Thank you.

In [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=173836]this thread[/url] I mentioned that I recently I sold 35,000 pieces of 223 brass to my local FFL. At two cents per piece I got a check for $700, and I have a little over 12,000 pieces left. This represents all of the ammo I've put through my various ARs since I bought my first two Colt 6601 HBARs in 1991.

While the keyboard warriors here are busy pissing on Colt over non-issues I'm on the range enjoying my three Colts. I've had far more enjoyment out of them than the four clones I've owned-with my old 20" Bushmaster XM15 being at the top of my list of shoddy, half-assed products with pisspoor quality control. I probably wouldn't feel as strongly about if my XM15 hadn't gone back to Auburn [b]three times[/b] for warranty repair. Despite the warranty claim "hat trick" my rifle was still a fucked up POS that doubled at least once every time I hit the range.

The Colt bashers love to point out that Colt bent over and took the PC approach to appease the antis. What they neglect to mention is that the BATF muscled Colt and threatened to pull their government contracts if they didn't toe the line. Why aren't the cloners subject to the same rules? Because the cloners aren't legitimate government contractors-so the BATF didn't have anything to muscle them with. Think Bushy is a legitimate government contractor? Marvelous...let's see the contracts. The 500 M4s that Bushmaster sold to the DoD during Gulf War I hardly qualify since the DoD was in a pinch and needed carbines fast. The local 7-11 can't call themselves a "full service pet supply superstore" by virtue of having three cans of Alpo on the shelf.

Speaking of Bushmaster M4s, I wonder if any of them are still in service. For the sake of the men and women who deployed with them I sure hope Bushmaster was a little more diligent with QC than they are with their civilian weapons. I wonder if any of the Bushmaster DoD M4s were sporting overtorqued barrels, canted sights, soft FCG parts or purple receivers. I wonder if any of them got the "patented Bushmaster reliability package©" which consists of a Colt bolt, carrier, and "H" buffer...

You guys go ahead and knock yourselves out and continue to piss on Colt-just as long as it makes you feel better about whatever choices you've made. While you're doing it I'll put another 47k downrange, and I'll have a shit eating grin on my face while I'm doing it...

...I'll be grinning because the chances are good that [b]my[/b] rifles won't break.

Best of luck with yours.

Only the FA guns currently use small FCG pins. All current models use the small pivot pin.

My Bushmaster is the equal of any Colt.  Had a Colt M4 upper.  Its no better than my Bushmaster.  I dont care about firecontrol parts I use after market.  Dont have any purple parts.  My upper is jet black.  My barrel is a DOE contract over run so perhaps they ARE more careful with govt purchases.  All I know is that anything thats not after market is Bushmaster and my rifle runs 100% and shoots MOA groups.  If I have problems you guys will be the first to know.  My one rifle means nothing though just like CJan_NH's single rifle means nothing.  By and large Bushmasters do fine with the exception of the bad run they had.  I bought a post ban during that time but hand picked it.  It also ran 100%.  RRA, Colt, Bushmaster... its all parts to me, and parts is parts.

Colt SAA, 1911A1, M16, for me its like having a very small part of history.  I'm also glad there are other options/makers for us as well.

The debate between Colt and 'everyone' else rages on..

Having been accused of being a 'pin nazi' on several occasions in the Colt debate, the only thing I can say is... Yes, I am.

Colt did what they did, be it poor management, .gov pressures, attempts at appeasement, or not knowing how to read the tea leaves.  For whatever reasons, Colt made changes that did alienate some members of the AR community.  And Colt's rather contemptuous view towards we lowly civilians and civilian sales didn’t help matters.

Having said that, I still buy Colt barrels, bolt carriers, bolts, and any individual/small parts I can... great stuff, but a complete rifle or carbine is another story altogether.  With the extensive amount of spare parts I keep on hand I refuse to add Colt’s proprietary FCG to the mix.  Some people say the FCG issue isn’t a big deal and perhaps it isn’t to them but to me one of the benefits of the AR system is parts interchangeability…

Every manufacturer can build a lemon.  It’s how they handle it that counts.  CJan_NH has pointed out Colt’s lifetime warranty and a good CS experience as a point in favor of accepting Colt’s little foibles over Bushmaster… As a recovering rabid Colt fanatic who up until ’96 wouldn’t own anything but Colt, I also learned first hand how Colt’s CS feels about their loyal customers.  BTW, Bushmaster isn’t the only manufacturer who knows how to overtorque a barrel...  [;)]

But I do thank Colt and the crap their CS ran me through… Because of them I got the books and tools and learned how to put these Black Rifles together… and I started buying ArmaLite and Bushmaster…

Add my 3 Colt pre-bans to the list of flawless weapons. Interesting point made by CJan_NH though, I also have Bushmaster friends that put Colt parts in their rifles and then bash Colt the first chance they get. While I don't care what anyone's choice is when it comes to AR clones, it's safe to say Colt is easily at the top in finish and craftmanship, at least when it comes to their pre-bans. I can't vouch for the post-ban wanna-bees.

Dirk

If this is true, then why haven't they gone back to more of a mil-spec format by now?

Are you referring to Colt? The civilian Colt MT6400c M4 carbine is closer to "milspec" than any other civilian M4 "lookalike" on the market. I use quotes around the word "milspec" because the term has been bastardized into a meaningless marketing buzzword and nothing more...

The Colt 6400c has an M4 marked upper and lower:
[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/M4_Lower_small.JPG[/img]

[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/Upper.JPG[/img]

Heavy duty "H" buffer and heavy duty extractor spring for reliability:
[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/Buffer.JPG[/img]

[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/Extractor.JPG[/img]

Barrel has proper 1/7ROT, chamber and barrel are chrome lined:
[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/Cmp.jpg[/img]

Upper is RAS numbered:
[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/Ras.jpg[/img]

Side sling mount:
[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/Sling.JPG[/img]

The 6400c has a standard pushpin lower, no protruding sear block, proper M4 handguards with dual heatshields, extended feedramps, and has a [b]lifetime service agreement.[/b]

Who else is even in the same ballpark? Bushmaster with their [b]non[/b] "milspec" 1/9ROT barrel and plastic trigger guards? The others who use [b]non[/b] "milspec" 4140 barrel steel?

Aside from the .170 H/T pins, fixed telestock, and funky brake (all courtesy of the BATF and Diane Feinstein BTW) what else could you possibly want?

Screw it, I'm on a roll-so let's talk about reliability while we're at it [:)]

How many of you guys who claim your ARs are completely reliable have ever actually pushed them to the limit?

From a previous post:

[i]I make it a point to torture test every new AR to make sure it will be reliable when hot. Any gun is reliable when cold, but if it's still problem-free when hot you know that it should stand up to anything you can throw at it in a defensive situation.

After the first 200 (gentle and slow) rounds through my new Colt M4 carbine I let it cool down and then cleaned the barrel. Once it was cool I dumped four mags (120 rounds) through it as fast as I could pull the trigger and reload. My goal is to get as close to the maximum rate of fire as possible.

In the end of the four mag dump the handguards were hot to the touch and the barrel was steaming-but it still ran perfectly. I let it cool to the point where I could touch the barrel with bare hands and then repeated it six times without cleaning (840 rounds total plus the 200 initial rounds).

As far as I'm concerned if an AR can't handle that without a malfunction it's a piece of junk.[/i]

Do any of you torture test your new ARs to see what they can do? I don't know about you, but in my collection there is no such thing as a safe queen. If one of my weapons isn't reliable after I beat the living snot out of it then it has no business being in my collection.

EDIT: The only non-Colt I've ever owned that passed that test without a single malfunction was my RRA.

I couldn't agree more about the meaningless market drivel.  The post below is copied from a similar 'discussion' that occured in another forum.

-----------------------------------------------
From a prior post:  


Edited to add: Now if there is anyone who wants to continue to argue that Brand X is indeed a Mil-Spec AR then open a NEW thread and I'll be most happy to oblige.
-----------------------------------------------

[b]There are two primary elements to a MilSpec:[/b]
1) A verbal description (narrative) of what the product is and what it does and...

2) A list of reference documents governing production (dimensions, tolerances, etc.).

[b]Last I knew, MilSpec R-63997 was the guiding document for the M-16A2.[/b] (Obviously not one document but many documents and drawings.)

Then there is acceptance; for the Army that's the Tank, Automotive and Armaments Command.

[b]Wonder who is doing the 'accepting' (insuring EVERY part is made to the Mil-Spec) for Brand X ??[/b]

5sub

Does not matter whether or not ArmaLite makes your favorite AR-15.  You have to admire their candor and lack of B/S.

The below is from ArmaLite's Technical Notes:



[b]4.  ArmaLite does not claim that its rifles are made to the full provisions of MIL-R-63997..........

5.      ArmaLite and Eagle Arms rifle parts feature excellent interchangeability with MILSPEC M16A1 and M16A2 parts. With the exception of parts designed for semiautomatic use only, no known incompatibilities exist.[/b]

These posts are off thread.  The original rant had nothing to do with reliability.  It had to do with Colt not using standard parts.  That Colt has or does use non-standard FCG or Pivot pin sizes, sear blocks, and cut carriers is a fact.  For someone who is trying to swap parts or maintain spares, it's going to cause them hassle and more money.  Searcherfortruth found this out when he received his AS trigger and it didn't fit.  You can whine all you want about Colt or non-Colt reliability, or deviations from mil-spec, CS, or what have you, but the fact is they use design deviations that cause problems in parts conformity, as well as legal conversions. Period.

Me, I don't really care who makes what as long as it works, is reliable, and doesn't cause me problems using new parts or accessories.  I have 2 Colts, 1 Armalite, 1 Bushy, and 1 RRA, and I like them all.  While I like my Colt 6520, it cost me a lot of extra money to build a push pin M4 upper, and I can't swap uppers around on it.  None of the rest cause me that kind of problem, and that's a hard fact.  There is a legitimate reason for disparaging Colt for using non-standard parts and designs.  That doesn't say anything about their quality, their motives, their CS, or who is better, it's just a fact and one that is not desireable to the civilian consumer. I am glad the others do not do this.

I'm sorry, but the argument about having to go through extra hassle and expense for spare parts doesn't wash. Period.

-You can buy 170 pin Colt FCG parts anywhere-even Bushmaster sells a complete kit for $49.95 [url=http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/lowers/arcoltkit.asp]Colt FCG kit[/url]

-Want to run a small pin upper to a large pin lower? Buy a conversion pin for $6.99 [url=http://store.yahoo.com/cdnn/arunfronconp.html]Conversion pin[/url]

-New Colts have a small pin lower so this is a moot point for new rifles anyway.

-Want an Accuracy Speaks Trigger for a 170 pin Colt? Then order one that's made for a 170 pin Colt [url=http://www.accuracyspeaks.com/parts.htm]Accuracy Speaks parts link[/url]

By the way, anyone who thinks an Accuracy Speaks Trigger is a drop in kit for a small pin AR has clearly never installed one. The AS trigger [b]isn't[/b] a drop in kit no matter how big the pins are in your AR. Fitting is required no matter what-go to their website and see for yourself. Blaming Colt's pin size is pretty ignorant-the AS trigger was never intended to be a drop in solution.

The Colt bashers can whine all they want about Colt's deviation from the milspec, but they should at least have the decency to put blame where it belongs-with the fed and the antigun politicians.

CJan_NH, you go boy!

CJan_NH: you are not upset are you?

This will be said and I will be done with it.
If I had a chance to buy a new colt M4 I would in a hartbeat.
 
 the [b]ONLY[/b] thing that I never cared for in colts is the front screw, and the god ugly sear block which made custom trigger parts hard to install and adjust. the oversized trigger pins does not bother me at all.  

You cant install a KAC 2 stage trigger in  a Colt.  They dont make a large pin trigger.  That alone steered me away from Colt as my lower.  AS just requires a filing of the disconnector to get it to fit.  Other than that its a drop in trigger.  The KAC is truly a drop in requireing 5 min to install. Conversion pins are a pain in the ass.  Colt made the chamges to deviate and it drove away customers like me who simply want the best.  Had they not done what they did (I dont care WHY) then I would only own Colts.  However they did not meet my personal specifications.  Parts is Parts unless they dont meet your needs.  I can put ramps in a Bushmaster 1/7 barrel but I cant put a Knights trigger in a Colt lower.

I'm not upset at all [:)]

For what it's worth a Colt 6400c M4 carbine has a front pushpin instead of a screw, and it does [b]not[/b] have a protruding sear block.

I've just grown tired of all of the anti-Colt misinformation and outright bullshit that flies around this website.

For example: Take a look at the comparison chart at the top of this page concerning Colt's warranty. Once you've done that take a look at the following pic:

[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/service.JPG[/img]

Can you see why this can be a little frustrating at times?

Unfortunately I have to step away from the PC for a few hours so I won't be able to see how this thread turns out until later.

It should be interesting...

I actually used that same analagy with a friend of mine when he asked why I wanted a Colt when I already had a Bushy.. he's a guitar guy, and I told him for the same reason he saved up for a Gibson and traded in his Epiphone. Just a matter of preferring one name to another I guess.. I like my Bushy and my Colt equally as far as performance, but for some reason I like having that pony on my receiver.

... and to make sure that they never get a fucking penny from me.

Thanks for getting my point.  Another guitar player?

CJan_NH, we gotta talk, doll. You're on a roll.

So - you claimed that modern Colts have small pin ( standard lowers ) lowers in a previous post. True or not true?

But wait, I just got a thought. Wouldn't larger dia. pins actually be somewhat of an advantage? I mean, it probably would be a tad stronger...

[beer]

ETA,
Nice pic of the "F" marked FSB CJan.

It's absolutely true-new Colts have a standard "milspec" front pushpin.

Since a picture is worth a thousand words here's a pic of the front pin on my M4:

[img]http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/front_pin.JPG[/img]


Thanks! I've certainly put my super whizbang Nikon digicam to good use today [:D]

This is certainly true but I can't help but wonder-can anyone else put feedramps in a 1/7ROT Bushmaster barrel?

What I mean is, you have a 1/7ROT Bushmaster barrel, but I can't seem to find anything but 1/9s and 1/8 DCM barrels on Bushy's site. Where would someone go to get one?

Based on Troy's thread it would appear that you guys are a few short of the 200 orders necessary for Bushmaster to build you one.

As soon as the supply line gets a little better for 77gr OTM is Bushmaster going to wake up?

Ooooh, I thought you were talking about the fire control pins, not the lock pins. I see now - carry on.

Truth is, I would get a Colt, but the damn trigger issue is a major turn off. You are limited to a set number of trigger components, unlike the standard lowers, where just about EVERY trigger unit will fit.

Otherwise, Colts are fine in my book.

[lolabove]

I got to remember that trick.

Why would you want to put non Colt parts into your Colt?

As for the AS triggers, we just had one over the Troubleshooting forum that interfered with the selector. Enough so that the rear of the AS trigger had to be relieved. The AS instructions cover this, as does Tillman and Martin's book. Depends on your definition of "drop in" I guess.

The only aftermarket trigger maker to my knowledge that doesn't offer a 170 pin version is KAC.

For me not being able to install a KAC trigger in a Colt is a small price to pay for having a rifle that I can depend on...

CJan_NH, that's all fine and dandy that non-standard parts are available, but you missed part of my post.  If I want to have spares for multiple rifles, like I have, I am going to have to have multiple versions, costing me more money.  If one already has say, a match trigger for a non-standard rifle (Colt), keeps the tigger and switches rifles, he is screwed out of anywhere between $50 and $250.  That is extra cost.  If I want a spare upper for my 6520, I can't use one of my other uppers, I have to go out and buy or build a special upper just for that rifle if I want to maintain the push pin feature.

Just because parts are available, that doesn't change the fact that they would not be needed if it weren't for Colt.  They created a whole market of non-standard parts, and those parts are only usefull in Colts.

So I will continue to whine about non-standard parts, because of Colt, as they are the only reason for their existance.  While I have spare parts on hand, it bothers me that I have to go shell out extra money just to buy upgrades or spare parts just because Colt deviates.  I'm not saying anything about why they did this, just that they do, and you still cannot deny this or the fact that special parts are required for some of their rifles, and only their rifles.  Even though those parts are available, the selection is more limited, and at times more difficult to procure.  Everyone carries the standard parts, but not always the special parts just for Colts.  That in my book is a hassle, no matter how reliable they are, who made them do it, or what they or others have to offer.

Mike, I'm not denying that there are differences. What I [b]am[/b] saying is that those differences are simply not the Earth shattering event that the cloner fanboys make them out to be.

Based on the pictures you've shared you own many beautiful, high end weapons-far more than most people ever will. Is it really that big of a friggin' deal to keep two different sized $6.00 discos in your toolbox? While we're on the subject, how often have you had to replace a Colt FCG part anyway?

As far as aftermarket triggers go, how often do [b]you[/b] move triggers from gun to gun? Lets get real.

There are precisely [b]five[/b] parts in a new Colt that aren't interchangable with a clone: the hammer, trigger, disco, and the two H/T pins. The springs, pins, detents and everything else are completely interchangable.

As far as uppers go, new Colts have a small pushpin anyway-so that gripe is slowly getting phased out.

I don't mind the 170 pins for several reasons:

-I already have plenty of spare parts onhand.

-I can buy any aftermarket trigger on the market with the exception of one.

-My spare parts are genuine Colt, and not some generic POS from Bubba's_Parts_Emporium.

-It's a small price to pay for owning a rifle that isn't an overhyped piece of junk built with generic parts and a shitty warranty.

[b]Here's the best part of the whole "milspec" argument:[/b] I wonder how many of the "pin kommando" dipshits have realized that they are going to have to spend a couple hundred bucks on a new 1/7ROT barrel if they want to run 77gr OTM?

Where are the threads screaming bloody murder because Bushmaster and the other cloners deviated from the "milspec" and shipped their rifles with Fisher Price barrels?

Where are the daily rants?

Where is the indignation?

If the DoD officially adopts 77gr OTM all of the little fanboys are going to want to run it in their own ARs ...[b]BUT...THEY...CAN'T.[/b]

Personally I'd be more concerned about not being able to shoot the premier 5.56 defensive load because the builder of my AR fucked me out of a real barrel. In the overall scheme of things that strikes me as being a little more important than pin size...

But hey, that's one of the reasons why I own Colts in the first place [rolleyes]

CJan_NH

I am in agreement.  People have problems with the other issues but that wasn't what this thread was initially about.

As I said, I have two Colts and enjoy them very much.  I can get around all the parts problems because I can afford too.  It's not a big hit to me, but it can be to others.  It's not something that can't be overcome, it's more of an annoyance.  I appreciate Colt quality.  All my rifles are reliable though that is not always the case for others.  All my barrels are 1/7 twist except for two and those two I specifically got 1/9 on purpose because I plan to only shoot 55gr cheap fodder in them.  I am glad I chose 1/7 because it is all coming back around to it.  Those that laughed at my choice are not laughing anymore.

While everyone has opinions of the other brands, to me, a Colt is the standard by which others are judged, a known quality with rare exception.  I love my Colts, but I still like my other rifles.  They may have been forced into those design deviations, but they are there - it's an annoyance and can cause problems, but yes those problems can be overcome.  Some consider it a small price to pay for having a Colt, others do not, but that's up to the owner to decide.  The FCG pins don't bother me so much as the pivot pin.  While Colt may be phasing the large pin out, that doesn't help me much with my preban 6520, however, that doesn't make it undesirable.

Bottom line for me - if I buy another AR, if I can get the small pivot pin and preferably standard fire control pins, it would be a Colt given the choice.  I didn't buy my other brand rifles cause of the brands, it was out of happenstance and convienience, not brand loyalty.  When I fire a Colt, I know it's going to work, when I grab another brand, I have to fire it and see, and that says something.  I have to admit, confidence is high for most of the other major brands though.

If there were nothing special about Colts, I don't think there would be so much resale value, even if it's just in the name. If there was a table that had 6 AR-15's from the major manufacturers, and you got to pick one for free, most would take the Colt, a few not.  Luckily, most of the major mfg AR's are pretty damn good with minor exceptions, and that's good for all of us.

Bushmaster makes seperate barrels for government contracts.  They do the 20" A2 profile and 14.5" M4 profile in a 1/7 twist.  My M4 1/7 was a DOE overrun and I bought it from Gunsmoke for $175.  The Colt M4 barrel which was identical except for the feed ramps was $400.  Bushamster was selling them to anyone who CALLED ON THE PHONE and asked for $195.  Those barrels are not listed on the website.  You have to know to ask.  The special order 1/7 barrels are 16" which Bushmaster does not do and it is begining to look like they may never do.  Coming up with a 6 week timeline right before Chrismas is tough for people like me who like to buy the best they can but dont always have a ton of funds on hand to purchase all the things they want when they want them.

The point I like that CJan_NH made.

All AR clones have something that makes them deviate from the [b]M-16[/b] carried by our U.S. forces. We nit pick about why we can't have that and we can't have this.

Thank the government and politicians!

We are not allowed to have new machine guns!

So [b]ALL[/b] civilian makers are different from the [b]MILITARY[/b] version in some way. True?

We have to make them into semi-auto civilian friendly firearms.

So why does [b]COLT[/b] get all the backlash about this?? If all companies do the same thing, just at different points in the firearm.

All the time on this board, I read people writing “Colt sucks” “Colt sucks”. Why?

I have never said Bushmaster sucks or any other for that matter.  Well except Vulcan/Hesse! They truly [b]SUCK[/b]

So let’s all take a deep breath and agree that Colt ,Bushmaster, Oly, Armalite, RRA all make good parts and call it a day.




Hey AK_Mike is it cold up on the artic circle yet? Hehe.

Again "I" never said Colt's suck. I have 2 AR's, both Colt Pre-b's. I like Colt Quaility, but my 1st post is the real question I wanted answered.[rolleyes] I never said Colt makes a cheap or crappy product. I just seriously wanted to get an understanding WHY my to pre-b's both made just a few years apart, can't interchange parts with each other, & what's with the front pin being the way it is. I really didn't neeed to be treated like I hate Colt's & am an ignorant fool, or a whiney brat. AK Mike seemed to be one of the few who actually understood my queston's & my present frustrations with my 2 Colts, & their unswitchable internals.

I'm sorry that I turned your thread turned into a multi-paged rant. I realize that you weren't pissing on Colt-I got wound up reading some of the other responses [:)]

[b]WHOOOOOOOOO[/b] there partner.

I never said or meant to imply you hate colt or are an ignorant fool!!!

Reading this site over the past year is what I was talking about. Not your thread.

Searchfortruth, you have to understand starting a thread is just that.. a start. We all make it, then a debate. I am just pointing out what I have noticed. Adding my $0.02 so to say.

To your orginial question. Colt made changes in their parts, I'm sure due to exec's at the plant that had to have it a certain way to make most everyone happy. Mostly at the government level.

Hope that helps, and have a great day. [wave]

I'm taking my Colt the range this weekend, Fri, Sat and Sunday!  Need more ammo-------------[:D]

CJan_,
I'm in agreement with much of what you say.

However, the 1:7 barrels come with a price.  (There just ain't no free lunch.)  If you shoot the longer, heavier bullets, and why would you want a 1:7 if you didn't, barrel and bolt life will both be reduced.  Now for true marksman type shooting, the 1:7 and the long, heavy 77grn match bullets work very well.  

For most of our use the 1:9 barrel remains the best choice.  (That is a 1:9 barrel that is at least 18" long unless the AR is truely for Urban Warfare.  Our troops first got in trouble in the Afghan because they were shooting with short barrels and NOT because of the barrel twist.  The AR-15 and M-16 are and always will be SCHV weapons.  Take velocity out of the equation and you've just got a .22.)

[b]I can't tell you guys how much you've taught me here on AR15.com.  However, I've ALWAYS wondered how an otherwise very bright group could have ever fallen for Brand X's Mil-Spec crap.  I still wonder.[/b]

5sub  

Good post.  Incidentally, Colt gets a lot of bashing for using non-interchangeable parts unlike the others (barring quality issues), the original rant of this thread, but the bashing seems to go much further than that to which I have nothing to add.

Government, politicians, no new MG's, and Hesse/Vulcan Arms - now those I think we can agree on!  Always count me in to bash those!

Oh, it hit -28F a little while ago.  Thanks for asking. [;)]

SO! Now that this board seems to have undergone a shock-to-the-balls about the reality of Colts, let's go buy some![:D]

Just as a thought - can't Colt ( not that it matters much anymore, due to the abundance of trigger parts ) just revert back to standard fire control parts and sell it under a different name?

Or did the stoopid BATF ban that too?

Interesting thread, with a lot of good information along with the usual bullshit mixed in - so, of course I have to put in my $.02 as well...

Because of the NFA it goes without saying that our civilian versions of the M16/AR-15 family simply CANNOT be mil-spec in any literal sense of the word.

EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS THIS, it is a fact of life for us, so why the argument about pin-holes and such? You can't have a mil-spec hammer, trigger, selector and so on, either, so why are we wasting time on the damned pins? Perhaps the larger diameter of the Colt pins gives a greater bearing surface and therefore causes less wear on the holes in the aluminum receiver, making the large pins actually  better than mil-spec? Both Colt and Bushmaster make varmint rifles, and I'm pretty sure those aren't mil-spec, so the hell what?  (I will say one thing about Colt using certain mil-spec parts, though: Good riddance to that infernal screw-together pivot pin!)

I've always thought of the term "Mil-Spec" in terms of relevance to our civilian variants. What material are the parts made of? Are they hardened/treated/forged, etc., to the same quality as military parts? Are the tolerances as good? What about anodizing/coating? As far as twist, you can get both Colt and Bushmaster in 1:7 and 1:9 so I don't see the validity of that particular beef.

It certainly seems that Colt - or their subcontractors - makes all their parts to the same quality, be it for military or us mere civilians. It can be determined if Bushmaster, whether or not they have a current contract, does the same; it is my opinion that they do, but I'm not so sure about what I think of as "Shotgun News Specials." Given the economies of scale, it would seem a false economy to make two lines of parts of different quality, one for the government and another for "other." I've used parts taken from Colt LEO guns and they appear no different from Colt "civilian" lower parts kits I've purchased from various vendors.

I also believe that the mil-spec reference on Bushmaster's website is addressing manufacturing standards and overall quality, not pretending that they're selling you an M16.

Further, it occurs to me that all these manufacturers employ humans to assemble their arms, and humans can make mistakes. Ditto for the humans in Customer Service who answer the phone when you call in with a problem. That's often luck of the draw, sad to say, but companies should work to correct such results.

As for my own experience, I have built several rifles, at least a half-dozen from parts using stripped OEM lowers. Colt parts on Colt lowers, Bushmaster parts on Bushie lowers, and have never had so much as a hiccup after final assembly, test firing and breaking-in (several have required tweaking things like gas tube, buffer and whatnot). Can't say the same for DPMS and others, in my admittedly limited experience building rifles with DPMS parts (only two), their parts don't seem to play well with others. Both times DPMS uppers and lowers didn't work well when mated with other brands. I've also built about a half-dozen rifles on KT Ordnance lowers (beautifully CNC'd from billet) using mostly Bushie parts with some Colt parts mixed in (Bushmaster hammer and trigger because the KTO lowers have standard size holes) and have fired them till they smoked and then some with no bobbles.

Oh, and try going to Colt's website and ordering a barrel, bolt carrier and a bunch of small parts. As if. Colt is aiming at the large buyer, which is fine, while Bushmaster and DPMS focus on providing shooters and hobbyists what they need, and that's fine, too, it's called a free market. Say what you want, Bushmaster makes everything available a la carte and the parts fit and function extremely well, they do it consistently, and are always interchangeable.

To me, the quality is what I want to be "Mil-Spec." The pin size thing is a minor inconvenience, if that. The rest is just partisan bitching by a bunch of "often wrong, never in doubt" know-it-alls as far as I'm concerned. What matters is that it shoots, and shoots well, and both Colt and Bushie will do that all day long.

Booth,
doesn't much matter what you want or I want.  Mil-Spec is a highly defined term both verbally and with drawings, specifications, tolerances, etc.  Products either conform to the current Mil-Spec or they do not. If Product (X) conforms to R-63997 then Product (X) is Mil-Spec.  If Product (X) does not conform to R-63997 then Product (X) is NOT Mil-Spec.

Even when FCG parts are excluded there is no Mil-Spec AR-15 type weapon available to the general public to the best of my knowledge.

I'm sure that any company manufacturing an AR-15 product and claiming that AR-15 type product is Mil-Spec, would be happy to provide a certificate attesting to that fact.  

Boothe

[red]I LOVE MY COLT[/red]

VERY SIMPLE: A Rolex is not just another watch!

There is Colt and then there is everything else!  This should start something good.

Ponies-kick ass
Snakes-bite ass
Panthers-lick ass
Rocks-fall on their ass

You bet.. I'm playing a standard cherry Les Paul now, and have been saving up for a "real" SG, but I'll probably spend the dough on another rifle once I have enough (That Type 97 has had me curious for a while now).. hehe.

I love my

59 Fender Strat

Ernie Ball Music Man  Eddie VanHalen

Peavey   Wolfgang

And in guitars..... there is a [b]BIG[/b] difference between the original and copies.

A rolex is an overpriced timepiece (when they keep time).

Ponies are afraid of snakes
panthers kill snakes
rocks kill them all

Good one,  I would never own a Rolex, but wouldn't own anything other than a Colt.

Let me share a pic: BASIC INSTINCT.  This a "BLACK GUN"

[img]http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WQDOAgMbOLhDWGRCAVRWNJLIUI8SFl8ArjiRHKU3!ap3R2s1z7ZjrI4BQSGgjLwPifmyFFOlo1D6CFldsmF92dSVN7DPejtnFywgmUNfoPLE*QmLYdgBHHMoCY5BcZO9i7d611bxzsQ/AR15SHORTY.JPG?dc=4675446247815692818[/img]

The DC sniper did not help the cause for Bushmaster.  Someone asked"Can I buy one of those Bushmasters at KMART, they sell rifles"?

I told him "no".  Just look in the classified section.  There are always a bunch for sale, just like Jeeps.

Agreed-mine certainly was.

I sold my Oyster Perpetual Datejust many years ago and now wear a cheapo (relatively speaking) Citizen EcoDrive. Even after a tuneup it still couldn't keep time as well as a $25.00 Timex.

The only thing that was kind of fun about having it was getting a loaner watch whenever it was shipped out for service [:)]

I have 2 Casio G Shocks for 20 years and they are great!!

BTW, My G Shock matches my COLT...

Methinks thou doth protest too much...
I'm not saying what I personally want, I'm saying that I understand the difference between something being made to "mil-spec" manufacturing standards and something actually being "the spec." I think that perhaps those beefing about these manufacturers are perhaps defining things a little too narrowly. As you no doubt know, there is a "mil-spec" for everything, the military issues, from the M16, to the parts for the rifle, to processes and standards used in manufacturing those parts, to the finish applied to various surfaces, all the way down to the lube issued for maintaining it. I can't speak for all manufacturers, but I took a quick look ant Bushmaster's website and I could find no claim that their guns are completely "mil-spec" items. What they do say is that their manufacturing processes and certain parts are to spec. For example:

"We machine our barrels from the best grade Chrome-Moly Vanadium Steel - to military specification..."

"We utilize the mil. spec. recommended protective finish for steel in our manufacturing."

"We machine our receivers to fit together with two standard mil. spec. push pins. This offers simple “tool-less” take down in the field - no need for two screwdrivers as with some other brands." (Take that, Colt! Ouch!)

"We use the standard mil. spec. A2 Dual Aperture Rear Sight..."

"We install the latest A2 standard trapdoor buttstock - which is 5/8" longer than the original A1 - for a mil. spec. trigger pull length of 13.5 inches."

Now, though the term MILSPEC is used by the military as shorthand for "Military Specification," I find nothing dishonest in the use of that term in the business world since it has no legal meaning in that context, any more than "National Match" does WRT the Ar-15. The company is merely pointing out that certain of their methods and materials are made to the same size, shape and/or standard as the corresponding military ones.

If you fail to understand that, then you lack a fundamental grasp of the free market system, and probably also would expect Tylenol to come with government documentation proving that it is "Extra Strength."