Colt's quality control going to crap? - Page 2

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Colt's quality control going to crap? (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 12/11/2005 9:11:59 AM EDT

[#1]

When you're ready to buy it, just take the gun out and look at it before you buy it.

Posted: 12/11/2005 10:08:23 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
You can buy the RRA and be very happy with it, Great rifles

but

You'll still want the Colt, I'd look for a nice looking Colt to begin with, might be a little trouble but worth it in the end
ymmv

+1

Posted: 12/11/2005 12:07:25 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
The only Colt I still own, and Ihave owned about 4 others, all pre-bans, is a pre-ban 6520, early 4 digit serial number. Cosmeticaly it is as good as my Bushy's, thought the upper/lower fit is a bit loose, but not as loose as the AR1- Sporter HBAR was.

The deal is if you are like me and a few others here and care about what a $1200 purchase looks like, take the gun out and look at it before you buy it.

I am a 51 yo dad, I own a small business in what used to be New Orleans (Hurrican Katrina), I am not a comando. I shoot IPSC with a Bushy and CMP with a CLE-Bushy Service Rifle and none of then have anodization chipping off. As a matter of FACT, I shot an AR15A2 6600 for years and about 6 thousand rounds until I sold it to a friend who just had to have it in the ban, it looked nearly 98%. Near zero wear as I don't recall any. No tool makes at all, very very nice, but the upper/lower wiggle drove me to the "accu-wedge". So why are we making excuses for $1200 rifles comming out looking worse than one I sold with 6K rounds and 5 or 6 years of shooting on it? Who knows, my advise is simple, buy what you want and shoot what you have and let the other guy do the same.

Bill

Truth is that I am not a commando either, I just like to pretend to be on the weekend I graduate next year with a Criminal Justice degree and will likely try to pursue one of Federal Agencies. If I do that it is possible. though unlikely, that I might use this rifle as a service weapon. But for now I'm getting this AR to shoot on the weekend and to add another rifle to my collection. So I do have a problem with buying a $1200 weapon that looks 5 years old new. As someone pointed out earlier, it may well end up with dings, but only because I put them there myself....that is very different. Colt may be the best in many ways, but at this point I doubt I will spend the extra money to get one. To each his own...and for me pride of ownership is something. If RRA really does make a very good, reliable rifle, and has better fir/finish, I may check them out. Good honest input though folks........

Posted: 12/11/2005 3:27:50 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You can buy the RRA and be very happy with it, Great rifles

but

You'll still want the Colt, I'd look for a nice looking Colt to begin with, might be a little trouble but worth it in the end
ymmv

+1

With RRA you can have both! Great Looking and 100% reliable. If anyone has doubts as to the reliability of RRA compared to Colt, do a search on the DEA/FBI carbine trials. There you will find that RRA beat all other brands submitted, including Colt. Although Colt also passed the trials (eventually) they were allowed to re-submit rifles as the original ones failed to pass the durability (tourture) testing phase. The RRA rifles were the ONLY ones to pass all phases of testing the first time. I'll never beat on my rifle like the DEA/FBI did in their testing, and I doubt you will either. The bottom line for me was RRA are Tough, Reliable, and yes good looking too!!! Hey if makes you happy buy a Colt, they are great, you'll just have to spend more $$ and you run the risk of getting an ugly one

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:45:21 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Truth is that I am not a commando either, I just like to pretend to be on the weekend I graduate next year with a Criminal Justice degree and will likely try to pursue one of Federal Agencies. If I do that it is possible. though unlikely, that I might use this rifle as a service weapon. But for now I'm getting this AR to shoot on the weekend and to add another rifle to my collection. So I do have a problem with buying a $1200 weapon that looks 5 years old new. As someone pointed out earlier, it may well end up with dings, but only because I put them there myself....that is very different. Colt may be the best in many ways, but at this point I doubt I will spend the extra money to get one. To each his own...and for me pride of ownership is something. If RRA really does make a very good, reliable rifle, and has better fir/finish, I may check them out. Good honest input though folks........

You really do have a point, but even after all the photos and proof that Colt has recently turned out a number of cosmetically flawed rifles, I would still buy another one. If you truly want a Colt, but you are hesitant of how it looks, just ask your local dealer for an inspection. Even though my 6920 wasn't cosmetically perfect, most I have seen are.

Posted: 12/11/2005 4:52:53 PM EDT

[#6]

I still really,really want one.

Posted: 12/11/2005 5:13:30 PM EDT

[#7]

Apparently, there are many who feel this is acceptable because it is a Colt. I was fortunate enough to be able to pick through quite a few rifles when I got my 6721.

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=255381

Posted: 12/11/2005 5:44:19 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

Posted: 12/11/2005 6:09:12 PM EDT

[#9]

All of my military rifles, and surplus parts kits and such are ugly and have cosmetic flaws. This also extends to Colt's commercial AR's, and goes all the way back to the into the 1960's. If I had the free time available I would do a photo shoot of typical cosmetic flaws. Thinks like the sides of the mag well on my early 1970's SP1 that appear to be done with a dremel, or the pitting under the finish on my 1994 6551 lower, or the scratches down to the steel on the 2004 MT6400C barrel I had, thin parkerizing, and missing anodizing.

If you want a pretty gun DO NOT buy a Colt's. I would recommend a early 90's Eagle Arms instead, just based on looks. The upper and lower were impeccably finished, very very purdy.

Posted: 12/11/2005 6:44:50 PM EDT

[#10]

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

It's not a choice of does it run or is it pretty. I would never have chose RRA if it did not have a steller reputation for reliability . It's just that RRA also pays attention to what their product looks like. I'd rather have a rifle that runs and looks good while doing it than one that runs and looks like it was put together by a 3 year old. JMO

Posted: 12/11/2005 7:10:14 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.

Posted: 12/11/2005 7:27:08 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.

Not saying it's a positive at all. I'm just saying that a thread like this probably won't have the effect you are claiming it will because Colt owners don't tend to use cosmetics as a basis for their arguments. Your reply is typical though...lacking in substance and only meant to inflame. It's a shame the haters can rarely come up with anything better than that.

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:06:17 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.

Not saying it's a positive at all. I'm just saying that a thread like this probably won't have the effect you are claiming it will because Colt owners don't tend to use cosmetics as a basis for their arguments. Your reply is typical though...lacking in substance and only meant to inflame. It's a shame the haters can rarely come up with anything better than that.

In mu opinion your comment would hold more weight if it weren't directed at Mongo... in the 9 months or so I've been reading AR15.com, he has always come across as one of the more straight shooting people around here. I certainly don't think it is fair to call Mongo a hater just because he isn't a Kool-Aid drinker.

What I think the whole thing comes down to in my opinion is that while I am definitely a function over form sort of person, if I was paying the huge premium in price of a Colt over a Bushmaster or Armalite/Eagle (let alone over RRA which seems like a real bargain for what they are), I'd expect BOTH flawless operation and flawless cosmetics. And it is more questionable in my mind if the accusations of Colt's consistancy of quality in fit and finish having gone downhill over the past few years.

Posted: 12/11/2005 8:18:01 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.hr

Not saying it's a positive at all. I'm just saying that a thread like this probably won't have the effect you are claiming it will because Colt owners don't tend to use cosmetics as a basis for their arguments. Your reply is typical though...lacking in substance and only meant to inflame. It's a shame the haters can rarely come up with anything better than that.

In mu opinion your comment would hold more weight if it weren't directed at Mongo... in the 9 months or so I've been reading AR15.com, he has always come across as one of the more straight shooting people around here. I certainly don't think it is fair to call Mongo a hater just because he isn't a Kool-Aid drinker.

What I think the whole thing comes down to in my opinion is that while I am definitely a function over form sort of person, if I was paying the huge premium in price of a Colt over a Bushmaster or Armalite/Eagle (let alone over RRA which seems like a real bargain for what they are), I'd expect BOTH flawless operation and flawless cosmetics. And it is more questionable in my mind if the accusations of Colt's consistancy of quality in fit and finish having gone downhill over the past few years.

that paragraph about sums up how I'm feeling at the moment. I'll pay for function, but I expect decent fit and finish to come with that.

Posted: 12/12/2005 3:53:40 AM EDT

[#15]

I'm telling ya' Get the Colt

You folks are acting like every one of them have an issue, They Dont.
They're very few and far between but they do get a bad rap, just because they seem to be in the limelight and when someone here finds a dud they cant wait to pass it on.

Kinda like a movie star, Who goves a shit what they do, till they do something wrong, then it's all over the news.

Posted: 12/12/2005 3:59:26 AM EDT

[#16]

I've seen 5 Colt LE6920's that were recently made within the last 2-3 months and I can attest that they look terrible compared to how they used to look. There are scuff marks, tooling marks, uneven finish in places, frankly I was shocked. The first time I saw it, I asked the guy if he got a QC-fail or demo rifle or something. This topic has been discussed before on other boards. The conclusion is that Colt is now failing to re-finish or smooth-out rifles post finishing and assembly.

Personally I am not going to pay $300-500 more for a rifle that does not look perfect, so Colt can go to hell.

ETA: If you are spending around $1,200 on a Kimber, Wilson Combat, Colt, Springfield or other 1911-style pistol, are you going to be pleased if you receive it all scuffed up or had improper finish or tooling marks? I highly doubt it. Why should a rifle be treated any differently? You are paying a premium for a supposed "authentic" top-notch rifle. You should be paying for a perfect rifle, cosmetics and all.

- rem

Posted: 12/12/2005 4:11:22 AM EDT

[#17]

I used to have (key phrase: USED TO HAVE) Three of the CT legal "Match Target" Colts with 20" bbls.

They all sucked so bad I got rid of all three. I mean SUCKED. Accuracy wise. They were throwing
shotgun patterns at 100 yards. I'm talking 6-8" groups from a bench with various kinds of ammo.
And they had the WORST triggers I've ever felt on a rifle - which I'm sure contributed to the bad accuracy. Functioning was fine.

Just to make sure it wasn't me.... I tried shooting two different Bushmasters and guess what? I'm drilling the 10 ring with 20 shots into the size of a half-dollar at 100 yards. (Iron sights benched).

So, as John Fogerty sang : "It ain't me.....it ain't me...I'm no fortunate one.." I paid close to
a G-note for each one, new. Two together the same day left in the box in anticipation of the CT
2001 Part 2 AW ban that didn't happen. I gradually broke out all three and tried them.

What a freakin' disappointment!

I went to Defense Associates (Chuck Taylor's practical rifle course) and , the instructor there, explained to me that Colt had old worn out tooling and the 20" versions in particular were really
bad but the 16" ones were still coming out good and shot well. This was in the autumn of 2001,
so, I don't know if anything changed at Colt tooling wise or quality wise since then.

From 2001 to 2003 I was happy with Bushmaster but even they have taken a big drop in QC over the past year or two. I had an M-4 post ban style upper whose rear lug was not contoured properly
to fit onto ANY lower I had and they replaced it promptly with another one that had the exact same
problem. Someone told me they were a bad run of CMT uppers for Bushmaster.

Then I bought a Rock River upper and I've been happiest with that as well as the older RRA marked lower receivers that had the fine rather than course lettering.

I think QC is down the tubes all the way around.

Posted: 12/12/2005 4:27:00 AM EDT

[#18]

My 6450 bought new this summer was pretty bad if one were grading it on finish. There are some minor errant grinder scrtaches (below the finish) on the upper And, the inside of the carry handle casting/forging(?) marks can almost be considered "sharp" in one area. I consider it a working gun though so who cares...
flap

Posted: 12/12/2005 5:50:39 AM EDT

[#19]

I just picked up a Colt 6450 and the inside rim of the carry handle has some ugly grind marks. I considered contacting Colt regarding the apparent poor finish quality, however after one range trip I decided against it. Why you ask? Because the carbine functions every bit as reliable as my cosmetically perfect 6920 and 6721.

Posted: 12/12/2005 7:05:03 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

you were doing good here, mongo

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

but now the eye of our priestess is upon you.....

be careful...I see Turkish Delight in your future

Posted: 12/12/2005 7:06:01 AM EDT

[#21]

The kool-aid I drank has forced me not to complain about chipped finish on my removable carry handle or scraped finish on a delta ring. Its how Colt keeps their customer service department so thin on employees.

When no one can call because they are all kool-aided up then why employe more that one or two people in customer service?

Posted: 12/12/2005 7:09:40 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
The kool-aid I drank has forced me not to complain about chipped finish on my removable carry handle or scraped finish on a delta ring. Its how Colt keeps their customer service department so thin on employees.

When no one can call because they are all kool-aided up then why employe more that one or two people in customer service?

Not to mention, my mom works for their C.S. Dept....

This is her....I think that may have something to do with it....

Please guys, don't piss her off!

Posted: 12/12/2005 8:48:04 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know if Colt has technically done away with cosmetic QC, but my 6920 has 2 visible tooling marks, and the upper/lower finish match is not a match at all. That being said, I am definitely a kool-aid drinker and it isn't terribly important to me that my 6920 needs to be museum-quality. It is a shooter. As a matter of fact, I don't own anything that can be referred to as a "safe queen". These are firearms we are talking about, not an artifact from an extinct civilization.

However, if you would likes some pics for comparison, I can provide them.

wouldn't mind taking a look. I'm a college student and it's been 3 years since I bought my last rifle....that's a lot of saving. Fit and Finish isn't paramount, but it is something to me; saved too long to have complaints. Even if I am being anal......

It's not that I think anyone is "anal" when it comes to finish matches. It is more important to some than others, and you should have the right to be picky if you so desire when spending the kind of money a Colt carbine normally commands. When I bought mine from Clyde Armory in Athens, GA, I was asked if I wanted to inspect it before I bought it. Of course they come shiiped in plastic bags completely floating in CLP, so I didn't really catch the color mismatch. If given the option of having two side by side - one matching better than the other, I would obviously take the one that matched, but I am still happy with it.

Anyhow, my camera is old, so I took the best shots I could:

Obvious upper/lower color mismatch. The M203 notch in the M4 profile had a very visible gouge in the finish that allowed bare metal to show through - about 3/4" long. I don't have a picture of it now, because ADCO fixed that as well when I sent the upper in for some custom work.

The obvious finish blemishes are on the left side mag release bevel (it was dinged/gouged when I first pulled it out of the plastic bag they ship in). Another notable area is the bolt catch roll pin recess. This actually doesn't bother me at all because the roll pin is driven in with a punch, and marring can occur; however, I have seens tons of other various AR's without this blemish.

home.alltel.net/~cwilliams/6920_1.jpg

home.alltel.net/~cwilliams/6920_2.jpg

home.alltel.net/~cwilliams/6920_3.jpg

home.alltel.net/~cwilliams/6920_4.jpg

It's interesting to see so called top quality rifles that look as if they have been assembled by people who have never done it before. And that statement is unfair to plenty of folks like me who HAVE never done it before and still have managed to assemble rifles that look better than that.
I just finished assembling my first lower receiver and it looks great; not an assembly scratch or ding anywhere on it including INSIDE of the receiver where a new Jewell trigger resides (which is a bit trickier to install than a stock trigger assembly what with the adjustable first stage spring which needs to be tensioned using "fishing tools").
Colt's should be ashamed of themselves and their assemblers should be docked their pay until they learn how to assemble a damn rifle.

Posted: 12/12/2005 8:57:47 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

you were doing good here, mongo

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.he

photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=43664

be careful...I see Turkish Delight in your future hr

[ROLF2]

Posted: 12/12/2005 9:00:06 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

you were doing good here, mongo

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.he

photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=43664

be careful...I see Turkish Delight in your future hr

[ROLF2]

Posted: 12/12/2005 10:39:50 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.

Not saying it's a positive at all. I'm just saying that a thread like this probably won't have the effect you are claiming it will because Colt owners don't tend to use cosmetics as a basis for their arguments. Your reply is typical though...lacking in substance and only meant to inflame. It's a shame the haters can rarely come up with anything better than that.

I'm not a hater, just haven't bought into the cult thinking that's all. The fact is I will never again own a factory monkey built rifle, no matter who's pretty logo is on the side.

I fall into a different category and take the best of all companies, including some Colt components, and put them in my rifles. IMO, it's a much better and economical way to go to get the same end product.

As a side note, I do believe that Colt and their products are a fraction of what they used to be. You choose your reasons as to why, if you think the same, but it's hard to deny that they are slipping down a slope in nearly all categories in one way or another.

As usual, IMO, YMMV, IIRC and all other disclaimers apply.

Posted: 12/12/2005 11:02:44 AM EDT

[#27]

Stuff like this is what has turned me off to Colt.

For me the dings, scratches, and other things don't matter, as long as I'm the one that put them there! No gun should come from the factory looking like it's bounced around in the trunk of a car for a couple months, especially a gun carrying an $1100+ price tag. Now, if this were a $700-800 or so rifle, great! It would be easy to consider one at this price.

Posted: 12/12/2005 11:12:18 AM EDT

[#28]

I prefer my rifles with the beat up look, just don't look right when their perfect. Hey that reminds me, if anyone has any beater Colt's lowers I am in the market for some, thanks.

Tell you what does get my goat, that is improperly assembled Colt's that won't run, now that ain't right, and I have seen way too many since 1998, and none prior:

ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=260644

Posted: 12/12/2005 12:11:21 PM EDT

[#29]

I just bought a 6400C last week which my FFL ordered directly from the distributor. The shipping box was a little dented so I was worried it was fucked over, but when I opened it I was relieved to see it was in nice shape. The only mark I saw was a smudge on the outside of the magwell that turned out to be from the oil they coat it in, which had dried and hardened a bit from the cold. There is a mark on the buffer tube that the fixed stock might have made when being put on, but I'll live with that after seeing all the pics with tool marks. Overall I see no marks or dings anywhere, and I went over it with a fine tooth comb after reading this thread.

Posted: 12/12/2005 9:14:55 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Stuff like this is what has turned me off to Colt.

For me the dings, scratches, and other things don't matter, as long as I'm the one that put them there! No gun should come from the factory looking like it's bounced around in the trunk of a car for a couple months, especially a gun carrying an $1100+ price tag. Now, if this were a $700-800 or so rifle, great! It would be easy to consider one at this price.

Even at $700-800 I would consider a gun that had more than a couple of minor tooling marks unacceptable. Get A Rock River, you won't regret it. You can spend the extra $300 on Mags, Ammo, and accessories like I did

Posted: 12/12/2005 9:37:57 PM EDT

[#31]

Every gun company puts out guns with issues. No one is perfect. Some people that post here have built Colt up to something that is perfect and infalliable. That isnt the case. Colt has bad days and puts out bad guns on those days. Three Colts blew up under hard DEA testing, hundreds of Colts defend soliders in Iraq in harsh conditions and work fine....

Lots of hype going around with enough to spare. Dont buy into it, and you wont be let down...

Posted: 12/12/2005 9:41:35 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

In mu opinion your comment would hold more weight if it weren't directed at Mongo... in the 9 months or so I've been reading AR15.com, he has always come across as one of the more straight shooting people around here. I certainly don't think it is fair to call Mongo a hater just because he isn't a Kool-Aid drinker.

Perhaps hater was the wrong choice of words. While Mongo can contribute quite a bit, if he wants to, he can also contribute very little. One of his favorite pasttimes is to inflame Colt fans. Not on basis of fact, but rather just to get people riled up. It's just what he does.

Posted: 12/12/2005 9:52:51 PM EDT

[#33]

I would like to say that I have a 2003 6920 that is as good looking as my RRA and better than my Bushy. Just wanted to say, there are some good looking 6920's out there.

Posted: 12/12/2005 9:54:43 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
I've seen 5 Colt LE6920's that were recently made within the last 2-3 months and I can attest that they look terrible compared to how they used to look. There are scuff marks, tooling marks, uneven finish in places, frankly I was shocked. The first time I saw it, I asked the guy if he got a QC-fail or demo rifle or something. This topic has been discussed before on other boards. The conclusion is that Colt is now failing to re-finish or smooth-out rifles post finishing and assembly.

Personally I am not going to pay $300-500 more for a rifle that does not look perfect, so Colt can go to hell.

ETA: If you are spending around $1,200 on a Kimber, Wilson Combat, Colt, Springfield or other 1911-style pistol, are you going to be pleased if you receive it all scuffed up or had improper finish or tooling marks? I highly doubt it. Why should a rifle be treated any differently? You are paying a premium for a supposed "authentic" top-notch rifle. You should be paying for a perfect rifle, cosmetics and all.

- rem

Ah, so you'd rather spend your money on a reverse-engineered rifle made with inferior parts because it looks prettier. To each their own I s'pose. I do find it ironic, though, that people have been accepting poorly assembled rifles from Bushmaster since their inception. Truly fascinating.

Posted: 12/13/2005 10:03:17 AM EDT

[#35]

It would be nice if these manufactures would loan out their products for us to abuse for a couple of weeks so we can decide for ourselves which was best. Well, that's not going to happen. However all the major players did allow the DEA/FBI to beat the stink out of a few samples in hopes of getting a contract. They chose Rock River......So did I

Posted: 12/13/2005 1:13:57 PM EDT

[#36]

I have Bought three new Colt's in the last 6 months (6700C, LE6920, 6724 accurized). All came in unopened boxes. A couple of very small nicks on the LE6920. The 6724 had a pin head size nick on the aluminum foregrip. The 6700c had a almost unnoticeable nick on the lower. Colt's that are beat to pieces are still beter than some of the other junk that's out there. If someone has not shot one they would'nt understand. I have a flat black paint pen that matches perfectly with the factory finish. Making the flaws nearly impossible to see. It's made by Birchwoodcasey.com
It's a durable fix, but some gun cleaners may make it necessary for a reapplication. Maybe the factory could be a little more careful. The shooting quality is still there...................

Posted: 12/13/2005 3:27:32 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.

Microsoft thinking, thats not a bug; Its a feature

Posted: 12/13/2005 10:24:24 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
It would be nice if these manufactures would loan out their products for us to abuse for a couple of weeks so we can decide for ourselves which was best. Well, that's not going to happen. However all the major players did allow the DEA/FBI to beat the stink out of a few samples in hopes of getting a contract. They chose Rock River......So did I

Rock River marketing stated "and then there was one", but actually there were three manufactures that passed acceptance, got contracts, and made deliveries, that is Colt's RRA, and SIG.

Be careful what you read in gun rags, most of it is simply bought and paid for advertising.

Posted: 12/13/2005 10:29:55 PM EDT

[#39]

Why is everbody trying to scare me about Colt? I just odered a Colt LE 6920 from Law Enforcement Sales in TX and having it sent to my local dealer in NC. This is my First Colt and I hope there is nothing wrong with it because of how much money that I have paid for it. I love the 2-LMT M4'S that I own.

Posted: 12/14/2005 7:11:20 AM EDT

[#40]

Just a few personal data points...

I currently have three Colts - a green label A2, a blue label Sporter and a post-ban MT6400 "M4". The green label has some peppering under the finish of the lower receiver and a couple of areas that have a "brushed" appearance. Color match is perfect. The blue label and the M4 are like museum pieces, absolutely flawless finish. All three are mechanically perfect and I've never had a stoppage with any of them. I have owned other Colts as well that have had some cosmetic irregularities, but have been functionally perfect. I have had a slew of Bushmasters (and one Armalite) that looked nice but were assembled improperly at the factory. All of my Bushmasters, including an M4 I bought just 2 months ago, have had very poorly staked gas keys and badly overtorqued barrels (they would barely be able to put a round within 2 feet of mechanical zero at 100 yards. 3 had tight magwells. 2 had trigger pulls in excess of 12 lbs. I would really like to like Bushmaster products, but I just can't (or they can't seem to sell me one that works) when Colts are available that are built better and perform better. When Bushmaster can sell me a rifle that works, shoots straight, and is made of parts that are tested and inspected according to military standards, then I will happily buy one. 'til then, it's all Colt for me. Oh, and I'll happily trade pretty for performance any day when it comes to rifles.

Brewer

Posted: 12/14/2005 7:27:51 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Demand is high....................................extremely high. Product MUST go out the door. Anybody who thinks a company won't turn a blind eye to minor cosmetic issues while operating in a market environment like that is fooling only themselves. The vast majority of the product going out Colt's door is high quality stuff, but I'd bet that the number of minor, cosmetic issues is on the rise. We are seeing it here more often than ever. This isn't the first "My Colt rifle is less than perfect" thread. I'm too lazy to find the others. Many are already here in this thread.

Reality is a hard pill for cult members to swallow because reality is.................well...................reality. And cult members, just by the nature of their thinking, are..............well...............less than real thinkers.

I don't know too many Koolaid drinkers that use cosmetics as a basis for defending Colt quality. They buy Colts because they run. Are you sure you aren't confusing them with the Brand X groupies? You know the "I bought an RRA because it was pretty" crowd.

Cult thinking at its finest. Only a true cult minded member can take a poor quality hit and turn it into a what would appear to be a positve.

Not saying it's a positive at all. I'm just saying that a thread like this probably won't have the effect you are claiming it will because Colt owners don't tend to use cosmetics as a basis for their arguments. Your reply is typical though...lacking in substance and only meant to inflame. It's a shame the haters can rarely come up with anything better than that.

I'm not a hater, just haven't bought into the cult thinking that's all. The fact is I will never again own a factory monkey built rifle, no matter who's pretty logo is on the side.

I fall into a different category and take the best of all companies, including some Colt components, and put them in my rifles. IMO, it's a much better and economical way to go to get the same end product.
As a side note, I do believe that Colt and their products are a fraction of what they used to be. You choose your reasons as to why, if you think the same, but it's hard to deny that they are slipping down a slope in nearly all categories in one way or another.

As usual, IMO, YMMV, IIRC and all other disclaimers apply.

big +1

don't need the moniker, but Colt does make good parts.

Posted: 12/14/2005 9:45:59 AM EDT

[#42]

Despite 23 years in the military, I've never handled a "Colt" rifle. Mainly FNs and some off-branded stuff, all of which worked great. However, they've been turning out overpriced crap for pistols for as long as I can remember. I had a friend buy a Python for its legendary trigger pull, which was great, except the cylinder timed only halfway lined up with the barrel, and another friend bought a Gold Cup the same time I bought a Norinco 1911. The Norinco shot consistant 3" 25 yard groups, while the Gold Cup required extensive gunsmithing just to work, period.

Colts are like Harleys. Insecure people pay for the name. It gives them an identity to replace the one they don't have. Or people who are mechanically incompetent just think the more money they pay, the better chance they have of something working.

Posted: 12/14/2005 10:09:09 AM EDT

[#43]

A dealer on this board recently sent a Colt barrel to be MP tested. It failed the test. This leads to two questions. Does Colt push rejected parts onto the Civy market or do they just look the other way when one of their expensive parts fails MP testing?

C4

Posted: 12/14/2005 10:41:28 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Colts are like Harleys. Insecure people pay for the name. It gives them an identity to replace the one they don't have. Or people who are mechanically incompetent just think the more money they pay, the better chance they have of something working.

Man, you got me pegged, both counts, am insecure, and all thumbs, so I buy Colt's!

Posted: 12/14/2005 10:53:00 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Colts are like Harleys. Insecure people pay for the name. It gives them an identity to replace the one they don't have. Or people who are mechanically incompetent just think the more money they pay, the better chance they have of something working.

Posted: 12/14/2005 11:41:41 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
.

Colts are like Harleys. Insecure people pay for the name. It gives them an identity to replace the one they don't have. Or people who are mechanically incompetent just think the more money they pay, the better chance they have of something working.

Does this mean I have to sell my rebuilt from the ground up 55 Chevy to buy a Harley

Posted: 12/14/2005 11:48:34 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:
.

Colts are like Harleys. Insecure people pay for the name. It gives them an identity to replace the one they don't have. Or people who are mechanically incompetent just think the more money they pay, the better chance they have of something working.

Does this mean I have to sell my rebuilt from the ground up 55 Chevy to buy a Harley

No, you are not incompetent, you are no identity, that is why you have a 55 Chevy.

Posted: 12/14/2005 12:38:51 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
.

Colts are like Harleys. Insecure people pay for the name. It gives them an identity to replace the one they don't have. Or people who are mechanically incompetent just think the more money they pay, the better chance they have of something working.

Does this mean I have to sell my rebuilt from the ground up 55 Chevy to buy a Harley

No, you are not incompetent, you are no identity, that is why you have a 55 Chevy.

Ya Know, After looking at my Drivers License picture, you might be right