AR Sponsor
Posted: 7/4/2013 6:40:44 PM EDT
| How are Wilson Combat ARs considered? They look and seem nice...but their price is on par with or exceeds both LaRue and Noveske. Are they THAT good? |
| i just ask this same question i think they look very high quality and nice. if there anything like there 1911 its amazing. alot people say the price and something about they dont do goverment contract or something like that. mybe someone will chime in and tell us. i know for my money i would go LARUE wilson combat and noveske for the highest quality finish i have ever seen. |
|
Quoted: Thank you sir. Anyone else got any experience and/or opinions on Wilson? Hi Blake, I purchased a new Wilson Combat M-4T (Tactical Carbine) in 2009. I paid $1850'ish for it back then. I sold it last year and I'm still regretting it. It had Wilson's now famously popular and reliable Tactical Trigger Unit with a 4lb pull, premium NP3 coated carrier group, and their Armor-Tuff finish. At the time, I also had a BCM 5.56, and a Colt 6940 5.56. The Wilson was my favorite of the 3, but I'm sure that with the same Wilson upgrades, the 'feel' of the other 2 would have improved greatly. You can't go wrong with a Wilson Combat rifle, period. Typically, at this point in my responses to questions like yours, I would say, "your millage may vary". However, in the case of the Wilson Combat rifles, your millage will be the same as everyone else who owns them; you'll freakin' love it! :) |
|
I have been hunting with a Wilson 458 SOCOM, and I also have a 223 upper for it as well, that I have killed several coyotes and a turkey with.
I have killed several wild pigs and 2 deer. I have shot a lot of AR's/M16's over the years, and these Wilsons are top notch. I liked my first "set" so well I bought another 223. All my barrels are very accurate, and I ;lioke their forend better than any other I have handled. Their trigggers are almost too good... |
|
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were.
If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. |
|
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? Also would love to hear the reasoning behind this opinion. I've never heard any complaints about those phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap shooters. |
|
Quoted: Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. What do you base this on? Just because you can't afford one (neither can I) does not make that bullshit true. |
|
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. Have you ever even held one? There very nice weapons. I don't have the change to buy one, but my lgs had one hanging on the wall and i looked it over. It was a quality rifle, and if i had the money I would have bought it. It had an amazing trigger also. I guess that is expected with a rifle that expensive. |
|
Like I said, unless they faked-it-till-they-made-it. Could be they have. But back when I was in the tactical shooting scene, they were nothing more than re-branded parts guns with expensive coating coming from a custom 1911 shop that didn't seem to have any idea what made a quality AR.
And here in this thread, I haven't seen a single person list a single quantifiable reason for thinking they're worth the price. Looking an AR over doesn't tell you anything about it's construction- you have no idea where the parts come from, what kind of testing they've been subjected to, who's vetted the name, etc. What AR doesn't look "good" in the hand? Looking at the WC website, I see they at least acknowledge MP testing on their bolts, but still see no important details. What I do see is a $2250 price tag on a painted CMT parts gun with a weird handguard. What, exactly, are you paying for? |
| Wilson makes great 1911 stuff but theres nothing that wilson does with an AR that a competent experienced builder couldnt do for less money and just as good contracted out parts.They dont do anything special with there rifle that makes it any more accurate than anything else quality out there hell for what they charge id like to see top of the line chromelined barrels on their ARs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? Really? You've been here since 2001 and you haven't heard that before? Seriously? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? He's right actually, Wilson has always been focused on aesthetics and creating the perception of quality without necessarily proving it. Anyone can use Billet receivers and charge a fortune - to make an AR worth that kind of money, especially when the people that purchase high end ARs are mostly well versed in the value dynamic, you can't just dress up a pig with lipstick. I won't consider Wilson a high end product until swarms of shooters have battle tested them, instead of making threads about how they've not heard many bad reviews (but never put one to the test themselves). Their MO is becoming known as the "Wilson Formula". |
|
Paul Howe is running Willson's now, and even has his own "signature" carbine.
I think it says a lot that a very reputable trainer like Paul is willing to put his name on this rifle. They are a bit pricey, and I would go in a different direction, but I sure wouldn't scoff at someone who decided to run one. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? He's right actually, Wilson has always been focused on aesthetics and creating the perception of quality without necessarily proving it. Anyone can use Billet receivers and charge a fortune - to make an AR worth that kind of money, especially when the people that purchase high end ARs are mostly well versed in the value dynamic, you can't just dress up a pig with lipstick. I won't consider Wilson a high end product until swarms of shooters have battle tested them, instead of making threads about how they've not heard many bad reviews (but never put one to the test themselves). Their MO is becoming known as the "Wilson Formula". How will Wilson ever become "battle tested" since they are a consumer rifle. Only rifles that are technically battle tested are Colts an FN's and that is because they are "Mil-Spec" or as I like to say the cheapest crap the government can buy that meets their spec! |
|
I have had my Wilson AR in 458 SOCOM with the extra 223 upper for abouit one year.
I have killed several animals with both uppers. I have shot them quite a bit, the 223 barrel out to 500 yards several times. I have shot several different hand loads in the 458, and several different 223/5.56 factory loads in the upper marked 5.56x45 / 223. I have not had any malfunctions. These rifles are very accurate, and the triggers are excellent. Everything else about the rifles is first rate. I like their forends better than any other AR foreend I have handled. I have been shooting AR's since the early 1970's, I have shot several custom AR's in Match Competition, and shot many other factory AR's from other makers. I would rate these AR's the equal to any other I have used/seen in accuracy [the exception would be a few custom Match AR's with high dollar custom heavy barrels, with heavy foreends and lead in the butt stock, set up for High Power shooting], fit and finish and reliability. I have recently been to the Wilson Factory, you might be suprised at how many of the parts they are now making in house, and they plan to start making even more of their parts in house. I have not seen another factory AR that I liked better. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? He's right actually, Wilson has always been focused on aesthetics and creating the perception of quality without necessarily proving it. Anyone can use Billet receivers and charge a fortune - to make an AR worth that kind of money, especially when the people that purchase high end ARs are mostly well versed in the value dynamic, you can't just dress up a pig with lipstick. I won't consider Wilson a high end product until swarms of shooters have battle tested them, instead of making threads about how they've not heard many bad reviews (but never put one to the test themselves). Their MO is becoming known as the "Wilson Formula". How will Wilson ever become "battle tested" since they are a consumer rifle. Only rifles that are technically battle tested are Colts an FN's and that is because they are "Mil-Spec" or as I like to say the cheapest crap the government can buy that meets their spec! There are plenty of ways for a firearm to be "battle tested" without being adopted by the US military. There are a significant number of contractors working in nasty places throughout the world who can choose whichever AR they would like. There are tons of foreign nations who can adopt the firearm as well. It's not all about what the US military is using. Although I'm not hearing many reports of those cheap crap Colts and FN's going tits up in combat. The vast majority of AR's sold in this country do not meet the cheap crap specs you described. |
|
Quoted:
Really? You've been here since 2001 and you haven't heard that before? Seriously? Ahhh, dport. Long time...  No, I have never heard anyone say Wilson is less than top quality...ever. (at least in 1911s) There are people who can't afford their stuff, and that's fine. I know people on here drool over LaRue, and it may be great stuff, and I may buy one. I personally know that Noveske is high end. While in a gun store in Destin last week, I came across a great looking Wilson SBR with a Wilson can on it. For anything in the $2k and over range, it better not only be built like a tank and dead nuts accurate, it better look good also...which is why I asked.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unless they've somehow faked-it-till-they-made-it, I'm going to guess they're the same phenomenally over-priced gimmicky crap they always were. If you're going to drop that kind of money on an AR, might as well go with one of the companies you don't have to ask this question about... KAC, Noveske, Larue, etc. I appreciate the reply, but I've never heard any review of Wilson like you described. Do you have experience with Wilson ARs that would merit such a review? He's right actually, Wilson has always been focused on aesthetics and creating the perception of quality without necessarily proving it. Anyone can use Billet receivers and charge a fortune - to make an AR worth that kind of money, especially when the people that purchase high end ARs are mostly well versed in the value dynamic, you can't just dress up a pig with lipstick. I won't consider Wilson a high end product until swarms of shooters have battle tested them, instead of making threads about how they've not heard many bad reviews (but never put one to the test themselves). Their MO is becoming known as the "Wilson Formula". How will Wilson ever become "battle tested" since they are a consumer rifle. Only rifles that are technically battle tested are Colts an FN's and that is because they are "Mil-Spec" or as I like to say the cheapest crap the government can buy that meets their spec! There are plenty of ways for a firearm to be "battle tested" without being adopted by the US military. There are a significant number of contractors working in nasty places throughout the world who can choose whichever AR they would like. There are tons of foreign nations who can adopt the firearm as well. It's not all about what the US military is using. Although I'm not hearing many reports of those cheap crap Colts and FN's going tits up in combat. The vast majority of AR's sold in this country do not meet the cheap crap specs you described. I have heard of contractors using bushmasters but they are still not on par according to the colt fanboys and unfortunately do to the nature of contractor work we will probably never get a real idea of what AR's they chose. |
|
Go to Noveske's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs.
Go to Bravo's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Go to Larue's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Go to KAC's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Finally, go to WC's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Now.... what am I getting for my $2250? |
|
Wilson is renown for their well built semi-custom 1911's. But don't let the Wilson name fool you into believing that their worth the sticker price.
While it takes skilled pistolsmiths to build the 1911's that they do, just about any enthusiast can assemble an accurate and reliable AR. I emphasize the assemble part because that's exactly what occurs. There isn't any hand fitting required when building an AR. You don't have to hand blend any pieces with a file to get a tight fitting AR. Hand sanding with 1200 grit sandpaper on the flats to get that gorgeous mirror finish after a quality bluing. No precision fitting of the bolt to ensure a tight lockup and accuracy. All these things are what Wilson puts into each and every high quality 1911 that leaves their hands. The time poured into each build and the attention to detail is what you pay for when you purchase a Wilson 1911. Little, if any of that goes into assembling a production AR. There's no year and a half wait to have them assemble an AR for you. Their rifles aren't any more accurate, reliable or durable than rifles costing half as much. Minus the sweet trigger and handguard, what proprietary parts are they offering? |
|
Quoted:
I have heard of contractors using bushmasters The only "battle tested" AR's that I know of are Colt, FN and Bushmaster. Bushmaster AR's are used by over 60 militaries and countless security companies including the now defunct Blackwater. They were also used as the standard issue weapon during the Russian Vs. Georgian conflict. 
|
|
Quoted:
Wilson is renown for their well built semi-custom 1911's. But don't let the Wilson name fool you into believing that their worth the sticker price. While it takes skilled pistolsmiths to build the 1911's that they do, just about any enthusiast can assemble an accurate and reliable AR. I emphasize the assemble part because that's exactly what occurs. There isn't any hand fitting required when building an AR. You don't have to hand blend any pieces with a file to get a tight fitting AR. Hand sanding with 1200 grit sandpaper on the flats to get that gorgeous mirror finish after a quality bluing. No precision fitting of the bolt to ensure a tight lockup and accuracy. All these things are what Wilson puts into each and every high quality 1911 that leaves their hands. The time poured into each build and the attention to detail is what you pay for when you purchase a Wilson 1911. Little, if any of that goes into assembling a production AR. There's no year and a half wait to have them assemble an AR for you. Their rifles aren't any more accurate, reliable or durable than rifles costing half as much. Minus the sweet trigger and handguard, what proprietary parts are they offering? Well said. |
|
Sigh...
Average nothing special AR, around $1,200. Add a rail, match grade barrel, premium trigger group, coated BCG and were do you end up? Right around $2000. Now add a Ceracote, Duracoat or what-evercoat finish you want to make it pretty and it's another $250. $2250, gosh, exactly what Wilson, and most any other high end AR purveyor charges. I find it interesting that the naysayers ask if Wilson is proven like other brands in their price range in one sentence, and then in the next claim the price is too high because no special skill is needed to build a good AR. If no special skill is needed, whats to prove? I think the biggest problem most Wilson (and other high end AR) trash talkers have is a serious case of price tag envy. Talking your $2250 rifle down makes them feel better about their $800 home build. |
|
Quoted:
Sigh... Average nothing special AR, around $1,200. Add a rail, match grade barrel, premium trigger group, coated BCG and were do you end up? Right around $2000. Now add a Ceracote, Duracoat or what-evercoat finish you want to make it pretty and it's another $250. $2250, gosh, exactly what Wilson, and most any other high end AR purveyor charges. I find it interesting that the naysayers ask if Wilson is proven like other brands in their price range in one sentence, and then in the next claim the price is too high because no special skill is needed to build a good AR. If no special skill is needed, whats to prove? I think the biggest problem most Wilson (and other high end AR) trash talkers have is a serious case of price tag envy. Talking your $2250 rifle down makes them feel better about their $800 home build. Nobody's trash talked high-end ARs here, bro. Noveske, KAC, Larue- all good kit. Worth the money, if you're in to that sort of thing (I've owned a couple Noveskes). Wilson ISN'T a high end rifle- they just price 'em that way. |
|
Quoted:
Nobody's trash talked high-end ARs here, bro. Noveske, KAC, Larue- all good kit. Worth the money, if you're in to that sort of thing (I've owned a couple Noveskes). Wilson ISN'T a high end rifle- they just price 'em that way. OK, so Noveske, Knights and LaRue are worth it. Specifically, what makes them better than Wilson? No opinions please, facts only. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nobody's trash talked high-end ARs here, bro. Noveske, KAC, Larue- all good kit. Worth the money, if you're in to that sort of thing (I've owned a couple Noveskes). Wilson ISN'T a high end rifle- they just price 'em that way. OK, so Noveske, Knights and LaRue are worth it. Specifically, what makes them better than Wilson? No opinions please, facts only. "sigh" Quoted:
Go to Noveske's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Go to Bravo's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Go to Larue's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Go to KAC's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Finally, go to WC's website and look at one of their rifles. Look at the specs. Now.... what am I getting for my $2250? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Really? You've been here since 2001 and you haven't heard that before? Seriously? Ahhh, dport. Long time... No, I have never heard anyone say Wilson is less than top quality...ever. (at least in 1911s) There are people who can't afford their stuff, and that's fine. I know people on here drool over LaRue, and it may be great stuff, and I may buy one. I personally know that Noveske is high end. While in a gun store in Destin last week, I came across a great looking Wilson SBR with a Wilson can on it. For anything in the $2k and over range, it better not only be built like a tank and dead nuts accurate, it better look good also...which is why I asked.
I'd say it was about 7 years ago when it was all the fashion to diss Wilson in favor of other brands. Wilson and Les Baer. Anyway, there were a rash of threads back then. I've also heard people say their 1911s have gone down hill. I have no dog in the fight. I don't own one, probably won't own one, and have no problem with people who do. I'm just surprised considering the number of threads from back then. |
AR Sponsor