Quote History Quoted:
Colt was always the betamax to the rest of the industry's vhs, or heck cd/ipod/usbmemorystick - heck they're still selling betamax's LOL. Oversize trigger pins and molded in sear blocks, and like the guy above said, milled off safety selector stops. Who needs that aggravation? In the end it bit them in the tail. There are still, and always will be, the Cold cool-ade drinkers, but as for me, I choose "other".
View Quote
I'm not a Colt fanboy. Don't own any of their rifles or pistols, but I disagree with this statement.
Colt has forgotten more about what makes these types of rifles work than most of the AR15 imitation industry will ever know.
They have also pushed innovation and alternate caliber development that gets overlooked because so many people are new to AR15's and AR10's, and don't really know much of anything about the history of these guns.
Take the Colt 7.62x39 Sporter, for example. They did a lot of engineering work on that project to get those guns to work. All of it was ignored when gun show grade companies like Model 1 Sales jumped on the caliber back in the day and thought they could market x39 parts with just an enlarged bolt face and garbage-grade barrels.
I started to see really quick that after-market vismod guns have nothing in common with Mil-spec guns, other than looks. Not even the detents are the same, let alone the springs, extractor steel quality, barrel steel, chamber dimensions, gas vent holes, dimensional tolerances on the critical areas of the system, QC'd via MPI on lower parts with inspections codes and stamps, etc.
You also know that any AR design they introduce has actually been tested by a team with institutional knowledge that dwarfs that of most of the AR assembler part companies combined.
For these reasons, I would look at a 901 over most of the other .308 offerings currently on the market, especially since they have a smaller receiver set that feels like handling an AR15 more than an AR10.