Depends on what you want in a rifle. If you want a rifle that is basically what the military uses, then Colt, Sabre and LMT. In my opinion (and I have owned all three brands) they are on par with each other. If you simply want to plink at paper with an AR type rifle on weekends; Bushmaster,Armalite, Stag, and most AR`s in this price range (some US LE agencies use these brands as well).
I disagree. Continental Machine Tool of New Britain, Hartford County, CT, the parent company of Stag Arms, are a US Dept of Defence approved sub-contractor for the manufacture of M16 parts and assemblies, and have been since 1973. They've also been a DOD approved M4 sub-contractor since the M4 was started. Stag Arms was formed as a company and brand for the commercial production of firearms in 2003 after CMTs primary customer announced they were abandoning the US civilian AR15 market. They've done very well with it.
Having DOD certification as an M4/M16 subcontractor means being Government certified to manufacture and provide USGI quality milspec parts, and they make all of them. They do M4 replacement uppers, M16 to M4 fleet conversions, foreign military sales/assistance and so on. So their parts are made to a spec very much 'what the military uses'. I'm pretty comfortable in saying that, of the brands mentioned in the quote, over the past 35 years only Colt would have produced more parts that are currently in US and foreign M16/M4 military service, (Leaving FN out of it, because they weren't mentioned, and, I frankly don't know).
So, The problem I have with the yellowvisors "tier chart", is that people reading it as they try and learn about AR15s may be mistaken into equating the 'features' listed as indicators of the 'quality' of the parts or rifle. Indeed it is now commonly offered as a reference when someone asks about 'quality'. "The Chart" does try to lay out what are current M4 TDP identifiers, but Stag Arms are careful not to infringe on Colt's active patents from the M4 Technical Data Package, for obvious reason, so the Stag-15 rifle is an "AR-15" (patents expired) not an "M4". It's good business not to be use their position and knowledge to infringe on Colt. While this does affect the number of ticks on "the chart", for ticks about things like the colour of the extractor insert (a 25c part), it does not signify that the rifles is of lower quality (barrel twist rate is not quality, for example). Stag Arms manufactured parts and assemblies are notoriously top notch quality, correctly and carefully manufactured, with the latest technology and milspec finishes.
To the parts I think are worth noting, Stag Arms receivers are dimensionally correct and perfect, all the time. Stag internal small parts noticibly top quality and the same manufacturer part for part we see in current semi-auto Colt Defence guns. The barrels, the one metal part they do not manufacture in house, are supplied in the raw by ER Shaw, also a military subcontractor, and are correctly manufactured to milspec dimensions and methods. The barrels are chrome lined and phosphated prior to installation of the FSB, the FSB is fixed with Taper Pins rather than straight pins to ensure positive gas seal. They use the correct height for flat top upper, F-marked Front Sight Base. The bolts ARE shot peened and magnetic particle inspected. Their finishes and chroming are the latest milspec types, and performed by the same subcontractors as the primary M4 contractor uses. The carry handles are correct for the front sight height. They use milspec receiver extensions. The top stake on the gas key bolts IS completely effective, and normal for aerospace manufacturing, there are no reports to Stag (or us) that this method is any less reliable than the side stake method (listed in the chart as the 'correct' method). The receiver fit and finish gets the extra attention Stag Arms can provide the complete manufacturer all their major parts. The machinists and operators as individuals making these parts have have been doing so for decades in many cases, and give the Stag Arms production extra attention and produce beautiful parts to very high tolerance, as the CEO of Stag Arms demands. This experience, attention to detail, high quality is self evident every time an operator handles or shoots a Stag Arms rifle or carbine.
Quality wise, we service the Stag Arms brand in Canada, with full factory support. There are a very good number of Stags in service in Canada today, with many in high volume training use, and yet we remain like the Maytag repairmen as far as repairs go. I've spoken to two instructors in the past day who have put 14000, 7000, and 9000 rounds through their Stag carbines in the past year without changing so much as a spring. They report excellent accuracy and performance. They recommend them to their students. I hear stories like this a lot (and I love hearing it!).
Accuracy and performance, Stag Arms shooters are competing with distinction in service rifle and tactical rifle competitions from coast to coast.
So, I guess I'd say the proof of quality is in the hand and on the targets, rather than the M4 TDP features chart.
You can spend more if you want to, but you won't get a rifle that does anything better, or any more reliably, than a Stag Arms AR15. After Colt, no one has been making AR15/M16 parts continuously for longer.
The use of 4150 barrel steel is mentioned in 'the chart' as milspec, this is true. Stag Arms (and most manufacturers) do use 4140 chrome moly in their semi-auto guns. Stag uses chrome lined ER Shaw barrels. They do use 4150 in their full auto guns. However, the use of 4140 is not without thought. The difference between 4140/4150 steel relates to a greater resistance to bursting after repeated cycles of sustained full auto firing. This is not a consideration in a semi-auto gun, regardless of the operator. That this is the case is reflected in the fact that not one has every burst, ever. Using 4140 barrels does help keep the price down by a small bit,
which is passed directly on to the customer. It is NOT a factor in performance or accuracy, which for our purposes, I define as quality. If greater resistance to bursting in F/A mag dumps is an important issue for someone, we charge $80 more for F/A Stag Arms to suitably licensed agencies. These have 4150 barrels, 1/7 too. We don't charge $500 more.
1/7 vs 1/9 is not a cost issue or a quality issue, it's an ammo issue. 1/9 is more in demand in the civilian market as it is seen as more accurate with a wider range of popular ammunition, (more in demand in Canada too, though I know the 1/7 fans here won't believe it
, there really is a reason 1/9 is more common). That said, the Stag 9" twist measures out to about 8.5" and I have neither seen nor heard of any Stag Arms 1/9 barrel that has not stabilized everything from 45gn to the 77gn Sierra Match King bullet. My rule of thumb has been if I can mag feed it, the barrel will stabilize it.
Finally, Stag Arms does (obviously?) manufacture carbines which tick every M4 category from 'the chart', and we do sell them to agencies in Canada. However, we can't import them for commercial resale due to US export controls, (and neither can anyone else!).
So to sum up, TDP doesn't equate to 'quality', and Stag Arms makes a fantastic, very milspec where it counts, rifle.
Stag Arms loves Canada, are proud that Canadian civilians, police, and soldiers have taken to their guns as they have. Since 2004 Stag Arms have continuously manufactured configurations specifically for export to Canadian shooters, both Civilian and Professional, adapting designs all the while as the DOS moved the export goalposts. Stag Arms have put Canadian shooters ahead of LOTs of others who are scrambling for their product.
I will not run down any other brand, but as far as yellowvisors chart goes, there is evidence that not every manufacturer is being completely honest with the testing claims provided, if the manufacturers did in fact provide the info in the chart and it wasn't just provided as heresay. For example, You can't say that every bolt you sell is individually proof fired when you have released a run of bolts (once) that wouldn't close into a chamber due to the lugs being machined out of spec. I'm just saying, there is truth, then there is marketing, then there is telling people what they want to hear.
As usual, I stand to be corrected with facts rather than unqualified statements.
Cheers,
DT
