Your budget AR is not "just as good"

[DAVE_M]

Well do you think the QC would improve if the castle nut was tighten and staked at one station and then continued moving while the person installing the castle but just kept installing castle nuts.

Look best I can tell the time if takes me to assemble an AR it could never be profitable unless I assembled things in bits and pieces or charged 3 times what it would be worth.

I liked this video it is neat to see how thing were done 50 years ago, but it seems we have advanced so many ways but not others.

No, I do not believe creating an assembly line would increase quality control.

 

[MOTOR51]

With prices the way they are now, it would be hard to build one. You can get a used BCM for a little more than building a PSA I think. I bought a brand new geissele super duty for $750 from the factory. The prices now days are great for the consumer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

How can I tell if my AR is quality or not? It is stamped HELANBAK, presumably the maker. Is my gun a quality build or a POS? Is there a clearing house I can send it to for inspection? Can someone give me a list of quality AR's? I always thought that if the gun went pew every time you pulled the trigger and the hole appeared where you were aiming that it was a pretty good gun. Does price indicate a good quality build? What precisely determines a good quality build? What determines a **** build. Who determines what maker makes "good" parts and who makes crappy parts. I ask this in all sincerity. There are economics of scale that allow mass production guns to be made cheaper than a one off but that doesn't mean lack of quality so Price alone isn;t a defining benchmark? SP what is the precise defining benchmark of a "quality" build vs a not quality build? Owner opinion?
And no, I am not an operator, just an old fat guy.

 

[buttanic]

How can I tell if my AR is quality or not? It is stamped HELANBAK, presumably the maker. Is my gun a quality build or a POS? Is there a clearing house I can send it to for inspection? Can someone give me a list of quality AR's? I always thought that if the gun went pew every time you pulled the trigger and the hole appeared where you were aiming that it was a pretty good gun. Does price indicate a good quality build? What precisely determines a good quality build? What determines a **** build. Who determines what maker makes "good" parts and who makes crappy parts. I ask this in all sincerity. There are economics of scale that allow mass production guns to be made cheaper than a one off but that doesn't mean lack of quality so Price alone isn;t a defining benchmark? SP what is the precise defining benchmark of a "quality" build vs a not quality build? Owner opinion?
And no, I am not an operator, just an old fat guy.

HELANBAK, seems like a play on the words Hell and back, but it is a company. First I ever heard of them. Although there site shows an AR there is no mention of them in their products and the linked page to firearms does not work..

http://helanbak.com/

 

[DAVE_M]

With prices the way they are now, it would be hard to build one. You can get a used BCM for a little more than building a PSA I think. I bought a brand new geissele super duty for $750 from the factory. The prices now days are great for the consumer.

Knowing what I know now, it's more cost effective to buy a good rifle than to build one. Parts can be

How can I tell if my AR is quality or not? It is stamped HELANBAK, presumably the maker.

I've never heard of Helanbak, so I looked them up. They appear to be a fab shop out of Mississippi. That's a clue.

Is my gun a quality build or a POS?

Without someone inspecting it, it's difficult to say. It's from a fairly unknown maker presumably using parts from an OEM. I'd be concerned with build quality and parts quality.

Can someone give me a list of quality AR's? I always thought that if the gun went pew every time you pulled the trigger and the hole appeared where you were aiming that it was a pretty good gun.

A list of quality rifles would continually change. Companies change hands and quality changes. There are companies that once made a good product and are now making very poor quality products.

Does price indicate a good quality build? What precisely determines a good quality build? What determines a **** build. Who determines what maker makes "good" parts and who makes crappy parts. I ask this in all sincerity

Price most certainly doesn't indicate good build quality, unfortunately. There are makers pushing $2,000+ rifles that they couldn't give away and eventually go under.

What determines good quality would be many factors, including the level of quality control and quality assurance, quality of parts, and a warranty that takes care of you if your rifle has a failure.

The AR-15 market is saturated. Many of these pop up shops are cobbling together rifles using parts sourced from the same OEM. It's difficult to stay competitive and have the added cost of using premium parts and labor, so many of these shops close their doors after a short run. Major manufacturers have found a way to cut costs to remain competitive, even if that effects the cost of overall quality. Not every end user is purchasing a rifle with the intention to fire 15,000 rounds per year on a relatively harsh firing schedule. Some people will buy a rifle, put in the in the safe, and take only take it out to a fire a magazine or so every now and then. If it's not something you rely on as a defensive weapon, then quality isn't much of a concern, because fixing something when it breaks can be done at your leisure. People relying on them as defensive weapons do not want their rifle to fail.

PSA is a common example of a company that can produce something decent, but generally produces poor quality products. This is why they sell different tiers of products. The issue lies with people assuming that because PSA may source parts for their premium line from a quality manufacturer, that those parts are also quality. An example of that would be the CHF barrels PSA subs out to FN. While they are CHF barrels, they are made to whatever specification PSA wanted. If the specification called for tighter tolerances than FN makes for their own barrels, you would be paying a premium, but the price PSA pushes is significantly less than a barrel direct from FN.

There are parts and manufacturers known for quality, but it's not a given unless you know what you're looking for. That's why I posted the video in the original post. If you want to be familiar with AR-15's, that video is a good start. Don't trust everything you read on the internet. The majority of the time it's someone being paid to tell you something is good.

 

[Bangswitch]

How can I tell if my AR is quality or not? It is stamped HELANBAK, presumably the maker. Is my gun a quality build or a POS? Is there a clearing house I can send it to for inspection? Can someone give me a list of quality AR's? I always thought that if the gun went pew every time you pulled the trigger and the hole appeared where you were aiming that it was a pretty good gun. Does price indicate a good quality build? What precisely determines a good quality build? What determines a **** build. Who determines what maker makes "good" parts and who makes crappy parts. I ask this in all sincerity. There are economics of scale that allow mass production guns to be made cheaper than a one off but that doesn't mean lack of quality so Price alone isn;t a defining benchmark? SP what is the precise defining benchmark of a "quality" build vs a not quality build? Owner opinion?
And no, I am not an operator, just an old fat guy.

Well I think there are two factors that we are truly discussing: 1: quality parts within spec dimensions and metallurgy to spec or higher. 2: quality assembly.

This is where I find home brew builds can excel (sometimes don’t) if they are properly assembled. You can buy quality parts and assembled it yourself for the price of less expensive guns. But honestly in my laymen’s opinion if the gun is assembled with quality parts and you take the time to check the figment and assembly it doesn’t really matter if 1 or 18 people assembled it if you do your due diligence when you inspect clean and lubricate it before you go to the range.

 

[DAVE_M]

This is where I find home brew builds can excel (sometimes don’t) if they are properly assembled.

I would wager that the vast majority of home built rifles are not properly assembled.

Most people don't even know what Aeroshell is.

 

[Kuffaar]

I just wanted to pop in and ask a question. Is this in regards to mil-spec or match grade rifles?

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

 

[AustinBR]

I just wanted to pop in and ask a question. Is this in regards to mil-spec or match grade rifles?

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

'Mil-Spec' isn't really a good way to grade the quality of a rifle. The military is known for buying products that "work," produced by whoever can produce them the cheapest. There are many products available that exceed the base expectations required by the military.

Match grade rifles need to perform for matches, but don't exactly need to be completely reliable from a self-defense standpoint.

This thread is more of aimed at rifles that are more dependable for highly stressed situations that 99.99% of rifle owners will never be in. What a Navy SEAL needs is not the same as what John Doe Range Plinker needs. Additionally, the topic of 'quality' is very interesting as quality can be both objective and subjective. Objectively, there are much higher quality rifles than a basic S&W AR, but subjectively, a S&W AR used for range plinking by someone with limited experience will likely do the same thing as a custom-built $7000 high-quality rifle.

Simply put, most people don't need a high-quality rifle. Most people don't use their rifles for more than plinking at the range. I'd venture to guess that most people who own ARs don't even consider them their self-defense weapon. They're likely just range toys and nothing more.

 

[Bangswitch]

I would wager that the vast majority of home built rifles are not properly assembled.

Most people don't even know what Aeroshell is.

Well that is probably a fair assessment but it doesn’t make the gun crappy. It just means it should be assembled better. Just like the DD that had the castle nut started backing off. Now for what you pay to own a DD that’s unacceptable unless the owner had disassembled the buffer tube or something.

 

[Troedoff]

I would wager that the vast majority of home built rifles are not properly assembled.

Most people don't even know what Aeroshell is.

I'd wager to say that you liberally discount many peoples ability, and if you are going to throw out statements like "Most people don't know what Aeroshell is." Be specific. Aeroshell could be any one of many products produced by the shell oil company. Much like the Aeroshell 10w50 used in aviation. Aeroshell is a division of the shell oil company that makes products typically used in the aviation industry hence the Aero. Which in most cases is put under strict Quality control standards, and military specifications. Which is reflected in the price most of the time. Much like the 33ms grease or one of it's variants you are likely referring to. Which is used to prevent the galling of threads, and also the bonding of aluminum to steel components subjected to heat, and pressure. Of which there are many of the aforementioned joints in airplane construction.

As far as Mil-Spec goes, many of the companies advertising mil-spec anything are not actually doing the required testing to get the certifications. They simply use it as a marketing tool, and to signify that their product was constructed to mil-spec tolerances which in some cases were sized differently than some civ versions in days past. The most recent and obvious being a mil-spec buffer tube, vs a commercial buffer tube where there is actually a measurable size difference.

 

[AustinBR]

Well that is probably a fair assessment but it doesn’t make the gun crappy.

I think the above, underlined statement is where all of the back and forth has come from. Crappy is subjective, based on experience and expected use.

An M&P Sport II costs about $500 bucks new. It works very well for casual range trips and even can handle moderate use in an AR class. An inexperienced shooter will shoot it about as well as a $2000 Daniel Defense or BCM. I've even seen cops carrying these. More often than not, they'll get the bullet downrange where you're aiming. Would a SEAL or advanced military unit member choose this for their uses? Probably not. It's also very unlikely that anyone would choose it for competition. It's good for some and crappy for others. And that's where we are at. Would it work in a self-defense situation? Probably. Is it as dependable as something that is better made? Probably not.

 

[DAVE_M]

Well that is probably a fair assessment but it doesn’t make the gun crappy. It just means it should be assembled better. Just like the DD that had the castle nut started backing off. Now for what you pay to own a DD that’s unacceptable unless the owner had disassembled the buffer tube or something.

Shoddy assembly is typically one of two defining factors in what makes a rifle "crappy." The other would be quality of parts.

If you pay the minimum, you will receive the minimum. If you pay the maximum, you should receive the maximum, but it's not always the case.

You will never find a bottom tier rifle built to the same quality as the best of the best.

 

[DAVE_M]

I'd wager to say that you liberally discount many peoples ability, and if you are going to throw out statements like "Most people don't know what Aeroshell is." Be specific. Aeroshell could be any one of many products produced by the shell oil company. Much like the Aeroshell 10w50 used in aviation. Aeroshell is a division of the shell oil company that makes products typically used in the aviation industry hence the Aero. Which in most cases is put under strict Quality control standards, and military specifications. Which is reflected in the price most of the time. Much like the 33ms grease or one of it's variants you are likely referring to. Which is used to prevent the galling of threads, and also the bonding of aluminum to steel components subjected to heat, and pressure. Of which there are many of the aforementioned joints in airplane construction.

As far as Mil-Spec goes, many of the companies advertising mil-spec anything are not actually doing the required testing to get the certifications. They simply use it as a marketing tool, and to signify that their product was constructed to mil-spec tolerances which in some cases were sized differently than some civ versions in days past. The most recent and obvious being a mil-spec buffer tube, vs a commercial buffer tube where there is actually a measurable size difference.

Aeroshell 64 to be specific. It's use to prevent galvanic corrosion and ensure proper torque is met.

Mil-spec is mil-spec. Tolerance stacking is the issue. Watch the video posted in the original post.

 

[AustinBR]

You will never find a bottom tier rifle built to the same quality as the best of the best.

I agree with this, with the caveat that most on the verge of almost all do not need a rifle that is the best of the best. Most people only need the okayest of the best, if that.

90% of the time I see someone shooting an AR at the range, they are shooting a target at 10 yards and have groups considerably larger than what I am shooting with a baby pistol. ARs are often just range-toys for people who want to venture out from Call of Duty. Most of the members here fall into the category of range plinkers and have never had any advanced training, which makes this discussion mostly moot.

 

[Bangswitch]

'Mil-Spec' isn't really a good way to grade the quality of a rifle. The military is known for buying products that "work," produced by whoever can produce them the cheapest. There are many products available that exceed the base expectations required by the military.

Match grade rifles need to perform for matches, but don't exactly need to be completely reliable from a self-defense standpoint.

This thread is more of aimed at rifles that are more dependable for highly stressed situations that 99.99% of rifle owners will never be in. What a Navy SEAL needs is not the same as what John Doe Range Plinker needs. Additionally, the topic of 'quality' is very interesting as quality can be both objective and subjective. Objectively, there are much higher quality rifles than a basic S&W AR, but subjectively, a S&W AR used for range plinking by someone with limited experience will likely do the same thing as a custom-built $7000 high-quality rifle.

Simply put, most people don't need a high-quality rifle. Most people don't use their rifles for more than plinking at the range. I'd venture to guess that most people who own ARs don't even consider them their self-defense weapon. They're likely just range toys and nothing more.

Couple things. I would like to contribute to your statements. Nothing really to argue with but I wanted to complete some thoughts.

Mil-Spec is just a spec to meet or exceed it’s almost just a buzz word because the COTAR’s just call it spec, and often allow for deviation when it improves whatever the product or service is that is being specified.

Additionally the elite operators generally deviate from regs in many aspects firepower would almost assuredly be one of them. But that doesn’t necessarily mean ‘mil-spec’ is not up to the task of a gun fight. Non-tier one guys get into scuffles from time to time too.

And the cheapest on bid day doesn’t necessarily mean the cheapest in reality. On a lot of contracts you are working with an incomplete design often the contractors/vendors and the COTARs work out the details until the contract is completed which lends itself to revisions to the contract more often than not increasing it.

Again I don’t think our thoughts are contradictory. I think I just kind of fleshed yours out more in-depth.

 

[AustinBR]

Couple things. I would like to contribute to your statements. Nothing really to argue with but I wanted to complete some thoughts.

Mil-Spec is just a spec to meet or exceed it’s almost just a buzz word because the COTAR’s just call it spec, and often allow for deviation when it improves whatever the product or service is that is being specified.

Additionally the elite operators generally deviate from regs in many aspects firepower would almost assuredly be one of them. But that doesn’t necessarily mean ‘mil-spec’ is not up to the task of a gun fight. Non-tier one guys get into scuffles from time to time too.

And the cheapest on bid day doesn’t necessarily mean the cheapest in reality. On a lot of contracts you are working with an incomplete design often the contractors/vendors and the COTARs work out the details until the contract is completed which lends itself to revisions to the contract more often than not increasing it.

Again I don’t think our thoughts are contradictory. I think I just kind of fleshed yours out more in-depth.

I don't disagree with anything above. My big point is that something can be mil-spec, but still be shitty quality and fail on you (or have a higher probability of failure than something of higher quality).

 

[DAVE_M]

Mil-Spec is just a spec to meet or exceed it’s almost just a buzz word because the COTAR’s just call it spec, and often allow for deviation when it improves whatever the product or service is that is being specified.

Mil-spec has become a buzzword, I'll give you that, but it doesn't mean it's invalid.

The issue with the term comes from the consumer market where you have companies claiming they built their rifles to the correct specification and indeed are not. I'm not going to attack a specific brand, but would rather have people understand that companies are there to sell you a product. It's up to you to ensure that product is what you think it is. Making the assumption that the $400 rifle advertised at the big box store is "just as good" as what you're going to find in the rack of a patrol car is foolish.

 

[Bangswitch]

I think the above, underlined statement is where all of the back and forth has come from. Crappy is subjective, based on experience and expected use.

An M&P Sport II costs about $500 bucks new. It works very well for casual range trips and even can handle moderate use in an AR class. An inexperienced shooter will shoot it about as well as a $2000 Daniel Defense or BCM. I've even seen cops carrying these. More often than not, they'll get the bullet downrange where you're aiming. Would a SEAL or advanced military unit member choose this for their uses? Probably not. It's also very unlikely that anyone would choose it for competition. It's good for some and crappy for others. And that's where we are at. Would it work in a self-defense situation? Probably. Is it as dependable as something that is better made? Probably not.

Shoddy assembly is typically one of two defining factors in what makes a rifle "crappy." The other would be quality of parts.

If you pay the minimum, you will receive the minimum. If you pay the maximum, you should receive the maximum, but it's not always the case.

You will never find a bottom tier rifle built to the same quality as the best of the best.

I agree with this, with the caveat that most on the verge of almost all do not need a rifle that is the best of the best. Most people only need the okayest of the best, if that.

90% of the time I see someone shooting an AR at the range, they are shooting a target at 10 yards and have groups considerably larger than what I am shooting with a baby pistol. ARs are often just range-toys for people who want to venture out from Call of Duty. Most of the members here fall into the category of range plinkers and have never had any advanced training, which makes this discussion mostly moot.

I think we agree pay for lower tier and expect it. Pay for higher tier and require it.

I do believe you could take a gun with good parts (meets or exceeds spec) and take the time to QC the assembly yourself before you fire a bullet and you will have something. But that’s the thing most users don’t do that, and if it’s a more expensive rifle all you should have to do is clean, lube, shoot, repeat.

 

[AustinBR]

I think we agree pay for lower tier and expect it. Pay for higher tier and require it.

Exactly, though I think a lot of people think that lower-tier weapons or mid-tier parts piecemealed together are "just as good" as higher-tier platforms. Objectively, they are not. Subjectively, they probably are for general use.