Originally Posted by purehavoc
What truly makes a $1000 rifle more trust worthy than a $700 rifle?
Mil spec trigger and bcg, mpi (magnetic particle inspected) parts, etc...
I'm not going to lie. I just got into the whole AK thing, and by Canebrakes suggestion (hats off to you, Cane) I got a Colt. I'm not saying you should get a Colt, but mil spec is something to desire.
I got my AR this summer, and have done a lot of research. Being an engineer helps in understanding the importance of metallurgy, inspection practices, and quality control.
I'm not saying a Windham arms, Bushmaster, etc, are bad rifles. All I am stating is that, for ME, I would want nothing less than mil spec parts.
This leads me more to Colt, because they've been doing this for a long time.
However, I have had the privilege of learning from people who are highly involved in the military side of things, like building, armorers, etc.
They speak highly of BCM, and a lot exclusively recommend them, as well as LaRue.
This post is very short and I apologize, but I'm on my phone. Like I said, this is from my own path of discovery and my opinion, for myself.
If I were buying a parachute, my line of thought wouldn't be, 'what is a good budget parachute?' It would be, 'what is the best parachute, why, and how can I raise the money to get that?' And if I couldn't, then I wouldn't start jumping out of airplanes.
I would (once again, my opinion) rather buy a cheaper AR, then pretend it didn't exist in a self defense/SHTF scenario, and grab the 12 ga instead. Than start a self defense scenario (like shooting at intruders and standing my ground), with a rifle that might go click instead of bang. I've read quite a few accounts of soldiers in Vietnam who initiated an ambush because they thought they had the upper hand, only to be gunned down when their unproven rifles malfunctioned. And as an engineer myself, I am very aware that Mr. Murphy has a sick sense of humor.