Who manufactures most ARs??
On General Discussion I asked about personal preferences between AR uppers, DPMS, Palmetto State Armory, Del Ton, Spikes, ect. Most of the replies said there wasn't much difference.
Then I got to thinking about a recent over heard conversation in a local gun shop about most ARs are built by two companies, just stamped with a different make/brand.
Don't know if this is true but it would explain why so many thought there were very little differences.
Then I got to thinking about a recent over heard conversation in a local gun shop about most ARs are built by two companies, just stamped with a different make/brand.
Don't know if this is true but it would explain why so many thought there were very little differences.
0
-
Well, I think there's a few more than two, but there are a lot less manufactures, then there are brands. For the record, Olympic Arms makes all their own stuff EXCEPT trigger disconnects, and plastic stuff. 0 -
I'm guessing that those ones made from steel were made by at least a third maker. 0 -
To clarify that, there are only two companies, who make forgings for the lower recievers. They sell them to other manufacturers(the DPMS's, Rock River, Del Ton, Stag, Double Star, etc) who finish machining, and finish them(usually anodized).
There are many out there who take a billet, instead of a forging, and machine it. A billet is usually a block, cut off from an extrusion of bar stock.
Given a choice between the two, most knowledgeable people like the forging over the billet, but not always.
Best
EDIT 1
quote:But the reality is that the receiver in ARs basically just holds the moving parts and stock in place. Its not subject to much stress, and that's why you can get away with polymer AR-15 receivers. Failure in properly made Al receivers from normal use is exceptionally rare.
So I'm not really convinced that forged is "better", at least not for the overwhelming majority of AR owners who rarely shoot their guns, aren't taking them to war, and probably never will. If you're not using your AR as a battering ram or in hand-to-hand combat, and the receiver itself is otherwise up to spec, it probably doesn't make any real difference if its billet or forged, and even if you are, it still pretty darn unlikely that you're going to run into a scenario that will destroy your billet receiver gun, but a forged receiver one would come out OK.
I totally agree with this statement. The fact that the upper, or lower receiver does not make up the stress points, which are basically the barrel/barrel extension/bolt interface, a ton of strength is not needed. Much like the old debate of milled receiver/stamped receiver AK-47's.
What does come into play, is the quality, thickness, lubricity, and hardness of the hardcoat finish. That determines the smoothness of operation, and longevity of the rifle.
So, yes, there are many different things to be aware of, when looking.
Best
EDIT 2
Technically speaking, this statement below, is not correct...
quote:I think technically speaking, Colt is the ONLY manufacturer of AR-15s, since that's the tradmarked brand name of the rifle. Everyone else's version is a "copy"/"clone" of same.
Eugene Stoner, was an engineer, that Worked for Armalite...hence Armalite Rifle(AR). Armalite could not meet production demands, and sold the licensing to Colt, along with possibly the patent rights. The original AR-15 was a selective fire weapon.
Best0 -
It is NOT true that all ARs are built by two companies then branded differently. There are a few large manufacturers who build their own guns on site, and quite a few smaller "boutique" ones that build (ie assemble) their own guns, some in various "niches".
On the other hand, it *IS* true that most of the AR makers are using component parts from a relatively small number of manufacturers. As mentioned above, there are fewer manufacturers of receivers than companies selling completed guns, and only a limited number of places that do forgings of blanks here. But there are a relatively large number of shops that are machining their own receivers from billets, plus at least three separate makers of polymer receivers. On top of that there is (or was) at least one STEEL AR-15 receiver on the market and at least one carbon fiber one.
At this point, there are so many makers of AR guns that its a competitive market where you more or less do get what you pay for. More money basically buys you better component parts, higher build quality, and (hopefully) better customer service. And like with every other product, at some point up the chain, you're basically paying for bells and whistles and/or a nice brand name.
As to forged vs billet/machined, on paper forged is stronger (more so with steel than Al, I think) and so all else being equal, probably "better" at least from a purely functional standpoint. Billets can LOOK nicer. . .if that matters. Billets can also be more easily run into non-standard configurations. . .(including ones with thicker walls to make them stronger) though this probably isn't really a factor for most shooters.
But the reality is that the receiver in ARs basically just holds the moving parts and stock in place. Its not subject to much stress, and that's why you can get away with polymer AR-15 receivers. Failure in properly made Al receivers from normal use is exceptionally rare.
So I'm not really convinced that forged is "better", at least not for the overwhelming majority of AR owners who rarely shoot their guns, aren't taking them to war, and probably never will. If you're not using your AR as a battering ram or in hand-to-hand combat, and the receiver itself is otherwise up to spec, it probably doesn't make any real difference if its billet or forged, and even if you are, it still pretty darn unlikely that you're going to run into a scenario that will destroy your billet receiver gun, but a forged receiver one would come out OK.
quote:Originally posted by USN_Airdale
in the early days of the AR-15, they were made by only one company......, COLT !!
and in my OPINION Colt is still the #1 maker of AR-15's, M4's etc.
I think technically speaking, Colt is the ONLY manufacturer of AR-15s, since that's the tradmarked brand name of the rifle. Everyone else's version is a "copy"/"clone" of same.0 -
in the early days of the AR-15, they were made by only one company......, COLT !!
and in my OPINION Colt is still the #1 maker of AR-15's, M4's etc.0 -
quote:Originally posted by beantownshootah
On the other hand, it *IS* true that most of the AR makers are using component parts from a relatively small number of manufacturers.True.
A problem is that with many AR manufacturers you never know who produced the internals from one sample to the next. These companies purchase batches of parts from whichever producer offers them the best price at the moment, often even mixing parts from different producers in the same rifle.
If you disassemble them you may very well find that those two identical brand/model rifles on the store's rack really aren't identical. I've seen some where one's lower contains 100% Colt internals, then another of the same brand contains a mixed bag of producer's parts. Same receiver markings and same price, but one's actually just a factory produced Franken-gun.
This is why you'll hear someone complaining that their Brand Z rifle is a POS, but then the next guy counters that his Brand Z gun runs like a champ.
The devil is in the details and unless you're talking about upper tier AR's quality can often be a complete crap shoot.
EDIT:
quote:Originally posted by Horse Plains Drifter
For the record, Olympic Arms makes all their own stuff EXCEPT trigger disconnects, and plastic stuff.True, but...
Never owned one myself, but I hear from people who do have them that parts compatability is an issue. I've heard multiple users complain that their receivers won't run properly with non-Oly internal components.
Reportedly, even genuine, guaranteed 100% milspec Colt internals won't work.0 -
No doubt Colt. Uncle Sam has alone bought hundreds of thousands for the armed forces... 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
7 comments