I might buy my first AR-15, looking for a sanity check

[PowerG]

Why is everyone so hung up on "Mil-spec"? Those specs were drawn up and set in stone almost fifty years ago. A lot of today's newly made parts are far superior to the Army's half century old specifications.

Is a Geissele trigger superior to A GI trigger? (yes) Is it mil-spec? (no) LWRCI makes a bolt carrier with an integral gas key. It will never loosen up. Is it better than mil-spec? Yes. Is it mil-spec? No way. Is your bolt made from Carpenter 158? If it isn't, then it isn't mil-spec. There are better steels available today. There are better flash suppressors, better muzzle brakes, I could go on forever. None of them are mil-spec.

Mil-spec was the best 50 years ago. Nowdays, in many cases, it is inferior. Not bad, or substandard, just not as good as some of the aftermarket parts. One must remember that mil-spec parts are built to a set of specifications set forth by the government.....

....and built by the lowest bidder. And the lowest bidder will build parts just good enough to met specs, but no better.

You don't think the TDP has evolved any at all in the last 50 years? in fact the TDP has been changed many times to reflect things learned in the field, to improve both reliability and durability of the weapons. You've gotta keep in mind that the military isn't interested in the absolute best accuracy, they are interested in acquiring a rifle that is as reliable in combat as they can get, for the lowest cost. If your rifle won't run then you're inconvenienced, if theirs won't run it could get them killed. So a Gisele trigger may be better for what you're doing with it, but it may not be better for what they're doing with it.

And in a lot of cases you really don't need mil-spec parts for a range gun, and in some cases you absolutely don't want them (many chrome-lined barrels are very accurate, but there are better choices for a paper puncher where you want the absolute best accuracy possible). Some of the testing does add to the cost of the guns. For example: we do a lot of MPI (mag particle, wet mag, MPE, different people call it by different names) where I work, I am the QA manager so setting up and running these type programs is something I am familiar with. The equipment doesn't cost very much, it's relatively low-tech, but to do this testing requires a level of certification, I would guess the guy in the plant that does it is a Level II. So training him costs money, and he must re-certify periodically. Almost certainly there is a Level I overseeing the program, he will most likely have other duties but he must carry this certification to run the MPI system and supervise and train the Level II people, and every bit of the testing must be documented; I would guess with the military involved there very well may be a piece of paper on file for each and every bolt and barrel they test. It costs money, and it adds to the price of the gun. In the industry I work in (not firearms) it's not unusual for QC requirements to add 20% to the price of a job...a job we recently finished had $40,000 in the budget for the QC documentation package alone, and that didn't include any of the testing. In the case of AR's the military has decided that they consider all this testing to be worth the cost, and probably over the years experience has shown them that in the long run this testing actually saves money. It's up to you to decide if you think your rifle requires all of this, and if you're plinking at cans or something then it certainly doesn't, but if the rifle is used for more serious purposes then it very well could be something worth paying for. And this is just the MPI testing, they do a lot more to these parts, shot peening, the pressure tests, and I would guess quite a bit of materials testing.

 

[Warp]

Warp, I don't understand your comment. "You can spout that "brand-name and logo" crap all you want...but we all know that isn't what it's about".

I don't know how you cannot.

People who choose known quantity parts, quality parts with a certain specification because they are proven to work, are not buying something because of some logo. You can tell yourself that, and you can even try to insult the rest of us by telling us that is what we are doing, but it is wrong...and I'm pretty sure you know it's wrong.

Why is everyone so hung up on "Mil-spec"? Those specs were drawn up and set in stone almost fifty years ago. A lot of today's newly made parts are far superior to the Army's half century old specifications.

Is a Geissele trigger superior to A GI trigger? (yes) Is it mil-spec? (no) LWRCI makes a bolt carrier with an integral gas key. It will never loosen up. Is it better than mil-spec? Yes. Is it mil-spec? No way. Is your bolt made from Carpenter 158? If it isn't, then it isn't mil-spec. There are better steels available today. There are better flash suppressors, better muzzle brakes, I could go on forever. None of them are mil-spec.

Mil-spec was the best 50 years ago. Nowdays, in many cases, it is inferior. Not bad, or substandard, just not as good as some of the aftermarket parts. One must remember that mil-spec parts are built to a set of specifications set forth by the government.....

....and built by the lowest bidder. And the lowest bidder will build parts just good enough to met specs, but no better.

You clearly don't even know what you are talking about.

PS: The specs are good. That's the whole point. It doesn't matter if company A can meet the specs for less than company B, the specs are what the specs are, AND THEY ARE GOOD! As stated time and again in every stupid thread like this, when you deviate from the known-good, there needs to be a good reason...a reason other than "because it's cheaper"

Maybe you get Geissele triggers for less money than a standard GI type trigger. I don't know. But you would be the only person I've heard of who uses Geissele triggers because they are less expensive than GI/milspec.

 

[HGM22]

To the OP,

Look into the TDP and get an idea of what a quality AR looks like so you have some basis to make a decision later. If you want to change some things you can, but you will know why you are changing them. I would, for example, probably look at a better stainless barrel and better trigger while also making sure my receiver extension and bolt was TDP spec. You are right to point out that you will probably never have to use the rifle to protect yourself, but this way you can get an idea of what matters to you without getting stuck with a gunsmith special.

For JWH: If its not clear, I believe Warp is saying that its a tired argument that people only buy Colts (or other higher-end rifles, but Colt seems to be the most disparaged) because of the pony on the lower. In reality, many people buy them because that pony represents a quality rifle; it is not because they like how the logo looks. Most would buy that rifle if some other logo was put on the side. So to insult purchasers of Colts as being nothing more than ignorant fanboys who would buy anything with a pony on the side is disingenuous and confusing to those looking to learn about ARs.

Edit: Right now you can get a Colt 6920/6720 for $800-900 which is a great deal for such a high quality gun and represents the best value:dollar ratio out there now.

 

[Warp]

To the OP,

Look into the TDP and get an idea of what a quality AR looks like so you have some basis to make a decision later. If you want to change some things you can, but you will know why you are changing them. I would, for example, probably look at a better stainless barrel and better trigger while also making sure my receiver extension and bolt was TDP spec. You are right to point out that you will probably never have to use the rifle to protect yourself, but this way you can get an idea of what matters to you without getting stuck with a gunsmith special.

For JWH: If its not clear, I believe Warp is saying that its a tired argument that people only buy Colts (or other higher-end rifles, but Colt seems to be the most disparaged) because of the pony on the lower. In reality, many people buy them because that pony represents a quality rifle; it is not because they like how the logo looks. Most would buy that rifle if some other logo was put on the side. So to insult purchasers of Colts as being nothing more than ignorant fanboys who would buy anything with a pony on the side is disingenuous and confusing to those looking to learn about ARs.

Edit: Right now you can get a Colt 6920/6720 for $800-900 which is a great deal for such a high quality gun and represents the best value:dollar ratio out there now.

Yes.

Part in bold: Spikes comes to mind. Their default logo looks like two male genitalia fighting it out, but Spikes rifles have good spec's and a good reputation for quality, so people buy them, if they want a good rifle, and when the price is right.

 

[tark]

Warp, I'm having trouble making any sense of your reply. All I said is that many aftermarket parts are better than mil-spec. That is fact, and not open to debate or discussion. I don't recall using the word "Cheap" any where in my post. In my post previous to this one I stated that the Mil-spec standards were high. I never insinuated they were cheap of substandard. I did use the word "Inferior" So.....is a Buick inferior to a Rolls Royce? Some would say so.....but that doesn't mean that the Buick is a bad car. Just, that it isn't built to RR standards.

Some Mil-spec parts are inferior to some aftermarket parts. That doesn't mean they are worthless, any more that the Buick is worthless. That was all I was trying to point out.

 

[tark]

By the way, Warp, I don't use a Geissele trigger, never implied that I did, and I certainly didn't imply they were cheaper. Where you got that line of thought I do not know...

 

[Warp]

Warp, I'm having trouble making any sense of your reply. All I said is that many aftermarket parts are better than mil-spec. That is fact, and not open to debate or discussion. I don't recall using the word "Cheap" any where in my post. In my post previous to this one I stated that the Mil-spec standards were high. I never insinuated they were cheap of substandard. I did use the word "Inferior" So.....is a Buick inferior to a Rolls Royce? Some would say so.....but that doesn't mean that the Buick is a bad car. Just, that it isn't built to RR standards.

Some Mil-spec parts are inferior to some aftermarket parts. That doesn't mean they are worthless, any more that the Buick is worthless. That was all I was trying to point out.

We weren't talking about people saving money and being anti-brand-snob, buying as-good-as rifles, because they get a Geissele SSA for their rifle.

Your post about more expensive, name brand, quality, proven rifle parts is pretty much irrelevant to the person who wants to buy a lower-quality rifle just-because they are hipster and "I don't need a fancy pony on the side of my rifle to be a cool kid"

 

[ColoradoShooter77]

Dollar for dollar, you'll have a hard time beating the S&W M&P Sport, either version 1 or 2. Mine has been flawless through 1500 rounds and I'm seriously impressed with it.

 

[d2wing]

I would buy the RRA. If you want to change something you can. I would build a gun later when you have a better idea of what you like or may want another style gun.

 

[JWH321]

"For JWH: If its not clear, I believe Warp is saying that its a tired argument that people only buy Colts (or other higher-end rifles, but Colt seems to be the most disparaged) because of the pony on the lower. In reality, many people buy them because that pony represents a quality rifle; it is not because they like how the logo looks. Most would buy that rifle if some other logo was put on the side. So to insult purchasers of Colts as being nothing more than ignorant fanboys who would buy anything with a pony on the side is disingenuous and confusing to those looking to learn about ARs."

HGM22 -- Thanks for the clarification. I did not intend to demean or disparage anyone. What I meant was that I have had folks look at my gun and tell me that I should have not bought the upper and lower that I bought because it was no good. I had one guy tell me that I was an idiot for putting an expensive (to me) barrel on low cost receivers. What I intended to imply is that my rifle shoots straight and that I had a hell of a lot of fun building it. My son-in-law shoots an LMT rifle that is truly an impressive gun. There is no question about its quality. Yet I shoot my gun with no less accuracy than I shoot his. Others will shoot both guns much better than will ever be capable of doing (70 year old eyes). What I really wanted to say is that the fun is in the shooting, regardless of one's technical expertise. Obviously I did a poor job of saying that, and for that I apologize. Having been on the receiving end of brand-name ridicule, I would never seek to impose that on anyone else. And I had never before heard of the Colt argument that you reference. When I set out to buy an AR, I had a short list of brands and models. I found none that had EVERY element that I sought so I quickly discovered that you bought a gun and then came home and revised it. That's what led to my decision to build one. I knew that each and every part would be the part that I chose. There are many many learned arguments for and against every part that I selected. Some I chose on price alone with the full knowledge that I was introducing compromise. But, in the end, I still love my little gun -- more than I thought I would when I started building it. I suspect that my son-in-law will eventually convince me that I need an LMT. But my little home-built will stay with me, regardless.

 

[strambo]

I don't own a Colt, but I've carried them in combat. If I were buying a factory AR today and price was a concern, I'd get the best deal I could on a 6720 shooting for $800. Not for the Pony logo, but for the balance of quality and cost it represents. That is if defense would even be a possible use for it. If I was 100% sure it would just be a range toy with defensive needs covered by different guns, then it doesn't matter.

All my ARs, I assembled lowers and bought factory uppers of known good quality (LMT, DD) and have a couple full builds but they aren't for defensive use (a .22lr and a light weight 5.56). For factory, I'd stick with Colt, DD, BCM, LMT, Spikes at around the $1k-ish price point. The PSA Premium line and S&W if wanting to be solidly sub $800.

RRA isn't bad, but its cost is in line with better quality options provided you shop around so it doesn't represent a value. The S&W M&P sport is a good value.

 

[FL-NC]

If that's the rifle you like, normally I would say go for it- but from what you described you will be using it for, it looks (and costs) like much more rifle than you need. I believe in the KISS principle. If you went with something more basic like a S&W M&P sport or one of the similar mil-clone type guns from PSA, Del-ton, etc., it would still be a "factory gun", at a much cheaper price- meaning you could put more $ into important things like sights, mounts, lights. ammo, mags, etc. If you need a "little rail" for an accessory or 2, I like those cheap magpul handguards (MOE?) that you just add sections to suit your needs. As far as mounts returning to zero, Larue's mounts seem to do the best job at that. A little pricey, but def. quality (you get what you pay for)- and remember what you want them to do. That won't happen with a $5 set of trashco rings from wally world.