AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Bushmaster vs. Colt design (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 2/6/2005 4:45:09 PM EDT
|
Do the Bushmaster Non-LEO rifles incorporate the Colt features, such as: Sear block Non mil-spec pin sizes Any other bullshit non mil-spec. parts Would you consider the Bushmaster to be a mil.-spec. rifle, only without the full auto fire control parts? Thank's for those of you who take the time to answer. Ray |
|
lower reciver is not mil-spec non of the fire control parts are mil-spec carrier is not mil-spec. but then nobodys ar rifle is mil-spec. on bushmaster parts. the lower reciver has no sear block fire pin size is the smaller one carrier is a full circle fireing pin shourd type. I dont think there buffer tubes or collisable stocks are spec. For the price it is hard to beat Bushmaster. FultonArmory makes a good rifle as well wait just may be less than what bushmaster has right now. And you can get it your way. |
Bushmaster parts that aren't "milspec" Barrel: 4150 steel, but individual barrels are NOT all magnetic particle inspected & proof load tested, "sample basis" only; 1/7 twist generally available only by special order Bolt: "sample basis" only magnetic particle inspection & proof load testing FSB: not "F" height, may require the higher FSP to zero with a milspec BUIS Carbine receiver extension: wrong diameter, milspec/LMT/Vltor stocks won't fit CAR/M4 stocks: don't fit milspec tube and are shaped differently Bushmaster makes an excellent product but to say that they are "100% milspec" is incorrect. |
If you must have an AR that's as close to "milspec" as possible, buy a stripped "low-shelf" lower, and then assemble it with all Colt parts (complete upper, M16 BCG, small pin semi LPK, and stock assembly). This will give you a rifle that's closer to "mil-spec" than either a Colt or Bushmaster factory rifle. Or you could just not worry about being "completely mil-spec". As long as you use parts from reputable companies, you shouldn't have any problems. This is my suggested course of action. |
what's FSB,FSP, BUIS, "F" height? and what is the carbine reciever extension? sorry, but I'm quite a noob. 
|
FSB = Front Sight Base FSP = Front Sight Post BUIS = Back-Up Iron Sights Carbine Receiver Extension = The tube sticking out the back of the lower receiver that the stock goes on. "F" height = the height the front sight base is supposed to be, but isn't on bushmasters. |
I agree with you. But FWIW my new rifle has a 1/9 M4 barrel that was magnetic particle tested. Or at least the proofmarks say that. I never noticed the FSB, is it really that much shorter? Why did they do that? Ps I hate the word "milspec" it essentially means nothing anymore. |
Dont worry. Everyone gets called a troll here. At least once. Some folks see any new person as a troll. |
Bushmaster stamps their barrels but does not test each barrel. They test a very small percentage and then stamp all of the barrels in the lot as having been tested. |
On the Bushmaster: No Sear Block Standard sizes (mil-spec) pins on FCG I think the confusion comes in with the word "mil-spec" No civilian sold rifles are 100% "mil-spec", and then again you can endlessly debate which "spec" your referring to. The short answer is the Bushmaster is a quality product. In that the FCG is small pin, the take down/piviot pins are small size, chrome lined bore and chamber, etc. |
So Bushmaster stamps em but the MP mark doesnt mean squat? Isnt that like lying? Maybe I should have got a Colt. Or do they do the same thing? |
All Colt barrels are inspected. BM does this only on a "sample basis". See this thread: www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=2&f=28&t=143771&page=1 |
thanks for the explaination. That sight height issue makes me reconsider getting a bushmaster. so on a 20"A3 both, the carry handle and the Front Sight Base (that's the thing on the gas port, right?) are lower than on a military m16a4? |
The Colt 6400 is about the closest to mil-spec you can get aside from the LE version. It has a 16" barrel instead of 14.5, half circle carrier, a muzzle brake, big trigger pins, semi-auto only and a faux stock. Thats about it for being non mil-spec but everything else though is up to standards. You get all the goodies from front sight base that's correct height, H-buffer, t-marked rail, M4 roll stamps, full chromed 4150 barrel and chamber, M4 profile, double shielded hand guards, and a few others. If you want mill-spec then pick up a 6400. Remove the faux stock and pull the plastic off then rebuild the latch with the small parts needed. Then buy a VLTOR extension and put the Colt plastic stock back on. |
I sold it because I needed the money at the time and it was the easiest thing to sell that I owned. I've since bought another one. IMO the 6920 is the best factory AR rifle currently available. |
Wasnt directed at you especially, just the general argument of which AR15 is Mil spec and which isnt. Fact is, there is no such thing as a mil-spec AR15. There is a mil-spec M16 though. As long as the parts are interchangable the title or mil-spec or not isnt important, yet people will sit here and argue over a part being .0000001" too large or small. For "anyone" that wants mil-spec rifle , enlist, otherwise be content with your civvy AR15. The H2 is not a mil-spec humvee. The AR15 will never be a mil-spec M16. I dont care who makes it |
|
As has been discussed, civilians are hard pressed to find a 100% milspec AR. Each manufacturer has its pluses and minuses. Using the M4 platform for an example: With Colt you will get many milspec features, but then you have larger FCG pins, and the 6920 are hard to find, and way overpriced. With BM (to use a manufacturer from the thread title), you can normal FCG pins, but then have no F-FSB, no M4 feedramps, T-markings, commercial sized buffer tube,etc. To get semi-auto replica type M4, (as close as you can) you may need to combine parts from a couple different sources. One possible suggestion: Upper --- Colt or LMT Features: M4 feedramps, chrome lined barrel and chamber, F-FSB, 1/7 twist, T-marks Lower --- Bushmaster Features: standard FCG pins, low shelf (still much different than an M4A1), purchase a LMT or Colt M4 stock assembly (Or you could buy a LMT lower with high shelf . . .) I have just listed features, without debating "mil-spec" QC (Which I would agree is a very important milspec feature) But it is my personal opinion that mil-spec QC does not exsist in the civilian market. |
|
Bushmaster makes a good rifle, But Colt is & allways be the best. As pointed out earlier in this thread Colt Quality control is second to none, MP Testing all barrels/Bolts/Carriers, Properly Staking Metal parts instead of Gluing & checking all other parts. No other AR Mfg. does that. As for Mil Spec., No Civvy AR is Milspec. |
+1 to everything he said (including the part I cut out to save space). If you have a weird "mil-spec" fetish, you're not going to get exactly what you want unless you build it yourself. I love my Colt rifle, and it's nice to know that it's has the MP inspecting done to it, as well as the right FSB, buffer tube, etc. But I'll freely admit that it's not "100% milspec". Likewise, Bushmaster makes an excellent product, and I think letting the slight variances away from the "milspec" in a Bushmaster rifle sway one's opinion against their product is silly. Either one will serve you well. |
Unless some one has a real govt marked M4A1 or M4 that says US property and select fire we all have clones.Diameter on the extension is .115 mil spec and .118 every one else.Bravo company had it right an upper with feed ramps,1/7 14.5 4150 steel barrel and a Bushy or any one elses A2 lower with a colt telestock or LMT oh for any one who cares SARCO has colt telestock assemblies the older polymer one with an H buffer new for $125
|
|
I'm not bored and I asked a simple fucking question. If someone decides to start a flame war or steal the post, it's beyond my control. It's up to the people who respond to answer appropriately. I'll continue to ask questions here until the BS get's just below my nostrils. most of the people who take the time to answer are very helpful, and I want to thank you. |
In all honesty unless you plan on doing some serious illegal shit in CONUS you dont need a milspec rifle. Colts and Bushys and Armalites and RRA and Stoners all work the same and all shoot pretty much the same. So what difference does milspec matter. Buy what ya want and enjoy it. Youre going to be hard pressed to find factual error proof tests that prove 1 rifles superiority over anothers. 
|
| I dont think its a quality question its this simple colt has the larger non standard fire control parts and blocked lower and has better quality control testing as they do test the bolts,carriers and barrels MP on those partsBushmaster tests examples from the whole batch,Colt telestock is the .115 dismeter spec every one elses slightly thicker .118,I like thicker,Barrels same quality.I have rebuilt my Bushmasters to have the best parts I want.My carbine is Bushmaster upper,lower and parts except RRA hammer and carrier and telestock,Colt MPC bolts with lesbaer chromed extractor,Colt H buffer,RRA aluminum trigger guard.Build rifles from scratch using the best parts thats my new moto.My next rifle is a Bushmaster lower,RRA lower parts and Colt type 2 telestock,upper is CMMG 14.5 1/7phantom feed ramp upper,I like A2 sights Colt Bolt carrier/bolt assembly with my chromed extractor thats my new recipe. |
|
This is the game plan. Aquire an upper that will adapt to M4 lower. Also a semi. lower that will work with said upper. Get good qualityand use @ training. Work hard toward employment outside conus/take upper with me. Nothing illegal/wannabe intended. I will probably go with an LMT upper. Not sure yet on the lower. Thank you all for sharing your time and knowledge. Ray |
| I don't recall ever having an Army issued "Colt" M16 (M16A1 or A2) anyway. I now have a BM A2 style AR (with a Government profile 1:7 barrell) and it looks, feels, and shoots just like my old "Mil-Spec" A2 -- minus the crappy burst mode -- and more so than an H-Bar. If you look at a photo of it against the FN M16A2 on FN's website you could not tell the difference. Be thankful that the ban has expired and get one built from one of the better companies listed on these boards. Self-build only if you know what you are doing. I had a PacWest AR before the ban with a non-PW upper and it sucked. Tried tweaking it and it continued to suck. What's in a name? How about 4.2 gun tubes made by Whirlpool? As long as it does the job! |
Why do people give a crap about sear blocks? They are NEVER going to repeal the MG ban. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Bushmaster vs. Colt design (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor