Back in the day we had the (in)famous chart. While not perfect it was an ok tool for showing the uninitiated where various manufacturers stood when it came to attention to what was important.
But in the last few years the AR market has changed drastically. Every bubba with access to a machine shop now considers themselves a qualified erson to “build” an AR, or start a new firearms company making ARs.
We have a number of companies that have come in at various points on the quality scale. Scionics isn’t know too much outside of here but make a hell of a rifle, while companies like PSA and Anderson can be found everywhere while being pretty Meh or even crappy. Some other companies seem to have slipped. DD comes to mind here.
So where do various companies stand anymore? I guess I am mainly wondering about ones that have fallen from grace or managed to drag themselves up from the tar pits of mediocrity.
i would say its the Money involved, new companies come and their mfsrp is more friendly than the old companies, old companies have to deal with new inventors and competition. this happenings o most industries around the world, once availability matches with demand, the market becomes cheap and always available.
The chart still applies. It lists the specs and materials that comprise a quality product. Apply that information to any manufacturer and purchase accordingly.
This. Given the propensity for crap and gimmicks to be the flavor of the month, and prices being at an all time low, the easy button is too easy to push.
It was a thing Rob_S did ten years ago or so back when aRs were really taking off.
I pretty much stick with BCM uppers and LMT lowers and don’t worry about all the other junk on the market. I don’t even know how people find most of that stuff.
Not really sure what companies have slipped, but in my experience DD has not slipped. An issue here or there but they have been taken care of quickly, and I have not experienced any myself.
Daniel Defense quality has not dropped at all. Several are just mad that they had a large layoff of workers as the market has hit a saturation point, and that DD spends ALOT on the various advertising and sponsorships. Also as their MSRP is rather high but who pays that? I got a DDM4v7 for hundreds less than list price. When you compare prices, you cannot compare MSRP of one to a discounted other. The couple of quality problems DD did have, Mk18 gas port I believe and disconnector, were fixed efficiently for free. I had the disconnector recall but I’d already put in a Geiselle SSA way before that. Went ahead and got the replacement part just to have on hand with original trigger and they were quick, friendly and VERY GENEROUS I might add. All companies can have a small quality glitch but it’s too how well they remedy the problems.
I think the point is you can make rifles that comply with the chart, and they are still junk. So the question meant was, who build guns to the chart that are quality?
Honestly, nothing has really changed – most of what you’re seeing is just noise from over-saturation. The quality, top-tier rifle manufacturers… are still the top-tier manufacturers (e.g. Colt, KAC, BCM, LMT, DD, etc.)
There have been a few slight enhancements to the platform (e.g. Keymod/M-LOK modular rails, “enhanced” bolts by KAC/LMT, guns are getting a little bit lighter, etc.), but by in large, same shit different year.
Best to approach new AR assemblers and manufacturers with a healthy dose of skepticism. Trust but verify. I say this as a very big fan of the AR, is there anything that has really been a significant evolution of the design in the recent past? Negative footprint accessory mounting to railed fore-ends (ie Keymod, Mlok, etc), the LMT MRP/mws chasis, KAC e3 bolt, KAC mod2 gas system, Gemtech SBC, VLTOR A5 buffer/RE all come to mind as significant achievements in the last 10 years. I’m missing a few items here, of course. Most AR companies are selling rifles that are not much different than the majority of other rifles offered by other companies. A snazzy new and expensive coating does not an evolutionary or revolutionary change make. We are still shooting rifles that use a cylindrical bolt carrier sliding within a tubular receiver, with a counterweight buffer and recoil spring in the stock. The hk 416 (which I consider a bit outside the “recent” past as it’s over 10 years old) and MCX design have evolutionary merit. But what does any new company have to offer over the tried and true, the companies who know not only how to make a top tier rifle, but also the pitfalls to avoid. Colt hasn’t been “new” to anyone since they purchased the rights to the AR15 from Armalite many moons ago.
So while there may be some new companies worth considering, it’s important to do so with healthy skepticism.
I have seen dozens or more examples of DD rifles with incorrect/out of spec castle nuts which resulted in improper stakings. In fact, one of them came loosened during some recent testing. This isn’t an isolated case.
The chart basically baselines the industry vs a 6920, telling you who made what with what. It helped you know if the gun was made from top quality parts.
However, it was unable to tell you if the gun was quality assembled. There is still no chart for that, even though many MFGs use similar parts as in a 6920.