User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 8:58:29 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Genuinely asking, not a fanboi, nothing like that, not buying anything. I am genuinely curious as to whether there is any difference, six of one, half a dozen of another? Not buying anything, just always looking around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 9:00:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: TDP |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 9:05:45 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: TDP |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 9:58:35 PM EDT
[#4]
I'm not yet familiar with TDP.
Someone mind letting me into the cool kid club? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:02:16 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not yet familiar with TDP. Someone mind letting me into the cool kid club? Owned by Colt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:18:47 PM EDT
[#6]
So companies are using the TDP that they aren't licensed to use? Or?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:21:39 PM EDT
[#7]
Sorry, I don't know what this means or how it return to my question.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:28:38 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So companies are using the TDP that they aren't licensed to use? Or? All others reverse engineer or guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:39:22 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Colt/FN produce for .mil, only 2 with access to it. All others reverse engineer or guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:40:01 PM EDT
[#10]
Big question is what do you want, whats it for and whats your budget?
BCM, DD and larue/colt if you want to spend dollars, and get something really nice, or you can get a decent PSA that will go bang bang also. More to it then that, but it's a start. I have a Spikes, with a BCM mlok rail and love it. Or you can check out the EE and put something nice together as well, via parts and psc. Mad Max quote. "Speeds just a matter of money, how fast do you want to go"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 10:43:58 PM EDT
[#11]
Build it yourself
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:00:20 PM EDT
[#12]
Really, not building anything or buying. Actually, need to focus on better optics. I have a 6920, 6940, Larue Stealth, plus some PSA stuff and a franken upper with BA barrel and SLR rail.
Really just wondering if there is metal differences, tolerances, an actual difference in build, quality, materials, etc. Don't have a dog in this race, genuinely curious as to what or if anything separates these companies and their weapons or if you have one, you pretty much have the same from another? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:02:08 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really, not building anything or buying. Actually, need to focus on better optics. I have a 6920, 6940, Larue Stealth, plus some PSA stuff and a franken upper with BA barrel and SLR rail. Really just wondering if there is metal differences, tolerances, an actual difference in build, quality, materials, etc. Don't have a dog in this race, genuinely curious as to what or if anything separates these companies and their weapons or if you have one, you pretty much have the same from another? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:04:43 PM EDT
[#14]
The colt 6920 is the measuring stick that all others are compared against. They’re accurate for what they are and they are reliable. Think of the colt like a mustang GT, that’s kind of the measuring stick for other car companies fun cars. Are there hellcat challengers and corvettes that can beat it yes, but at a higher price. Colt unfortunately offers nothing innovative, I hate to say that because my dad worked their and I loved going into the factory with him, their vault meeting room, and all the other cool stuff about that place. Their combat unit carbine is a step in the right direction but it’s 5 years overdue if not longer.
LaRue makes high end precision rifles and they’re expensive but very accurate. PSA premium is a budget option, meant for the everyday man that will buy a cheap vortex and shoot it maybe 3-5 times a year. Daniel defense is an upgraded colt. Nicer rails, CHF barrelsand they make just about everything in house. They have their own furniture and they have a big following of military guys because of the RIS II rail for the sopmod rifles and they gives us discounts for group buys. Expensive but accurate and meant to be a durable gun. BCM is similar to Daniel defense. Meant to be an upgraded mil spec duty rifle but cheaper than Daniel defense. They’re durable but not as accurate as DD. They make a lot of their own stuff and they have upgraded stuff as standard on their guns like compensator, trigger, and charging handles. They make a good gun and for what you pay it’s worth it. Another company worth looking into right now is triarc systems. They’re a botique company like LaRue and Noveske but they make reliable guns with good accuracy. They make barrels BCG and now a rail of their own. If they don’t make it they get something from a respected company like geissele, CMC, Surefire. But they are expensive. But if you’re LE/MIL their work gun offer is probably the best value buy you can get. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:08:16 PM EDT
[#15]
I was under the impression that the TDP for the M4 and M16 that Colt/FN have can’t be used for civilian guns.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:17:53 PM EDT
[#16]
With PSA, isn't that basically an FN gun with the premium set up? Is QC the same for all of these?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:26:29 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's been rumored that at least one in the title has "peeked." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Colt/FN produce for .mil, only 2 with access to it. All others reverse engineer or guess. "The origin of the “M4 Addendum” traces back to the improper release of the M4 TDP by the US Army’s Rock Island Arsenal to the US Navy’s NSWC-Crane in early 1996. NSWC-Crane had requested a copy of the M4A1 TDP to support the solicitation of accessories for the M4 SOPMOD kit. While soliciting an adaptor for training ammunition, NSWC-Crane provided the M4A1 TDP to 21 vendors in August/96. As one of the potential bidders, Colt was very much surprised to receive a copy of their own TDP drawings, and gave notice that the terms of the 1967 Licensing Agreement had breached. NSWC-Crane quickly attempted to recover all copies of the TDP and sent out non-disclosure agreements (NDA) to the other 20 vendors. All of the vendors except FN Manufacturing complied. " |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:35:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Technical Data Package. Owned by Colt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:41:29 PM EDT
[#19]
Just buy a Toolcraft BCG and call it a day.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:45:15 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Technical Data Package. Owned by Colt. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm not yet familiar with TDP. Someone mind letting me into the cool kid club? Owned by Colt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:51:46 PM EDT
[#21]
So, the reality is that are all pretty much the same is what I have gathered beyond cosmetic differences such as rails and the like.
Interesting about the TDP, never knew about that before, appreciate the info. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:53:30 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Neither Colt nor FN have exclusivity on anything M4 related. And yes, the TDP. But yes, second source contractors do have access. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 11:58:14 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, the reality is that are all pretty much the same is what I have gathered beyond cosmetic differences such as rails and the like. Interesting about the TDP, never knew about that before, appreciate the info. Technical Data Package (TDP) Definition: Normally includes technical design and manufacturing information sufficient to enable the construction or manufacture of a defense item component modification, or to enable the performance of certain maintenance or production processes. It may include blueprints, drawings, plans, or instructions that can be used or adapted for use in the design, production, manufacture, or maintenance of defense items or technology. It is also is a description of an item adequate for supporting an acquisition, production, engineering, and logistics support (e.g. Engineering Data for Provisioning, Training, and Technical Manuals). The description defines the required design configuration or performance requirements, and procedures required to ensure adequacy of item performance. It consists of applicable technical data such as models, drawings, associated lists, specifications, standards, performance requirements, QAP, software documentation and packaging details. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 7:48:29 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, the reality is that are all pretty much the same is what I have gathered beyond cosmetic differences such as rails and the like. Interesting about the TDP, never knew about that before, appreciate the info. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 7:50:33 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In addition, the TDP has NO bearing on commercial ARs. It ONLY relates to military weapons and is required by the DoD. Technical Data Package (TDP) Definition: Normally includes technical design and manufacturing information sufficient to enable the construction or manufacture of a defense item component modification, or to enable the performance of certain maintenance or production processes. It may include blueprints, drawings, plans, or instructions that can be used or adapted for use in the design, production, manufacture, or maintenance of defense items or technology. It is also is a description of an item adequate for supporting an acquisition, production, engineering, and logistics support (e.g. Engineering Data for Provisioning, Training, and Technical Manuals). The description defines the required design configuration or performance requirements, and procedures required to ensure adequacy of item performance. It consists of applicable technical data such as models, drawings, associated lists, specifications, standards, performance requirements, QAP, software documentation and packaging details. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, the reality is that are all pretty much the same is what I have gathered beyond cosmetic differences such as rails and the like. Interesting about the TDP, never knew about that before, appreciate the info. Technical Data Package (TDP) Definition: Normally includes technical design and manufacturing information sufficient to enable the construction or manufacture of a defense item component modification, or to enable the performance of certain maintenance or production processes. It may include blueprints, drawings, plans, or instructions that can be used or adapted for use in the design, production, manufacture, or maintenance of defense items or technology. It is also is a description of an item adequate for supporting an acquisition, production, engineering, and logistics support (e.g. Engineering Data for Provisioning, Training, and Technical Manuals). The description defines the required design configuration or performance requirements, and procedures required to ensure adequacy of item performance. It consists of applicable technical data such as models, drawings, associated lists, specifications, standards, performance requirements, QAP, software documentation and packaging details.
The TDP applies to manufacturers that have it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 9:46:05 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, not at all. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, the reality is that are all pretty much the same is what I have gathered beyond cosmetic differences such as rails and the like. Interesting about the TDP, never knew about that before, appreciate the info. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 10:57:16 AM EDT
[#27]
Lets be honest, it is not exactly difficult to manufacture to mil spec and mil spec does not mean the best when it comes to the AR. All manufacturers are in business to make $ whatever their formula for doing so is.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 10:58:29 AM EDT
[#28]
FN does not use FN-exclusive parts in making our military weapons, they subcontract as necessary, so it's my belief milspec is milspec, regardless. I know because I toured the FN plant in SC years ago in an industry safety-rep get-together and saw a shipment of receivers coming in. They were not from FN or Colt. Our tour guide wouldn't divulge who they came from, but admitted the subcontracting.
As for the difference among parts and manufacturers...I think as long as they meet milspec - which is readily available, they're essentially the same and you're just paying to advertise. Take the receivers for example...I have ARs built with RRA, Bushmaster, Anderson, and Stag receivers, plus I've built maybe 50 rifles for people using those and other milspec receivers. I've never noticed any difference among them other than price and maybe the finish was slightly better on some. A writer in Shotgun News years ago did an article where he fully measured different receivers against specifications and also from his personal experience, came to the same conclusion. It would be hard to prove to me that a plain lower from DD is any better than one from Anderson - bullet proof suit on, so fire away. As far as I'm concerned, the most important thing in the final product is reliability anyway, period, not the names stamped throughout. If having a certain name on your rifle's parts is your thing though, more power to you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:22:05 AM EDT
[#29]
That is basically what I am getting at, unless there is some special metal, such as Rearden steel
 , and some whiz-bang process then what is the differentiating factor? Many parts come from a few manufacturers, same processes, materials, they are basically the same at this level.
Not asking what is the best, just what makes a difference between them, if really any. Would love a manufacturer to step in and say. I understand that Knight's stuff goes further, but on the level these others are, what difference does it make?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:45:15 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is basically what I am getting at, unless there is some special metal, such as Rearden steel , and some whiz-bang process then what is the differentiating factor? Many parts come from a few manufacturers, same processes, materials, they are basically the same at this level.
Not asking what is the best, just what makes a difference between them, if really any. Would love a manufacturer to step in and say. I understand that Knight's stuff goes further, but on the level these others are, what difference does it make? Basic milspec - no difference, IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 12:06:06 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If there is, then that is what I was curious about. If you have a premium FN barrel from PSA with a tool craft bcg, how does that different from a BCM? Or how does a Colt differ from DD? An FN from Larue? Etc.? Is it only QC, materials, manufacturing techniques, ???? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, the reality is that are all pretty much the same is what I have gathered beyond cosmetic differences such as rails and the like. Interesting about the TDP, never knew about that before, appreciate the info. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 12:17:57 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Colt/FN produce for .mil, only 2 with access to it. All others reverse engineer or guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 12:27:49 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Unless they are outsourcing out to other companies I shoulda been more specific. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 1:15:45 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: PSA premium is a budget option, meant for the everyday man that will buy a cheap vortex and shoot it maybe 3-5 times a year. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 1:32:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In my opinion, people make a bigger deal between brands than there actually is. After all, we are talking about the same gun with the same function. Small differences in finish, QC, or materials mean little as long as the gun works as intended. Cosmetics and the name on the receiver dictate price much more than any difference in the guns ability to shoot bullets reliably and accurately. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 2:25:39 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Colt does own proprietary rights to the M16 TDP and M4 TDP, Army holds a licensing agreement with Colt, at least this is my understanding. But yes, second source contractors do have access. The USDOD holds the TDP for the entire M4 and contractors have pretty much open access when a solicitation against any component is released. All specs (TDP) are neither proprietary nor exclusive to Cold or FN regarding the M4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 2:28:10 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is basically what I am getting at, unless there is some special metal, such as Rearden steel , and some whiz-bang process then what is the differentiating factor? Many parts come from a few manufacturers, same processes, materials, they are basically the same at this level.
Not asking what is the best, just what makes a difference between them, if really any. Would love a manufacturer to step in and say. I understand that Knight's stuff goes further, but on the level these others are, what difference does it make? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 2:32:04 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Statements like this crack me up. So, is that in their mission statement? LOL 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 3:09:31 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually Colts exclusivity on TDP rights has long since expired. That's a part of the initial contract terms. After "X" years, the USDOD will take full possession of the TDP and make it available for competitive manufacture. Keep in mind this is on the component level, but reflects the entire M4 platform. Complete weapons will continue to be contracted from Prime vendors of the USDOD largely due to the fact that the list of small arms manufacturers who could deliver on that level is a fairly short list. If for instance Ruger decided it wanted to take a shot and building and delivering X number of complete M4's to the USDOD, there is absolutely nothing preventing that. They've never done that probably due to their business model never really angling heavily towards .gov sales. Much more so the civilian market. The USDOD holds the TDP for the entire M4 and contractors have pretty much open access when a solicitation against any component is released. All specs (TDP) are neither proprietary nor exclusive to Cold or FN regarding the M4. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Colt does own proprietary rights to the M16 TDP and M4 TDP, Army holds a licensing agreement with Colt, at least this is my understanding. But yes, second source contractors do have access. The USDOD holds the TDP for the entire M4 and contractors have pretty much open access when a solicitation against any component is released. All specs (TDP) are neither proprietary nor exclusive to Cold or FN regarding the M4. -"As of July 1/09, the sole source clause of the “M4 Addendum” expired, allowing the Army to second source Second source contractors will also be required to sign non-disclosure agreements, just as they do for the M16. The non-disclosure/ non-use agreements for accessing the TDP will forbid the other companies from using Colt’s proprietary data for commercial sales. Once the second-source vendor’s military contract ends, the company will be required to be destroy all of the TDP information provided to them. of the M4/M4A1 carbines and their unique parts. Under the terms of the licensing agreement, however, the M4 TDP remains Colt proprietary data. Those terms also state that the US Army would have to pay 5% in royalties to Colt, for every M4/M4A1 carbine and/or their unique parts procured from second sources, for another 26 years – through Dec 24/37. Second source contractors will also be required to sign non-disclosure agreements, just as they do for the M16. The non-disclosure/ non-use agreements for accessing the TDP will forbid the other companies from using Colt’s proprietary data for commercial sales. Once the second-source vendor’s military contract ends, the company will be required to be destroy all of the TDP information provided to them." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 3:21:38 PM EDT
[#40]
This is great to know for my next purchase or build that this is far less of an issue. Want to focus more on quality, especially in terms of optics too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 3:30:46 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PSA premium is a budget option, meant for the everyday man that will buy a cheap vortex and shoot it maybe 3-5 times a year. "Barrel: A proprietary blend of Hammer forged chrome molly vanadium made by FN that is referred to as "Machine Gun Steel" by virtue of its required use in FN's M249 and M240 weapons. The hammer forging process work hardens the steel, making it more durable. In addition, the chrome process for the bore allows for a lining almost twice as thick as a standard M16 for enhanced durability. Chambered in 5.56 NATO, with a 1:7 twist rate, M4 barrel extension, and a rifle length gas system. The A2 profile barrel is Mil-Spec phosphate coated, High Pressure tested and Magnetic Particle inspected. Barrel is finished off with an F-marked front sight post with sling swivel, standard handguards and an A2 flash hider. Upper: Forged 7075-T6 A3 AR upper is hard coat anodized black for durability. Featuring T-marks, these upper upper receivers are made for us right here in the USA. BCG: Bolt is made of Mil-s\Spec shot-peened Carpenter 158 steel. Gas key is secured with grade 8 fasteners and staked per mil-spec." Then that does not appear any different than any other of the manufacturers I talked about, unless I am mistaken. Are these specs different, better or worse, than others? Again, not buying anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 3:33:22 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The high-end stuff is black-hole gravity-forged, then cryogenically treated on Saturn, made from high-grade unobtanium, by German engineers whose relatives taught John Browning everything he knew, on Wednesdays.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 4:17:46 PM EDT
[#43]
The money you spend on a high-end, quality barrel will help you, but it won't magically impart sniper-level abilities on you. That said, most of us aren't really that good, nor do we care, to take advantage of the uber expensive barrels anyway. I say get a barrel with the profile and features you like from a reputable maker and press on. I have a 10.5" barrel from BCA that can help me produce 1" groups at 50 yds (extent of the local range for FMJ) with a red dot, and I am not a disciplined shooter. That's pretty good in my book, and I picked up the barrel for $55. As always, my concern is reliability.
As far as optics go, same concept. I use a couple of Nikons and a Leupold on other ARs and they work fine when I do get a chance to shoot further. I like the fact they're very clear optically and affordable. I won't see the hair on a gnat's ass at 1000 yds, but I don't need to. I also use Sig and PA red dots. They work well, although I like the Sig better. Some of my shooting buds have Aimpoints and stuff. Really nice, but they don't really shoot any better than I do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 5:54:38 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The colt 6920 is the measuring stick that all others are compared against. They’re accurate for what they are and they are reliable. Think of the colt like a mustang GT, that’s kind of the measuring stick for other car companies fun cars. Are there hellcat challengers and corvettes that can beat it yes, but at a higher price. Colt unfortunately offers nothing innovative, I hate to say that because my dad worked their and I loved going into the factory with him, their vault meeting room, and all the other cool stuff about that place. Their combat unit carbine is a step in the right direction but it’s 5 years overdue if not longer. LaRue makes high end precision rifles and they’re expensive but very accurate. PSA premium is a budget option, meant for the everyday man that will buy a cheap vortex and shoot it maybe 3-5 times a year. Daniel defense is an upgraded colt. Nicer rails, CHF barrelsand they make just about everything in house. They have their own furniture and they have a big following of military guys because of the RIS II rail for the sopmod rifles and they gives us discounts for group buys. Expensive but accurate and meant to be a durable gun. BCM is similar to Daniel defense. Meant to be an upgraded mil spec duty rifle but cheaper than Daniel defense. They’re durable but not as accurate as DD. They make a lot of their own stuff and they have upgraded stuff as standard on their guns like compensator, trigger, and charging handles. They make a good gun and for what you pay it’s worth it. Another company worth looking into right now is triarc systems. They’re a botique company like LaRue and Noveske but they make reliable guns with good accuracy. They make barrels BCG and now a rail of their own. If they don’t make it they get something from a respected company like geissele, CMC, Surefire. But they are expensive. But if you’re LE/MIL their work gun offer is probably the best value buy you can get. Those that want the best technological improvements in battle rifle type AR's will be looking beyond Daniel Defense or BCM. Nothing wrong with either. I have a lot of DD stuff and like it. Rather they gravitate to Knights Armament (KAC). LMT (Lewis Machine and Tool) or LWRC. Those companies have superior fit and ]finish and all the most advanced technology and user ergonomic features. Those companies are often suppliers to our military for various special purpose rifles. Their stuff tends to be what the military goes to next when they upgrade equipment. Then there is the matter of barrels. Almost any complete rifle can be made much more accurate by installation of a match grade barrel from dedicated barrel makers like Kreiger, Lilja, Bartlein, Shilen and such. These are the barrels selected for roles where extreme accuracy is required. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 8:25:38 PM EDT
[#45]
OP the difference has been answered, it's the TDP (technical data package) and Colt has it and has it right. This covers in my understanding everything from the metal types, torque specs on the build, gas port size, forged parts no MIM parts etc and everything else pertaining to the rifle and if it doesn't meet the specs, it's a no go and it isn't used period. Some companies may use all quality or a mixture of quality parts but don't follow torque specs, don't stake castle nuts but use a thread locker etc. which isn't a part of the TDP. For the average person looking for a good AR for HD or punching paper there are dozens of manufacturers out there to include some Gucci type manufacturers. If you want an AR for the zombie apocalypse just keep your LE6920 you advised you have and you will be good to go IMHO and experience
 . I have no connection to Colt just merely use their rifles Edited to add content.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 9:06:01 PM EDT
[#46]
Buy within your budget and move on in life.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 9:18:00 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: PSA premium is a budget option, meant for the everyday man that will buy a cheap vortex and shoot it maybe 3-5 times a year. 
PSA premium sport Cold Hammer Forged Chrome Lined FN barrels. You must be confusing the old Ptac with their Premium line... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 9:24:15 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The colt 6920 is the measuring stick that all others are compared against. They’re accurate for what they are and they are reliable. Think of the colt like a mustang GT, that’s kind of the measuring stick for other car companies fun cars. Are there hellcat challengers and corvettes that can beat it yes, but at a higher price. Colt unfortunately offers nothing innovative, I hate to say that because my dad worked their and I loved going into the factory with him, their vault meeting room, and all the other cool stuff about that place. Their combat unit carbine is a step in the right direction but it’s 5 years overdue if not longer. LaRue makes high end precision rifles and they’re expensive but very accurate. PSA premium is a budget option, meant for the everyday man that will buy a cheap vortex and shoot it maybe 3-5 times a year. Daniel defense is an upgraded colt. Nicer rails, CHF barrelsand they make just about everything in house. They have their own furniture and they have a big following of military guys because of the RIS II rail for the sopmod rifles and they gives us discounts for group buys. Expensive but accurate and meant to be a durable gun. BCM is similar to Daniel defense. Meant to be an upgraded mil spec duty rifle but cheaper than Daniel defense. They’re durable but not as accurate as DD. They make a lot of their own stuff and they have upgraded stuff as standard on their guns like compensator, trigger, and charging handles. They make a good gun and for what you pay it’s worth it. Another company worth looking into right now is triarc systems. They’re a botique company like LaRue and Noveske but they make reliable guns with good accuracy. They make barrels BCG and now a rail of their own. If they don’t make it they get something from a respected company like geissele, CMC, Surefire. But they are expensive. But if you’re LE/MIL their work gun offer is probably the best value buy you can get. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 9:56:07 PM EDT
[#49]
Does the military use AR-15 bolt carriers, large pin holes, high shelf uppers, 16” barrels, and semi auto only FC parts?
I would think a 16” carbine with a mid length gas system and an M-16 BCG would be so much more of a pleasure to shoot than a 16” carbine with an AR-15 BCG... but muh TDP Colt fanbois 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 10:05:52 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does the military use AR-15 bolt carriers, large pin holes, high shelf uppers, 16” barrels, and semi auto only FC parts? I would think a 16” carbine with a mid length gas system and an M-16 BCG would be so much more of a pleasure to shoot than a 16” carbine with an AR-15 BCG... but muh TDP Colt fanbois
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
