Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

lower end AR-15s


Trigger Mike

Recommended Posts

They sell the lower end AR 15 Bushmaster and Smith and Ruger for around 600 but other Rugers are 1800 or so and other ARs are 1000 and of course Colt is around 1100-1400.  I was at a store in town that builds AR-15s .  They produce supper accurate weapons.  I asked him the difference and he said that the lower end rifles had some good things about them but they are rough finished in the bolt and inside the barrel is not chromed but raw steel.  He said it would take a good bit of trigger work and other things to get it where it needs to be but that they were designed to be bought by those who did not have one due to money, to scoop up the rest of the customers out there.  He said the Bolts on some of them have not even been rounded off fully for a better performance.  

 

To me it dilutes the market and skews the real value of the more quality weapons.  It makes it hard to justify to someone why they should pay 1000 when 600 looks the same.  I also think though that by getting the price down for everyone to afford creates a larger fan base.  If everyone has one they are less likely to want it banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like anything, you usually get what you pay for.

 

Low price means lower quality. High priced means higher quality.   at least if we are talking basic goods, not supply and demand.

 

The lower end ARs are usually a good fit for most shooters or hobbyists or your occasional, basic firearms recreationalist. Higher end ARs are better finished, have better small parts, better fitting of parts, better barrel, higher priced lighter materials in some parts, etc., just like the difference between a $600 1911 and a $3500 1911.

 

Or... an AR for every budget. :D

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally but its not absolute. Local store had DPMS AR's for 389. Ruger's for 509. (That's cheaper than I get'em from my wholesalers, arrrggghhh, lol. Diamondback, Palmetto, all good. Windham (formerly Bushmaster) nice but overpriced. Daniel Defense, Layke Tactical both really nice with a four digit price. They ALL have the same milspec parts every other AR has but usually, depending, have the nitrided trigger/hammer. If there's fitting, I sure couldn't tell but their finish is nicer on the Laykes and DD's. Palmetto has several different levels of quality but mostly, they're ok. You get what you pay for still stands true so yeah I agree with y'all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The little secret about ARs is many of the Mil-Spec parts come from one source. Stag arms in Connecticut. I am talking lower parts kits, bolt carrier groups and such.

The lower receivers, most are made by only a couple of different forges in the US. The manufacturer just has their name put on it BUT one forge might have several different levels of quality.

 

Now, just because a manufacturer has Mil-Spec parts in their lower it doesn't mean they just grab parts from a bin and install them. Many dress them up and match them to their interfacing parts.

 

There are lots of nuances regarding ARs. They all run the same and look similar but they are the sum of their parts. Excellent parts = Better gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, these jokers that tell you a chrome lined barrel is better are full of it. When was the last time you saw corrosive ammo for sale anywhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat the chrome lining while once was a stop gap function fix for early AR's in Nam, it had to do with the powder used and extraction issues not corrosion.

It DOES stop erosion of the bbl and chamber due to the extreme heat an AR or esp a full auto produces. On full auto an AR can get red hot in a few

hundred rounds or so. The chrome can extend a heavily used bbl from 5K rds to more like 50K. And the new melonite bore treatments while  corrossion

resistant are NOT erosion resistant. That said most non chrome lined bbls are more accurate than chrome lined. You want the best all around, go stainless.

 I've been shooting AR's (heavily), for close to 50 years and can tell you there is a hell of a difference in a $2600 Noveske versus even say a Colt 6920,

let alone a $600 Ruger. I  had the fortune of meeting Eugene Stoner several times as well as jim Sullivan as I worked with Armalite  a few decades ago.

 I think at this point I've about forgotten almost as much as I still :D know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Dutch Nichols, SASS #6461 said:

Pat the chrome lining while once was a stop gap function fix for early AR's in Nam, it had to do with the powder used and extraction issues not corrosion.

It DOES stop erosion of the bbl and chamber due to the extreme heat an AR or esp a full auto produces. On full auto an AR can get red hot in a few

hundred rounds or so. The chrome can extend a heavily used bbl from 5K rds to more like 50K. And the new melonite bore treatments while  corrossion

resistant are NOT erosion resistant. That said most non chrome lined bbls are more accurate than chrome lined. You want the best all around, go stainless.

 I've been shooting AR's (heavily), for close to 50 years and can tell you there is a hell of a difference in a $2600 Noveske versus even say a Colt 6920,

let alone a $600 Ruger. I  had the fortune of meeting Eugene Stoner several times as well as jim Sullivan as I worked with Armalite  a few decades ago.

 I think at this point I've about forgotten almost as much as I still :D know

I was thinking that Stoner originally designed the gun with a chromed bore and the government deleted that as a cost saver, and then the powder change in the ammo. Is that correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howdy,

NOt only quality of the part but quality control.

A friend of mine rebarreled a lot of rifles.

The old barrels stacked up in his shop and when he had time,

he tried the old factory barrels for accuracy.

Sometimes the factory barrel would be just outstanding.

He sold those as select grade.  The rest were sold cheap at gun shows.

There are even variations in aftermarket barrels.

Three hundred dollar barrels are NOT all equal.

Best

CR

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob quick answer was rifles in the field started choking, half extractions, rounds not fully seated/in battery, quickest fix was to find something wear resistant as well as some lubrous properties, chrome lining was added (not in original rifles), and the forward assist added to fully seat a round if it short cycled. After some time, rifles were pulled for evaluation. They found extraction/chambering issues were due to calcium carbonate crystals forming in the gas tubes. This restricted gases so bolt "short-cycled". As you stated someone in procurement switched to Win ball powder which had a higher cal-carb content. It was found that when the tubes heated in the humidity of SE Asia, the cal-carb formed crystals which restricted gases thru the tube.

 A switch back to extruded stick powder from IMR/Dupont,  resolved the issues but it was found the chrome lining extended bbl life so it remained.

The forward assist also remains but should NEVER be used as it was found that rounds that have to be "force seated" , in many cases will tear the rim leaving cases stuck in the chambers.

 This brings back memories!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The problems with the M16 in Vietnam were due to the Bean Counting attitude of the McNamera DOD.  He was a Harvard MBA whom became Sec Def picked from Ford Motor Co..  And anybody who knows the post WWII history of the Blue Oval company, at least before the 1990's, systems analysis & bean counting was more important than styling or engineering.  Just look at the Pinto's unprotected fuel tanks.  The powder that the 223 was designed with was replaced with the 30-06 powder that millions of pounds were in inventory. I.E. cheaper Also, plating the chamber & barrel costs money.  Another McNamera F'up was the TFX aircraft program (F111) that took 30+ years for the DOD to unlearn the lessons learned and fund the JSF program (F35). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, J.D. Daily said:

The problems with the M16 in Vietnam were due to the Bean Counting attitude of the McNamera DOD.  He was a Harvard MBA whom became Sec Def picked from Ford Motor Co..  And anybody who knows the post WWII history of the Blue Oval company, at least before the 1990's, systems analysis & bean counting was more important than styling or engineering.  Just look at the Pinto's unprotected fuel tanks.  The powder that the 223 was designed with was replaced with the 30-06 powder that millions of pounds were in inventory. I.E. cheaper Also, plating the chamber & barrel costs money.  Another McNamera F'up was the TFX aircraft program (F111) that took 30+ years for the DOD to unlearn the lessons learned and fund the JSF program (F35). 

That has been my understanding of the first M 16s also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pasted from a small arms review article. as I stated previous the rifle was NOT designed with a chrome line chamber or bore, McNamara's bean counters , and extra cost had nothing to do with it.

 

As stated by William Davis, Jr. about the decision to not chrome plate the chamber, “If the rifle needed a chrome chamber Stoner would have designed it that way. So it did not have one therefore it did not need one.” Despite that fact, the rifle that Stoner and Colt showed the government was not a finalized weapon. It would need development to get ready for the troops to use at large.

This problem was simply corrected. First to appear were barrels with chrome plated chambers only. The barrels were marked “CMPC”(Colt magnetic particle inspected and proof tested). Barrels were also sent to Rock Island to have the chambers modified and chrome plated. This prevented the serious failures to extract and made the chamber easier to clean. Later in the war, the barrels were chrome plated in both the bore and chamber. These barrels were marked “CMPB” or “ CMP Chrome Bore.” With this modification the failures to extract became a thing of the past in the rifle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.