AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why Colt? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 1/29/2009 2:08:18 PM EDT
| What makes colt AR's better than the rest? Or are they on the same level as others? If not what makes it better and worth getting. |
|
Quoted:
What makes colt AR's better than the rest? Or are they on the same level as others? If not what makes it better and worth getting. Colt has been making AR-15s/M-16s a lot longer than the others. It's the original, just like with the 1911 pistol. If you'll notice, all the others are constantly being compared to Colt. "Brand X is just as good as a Colt", "Fit and finish is just as good as a Colt" You don't hear people saying that it's just as good as a Bushmaster or Oly? Why? Colt has the largest group of "haters" than any other brand. Why? I believe that most of the Colt haters are just jealous because they bought something inferior and regret it. With a Colt you have a quality weapon that will probably outlast you. With the others you "probably" have a weapon that's just as good as a Colt. What do you want, the best or something just as good? How high are your standards? |
|
Quoted:
Fit and finish are just a small part of the equation. It's what you CAN'T see that matters, and that's where the testing that Colt does on their components comes into play. Some manufacturers do lot samples, while Colt tests each and every component to ensure they meets MIL-SPEC standards. I personally want to know that things like my barrel, bolt, bolt carrier, etc. have been thoroughly tested to military standards and not just been looked at visually before they are assembled into my weapon. I just bought a Colt 6920 to replace my Bushmaster: my Bushy looks just great, but I'm not convinced it will stand up to the test of time nearly as well as a Colt.
Colt just seems to be the "best" in everyone's eyes. My RRA has just as good fit and finish as my Colt. |
Yes, because that's the important part. Your RRA probably has |
Quoted: Quoted: What makes colt AR's better than the rest? Or are they on the same level as others? If not what makes it better and worth getting. Colt has been making AR-15s/M-16s a lot longer than the others. It's the original, just like with the 1911 pistol. If you'll notice, all the others are constantly being compared to Colt. "Brand X is just as good as a Colt", "Fit and finish is just as good as a Colt" You don't hear people saying that it's just as good as a Bushmaster or Oly? Why? Colt has the largest group of "haters" than any other brand. Why? I believe that most of the Colt haters are just jealous because they bought something inferior and regret it. With a Colt you have a quality weapon that will probably outlast you. With the others you "probably" have a weapon that's just as good as a Colt. What do you want, the best or something just as good? How high are your standards? With this statement in red, it is very clear you have no idea what "AR" stands for. Lets get one thing clear, I paid well over $1800 for my AR that I built. Which says that I could have bought a Colt if I wanted to. But I didn't. Ponder that for a while. |
Because people assume that because they get all the government contract they are the best. Which is not true by the way. Its all about politics and lobbyists. Colt actually has some outdated equipment to build their rifles. They are not as modernized as other rifle manufacturers. Not that it matters too much but one of the reasons that they get all the contracts is because they can pump our more rifles on a monthly basis than anyone else can. Also, they are great rifles but think of it this way....If you went to war would you like to be assigned a rifle that was made by the lowest bidder??
But they are top notch just not THE BEST! Anyways I'll probably get smoked for this! I'll go to war with my KAC anyday over a Colt. Peace out.. |
|
Quoted:
Because people assume that because they get all the government contract they are the best. Which is not true by the way. Its all about politics and lobbyists. Colt actually has some outdated equipment to build their rifles. They are not as modernized as other rifle manufacturers. Not that it matters too much but one of the reasons that they get all the contracts is because they can pump our more rifles on a monthly basis than anyone else can. Also, they are great rifles but think of it this way....If you went to war would you like to be assigned a rifle that was made by the lowest bidder?? 
But they are top notch just not THE BEST! Anyways I'll probably get smoked for this! I'll go to war with my KAC anyday over a Colt. Peace out.. I agree with you. |
|
They still hold the TDP for the system. Not that it's the deal closer, but it does set it apart from the rest.
TDP= technical design package; every time there is a government-specified upgrade, no matter how minute, it's set in the TDP. All AR's are likely within the ballpark of one another, but only one holds the TDP. So if you have to choose one for SHTF, how are YOU going set them apart from on another. It's an intensely personal thing. For now. KOOL AID!!! |
|
Quoted:
Because americans believe that if it cost more it must be better. The military uses Colt because they were the lowest bidder. The military uses Colt because Colt designed the M4, they took the M16 and shortened it and tweaked it and developed it, created the TDP, and they had the know-how from twenty years of building carbines that went into harm's way, and were awarded a sole-source contract on the carbine. It's not a "lowest bidder" scenario. When the sole-source solicitation ends, the M4 Carbine may very well go to the lowest bidder, and will be built in strict accordance with the testing procedures and the TDP for the M4 Carbine. I *am* a Kool-Aid drinker, I like my ponies, very much. I am not, however, an elitist snob, and I do not insist that others fall in line, and buy only Colts. There are many great rifles and rifle makers out there, I would not be upset by someone using a Noveske or LMT, or other quality maker. I'm indifferent if you choose to use a DPMS, Bushy, EA, or RRA lower for your quality build, as long as they're in spec, they're in spec. I will not ridicule you for making a well reasoned decision about what you feel meets your needs, and what you want to buy. I will ridicule you if your reasoning is faulty or absent, or if you try to make outlandish claims. 95% of rifles out there from the big makers will do what they need to do. If you don't think the increased cost for improvements in quality are commensurate, that's up to you and your wallet to decide, but don't stand there and try to say that the differences in quality do not exist. Not worth it and do not exist are not the same thing, not the least of which is because one is a statement of opinion, while one is a statement of fact, if you're confident in your decision, you should have no problem simply saying that you didn't feel like paying that much more, nor should you feel that it's an assault against you that someone else did. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
Because americans believe that if it cost more it must be better. The military uses Colt because they were the lowest bidder. +1 Do you want a GMC truck or a chevy truck .... Same truck, same plant, different grill. They did a study and some folks actually believed that GMC used thicker steel and had higher quality control. |
|
Quoted:
Because people assume that because they get all the government contract they are the best. Which is not true by the way. Its all about politics and lobbyists. Colt actually has some outdated equipment to build their rifles. They are not as modernized as other rifle manufacturers. Not that it matters too much but one of the reasons that they get all the contracts is because they can pump our more rifles on a monthly basis than anyone else can. Also, they are great rifles but think of it this way....If you went to war would you like to be assigned a rifle that was made by the lowest bidder??
But they are top notch just not THE BEST! Anyways I'll probably get smoked for this! I'll go to war with my KAC anyday over a Colt. Peace out.. You really think it's about the bid price? How's this sound...."Colt is the lowest bidder that meets the standard set by the government." How many of your other brands can meet the standard? The answer is ZERO. KAC can do it, but they have a production cost way above what the government can spent on the quantity needed to outfit our military. Quoted:
Colt just seems to be the "best" in everyone's eyes. My RRA has just as good fit and finish as my Colt. Yeah, and my wife's Ford Focus has just as good of fit & finish as a BMW. I guess that makes it just as good?....Right? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What makes colt AR's better than the rest? Or are they on the same level as others? If not what makes it better and worth getting. Colt has been making AR-15s/M-16s a lot longer than the others. It's the original, just like with the 1911 pistol. If you'll notice, all the others are constantly being compared to Colt. "Brand X is just as good as a Colt", "Fit and finish is just as good as a Colt" You don't hear people saying that it's just as good as a Bushmaster or Oly? Why? Colt has the largest group of "haters" than any other brand. Why? I believe that most of the Colt haters are just jealous because they bought something inferior and regret it. With a Colt you have a quality weapon that will probably outlast you. With the others you "probably" have a weapon that's just as good as a Colt. What do you want, the best or something just as good? How high are your standards? With this statement in red, it is very clear you have no idea what "AR" stands for. Lets get one thing clear, I paid well over $1800 for my AR that I built. Which says that I could have bought a Colt if I wanted to. But I didn't. Ponder that for a while. Why didn't you? Ponder that for a while. |
|
Quoted:
Because americans believe that if it cost more it must be better. The military uses Colt because they were the lowest bidder. To meet "Mil-Spec" That is what you have to remember.....And no I do not own a COLT. From my what I know about AR(s), most of the manufacturing companies that produce "mil-spec" rifles, charge as much or more then Colt to the paying public. Does that make them better? Maybe, maybe not..... 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
.... Colt actually has some outdated equipment to build their rifles. They are not as modernized as other rifle manufacturers..... Please tell us how you came by that information? Yes, please tell us how an ISO 9000/9001 company can have such outdated equipment. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
.... Colt actually has some outdated equipment to build their rifles. They are not as modernized as other rifle manufacturers..... Please tell us how you came by that information? Yes, please tell us how an ISO 9000/9001 company can have such outdated equipment. How do you know they have such outdated equipment? |
| I didnt start this thread to have people fight. I wanted to know because I am in the process of building a CMMG AR, and I was wondering how things compared to Colt. I looked at priced of Colts on gunbroker and S&W M&P's. I will stick with my CMMG until I can maybe afford a COLt just so I can have one. |
|
Quoted:..... and I was wondering how things compared to Colt....
"and I was wondering how things compared to Colt" Why would you do that? Why not wonder how they compare to some other brand? Doesn't that tell you something? Think about it? Save your money and buy a Colt 6920! Cut to the chase and get what you really want. |
|
Quoted:
What makes colt AR's better than the rest? Or are they on the same level as others? If not what makes it better and worth getting. The only item that MIGHT make a Colt any better than so called "2nd tier" companies, is a shot peened bolt. Being that you can buy a shot-peened, MP tested bolt for $60, how much is the pony pic. worth to you? After the bolt, it is all conjecture. BTW, Colt makes a superb AR, but they are not SUPERIOR to all others. I don't personally buy into the MP testing at all...I will also say that I have never had a non shot-peened bolt fail on me. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:....
BTW, Colt makes a superb AR, but they are not SUPERIOR to all others. Then why in the world are all the "others" constantly being compared to Colt? Read this thread and the gazillion others like it. You would think that Colt is the Gold Standard by which all other ARs are judged. Colt followers are referred to as "Kool Aid Drinkers". What pet names do we have for the lovers of other brands? Colt has gained a cult following for a reason: THEY ARE THE BEST! Others may be just as good, but they are not Colts. Only a Colt is a Colt, all the others are just aftermarket copies. Can I get a Amen? |
| I read a few of the posts and enough to get the point (which has been hammered into Damascus!) The fact is that Colt has been been trusted to provide weapons for our Military for a long time and it isn't due to lowballing other manufacturers. They are good rifles hands down. The best? Probably not "technically", but big deal, they are in the hands of my comrades and I trust them. I must have LTI'd thousands upon thousands and if I failed a dozen for anything but bolt rings I'd be surprised. Once we switched to chrome bores, them rifles were damn near perfect. Not to completely discount some seemingly dumb contract awards for sure. I was in the middle of my Marine Corps Armorer career when we switched to the M9 Beretta and that's a whole 'nuther story....... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
What makes colt AR's better than the rest? Or are they on the same level as others? If not what makes it better and worth getting. The only item that makes a Colt any better than so called "2nd tier" companies, is a shot peened bolt. Being that you can buy a shot-peened, MP tested bolt for $60, how much is the pony pic. worth to you? After the bolt, it is all conjecture. BTW, Colt makes a superb AR, but they are not SUPERIOR to all others. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is why MP bolts are so critical. They will break along the teeth, but not at the cam hole. Bullshit. MP CAN NOT INDICATE SUCH A FLAW. That is a fault of heat treatment, thinest sections are over-hardened. 8620 also carburizes and such a geometry allows a near knife edge embrittlement. 8620 as a bolt material is why they have to do all that NDE and special treatment. There ARE better steels. Besides, MPI does not prevent defects, it only indicates SOME defects and those would be defects extending to the surface. A bolt that FAILS MPI in this area will also fail within the first 10 rounds. The last time I checked, the bolt is supposed to be made of Carpenter 158 steel. I think this is a through hardening alloy, not case hardened. Of course you are correct, MPI does not fix anything. It is a QC scheme to catch flaws that will lead to a failure. Never the less, the common treatment to removed surface imperfections and reduce/avoid brittle fracture is to shot peen the item. All true mil spec bolts receive a shot peen treatment. I also take a dremel with a sand roll and gently radius the sharp edges of the bolt where the cam pin fits through. This will help avoid the initiation of a crack and its propagation through the matrix of the alloy leading to the failure shown in the picture. The easiest and most effective thing any of us can do to avoid early bolt failure as seen above, is DO NOT BUY DPMS BOLTS. woofe 8620 IS a through hardening NiCrMo alloy. Shot peening will not fix any defect, in fact is may accelerate an internal defect (more accurately, a dislocation) and especially once the bolt is carburized (Melonite is one such process). Such surface treatments diffuse carbon and/or nitrogen into the "skin" of the metal, increasing the hardness. Because this is most rapidly done above the austenite phase transition temperature, the metal is subject to slight volume increase. Upon quenching, the skin is now in compression while the core is in tension. Because there is very little core material in ths cam pin hole webs, the ratio of tensile to compressive areas is minimal, meaning this material is biased to tensile failure! And how is is loaded? MT/MPI (same thing) cannot indicate any flaw underneath the surface skin formed by the combination of shot peening and carburizing. And it doesn't take a visible indication to initiate failure in such a condition. This is a case of LOW CYCLE FATIGUE. It is a MATERIAL ISSUE, not a INDICATABLE DEFECT ISSUE. Meaning no amount of MT, PT or RT would have found it. The dislocation where it happened was microscopic. All metals of polycrrstalline nature have dislocations. Stack enough of these dislocations in a small area, then subject them to cyclic stress and you will have eventual failure. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is why MP bolts are so critical. They will break along the teeth, but not at the cam hole. Yep. Milspec bolts will likely break at the teeth if they fail, while non MP tested bolts are more likely to fail at the cam pin hole. ETA: I'm guessing the OP's bolt only had a couple thousand rounds on it. Non-MP bolts are likely okay if they make it past that. MPI will NOT prevent these errors! They are a HEAT TREATMENT ERROR and the ONLY TEST for that would be a semi-destructuve...Vicker's Microhardness test. You morons spoutong "MP testing" are cargo cultists.  Yes, that is an insult. Deal with it and LEARN.
8620 steel is a carburizing chrome moly. Carburizing means that the surface can absorb carbon, be it from packing in charcoal or treatement in a cyanide bath (KCN, also nitrides improve the hardness). This makes the outer surfaces much harder and resistant to wear. It is done at elevated temp, usually 1400 F and above. But in the vicinity where this bolt broke, the carbon diffused from TWO SURFACES, the inside and out. As this is the THINNEST AREA of the bolt, it is most affected. Also, after the carburizing treatment, the part is quenched. Here, the thin section also makes the quench more severe, making is even harder and more brittle. Now how about shot peening? USELESS HERE TOO. Why does it work? Well, it makes the surface of the part in COMPRESSIVE STRESS. This is not unlike prestressed beams or tempered safety glass. But the CHANGE IN GEOMETRY means this "concentrates" the external compressive skin stress and place the TINY core into considerable TENSION STRESS. |
|
And this:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Keith_J, Thanks for the educational posting. I love it. One question, would high pressure testing be more likely to detect material flaws? How about HPT and then MPI? No, the failure mode is low cycle fatigue. It is due to excessive hardness in the area and the combination of shot peening/carburization. Shot peening and carburization leave the surface in a state of compressive stress. Because there is very little material at cam pin hole, having most of it in the compressive stress state leves very little material for tensile loads. Bolts failing after less than 10 rounds have a material flaw that MIGHT be detected by non-destructive processes. Bolts that fail under 10k rounds do so because they are excessively stressed or the material is too hard for the cyclic stress. Using a different steel or just altering the process of heat treatment to gain toughness in this area would go a long way to improvement of fatigue life. Selective tempering. 
Shitfest aside though, colts work. Regardless of price, regardless of what you think about their prices to civilians, or the LEO only markings, their civilian guns coming scuffed from the factory, or the kool aid- they're a good product, and they work. And no one's internet forum bitching is going to suddenly make their guns seem to not work as well as they are. They're good, they work, and if they sucked, the military wouldn't be using them in enormous numbers!! |
| I own several 6920 colts just for collector value and resale. They are great rifles, as good as any. The reason I actually use Rock River is it never made sense to pay more for a rifle then have to put a better trigger in it. I love Colt 45's as well. I carry a Kimber. By the time you take a colt 45, put in a better bushing, trigger and other parts, you get a Kimber. Colts are great, I just prefer to use other brands. |
| you are comparing rack grade guns to companies that supposedly offer "production custom" Colt makes simple guns that work without all the extras that are not necessary. Military triggers are not meant for target work. and as h=far as 1911s I will stay with colts and not MIM parts |
| Colt has held the TDP(technical data package) on the AR for 30+ years, that is what makes them the best IMO. Yes, you can build a custom AR that in many ways may be better, but as far as "off the rack" or "out of the box" AR's go, Colt makes a superior gun to other companies. |
|
Quoted:
Colt has held the TDP(technical data package) on the AR for 30+ years, that is what makes them the best IMO. Yes, you can build a custom AR that in many ways may be better, but as far as "off the rack" or "out of the box" AR's go, Colt makes a superior gun to other companies. He we go again with the "SUPERIOR" wording.... 
Exactly what in the TDP makes the Colt "superior"? |
|
Quoted:
Colt has held the TDP(technical data package) on the AR for 30+ years, that is what makes them the best IMO. Yes, you can build a custom AR that in many ways may be better, but as far as "off the rack" or "out of the box" AR's go, Colt makes a superior gun to other companies. That's laughable. I would put an LMT MRP up against your Colt any day.. High quality and more missions adaptable than your Colt could only dream of being. |
|
Quoted:
One of these again huh? Ok, i'll say it, Rock River beat Colt in the DEA tests!!! Naaa na na na naa!!! The DEA does know their gun stuff... DEA Agent on Gun Safety |
|
Quoted:
Because americans believe that if it cost more it must be better. The military uses Colt because they were the lowest bidder. Lowest bidder is a misnomer. Colt can provide the best product for the least cost. If the US military simply wanted cheap rifles, they'd issue Olympics. |
|
History, panache, and the horsey.
I'd get one if I was in the $1200-$1800 AR market. It wont matter to many AR shooters, but their guns will never have the history and name. To many it is just not worth it, but they would not be selling it if they had one free. |
|
Quoted:
Because people assume that because they get all the government contract they are the best. Which is not true by the way. Its all about politics and lobbyists. Colt actually has some outdated equipment to build their rifles. They are not as modernized as other rifle manufacturers. Not that it matters too much but one of the reasons that they get all the contracts is because they can pump our more rifles on a monthly basis than anyone else can. Also, they are great rifles but think of it this way....If you went to war would you like to be assigned a rifle that was made by the lowest bidder??
But they are top notch just not THE BEST! Anyways I'll probably get smoked for this! I'll go to war with my KAC anyday over a Colt. Peace out.. I respect your choice in rifles. KAC makes a fantastic product - the only "problem" I see with KAC is that their rifles are not commonly available. But they have their reasons for that.
|
|
A quality AR has NOTHING to do with fit and finish. When I go looking for a gun, I operate under the assumption that sloppy parts manufacturing is the best indicator of a true premium product. If reciever fit is loose, nice. Upper reciever offset laterally on the lower, smooth. The trigger full of creep and grit, sweeter yet. Mushy, sloppy safety lever movement, right on. The rear sight assembly sitting noticeably canted to the line of the bore, awesome. Aperture off center, hell yeah. The cutout between the front sight ears out of plumb, righteous. 6-12 clicks of windage required to get a zero? That's just a bonus. Any company that spends time sweating those trivial details is likely skimping on the things that actually count. Right? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Colt has held the TDP(technical data package) on the AR for 30+ years, that is what makes them the best IMO. Yes, you can build a custom AR that in many ways may be better, but as far as "off the rack" or "out of the box" AR's go, Colt makes a superior gun to other companies. That's laughable. I would put an LMT MRP up against your Colt any day.. High quality and more missions adaptable than your Colt could only dream of being. Do you say that because of th4e quick change barrel? Not meant as sarcasm, just curious, becasue I cant see some guy on a patrol in the desert stoping his patrol so he can swap barrels on the edge of a town before he enters it for CQB. I am sure this is not what LMT intended so if its not, then you can just pick a diferent dedicated rifle before hand, or swap uppers. What is the cost of the LMT barrel for the MSP as opposed to a differnt upper for the same lower and is it faster than 2 push pins? |
|
Quoted:
A quality AR has NOTHING to do with fit and finish. When I go looking for a gun, I operate under the assumption that sloppy parts manufacturing is the best indicator of a true premium product. If reciever fit is loose, nice. Upper reciever offset laterally on the lower, smooth. The trigger full of creep and grit, sweeter yet. Mushy, sloppy safety lever movement, right on. The rear sight assembly sitting noticeably canted to the line of the bore, awesome. Aperture off center, hell yeah. The cutout between the front sight ears out of plumb, righteous. 6-12 clicks of windage required to get a zero? That's just a bonus. Any company that spends time sweating those trivial details is likely skimping on the things that actually count. Right? or the make a show of the look of the gun as opposed to the inner parts that make it dependable. Dings in the finish do nothing for operation, though I do see your point. If it was a custom Double rifle I would agree,but not something meant for fighting and to take abuse constantly |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why Colt? (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor