Things like material spec’ed per the chart doesn’t mean qualify. What does the proper barrel steel matter if it’s poorly rifled, and the chamber has lots of run-out? What about poorly staked gas keys and castle nuts? What if the barre and muzzle device is over-torqued? PSA premium rifles check many boxes but I wouldn’t trust my life to them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was saying that I was/am under the impression that the chart, which I can’t find anymore but read many, many times before buying my first AR, outlines the proper materials for use in building a quality rifle, as well as the proper assembly of said quality rifle. How this can be truly done & still not have a good rifle is what I don’t see.
Obviously there are/were manufacturers who got more boxes checked than others, but I thought that the ones (Colt, LMT, KAC, etc,) who got most/all the boxes checked made the “best” rifles. And I am not advocating for the makers who claimed to be “mil-spec” but aren’t/weren’t, I thought I understood the difference. I dont see, based on my understanding of what “The chart” is, how a maker can really have all the boxes checked and not make a good rifle, with the exception of the occasional lemon that all makers have, or will eventually, put out
I’m still searching for the chart, but I thought that it also includes proper assembly techniques, like gas key & castle nut staking, HP/MPI testing, etc.
I think it did have staking, but a lot of other quality related issues were not included.
It doesn’t define quality control, assembly techniques, etc. For example, a castle-nut can be staked, but be done improperly. It isn’t as simple as just checking boxes. A maker may use a 5.56 reamer may be used, but the runout may be so bad that the chamber is banana shaped.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It may include staking but does it define quality staking? I don’t believe it did. Or torque, or a whole shot of things.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just found the Combat Tactics issue with Rob Sloyer`s article, with the chart, and the chart defines, in Rob’s words, “(1) the quality of the materials used, (2) the testing of those materials to ensure their structural integrity, and (3) the manufacturing assembly processes that turn raw materials into finished parts and finished parts into complete guns.” The article goes into great detail about the relevance of the checked boxes, a great number of which cover processes not materials.
Not one of the makers who scored well on the chart were considered anything other than top-tier in 2009. My question is, who are the makers who score(d) well, but are still not making quality rifles?
Properly staked gas key was an item. It was about the only instance of proper install in the chart.
All other install or q&a was not included.
Again, don’t think you get it. How do you quantify or qualify staking? Then the chart left off things like run-out, torque, etc.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look no further my son.
I just spewed the kool-aid I was drinking all over my tablet:o
Agreed. Since DD switched to castle nuts like the one on top it seems their staking has gone to crap. The ones I’ve had occasion to break loose have required little to no effort. If I recall correctly they switched to this type of castle nut about the same time they switched to plastic dust covers.
Daniel Defense Castle Nut
BCM Castle Nut (Standard) for comparison
My first AR had a PSA premium upper with FN CHF barrel. I remember using the chart to select this upper as it checked all the boxes down to the dry film lube inside the upper receiver. I have no doubt that all the parts are quality mil-spec components. That said, I recently removed the barrel from said PSA upper to use on another build. The barrel nut was torqued slightly more than finger tight. I was a bit surprised to say the least.
So yeah, a rifle is not just the sum of its parts, but there is a reason Iraqguns goes around the country teaching armorer’s classes. Whenever you purchase a discount AR-15, there are going to be corners cut. Even if assembled from top notch parts, experience, attention to detail, technical knowledge, consistency in assembly processes, track record, and quality control are often the overlooked categories that are not easily quantifiable on a chart or marketing campaign.
That’s been my experience as well. With solid torque, it still should be difficult to break loose.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. 
I think it best to understand the manufacturing process involved in a AR-15. I don’t believe there is a single company out there that manufactures 100% or even 75% of the parts needed to assemble a fully functional AR-15. Manufacturing a barrel, flash hider, sights, gas block, optic mounts or a handguard from an extrusion is pretty straight forward.
There only a few companies in the US that can cast an upper and I believe they are Martin Marietta, Alcoa, Cerro Forge, Kaiser Aluminum, Harvey Aluminum, Muller and possibly a couple others. The lowers are cast, some are forged from a billet extrusion and there are just as many companies that do that. So most manufactures are going to start there, deciding which manufacture of raw uppers and lowers to start with. I would think that a lot of firearm manufactures had at least 4, 3 axis CNC mills and a broaching machine to finish the lower and post processing and finishing on the upper. After that the LPK and UPK is made up of springs, roll pins, brass detents, forgings that include mag release, forward assist, stamped dust cover, bolt catch, hammer and trigger, and a take down/pivot pin. Who makes those? I know a lot of companies supply them but I doubt those suppliers manufacture the roll pins or springs. Most stocks are injection molded and made from a thermo-plastic, those machines cost at least a million and just the molds cost hundreds of thousands. The buffer tube is cast from aluminum and then machined- who makes those? Some of the radical designed flash hiders and muzzle brakes are made from EDM- (electrical discharge machining) or chemical milling and those machines cost a fortune!
I think a lot of manufactures like Daniel Defense, Noveske, LWRC, Knights Armament, BCM, Colt, FN and Sig are quality manufacturers but they are only as good as their suppliers and vendors for the parts that they don’t manufacture in house.
I have a $49 PSA LPK and a $170 LMT LPK and to tell you the truth, I can tell the difference, all brass detents looks identical, all springs and roll pins look identical, all takedown/pivot pins look identical. On some parts there is a noticeable difference, the buffer tube from LMT has a thinker wall, end plate is heavier and the castle nut look just like a BCM castle nut. My Armalite barrel has the exact same marking as my Colt barrel and the marking are in the exact same spot. My $2500 Knights Armament has the same grip as my $800 Armalite. In fact, I will bet they have the same dust cover, forward assist, takedown/pivot pin, roll pins, springs and detents. The only difference in i can visually see is the ambi-mag realease, ambi-bolt catch and ambi-safty on the KAC.
So i think a lot of manufactures stick to barrels, flash hiders, rails, optic mounts, sights, trigger guards, gas blocks and assembling the gun and leave everything else to suppliers.
Your post is filled with quite a bit of bad info. Detents are also not made from brass.
detents are made from hardened tool steel, but I just said brass because of the color. please be specific about the “bad info”.
If that’s the rob s list/table from 2007 I’m sure some water has passed below the bridge.