinton AWB, got twice out of it what I paid for it. That's all I've got to say about Colt. When I felt the urge to own another, (and another), I put them together from parts I chose, myself.

 

[cdb1]

Telling me to stop it when it is your veracity being called in to question grampajack? I will say I'm not going to post on this thread again which will allow you to get in the last word which is your ultimate goal I imagine - to heck with reality.