For plinking and other shenanginas a DPMS is perfect.
Also DPMS has an actual presence on this forum which in my opinion is a big plus.
I don't think I remember seeing any cases of DPMS not taking care of their customers if there's an issue.

If it's in your price range, and you're not going to be going to war with it - I'd say go ahead and pick up a DPMS.

Yes there are some cases of DPMS rifles having issue, but what company doesn't once in a while?
Go into the BCM forum, you'll see people having issues once in a while as well.
Even someones godly can do no wrong Colt exploded recently and was replaced by Colt.
Shit happens.

It is a matter of percentage or rate of failure. DPMS has one of the highest lemon factors I have ever seen. Sure any compnay can have problems but DPMS saves you money but cutting the very quality control checks that weed out these lemons.  Nothing is free. If you wonder why their rifles are cheaper its because they use inferrior parts and have very few quality control checks. The best warranty or customer service policy is the one you never have to use. Not sure what your smoking on saying a Colt blew up but one of the things about companies like Colt is you get the gun right the first time without having to send it back to the factory multiple times.
Pat

Common sense would be higher sales = more duds. I'm sure if the "top tier" brands marketed like these "inferior" companies they would show similar QC issues. I think the PSA explosion is a good example of that.

exactly.......

Anyone remember what colt's defect rate is with it's military deliveries?  There was a report it was almost 5% and that report was posted here a while back.  Anything mass produced will have some issues however, by a wide margin, dpms owners here  are very very happy

I have seen a failure rate of 33% with DPMS. That is 12 new guns coming in and 4 having problems right off the bat.

Here is a good article with some DPMS evaluations.
AAR - Center Mass, Inc. Patrol Rifle Instructor School

I recently returned from a Center Mass Inc. Patrol Rifle Instructor School. The course is an instructor-level, 5-day, 50+ hour curriculum of instruction on pertinent aspects of patrol rifle program development, training, and deployment. On the web here: http://www.centermassinc.com/638278.html

The Course:

Content covered the many pertinent aspects of LE patrol rifle programs. Topics were spaced out throughout the week in a logical sequence. Exercises were conducted in an allotment of time sufficient for the lowest common denominator to achieve a basic proficiency. Two sessions of classroom training were conducted, almost one full day on TD1 and the morning of TD3. Night exercises were conducted on TD3 and covered common low/no light deployment methods. The balance of the course was dry and live fire exercises on at the outdoor range facility.

Included within the course were exercises on a CAPS system for scenario based training. This was a highlight of the course for many, as most students had never used a live-fire simulation system. On the web at: http://www.caps-inc.com/

Throughout the week, students were prompted to spontaneously instruct a particular skill, coach others, and run the line as other students shot. When not assigned such a task, each student coached another student.

The course concluded with student presentations of assigned topics, a written test of material covered, and a COF most found challenging. The COF is well written, one of the better for this purpose in fact, and included a test of each skill learned within the course.

Each student received an exceptionally well prepared and comprehensive manual containing the entirety of course content, as well as additional supportive information and resources.

Students:

Students in attendance were all currently serving law enforcement firearms instructors in agencies deploying patrol rifles, planning to, or contemplating same. Previous training and experience varied, with some who had substantial training, instructional background, or operational experience, and others with only basic/initial LEFI certs. The latter were the bulk of the class. Most of the students were known to each other, and the class gelled well.

Equipment:

Equipment varied. Some arrived with quality gear proven to be GTG that ran with boring reliability. The tendency of administrators to economize was clearly evident, and there was a disproportionate amount of gear purchased with economy in mind rather than performance. There were no surprises.

DPMS: Several in attendance. A disproportionate amount of the stoppages, failures, and issues were with these guns. None possessed sufficient gas key staking. None were staked at the receiver extension nut. One had suspect chamber dims. None had the correct extractor spring assembly. One officer brought a carbine with a 4-position selector, sequenced (from the 9:00) Safe-Auto-Semi-Burst. He fought the gun. DPMS buyers cited low price and immediate availability as primary purchase criteria. When discussing desirable assembly methods and the reasons for them, one owner asked, “why don’t they just do that at the factory?” Overheard from another: “There are four problems with my gun: 1) D. 2) P. 3) M. 4) S.”
Eotechs: The first went loose on TD1, and 2 more during the week. The first went loose again later as well. Guys with these on their guns learned fast, and constantly checked their gear. Also heard: “Hey, who turned off my sight?”

Defensive Edge SLR-15: Nicely assembled. Positive staking of all pertinents. Proper extractor spring insert. When lubed correctly, it ran well. Unresolved quirk while seating a couple of mags. Pending.

HK G36K: Two in attendance, both ran well. The stocks are too long for pretty much everyone, and especially for IBOs. HK mags tend to hang in pouches and pockets due to the tabs that link them together. If mags won’t be linked together in the field, users might consider shaving them off.

Mini-14: Get it hot, run it dry, and watch it lock up tight. Credit where credit is due: the firing pin and extractor made it.

Remington Rem-Oil: Doesn’t go the distance. A light, sporting/commercial grade lubricant that should stay in that venue.

Weaponshield CLP: At least as good as the other CLPs out there, and just may be much better than most. Comparatively less evap, burn-off, and run-off than others on the line, especially Breakfree.

Stoppages due to insufficient lube- multiple. The “less is more” mantras, old military habits, and aversions to having a “messy gun” die hard. Some learned, stubborn others will return to the road with guns that won’t run long.

Loose pistol grip screws- 2. While effecting repair of one, an instructor was surprised to learn that PG screws were not standardized, with some being slotted and some being hex. Only the slotted driver was readily available.

Extraction failures- multiple. Several guns came with rifle extractor spring assemblies, and it showed. Weak or absent extraction in fouled or hot guns was frequent. Most commonly in DPMS.

Magazine issues- Various problems from USGI mags that have been kept in service too long. Some D&H mags were seen with that soft, easily deformed quasi-GI follower.

Likewise, the ammunition supplied for this course provided its own quirks. 21 shooters fired ~21,000 rounds of Remington UMC 55gr MC (p/n L223R3). Bullet setback, bullet deformation, case deformation, jacket/core separation in 1/7 twist, and failures to fire were observed. There were no catastrophic failures.

As always, you get what you pay for. Buy cheap, buy twice.

Some gear that should’ve had issues was spared them. The firing schedule was more than most were used to, but not particularly intense. Further indictment of the gear that faltered.

My gear ran without issue, as it always has. Worn daily:

Colt LE6920 w/ irons only, mounted Surefire G2, Specter sling.
Magpul PMags and CProducts SS mags in Wilderness pouches.
3 handguns, Glocks 23 (belt), 27 (ankle), SW 642 (pocket). Worn every day.
Surefire E-series lights in the pockets.

This was the major shakedown cruise for PMags, and they did well. One showed some resistance to seating in the 6920 and did not drop free when empty. Removing a little material from the top of the mag catch detent seems to have done the trick.

This was also a test of the Weaponshield CLP sample(s) sent from the manufacturer. I started TD1 with a clean and lubed gun. Relubed TD3. Knocked the chunks out and relubed on the morning of TD4. Cleaned and relubed late TD4 and shot TD5 clean. Due to the combined hot/cold range management and breezy conditions, I was able to accumulate a good quantity of dirt and dust along the way as well.

My final round count: ~1200rds.

Parting thoughts:

LESO/1033 M-16s remain viable and popular patrol rifles. They are quality builds, and perform well when properly maintained. When service is indicated, put the good stuff in it to keep it going.

A competent shooter does not require an accessorized M4-type to bring the fight to the bad guy. An incompetent shooter isn’t made better by one. Fundamentals first, especially for the police patrol environment.

Optics and accessories add a dimension to training most instructors underestimate. But they're neat, aren't they?

Instructor development is not a course or a certification, it’s a pursuit that doesn’t end.

Based on the above, I recommend this course to others in need of training on the subject. Good week.

I don't think you're factoring in the amount of rifles they sell.
It's quite more common to see DPMS and similar priced ARs in gun-stores through out the country.
How often have you seen a BCM rifle at your dealer?

It's like saying less Ferraris than Fords break because they cost more.

I'll stick to my original comment.
If you're on a budget and looking for a fun gun to plink with, I don't think a DPMS is a bad choice.
If you have funds to play with, grab a Colt and never look back.

Edit: I actually took a peek at what they're currently going for. Now a days it looks like there's a lot better buys in that price range. You can pick up a mil-spec PSA (Palmetto State Armory) M4 AR for roughly the same price as a DPMS. I would say go with that.

This is what I have experienced with DPMS. 1st department I worked for 4 out of 12 rifles had issues right off the bat. 1 the J spring broke causing the gun to fire when the safety was applied.  Another was missing the gas tube retaining pin. 2 more had issues with extraction from overly tight chambers and had to be sent back.

Fast foward to another department I worked at some years later. They had 4 DPMS guns and when they went to training all 4 had issues with extraction from overly tight chambers.  My current department has 8 DPMS rifles and again 2 had to be sent back to have their chambers re done because they were too tight and casings would stick in the chamber and would need a cleaning rod to be extratcted. I got the others running by staking the carrier keys and installing BCM extractor up grade kits. Fastfoward to training we hosted a agency sends 2 officers down with DPMS crap specials and guess what yep their rifles failed on the first day.  If you actually USE DPMS rifles you will be very unhappy in short order. If it sits in the safe and does not get shot its fine.
Pat

I am factoring in the number of rifles they sell. Colts and other brands out number DPMS guns in LEO hands up here fortunately and yet you still see the DPMS guns failing at an alarming rate in training.
Like I said before its a percentage thing. If I have 12 DPMS guns and 4 fail and another agency has 300 Colts and 10 fail DPMS loses .
Its a matter of quality control. Its very possible you will get a DPMS gun that is just fine they don't all fail. However your chance of getting a lemon is far greater than with say BCM or Colt.
Pat

That's not good news.
Generally people swing facts without having any backing behind them, which isn't the situation in your case.

Contemplating your experience, I would have to agree with you and and recommend he seeks a rifle from another company.
PSA or Spike Tactical seem to be both better bets and roughly in the same price range.
If a Colt is within his price range, I would without a doubt recommend that before anything else.

Also I'm a bit surprised police departments would order DPMS rifles.
Thought they would go for a higher end gun like Colt.

Thank you for the information, by the way.

Unfortunately many police departments are cash strapped and they look to DPMS for the same reason other consumers do. The bottom line which is price. Unfortunately many times those making the purchasing decision at smaller agencies don't know what they don't know. They think all AR's are the same and then they order the cheaper ones. A lot of our gear is like that and hence the reason I buy a lot of my own gear instead of using department issued equipment when allowed. Sorry if I offended any one here with these posts. I feel strongly on the topic and I have had to deal with DPMS for a lot of years. To their defense there is one good thing about DPMS. They support the shooting sports heavily . I just wish they would at the very least offer a more expensive line that was reliable for people who need them like LEO's.

A cursory inspection of the rifle before buying it will solve 99% of the issues commonly seen.



I blame the buyer as much as DPMS.



It's like buying a used car without inspecting it thoroughly.



I wouldn't buy a colt without field striping it and looking it over.


 

I have an Oracle and it shoots hand-size groups –– but I [must have] have tiny hands.



It's also lousy for hunting.  It took one shot at 165 yards to get this doggy.



My experience with the Oracle has been every bit as good as with my Colt.  My brother bought one and loves it, too.

I would be willing to say that 90 percent of that shooting was all you.
I would get no where near that good of a grouping with the same rifle.

I don’t know why people comparing cars to diff brands of ARs,

Ferraris and Ford have totally diff goal in design, philosophy, performance and market share…ect.

While all manufactures of ARs are copied/mimicking one single design and philosophy.

Anyone who uses the term “Hobby Gun” in a firearms forum should have their lungs ripped out by Lee Ermey, they should be shot with a dull bullet, be drawn and quartered, be burned at the stake and have their library card revoked.

The only people who use the term “gun” are the people who want to take your firearms away from you.

I’m 62 years old and the “mil-spec” Colt M16s they handed us in the service all jammed and were a POS when they first came out.

I traded three milsurp “rifles” and paid out $10.58 for my DPMS A2 HBAR, it goes bang every time I pull the trigger and doesn’t jamb like the first mil-spec models of the Colt M16 did.

I wonder if the people firing the Colts in these courses have already had their armourer go over these rifles after having put a few hundred rounds down range and have a advantage in reliability.

I don’t plan on throwing my scoped Remington 700 in the mud any more than my DPMS AR, and proper care and cleaning goes a long way in preserving any firearm. And bragging about shooting thousands of rounds without cleaning your AR doesn’t impress me in the least. And it’s like bragging you go 50,000 miles between oil changes and check your tire pressure once a year.

Speaking from experience the word mil-spec is over rated and if I do need a very reliable firearm I will grab my M1 and know that the bad guys won’t argue about its bark and bite when hit.

And the first M16s were called mouse guns, they were made by Colt and they were “mil-spec”.

DPMS owner here good stuff for a weekend warrior and variment hunting guy I'd rather trust my life with my build as its has over proven the DPMS but still would be satisified if I had just DPMS in SHTF

Pat Rogers uses the term "hobby guns".  I don't think it'd be wise to try to do all those bad things to him.

OP you are so close in price to a PSA.

Or Spikes if you can find one.....I'd spend the extra 100.00 and move up.

And Mr. Rodgers would sing "Its a wonderful day in the neighborhood" on his show.

And I don't own any "hobby guns".

A "hobby gun" is a paint ball gun used on weekends to fight pretend wars.

And these military rifles weren't used for paint ball wars.

That is the most retarded statement I have seen on this forum in a while.
Especially when you live in an area where you have to order your guns through a dealer sight unseen. Also you can not tell if the chamber dimensions are incorrect by handling it, you can't tell its going to have problems with extraction.l In fact about the only thing you can tell is major stuff like things not being assembled properly and if it looks pretty. As for blaming the buyer that is like blaming a crime victim for the actions of a criminal. Its the companies responsibility to put out a good products not the buyers.
Pat

The issue with the first M16 was more lack of training for the troops and lack of cleaning equipment than any real design issue. In fact I have fired many an older M16 through the military sales to leo program and they work fine. Just treat them like any other ar and run them wet and they won't let you down. Also AR's are not so sensitive about cleaning as they are about being lubed properly. Yes its a good thing in the real world if your gun does not have to be babied and cleaned every 200 rounds. In real lilfe tools get muddy, sandy etc and you need them to run.  Mil Spec does mean something. It means the rifles were built to a specific standard and government inspectors make sure of it. As for bit and bark. I dropped a 200 pound black bear with a 75 grain tap round from my 5.56. So I am sure it will do its job on people if I do mine.
I will sum it up with DPMS buyer beware.

If I recall one of the early problems with the M16 also was the fact that Stoner had designed it to fire ammo loaded with IMR powder and the army changed it to ball powder,which was dirtier and led to a higher cyclic rate as well. I believe that once they issued cleaning kits, changed the buffer and chromed the chamber and then the bore the problems pretty much were resolved.

Just like another user posted in this thread, when you buy Colt/ other high end AR's you're buying peace of mind. High end AR's will be well made, and perform to par close to 100% of the time. That being said it's also true that these perceived 2nd class AR's are forged in the same factories that Colts and such are made in, then finished and assembled by the brands in question. Take a Colt upper and compare it with a DPMS upper, or any other upper forged in Brass Aluminum Forging Enterprises. They are the same piece of metal, finished to different standards. This belief that an affordable AR will be out-performed by a Colt is false.

My argument is not to say that an AR is an AR, don't waste your money. Its to say that depending on your philosophy of use, you may be just as happy buying a more affordable AR. If my life depended on it, I would buy a Colt hands down. The fact is that it doesn't.

There are also many other affordable AR brands I would recommend over DPMS. JSE Surplus and PSA being the top two that come to mind. You'll be hard pressed to find negative reviews about rifles from these guys.

Another suggestion that I have is to assemble your own rifle. You can get your hands on a quality aluminum lower, lower parts kit, and complete upper for anywhere from $550-$700. You'll know your rifle more after you build it, and you'll be proud of your work and the rifle you've picked the parts for and assembled yourself.

My final words of advice for you are to stay away from biased reviews and gather your own information from a wide variety of sources. Once you know what you're getting into, and hopefully know about the products you're buying, you'll be able to make a decision you won't regret. Philosophy of use should be the most important factor to consider when buying an AR. Does your life depend on it? How many rounds per year will you put through it? Is it just a range toy?

Actually what happened was the Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara (mack the knife) closed down the Springfield Arsenal and turned it into a museum. And then McNamara contracted out our military's firearms to civilian contractors, then our military received a hobby gun from Colt that didn't work and got our service men killed and cost over twice as much as the M14...........and it was "mil-spec" and issued to our troops before it was ready.

My DPMS doesn't have a chromed chamber or bore nor do ANY of my rifles and they are all cleaned after firing.
Is my 30-30 Winchester a toy or hobby gun?
Is my Remington 700, or my Smith & Wesson model 28 a hobby gun?

My Ford truck is built Ford tough and Chevy's really suck and that is nothing more than an opinion and brand loyalty. And the term of "Hobby Gun" is insulting and doesn't belong in any firearms forums.

There is so much nonsense in this thread it's ridiculous.  No company could stay in business much less have anywhere near the positive reviews as dpms does here if they had a 33% failure rate.  Again, colt has a 5% delivery defect rate to our troops, you know the guys tasked with actually fighting and not shooting at coke cans on the weekend.  5% for any company is not good and without a mil contract to support that failure rate, they'd be toast.  Modern variances in cost production don't allow for 5%.  

I own top to bottom on the scale and my dpms and older bushmaster is every bit the rifle my higher end noveske or lwrc's are with respects to pulling the trigger and going bang. The problem with some of you is the price tag.  You think cause it's cheaper the rifle isn't as good.  Colts are not much better.  Talk to any army armorer and you get nothing but horrid stories of delivered colts.  Anything mass produced will have issues.  Anything made by man will have issues.  Inspect your rifle before you use it, install quality parts, clean and maintain.

We've got paki's making guns out of coke cans that work just fine and you get yahoos on here saying modern machining of dpms isn't good.  laughable

Clearly some brands have better qc and use finer materials than others however, that does not mean the other brand is bad.

I can see it now, the next load of horeshite is gonna be the, 'I wouldn't trust my life to the bipod that isn't a Atlas'

Wow. Are you dense?



You've managed to somehow completely miss my point, and offer a counter argument that agrees with mine.



Best of luck buddy.
 

I've used 3 DPMS lower parts kits, a MK12 barrel, one lower, and various other bits and pieces without issue. And my MK12  barrel is very accurate. My 10 shot groups are around moa or better with my handloads.

So other than maybe gas key staking, what is it you are looking for that could visually tell you that a rifle would be likely to fail and "solve 99% of the issues commonly seen"?

Given that feed ramp match issues and gas key staking are the vast majority of the problems we've encountered, I'd say a cursory inspection can get you most of the way there.
 

Your point was retarded. You are blaming the buyer for a crappy product of the manufacturer, and you called me dense?
Pat

Sigh...



I didn't call you dense. I asked if you were.



I'm not blaming the buyer exclusively.



I'm simply saying that if you are going to buy a gun, how about inspect it first?



Doing so will eliminate many issues at the starting line.



Why is this difficult?
 

Ok so your saying a buyer should always inpsect a gun before buying. Sounds reasonable enough except when its not.
1. You're order for a police agency purchasing multiple firearms from a dealer. You don't get to inspect each gun before it arrives.
2. You live in a remote area and go through a local FFL for gun sales where you order on line.
3. You simple don't like paying retail price so you order on line.  


Next problem with your statement is this there are a lot of problems you will not see on a visial inspection and function check like undersized chambers which is a common DPMS issue in my experience.

Lastly with other brands like BCM, Noveske, Stag etc is you don't have to be an armorer because you can actually trust their guns to be sent to you working properly for just a bit more money. The resonsibility does not rest with the consumer but rather the manufacturer to build a quality product and when they fail its shame on them. For the record I did not call you retarded but your point in my opinion was less than well thought out to say the least.
Pat

Trusting a gun from the factory is naive and stupid. I will never trust a tool that I haven't personally inspected and tested. It might be a radio or a taser or a pistol, but god bless I won't issue it out to one of mine before ensuring it's functionality.



This whole story of "massive failures in classes" and such is pure bullshit. The guys running ANY gun that they haven't thoroughly tested are tools of the highest orders. Do you really think I would order a dozen ARs for my dept. and just issue them without testing and inspection? Fuck no.



You can call me retarded if you want, but I take responsibility for the tools I use. If I have a problem with them, I take it up with the manufacturer, and I NEVER, NEVER put that weapon into service.



Hell man, I've been called much worse by people I love. You'll have to do better to get my feathers ruffled.
Long story short... I've seen DPMS issues, I've seen Colt issues. I've seen RRA issues. The absolute end game is that you better make sure your fucking tools are in order before you trust your life to them.



I've trusted my life to a DPMS for 5 years now. She's never failed me. I've even gone 3000 rounds between cleanings just to prove a point.



I have a half dozen officers in my dept that carry DPMS rifles. I'll let you tell them that despite their years of unfettered service and 100 qualification scores, that they shouldn't trust their guns because some random ass guy on a forum says so.



 

Regardless of all the other exchanges happening in this thread, these are wise words. Of the oft reported guns that "go down" in these classes (AR, handgun or any gun), or have problems with issued gear, I wonder how many were really tested before the class or before issue. 100 rounds? 300? 500? 1000? My thought is, often, the dude bought the gun just before class and/or is running a difference gun/ammo combo and/or is running reloads and/or gun is not maintained and/or never really had the bugs (tool or user) worked out from the start, or gun is just not broken in. Then of course you have generalization of individual experience.

Regardless:
Should the tool work from the start? Yes.
Is it naive to assume it will? Yes.
Is it often a simple fix? Yes, though maybe annoying nonetheless (e.g. repair or return) or not (e.g. clean/maintain it better).
Can more upfront money, if well spent, increase the odds the tool will work from the start? Maybe, maybe not... but, admittedly, likely yes.
Can most hobby shooters save money on cheaper gear that serves their individual limited hobby needs just as well? Often, yes.
Do most dudes want to admit they are a hobby shooter? No, this is man stuff afterall.
Can almost any modern AR, that's properly tested and not otherwise broken, when properly cleaned and maintained, with quality factory new ammo, make it through the very limited number of rounds needed in a self-defense use? Yes.
If you are a heavy gamer may you have different needs? Yes.
When the Zombies attack will DPMS owners wish they'd sprung for more gun? Time may tell.

Me:
I have a Glock that got light strikes. $15 trigger assembly. Solved.
I have two Glocks that broke slide lock springs. $2 each. Solved.
I have a Glock that spit brass in my face. $15 extractor. Solved.
I have an AA .22lr upper that developed gas cutting. $5 to ship for repair. Returned as new. Solved.
I have a 1911 that would get early slide lock back. $0 to dimple the slide stop. Solved.
I have the same 1911 would get FTRTB. $7 spring. Solved.
I had a 1911 that shot 6" high at 20 yards. $5 sight. Solved.
I had a Nighthawk 1911 mag that cracked in the back. $2 to ship. New mag sent. Solved.
On my Dillons, I've had a cracked frame, broken handles, torn shell plate, cracked link arms, and other small breakages. Call to Dillon. Free parts shipped. Solved.

I could go on an on. These are tools. Use them enough and stuff happens. Lemons happen. Stuff may need tweeking. Stuff breaks. I still buy Glock and 1911, and swear by Dillon. Customer service is what can really matter. I'd buy DMPS at the right price. If I was so worried about AR reliability I'd buy an AK at half the price. Flame suit on.

Its not bullshit because these guns are crapping out and top training are seeing it. DPMS has about the worst reputation amoung end users for a reason.  Been there and seen i myselft.  Here is the deal  yes you should test a gun before you carry it.  That falls under the No Shit Sherlock catagory.
However when your order said rifles and 4 of them fail it costs money and time to deal with the issues.  When you order Colt, LMT, Noveske and other tier one guns you don't have these issues. That is no shit.
Those out there that think all AR's are created equal are simple ignorant.
As for being some random guy. I have been a cop for 13 years now and a firearms instructor and armorer for 11 of those years. For the record I don't see an officer star under your name.

Stuff does happen however it happens a lot more to companies that use inferrior materials and cut their quality control practices to almost nothing. Its this simple you get what you pay for. DPMS is able to offer cheaper rifles because they cut corners. To anyone reading this thread. Do a search on line on DPMS and you will see for yourself a lot more negative feed back than most other brands.
Pat

I completely agree. I have seen BCM, Noveske, LMT, Del-ton, Colt, DD, RRA, CMMG, DPMS, and others fail just as often as "lower end" rifles made by little known manufacturers. An AR is an AR is an AR.....All these companies use the exact same manufacturers of upper and lower receivers, BCGs, barrels, etc...they only difference is, they "glitter them up" by adding 3D logos of their company on every single part so that the buyer will become a free advertisement for them when showing off their overpriced rifle to other people......Here is the rule of thumb....the more junk that you see printed on a rifle, the more you will pay for it....not because it is better quality, but because it cost the builder a lot of money to "glitter" up that rifle with advertising logos...and someone has to pay for all that advertising.....and that person is not the builder, it is the one who paid too much for the rifle with all that glitter on it...

absolutely not true

First off, dpms is able to offer at a cheaper price because of the scale of the process and not because they cut corners.  Odd that you consider colt given their documented issues and even here on the boards the number of threads on malfunctions we've seen.  I've had to send back lwrc, noveske, and RRA.  The reason you see more is because of how many they sell in an environment where every manufacturer is stressed to meet demand.  It's no wonder every single maker is seeing qc issues.  

I was recently at a class where a pof, a colt  and a lmt had issues.  Uh oh, can't buy those makes now....absurd

In this thread, you and two others are the primary bashers while there is overwhelming support for the brand.  On this board there are FAR more people that support the rifle than bash it.  

You don't like them, that's fine but either understand the manufacturing process, the supply/demand cycle and what's happening in the industry or admit you dont' and stop trying to make a case on a limited sample and inuendo.

they guy you are responding too makes the most sense in this whole thread.

agree

the only rifle I've ever had that needed nothing was my mosin...haha

Ahh didn't think of the feed ramps.  Thanks for pointing out the obvious in a kind way