AR Tiers - Page 17
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion > AR-15 Discussion > AR Tiers

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-18-2012, 03:42 AM   #161
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Quentin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,520
Liked 980 Times on 689 Posts
Likes Given: 983

Default

IIRC his AR book that had the C15 is old, in fact most of the ARs pictured were ban compliant. I don't have it but I have read it in the past because it featured ArmaLite. And it had more typos than I've ever seen in a published book!

__________________

______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together. You'll remember the quality of a gun long after you forget how much you paid for it.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek

Quentin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2012, 04:29 AM   #162
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Chandler51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: somewhere in....,Oklahoma
Posts: 2,185
Liked 62 Times on 51 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quentin
IIRC his AR book that had the C15 is old, in fact most of the ARs pictured were ban compliant. I don't have it but I have read it in the past because it featured ArmaLite. And it had more typos than I've ever seen in a published book!
You noticed that too, huh?!?!

Yeah carbon 15 or no, it was def written before spellcheck, apparently!!

It had a nice write up on ArmaLite. They machine all their own receivers, out of forged material. And the subcontracted forge uses ArmaLite forge tooling. I wonder if that is pretty common? I understand many companies buy forgings from subcontracted suppliers, but that doesn't mean that all receivers are therefore the same. For the simple matter that the CNC work may be done in house, as is the case with ArmaLite.

I'm learning...I wanna be able to contribute to these parts is parts threads with DOCUMENTED info that I can reference.

Maybe keep the passion at a tolerable level if a link to actual Mfg data is available.
__________________
"Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." -- John Wayne
Chandler51 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 04:08 PM   #163
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4
Default

I thought I would weigh in since I was referred to as a "mall ninja" (whatever that is).

For anyone reading the Chart, old or new, you have to read the Explanation of Features that goes along with it. I realize that I am behind on issuing the new E of F but as you can well imagine the new version with over 30 bullet points is getting rather cumbersome (and since so few read the current one, I don't see anyone spending the time to read the new, even longer, one). I also tend to focus my attention on writing assignments that pay vs. ones that do nothing but get me villified on the internets.

Either way, you need to understand what all of the features are, and what they mean, and whether or not that particular feature is important to you.

In reading over all 17 pages of this thread it is interesting to note that 100% of the people vilifying the Chart or me own rifles they feel are somehow maligned by the document. A document that is nothing more than a collection of fact. As for those companies that will not participate in the new version, it is not that they have turned a deaf ear, it is because they have told me outright that they did not like the way they were portrayed in the prior version. When I point out that they now have the power to correct any mistakes directly they respond that there weren't any mistakes they just didn't like the facts being pointed out.

Regarding empirical testing, I agree that it would be best. Anyone who wishes to contribute to my fund to purchase 10 examples of each commercially available AR carbine and an accompanying 10k rounds of ammo per gun, plus to cover my living expenses for the next 5 years while I do nothing at all but fire guns to failure at the range can contact me directly. Fortunately, we are human beings and we can see causation. A carrier key comes loose enough times and I'm going to eventually figure out that it's because it wasn't affixed properly, etc.

__________________
rob_s is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 04:48 PM   #164
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
BenLuby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Douglasville,Georgia
Posts: 2,179
Liked 73 Times on 43 Posts
Likes Given: 6

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
I thought I would weigh in since I was referred to as a "mall ninja" (whatever that is).

For anyone reading the Chart, old or new, you have to read the Explanation of Features that goes along with it. I realize that I am behind on issuing the new E of F but as you can well imagine the new version with over 30 bullet points is getting rather cumbersome (and since so few read the current one, I don't see anyone spending the time to read the new, even longer, one). I also tend to focus my attention on writing assignments that pay vs. ones that do nothing but get me villified on the internets.

Either way, you need to understand what all of the features are, and what they mean, and whether or not that particular feature is important to you.

In reading over all 17 pages of this thread it is interesting to note that 100% of the people vilifying the Chart or me own rifles they feel are somehow maligned by the document. A document that is nothing more than a collection of fact. As for those companies that will not participate in the new version, it is not that they have turned a deaf ear, it is because they have told me outright that they did not like the way they were portrayed in the prior version. When I point out that they now have the power to correct any mistakes directly they respond that there weren't any mistakes they just didn't like the facts being pointed out.

Regarding empirical testing, I agree that it would be best. Anyone who wishes to contribute to my fund to purchase 10 examples of each commercially available AR carbine and an accompanying 10k rounds of ammo per gun, plus to cover my living expenses for the next 5 years while I do nothing at all but fire guns to failure at the range can contact me directly. Fortunately, we are human beings and we can see causation. A carrier key comes loose enough times and I'm going to eventually figure out that it's because it wasn't affixed properly, etc.
Thank you for your reply, Rob. Hopefully you'll stick around and contribute your experience and knowledge of the AR platform to the discussions, and not perform a 'hit and git' approach to drop one post and run.
Good explanation, and appreciated, once again.
__________________

What part of 'shall not be infringed' confuses people?

BenLuby is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 06:04 PM   #165
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Chandler51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: somewhere in....,Oklahoma
Posts: 2,185
Liked 62 Times on 51 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_s
I thought I would weigh in since I was referred to as a "mall ninja" (whatever that is).

For anyone reading the Chart, old or new, you have to read the Explanation of Features that goes along with it. I realize that I am behind on issuing the new E of F but as you can well imagine the new version with over 30 bullet points is getting rather cumbersome (and since so few read the current one, I don't see anyone spending the time to read the new, even longer, one). I also tend to focus my attention on writing assignments that pay vs. ones that do nothing but get me villified on the internets.

Either way, you need to understand what all of the features are, and what they mean, and whether or not that particular feature is important to you.

In reading over all 17 pages of this thread it is interesting to note that 100% of the people vilifying the Chart or me own rifles they feel are somehow maligned by the document. A document that is nothing more than a collection of fact. As for those companies that will not participate in the new version, it is not that they have turned a deaf ear, it is because they have told me outright that they did not like the way they were portrayed in the prior version. When I point out that they now have the power to correct any mistakes directly they respond that there weren't any mistakes they just didn't like the facts being pointed out.

Regarding empirical testing, I agree that it would be best. Anyone who wishes to contribute to my fund to purchase 10 examples of each commercially available AR carbine and an accompanying 10k rounds of ammo per gun, plus to cover my living expenses for the next 5 years while I do nothing at all but fire guns to failure at the range can contact me directly. Fortunately, we are human beings and we can see causation. A carrier key comes loose enough times and I'm going to eventually figure out that it's because it wasn't affixed properly, etc.
If you find someone willing to come off with the gear and ammo, I'll volunteer to help...it'll cut the test time to 2.5 instead of 5 years....
__________________
"Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." -- John Wayne
Chandler51 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 07:10 PM   #166
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenLuby View Post
Thank you for your reply, Rob. Hopefully you'll stick around and contribute your experience and knowledge of the AR platform to the discussions, and not perform a 'hit and git' approach to drop one post and run.
Good explanation, and appreciated, once again.
I am actually participating in less and less forums, but I do like to keep tabs on where the discussions of the Chart wind up. I was really impressed with how civil this discussion went right up until it went south.
__________________
rob_s is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 07:43 PM   #167
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
purehavoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Not where I wanna be
Posts: 4,737
Liked 1126 Times on 731 Posts
Likes Given: 2014

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
I am actually participating in less and less forums, but I do like to keep tabs on where the discussions of the Chart wind up. I was really impressed with how civil this discussion went right up until it went south.
Rob,
unfortunantly thats how most of them go
__________________
purehavoc is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 07:53 PM   #168
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Chandler51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: somewhere in....,Oklahoma
Posts: 2,185
Liked 62 Times on 51 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_s

I am actually participating in less and less forums, but I do like to keep tabs on where the discussions of the Chart wind up. I was really impressed with how civil this discussion went right up until it went south.
Yep, you're right....I don't mind the passion, but when the name calling begins, I start to take offense and have to throttle back, usually by abstaining altogether.

It's unfortunate.

I have an ArmaLite. It was represented in the AR15 category (I actually have an AR10, my 5.56 rifle is an LWRC) as "mid-tier". If that's how it falls, based on the parameters given, well as they say "it is what it is". I don't understand why some people are offended. But, they are.
__________________
"Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." -- John Wayne
Chandler51 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:19 PM   #169
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
BenLuby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Douglasville,Georgia
Posts: 2,179
Liked 73 Times on 43 Posts
Likes Given: 6

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
I am actually participating in less and less forums, but I do like to keep tabs on where the discussions of the Chart wind up. I was really impressed with how civil this discussion went right up until it went south.
We try to remain civil on this forum as much as possible. Sadly, the troll's are multiplying and the maturity tends to be lacking at times.
__________________

What part of 'shall not be infringed' confuses people?

BenLuby is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:44 PM   #170
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Quentin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,520
Liked 980 Times on 689 Posts
Likes Given: 983

Default

Rob, it's a pleasure seeing you post here. I know you're busy but thanks for weighing in on this subject that causes so much dissention on every AR forum. I wish we could all chip in and let you do that 5 year test on ARs or at least do what AgentTikki said below!

One thing we can do is buy magazines that have your articles. Guys, remember the name Rob Sloyer, you'll enjoy his writing, he is very clear and to the point. He says a lot in as few words as necessary so you get the right stuff and no fluff like so many other magazine writers (like Sweeney who was mentioned earlier). I've seen Rob's articles in Tactical Weapons (I believe) and others. Rob if you would mention any current projects a lot of us would be interested!

Quote:
Originally Posted by AgentTikki View Post
>>> I DO NOT fault the author. In fact I'd buy him a beer if I'd ever met him even tho he did that version 3 years ago It's just a lot of work for someone to do, and there are SO many different manufacturers these days and so many models made by the different manufacturers its just too crazy. The mountain of data to compile and the fact that a lot of manufacturers refused to participate it would have made it very difficult to compile a comprehensive list.
__________________

______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together. You'll remember the quality of a gun long after you forget how much you paid for it.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek

Quentin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes