I'm thinking about getting a new rifle. Looking at an M&P sport II at about $599 or a PSA upper and lower build that would total about $530. Both of these would have same sight set-up with one pmag. The PSA would be of the stainless barrel variety for the price mentioned. What are your opinions?
PSA vs M&P sport II
- Thread starter bscott29
- Start date
- Status
ColoradoShooter77
Member
I have the original M&P Sport and its a fantastic rifle. In 7 month's, I've put 1800 rounds through this thing and not one single mis-feed. I only use P-Mag's.
I'd go with the Smith, very nice rifle for the money.
I'd go with the Smith, very nice rifle for the money.
Jackal
Member
The Sport 2 uses a 4140 barrel, the cheapest steel used in AR barrels. Whether that makes a difference is up to the individual. I'd personally opt for a 416R or 4150 barrel at the same cost, before a 4140. With decent quality 4150 barrels in the $100 range, I dont understand why S&W or DPMS (Oracle/Sportical) are even still using 4140. Once again, while a person may never see a difference between the 2, why spend more for less?
Last edited:
Quentin
Member
Either can be a great low cost AR. But with PSA you're gonna have to do more research to get the best deal and may need lots of patience and luck waiting for the parts you want to go on sale - or even be in stock.
PSA is a patient, thinking man's game. You can be rewarded with an amazing rifle for the money or you can cobble together something you won't be happy with.
Know yourself before choosing, and remember the Sport is not a bad choice at all. You can build a better PSA for the money. Or a lesser PSA.
PSA is a patient, thinking man's game. You can be rewarded with an amazing rifle for the money or you can cobble together something you won't be happy with.
Know yourself before choosing, and remember the Sport is not a bad choice at all. You can build a better PSA for the money. Or a lesser PSA.
grubbylabs
Member
I just built a PSA for my boss. We bought everything together in one shot. For the money, it's a nice rifle. It's every bit as good as M&P.
Jackal
Member
You should also look at Radical Firearms, I've purchased 2 upper's and they have ran perfect so far. http://www.primaryarms.com/radical-...iver-12-fgs-handguard/p/rfu16-1-7-5.56-12fgs/
Slap in a blem PSA premium bcg for $80 and a $15 charging handle. $305 for a complete free floated upper. While certainly not as accurate as my Larue PredatAR, the entire Radical upper costs less than the Larue barrel....
Slap in a blem PSA premium bcg for $80 and a $15 charging handle. $305 for a complete free floated upper. While certainly not as accurate as my Larue PredatAR, the entire Radical upper costs less than the Larue barrel....
If your PSA rifle was assembled properly and all the parts are in spec then you will probably have the best sub-$600 rifle. The problem is that PSA seems to have sporadic quality control problems which you cannot identify before you buy since you will likely be ordering it over the internet. The S&W Sport II is probably a safer purchase as far as quality control.
NWcityguy2
Member
Both are good choices. The advantage of the S&W is that it can be held in the hand, inspected and bought locally. The advantages of the PSA is it will come with a dust cover and forward assist (typically), can be carbine/mid-length/rifle gassed, can have a stainless/melonited/chromed barrel and also can come with some upgraded furniture.
There is nothing wrong with a stainless barrel if you don't plan on shooting thousands a year through it. It won't last as long as a melonited of chrome lined barrel (which only cost a little more), but it won't wear out all that fast either. Freedom line Stainless barrels aren't exactly match grade either (though I do get sub-moa out of mine with handloads), but are quality products. All things equal though, the stainless barrel is going to perform about the same as any other unlined barrel. It will just be a different color. I don't think there has ever been any evidence that an entry level unlined barrel of one material has performed noticeably different than a equivalent barrel of another material.
And honestly, even though Chrome lining or meloniting is very cost effective when looking at the overall price, the sometimes forgotten reality is that people who can afford to wear out barrels can also afford to replace them.
There is nothing wrong with a stainless barrel if you don't plan on shooting thousands a year through it. It won't last as long as a melonited of chrome lined barrel (which only cost a little more), but it won't wear out all that fast either. Freedom line Stainless barrels aren't exactly match grade either (though I do get sub-moa out of mine with handloads), but are quality products. All things equal though, the stainless barrel is going to perform about the same as any other unlined barrel. It will just be a different color. I don't think there has ever been any evidence that an entry level unlined barrel of one material has performed noticeably different than a equivalent barrel of another material.
And honestly, even though Chrome lining or meloniting is very cost effective when looking at the overall price, the sometimes forgotten reality is that people who can afford to wear out barrels can also afford to replace them.
RainDodger
Member
Save money and buy something a tiny bit more expensive if you're worried.
Armybrat
Member
The new S&W Sport II has the FA & dust cover, plus the barrel is melonited (they just call it by another name).
The S&W is also has a lifetime warranty, IIRC.
I have an older Sport with no FA or dust cover. Still a fine shooter, but I upgraded the cheap factory hand guard to a Magpul model.
The S&W is also has a lifetime warranty, IIRC.
I have an older Sport with no FA or dust cover. Still a fine shooter, but I upgraded the cheap factory hand guard to a Magpul model.
- Status
