Why get a LMT over stag over norc?
- Thread starter Kryogen
- Start date
The Norico M4 is a "Sporting" Rifle.
Would I use it on the street? No.
For an entry level tool to get me into CQC/Service Rifle, it does the job for now until I learn more and figure out what I like.
My kid has a potentially terminal illness. So most of my other firearms have been sold to pay for things for her.
That is my "financial" decision and why I "Cheaped Out".
The Norinco was something that I got to keep me in the game as a hobby and as a distraction.
Eventually the rifle will become my Daughter's, and will be a straight iron sight platform for learning.
Would I use it on the street? No.
For an entry level tool to get me into CQC/Service Rifle, it does the job for now until I learn more and figure out what I like.
My kid has a potentially terminal illness. So most of my other firearms have been sold to pay for things for her.
That is my "financial" decision and why I "Cheaped Out".
The Norinco was something that I got to keep me in the game as a hobby and as a distraction.
Eventually the rifle will become my Daughter's, and will be a straight iron sight platform for learning.
If it was all that I could afford, I would buy a Norc and a lot of ammo, and I wouldn't feel bad. As it is now, I hardly get to the range with my work schedule. I don't compete, and I don't travel to the US, so spending $1200-1400+ on a paper puncher does not appeal to me.
I am in the market for an AR soon, but I don't really want to spend more than $1K. Its not that I am not willing to spend more on guns, some of my trap guns are worth far more than an LMT... but I am not willing to spend that kind of money on a gun I will only be using for fun at the range.
I understand why people want LMT, Stag and Colt, but I think those people have to recognize that for the majority of recreational shooters the Norcs are just fine. Sometimes it does come down to not being able to spend another $400 to move from a $700 norc to a better brand name manufacturer. If your passionate about shooting, buy what you can afford. Don't go in debt to buy a gun that you can't afford to feed just to appease the people on these boards.
Just curious, why do so many people on here claim that you can't compete with a Norc? (excluding us events). The Norc AR are accurate, and many people on here are using them to compete against guys with $3,000 custom built AR's. If your "get what you pay for " argument was valid, why are the expensive AR's not dwarfing Norc shooters in the results? Perhaps buying a $700 Norc and spending $300 on ammo puts the Norc shooters at an advantage to the guys dropping $1400 on a gun and putting only a few hundred rounds through it. Perhaps the guys who buy a $700 norc are spending more time actually shooting it than the people dropping $3K into custom built AR's that take months of time to build.
Just an observation, a lot of members here seem to put far to much emphasis on the quality of firearm that members are using, and far less focus on the shooters skill. Just because someone is at the range using a Norinco or a bottom tier AR, doesn't mean they are not a good shooter, or "operator" or ex member or Delta force, people just assume they are some uneducated neophyte because of the $$$ value, make and model of their gun.
(I am not trying to stir the pot, I am just observing a trend on here)
I am in the market for an AR soon, but I don't really want to spend more than $1K. Its not that I am not willing to spend more on guns, some of my trap guns are worth far more than an LMT... but I am not willing to spend that kind of money on a gun I will only be using for fun at the range.
I understand why people want LMT, Stag and Colt, but I think those people have to recognize that for the majority of recreational shooters the Norcs are just fine. Sometimes it does come down to not being able to spend another $400 to move from a $700 norc to a better brand name manufacturer. If your passionate about shooting, buy what you can afford. Don't go in debt to buy a gun that you can't afford to feed just to appease the people on these boards.
Just curious, why do so many people on here claim that you can't compete with a Norc? (excluding us events). The Norc AR are accurate, and many people on here are using them to compete against guys with $3,000 custom built AR's. If your "get what you pay for " argument was valid, why are the expensive AR's not dwarfing Norc shooters in the results? Perhaps buying a $700 Norc and spending $300 on ammo puts the Norc shooters at an advantage to the guys dropping $1400 on a gun and putting only a few hundred rounds through it. Perhaps the guys who buy a $700 norc are spending more time actually shooting it than the people dropping $3K into custom built AR's that take months of time to build.
Just an observation, a lot of members here seem to put far to much emphasis on the quality of firearm that members are using, and far less focus on the shooters skill. Just because someone is at the range using a Norinco or a bottom tier AR, doesn't mean they are not a good shooter, or "operator" or ex member or Delta force, people just assume they are some uneducated neophyte because of the $$$ value, make and model of their gun.
(I am not trying to stir the pot, I am just observing a trend on here)
The "You get what you pay for is valid". As you said, it's quite likely that the people winning competitions with norcs are probably practicing more. Ammo + gun = results, and practice ammo ain't cheap.
Frozen Snake
Regular
- Location
- 49°29'28" N 119°35'19" W
So how many people out there with the Norincos actually has or had problems with the rifle? Or is it more a matter of being slightly out of spec that has some people turned off.
I don't have much experience with ARs in general, but I can tell you that while I was impressed by both of my M305s, the Norinco AR blew me away.
Yes the fit and finish isn't the best, but an inspection of this rifle shows that it is fairly well built and it works very well. I think that manufacturing firearms is something Norinco does very well.
The Norinco AR to me, seems very reliable. We load for our firearms and our test load ended up being ~2400fps instead of ~3000 and it cycled over 1000 of those under powered loads before we got our chronograph and made an adjustment to the load. The only issue we ever had, was it not always locking back on an empty magazine but most people will agree the Norc AR mags are the worst in existence.
Sure there are other better brands out there, but if your only criteria is to accurately place projectiles into a paper target you'll be hard pressed to find a rifle that offers better value for your dollar than the Norinco.
A Norinco is also a great way to introduce yourself to the AR platform. I personally don't like the AR that much. I shot the Norc enough to make me want to build an AR, but once I started I realized I didn't really like the AR enough to spend that kind of money on one. Had I bought the Norc, it would have been an ok purchase and I wouldn't have sold it off.
Yes the fit and finish isn't the best, but an inspection of this rifle shows that it is fairly well built and it works very well. I think that manufacturing firearms is something Norinco does very well.
The Norinco AR to me, seems very reliable. We load for our firearms and our test load ended up being ~2400fps instead of ~3000 and it cycled over 1000 of those under powered loads before we got our chronograph and made an adjustment to the load. The only issue we ever had, was it not always locking back on an empty magazine but most people will agree the Norc AR mags are the worst in existence.
Sure there are other better brands out there, but if your only criteria is to accurately place projectiles into a paper target you'll be hard pressed to find a rifle that offers better value for your dollar than the Norinco.
A Norinco is also a great way to introduce yourself to the AR platform. I personally don't like the AR that much. I shot the Norc enough to make me want to build an AR, but once I started I realized I didn't really like the AR enough to spend that kind of money on one. Had I bought the Norc, it would have been an ok purchase and I wouldn't have sold it off.
You're "observations" leave a lot to the imagination and you're going purely on speculation. You're making a ton of assumptions here that simply aren't factual. Remember, you're the guy who doesn't know the difference between a LMT and a Norinco.
There's no doubt that a skilled shooter with a Norc is likely to score better in competition than a complete noob with a Noveske. Where's the argument? Your statement is a little hollow comming from someone who has little to no experience with an AR, don't you think?
You need to understand something. STAG's & LMT's are not high end AR's by any means. There are far more expensive options out there. If price was the most important factor in any purchase decision, we'd all be driving Kia's and shooting Norc's. That's simply not the case.
You're assertion that shooters buying good quality gear are less apt to use it as opposed to those buying cheaper AR's like Norc's is, at best, a ridiculous statement. How much you pay for your AR is going to have absolutely zero significance on either how often you get to practice or have the funds necessary to buy or handload ammunition. As said a number of times already, if you're in this for the long haul, that $700 difference in price is a small amount compared to the money you're going to spend on ammo over the course of ownership.
Having said that, if you're just looking for something for occasional shooting and not looking for a large investment, then the Norc would be a good option for you. You don't need a more expensive AR to have a fun rifle to plink at the range.
Please don't get defensive and knock others because their advice doesn't fit within your budget or expectations. You came here asking for advice and you got it. I seriously doubt anyone is making purchase decisions under peer presure so that they can be "one of the boys" on this forum. If you don't value the advice of the membership here then don't ask for it. Plain and simple.
Buy your Norc and enjoy shooting it.
Last edited:
Actually I didn't speculate at all, and it is a genuine observation, my comments were clear, I didn't leave anything to the imagination, I stated my opinions, and you clearly disagreed with your interpretation of them. I also didn't say that I don't know anything about AR's, I didn't say that I don't know the difference between LMT products and Norinco, you inferred that. Regardless, that doesn't even matter because my points were about buying according to your needs, budget and what works for you. Also the threads in this section “rank the AR manufacturer”, “why are people buying cheap AR’s” and “new to AR’s norinco vs ###” threads are full of the exact type of sentiment I am referring to of “gear bashing”… in fact… I am pretty sure you commented on another user doing that in one of those threads.
You seem to have misunderstood me. I was making a point that if (as a new AR shooter) you should buy what you can afford and become competent with it, and you can be competitive, versus buying something you can't afford and not being able to buy more than a box of ammo every couple of months. If you are new to AR's, buying a lower cost one to determine if you even like the platform is not bad advice.
My point was becoming more proficient with the platform, and that you could still compete with a norc if that something that you wanted to do. If you disagree with the logic of my comments that is fine, but I didn't post it as a blanket statement regarding every shooter or every gun, rather I phrased it as a question (hence the "?") to make people consider alternatives to their held opinions.
Also I didn't say all shooters who buy expensive gear, or build expensive custom AR's don't use them, I was making a point regarding people overextending themselves buying a more expensive gun than they could otherwise afford/need and not being able to feed it...believe me it happens, I have been there myself... also there are a few AR's on the EE right now that are selling for $2K+ and advertise only having a few hundred rounds through them.
I only mentioned this because if the OP (and other users creating "new to AR's what to buy " threads) were looking to spend $700-1000, and people convince him to buy a $1,400 option... he is now $400 over his budget, yes this does affect his ability to go out and enjoy the firearm, I know because I have been there.
Also I don't have to be an expert on AR's to hold an opinion on buying them, and I don't have to own one to hold a BUYING opinion on them. Buying is a purchasing decision, I can make a BUYING decision based on anything and it doesn't have to be logical, well thought out or even intelligent. Some people buy products because of marketing, impulse or celebrity endorsement, does that make the product good? This works with anything, cars, guns, computers, video games and etc.
If I know nothing about cars but have a ton of money, does it matter if I buy a Kia or a Ferrari if I only use it to get groceries?
If I’m broke as ####, does it matter if I can barely afford to lease kia but somehow managed to finance a Lexus?... yes it does.
If my lack of explicit technical knowledge on the alloy composition on an HK 416 compared to a NEA, or not knowing every standard of "Milspec" , or not caring if a Bushmaster is running a M16 BCG affects my ability to enjoy a Norc then I guess ignorance is bliss.
This was one of my points in my post. It was in the post you quoted, I was pretty clear about buying according to your needs.
I didn't ask for advice at all, the OP did. You are doing exactly what your accusing me of, your knocking my opinion and advice, because it doesn't fit your expectations.
I never said I was going to buy a norc, I also didn't say buying the lowest costing AR was going to be the biggest factor in my buying decision, I said I was going to spend about $1K on an AR, because that is all I am willing to spend on an AR for what I will use it for. Of course I would buy a LMT over a Norc if it was within my budget, I didn't say that all AR's are equal or that a Norc is "as good as", I said if it meets your needs and its what you can afford buy it and shoot it, don't be gun poor just to say you own a tier 1 firearm. If you don't agree with this, that is fine, its a free country and everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Sorry I dindn't intend to sound that way, I definately do not have anything against spending money on quality firearms! We all have to enjoy the finer things in the sport!
I definately agree, buy what makes you happy and best meets your needs.
I also see it this way.
Name Brand AR platform = Scalpel
Norinco AR platform = Dinner Knife
Both will cut the cheese, however one will be a more blunt instrument and make a mess, and the other will be more precise and clean.
Is it just the M4/CQA platform that is the issue with QC, or does this also go into other Norc branded firearms?
I have heard nothing but sweet-ass-good things about Norc AK's and M-14's.
But here is the kicker that a Norc owner has to see and understand. At least I do.
There is the argument "Why pay $### for a Norc and $### for accessories that will end up costing the same as a better quality AR?"
I do see this and understand it.
That won't be me. Ill change the stock, grip, and invest in an appropriate scope/red dot.
It will perform for me in competition as it is intended.
But the Norc as I see it, is as I explained before, a "sporting" rifle. So tricking it out without making it perform better, is making the rifle into something it is not.
Same as the Mini-14. To me that is a sporting/hunting rifle with a clear niche purpose of use.
When I owned one, I knew this, but I wouldn't spend all the extra cash to make it into something else it is not, like an EBR stock that is worth more than the rifle itself.
Unless it was a scenario where I had the cash to add a better barrle, make it accurate past 500 yards, etc, then maybe, but in essence that is not what the Mini-14 is.
So unless I decide to make the Norc a precision DMR, then there is an overhaul that needs to be done over and above adding a #### tonne of Magpul and rails.
- better barrel, gas system, internals, bolt carrier group, etc.
By that time, yes it will be a more expensive rufle, maybe on par witht he higher end rifles, but by then, the Norc won't be the same Norc from the begining.
It will be a better platform, as built over time, with experience and with education and knowledge of the AR build process. Money permitting.
Name Brand AR platform = Scalpel
Norinco AR platform = Dinner Knife
Both will cut the cheese, however one will be a more blunt instrument and make a mess, and the other will be more precise and clean.
Is it just the M4/CQA platform that is the issue with QC, or does this also go into other Norc branded firearms?
I have heard nothing but sweet-ass-good things about Norc AK's and M-14's.
But here is the kicker that a Norc owner has to see and understand. At least I do.
There is the argument "Why pay $### for a Norc and $### for accessories that will end up costing the same as a better quality AR?"
I do see this and understand it.
That won't be me. Ill change the stock, grip, and invest in an appropriate scope/red dot.
It will perform for me in competition as it is intended.
But the Norc as I see it, is as I explained before, a "sporting" rifle. So tricking it out without making it perform better, is making the rifle into something it is not.
Same as the Mini-14. To me that is a sporting/hunting rifle with a clear niche purpose of use.
When I owned one, I knew this, but I wouldn't spend all the extra cash to make it into something else it is not, like an EBR stock that is worth more than the rifle itself.
Unless it was a scenario where I had the cash to add a better barrle, make it accurate past 500 yards, etc, then maybe, but in essence that is not what the Mini-14 is.
So unless I decide to make the Norc a precision DMR, then there is an overhaul that needs to be done over and above adding a #### tonne of Magpul and rails.
- better barrel, gas system, internals, bolt carrier group, etc.
By that time, yes it will be a more expensive rufle, maybe on par witht he higher end rifles, but by then, the Norc won't be the same Norc from the begining.
It will be a better platform, as built over time, with experience and with education and knowledge of the AR build process. Money permitting.
- Location
- State of Alabera
If it is expensive, it is automatically good.
Anyone that disagrees is on welfare.
Anyone that disagrees is on welfare.
My experience with the above rifles.
I have a LMT MRP. The monolith upper version is the main advantage of the MRP over the others. That and each bolt is MPI tested blah blah blah. Great specs etc. I happen to like the stock, pistol grip etc that it comes with. So no need in my case for any upgrades. It made sense for the price I paid.
The Stag. I have the 2T. Free float handguard. Nice rifle. The trigger on mine is pretty good for a stock trigger although it did have some polishing done. I changed out the pistol grip, and when I bought mine I paid the extra for a CTR stock. I'm happy with mine the way it is. Yes I would trust this rifle.
Here's the interesting thing. The LMT action has the dry lube in it, as does my Armalite AR15. Both actions feel the same when loading etc. The Stag however is a lot smoother. The Stag action when opening and closing the bolt is smoother and feels more solid. I'm not sure why but it does. As for fit/finish the LMT, Stag, Armalite are all in the same boat at least when viewed externally. They are all good.
You pay extra for some features, individual bolt testing, vs batch testing and brand name. For me I just try and make it worthwhile by having to replace as little as possible on the rifle. A pistol grip is fairly cheap but it's still about $40 after shipping etc.
The Norc. I don't own one, but have shot one. A buddy of mine has one. Fit/finish is clearly below the others. It's functional but seemed sort of pot marked on the finish. Now his had extras such as rails, magpul pistol grip, CTR stock etc. That 14.5" Norc was shooting around 1 moa off the bench with decent off the shelf ammo. It's an AR. It works, and worked well. Keep them well lubed, and maintained and they will work just fine for you. Long term wear/tear might not be as good. Also specs have been known to be a bit suspect. But again it will do the job just fine.
Triggers. Here's something you don't hear that much about in terms of overall cost. It's easy to spend $200 on an AR trigger. The Norc one generally isn't good. The LMT AR15 one is ok, once you G96 it and dry fire a bit. The Stag one I had was good, but it did have some minor polishing. The Armalite one I have was a two stage match and was very good if you don't mind two stage triggers (I like them). Factor that into your final cost as well.
I try to be fairly careful with my purchases. I've personally avoided the Norc M14 (308) due to the fact they start out cheap but end up being a financial black hole. At the end of the day it would have been cheaper just to buy what I really wanted from the get go. I think of this like the guys who buy Civics and then pour $10-20K into them. I'd rather just buy a better more powerful car from the beginning. For those that enjoy the tinkering and modifying they will no doubt be ticked at my stating this. If that's your enjoyment then great. For me it doesn't make economic sense, it's not my hobby and frankly I don't have a lot of time. On the other side of the scale is the high end stuff. For example I've avoided the KAC SR25 (308) and I'm a huge 308 AR fan. There are other options out there that work just as well and in some cases such as the LMT MWS are fairly close while half or less of the cost. Cost/performance value just wasn't there for me to justify it. Maybe some day if I win the lottery but not right now. For someone else they may be able to justify the cost, or it's what they really want. So to them it would be a good buy.
One more example. Before buying the LMT MRP, I looked at the competition. One option was the not yet released NEA Monolithic upper listed for an estimated $1425 price. When I worked out the total cost for the configuration that I wanted it didn't make sense to go that route. The LMT I bought which was at a fantastic price point (Questar sale) worked out to $100 more (I went with the MRP export compliant model, 223 barrel not threaded and no flash hider, everything else was the same as the F model). After buying the last one of those, that option is no longer available unless you go second hand on the EE. But at the time with what was available it was a fairly easy decision when I weighed the pros/cons and the overall cost of each. The "cheaper" product would have only been marginally cheaper at the end of the day when both were setup to the same configuration
Bottom line, there are different ways depending on your interests to go about this. Everyone will have their own answer. The tinker types will go base model and upgrade. The cheap guys like myself will try and get as close to what they want and leave it as close to stock as possible. Others will want the best money can buy, status symbol etc. Sometimes a person will even change gears and decide to take on a project etc. So many choices with the AR rifles. Figure out what you want, what your interests are and what features/options are important to you. Then decide from there. What you can afford is also of course a consideration.
I have a LMT MRP. The monolith upper version is the main advantage of the MRP over the others. That and each bolt is MPI tested blah blah blah. Great specs etc. I happen to like the stock, pistol grip etc that it comes with. So no need in my case for any upgrades. It made sense for the price I paid.
The Stag. I have the 2T. Free float handguard. Nice rifle. The trigger on mine is pretty good for a stock trigger although it did have some polishing done. I changed out the pistol grip, and when I bought mine I paid the extra for a CTR stock. I'm happy with mine the way it is. Yes I would trust this rifle.
Here's the interesting thing. The LMT action has the dry lube in it, as does my Armalite AR15. Both actions feel the same when loading etc. The Stag however is a lot smoother. The Stag action when opening and closing the bolt is smoother and feels more solid. I'm not sure why but it does. As for fit/finish the LMT, Stag, Armalite are all in the same boat at least when viewed externally. They are all good.
You pay extra for some features, individual bolt testing, vs batch testing and brand name. For me I just try and make it worthwhile by having to replace as little as possible on the rifle. A pistol grip is fairly cheap but it's still about $40 after shipping etc.
The Norc. I don't own one, but have shot one. A buddy of mine has one. Fit/finish is clearly below the others. It's functional but seemed sort of pot marked on the finish. Now his had extras such as rails, magpul pistol grip, CTR stock etc. That 14.5" Norc was shooting around 1 moa off the bench with decent off the shelf ammo. It's an AR. It works, and worked well. Keep them well lubed, and maintained and they will work just fine for you. Long term wear/tear might not be as good. Also specs have been known to be a bit suspect. But again it will do the job just fine.
Triggers. Here's something you don't hear that much about in terms of overall cost. It's easy to spend $200 on an AR trigger. The Norc one generally isn't good. The LMT AR15 one is ok, once you G96 it and dry fire a bit. The Stag one I had was good, but it did have some minor polishing. The Armalite one I have was a two stage match and was very good if you don't mind two stage triggers (I like them). Factor that into your final cost as well.
I try to be fairly careful with my purchases. I've personally avoided the Norc M14 (308) due to the fact they start out cheap but end up being a financial black hole. At the end of the day it would have been cheaper just to buy what I really wanted from the get go. I think of this like the guys who buy Civics and then pour $10-20K into them. I'd rather just buy a better more powerful car from the beginning. For those that enjoy the tinkering and modifying they will no doubt be ticked at my stating this. If that's your enjoyment then great. For me it doesn't make economic sense, it's not my hobby and frankly I don't have a lot of time. On the other side of the scale is the high end stuff. For example I've avoided the KAC SR25 (308) and I'm a huge 308 AR fan. There are other options out there that work just as well and in some cases such as the LMT MWS are fairly close while half or less of the cost. Cost/performance value just wasn't there for me to justify it. Maybe some day if I win the lottery but not right now. For someone else they may be able to justify the cost, or it's what they really want. So to them it would be a good buy.
One more example. Before buying the LMT MRP, I looked at the competition. One option was the not yet released NEA Monolithic upper listed for an estimated $1425 price. When I worked out the total cost for the configuration that I wanted it didn't make sense to go that route. The LMT I bought which was at a fantastic price point (Questar sale) worked out to $100 more (I went with the MRP export compliant model, 223 barrel not threaded and no flash hider, everything else was the same as the F model). After buying the last one of those, that option is no longer available unless you go second hand on the EE. But at the time with what was available it was a fairly easy decision when I weighed the pros/cons and the overall cost of each. The "cheaper" product would have only been marginally cheaper at the end of the day when both were setup to the same configuration
Bottom line, there are different ways depending on your interests to go about this. Everyone will have their own answer. The tinker types will go base model and upgrade. The cheap guys like myself will try and get as close to what they want and leave it as close to stock as possible. Others will want the best money can buy, status symbol etc. Sometimes a person will even change gears and decide to take on a project etc. So many choices with the AR rifles. Figure out what you want, what your interests are and what features/options are important to you. Then decide from there. What you can afford is also of course a consideration.
Last edited:
- Location
- Nova Scotia
I've had my Norinco M4 for a couple of weeks and it is the only way I would ever have owned an AR platform. Worth every penny. That said, the trigger really sucks. I don't have any knowledge regarding the merits of the premium M4 brands, but I know a ####ty trigger when I pull one.
I have many hunting rifles and shotguns worth several times as much as the $675 this little rifle set me back, but none are as much fun to take to the range. I will be spending a lot more money on ammo for this M4 than any of my other rifles.
I have many hunting rifles and shotguns worth several times as much as the $675 this little rifle set me back, but none are as much fun to take to the range. I will be spending a lot more money on ammo for this M4 than any of my other rifles.
Starscream
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Alberta
....
If any of us were in a real gun fight, I'd be hoping we'd be packing a C8. And lots of friends with C8's. And a couple with C9's. And the radio guy that knows how to coordinate close fire support.
Im starting to like you starscream. lol.
