AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/12/2016 2:46:55 PM EDT
|
Doesn't the "features" on this Colt seem a bit odd?
Smith came out with the Sport which sold very well until Ruger introduced the AR 556. So Smith countered with the Sport II. Given that wouldn't you expect for the Colt to have a forward assist, chrome lined barrel and dust cover? After all both Ruger and Smith can do it in their economy model. |
|
As a Holiday Inn Express manufacturing expert, I'm just guessing that Colt isn't as flexible in producing parts for new models as Ruger or Smith so they cut where they could. In the case of the barrel, they don't have the nitriding investment that either have and chrome lining is a more expensive process. Also notice that the upper is their standard A3 with parts deleted, they likely did that to limit their production line impact as well as cut assembly time and therefore UAW labor costs.
Ruger used a cheaper polymer delta ring, and they have their casting capabilities which allow for a cheaper cast FSB than a forged one. Both they and S&W have the advantage of non-union labor as well. |
|
Quoted:
I still don't understand the difference between it and the 6920. Probably easier to list what is the same, which is pretty much the stripped lower and bolt. According to posts in the Colt industry forum most of the parts of the Expanse are sourced from different manufacturers and assembled by a contractor. There's conflicting info about whether the FCG and other internals are Colt but either way they're different than the 6920. |
AR Sponsor