Service M4 vs Civilian AR15 Quality

[Ggreen]

I thought colt brought out the 6940 line to fix the 6920 mess.

You can build a Frankin15 with quality parts from several different manufacturers and combine them for a better rifle than what the military is issued. Except maybe the new FN made M4's. FN makes high quality firearms for military service.

The M240 is a renamed FN MAG.

The M241 is the FN minimi

Both are excellent.

The 6940 has different features it isn't a replacement. The problem with the 6920 of late were colt qc problems. They cut a ton of their manufacturing and used assemblers vs armorers. There was a really fun thread on another site where guys were posting their colt bcgs that the gas key staking completely missed the bolts. Hopeful that cz can fix the issues.

I have a couple ARs that I have never shot but I have had no trouble with them at all and they seem to do just as well as the others. So I think we can all agree they are just as good.

Every online review I've ever read in one post, magnificent lol.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I was watching a video from one of the fairly well known gun personalities on the interweb of all knowledge. This person made the statement that the vast majority of civilian AR 15s on the market were of at least the same quality if not better quality than the average soldier/marines service rifle. Since I read debates and advice on here all the time about buying the "high end" rifles vs average rifles I am curious about the truth of this statement. Those of you who have served are serving in the military and maybe even our LEOs who are issued rifles what say you? Is the average price PSA, Anderson, Aero, Bushmaster AR15 the equal of an issue rifle or does one have to go to a more expensive brand? I did not serve and have never had the opportunity to handle a military issue M4/M16 so I am genuinely curious. I look forward to hearing some Ingo knowledge.

I think many gun owners get wrapped around the axle about the dual railroad tracks of "quality" and "milspec".

The 2 tracks, both are correct:

1. There are many AMAZING AR-15 rifles that are not "milspec" and are great guns.

2. The TDP of milspec gives you fungibility a la Eli Whitney, not quality per se.

While all righteous people here on INGO are Colt fanboys, there is nothing wrong with "lesser" brands, e.g. PSA, depending on what you want to do. I just want to plink at the range, cool, rock that DelTon. I just want a solid deal, cool, get an Aero AC-15 and rock on.

Remember, it is a tool, the threshold question for a hand tool is "what is it for?" What is best depends if you want to drive nails or cut a board.

Do you want a rifle to fight with with a bunch of other people? Maybe you want FN milspec, as you all would have it because CWO3 McPherson told you that this is what you will have.

Do you want to 3 gun? Well, something else then.

Do you want to defend home and hearth? Maybe milspec, maybe something better as it is just you.

Do you want the best AR-15? Then that is Colt, as is the consensus here on INGO.

 

[Ggreen]

Do you want the best AR-15? Then that is Colt, as is the consensus here on INGO.

Hopefully cz corrects their outsourcing qc. FN and SoLGW have eclipsed Colt in every way including price now though.

 

[Mark106]

Interesting stuff on this thread.
I'm not an AR guy, per se, but I do keep one carbine around pretty much just because they're a handy rifle and fun to shoot, IMO. I run mine with a little Nikon 3x32 P-Tactical atop it.
I started out with a (Remington) Bushmaster and was not impressed by it. On the recommendation of a couple of friends, I tried a Colt LE6920 M4 Carbine Magpul edition in 2013.
Reading this thread prompted me to look up my rifle's serial number, and I found and that my carbine was, in fact, made in '13.
The only thing I found "must change" on that rifle was the trigger, which was a simple enough fix. After that, it's been a pleasure, really. Granted, it's been a lightly used range toy, but it's been an accurate little number and gulps down Lake City bulk just fine.
Considering I picked it up right around MSRP during the madness in '13, I've always thought it a quite satisfactory purchase.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Hopefully cz corrects their outsourcing qc. FN and SoLGW have eclipsed Colt in every way including price now though.

Interesting stuff on this thread.
I'm not an AR guy, per se, but I do keep one carbine around pretty much just because they're a handy rifle and fun to shoot, IMO. I run mine with a little Nikon 3x32 P-Tactical atop it.
I started out with a (Remington) Bushmaster and was not impressed by it. On the recommendation of a couple of friends, I tried a Colt LE6920 M4 Carbine Magpul edition in 2013.
Reading this thread prompted me to look up my rifle's serial number, and I found and that my carbine was, in fact, made in '13.
The only thing I found "must change" on that rifle was the trigger, which was a simple enough fix. After that, it's been a pleasure, really. Granted, it's been a lightly used range toy, but it's been an accurate little number and gulps down Lake City bulk just fine.
Considering I picked it up right around MSRP during the madness in '13, I've always thought it a quite satisfactory purchase.

You have chosen correctly.

 

[mmpsteve]

Many civilians that I see don't need a $3000 AR, they need a $600 AR and $2400 worth of training.

There are many reasons why Rock River, Wilson, Daniel Defense, LaRue, Bravo Company and Ruger ARs are not going down range.

As an AR newbie, can you explain what you mean by "not going down range"? Are you saying your list above is decent quality, or not so good? I know I don't need a $3000 AR, but I did buy a Ruger MPR early last year, before prices exploded. I was hoping it was a decent entry level piece to get my feet wet in the AR world, and I have several other Ruger firearms that have served me well. I have not shot it yet, due to other firearm interests, so mostly curious where the MPR stands in the quality hierarchy.

.

 

[ScouT6a]

As an AR newbie, can you explain what you mean by "not going down range"? Are you saying your list above is decent quality, or not so good? I know I don't need a $3000 AR, but I did buy a Ruger MPR early last year, before prices exploded. I was hoping it was a decent entry level piece to get my feet wet in the AR world, and I have several other Ruger firearms that have served me well. I have not shot it yet, due to other firearm interests, so mostly curious where the MPR stands in the quality hierarchy.

.

I think you did fine on your first AR purchase.

All I meant by my other comment was that you don't see those other manufacturer's rifles, in large quantities, in the military arsenal and there are many/varied reasons for that.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Any high end AR is going to put a service M4 to shame with all the bells an whistles. Though service M4s aren’t bad. Though colt > bushmaster

 

[mmpsteve]

I think you did fine on your first AR purchase.

All I meant by my other comment was that you don't see those other manufacturer's rifles, in large quantities, in the military arsenal and there are many/varied reasons for that.

Thank you for the explanation. After seeing what they're selling for on Gunbroker, if everybody told me the Ruger was junk, I could double my $$ easily, and save up for something nicer . I've been on a pistol and CMMG AR bender for the last year or so, and the Ruger has just sat there, waiting it's opportunity to be useful. I guess I really should at least function test it though.

.

 

[DadSmith]

I'm definitely down to test out a CZ Colt AR-15 once they've went through and cleaned house.

 

[indyjohn]

Any high end AR is going to put a service M4 to shame with all the bells an whistles. Though service M4s aren’t bad. Though colt > bushmaster

Are you declaring that you own an AR platform firearm?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Are you declaring that you own an AR platform firearm?

Lol, a couple. And believe or not, some members here have even seen me with them...

 

[indyjohn]

Lol, a couple. And believe or not, some members here have even seen me with them...

Noted....

 

[indyjohn]

Remember not to judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree.

This is the best quote of the thread.

I wish I had more to bring to this discussion but all I can muster is nearly two decades of Highpower competition. In that time I used better than PSA grade equipment and received good service over thousands of rounds with failures I can count on one hand that were due to ammo every time.

When I owned AR style firearms, I had high grade, PSA grade, and examples I built in my garage from parts I sourced. None gave me functional issues at any level. I can say that those rifles didn't suffer the round count and the environmental exposure depicted in the posts above.

IMO - They start out close enough to the same level, but their lives over time determine their serviceability.