Quote:
|
Do you guys think the price difference between these rifles is justified?
|
Not remotely. The primary difference is in what's stamped on the side.
Quote:
|
the DPMS is 98% as good as the Colt but because it's $550 less I can buy 2000 rounds of 5.56 (there are places online selling 1000 round boxes for $280), then I would go with the DPMS. Or heck I could even spend that saved money on some more of that "training" stuff.
|
This. This is truth. Your money is much better spent on training and/or ammo and/or magazines than on a milled pony engraving.
I've sold the DPMS rifles for years and never heard of the first problem with them. While their entry-level "Sportical" rifle does omit certain features (chromed bore, forward assist, dustcover, shell deflector), they are present on the rest of their line, from the "Oracle" on up.
And to be perfectly frank, I've never understood why everybody got so damned hot n' bothered about this "M4 feedramp" issue. I've never seen any benefit to it, and none of my hundreds of DPMS-buying customers have ever reported any issues with any type of ammo or rate of fire. Mostly it seems like a marketing gimmick dreamed up by some asshole at Colt, sold to the DoD to half-justify Colt's keeping the M4 contract (the only contract they still have; everything else is made by FN down in SC), and from there sold to a public that loves the latest "MilSpec" gadget. Maybe it has some utility if you're slingin' 900rpm of full-auto in horrendously dirty -actual- combat conditions, but for 99% of civilian/LE shooters it seems irrelevant. Likewise, chromed bores/chambers help a little with extraction but provide no realistic benefit to any civvy who isn't throwing down tens of thousands of rounds per year. Chroming also degrades accuracy, which is why long-range Varmint/target AR's don't feature it.