Cheapest AR you’d trust?

outrider58 said:

So what you're saying, it's more of a quality control issue than anything else. Sure, there are out of spec parts that come along, but that also falls within quality assurance which is a human factor.

Many of us have taken a friend's turd AR and after tearing them down and replacing maybe a couple simple little parts(a pin here, a spring there) and returned to them a well functioning machine. Mostly the issues originate from poorly assembled products. This is the crux of the problem IMO.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

SkiPatrolDude said:

I think this is a good point.

Most any reliability issue with an AR is either related to parts that are out of spec, poor assembly, or both. This is assuming that the important parts are also made to at least "mil spec" (looking at you, S&W).

Assuming a low end AR is within acceptable tolerance, it really becomes a matter of proper assembly.

I also think that trying to find an AR that has at least a nitride barrel is ideal. A non lined barrel is just fine for most people, but in terms of long term storage, it can be more prone to corrosion. But certainly no reason I would not "trust" a basic non lined barrel, so long as it was confirmed to be within spec.

My PSA CHF upper has been flawless, but I also stripped it down, dimpled the barrel, and reassembled everything to my preference, so I know it's legit. I've done the same thing for a few friends with Anderson rifles, Rugers, and a Delton. It will amaze you how easily some of the gas blocks will come off.

Click to expand...

outrider58 said:

So what you're saying, it's more of a quality control issue than anything else. Sure, there are out of spec parts that come along, but that also falls within quality assurance which is a human factor.

Many of us have taken a friend's turd AR and after tearing them down and replacing maybe a couple simple little parts(a pin here, a spring there) and returned to them a well functioning machine. Mostly the issues originate from poorly assembled products. This is the crux of the problem IMO.

Click to expand...

No doubt. I have a friend that has watched me disassemble/assemble several rifles and is understanding why we do it. He's in the car business (collision) and recognizes similarities between the two. Small improvements make a world of difference. Even a simple inspection to catch something goes a long way.

outrider58 said:

So what you're saying, it's more of a quality control issue than anything else. Sure, there are out of spec parts that come along, but that also falls within quality assurance which is a human factor.

Many of us have taken a friend's turd AR and after tearing them down and replacing maybe a couple simple little parts(a pin here, a spring there) and returned to them a well functioning machine. Mostly the issues originate from poorly assembled products. This is the crux of the problem IMO.

Click to expand...

More to the point, is there really much of a discernable/functional difference between AR uppers and lowers that are made by some "high end" maker like Colt or DD, and one that comes from PSA?

It's not like Colts and DD's are sprinkled with magical anti-malfunction fairy dust. They can have CQ issues just like any other manufacturer.

I also agree that if you took a basic AR upper and lower and swapped out some key budget level parts with more expensive parts from a reputable manufacturer, you could come away with a very nice rifle that would still save you money from something like DD.

trickg said:

More to the point, is there really much of a discernable/functional difference between AR uppers and lowers that are made by some "high end" maker like Colt or DD, and one that comes from PSA?

It's not like Colts and DD's are sprinkled with magical anti-malfunction fairy dust. They can have CQ issues just like any other manufacturer.

I also agree that if you took a basic AR upper and lower and swapped out some key budget level parts with more expensive parts from a reputable manufacturer, you could come away with a very nice rifle that would still save you money from something like DD.

Click to expand...

As stated, assembly is a key difference.

Metallurgy is sometimes a factor as well. Some use 4140 for the barrels when 4150 is preferred.

Some use a lot of 6061 aluminum when 7075 is preferred. I can literally break a 6061 charging handle with one hand.

Bolts are sometimes not C158, nor MP or HP tested. Sometimes they are just MP tested but not HP tested (this is a highly debated topic in of itself). And then between bolt manufacturers, some hold to tighter QC specs than others.

But beyond some basic stuff, assuming both are in spec and assembled correctly, they will both be perfectly functional. The rate of QC issues is generally much higher when looking at the low/ bargain end of the spectrum.

trickg said:

More to the point, is there really much of a discernable/functional difference between AR uppers and lowers that are made by some "high end" maker like Colt or DD, and one that comes from PSA?

It's not like Colts and DD's are sprinkled with magical anti-malfunction fairy dust. They can have CQ issues just like any other manufacturer.

I also agree that if you took a basic AR upper and lower and swapped out some key budget level parts with more expensive parts from a reputable manufacturer, you could come away with a very nice rifle that would still save you money from something like DD.

Click to expand...

I can see legitimate differences between manufacturers. I have BCM stripped uppers that are clean and things are right. I've got SOTA Arms stripped uppers that look horrible. Feedramp inconsistencies, fit issues, etc. Does the SOTA upper function? Sure. I'll shoot it but I wouldn't bet my life on it.

I have a PSA premium BCG that was gauged and had springs swapped. The chrome lining isn't great though. It functions great but will wear gas rings a little faster. I've seen other PSA premium BCGs that didn't pass. But that's PSAs deal. The customer is QC. My SOLGW BCG passed but has very nice chrome lining. Paid the same price for both and didn't have to swap springs in the SOLGW.

All companies have issues at some point. Some companies have less QC issues than others. With that in mind I agree with you that manufacturers aren't perfect and make it standard practice to disassemble, inspect, swap sketchy parts and reassemble everything I buy.

SkiPatrolDude said:

As stated, assembly is a key difference.

Metallurgy is sometimes a factor as well. Some use 4140 for the barrels when 4150 is preferred.

Some use a lot of 6061 aluminum when 7075 is preferred. I can literally break a 6061 charging handle with one hand.

Bolts are sometimes not C158, nor MP or HP tested. Sometimes they are just MP tested but not HP tested (this is a highly debated topic in of itself). And then between bolt manufacturers, some hold to tighter QC specs than others.

But beyond some basic stuff, assuming both are in spec and assembled correctly, they will both be perfectly functional. The rate of QC issues is generally much higher when looking at the low/ bargain end of the spectrum.

Click to expand...

These are excellent points. I haven't purchased a spare bolt because I'm having a hell of a time finding one in C158.

omegared24 said:

No doubt. I have a friend that has watched me disassemble/assemble several rifles and is understanding why we do it. He's in the car business (collision) and recognizes similarities between the two. Small improvements make a world of difference. Even a simple inspection to catch something goes a long way.

Click to expand...

*****We would do this when building Super Stock and other similar limited modification class engines. Small, seemingly insignificant differences in things like valve seats and angles, as well as piston ring gaps and honing of cylinder walls with and without proper clamping had remarkably big effects on engine performance and reliability.

I'm a fairly detail oriented guy and would check and re-check stuff constantly and remember taking a crankshaft from one of our race cars that tested bent for our needs but still sorta within specs for a production car and had a specialist we used to fix it and I could NOT believe how he fixed it: He clamped it properly into a mock block, verified the run out, and said he could fix it with a BFH tool. I was like "okay!", not knowing what that was..... He used a BIG F*CKING HAMMER to fix the bent crankshaft, and to me it was a miracle - it was dead nuts on where it needed to be. The guy just had lots of experience and knew where to hit and not hit things to straighten them out. I was thinking it was gonna take some fancy machine work and a ton of measurements... A couple of measurements and a whack with the BFH fixed a bent crank. Crazy.

So yea, people, tools, people that are total tools sometimes have a bad day and even a decent brand rifle can be waaay out of spec. Dunno if there is an equivalent BFH tool for AR's but I've seen some not so expensive or well regarded AR builds that were put together by someone *awesome* at it, and they ran flawlessly. A decent builder or gunsmith can, with enough time, really make some otherwise kind of not so well regarded builds with mediocre parts and machining really work quite well.

Sometimes it just takes a BFH and the right guy to do the job..

MaxVO2 said:

*****We would do this when building Super Stock and other similar limited modification class engines. Small, seemingly insignificant differences in things like valve seats and angles, as well as piston ring gaps and honing of cylinder walls with and without proper clamping had remarkably big effects on engine performance and reliability.

I'm a fairly detail oriented guy and would check and re-check stuff constantly and remember taking a crankshaft from one of our race cars that tested bent for our needs but still sorta within specs for a production car and had a specialist we used to fix it and I could NOT believe how he fixed it: He clamped it properly into a mock block, verified the run out, and said he could fix it with a BFH tool. I was like "okay!", not knowing what that was..... He used a BIG F*CKING HAMMER to fix the bent crankshaft, and to me it was a miracle - it was dead nuts on where it needed to be. The guy just had lots of experience and knew where to hit and not hit things to straighten them out. I was thinking it was gonna take some fancy machine work and a ton of measurements... A couple of measurements and a whack with the BFH fixed a bent crank. Crazy.

So yea, people, tools, people that are total tools sometimes have a bad day and even a decent brand rifle can be waaay out of spec. Dunno if there is an equivalent BFH tool for AR's but I've seen some not so expensive or well regarded AR builds that were put together by someone *awesome* at it, and they ran flawlessly. A decent builder or gunsmith can, with enough time, really make some otherwise kind of not so well regarded builds with mediocre parts and machining really work quite well.

Sometimes it just takes a BFH and the right guy to do the job..

Click to expand...

Absolutely. I'll defer to experts in a second that know better than I do. It's amazing what a real expert can do. I've learned to do things the hard way several times. No more.

MaxVO2 said:

*****We would do this when building Super Stock and other similar limited modification class engines. Small, seemingly insignificant differences in things like valve seats and angles, as well as piston ring gaps and honing of cylinder walls with and without proper clamping had remarkably big effects on engine performance and reliability.

SNIP!

Sometimes it just takes a BFH and the right guy to do the job..

Click to expand...

Ask me how many P80 pigs I've fixed for people, most times without replacing parts. Guns you'd swear were assembled using only a rock and a stick.
It is its own sort of fun.

SkiPatrolDude said:

It will amaze you how easily some of the gas blocks will come off.

Click to expand...

This.

It goes back to my QC beef. They pass down that troubleshooting to the consumer and their chosen gunsmith or their own bench. These rifles aren't truly complete off the rack until they've been vetted like this. I've seen missing gas blocks, detached gas tubes. This is such a critical area that I get physically ill thinking that these companies allow these rifles to leave their factories. And they aren't isolated incidents either. if 65% of buyers get a reasonably in-spec rifle and 35% get a mess, who will believe the other? Especially on the internet, if they're hearing something they don't want to from a random stranger.

outrider58 said:

How about two brands I won't trust based on ones I've repaired for people on the range; S&W M&P and Ruger 556.

Click to expand...

I have a Ruger.556. Have probably put about 1000 rounds through it. Haven't had any issues so far.

outrider58 said:

All things being equal (and they're not...), any AR is better than no AR...

Click to expand...

HeatSeeker said:

I have a Ruger.556. Have probably put about 1000 rounds through it. Haven't had any issues so far.

Click to expand...

Such a great thread!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Benny said:

Such a great thread!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

It's the norm.

I think it's typical for a thread of this nature to be this way.

On one hand you're going to have the guys who understand that there's nothing mythical about gun parts - as long as parts are within spec, made from decent materials, and are put together and maintained in an acceptable fashion, the gun is going to function. Then there are the gun snobs who throw more money into their gear than is actually necessary, but who will insist until their dying breath than anything less would be unreliable.

There's usually a balance that can be found somewhere in between.

Where would this conversation be if we were talking about semi-auto pistols? One of the cheaper options out there is the Glock, but a better comparison would be the 1911 platform. What's the cheapest 1911 you'd trust?

With the 1911 we'd get all kinds of similar conversation. There are going to be the guys on the cheap end of the spectrum who would say their stock RIA MilSpec 1911 is more than enough. On the other end you'll get the guys who will tell you that nothing less than Wilson Combat/Les Baer/Ed Brown/Nighthawk Custom are absolutely necessary. Somewhere along the way the conversation will delve into the debate about whether or not MIM parts are acceptable, some will insist that only a true Colt Series 70 is the only way to go, others will talk about customization, etc ad nauseum, and all of the other brands will get tossed about in there somewhere - Kimber, Springfield, Dan Wesson, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Sig, Remington...

Typically these threads boil down to guys talking about the guns they have and them defending the choices they made for why they have what they have.

The truth is, if a gun functions, it functions. I've read stories about guys who spend lots of money on expensive guns only to have issues with functionality from the outset (I've heard this a lot regarding Wilson Combat 1911s, which apparently need a lot of rounds for them to "break in" before they'll function properly) and I've also read stories about guys who picked up the least expensive RIA 1911 they could get, and it's not only accurate, but it's also very reliable.

Most of the time these threads are just exercises in the good ol' "what if..." as well, and the likelihood that any of the participants of the thread will ever need their gun in any kind of a real survival or combat situation is virtually nil. Much ado about guns that will spend most of their life as little more than range toys.

It's funny how some people care about minute details of the gun. I personally know a retired full bird colonel who was airborne infantry all his career. He cares less about the gun itself. It's just a piece of equipment like the airplane he jumps out from.

Michigander08 said:

It's funny how some people care about minute details of the gun. I personally know a retired full bird colonel who was airborne infantry all his career. He cares less about the gun itself. It's just a piece of equipment like the airplane he jumps out from.

Click to expand...

That's funny. I bet the pilot cares about the "minute details" of that plane.

He doesn't care because he doesn't know better. Or you're just saying dumb things on a forum because it can't be verified.

omegared24 said:

Or you're just saying dumb things on a forum because it can't be verified.

Click to expand...

It isn't a dumb thing what I said. Is there a general spec and acceptable standard for guns? Or do you think it is piece of junk like dollar store stuff and we have to wade through and weed it out to find a "decent" gun?

And the colonel is true; a former commander of 509th Parachute Infantry battalion.

JRisBundyboyz, I just rifled through all this, and thought...holy god!

Did you get anything useful out of all this?

I'm hearing from you....twins coming congrats! so, time is short, funds are going to be short, and knowledge is even shorter, with no time to learn.

A complete, sound rifle is in your future if you can pony up the sticker shock...

IMHO....Windham, SW, Ruger have been making solid stuff.

All you need to know for now, what your sights and optics.....out of state for mags, and enjoy!

Again, congrats on the family!

Michigander08 said:

It's funny how some people care about minute details of the gun. I personally know a retired full bird colonel who was airborne infantry all his career. He cares less about the gun itself. It's just a piece of equipment like the airplane he jumps out from.

Click to expand...

There was a tanker who was a contemporary of Gen. Patton during WWII...he was very well versed in how a tank was built and operated...he said Patton didn't know a damn thing about tanks. The difference was that Patton knew how to use tanks and let his subordinates handle the technical aspects of the tanks.

I liken guns to an automobile engine. Say you have a small block Chebbie...any make will do. I've seen guys buy a bunch of high quality parts...Edelbrock...Holley...Lunati...you name it. They throw the parts together and get an engine that doesn't function well because they didn't match the parts together to meet a common, defined goal. Others will define the goal they're after and collect the parts that, once put together...will meet that goal...whether name parts or private label parts.

Guns can be the same...mix a bunch of parts that aren't well fitted or intended to meet a defined goal and you won't be happy with the results.