Article on AR cleaning and lubrication

[Nighthawk]

They are talking about the chart that tell you that one brand is according by one persons research put together better than another. Not taking into account that manufacturers change their practices and upgrade all the time.

Many people that put together guns with many different parts do a very good job at it, And I have seen some very good ones. And some do not, I get those that do not. That want to sell them to me, and get very upset when I do not want the weapon.

 

[WhiteyMacD]

They are talking about the chart that tell you that one brand is according by ones persons research put together better than another. Not taking into acount that manufacturers change their prcatices and upgrade all the time.

Many people that put together guns with many different parts do a very good job at it, And I have seen some very good ones. And some do not, I get those that do not. That want to sell them to me, and get very upset when I do not want the weapon.

Regardless, the chart is a pile of shite that doesnt saying anything other than HOW the rifle is built. Not how a rifle is better.

So, Im going to play the same game as some of the elitists on this board and say "If you aint an engineer, keep to your own profession. You go shoot your 10k rounds a week while we work on the brain intensive stuff."

*anyone who cant get the gest of that, dont reply. Im showing how stupid it is to tout things like how many rounds your put down range a week and how that makes you an expert (likewise, just because youre an engineer doesnt mean youre a good one)

 

[CAR-AR-M16]

Ok,... so we got a lot of shooters around here who think they are experts on quality guns.

Let me ask those people this,... The differences in most of "the chart" is testing. So by your standards, if it hasnt been tested a certain way it must be junk? Just because a part goes through a certain quality test does not make it higher quality than any other, it means that there is less chance that a sub-standard part can leave the factory.

So, unless you're an engineer,... you cant discuss this with me cause I doubt a gun shooter who is a hobby engineer can compete with someone who does it for a living...



Franken AR is a moot point, I put the rifles I have built (with high end parts) up against anyone who thinks Frankens are junk.

I think you hit the nail on the head. If you have a franken gun built with high end parts then I would say they are equal or maybe even better than most factory guns. I think the point Pat ws making is about the guys who put together an AR with cheap and suspect quality gun parts and then wonder why their guns don't work and start talking about how all AR's are junk.

As for me, all 3 of my AR's are franken guns (actually 2 franken AR's an 1 franken M16). However, all the parts are are BCM, Colt, Global Tactical, etc.. parts which are good parts. About the only low end parts on mine are the lowers and that is just because I bought them 20 years ago when there was not much else available and I did not know what was best. The lower itself is probably the least important though. A quality barrel, BCG, LPK and magazines are, in my humble opinion, the most important components as far as accuracy and reliability. All 3 of mine have run reliably for 1000's of rounds and I would not hesitate to stake my life on them.

 

[WhiteyMacD]

I think you hit the nail on the head. If you have a franken gun built with high end parts then I would say they are equal or maybe even better than most factory guns. I think the point Pat ws making is about the guys who put together an AR with cheap and suspect quality gun parts and then wonder why their guns don't work and start talking about how all AR's are junk.

As for me, all 3 of my AR's are franken guns (actually 2 franken AR's an 1 franken M16). However, all the parts are are BCM, Colt, Global Tactical, etc.. parts which are good parts. About the only low end parts on mine are the lowers and that is just because I bought them 20 years ago when there was not much else available and I did not know what was best. The lower itself is probably the least important though. A quality barrel, BCG, LPK and magazines are, in my humble opinion, the most important components as far as accuracy and reliability. Al 3 of mine have run reliably for 1000's of rounds and I would not hesitate to stake my life on them.

Yeah, but did you stake your castle nuts?

 

[Nighthawk]

LOL that is back to that chart again, required Mil., the main reason that several manufacturers do not stake them now is because many people change out the tubes and other parts or do Mods, so much after purchase.

 

[CAR-AR-M16]

Yeah, but did you stake your castle nuts?

No. I run full length fixed stocks on all of mine, so there are no castle nuts to stake. I do have all my carriers keys staked though.

 

[Josh-L]

The chart does specify others things such as which steel was used.

I've said it a milion times.... If you think the "elitist" are so wrong then sign ip for a Pat Rogers class and prove us wrong.

 

[Josh-L]

I will also add that NEVER have I or any other of the "elite" on here stated that you have to have xyz brand. In fact it's just the opposite. I am tired of this argument. Nobody cares what you have.

 

[Shadowrider]

What I want to know is, what is up with running a bead of vagisil along the top over the ejection port?

 

[Wormydog1724]

OK ok ok. I am not an engineer (although I major'd in engineering for a semester and took some really tough classes). There is a lot of b.s. on this board and the other one I am a member of. A "fraken-gun" is not a bad thing. I myself have had one put together by myself and a person on this board and it is miles better than my stock bushmaster. No bushmasters are not "high on the chart" right now, but I remember when they were. Also my Remington R-15 is better than my bushmaster, don't give me the b.s. they are made by the same company. They might be, but Remington gets the luck of the draw because both mine and my brother's R-15's are "better" than both our bushmasters. I say "better" as in a cosmetic standpoint; the finish is better, the fit is tighter, the BCG is of smoother finish, and other "minor" details that people insist make a "better" rifle. I don't really think I can tell a discernible difference between a Colt and a DSA as much as I shoot. Maybe some of the elite on here that shoot 10k's rounds a month can.

Now back to the "cheap parts". I find it HILARIOUS that someone can comment on rifles being put together by "cheap parts" when at their booth at every gunshow I have attended they have UTG, NC Star, and other various CHEAP brands. The funniest rifle I have ever seen was a 16" carbine with a bi-pod, vertical grip, light, laser, 3-9 power scope in a piss poor mount (probably UTG), UTG/NC Star rail, AND a Noveske KX3 flaming pig muzzle device. Really?? These are high quality and serve a purpose? REally??!? Maybe this person was just show casing their array of parts and different configurations. or maybe this person has a very small minded understanding about AR's and enjoys posting on a forum that they are a sponsor of to conjure up business. (which IMO there really is nothing wrong with that, it becomes wrong when that person is a arrogant and misguides people into buying subpar parts and touting them as being legit). Whats funny is the KX3 probably cost more than all of those other add-ons together.

I myself went through that stage where I thought it was cool to have a high power scope, bipod, VFG, and a light on a carbine. I SOON realized that it was VERY impractical. It was heavy, awkward, and really did nothing to add to accuracy and effectiveness. Learning is part of it. When I see weapons with all the gizmos and gadgets I just smile. I figure if that person carries that rifle for more than an hour, about half of that crap is coming off. I am not an operator nor LEO, although by watching their methods it is very easy to see what works.

The chart isn't entirely shite. I have never seen a chart between Remington, Winchester, Browning, or Kimber. Maybe there is one out there but I would bet its as meaningless as a chart on bottled waters. There are things that make certain things better. I feel that the "chart" is meaningless in determining which AR is right for you. MOST people will never use their AR to head to battle or to fight off zombies. MOST people use their for target practice, some for bench rest (whether they realize it or not), and other actually put some hard use through theirs by taking classes and competition. The only thing I see the chart aiding in is price. If a blow joe wants to buy an Ar, there is no point in him spending $1,500 on a rifle he may fire 200 rounds a year. Someone that is buying one for LE work or something where their life may depend on it will get better use out of the chart.

If anybody has a problem with this post then tough ****. I have never served in the military and I am not LEO. These are my personal thoughts on what I feel is hypocritical b.s. that goes on here. I really don't know many people in person on this board so I am not meaning to personally attack anyone. I just feel it is necessary to call people out on their lies.