Is this a good gun for around 800$. The carbon fiber one is 740$. This will be my first ar. Thanks in advance for y'all's advice.
I had a 20" Colt Hbar that was as accurate as a bolt target gun and when I tightened a wedge shaped scope mount on the carry handle with small pliers a little past hand tight it split the weld down the middle. It seemed fragile to meI saw a carbon model at a gun store that fell 4' off the wall and landed on the end of the barrel and split the top off the upper under the rail. Seems a little fragile to me.
I would also be sceptical of the carbon fiber regardless of the maker.
Warp - could you cite what 'corner cutting' they do? Not that I doubt you, just never heard of it.
How about the MPC Model # R16M4A4T
I guess we have different opinions of what is 'cutting corners' on quality. 1:9 twist is standard in many AR's and if you're shooting 55gr as most people usually shoot is preferred.
If it is indeed a commercial buffer tube (which I would be surprised but very well could be) than that would be pretty crappy I grant you.
This is not an argument, so don't take it the wrong way. I just fail to see how 1/9 rifling is a big cost saver over 1/7 rifling. Is 1/7 tooling that much more expensive? I just don't get it. I've been told I am easily confused though....1:9 twist barrel, not 1:7. That's a big cost savings on their part right up front on the most important and most expensive part of the entire rifle.
They don't list anything about the receiver extension, so that basically guarantees that it is a commercial diameter 6061 deal rather than a mil spec diameter 7075.
They don't list buffer weight, so it's probably a carbine weight not an H.
What do those three things have in common? They are cheaper than the standard. Not better. Only cheaper.
My dad bought a brand new Colt 6920 for <$900 shipped last month, at my recommendation. You don't want to know how Windham compares to Colt.
This is not an argument, so don't take it the wrong way. I just fail to see how 1/9 rifling is a big cost saver over 1/7 rifling. Is 1/7 tooling that much more expensive? I just don't get it. I've been told I am easily confused though....
I CAN see how a different material for the buffer tube could be a money saver. I don't see any advantage in making it a different diameter. Why would anyone ever even start this practice?
1:9 twist is only standard on cheap/bargain basement rifles, like Windham.
1:7 is absolutely great for 55gr...and the heavier/longer bullets, where 1:9 is not. But the 1:9 barrels are cheaper.
I was pretty sure Windham used commercial receiver extensions before I went looking for the specs for this thread...and they list nothing about it. I'd wager $10 it's a commercial tube based on that. And I guarantee it's 6061 and not 7075 no matter what.
And the buffer weight. Carbine is cheaper than H, that's why they use it.
I'm sure there are other things as well.
Windham uses cheap parts for seemingly no reason other than them being cheaper than the standard.
Now, some people will never notice.
every 1:9 I've owned all liked 68's or less.
Gun makers choose twist rates looking for the broadest range of bullets being able to be shot from the rifle. I have 1:9 rifles that love 75gr bullets.
As for commercial vs milspec buffer tubes, when was the last time you saw a commercial tube fail???