Colt to file chapter 11

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Chris B.

I'm sorry I should have been more clear. When I said AR's I should have said their 6920's. There has been the myth that their 6920s have been built separately for military and civilian markets and that the quality is different. That is 100% false as a 6920 is a 6920 and Colt does not build different variations of them. This has been hashed out in detail and proven to be 100% correct that Colt does not vary the quality in the two markets.


Yes, 6920's had large pins and other stupid features before Colt did away with that nonsense about 2007-2009ish.

While the 6920 is a fine rifle, 16" barreled carbines are not used by the military. Similar, yes. Same, no. Different barrels, different lowers, different fire control groups.
 
6920s are made using the same receivers and parts that the military guns are made from. "6920" is not a military gun but it is built to the exact same standard with the exact same parts as military guns(minus a happy switch).
I'm just saying that Colt does not make 2nd rate AR's for the civilian markets like many seem to think and they do not use non standard parts, non milspec parts. They may have years ago but no longer do

I also own Sabre Defense, LMT, BCM and Noveske but not LaRue. The 6920 is equal to Sabre, BCM and LMT but not as nice as LaRue or Noveske. But then you are looking at $2,000+ and not $700-$1,400.

There was also a chart on M4carbine.net that showed all AR manufactures and what quality checks when into their guns and materials used. It is no longer being maintained but Colt had more quality checks in place and used the highest quality materials then ANY OTHER MANUFACTURER including Noveske. You can still see "The AR chart" here:

https://www.google.com/search?q=M4+carbine+ar+chart&biw=1440&bih=754&tbm=isch&imgil=jtouPsB4HNh9RM%253A%253B5mQbuAoeOI7OTM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.thefirearmblog.com%25252Fblog%25252F2007%25252F10%25252F24%25252Flooking-at-purchasing-an-m4-check-this-comparison-chart-out-first%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=jtouPsB4HNh9RM%253A%252C5mQbuAoeOI7OTM%252C_&usg=__BcUeXkE6D2lEyNiRydsSKcFcANo%3D&ved=0CCkQyjdqFQoTCMi2l5GwksYCFVcUkgodhgIHkg&ei=vh9_VcjfM9eoyASGhZyQCQ#imgrc=fJbbUgaMsI0QxM%253A%3BvHXVekZ_6JDG4M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi149.photobucket.com%252Falbums%252Fs69%252FDonr101395%252F080904-AR15-Chart-FEATURES.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.calguns.net%252Fcalgunforum%252Farchive%252Findex.php%252Ft-374530.html%3B1024%3B595&usg=__BcUeXkE6D2lEyNiRydsSKcFcANo%3D

Or by googling "M4 Carbine AR chart".

I'm not a Colt fan boy either. I can post pictures with a hand written note that says "Bobistheoilguy" in from of my Noveske, LMT Noveske, Colt if you don't believe me. I just get sick of bull [censored] myths about Colt building non milspec inferior AR's when in fact they are built as good or better then most AR's on the market and with out a doubt more proven in combat then and AR on the planet.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
No one anywhere has ever heard of "the chart". Totally new stuff here.


And the Colt meets more of those checks then any other manufacturer. It is not just an "ok" rifle, it is arguable the best rifle made according to the chart. Do I feel my Noveske is "better"? Absolutely! My LMT, BCM ect? No.
 
Last edited:
The very definition of milspec is just OK. A baseline minimum standard. A checkmark, or lack of one, doesn't necessarily mean anything. You have to have further knowledge to make a determination.
 
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
No one anywhere has ever heard of "the chart". Totally new stuff here.


And the Colt meets more of those checks then any other manufacturer. It is not just an "ok" rifle, it is arguable the best rifle made according to the chart. Do I feel my Noveske is "better"? Absolutely! My LMT, BCM ect? No.


The guy who wrote the chart thought the Colt was the best thing since sliced bread. Since the Colt is mil spec, he made the chart to compare mil spec features to other rifles. A complete and utter fail on his part.

1) parkerizing under the front sight base - Really, how is this any indication of quality? Most people have no desire to remove the sight base and it could be argued that a plain metal on plain metal would have a better gas seal than it being parkerized.

2) Bolt carrier groups having a Carpenter 158 bolt and being high pressure tested. We have now learned that high pressure testing using a M197 proof round may actually do more damage than help. Some estimates are that by simply running one proof round of M197 through the gun can take 5000 rounds off the life of the bolt before it breaks. Also Carpenter 158 bolts is a REALLY old spec. Metal testing and fatigue testing has advanced quite a bit since then. Some testing I have seen are that 9310 bolts are nearly twice as strong/durable.

3) 1/7 twist. - The gov messed up going from 1/12 all the way to 1/7 twist. 1/7 twist is really fast. They should have went with 1/8 twist, which can stabilize the heaviest bullets all the way to the lightest 40 grain bullets.

4) Chrome lining - Decreases accuracy. The same barrel treated with Ferritic nitrocarburizing (commonly called melonite or nitride) offers a more accurate barrel with the same or longer service life and a more durable, rust resistant finish.

5) carbine gas system - Mid-length offers less wear and tear, lower pressures, and less perceived recoil.

Mil-spec is a MINIMUM specification, offering a decent set of standards. Some of the original mil spec standards are REALLY old. Like approaching 50 years old. Lots and lots of new technologies have appeared since the early days.
 
Milspec is just a minimum standard, it doesn't really mean much unless your trying to buy thousands of a gun at the lowest possible price.

Rack grade AR's are 2-4 MOA, that's it. So so trigger, meh furniture, meh sights, and aluminum mags. AR's have come a long, long way since the 1970's when those standards were put in place.


Interesting point, the Swiss have the highest quality standard issue rifles. The Sig550 is a Rolex compared to an off the rack AR. It would also not meet a lot of the Army's specifications, one of them being unit price!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
No one anywhere has ever heard of "the chart". Totally new stuff here.


And the Colt meets more of those checks then any other manufacturer. It is not just an "ok" rifle, it is arguable the best rifle made according to the chart. Do I feel my Noveske is "better"? Absolutely! My LMT, BCM ect? No.


The guy who wrote the chart thought the Colt was the best thing since sliced bread. Since the Colt is mil spec, he made the chart to compare mil spec features to other rifles. A complete and utter fail on his part.

1) parkerizing under the front sight base - Really, how is this any indication of quality? Most people have no desire to remove the sight base and it could be argued that a plain metal on plain metal would have a better gas seal than it being parkerized.

2) Bolt carrier groups having a Carpenter 158 bolt and being high pressure tested. We have now learned that high pressure testing using a M197 proof round may actually do more damage than help. Some estimates are that by simply running one proof round of M197 through the gun can take 5000 rounds off the life of the bolt before it breaks. Also Carpenter 158 bolts is a REALLY old spec. Metal testing and fatigue testing has advanced quite a bit since then. Some testing I have seen are that 9310 bolts are nearly twice as strong/durable.

3) 1/7 twist. - The gov messed up going from 1/12 all the way to 1/7 twist. 1/7 twist is really fast. They should have went with 1/8 twist, which can stabilize the heaviest bullets all the way to the lightest 40 grain bullets.

4) Chrome lining - Decreases accuracy. The same barrel treated with Ferritic nitrocarburizing (commonly called melonite or nitride) offers a more accurate barrel with the same or longer service life and a more durable, rust resistant finish.

5) carbine gas system - Mid-length offers less wear and tear, lower pressures, and less perceived recoil.

Mil-spec is a MINIMUM specification, offering a decent set of standards. Some of the original mil spec standards are REALLY old. Like approaching 50 years old. Lots and lots of new technologies have appeared since the early days.


With the exception of chrome vs melonite none of the above is not necessarily better. It can all go one way or the other. Some very high end manufactures are still using all of the above in some models of their guns. I'm not a colt fan and you don't have to convince me about any of this. I just call it how I see it and colt makes one of the very best AR's on the market. Most users could never tell the difference between brands any way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wemay
Turbocharger Maker Garrett Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection.
Replies
13
Views
2K
nthach
G
  • Locked
Freedom munitions files chapter 11 ?
Replies
10
Views
2K
FloatingBrick
F
  • Locked
GM unable to escape tort liability through Ch 11
Replies
16
Views
2K
edwardh1
J
  • Locked
GM considering Chapter 11 filing, new company
2
Replies
32
Views
11K
firemachine69
dave1251
  • Locked
Exxon Mobil
Replies
19
Views
14K
MolaKule
Back
Top