The "CHART"

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Well, what do you guys think?

 

Can someone post the chart here as well.

[Caine 147]

This is the new updated chart:

 

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AqmgMm61Ok7WdExwaG16OENzOEZ1akp2a3Y2NjMxTEE&single=true&gid=2&output=html

 

Explanations:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA#gid=2

 

Source: http://www.tacticalyellowvisor.net/69016/68995.html

 

My opinion: it's a good starting point for researching ARs. It should NOT be your only source of research.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

how come some don't put their stuff on there?

[Caine 147]

Dunno - from my understanding he contacts all the manufacturers and some respond and some don't. Maybe the ones that don't feel it's not worth their time... or maybe they don't compare well to others so they'd rather just stick their heads in the sand...

[raz-0 1,259]

I think it is useful information, but I think that people declaring it the benchmark for a good AR are idiots who don't know why what works works and what breaks breaks. Some of the stuff on it is universally key to a good rifle. Some of it is good to have to feel better about reliability, but not a guarantee. Some of it just doesn't apply to anything except full auto. Some of it has perfectly good alternatives. Some of it doesn't measure what they think they measure. Then there are things that matter to a gun running well and accurately that aren't even on the list.

 

For example, the bolt. There are perfectly good bolts that are not carpenter 158. There are steels out there that are metallurgically identical to carpenter 158 that are not called carpenter 158 (at least if it is like every other steel on the planet). That being said, there is so little variance in how a gun handles based on the bolt that a MPI, HPT bolt is something that is easy to find ofr a good price, and can save you a lot of experimenting and headache over trying to do it differently. So the stuff they list about peening and testing is useful to know. But in reality, you need to know if they test every unit, or batch test. If they batch test what is the ratio, etc. Only if EVERY piece is tested does testing mean you are guaranteed to catch parts that have been built badly.

 

Then there's the extractor buffer setup. There are at least 4 legitimate fixes to this that work well that I am aware of. 1) increase spring rate by using a spring with a higher spring rate. 2) increase spring rate by using a longer spring and pre-compressing it. 3) increase the spring rate by preventing the compression of parts of it (o-ring) 4) increase the spring rate by adding a second spring. They count coils as far as I can tell, which means absolutely nothing.

 

Then there's the carrier profile. Sure, they are right that a fully shrouded carrier ensures the carrier cocks the hammer, and you don't impact the firing pin. However, the increased lock time comes form mass. Mass is a function of material jsut as much as profile. so is it M-16 profile, or military spec on all materials etc? There are also benefits toa lightened carrier group, and if you aren't running a carbine length gas system, they might be worth more than increased lock time.

 

 

Carrier key staking. A firmly attached gas key is 100% critical to a reliable AR. Period. This tells you it is staked form the top or side. It doesn't tell you if it is staked WELL. In general, it is harder to screw up side staking, but it most definitely can and has been done by many manufacturers.

 

Barrel steel. There are a mess of good acceptable answers. I don't think there is any one goal for a gun that has only one right answer. So while the info is useful, it doesn't really matter in terms of reliability.

 

barrel testing. Same as above comment about testing. It's nice to know, and personally, I'd prefer that any barrel I put on my gun has been individually HTP and MPI tested. I'd accept one that has been just individually MPI tested if that's all I could get.But beggears can't be choosers. You want a gun and cna get neither, you can either forgo that or forgo a gun.

 

Chamber. I used to believe this was good information. These days, I believe that there are really only two answers to chamber size. .223-ish and Something .223 is but with a longer leade of indeteminite dimensions. Why? because in attempting to figure out what the hell the noveske match mod0 chamber was, I got a hold of the actual dimensions of a bunch of chamber reamers. There were at least 3 labeled as 5.56, two labeled as 5.56 sam-r, two labeled .223 wylde, and one other proprietary .223/5.56 reamer. Not a single one had the same dimensions as others claiming to be the same thing. One of the .223 reamers actually was dimensioned more generously than one of the generous .223/ tight 5.56 modified chambers. So really who the hell knows. It's one of those very messy things where the answer to the question asked means very little and nobody will give the answer to the right question.

 

Rifling twist. Nice to know, but not a guarantee of anything. It lets you make a guess about what will probably run well and have problems in terms of bullets.

 

M4 feedramps. Are you going to be using this upper on a full auto gun? No? Then the only thing that really matters is that you don't put an m4 cut upper reciever together with a non-M4 cut barrel extension. Especially if going mid-length or longer on the gas system with a heavy carrier and heavy buffer. That all slows the action down enough you don't really have to worry about outrunning the magazine springs, which is the point of M4 cuts in the first place.

 

M4 cuts done before or after anodizing. I've seen both. As far as I can tell this really doesn't matter.

 

What it leaves out about m4 feed cuts, that CAN matter if you need them is how aggressive they are. I ahve seen m4 cut uppers that are nearly an afterthought, and some that go so far that I question if they ahve removed too much material.

 

The type of front sightand how it is attached. My take on this? Who cares? Seriously, I've listened to people who said the world was going to end if you used anything but a taper pin attached gas block. History has proven them wrong as there are plenty of examples of set screw blocks, straight pin blocks, clamp on blocks, etc surviving tons of use and abuse. Once again, you care about done right, not which method was chosen.

 

 

Heat shields. Double is more heat resistant. A good free floated forearm however actually provides improved performance and functionality to either of the options in their list.

 

Extension diameter. Means nothing in terms of reliability. Means a lot if you plan on buying a replacement stock.

 

Extension material. There are plenty of ways to get to strong. but it can't hurt knowing what material they use.

 

Staked or unstaked castle nut. Staked is less likely to come undone. However, since the list first came out, manufacturers have gone nuts with this. I've seen staking so aggressive, I'd consider it damaging and detrimental to the firearm rather than something reassuring. You cna also have something that is staked, but insufficiently to be useful. Once again, this is something you care about being done right, and there is not only one right answer.

 

Buffer weight. You need to know if you need to fix gas system balance issues, but just because you know what they chose doesn't mean they chose right. You want to know, but it guarantees nothing.

 

 

So yeah, in the end the list doesn't really tell you much of what you need to know. Namely if it was done RIGHT. Just because a business has a history of doing it right doesn't mean they will tomorrow.

[Caine 147]

Nice write up Raz

[Ray Ray 3,566]

good read raz-o, thanks

[Cylinder Head 22]

I like the list, but I don't consider it to be the be-all. There is definitely some good information on there however and a lot of time and effort went into making it.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

I think the list is good in that it displays accurate Specs on the weapon, but in terms of reliability and performance there isn't a whole lot there. You have bad, good and excellent rifles. What determines that is a compilation of design and material elements that is "unknown" and only proven through trials. Then there will always be an give and take aspect to a build, the less you give up and more you ask the higher the price.

[bbk 188]

I like the list as a place of reference. Of course anybody who relies on one source is a fool, so I don't believe that this chart is the end-all, be-all.

 

To me, more then the listing of specs, etc, is that it shows the different levels of attention to detail of the different manufacturers. Because brand X has this vs. brand Y is a moot point as any brand, good or bad, can put out a lemon rifle or an amazing one. But the fact that certain manufacturers pay attention to detail and go that extra mile show, to me, what a manufacturer is willing to do to put out a worthy piece of machining and not just something to rake in paper.

 

But again, does that mean Colt, BCM, Noveske, and/or KAC will 100% of the time make perfect rifles? Of course not. And on the flip side, DPMS and Stag could easily put out rifles that last for generations. I think if people take the chart for face value, they're kind of missing the point.

[raz-0 1,259]

I think if people take the chart for face value, they're kind of missing the point.

 

This is the internet. Lots of folks love to miss the point and talk loudly about it. "the chart" is one of those things that attract those people.

[KpdPipes 388]

This is the internet. Lots of folks love to miss the point and talk loudly about it. "the chart" is one of those things that attract those people.

 

Exactly..Raz also had the best overall post i've seen on this. Most of the people who crow over "The Chart" are also the ones who will say that "There is only ONE" when it comes to manufacturers. There are several goos, solid companies that make good, solid, dependable rifles. Funny thing is, it doesnt matter WHO makes a rifle, it can be a Dog, or it can be 100% perfect..no way of knowing until you put it throguh your paces. I've seen Colts that couldnt shoot a 5 round group W/o a FTF/FTE, Colts with unstaked Carriers, missing parts, ect..conversely I've seen Kitty's and Olys that ran like raped Apes. Now because i;ve seen some dog colst i wont assume all Colts Suck, just like because i've seen decent rifles from DPM and Oly they DONT Suck The chart is a good staring point, but it isnt the end-all be all.