Bushmaster v. Colt v. DPMS v. R-15

[Mate]

Ok, you're not getting it.

IT IS NOT ABOUT DICK MEASURING.

If someone can save up $900, $100-200 more isnt a problem. I dont want to hear some BS about, "but then my kids wont have shoes". If you can squirrel away that much money, a little more shouldnt be hard, now should it? I'm not Bill Gates, ok people? I just subscribe to the "buy once, cry once" mentality. I saved up for months for my first rifle. I had to cut back on a few things so I could afford it. If something is important enough to someone, they'll do it.

Look, nobody wants to hear that their champ has a glass jaw. Some people are just mad that their "just as good as" rifle, isnt. I'm sure this will make you upset, but I dont care, because I know I'm right.

 

[sean_bart1]

I still wanna know what it is that you guys are doing with your top of the line rifles, that us substandard owners can't. My argument is.... I can do anything with a $900 RRA that can be done with $1400 Colt and have $500 left for whatever. Please somebody shed the light. I'm lost...

 

[TexasRoadDawg]

I'm sure this will make you upset, but I dont care, because I know I'm right.

I'm going to guess ten inches. Close? More?

Haha. Come on dude, lighten up just a little bit. There are different schools of thought, and to say that one is the "right" is just dogmatic.

I'm not against expensive rifles. I'm all for them. When I can, I plan on buying that perfect rifle that you only have to buy once. When I do, my Bushmaster will become my backup. My only gripe is, it isn't fair to tell someone who is just buying their first that they have to buy a certain brand or else its going to be a POS. My experience, as well as those of many others, testify against that. I'm not going to let some chart make me feel insecure about my gun when it has worked flawlessly for years.

Why strain myself and spend more money for features I will never need when I can spend less for a weapon that has everything I will need and works great? Different point of view, but not necessarily wrong. Now can we get along?

 

[frijolero817]

Ok, to Mate and everyone else who makes the argument for a rifle that meets or exceeds Milspec standars; I finally get the point you're making. I ignored it because my rifle works fine with lots of different ammo, but after checking out the link that shows exactly what the properly staked bolt carrier and all of the other things on the list were supposed to look like; I found my rifle coming up short. The stakings didn't even touch the fasteners. I will also concede that chrome lining is important for those who can't clean while in combat situations, and that magnetic particle testing would be valuable on key components. So, you've converted one person. I don't know that my rifle would fail in combat for sure, but I can see the importance in all of those features once I applied some of my metal smith knowledge, and took the time to read about the types of metals that these rifles are made out of. I'll take every advantage I can to ensure success, and this is part of it. Thanks, I've decided to buy a rifle that meets or exceeds these standards.

 

[Mate]

I still wanna know what it is that you guys are doing with your top of the line rifles, that us substandard owners can't. My argument is.... I can do anything with a $900 RRA that can be done with $1400 Colt and have $500 left for whatever. Please somebody shed the light. I'm lost...

HOLY SNAP, dude, lets use some simple math here -

$900 + $200 = $1100

Sean Bart, how often do you shoot your rifle?


Roaddawg - I have no problem with people buying lower end/priced rifles. This is part of your post that I take issue with -

"Why strain myself and spend more money for features I will never need when I can spend less for a weapon that has everything I will need and works great? Different point of view, but not necessarily wrong. Now can we get along? "

Your uses are different from mine. That's cool, just dont think that your rifle will work for my uses. I have seen Bushys fail, I have seen DPMS fail, I have seen RRA fail, I have seen POF fail. So far I havent seen a BCM or a Colt fail with my own eyes.

The stupid thing is, we have come to a conclusion on this subject months ago.

Find out what your going to use the rifle for, and then pick accordingly. For the range plinker, a RRA, DPMS will do just fine. For a more serious shooter, BCM, Colt, or a few others would be a better choice. It's not about shooting groups. Hardly anybody I know measures groups with AR's anyways. Most people that own AR's cant shoot to the rifles capabilities anyways, and if they can, then they are limited by ammo/optic/etc.

 

[sean_bart1]

HOLY SNAP, dude, lets use some simple math here -

$900 + $200 = $1100

Sean Bart, how often do you shoot your rifle?

At least once a week. I farm and ranch a few hundred acres plagued by a bad case of hogs. I keep my RRA in my tractor/truck and use it when needed. I DONT clean it as I should, it gets beat , its covered in dirt and dust sometimes, and it always works.

 

[TexasRoadDawg]

Roaddawg - I have no problem with people buying lower end/priced rifles. This is part of your post that I take issue with -

"Why strain myself and spend more money for features I will never need when I can spend less for a weapon that has everything I will need and works great? Different point of view, but not necessarily wrong. Now can we get along? "

Your uses are different from mine. That's cool, just dont think that your rifle will work for my uses. I have seen Bushys fail, I have seen DPMS fail, I have seen RRA fail, I have seen POF fail. So far I havent seen a BCM or a Colt fail with my own eyes.

The stupid thing is, we have come to a conclusion on this subject months ago.

Find out what your going to use the rifle for, and then pick accordingly. For the range plinker, a RRA, DPMS will do just fine. For a more serious shooter, BCM, Colt, or a few others would be a better choice. It's not about shooting groups. Hardly anybody I know measures groups with AR's anyways. Most people that own AR's cant shoot to the rifles capabilities anyways, and if they can, then they are limited by ammo/optic/etc.

Which is what I have said from the very beginning:

Figure out what you NEED, then buy the cheapest (price wise) gun with those features. Use the money you save to buy ammo and practice practice practice.

I'm glad we came to a consensus.

 

[ColdDeadHands]

Go with something that's Mil-Spec. forget RRA, Bushmaster, cmmg, DPMS and the likes. For the Price you can't beat a Daniel Defense but I'd rather go for a BCM or LMT.
And yes, I own a Noveske and a LMT but my dick didn't get 6" longer - my wife doesn't complain tho so I guess it's all good.

 

[sean_bart1]

I guess I wont get an answer so Ima drop it...

 

[Mate]

Sean Bart, how many rounds do you shoot through it?

And BTW, I dont clean my guns either. They run just fine all nice and lubed up.

 

[ColdDeadHands]

I still wanna know what it is that you guys are doing with your top of the line rifles, that us substandard owners can't. My argument is.... I can do anything with a $900 RRA that can be done with $1400 Colt and have $500 left for whatever. Please somebody shed the light. I'm lost...

It's about longevity and quality. Shoot a few thousand rounds thru your RRA and you might have to replace a bunch of parts. As for what I'm doing with my "top of the line" AR's....I shoot them but most of the time my Noveske sits in the safe and the LMT under the bed. I like to buy quality and am willing to pay for it. You could compare it to tools; some people buy quality tools and use them for a long time - others buy cheapo Harbor Freight tools, use them a few times till they break then they run to Harbor Freight again to replace them.
Pay once, cry once is my motto.

 

[sean_bart1]

Sean Bart, how many rounds do you shoot through it?

And BTW, I dont clean my guns either. They run just fine all nice and lubed up.

On a day I shoot I my run a 30-50 rounds at a herd of hogs. Sometimes i get board and shoot 3-400 rounds into the ponds. I have about 4500-5000 rounds down the pipe maybe more I don't really keep a log

 

[Mate]

So it's not really that harsh of a firing schedule then?

You shoot more than the majority of people though.

I am not measuring dicks, I've got a 3x3, so I'm kinda screwed, so I am not saying this to be condescending, I am not saying this because I like to feel "superior".

Today I shot 500 +/- rounds in the span of a few hours, in the rain, with most of it in low light. It was muddy as hell. It was a high tempo, working on drills to wring out some new gear I got. My rifle was a little sluggish at the start, but after some lube in the right spots I didnt have any problems.

Again, I did not say this because I'm trying to put anyone down. The man asked a question and I'm answering. Those rifles previously mentioned, I have seen them fail within the first 15 rounds, while zeroing, on a bright sunny day with no outside influences. People view things from their frame of reference. My experience tells me that the lower end rifles dont perform well for the type of shooting I do.

 

[sean_bart1]

It's about longevity and quality. Shoot a few thousand rounds thru your RRA and you might have to replace a bunch of parts. As for what I'm doing with my "top of the line" AR's....I shoot them but most of the time my Noveske sits in the safe and the LMT under the bed. I like to buy quality and am willing to pay for it. You could compare it to tools; some people buy quality tools and use them for a long time - others buy cheapo Harbor Freight tools, use them a few times till they break then they run to Harbor Freight again to replace them.
Pay once, cry once is my motto.

I know that there are good and bad in everything. I don't buy from Harbor Freight either. But if you were to compare AR's to tools. A DPMS, RRA, Stag, Olympic isn't just plain junk. If the top of the line AR is "Snap-On" quality, then a DPMS, RRA, Stag, Olympic is "craftsman" quality. They are good enough to get the job done.

 

[ColdDeadHands]

They are good enough to get the job done.

I still won't bet my life on any of the "cheaper" brands. But that is everybody's own decision. Look, if you have a RRA or whatever and you are happy with it who gives a damn what other people say about it. The only thing that bugs me is when people say their $800 dollar Bushy is just as good as my $2500 Noveske - it's not. I might not need that 2500 dollar rifle but have it because I can & because I appreciate quality and craftsmanship.

 

[Nestromo]

I would love to have a rig like that but my CD has ran 1,844rds so far with only failures being crap ammo (Wolf and UMC). I would bet my life on it if I had to. I would definately trust it more than anything else in the price range.

I'd say "Mac". It's not Snap-On though.

 

[ColdDeadHands]

I would love to have a rig like that but my CD has ran 1,844rds so far with only failures being crap ammo (Wolf and UMC). I would bet my life on it if I had to. I would definately trust it more than anything else in the price range.

I'd say "Mac". It's not Snap-On though.

I might be wrong but I think CD AR's are built to mil-spec also.

 

[Nestromo]

I might be wrong but I think CD AR's are built to mil-spec also.

Mine is the 1/9 version. It has a commercial grade stock. I bought it during the frenzy (I just had to have it). If I bought another complete rifle I would get the 1/7 with the Mil stock.

Forgetting about the Com stock, I just can't put this rifle in the same category as the other ~$1k guns. Nothing about it feels cheap like the others and it runs like a champ.

Jon

I dig it.

 

[TexasRoadDawg]

The only thing that bugs me is when people say their $800 dollar Bushy is just as good as my $2500 Noveske.

I don't think anyone would say that. But for most people, the bushy would fill the bill just as well as the Noveske would. That doesn't mean I don't still want one. Bad.

 

[kingofwylietx]

The only thing that bugs me is when people say their $800 dollar Bushy is just as good as my $2500 Noveske - it's not

I don't think anyone would say that. But for most people, the bushy would fill the bill just as well as the Noveske would. That doesn't mean I don't still want one. Bad.

Actually, I think the above 2 quotes pretty much sum up the heart of the issue.

1. Guy has more expensive AR, doesn't want it compared to less expensive models. Why? It's insulting to be told you spent 3x the money for no reason. There are certain things you normally get when you buy a lower volume/higher-end product...better fit, function, use, and hopefully longevity.

2. Guy has less expensive AR, doesn't want to be told it's pile of junk that won't fire 15 rounds without breaking. Why? It's insulting to be told you bought a paperweight with no practical use. There are certain things you normally get when you buy a high volume commercial product that is based on a military product.....better dollar to performance value, meets the needs of 99% of the population.

POINT:
When my wife & I moved in together, we both had leather couches. Hers was a $600 couch & my couches were $3000 each. Well, hers broke about 10 years after she bought it. Mine are still being used by us (they are 15yrs old).....though we've got quite a few scratches on them. Moral.......is the more expensive couch lasting longer...yes...but lets not pretend you couldn't sit comfortable on the cheaper one.