Prefered AR Manufacturer? Cheaper to Bling

First of all, I appreciate the discussion.

I don't think there is any data to support the claim that more expensive ARs fail less. And since there is NO data to support either claim,

Talk to instructors at carbine courses.

I am going to use reason: The more expensive ARs are far more likely to become safe queens than the inexpensive "bang about" ones and therefore will get far less usage, in general.

That isn’t reason. That is a bold assumption. Perhaps a rare rifle reasonably be assumed to become a safe queen. But just expense alone is not a good guideline for safe queen rate. I know a whole lot of KAC SR15s and SR25s that are used and abused. Sure, some people buy them strictly for the gram, but those people aren’t shooting cheaper guns more. They just don’t shoot a lot to begin with.

… I don't want to ruin my Gucci AR with these steel-cased abominations. …
That’s not going to happen. Extractors may wear earlier than normal (for any AR, expensive or not). But extractors are one of the shortest round count wear items in an AR. They should be replaced at appropriate intervals and you should have a spare or two on hand.

When there are two ARs, Gucci and El'Cheapo, the less expensive one is far more likely to get used and less-likely to get appropriate level of maintenance.
Two ARs owned by different people? Or owned by the same person? If by different people, yes it’s possible that owners of cheaper ARs may not follow an appropriate maintenance cycle. That would be an interesting study but I have nothing to support it. If by the same person, maybe that’s your SOP, but not what I’ve noticed. People generally train with the carbine they intend to use defensively to get familiarity and confidence with it. The only exceptions are with 22lr uppers for cheap training or designated simunition uppers.

The only point I think I failed to get across is the "good enough" approach when it comes to gas systems. If one were to start with inexpensive AR, it is more likely to have a gas system that hasn't been sorted out. , When it comes to cheap barrels, the most common issue I see on AR15.com forums is the diameter of the barrel gas port. The hole is usually undersized or has burrs that lower the amount of gas going back. By far, the most common problem! at it is most prevalent in Carbine length systems the time for pressure build-up is limited by the barrel length. in a Carbine, gas has to do a lot with very limited dwell time. The issue with the gas system appears a lot less with longer barrels and gas systems. This is why I believe that if one were to go with "good enough", low-cost AR as a starting point, avoiding a Carbine-length gas system is a good idea.

There are some barrels with undersized gas ports in an attempt to make the gun shoot softer, but I’ve seen that cheaper barrels actually tend to have larger gas ports to account for the lower energy of cheap 223. Then people complain about them being too gassy with full power 5.56.

And carbine length vs mid/rifle doesn’t necessarily change the dwell time. A 16” with carbine gas system actually has more dwell time than a 20” with rifle length gas system. And a 16” mid-length actually has less dwell time than both the M4 and the M16.

Dwell time only becomes a factor when you get really short dwell time like the 10.3/10.5” barrels or 16” dissipators. In the 10.3/10.5”, the gasses don’t have much time to cycle the system and so you need more gas, which results in sharper recoil and increased parts wear.

The downside to a carbine gas system is the increased peak pressure. The farther away the port is, the less pressure there will be at the port as the gasses have more volume to expand. There is also the factor about time to unlock.

I do find rifle gas systems smoother and they can shoot some higher pressure match ammo before getting pressure signs. And I prefer mid-length on 13.7-16” barrels because it is smoother than carbine. Mid-length exists now and it’s a improvement in feel for those M4-ish length carbines/rifles.

Make no mistake though, carbine gas systems have been around for a long time and are extremely reliable. If a cheap rifle’s gas ports are jacked up, that’s a reason not to buy that rifle. Not a reason to avoid carbine gas systems.

But yes, burrs in gas ports are an example of poor QC. Along with poorly secured gas keys, gas tubes that are slightly too long or short, bolts that weren’t properly heat treated, firing pins that out of spec, overly large firing pin holes, or un-staked castle nuts, etc.
 
Last edited:
I much prefer a build over a production rifle

FN Barrel, BCM gas tube, Surefire Warcomp, Midwest Industries Rail, BCM or Daniel Defense BCG, CMC Trigger, Aero enhanced Lower and I’m Happy.
 
First of all, I appreciate the discussion.



Talk to instructors at carbine courses.



That isn’t reason. That is a bold assumption. Perhaps a rare rifle reasonably be assumed to become a safe queen. But just expense alone is not a good guideline for safe queen rate. I know a whole lot of KAC SR15s and SR25s that are used and abused. Sure, some people buy them strictly for the gram, but those people aren’t shooting cheaper guns more. They just don’t shoot a lot to begin with.


That’s not going to happen. Extractors may wear earlier than normal (for any AR, expensive or not). But extractors are one of the shortest round count wear items in an AR. They should be replaced at appropriate intervals and you should have a spare or two on hand.


Two ARs owned by different people? Or owned by the same person? If by different people, yes it’s possible that owners of cheaper ARs may not follow an appropriate maintenance cycle. That would be an interesting study but I have nothing to support it. If by the same person, maybe that’s your SOP, but not what I’ve noticed. People generally train with the carbine they intend to use defensively to get familiarity and confidence with it. The only exceptions are with 22lr uppers for cheap training or designated simunition uppers.



There are some barrels with undersized gas ports in an attempt to make the gun shoot softer, but I’ve seen that cheaper barrels actually tend to have larger gas ports to account for the lower energy of cheap 223. Then people complain about them being too gassy with full power 5.56.

And carbine length vs mid/rifle doesn’t necessarily change the dwell time. A 16” with carbine gas system actually has more dwell time than a 20” with rifle length gas system. And a 16” mid-length actually has less dwell time than both the M4 and the M16.

Dwell time only becomes a factor when you get really short dwell time like the 10.3/10.5” barrels or 16” dissipators. In the 10.3/10.5”, the gasses don’t have much time to cycle the system and so you need more gas, which results in sharper recoil and increased parts wear.

The downside to a carbine gas system is the increased peak pressure. The farther away the port is, the less pressure there will be at the port as the gasses have more volume to expand. There is also the factor about time to unlock.

I do find rifle gas systems smoother and they can shoot some higher pressure match ammo before getting pressure signs. And I prefer mid-length on 13.7-16” barrels because it is smoother than carbine. Mid-length exists now and it’s a improvement in feel for those M4-ish length carbines/rifles.

Make no mistake though, carbine gas systems have been around for a long time and are extremely reliable. If a cheap rifle’s gas ports are jacked up, that’s a reason not to buy that rifle. Not a reason to avoid carbine gas systems.

But yes, burrs in gas ports are an example of poor QC. Along with poorly secured gas keys, gas tubes that are slightly too long or short, bolts that weren’t properly heat treated, firing pins that out of spec, overly large firing pin holes, or un-staked castle nuts, etc.
I’ve never had an instructor say higher end carbines are more reliable - never. Most will say “home builds” tend to break; all will say your equipment is less important than training.
 
Windham Weaponry. I have two and an additional upper. Have performed flawlessly. Customer service is outstanding. Lifetime guarantee. What's not to like! I have heard very negative feedback on Colt including from a local PD.
 
Here's a typical thought process: "I want to go to the range for some fun and practice. I don't want to spend a fortune on ammo so I would rather use cheap steel crap. I don't want to ruin my Gucci AR with these steel-cased abominations.
There is the problem.

The person thinking the steel case ammo will ruin their AR is an idiot.

Point 2 - if you cant afford the ammo and don't want to reload, unless you want the rifle for some collector value, don't buy it.

Reminds me of that guy that bought a 45/70 then complained 45/70 ammo right now is like $3/round but he didn't want to reload.
 
There is the problem.

The person thinking the steel case ammo will ruin their AR is an idiot.

Point 2 - if you cant afford the ammo and don't want to reload, unless you want the rifle for some collector value, don't buy it.

Reminds me of that guy that bought a 45/70 then complained 45/70 ammo right now is like $3/round but he didn't want to reload.

I don't think steel will ruin your AR but bottom line steel > aluminum > brass when it comes to hardness. And the recievers are aluminum - you get a jam or if you are ejecting off some area of the reciever/guard, it scars stuff up faster. I suspect it's less reliable as steel ammo in 5.56 is total bottom shelf, but hey maybe it's just as good. Bottom line ARs are made to run on brass.
 
I don't think steel will ruin your AR but bottom line steel > aluminum > brass when it comes to hardness. And the recievers are aluminum - you get a jam or if you are ejecting off some area of the reciever/guard, it scars stuff up faster. I suspect it's less reliable as steel ammo in 5.56 is total bottom shelf, but hey maybe it's just as good. Bottom line ARs are made to run on brass.
I want to make sure I follow this ...

Are you saying that the POS steel used for the steel case ammo is harder than your HIGH END receiver so it will damage it?
 
I don't think steel will ruin your AR but bottom line steel > aluminum > brass when it comes to hardness. And the recievers are aluminum - you get a jam or if you are ejecting off some area of the reciever/guard, it scars stuff up faster. I suspect it's less reliable as steel ammo in 5.56 is total bottom shelf, but hey maybe it's just as good. Bottom line ARs are made to run on brass.

I don't even know where to begin.
 
I’ve never had an instructor say higher end carbines are more reliable - never. Most will say “home builds” tend to break; all will say your equipment is less important than training.

I've heard it, seen videos bashing home built rifles, but personally I'd be more worried about a $1000 sort of AR versus what I carefully assembled for the same $$ in parts. And I wouldn't own a $500 model.

I wonder if that comes from a lack of attention to detail and budget builds or if legitimately somehow we introduce problems even doing it all "right" that the manufacturers avoid by scale/experience/testing?

It would be an interesting test to put home built ARs up against complete versions at the same price point, to see what really fails and the reliability difference.
 
I want to make sure I follow this ...

Are you saying that the POS steel used for the steel case ammo is harder than your HIGH END receiver so it will damage it?

I've never put a meter on my recievers but steel is definitely harder than brass case. And I assume it's harder than the 7075 or whatever they forge them from.

Those bits that fill up crevices in the chamber and float about, clearing a jam, ejecting that deflects off your reciever - brass is a more forgiving fodder no matter which way you cut it.
 
I am not sure if Wyndham Weaponry is considered low or mid but I own one and build is great value.

They are okay. I could never snag one in stock when it was time to make a CC swipe.

I'm all in now on Aero precision lowers. Have half aero uppers (I love their handguards) and one BCM upper.
 
I've heard it, seen videos bashing home built rifles, but personally I'd be more worried about a $1000 sort of AR versus what I carefully assembled for the same $$ in parts. And I wouldn't own a $500 model.

I wonder if that comes from a lack of attention to detail and budget builds or if legitimately somehow we introduce problems even doing it all "right" that the manufacturers avoid by scale/experience/testing?

It would be an interesting test to put home built ARs up against complete versions at the same price point, to see what really fails and the reliability difference.
Best I can tell it seems to be a mix of:
- using bottom of the barrel parts
- not torquing/staking things down properly
- not thoroughly testing the gas system

With uppers like BCM, they use something like red loctite on the gas block set screws. As a home builder, how many people do that? Very few because you might plan to change it out later. But BCM just wants the best reliability so they do it. (Also for anybody reading, just increasing the torque on those set screws can lead to precision degradation).

And manufacturers spend (the good ones) a decent amount of effort testing out the gas system of a particular model or line before it goes out the door. Home builders can do this too, but not all spend the time and effort.
 
Talk to instructors at carbine courses.
Not a very good indicator. Instructors are people too, with their own biases. Just try showing up with a Tavor at a CQB course and you will see it firsthand.

That isn’t reason. That is a bold assumption. Perhaps a rare rifle reasonably be assumed to become a safe queen. But just expense alone is not a good guideline for safe queen rate. I know a whole lot of KAC SR15s and SR25s that are used and abused. Sure, some people buy them strictly for the gram, but those people aren’t shooting cheaper guns more. They just don’t shoot a lot to begin with.
My argument was an exaggeration for a reason. As you concluded, there are those who buy expensive guns and don't shoot much. The same cannot be said about owners of cheap guns. These guns are not collectible nor do they pose an awe factor to the owner. These basic rifles are tools and are viewed as such and used.

Another factor that makes ARs so special is upgradability. If you don't like how something works/looks/feels, you can change it! Well, if one were to buy a $3000 AR and something doesn't fit, instead of changing it, the owner will assume it is their own ineptitude(people who created that rifle are experts so it must be perfect!) and will try to get used to the rifle. A cheap rifle, on the other hand, is assumed to be basic and the owner would be far more open to changing things out until it fits them.

And carbine length vs mid/rifle doesn’t necessarily change the dwell time. A 16” with carbine gas system actually has more dwell time than a 20” with rifle length gas system. And a 16” mid-length actually has less dwell time than both the M4 and the M16.
One can always point out oddball setups but when dealing with low-end rifles, sticking to basics is how you get reliability. I would never buy a cheap Carbine gas system AR that didn't come with a 14.5" barrel. This is what the gas system was created and optimized for and this is how you get the best reliability.
. Extractors may wear earlier than normal (for any AR, expensive or not)
Isn't this an argument for cheap ARs? why pay Daniel Defense money for an extractor when you can pay UnbrandedAR type of money for one with an identical lifespan.
 
It would be an interesting test to put home built ARs up against complete versions at the same price point, to see what really fails and the reliability difference.
It would be but there is NO incentive to do so. What if a $1000 homebuilt AR outperforms a $3000 AR? Can you imagine how many internet pundits' heads would explode!?

Personally, I don't want to own an AR I didn't build. I can set one up away better than the majority of mass-produced money pits. I'm also a Yankee: I cannot bring myself to waste money on an AR! A truly American rifle should not cost more than your first car!
 
My argument was an exaggeration for a reason. As you concluded, there are those who buy expensive guns and don't shoot much. The same cannot be said about owners of cheap guns. These guns are not collectible nor do they pose an awe factor to the owner. These basic rifles are tools and are viewed as such and used.
Oh no. There are also lots of people with cheap guns that just sit in the closet and get taken to the range once a year to do a mag dump into a paper target.

Another factor that makes ARs so special is upgradability. If you don't like how something works/looks/feels, you can change it! Well, if one were to buy a $3000 AR and something doesn't fit, instead of changing it, the owner will assume it is their own ineptitude(people who created that rifle are experts so it must be perfect!) and will try to get used to the rifle. A cheap rifle, on the other hand, is assumed to be basic and the owner would be far more open to changing things out until it fits them.
Can’t say I agree with that thought process. But also, “changing things out” doesn’t always mean more reliability, either in a higher or lower end AR.

Isn't this an argument for cheap ARs? why pay Daniel Defense money for an extractor when you can pay UnbrandedAR type of money for one with an identical lifespan.
The extractor is a frequent wear item, but it is far from the only possible failure point in an AR. It’s just the only component that may wear faster when shooting steel.
 
Oh no. There are also lots of people with cheap guns that just sit in the closet and get taken to the range once a year to do a mag dump into a paper target.


Can’t say I agree with that thought process. But also, “changing things out” doesn’t always mean more reliability, either in a higher or lower end AR.


The extractor is a frequent wear item, but it is far from the only possible failure point in an AR. It’s just the only component that may wear faster when shooting steel.
Anyone that has shot a lot of rounds would know that the extractor is almost the first to go amongst other parts. Life span of some of these cheap barrels are mediocre. However, a lot of AR aficionados buy them for occasional paper target plinking so you can actually get away with cheaper parts if the rifle spends more time in the safe and getting stroked all oily by their owners.

Every firearm that I have owned/purchased was with the scope of my life depending on it even if it got little use.

To his DD comment, some people shoot a lot and lots of classes or use them for other things, some care about shit like this……


65798469-096F-4425-BFCE-5B5CBF6EE552.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Palmetto State Armory has the same.

"With the combined expertise and experience of this robust family of manufacturers and innovators in the firearm components and accessories industry, Palmetto State Armory is able to have ownership in every step of the process of its firearms - from the first forging of the receivers to the last twist of the muzzle brake.

Making it ourselves allows us to keep the price low, the quality high and stay strongly invested in researching and developing new products. And on top of that, we back our product with a 100% Full Lifetime Warranty. If it has our name on it we will back it up. Whether you’re the first, second or tenth owner, we guarantee our quality. Ten years from now or thirty years from now, we guarantee it. We want this to be fun, and it’s only fun if it works."

 
Last edited:
I don't think there is any data to support the claim that more expensive ARs fail less. And since there is NO data to support either claim, I am going to use reason: The more expensive ARs are far more likely to become safe queens than the inexpensive "bang about" ones and therefore will get far less usage, in general. Here's a typical thought process: "I want to go to the range for some fun and practice. I don't want to spend a fortune on ammo so I would rather use cheap steel crap. I don't want to ruin my Gucci AR with these steel-cased abominations. Let's take the cheap one. If it fails, I can buy another one of those!" When there are two ARs, Gucci and El'Cheapo, the less expensive one is far more likely to get used and less-likely to get appropriate level of maintenance.

Overall, you make some good arguments. I went back to my original post and re-read it. Except for the post having a "pissy" tone, everything I've listed still stands and you have pretty much the same attitude, just in a less abrupt manner.

The only point I think I failed to get across is the "good enough" approach when it comes to gas systems. If one were to start with inexpensive AR, it is more likely to have a gas system that hasn't been sorted out. , When it comes to cheap barrels, the most common issue I see on AR15.com forums is the diameter of the barrel gas port. The hole is usually undersized or has burrs that lower the amount of gas going back. By far, the most common problem! at it is most prevalent in Carbine length systems the time for pressure build-up is limited by the barrel length. in a Carbine, gas has to do a lot with very limited dwell time. The issue with the gas system appears a lot less with longer barrels and gas systems. This is why I believe that if one were to go with "good enough", low-cost AR as a starting point, avoiding a Carbine-length gas system is a good idea.

Here's a review of a Bear Creek upper($280?). I agree with the reviewer 100: most will dog on Bear Creek without having used it or gave it an honest try.

I remember when they had their barrel extensions coming loose and had shit headspace out of the box.
 
Oh no. There are also lots of people with cheap guns that just sit in the closet and get taken to the range once a year to do a mag dump into a paper target.


Can’t say I agree with that thought process. But also, “changing things out” doesn’t always mean more reliability, either in a higher or lower end AR.


The extractor is a frequent wear item, but it is far from the only possible failure point in an AR. It’s just the only component that may wear faster when shooting steel.

"May wear faster"? Possibly, but it MAY NOT.

Consider this, shooting steel cased ammo will save the buyer/shooter between $100 and $200 dollars per case compared to brass cased ammo of almost any brand.

How many spare extractors and other spare parts can that $100-$200 dollars buy? A LOT!!!

Shooting premium brass cased ammo punching holes in paper is nothing short of foolish. Also, if your AR15 will not digest steel cased ammo all day everyday, there is something wrong with your rifle,,,,NOT THE AMMO. Do you also understand, that there may come a day when you may only be able to get steel cased ammo?
If your rifle will not shoot it or you've never tried it in your rifle and don't know how it will perform, YOU'RE SCREWED.

This argument has been beaten to death a million times ad nauseum on every gun board in the universe, particularly with regard to Wolf steel cased ammo. I've been shooting Wolf ammo since the first month it started being imported into the country, in multiple calibers.....9mm, .45acp, 40s&w, .223, 7.62x39, .308, and never once had an issue with it. I've never once had a failure to fire, never once had a failure to feed, never once had a failure to extract, never once had a failure to eject using any caliber of Wolf STEEL CASED ammo.

I use it in my pistols, rifles and machineguns with absolute confidence and in over 25 years it has not failed me ever.

With the money I've saved shooting steel cased ammo, I've amassed PLENTY of spare parts......and guess what, I've changed 1 (one) extractor in 22 years and I shoot more than the average guy as I've got my own range right outside my backdoor.
 
Last edited:
"May wear faster"? Possibly, but it MAY NOT.

Consider this, shooting steel cased ammo will save the buyer/shooter between $100 and $200 dollars per case compared to brass cased ammo of almost any brand.

How many spare extractors and other spare parts can that $100-$200 dollars buy? A LOT!!!

Shooting premium brass cased ammo punching holes in paper is nothing short of foolish. Also, if your AR15 will not digest steel cased ammo all day everyday, there is something wrong with your rifle,,,,NOT THE AMMO. Do you also understand, that there may come a day when you may only be able to get steel cased ammo?
If your rifle will not shoot it or you've never tried it in your rifle and don't know how it will perform, YOU'RE SCREWED.

This argument has been beaten to death a million times ad nauseum on every gun board in the universe, particularly with regard to Wolf steel cased ammo. I've been shooting Wolf ammo since the first month it started being imported into the country, in multiple calibers.....9mm, .45acp, 40s&w, .223, 7.62x39, .308, and never once had an issue with it. I've never once had a failure to fire, never once had a failure to feed, never once had a failure to extract, never once had a failure to eject using any caliber of Wolf STEEL CASED ammo.

I use it in my pistols, rifles and machineguns with absolute confidence and in 20 years it has not failed me ever.

With the money I've saved shooting steel cased ammo, I've amassed PLENTY of spare parts......and guess what, I've changed 1 (one) extractor in 22 years and I shoot more than the average guy as I've got my own range right outside my backdoor.
... yes. We don't disagree. I'm just saying that if any part of an AR is going to see a shorter life from steel ammo, it will be the extractor. And those should be checked regularly anyway.
 
Yup, I mentioned that earlier.



Of course they will. That’s their business 😁. Training is important, don’t get me wrong. But so is having something that is less likely to fail at a bad time.
No doubt. But you’re the one that suggested firearms instructors recommend high end rifles because they are less prone to failure - that hasn’t been my experience. Ever.

I don’t think there’s much, if any, difference in reliability. I have a BCM, but I’ve seen all manner of fancy guns fail in classes - especially home builds. But that’s just my anecdotal experience and I’m sure it won’t sway you, and I don’t care.
 
I look for a rugged handguard mounting system, well thought out design of the handguard, robust indexing features for the handguard to upper, well fit part for the upper/lower, good ergonomics.
I like geissele, BCM, daniel defense, and the aero precision enhanced mounts.
For barrel I really like the KAC mounting system of using a nut to retain the gas block and using flared gas tubes. that feature set is also found on Q and Savage MSR's
On the carrier I like integral gas keys so having parts come loose isn't a thing.
I like a tuned gas system...
really a company that makes a rifle with a combination of these features is what I would be considering.
 
... yes. We don't disagree. I'm just saying that if any part of an AR is going to see a shorter life from steel ammo, it will be the extractor. And those should be checked regularly anyway.
I agree, they should be checked after every shooting session if one wants to stay on top of things, and especially after shooting hot loaded brass cased ammo.

But they are no more prone to failure shooting steel cased ammo than with brass ammo, especially premium brass ammo which is loaded hotter.

The steel on an extractor is exponentially harder than the steel used in a cartridge case. It is the level of violence induced with extraction from higher gas pressure that creates a problem.

An over gassed or poorly chambered rifle will break extractors frequently using brass cased ammo alone.
 
just saying that if any part of an AR is going to see a shorter life from steel ammo, it will be the extractor
theoretically - true, from practical reality - well, may be it will be reduced, say, from 50k shots down to 30k shots? or may not even that.
there is only one practical limitation one will find out rather quick. it is less typical for 5.56 guns, but on _some_ .223 and wilde barrels with slightly tighter chambers, when you run your gun hot - say, shot 60 steel rounds rather quick, and then make a pause with a steel one in the chamber - on some of tula the lacquer can get slightly glued to the chamber.
it typically will spit it out, but may not load next round.

it does not happen on all guns, but, may happen on some, especially while they are new and squeaky clean. means - do not clean too often and shoot more often.

it used to happen on my 16" larue, never happened on 20" one. happens on one kind of a steel 308 regularly enough too.

never ever happens on a tavor, and i ran it crazy hot, but that thing is a machine. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom