Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 6/28/2003 5:37:12 AM EDT
Thanks for the input so far. I have been on the phone and net and my "in stock" choices are; Colt M-4 @ $979.00, Armalite M4A3 @ $798.00, RRA M4 Tactical Entry @ $848.00, Bushmaster 16" A3 at $798.00 and Knights M-4 with RAS for $1,249.00. I'm not that interested in the RAS and the RRA is not crome lined and would need a new stock as it comes with that dumb assed short one. I have zero exposure to Armalite and Knights. Any advice?? I'm still leanibg toward the Colt or BM even though some of the others have better warranties. I want reliability and accuracy.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 5:51:19 AM EDT
I just purchased a Colt M-4 for about the same price you are being quoted. At the range it functioned perfectly, the sights were right on out of the box. It boils down to personal choice, mine was Colt.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 7:20:23 AM EDT
I prefer Colt. Colt is the only company besides FN that makes mil spec guns. And you can't buy FN's. That being said BM and Armalite are not bad. PAT
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 7:49:53 AM EDT
Well I'm about to head out shopping. I'll let you know what I come up with. I'm going to give them all a good look. Glock Fan: Where did you become a M16 armour? I talked to my son last night. He is an MP at Ft. Lewis and is trying to get into the Armour school. (sorry about the spelling)
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:05:43 AM EDT
I got the Colt.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:11:05 AM EDT
see if the knights has the sr25 2 stage trigger. if it does, take it. the trigger is worth 250 alone. you can sell the RAS for 250 and end up with the amount you would have paid for the colt. and the logo looks cooler I think.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:17:48 AM EDT
It looks like it may have the Match 2 stage trigger if it is like this one. [url]http://www.impactguns.com/store/kmc_sr15_m4.html[/url]
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:22:42 AM EDT
Sorry guys. I bought the Colt at Impact Gums and the Knights was gone when I got there. So yes it was like the one in the ad because I was in that store. They did not have any Knights in stock in 5.56.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:24:46 AM EDT
To glock fan your colt M4 is not mil spec lower receiver parts are larger and bushmaster makes a shorter replacemant front site for the colt to compensate for its out of spec removable carry handle,bushmaster made rifles for the military to and can be put up their with colt and fn only difference bushmaster makes a mil spec commercial equivilent and the others dont.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:24:58 AM EDT
I have a Colt, three Bushmaster and one PWA. but none of them are factory build guns. I just buy lowers and build them to my liking. as far as the big three, I rank them all about equal. I like Bushmaster the best since it is the closest to the mil-spec gun on the market. Colt is the best featured gun with the M4 forward assist, M4 ramp cut, M4 handguards and side sling swivel as standard, but Colt have the receiver block and larger then mil-spec firing control pin. Armalite is a very well finished gun, beautiful as it can be. I lost some faith in Armalite because I had a AR10T, it can never hold a proper zero. Glockfan is a bit incorrect as far as who makes mil-spec guns, lot os company will offer mil-spec guns, but only Colt, FN and Diemaco manufacture for the military. Diemaco being the best of the three manufactuer when it come to military AR. C8 and C8A2 are the best AR carbine made.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:36:51 AM EDT
SMGLEE. Regarding the Colt pins being larger. Is this a problem?? I don't intend to modify the rifle. I have a couple of lower receivers on hand for a few projects I have in mind.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 11:51:15 AM EDT
Only if your anal retentive. Actually the larger fire control pins are better from a mechanical standpoint. The pins have a greater bearing surface but you will never see the benefit. Even bushmaster sells the large dia. parts. GG
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 12:34:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gun Guru: Only if your anal retentive. Actually the larger fire control pins are better from a mechanical standpoint. The pins have a greater bearing surface but you will never see the benefit. Even bushmaster sells the large dia. parts. GG
View Quote
So are you saying I am anal retentive?? [BD] Smaller pin are just simpler in changing parts, and replacing with a match trigger. of course lot of manufacture makes trigger set for Colt replacement nowadays. but I tend to stick to the smaller pin because it is interchangable with my other rifles.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 4:05:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/28/2003 4:08:39 PM EDT by Glockfan]
I went to a recent M16 AR15 armorers course held by Colt in Santa Barbara. The course was for LEO's and military personal. All leo's in the class however and no military. To the other poster all colt lowers now have .170 pins instead of .155. This is hardly worth note. PAT
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 4:17:08 PM EDT
An easy way to tell if something is milspec is to call the factory and ask for the mil spec number. If they don't have one and most don't then its not mil spec. PAT
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 6:35:58 PM EDT
I just now realized I posted after you had posted you got the Colt. DOH!!! My bad, you did good. I like the colt. It gives you some extra features like SMGLee said. and it says M4 on it. very cool. congrats
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 6:55:32 PM EDT
Just FYI, the Knight's SR-15 M4 has the good trigger but uses a chrome moly barrel and the RAS is not FF. Still, $1249 was a pretty good price.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 7:04:37 PM EDT
To the other poster all colt lowers now have .170 pins instead of .155. This is hardly worth note.
View Quote
It is if you want to install updates or spare parts that are not Colt.
Link Posted: 6/28/2003 9:07:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 5subslr5: Still, $1249 was a pretty good price.
View Quote
I'll second that.
Link Posted: 6/29/2003 5:18:25 AM EDT
Not that it matters now since you bought the Colt, but, the Rock River M4 Entry Tactical does have a chromed M4 barrel. And the short stock is only dumb ass if your taller than me, 5'9", then yes it is too short for most people. However, it is intended for entry type weapon. For me it's no more dumb ass than the fake tele-stock most post-bans come with. YMMV. Enjoy your Colt, you didn't go wrong.
Link Posted: 6/29/2003 5:37:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By model927: To glock fan your colt M4 is not mil spec lower receiver parts are larger and bushmaster makes a shorter replacemant front site for the colt to compensate for its out of spec removable carry handle,bushmaster made rifles for the military to and can be put up their with colt and fn only difference bushmaster makes a mil spec commercial equivilent and the others dont.
View Quote
Actually, M4 specs call for the taller front sight. Therefore, the carry handle is not an "out of spec removable carry handle". Sorry to disappoint you. And to your, "makes a mil spec commercial equivilent" quote. Last time I checked 1/9 was not mil-spec. Bottom line, no one makes a truely mil-spec civilian clone so we could spend all day nit-picking about how "my rifle is more mil-spec than yours". If you want real mil-spec sign on the dotted line. [;)]
Top Top