AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Infamous Colt quality?? (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 7/5/2017 12:11:35 PM EDT
|
Just got a new upper for my build. After the rave reviews by most on this forum, "Colt, Colt and only Colt". Ive got this!
Please tell me, is this normal? 1. Clearly visible, 1mm thin notch on one side and 0.5mm on the other. 2. Visible paint from T marking 3. Discoloration in the upper's interior chamber (or it's a dry lube, that will go away?) Comments / explanations are welcome Thank you 
|
|
Quoted:
I would've gone with Aero or a similar quality manufacturer. They actually care about how their products come out lol. Quoted:
I would've gone with Aero or a similar quality manufacturer. They actually care about how their products come out lol. Why do we have to have these threads all the time? It is petty and boring. Most of the time i can somewhat see what the op is talking about but these are really insignificant cosmetic imperfections. I honestly may have never even noticed if it were my rifle. Then to say go with a company who has put out some non functional parts lately is about as much derp as i can take. I have a colt lower right now (ALG fcg) but thats it and i am in no way emotionally tied to the company (I have owned 6) but if you actually look at the data and listen to the people who use this shit, they will tell you that from a functional standpoint, Colt makes a very high quality AR15. Maybe we need an "AR15 Cosmetics" subforum Quoted:
I spent some time with the armorers this week and got the run down on the various bolts. The Colt bolts did last the longest and it also seems as if some of the PSA bolts last longer than others. I don't know why or if it was a particular run of bolts, but some did seem to fail earlier than others. At some point in the near future, we will have a system in place to track round count to each weapon. We've had so many requests from various mfg's and even government employees about our data because of this thread. Some mfg's have asked for our broken parts in order to see why the part failed and what can be done to improve the part. That being said, I've started a thread in the HK Weapons forum and will update it again regarding a certain mfg's new patented bolt design. V/R Ron |
|
How does it shoot? You probably don't know, because you're were busy examining it with a magnifying glass.
AR15 = Tool. Faberge Egg = Art. BCM & Colt = Good To Go (if you care about performance). BCM & Colt = Not Good To Go (if you're a fit and finish fan). What do you want your rifle to do? Look pretty on the internet or provide long above average service? I'm not judging - I'm pointing out the alternative to viewing a mass produced service/military oriented weapon as a tool instead of a flawless work of art. |
|
Quoted:
lol again Why do we have to have these threads all the time? It is petty and boring. Most of the time i can somewhat see what the op is talking about but these are really insignificant cosmetic imperfections. I honestly may have never even noticed if it were my rifle. Then to say go with a company who has put out some non functional parts lately is about as much as i can take. derp. I have a colt lower right now (ALG fcg) but thats it and i am in no way emotionally tied to the company (I have owned 6) but if you actually look at the data and listen to the people who use this shit, they will tell you that from a functional standpoint, Colt makes a very high quality AR15. Maybe we need an "AR15 Cosmetics" subforum |
|
Quoted:
You've got to take in mind the price of these Colt products, they aren't cheap, and a shit ton of other companies make mil spec.... You'll get a bunch of people saying it doesn't matter about the cosmetics, but if I'm dropping a bunch of money on Colt parts, I would like to see it not have imperfections.... 
I bought a dealer new Colt 6920 OEM1 two weeks ago for $665 delivered. A BCM upper costs more. |
|
Lets try to be objective....
A Colt 6920 OEM can EASILY be found for less than $700. I bought a brand new Colt in 1984 for around $450. Adjusted for inflation the 1984 Colt cost $1054. Therefore, it stands to reason a Colt is now 30% cheaper than it was before anyone even considered any sort of legislative action (that now impacts gun values). I have a Colt 6520 sitting at home that I bought in 2005 for $1299. It was a deal at the time. Adjusted for inflation that gun would be $1626. Colt has managed to offer an INCREDIBLE PERFORMANCE TO VALUE ratio. $700-800 for a Colt 6720 or 6920 is the best AR15 deal ever. Again, I've continuously owned Colt AR15s (dozens and dozens of them) over the past 33 years...so my frame of reference isn't the stupid "sample of 1". |
|
In before the people who tell you don't worry about what it looks like even though you spent hundreds on it.
Too late. 
I simply do not understand why people buy Colt just because it says Colt and has has a "meh" looking rollmark. Too many other great AR's for similar price to put up with a company that can barely keep it going financially. The same guy who does their books must be the QC guy. He has "awesome" attention to detail. |
|
Quoted:
lol again Why do we have to have these threads all the time? It is petty and boring. Most of the time i can somewhat see what the op is talking about but these are really insignificant cosmetic imperfections. I honestly may have never even noticed if it were my rifle. Then to say go with a company who has put out some non functional parts lately is about as much derp as i can take. I have a colt lower right now (ALG fcg) but thats it and i am in no way emotionally tied to the company (I have owned 6) but if you actually look at the data and listen to the people who use this shit, they will tell you that from a functional standpoint, Colt makes a very high quality AR15. Maybe we need an "AR15 Cosmetics" subforum |
|
Quoted:
Too many other great AR's for similar price to put up with a company that can barely keep it going financially. The same guy who does their books must be the QC guy. He has "awesome" attention to detail. |
|
Quoted:
Yea, but if you're new to ARs of course they're going to blurt out imperfections. I mean Colt works, but they don't focus on the finish. While other manufacturers, can atleast have a nice looking finish, while keeping the same reliability. You've got to take in mind the price of these Colt products, they aren't cheap, and a shit ton of other companies make mil spec.... You'll get a bunch of people saying it doesn't matter about the cosmetics, but if I'm dropping a bunch of money on Colt parts, I would like to see it not have imperfections.... Quoted:
Quoted:
lol again Why do we have to have these threads all the time? It is petty and boring. Most of the time i can somewhat see what the op is talking about but these are really insignificant cosmetic imperfections. I honestly may have never even noticed if it were my rifle. Then to say go with a company who has put out some non functional parts lately is about as much as i can take. derp. I have a colt lower right now (ALG fcg) but thats it and i am in no way emotionally tied to the company (I have owned 6) but if you actually look at the data and listen to the people who use this shit, they will tell you that from a functional standpoint, Colt makes a very high quality AR15. Maybe we need an "AR15 Cosmetics" subforum Quoted:
It's a lower. It functions no differently than any other in spec lower. "Hi quality"..... lol. 
|
|
Quoted:
How does it shoot? You probably don't know, because you're were busy examining it with a magnifying glass. AR15 = Tool. Faberge Egg = Art. BCM & Colt = Good To Go (if you care about performance). BCM & Colt = Not Good To Go (if you're a fit and finish fan). What do you want your rifle to do? Look pretty on the internet or provide long above average service? I'm not judging - I'm pointing out the alternative to viewing a mass produced service/military oriented weapon as a tool instead of a flawless work of art. Yes, it's a tool. An expensive tool. I have plenty of tools both inexpensive and expensive and they didn't have scratches and marks on them when they were new. Why Colt gets a pass for this is unfathomable to me. I don't want scratches on anything I buy new. It's uncalled for and so are the excuses defending the practice. |
|
Quoted:
Having owned everything from Olympic Arms to KAC, I think $800 for a colt is a deal. It takes a few thousand rounds to really start noticing differences in quality. Buy an Aero, buy a Colt, buy 10k rounds of ammunition and then get back to me at the end of the year and let me know your opinion. I've chased my tail one too many times trying to resuscitate a poorly made AR with replacement parts. I've owned a bunch of other "brands" (SGW, Olympic, Smith & Wesson, Rock River Arms, Eagle Arms, Eagle Coal Valley, EA, ArmaLite, PSA, Bushmaster, DPMS, Stag, LWRC, POF, etc etc etc). The difference between those and a BCM, Colt, Daniel Defense start to show when you get the round count up or use them hard / dirty in a class. There are "more boutique" ARs like KAC, but they're double the current cost of a Colt. |
|
Quoted:
I don't want scratches on anything I buy new. It's uncalled for and so are the excuses defending the practice. As a side, I've bought $2,300 LWRC carbines that did not have perfect fit and finish. I even had one that LWRC had to re-cerakote... |
|
I find it hilarious that where Colt is concerned, it's all about "it's a tool, not a piece of art", but for any other manufacturer, any blemish is "return that crap! Can't believe they let that out the door!"
Why is it that almost every other manufacturer can produce a well-functioning, cosmetically appealing rifle but Colt can't? And it ain't about price; Colt isn't rock-bottom, pricewise. |
|
Quoted:
I find it hilarious that where Colt is concerned, it's all about "it's a tool, not a piece of art", but for any other manufacturer, any blemish is "return that crap! Can't believe they let that out the door!" Why is it that almost every other manufacturer can produce a well-functioning, cosmetically appealing rifle but Colt can't? And it ain't about price; Colt isn't rock-bottom, pricewise. |
|
Quoted:
WTF?
I bought a dealer new Colt 6920 OEM1 two weeks ago for $665 delivered. A BCM upper costs more. You also have to buy the furniture and rear sight. Being all magpul it would be around 80$ |
|
Quoted:
Find an example of this please because i don't see it. I actually think we see so much of this bitching bc the combination colt's price, availability, and notoriety (mid range price tag, available at walmart up until recently, and commonly known for being what the military uses) makes it susceptible to be purchased by people who don't know enough to inspect an AR on anything but a superficial level. Just saying |
|
Most civilians want their guns to look brand new and scratch free until they shoot it the first time. It's not like you would buy a $600 iPad and accept one that is chipped and scratched out of the box when it is supposed to be new.
Some sales guys would say "an iPad is a tool, not art." You all would return it I am sure of it. My guns stay in great shape as I will pass them down to my boys. I am not taking then to combat classes or war, so they don't get marred up. My guns are for shooting and not to post on forums and instagram sites as gun porn. But I still take care of them and would be pissed if someone dropped some high dollar gun of mine and damaged or scratched it. If it were a used gun, than you expect to see some wear, but not on new guns that cost $800+. |
|
Quoted:
I feel like this has to be a troll thread. Complaining about what I can only describe as a microscopic sized ding and his upper being dry film lubed, I just can't see OP as being serious. Discussion link |
|
Quoted:
The discoloration on the interior of the bore is dry lube. The rest is typical Colt, they don't tend to pay much attention to finish. |
|
That is a bizarre thread in the way the conversation flowed.
|
|
Quoted:
Where did you buy that? I only see Colt rifles in generals at 700-800+ You also have to buy the furniture and rear sight. Being all magpul it would be around 80$ They come with a pistol grip so you just need to add a stock ($45 for a CTR), handguards ($25 for MOE) and trigger guard ($7)...or pick up a cast-off set of furniture on the EE. |
|
Quoted:
That is a bizarre thread in the way the conversation flowed. Quoted:
|
|
I get it everyone wants the gun to be perfect. As a self professed "Colt" guy, there should be no excuse that the rifle should not be perfect from the factory. After all. It is your hard earned money you are spending on, and it should look good. But I will say I have purchased complete Colt AR guns and parts,and many have cosmetic issues. However, I don't buy them to be pretty: I buy them to use, shoot, and drag them through the mud. That being said, I have had zero problems with my Colt AR's and components. My work M-4's have been solid, and they keep going like the energizer bunny with proper maintenance.
A Colt Python, S&W Performance Center handgun, or Accuracy International rifle should look pretty. A Colt Ar? Not so much. |
|
Quoted:
Just got a new upper for my build. After the rave reviews by most on this forum, "Colt, Colt and only Colt". Ive got this! Please tell me, is this normal? 1. Clearly visible, 1mm thin notch on one side and 0.5mm on the other. 2. Visible paint from T marking 3. Discoloration in the upper's interior chamber (or it's a dry lube, that will go away?) Comments / explanations are welcome Thank you http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h55/victorxray18/FullSizeRender_zpsjewrorz5.jpg http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h55/victorxray18/FullSizeRender%202_zpsgflr8pm6.jpg http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h55/victorxray18/FullSizeRender%205_zpssgb8pybs.jpg http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h55/victorxray18/FullSizeRender%204_zpsyak4coak.jpg http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h55/victorxray18/FullSizeRender8_zpsaeir2xw7.jpg http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h55/victorxray18/FullSizeRender6_zps26gspbay.jpg
Really? |
|
Quoted:
I feel like this has to be a troll thread. Complaining about what I can only describe as a microscopic sized ding and his upper being dry film lubed, I just can't see OP as being serious. |
|
Quoted:
In before the people who tell you don't worry about what it looks like even though you spent hundreds on it. Too late.
I simply do not understand why people buy Colt just because it says Colt and has has a "meh" looking rollmark. Too many other great AR's for similar price to put up with a company that can barely keep it going financially. The same guy who does their books must be the QC guy. He has "awesome" attention to detail. Colt is still the only one making the correct extractor spring. Lots out there that try to be similar, but no one has been able to mimic the copper washed spring. I believe LRRPF52 has gone more in-depth of Colt vs everyone else in his area. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Infamous Colt quality?? (Page 1 of 3)
AR Sponsor