Which AR-15's are the most reliable weapon systems? (excluding COLT)

Has anyone mentioned the Barrett REC7?? I have one, and love it. It's a Gen I. I'm no expert, I'm not a pro, and I only have a few hundred rounds through it, but I love it. It's well built, and tight. It's not cheap (although I got mine from Wolverine for 30% off), but from what I've read, it's worth it.

-J.

No offence but a few hundred rounds doesn't mean anything. A few thousand rounds has some merit. I have little doubt however that your Barrett will serve you well. ;)

I wasn't arguing...I was just responding to your statement that you have seen "zero" lower end rigs place well in competition. That's not my experience...that's all - I have seen them do well.

As to your other question, perceived value works both ways...even if I had $3000 to spend on one firearm (which I don't so it's moot), I wouldn't currently. I can't see how I would get 5x more out any rifle than I do now.

I understand you've seen low end guns place, the point I was making is that it is the exception and not the norm. The second half to my point was that those who preach to buy cheap and spend the rest on ammo, training, optics etc rarely do. Which leaves them with a low end rifle with low end optics and near zero experience. That is a classic recipe for low end performance.

I agree that there comes a point where the cost is no longer a trade off for improved performance. Again, the point to what I've posted/said is that some brands are the same price or slightly higher than some of the lower end stuff and offer much better performance and a far better track record. When you can get a new Stag rifle for $1200 or a full mil spec BCM for $1300 or a used Colt for about $1000 (EE deals) why would anyone bother with low end brands?

A $500 hammer doesn't make you a better carpenter. All makers have occasional quality problems at times. I have even heard of a Swiss Arms having a malfunction once.
I have worked with CC or Diemacos a bit and sadly over the years, they are also the ones I see most often broken.:sok2
That is strictly because I work with them so much.
The way some of them are used I am tempted to qualify them as recreational firearms too.
The way some of them are abused I would hesitate to call them firearms.
There is no limit to the imagination when it comes to a recruit and a firearm.

Does this mean Diemaco are junk.
Not at all.
But,,, I would rather have someone who can manipulate their tools than be an advertising display.

It is good to buy something nice. Not going to disagree there.
It is better to be able to afford something nice.
It is probably best to be capable of doing something with what you have.

I never said a more expensive rifle will make you a better shooter. I said a higher quality rifle will afford you the chance to be a better shooter. If your $10 hammer splits a handle it's not much of a hammer anymore now is it? My point is that you need to a buy a rifle that works without fail and without needing to be modified or tinkered with out of the box.

Most manufacturers have had the odd issue or lemon, but some brands have yet to produce one whereas other brands seem to only produce lemons. Which brand would you buy?

I will ask this as an open question to all. If there was a table with a DPMS, NEA, Norc, and Dlask AR's on it. Another table has a Colt, BCM, LMT, and Stag rifles on it.... Which table are you going to pick your rifle from if it were free?

TW25B
 
I'm aware that a few hundred isn't a lot, that's why I was upfront about it. Just giving you my thoughts. Not pretending to be a pro, as I said above. If I was in the business of killin' folk (like Corb Lund sings about), I'd take my REC.

This is a thread that will go on for all eternity. There are too many AR's, at too many price points, with different missions, carried by too many people with different attitudes about quality, reliability,and price points.

I'll take my lead from dudes that have been shot back at, not those who shoot paper and steel in gravel pits. I bet those dudes don't say "I can just buy two Norinco's instead....".

-J.
 
I don't own an ar yet but my choice would be one from atrs! Made in Alberta is a cool fact I would pay a little more for. Anyone have any experience with them.
 
I don't know why people hate norinco. They work. They only become PITA when people try to take them apart and do #### to them.
 
I don't know why people hate norinco. They work. They only become PITA when people try to take them apart and do #### to them.

i don't.
i bought my first Norc, the M305 used here on EE & love it.
my first AR is the cheap DPMS Oracle, it shoots great. i'm planning to buy another AR15 & it'll be the Norc CQ-A 15
 
...I agree that too many spend the budget on the gun and have little leftover for ammo or training. On the flip side, if your rifle doesn't run properly then having that ammo is of little use. I have seen many low end guns/optics and I've seen many high/er end guns/optics on both the range and at matches, and I see a few reoccurring patterns. The majority of shooters have very little to no training, and spend very little time and ammo practicing or mastering the basics of operating their guns. The skill level is not directly related to the quality of the equipment being used. The number of low end guns that go down compared to known brands is very high.

What I see from the above data is this:

For the folks who say "buy cheap and spend the difference on ammo/training/better optics".... No one appears to be doing that, rather they spend the savings on another low end firearm/product....
TW25B

As above... So below.

i don't.
i bought my first Norc, the M305 used here on EE & love it.
my first AR is the cheap DPMS Oracle, it shoots great. i'm planning to buy another AR15 & it'll be the Norc CQ-A 15

I don't know why people hate norinco. They work. They only become PITA when people try to take them apart and do #### to them.

The problem is the gun is poorly made and is not in spec which makes changing anything from a bone stock setup a chore. I personally don't like to support nations who treat their people like dirt either...

TW25B
 
I don't know why people hate norinco. They work. They only become PITA when people try to take them apart and do #### to them.

My best friend bought a Norc as his 1st AR. Couldn't zero it, and couldn't figure out why. Turns out his upper wasn't true to the axis of the barrel, and was canted a few degrees off to the left - more than the adjustment on his optic allowed him to compensate for.
 
Lol, guys have won sr matches with Norks. While a fancy gun is very nice to own, it won't make a difference if you never shoot and build your skills.


There is truth there... but that's not the whole story either.

Many of us DO have the skills. Some from years and decades of service in uniforms. So we should not assume that a new buyer of AR's is a n00b to AR's, nor marksmanship and immediate actions.

I'm sure its true that some have won matches using inexpensive Norinco AR's. Skills, preparation, effort, practice all contribute to a victory at a competition.

HOWEVER...

Many who have high mileage in AR's state that this is where Norcs and some other budget AR's fall short, compared to higher range AR's. VERY FEW civilians shoot tens of thousands of rounds, maybe you do, but that's the minority. So for many, realistically a Norc will do just fine if its only for playing at the range. But others want higher quality. They may want something that will dependably give good tight groups and few parts broken, high reliability in all weather conditions, at 50,000 rounds... even if they never approach it. Or maybe they surpass that round count.

Recently a poster here did an endurance test on a Daniel Defense Mk.18, which is basically an AR-15 with 10" barrel. In a year and a half he put more than 30,000 rounds through it, and while he did replace a couple of minor parts, his investment was still going strong. Would a Norc handle 1/3 that number of rounds? I don't really know, but I'd want to see details of a test.

Should swat and special forces teams save money by trading in their LWRC, Colts and Deimaco C8's for Norincos, because some guys won civie shooting matches with Norcs? I don't think so. Apples to oranges, right? Both will feed you, but they are not the same, and sometimes the differences won't matter, while other times the differences are of extreme importance.
 
I currently have a Norc, and I once had a Colt Delta Elite. (I was offered too much money to say no!!! :d)

The fit and finish is miles better on the Colt, but as far as function went, the Colt performed no better than the Norkie.

That being said, I don't (didn't) fire thousands of rounds through either one, because I had to pay for the ammo!!

I do plan to buy a Colt Canada AR with the 15.7" barrel sometime in the near future, though, and use the Norc for a "buddy gun" at the range.
 
Back
Top Bottom