Official Firearm Thread V3

[THE RZA]

After close to 4000 rounds through my LWRC, I've now decided on upgrades necessary to my needs. The LWRC stock is nice quality, but I just don't love it. Not getting the cheek weld I want or proper eye relief as a result. Ended up ordering the LaRue Tactical RAT stock on sale.

 

I also decided to upgrade the trigger once again from the Geissele G2S to the SSA-E. It's offered as a factory upgrade from LWRC so now I want to see if it's an upgrade I wish I did in the first place. The G2S went in my .308 as it's an upgrade from the Mil-Spec but the appropriate pull weights for the heavier round. In the LWRC's case I actually liked the stock trigger over the G2S, but I imagine the SSA-E is a lot better. In addition, I had the opportunity to check out Geissele's HQ and factory yesterday in PA. Very cool place and a good amount of the people who live in town, work there. Proof the american dream still exists and employers that are willing to pay their people living wages to make quality products over higher profit margins.

[ehsnils]

http://www.bedug.com/pics/Fun4/daily_gifdump_1571_16.gif

[TSiWRX]

The only problem is that it requires boxed ammo.

[Penguin]

Think it’s time to order a KAC SR-15 and just get it over with. My attempts to price out an upper I want come close enough to the money it would cost for the KAC that I might as well just get the whole rifle.

 

Talk me out of ordering a 16” SR-15 E3 Mod 2 M-LOK. I’ll slap my NXS 1-4X24 FC-3G in Nightforce Unimount on top, and put an Arisaka light on the front, a QD socket up front, and maybe a barricade stop. Put my Vickers sling with sling ding on, and call it a day. The only AR I’ll probably ever need or want to use for 99% of my uses for the platform.

 

Possibly upgrade to a 1-8 optic at some point, probably another Nightforce but honestly the 1-4 does most anything a non precision AR in 5.56 is going to do.

[THE RZA]

Sell me your DDM4 or Colt if you do

[firepyro515]

Think it’s time to order a KAC SR-15 and just get it over with. My attempts to price out an upper I want come close enough to the money it would cost for the KAC that I might as well just get the whole rifle.

 

Talk me out of ordering a 16” SR-15 E3 Mod 2 M-LOK. I’ll slap my NXS 1-4X24 FC-3G in Nightforce Unimount on top, and put an Arisaka light on the front, a QD socket up front, and maybe a barricade stop. Put my Vickers sling with sling ding on, and call it a day. The only AR I’ll probably ever need or want to use for 99% of my uses for the platform.

 

Possibly upgrade to a 1-8 optic at some point, probably another Nightforce but honestly the 1-4 does most anything a non precision AR in 5.56 is going to do.

 

 

Proprietary parts within the firearm make it a pain to service.

 

Depending on what you are looking for, you can buy a rifle that is just as good for cheaper.

[Penguin]

The proprietary parts solve a lot of the known issues of AR platform and from what I’ve been able to research they just don’t break. The bolt for example is evidently extremely durable, never heard of one cracking a lug, or breaking in half at the cam pin hole. The gas system parts are also an improvement allowing what is reported to be the softest shooting duty grade AR in existence that doesn’t run an adjustable gas block. So I’m not too worried about service on the gun. If I’m able to afford to shoot the barrel out, or out enough rounds down it to break a bolt, or erode the gas manifold and gas tube I’m sure I can afford to fix it. That’s enough ammo you could buy a decent used car for the same money.

[Knight705]

The only problem is that it requires boxed ammo.

 

Ammo trays are cheap. Heck you can easily get them free from the local range trash bin. You only need to have like 5 to 10 trays

[THE RZA]

The proprietary parts solve a lot of the known issues of AR platform and from what I’ve been able to research they just don’t break. The bolt for example is evidently extremely durable, never heard of one cracking a lug, or breaking in half at the cam pin hole. The gas system parts are also an improvement allowing what is reported to be the softest shooting duty grade AR in existence that doesn’t run an adjustable gas block. So I’m not too worried about service on the gun. If I’m able to afford to shoot the barrel out, or out enough rounds down it to break a bolt, or erode the gas manifold and gas tube I’m sure I can afford to fix it. That’s enough ammo you could buy a decent used car for the same money.

 

 

 

But brooooooo you could build a better AR for cheaper using the poverty pony Anderson Manufacturing

 

 

:lol: :lol:

[Penguin]

The only problem is that it requires boxed ammo.

 

Also requires magazines that allow loading from the top with a strait downward push of the round past the feed lips. So most pistol magazines need not apply. I guess you can load the stick mags for your 9mm AR though.

[Sparkey]

Also requires magazines that allow loading from the top with a strait downward push of the round past the feed lips. So most pistol magazines need not apply. I guess you can load the stick mags for your 9mm AR though.

 

Damn you and your logic! I knew there was a reason I wasnt rushing out to buy it.. but that would be so nifty if it worked on most pistol mags..

[TSiWRX]

^ Seriously, damnit, Penguin, stop pointing out the obvious! You are supposed to be susceptible to marketing, like the rest of us red-blooded Americans!

 

For some reason, that honestly never even came up in my thoughts, although, of-course you're so obviously correct!

 

-----

 

Talk me out of ordering a 16” SR-15 E3 Mod 2 M-LOK.

 

How about just cheer-leading the enabling, instead?

 

I usually think along the lines that firepyro515 does, but the KAC's truly very well thought-out, and it's a proven gun with many hard-charging users having logged some serious round-counts on their unique samples. There's not a single one that I've seen go down in class, and I honestly would not hesitate to get one with my own money.

[TSiWRX]

^ The system is not letting me edit my own post? WTF?

 

Anyway......

 

Ammo trays are cheap. Heck you can easily get them free from the local range trash bin. You only need to have like 5 to 10 trays

 

You're absolutely right, but if I've gotta load my bulk ammo into the trays before I speed-load them into my mags, exactly how much time am I saving?

 

----

 

...put an Arisaka light on the front

 

Why the Arisaka?

 

This is coming from a guy who loves Will's stuff - and also has an Ariska 300 on his range/class-beater. There's no malice, here, just curiosity?

 

I get it, it's light, but so is the current Surefire M300C Scout, which will give you more light downrange both in terms of reach and spill (the Arisaka is spec'ed at 300 lumens and 9K lux @ 1 meter with the E1T head, whereas the current 500 lumens single-CR123 Scout head should also come in at over 13K candela ).

 

The mounting system won't be as streamlined, and you'll pay a bit more for the Surefire, but given that this gun will be your go-to, I think it's worth the spend - or even if you spent some extra dough on an Arisaka mount.

 

That said, I'm not flying off and getting the new KE1F revision as it's really not that much of a jump versus the 300-lumens KE1F in terms of throw (which is what I really wanted). There's more spill, but that's not really what I am looking for. But compared the the E1T, if I were talking to someone who didn't already have the E1T based Arisaka 300, I woudl say that the jump would be worth the dollars difference.

 

For my eyes, the E1T head really runs out of steam at 50 yards. Shooting with it isn't a problem, particularly if you have good glass like you do, but PID becomes questionable, especially if there's particulates in the air. Overpowering a photonic barrier also starts become an issue much closer in.

 

Hold-off for the Cloud Defensive OWL? Or does that not fit your form-factor/weight requirements for this gun?

Edited March 31, 2018 by TSi+WRX

[Penguin]

I’m leaning more towards the 600 series body with a Malkoff head. Either the super throw or the E2S.

 

I just really like the mounting solution that Arisaka has come up with.

[THE RZA]

I really like the SR15, solid rifle. Rifles made with proprietary parts means it won’t need to be replaced with crappy universal parts.

 

the LWRC feels so much better with the Larue stock. I commend LWRC for making their own stock, it’s nice quality but functionally it sucks (any SOPMOD stock for that matter doesn’t belong on a 16” or longer barreled rifle) Really wish they just kept using Magpul for their furniture.

Edited March 31, 2018 by THE RZA

[TSiWRX]

I really like the SR15, solid rifle. Rifles made with proprietary parts means it won’t need to be replaced with crappy universal parts.

 

I think you misunderstand my (and others') praise for the KAC.

 

While it proprietary components have proven both durable and reliable, this is most definitely -NOT- something that can be extended to the rest of the AR-genre. Most of the other proprietary AR setups are more junk than they solve any problem.

 

The DI "Mil-Spec" really has a lot of the systems shortfalls and potential problems worked out - witness the absolute durability and reliability of the basic guns coming out of BCM, Sionics, Hodge, SOLGW, Colt, etc. Not every manufacturer's unique attempt at further improving on the system in a proprietary manner works as-advertised.

 

If anything, guns like the KAC SR-15 are a standout because of the durability and reliability of their proprietary makeup.

 

Overall, if I were to give a complete novice my money and have them buy a gun today for some kind of serious use (duty/defense), unless I have the ability to just throw money at them and get them a KAC , I'm going to be sticking to a good, basic, Mil-Spec DI gun.

 

As someone who is getting deeper and deeper into ARs, THE RZA, I'd recommend that you pull up a comfy chair, draw up a thermos of coffee and have some tasty snacks nearby, and settle in for this marathon chat on the P&S Youtube channel:

 

 

It really is worth the four-hour listen.

 

And that really wraps back to what you'd written above - "crappy universal parts."

 

It's not that the parts are "universal'' that makes them crappy.

 

The current state of the DI AR is a system that's had its kinks worked out very, very well.

 

Components - "universal" that they are in that they will drop into any AR built to that same spec - that are made properly to those specs using proper materials and which have undergone the proper QC/QA will have a known lifespan and can be expected to perform nominally.

 

It's the crappy parts that are out there that are the actual problem, and that crappiness can exist just as much in the proprietary components that some manufacturers make in an effort to make their product seem "more special" or so that it can meet a certain price-point.

 

----

 

I’m leaning more towards the 600 series body with a Malkoff head. Either the super throw or the E2S.

 

I just really like the mounting solution that Arisaka has come up with.

 

Understood. I'm a fan of the Arisaka mounting solutions for the lights, too.

 

I have an E2ST on my backup gun for class. It's really pretty nifty and very similar to the KE2-A Ultra on the current-generation 600-lumens 2-cell Surefires.

 

Mission-wise, the higher-lumen but less-throw E2S should be more suitable for HD/CQB, but of an an all-purpose gun, I'm honestly more inclined to go with the more throwy Super Throw, as in most structures, the E2ST has focused enough light that it makes baseboard and umbrella lighting plenty sufficient for search, but offers not insignificantly more reach, which no matter what you do to the Super model (unless you've got an extra lens you're carrying around ), it just cannot manifest.

 

Regardless of which of these you go with, I'd recommend going with the 16650 option and even then, carrying an extra cell with/on your second-line gear. They're power-hungry options, and you can expect to see even worse run-time in colder weather. I store the gun with CR123 primaries in place, and I keep two of the 2-cell shrink-wrapped spares in the stock.

[THE RZA]

i’m gonna have to disagree there, because any rifle I’ve shot that uses proprietary parts has been a cut above the rest. LWRC, KAC, Sig Sauer, HK, FN....all built really well and with proprietary parts. Expensive parts to replace but if you’re already in for 2 grand + on a rifle, you can afford to replace said parts.

 

BCM & Daniel Defense are the exception for the Milspec rifles, not the rule. There isn’t anything special about either rifle, but they build the AR platform exceptionally well. That being said I wouldn’t modify either of them with parts other than their own.

 

Then you have “parts” rifles like the Warsport LVOA which is an expensive parts rifle but does use the best parts they could find to build it.

 

Btw, I’m not new to AR’s by any means, I’m newer to handguns and completely new to shotguns (just picked up a 590A1 over the weekend)

[TSiWRX]

^ The ones you mentioned area all among the top tier of the ARs available, and that's not what I'm addressig. They are different beasts than, say, a Ruger or other commercial rifles built using proprietary or other "special" parts that frankly are solutions to problems that simply do not exist.

 

The difference is that your saying, and I quote, "crappy universal parts" makes it read as though all rifles that utilize "universal parts" are "crappy," and that just simply isn't the case,. When those parts are built to mil-spec, using quality materials and with the appropriate QA/QC at each step, from sourcing to manufacture to assembly of the final rifle with said components, the "universality" of such components implies nothing to its quality.

 

A DD, BCM, Colt, or standard LMT BCG isn't an exception. It's simply what it should be. The same goes for the rifles that are built-up from those components. Just because a "non special" component can drop-in to any other "non-special" gun and function the machine in nominal manner logically does not make that component inferior than proprietary kit.

 

"Universal parts" isn't bad nor are they problematic when those universal parts are properly made, and there isn't anything wrong with a mil-spec build when framed in that context.

 

For example, a quality LPK as noted by the SMEs in the P&S Modcast contains parts that are by far -NOT- the equivalent of a commercial kit from Joe Boob's Parts Source.

 

"Universal" has no meaning here - a part that fits is not necessarily the part that you should use - and you should know that, given your experience with the AR.

Edited April 1, 2018 by TSi+WRX

[THE RZA]

No it does, life is too short to own cheap guns. Buy once, cry once [emoji846] a beater does have it’s purpose too though. I plan to get a Sig M400 or a DDM4 in the near future for beating on. I’m gonna put the MRO on that and a Nightforce NXS 4-24x50MM will go on the lwrc and that will be the precision rifle

[TSiWRX]

No it does.....

 

The term "universal?"

 

If so, how? Please elaborate?

 

A true mil-spec LPK is different from a commercial LPK. Anyone who does not think so can invest the time to listen to the P&S Modcast and learn from the SMEs, directly. There is no "universal LPK."

 

To suggest that "universal" parts are somehow automatically "crappy" just does not make sense.

 

A mil-spec BCG will pop in to any mil-spec DI AR and work just fine. Is that your definition of "universal?" Does it make that BCG automatically "crappy?" Isn't it a bit more nuanced than that?

 

...life is too short to own cheap guns. Buy once, cry once http://emoji.tapatalk-cdn.com/emoji846.png ....

I don't disagree with this statement, at all, but a gun isn't just about its price-tag. A bare-bones basic Colt, Sionics, SOLGW, or BCM isn't the cheapest out there by far, but at the same time, one could go out there and buy some really rather crappy guns for prices that either match or even exceed these proven pieces of hardware.

 

Even in light of the current political environment and daily events, the AR market still remains very favorable to the buyer. It is only smart for folks looking to either get their first gun or who want to enrich their collections to take the time and effort to understand what they are buying, before spending the money.

 

Like you said, buy once, cry once.

 

a beater does have it’s purpose too though. I plan to get a Sig M400 or a DDM4 in the near future for beating on.

I still love my DD - I retired it to a pure HD role after having beat on it in a few classes and putting enough of a round-count on it to insure that it is truly reliable......

 

And earlier this year, I very disappointingly missed a private tour of their facility.

 

I still think that their C/S is among the best in the business.

 

So don't get me wrong when I say this, but in all honesty, if it's with my money, right now and today, I'd drop DD from your list of potentials.

 

Why?

 

Because recently, their QC/QA sees to be a bit inconsistent. Will Larsen posted pictures last year of several guns with missed castle-nut staking (I am in agreement with many that although this isn't a big deal, it, much like muzzle device timing, really shows whether or not a manufacturer/assembler cares about the product they ship out) - and I don't know if it is just the usual "Way of the Errornet," but there was a rash of problems popping up on a couple of DD-fan-based FB Groups, too.

 

And while their CS will certainly rectify any issues (Mrs. Daniels occasionally pops in on various social media threads and offers to correct the issue ), my personal feeling is that if the end-user is spending this much for an AR, that AR really should not need a trip back to the factory so soon.

 

It breaks my heart to write that.....

[THE RZA]

I can get a DDM4 for 1200-1600 at any given time, which is the price range I'd want to spend on another AR if I don't want LWRC Quality, I am leaning more towards the Sig M400 Elite though. I'm a huge fan of Sig Sauer their rifles are highly underrated.

 

Universal? What's my issue with it. Think about it, you build an AR with a myriad of parts available out there, say you buy a poverty pony lower (anderson) and then build a rifle with any and every part imaginable. Will it shoot nice? Sure maybe for a bit, that that's like comparing a 600HP STI to a Porsche (frankenbuild AR vs. a SR15/M6IC/516RMR) It's a whole experience thing, sure that 600HP STI is just as fast as a porsche after you invest all that money in upgrades but does it feel as nice? is it more reliable? Does driving the STI feel like Mila Kunis is licking your sack everytime you go fast?

 

To me, if you buy a rifle and the OEM parts aren't good enough, you bought the wrong rifle, because then you're beginning to mess with the engineering. The only exception I would say is the trigger, a lot of high end rifles are built around an aftermarket trigger, specifically in my L dub's case upgrading to a SSA-E, that rifle was meant to be upgraded to it which is why they offer it as a upgrade from the factory. It's why Geissele makes specific triggers for specific rifles (MCX, HK, FN to name a few) because they know their standard 2 stage triggers just won't work as well with that rifle's tuning. So like I said if OEM parts for my rifle aren't cutting it and I need to upgrade them, I bought the wrong rifle.

[THE RZA]

I'm actually getting 2 articles published shortly on both my LWRC and my 308, and I'm in the works right now of talking with the manufacturers and the outlet I'm freelancing for to do an article testing 3 different AR's of different price points.

 

I'm going to be testing either a DDM4, BCM Gunfighter or FN15 as my high end rifle, a Sig M400 Elite Ti as my mid range rifle and a Colt LE6920 as our low end rifle. I'm going to put all 3 rifles through the same tests with the same 3 loads of ammo. I'm going to test each of them with both a red dot and a scope at 100 yards, along with a CQB test of just beating the living shit out of each of them with rapid fires and I'm going to compare the results. In all honesty I'm hoping that I get the same results from all 3 rifles because the goal is to get people in the gun community out of this mindset that they need the most tacticool rifle, they just need to buy an AR and go train. I'm also going to test all 3 over the course of 2-3 months rather than a one day range test, which under heavy abuse I'm positive thats where I'll see a difference in rifles.

 

either way, I'm getting free guns on loan and free ammo to beat them up with but what I REALLY hope is when my RMA is up one of these manufacturers just tells me to keep it rather than send it back

[TSiWRX]

I can get a DDM4 for 1200-1600 at any given time, which is the price range I'd want to spend on another AR if I don't want LWRC Quality, I am leaning more towards the Sig M400 Elite though. I'm a huge fan of Sig Sauer their rifles are highly underrated.

 

For that much, I really think the DD's should sit out, at least for the time being. I cringe every time someone picks out a problem with one that really should be caught at the factory.

 

Universal? What's my issue with it. Think about it, you build an AR with a myriad of parts available out there, say you buy a poverty pony lower (anderson) and then build a rifle with any and every part imaginable....

 

To me, if you buy a rifle and the OEM parts aren't good enough, you bought the wrong rifle, because then you're beginning to mess with the engineering. The only exception I would say is the trigger, a lot of high end rifles are built around an aftermarket trigger, specifically in my L dub's case upgrading to a SSA-E, that rifle was meant to be upgraded to it which is why they offer it as a upgrade from the factory. It's why Geissele makes specific triggers for specific rifles (MCX, HK, FN to name a few) because they know their standard 2 stage triggers just won't work as well with that rifle's tuning. So like I said if OEM parts for my rifle aren't cutting it and I need to upgrade them, I bought the wrong rifle.

"Universal" doesn't convey any meaning.

 

With the AR platform, either you're using mil-spec parts, or you're not.

 

If you're saying that mil-spec parts are having a problem dropping in and playing well with any mil-spec rifle, you're exactly right, something is way, way wrong there.

 

Those parts actually should be "universal" in that sense.

 

In this sense, "universal" should not - and does not - equate with the "crappy" that you'd wrote above, in post 1234 ( http://legacygt.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5777393&postcount=1234 ).

 

The BCM BCG that gets dropped into a Hodge, Sionics, SOLGW, FN, Colt, DD, etc. should work just fine, despite it being "universal" to these other rifles.

 

However, if we are looking at "universal" in the sense that any component that is made to be able to function in that role - but has not passed through the proper QC/QA - can be a suitable drop-in, then "universal" does not imply any guaranty as to its quality, and indeed, may reflect "crappy."

 

For example, in the P&S Modcast I referenced, they took a moment to speak about LPKs - and how some of the smallest parts within the LPK, such as a safety detent or the buffer spring detent, can drastically affect the function of the gun. These are the cases were the "universality" of the component - i.e. that "it fits and functions" - does not necessarily mean that they are either worth their (often reduced) cost or reflect in any way whether this component will actually be as durable or reliable as the one that is produced to proper specs and is made out of the proper raw materials or has undergone the proper QA/QC.

 

[ Typically, these are referred to as "commercial" components. While mil-spec components are nothing special, carrying that designation - provided that the company that makes/brands that component actually is sticking to the specs and have carried out the required QA/QC - at least allows the end-user to be able to rely upon common-knowledge troubleshooting and service intervals as a nominal guide. ]

 

Based on what you wrote above, your take on "universal" seem to only focus on this second interpretation., and that use of the word is simply incomplete, given that good quality mil-spec components drop in just as "universally."

 

I'm actually getting 2 articles published shortly on both my LWRC and my 308, and I'm in the works right now of talking with the manufacturers and the outlet I'm freelancing for to do an article testing 3 different AR's of different price points.

 

Then I really hope you are going to use proper terminology/vocabulary - there's a lot of difference between "universal," which is not a term that's commonly used, versus "mil-spec" and "commercial," both of which are accepted and known descriptions in this sector.

 

I'm going to be testing either a DDM4, BCM Gunfighter or FN15 as my high end rifle, a Sig M400 Elite Ti as my mid range rifle and a Colt LE6920 as our low end rifle. I'm going to put all 3 rifles through the same tests with the same 3 loads of ammo. I'm going to test each of them with both a red dot and a scope at 100 yards, along with a CQB test of just beating the living shit out of each of them with rapid fires and I'm going to compare the results. In all honesty I'm hoping that I get the same results from all 3 rifles because the goal is to get people in the gun community out of this mindset that they need the most tacticool rifle, they just need to buy an AR and go train. I'm also going to test all 3 over the course of 2-3 months rather than a one day range test, which under heavy abuse I'm positive thats where I'll see a difference in rifles.

 

either way, I'm getting free guns on loan and free ammo to beat them up with but what I REALLY hope is when my RMA is up one of these manufacturers just tells me to keep it rather than send it back

I think that'll be a cool test, and I really think that things should play out the way you think that they will - that the three will produce very close (if not the same) results.

 

In training classes, out of the hypothetical (but typical) shooters' line of 10 students, there's typically one or two high-end players, but the majority bring with them the middle-of-the-road guns. Usually, one or two of the newer players will come in with a bare-bones rifle, but as long as those are of good quality (like the 6920), the shooters will do just as well as their more fancy-pants counterparts.

 

You're right, that kind of thinking is pervasive among the masses, and it needs to be overturned. I hope your article will indeed help!

Edited April 2, 2018 by TSi+WRX

[THE RZA]

my problem with the term "Milspec" is that a lot of stuff is built to milspec but with shit materials. In my time as an Armorer, we would replace parts on M4's/M16's all the time and thanks to Obama our budget got worse and worse to a point where we stopped ordering OEM parts from FN because we couldn't afford them anymore, and ordered aftermarket parts "Universal" that would break more frequently.

 

That's where I became such a huge fan of the M27 IAR, because it was all proprietary parts from HK and they were amazing. Though the pits of hell that is afghanistan put them through the ringer and parts would need to be replaced, but all we could get were HK parts and everything was good. I rather a proprietary rifle as long as it's of good quality.

 

I get it there are people who will do stuff to their rifles like finding burnt finished BCG's and other tacticool features that come from "universal" parts, but that's their taste, not mine. I'm a functional shooter, I make upgrades based on what suits my needs. In that case I rather a nice rifle that uses a proprietary system that they claim sets them apart from others. Such as KAC, HK or LWRC's piston system

[TSiWRX]

my problem with the term "Milspec" is that a lot of stuff is built to milspec but with shit materials. In my time as an Armorer, we would replace parts on M4's/M16's all the time and thanks to Obama our budget got worse and worse to a point where we stopped ordering OEM parts from FN because we couldn't afford them anymore, and ordered aftermarket parts "Universal" that would break more frequently.

 

That's where I became such a huge fan of the M27 IAR, because it was all proprietary parts from HK and they were amazing. Though the pits of hell that is afghanistan put them through the ringer and parts would need to be replaced, but all we could get were HK parts and everything was good. I rather a proprietary rifle as long as it's of good quality.

 

I get it there are people who will do stuff to their rifles like finding burnt finished BCG's and other tacticool features that come from "universal" parts, but that's their taste, not mine. I'm a functional shooter, I make upgrades based on what suits my needs. In that case I rather a nice rifle that uses a proprietary system that they claim sets them apart from others. Such as KAC, HK or LWRC's piston system

 

Ah, I see where you're coming from now.

 

But that's the problem with parts that are not truly to-spec (which should include proper QA/QC).

 

It's not that those parts are "universal" that's the problem.

 

Rather, it's that they are not to-spec that's the problem.

 

As a functional shooter, you need the gun to work as a mechanical system.

 

That BCM BCG that is to-spec that drops in "universally" from one mil-spec gun like a DD (cringe) or BCM or SOLGW or FN or Colt or whatever else have you - a quality gun - isn't "crap."

 

But that no-name NiB BCG that's flaking its finish that also drops in "universally" is crap, and it will be a problem.

 

And you're right, a lot of things that claim "Mil-Spec" actually isn't. This is also something that's made clear not only in that P&S Modcast, but is also a point of confusion for much of the masses, particularly as this term is often also co-opted in various ways by many manufacturers to suggest that their product, which falls outside of the specifications, is somehow - be it true or not - "better."

 

To bring this back to car-talk, let's look at our wheels for a moment.

 

If one of us cracks a rim or otherwise catastrophically damages one of our wheels, do we say that it's because the wheel is 5x100? That because universally, 5x100 wheels fit, that it's the problem? Or is this more a fault of the actual make/model of the wheel, itself? It's not because the BCG fits every other rifle that's the problem, it's because of the actual make/model of the BCG that's the issue.

 

"Mil-spec" should mean something: it should mean that you will know the standards to which the item is built, it's materials sourced, it's QA/QC - all of which should in-turn translate to a predictable lifespan which can then be preemptively addressed via a nominal service interval. And if that "mil-spec" claim doesn't foster this kind of capability, then the problem is that somewhere along the line, someone claimed something for which it is not...and more often than not in the AR market, this can be avoided simply by buying from a reputable manufacturer and/or vendor.

 

"Commercial" versus "mil-spec" carries objective meaning, here.

 

"Universal" does not.

 

And this is also where we come to proprietary components/systems in the rifle.

 

Remember, for every KAK/HK, there's also a Ruger (sure, it's just a barrel nut and the FSB, but those are just minor annoyances that really don't need to be there).

 

Just because something is proprietary - or aftermarket - does not make it "better" automatically. And I think you drove this point in an important manner: that those changes should actually make the gun better (more reliable, more durable/robust, more consistent, etc.) and/or should better match the end-user's needs (i.e. ambidextrous controls).

Edited April 2, 2018 by TSi+WRX