Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'AR-15 Discussion' started by Kronous, Jun 14, 2013.
Thinking about acquiring one, but thought I would check the buzz first.
they are a decent gun. Some will say Colt is the standard by which ARs should be measured.
There are some realy nice custom ARs out there though that are really nice if you prefere something already on the custom side. I'm personally not much of a colt fan boy because if mil-spec parts are used, then many manufacturers meet the standard. Some meet only the material requirement without the same level of assembly quality or checks on finish, (I have seen some Colts that had some defects as well). I guess seeing M16 and M4 rifles with various manufacturers roll marks has left me more open to the fact thta Colt is not magical in meeting the military standard. I've seen rifles with General Motors roll marks, FN, and others. They all worked fine.
If you can find one with no visible problems, and the price is right, then Colt is a good one to have, because if you ever do sell it, some Colt collector will pay more for it just becaue of the pony and the name.
they sold em at wal mart for just under a grand (i thought that was a great price!) before the madness began.
i just saw one back on the shelf today for the first time in about 4 months.... for 1400 .....hmmm....i dunno about 1400. first time i have seen a serious price jump at wal mart on firearms.
supposed to be a very respectable AR, although i am no expert on the matter.
Thank you, it is part of a trade deal that I am thinking about. New in the box. The colt name perked my interest, but I had heard the quality concerns as well. If only Glock would go longgun, I would be set!!!
I wouldn't worry too much about poor quality, if there is nothing visible that bothers you. Colt makes good stuff. I just don't put them on a pedestal like some folks. The stuff that I saw that I would consider quality control issues were mostly cosmetic, like rings in the finish, jacked up roll marks, finish flaws. Nothing mechanically wrong with them.
Quality concerns on a 6920? You've got to be kidding. Got links to these claims? You need better intel.
If you can obtain a Colt 6920 for about 1K, get one. It's a solid 556 carbine. The carbine is worth the 1K asking price.
If you can get one with MagPul furniture, that would be my preference. I have a particular preference for the MagPul CTR stock, but a MOE stock will do.
There's nothing wrong with Colt quality. In fact, few manufacturers make 556 carbines of equal or higher quality for the same price. If you want to know where your money is going, it's quality control checks and slightly higher quality materials than commercial spec.
If you have more money and want a higher quality carbine, there are some manufacturers that will oblige you. Daniel Defense, Wilson Combat, and LWRC come to mind, but there are others.
As far as mil-spec is concerned, other manufacturers can and do make components to military specifications. Colt and the military formulated the Technical Data Package (TDP) for the M4 carbine and M16 rifle. If Colt doesn't know what mil-spec is, then no other manufacturer does.
As far as mil-spec is concerned, it doesn't mean "best", it means accepted for military use. Certain components, like chrome silicon springs, are better quality than military specifications and last longer.
In short, don't fixate on military specifications or this or that brand of 556 carbine. Although I've never had a quality issue with any Colt product I've owned (to date, three 1911's, six revolvers, and three AR pattern carbines and rifles), that doesn't mean that Colt can't produce a lemon. All machine tools, no matter how well made and irrespective of the materials used, will break or wear out with use.
As magazines go, I would not willingly use a Colt aluminum magazine over a MagPul PMAG except for range use. The Colt aluminum magazines are mil-spec quality and stepping on one renders it a not-very-effective paperweight. If you elect to use Colt aluminum magazines, I would purchase better springs for them but that's just me.
The only thing I find perplexing about the 6920 and carbines patterned after it is the M4 barrel profile. For military applications, namely mounting a M203 grenade launcher, it makes sense. From a functional standpoint, the 6520/6720 carbines are lighter and just as accurate for the intended design use.