I'm trying to compose a list in order to help those deciding on building an AR what is considered a "quality brand". While the specs of the individual rifle are what counts, who you buy it from makes a huge difference in: The quality of the materials used, quality control of parts, quality control of assembly, customer service/warranty, etc.

Please give input towards this list:

Tier 1 (Best):
(Paying a premium)
Noveske
Larue Tactical
Primary Weapons Systems

(Paying for Exactly what you get)
Bravo Company USA (Best for the money)
LMT
Daniel Defense
LWRC

Tier 2 (Very good):
Colt
Spikes Tactical (Best for the money)
Accurate Armory
POF

Tier 3 (Decent/mid-grade):
Rock River Arms
PSA (Best for the money)
Stag
Armalite
Sionics

Tier 4 (Not fantastic, but will work on a low budget):
DPMS
Bushmaster
Olympic
S&W
CMMG

Tier 5 (Cut quite a few corners there huh?)
Delton
DSA

For those Fans of RJF:

Tier 6
RJF =)

I DID NOT COMPOSE THE LINKS BELOW:
Comparison Chart:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsh...amp;output=html

Desired Specs in your AR-15 Explained

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=htmlhttps://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=html

It'll be a tough list to compile because people typically view their rifles as a higher tier. I would almost say it would be easier to group into 3 or 4 tiers.

But IMHO, only changes I would make:

+LWRC belongs in Tier 1
+BCM belongs in Tier 2
+PSA is not a whole lot different from Del-ton in my eyes. Just affordable rifle kits
+Tier 2 and Tier 3 all seem about the same to me
+POF is missing
+Where does Red Jacket fit in


BTW, I own or have owned an AR from your Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 4, and Tier 5. I can tell you there's a difference between Tier 1/2 and Tier 4/5, but the differences between Tier 4 & 5 are neglible.

Try posting this on AR15.com. You'll get some feedback there for sure.

Stag
Armalite
Sionics

Over bushmaster

bushmaster while has been reliable for me is frowned upon due to the lack of mil-specness in their rifles.

S&W rifles have come a long way. You have them below Stag, yet they used to be produced by Stag. You have the Colt in Tier 2, yet it is the rifle that all others are compared to?

It seems like you are trying to go off "the chart" and that doesn't tell the whole story on a rifle. Just because a rifle doesn't meet "mil-spec" doesn't mean it is low quality. That chart has caused more heartburn in the black rifle community than what it is worth. Depending on use, all of those "features" on the chart may not be needed, or desired. For example, if you are building a target rifle, you may want an unlined barrel. The chart says you have to have chrome lined, but that is not the best barrel for the application.

consult "The Chart"

Yeah we had some dpms garbage for about a month. No issues with the BMs.

I may step on some toes here but oh well...

I'm biased because I have one but you obviously know nothing of PSA. Do some research and check out their specs. Their rifles are completely Milspec and include M4 feedramps, F marked FSB, and a milspec buffer tube assembly. There's more I'm missing as well. Bushmaster doesn't even have milspec buffer tubes in their entry level ARs. Also, PSA offers CHF barrels manufactured by FN. If you actually do some research you might know better than bashing a company you don't even know. I don't understand why people even bash stuff they know nothing about. Comment on things you know about.

If you want proof, take some time and read this thread. http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_118/55983...YOU_DECIDE.html

IMO there's not whole lot of difference in almost all of those ARs. You guys do realize that most of the parts for ARs are made by the same manufacturers and the only difference is the logo slapped on the gun right? IMO, the only difference between and LMT and Noveske is the logo stamped on it and the options that come with the gun such as the handguards, LPK, etc... And when 3-4 different companies are known to run the same barrels manufactured by FN (Noveske, PSA, Spikes, and Centurion) how can you even say they are in a different class? The barrel is the most important thing.

I have nothing against PSA, but I haven't seen enough from them to justify that they're Tier 1/2. I dont own a PSA but wouldn't be opposed to buying one. If they're cranking out great ARs 5 years from now I'm sure my opinion will change.

Many companies offer upgraded barrels and those particular models are definitely better than your typical barrel. My first Spikes I wouldn't have considered Tier 2, but probably more run of the mill Tier 3. But my current Spikes with Lothar Walther stainless barrel is definitely worthy.

Unless they updated it recently is no longer useful. Many changes have been made by some manufacturers since that came out.

Was a good resource, but needs updating.

CMMG can be better than tier 4, depending on what you buy.

This is based upon generalities--the quality of most of their rifles, the quality of their warranty and CS, etc.

Bushmaster makes runs of mil-spec rifles every now and then, some it really depends on which model you get.

Agreed. Their melonite or WASP barrels are darn accurate. I for one am certainly glad I got one of their 6.8's before they discontinued them in favor of the 300 BO. Still scratchin' my head over that move.

ARP 5.56 & 6.8 Melonite LW barrels

LW for light weight or Lothar Walther?

Light Weight in the ARP barrels.

Spike's has LW barrels but not made by LW..

Seems to me, there are a few different kind of AR buyers.

Those that figure they want to buy a good AR, go to a store, who will tell them that brand [x, whatever is in stock] is bestest blah blah blah. Being like most shooters, they shoot very little, and don't have much of a problem. Then they read onliine how their gun is crap. Get angry at other's audacity cause their gun work fine for them.

People who go online and spend weeks or months online before making a purchase. They read a half dozen blogs. Seeing that the internet is full of BS most of the time, they'll buy their favorite brand. they shoot very little, and don't have much of a problem. Then they read onliine from others websites how their gun is crap. Get angry at other's audacity cause their gun work fine for them.

Yeah, people get upset when they spend $800+ on a rifle and have theoretical or real problems. For most people, who only put 40 rounds through at christmas time, it probably isnt that big of a deal.

I have owned a DPMS upper and a BCM upper. The DPMS didn't have any problems, but the BCM is a much better. The price was more, but I think it was worth it. I bought a rock river lower (both a stripped and complete) when the whole 2008 election craze (and paid way too much) from the advise of a friend who said they were "the best." After a few more years experience I've learned that he does't know jack about guns. It works ok, but I wish I had bought something else.


Personally, I think some of the things on "The chart" are worth it, some are overated. (Barrel twist rates and buffer tube diameter for example)

"mil spec" thrown around way too often.

Sorry for the rambling.

You have a point, that's for another thread. There is sub-mil spec, there is mil-spec and there is better than mil-spec. For instance, a stainless steel bull barrel is not mil-spec, but that doesn't mean it's undesirable for some applications. Having a low profile gas block is not mil-spec, but I have one because it allows the use of a longer rail in order to have a longer sight radius with iron sights.

Of course, you want your bolt carrier group and buffer tube to be mil-spec and you want the materials your upper and lower are composed of to be mil-spec. But again, some people don't care if they're making a beater AR and will go with something like a plum crazy lower, which is sub-mil-spec.

This is meant as a guide for those that want to get the best (brand wise)their budget will allow and to lend a guide for when their buddy, Bubba-Fud-Joe tells them that their spikes tactical brand is crap and their dpms is the "best".

Barrel and BCG are my main concern. Mil spec buffer tube means nothing to me. Have a commercial one in my M16 with a little over 5k full auto rounds in last 4 months with zero wear.

Why do I want my semi auto rifle to have a full auto BCG? It works as designed with the semi auto BCG. My firing pin is shrouded, and my bolt has been MPI and HP tested. So what is it that makes the full auto BCG more desirable in your opinion?

Personally I think Colt should be Tier 1 - all others are judged by and with Colt and when it comes to resell - people wnat the pony.

Other than that - the guns in Tiers 2-4 are all pretty equal except for Olympic - throw them at the bottom.

Earl

PSA=Spikes Tactical

Almost forgot

Colt and FN own the TDP. There is them then everyone else.

Colt is what others are judged by.

I can't afford the Colt so I buy the Spikes Tactical. They listed publically all of the metallurgy test done on all the compnents.

There is no doubt they are 100% milspec but they don't have the TDP so they can only copy Colt. PSA, I've read great things about them over on arfcom. Not sure if they are up there with Colt and Spikes but they are certainly knocking on the door.

The one thing I remember about Bushmaster is when they got the government contract and couldn't produce a single rifle up to the TDP.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/03/dod-contracts_3476.htm

That contract was terminated without them delivering a single rifle. Take from it what you want from that but I wouldn't own one.

Colt builds to the TDP. They have access to it, they own the M4 and that's all there is to it. There is them then everyone else.

Supposedly, the added weight in the FA BCG increases reliability and reduces bolt bounce. Many semi-auto BCG's also do not have a fully shrouded firing pin.

The main thing about the bolt carrier to worry about is the material it's made out of and whether it is assembled properly or not (carrier key staking for instance). It's the heart of your rifle--it's the last piece I'd ever cheap out on if any.