First AR - Sig, DPMS, or COLT?

I have no complaints about DPMS. My second AR rifle ever was a DPMS (fully built DPMS) and it functioned flawlessly for several thousand rounds till I decided to upgrade it. I've heard from others (here and elsewhere) that DPMS has faulty bolt carriers but I never experienced it with that particular rifle.

The problem in your question though is that you never set a price point. A fully built DPMS can be had for around six hundred dollars. Sigs and Colts typically land at a higher price point than that then we can move on to other manufacturers that are pricier yet.

The question here is what is YOUR price point? If money really were not an issue then I'd buy a Knight's Armament... but I'd wager money is an issue right?

Personally though I'd buy the DPMS in a heartbeat if I were on a tight budget. Get that, a handful of Magpul Pmags and some spare parts (spare springs are essential if you start disassembling your rifle - those things can go flying, get bent and/or pinched out of shape if you're not careful).
 
I've heard mixed things about the Sig line, (I've been there when people that just bought one are bringing it back to be fixed.) Colt is awesome and very reliable, (hardly a lemon to be found.) I've heard very good things, locally, about Stag/RRA.
Hope this helps, NE.
 
I realize that the DPMS AP4 is considered inferior but from talking to the guy at my gun shop it was supposed to be a MIL-SPEC copy of the COLT. Any truth to that?
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as a real "mil-spec" AR-15 for our consumption. Reason being, the military specification for the M4 stipulates things that violate the National Firearms Act (three round burst capability, 14.5" barrel... while the shorter barrel can be worked around via a longer pinned on muzzle device or by registering as an SBR, no full auto manufactured after 1986 can be for public consumption, thus, there's no mil-spec M4 on the market).

However, when people refer to a "mil-spec" AR-15, they usually mean that it conforms to the TDP for the M4 wherever possible. That TDP lays out more than just features; it also describes the materials to be used and the quality control checks to be used.

If one means "as mil-spec as possible", then no, DPMS is NOT mil-spec. They tend not to use the higher quality steels, they don't do magnetic particle inspection on EVERY bolt (just batch tests), they use commercial style receiver extensions and not the mil-spec ones, etc.

If you want the low-down on the assorted rifles, there's always "the chart." However, keep in mind that the chart is nothing more than a comparison of how each maker's feature set conforms to the TDP. Maybe that matters to you. Maybe it doesn't. Sometimes there's even improvements over the TDP (such as the new nitrided coatings or full chroming for the BCG). However, if you're looking for a reliable rifle, that TDP is a darn good place to start, and when people discuss what rifles are better than others, that chart is what people are thinking of about being "mil-spec." Sometimes it can be beat but usually changes are more to save money than to offer actual improvements.

Just know what you're getting for your money. And anybody saying DPMS is a mil-spec clone is just trying to sell the one they have sitting on the shelf. It can be a great rifle, it can be full of compromises waiting to trouble you when the bolt's microscopic cracks (not caught since it wasn't tested) let go when you start running a lot of rounds through it. One of the things you pay for with the "better" brands is the quality control checks that have theoretically been done, so you know that the rifle is to a certain level. But that may not be what you need. Just remember- "good enough for me" is NOT a synonym for "just as good as." My entry level Pentax DSLR may be good enough for me, but I'm not going to pretend it's up there with a Nikon D3X. It does what I ask of it, and there's no point in spending more. If that's your needs for a rifle, great. If you want something more, well, then you'll need to spend more to get it.
 
Ok, let's rewind the tape a bit...

- how much do you want to spend?
- does resale value matter to you?
- what type of shooting do you plan to do? Benchrest, off-hand, 50 yards, 500 yards? Coyote elimination?
- is this just going to be a 'look at my cool rifle' rifle?
- personal / home defense?
- how often do you really plan on shooting it?

You don't need to answer these questions here, but you really should ask yourself ... you'll be a lot happier with your rifle 5 yrs from now if you do ;)
 
Thanks for all the feedback. I will most likely be getting the COLT. I realize that the DPMS AP4 is considered inferior but from talking to the guy at my gun shop it was supposed to be a MIL-SPEC copy of the COLT. Any truth to that?
Click to expand...

Not really. Some parts and materials may be mil-spec but there are alot of problems with the DPMS. Things aren't staked properly is the main problem, no MPI or HPT testing of critical parts and overall small parts quality. There is a reason they have different price points.
 
From your choices I would go with the Colt.
I have 2 AR15A2s from the early 90s they have always been reliable and accurate with excellent fit and finish,I also believe the Colts will hold a better resale value in the long run.

I also have a DPMS LR308 AP4 that I bought 7 years ago this rifle has also been totally reliable very accurate and the fit and finish looks very good to me.
 
I have a DPMS. Been carrying it for about a year as I work my property in Eastern AZ. It has taken a lot of abuse as it is exposed to the elements (dust and dirt) in my UTV.

To date it has never malfunctioned and hit what I aim at.

I paid under $1,000 for the rifle, a case of ammo, after market forearm, TG optics w mounting hardware and 4 mags.
 
Nothing wrong with a DPMS if you get one made on a good day that is put together with really good parts.

You may have nothing but problems if you get one made with crap parts on a bad day.

What you are paying for with a Colt is the consistency. The chances of getting a bum weapon with Colt is there, but it is considerably reduced over other makers and they use the same parts as what they put in the military weapons.

DPMS and other makers, use whatever parts are cheapest at the time. Sometimes they get the exact same parts as what Colt uses. Sometimes they use parts that are rejected. Sometimes they just get whatever they can find and replace it if it fails.

That is why you see some many conflicting reports out there. Some people have a DPMS or other brand and have no problems whatsoever. Others have nothing but problems.

YOU just have to decide what is more important for YOU.

Get it and run 200 or 300 rounds through it, it if hasn't failed by then, you will probably be okay. Every rifle I have had problems with, Bushmaster/DPMS, were junk within the 1st 100 rounds if I even got to shoot them at all.:rolleyes:
 
Not even fair to compare the three. The Colt is by far the best choice. Sig QC is sketchy at best right now...
Click to expand...

Yes, it is fair. I have both the Colt LE6920MPR and the Sig M400 and the Sig compares very nicely the Colt. The Colt exceeds the Sig in a couple of areas, the Sig exceeds the Colt in a few. Here's some photos with a little commentary.

Sig top, Colt bottom
SigSauerM400andColtLE6920MP-R.jpg


Here's some of the Sig's features.

F marked front sight, like the Colt
002.jpg


ChromeMolyVanadium barrel meeting the material requirement of MIL-B-11595E. 1:7 twist, chrome lined bore and chamber.
003.jpg


7075-T6 forged upper and lower with "A" forge mark. Ambidextrous mag release.
006-1.jpg


Removeable carry handle.
007-3.jpg


Mil-Spec diameter 6-position receiver extension. Well staked castle nut.
008-3.jpg


(more photos in next post)


The Colt is a nice gun. But materially, it really has nothing on the Sig. The Colt does have an MP marked bolt and barrel. The Sig's are not MP marked, but Sig has informed me that they are sourced from a USGI contractor that does HP and MP test their components. Mil-Spec requires that the barrel and bolt be MP marked for acceptance. The absence of a MP mark does not necessarily indicate it is not MP tested. The Colt has an M16 carrer and an H marked buffer. The Sig has an enchanced AR15 bolt carrier and standard carbine buffer.

The Sig exceeds the Colt in the following areas:
1) Upper/lower tightness. There is no comparison whatsoever. There is simply no up/down or side/side movement in the Sig. Comparatively, there is a lot of slop in the Colt.
2) Finish. the Sig was cosmetically perfect. The Colt has several dings on it that appear to have occurred in assembly. I fixed these with a Sharpie and some Testors flat-black model paint.
3) Warranty. The Sig has a lifetime warranty. Colt 1 year.

I got my Sig for $900. Standard Colt SP6920s run roughly $50-$100 more. I

If you like Sig, they hit a home run with the M400. The Colt is a winner, too. The Colt may eek out a victory over the Sig due to some markings purists claim are necessary, as well as an M16 BCG. But you are not getting a lesser gun with the Sig. It's fantastic.
 
M4 feed ramps, and extractor support device in the barrel extension.
014-1.jpg


Carbine buffer.
017.jpg


Device in lower receiver that presses up on rear upper-lug resulting in tighter lockup.
016-1.jpg


Double heatshield handguards
018-1.jpg


Sig left, Colt right
BCG chromed same placed Colt chromed
007-2.jpg


Sig top, Colt bottom
Enhanced AR-15 carrier (versus M16 for Colt)
005-3.jpg
 
Last of the photos:

Sig left, Colt right
Gas key staked as well as Colt
003-2.jpg


Sig BCG components materially the same as Colt. Per Sig, sourced from a USGI producer.
008-2.jpg
 
RT said:
Get the Colt 6920
http://dsgarms.com/ProductInfo/CO6920.aspx
Click to expand...

Neither the Sig or DPMS were on my short list, but the Colt 6920 was and is the one I went with. Being Mil-spec virtually any part on the gun can be swapped out with endless options.

I ordered mine from DSG Arms around 5 PM, had my FFL fax their license to them about 30 minutes later, and the gun shipped with a tracking number emailed to me the next afternoon. Top notch service and the best price out there right now too. The 6920 is in short supply right now. Typically the 6920 sells for $1100 to $1300 and even more, so the price at DSG Arms makes the 6920 irresistible right now.
 
Micropterus -

Yes, excellent comparison, thanks for taking the time to share !!!

(however... your wife is going to kill you when she sees those grease stains on the carpet :eek: :D )
 
Sig BCG components materially the same as Colt. Per Sig, sourced from a USGI producer.
Click to expand...

I would trust the Colt IS. Not so sure about Sig. Are all the BCGs shot peened from this USGI producer? All MPI tested, or batch tested?
 
I contacted Sig with a significant list of questions about the materials used in the M400.

I was advised that the barrel is CMV meeting 11595E and is pressure tested. Not sure if it is MP inspected. Was advised the bolt is C168 steel, and shot peened. I was told the USGI maker shot peens and pressure tests all their bolts. I was also told the maker performs magnetic particle inspections on all their bolts. He would not (or could not) tell me who the USGI maker was. Whether any of this is true of not is unknown, but I have no reason to disbelieve them.

Neither the barrel nor the bolt are MP marked. But MPI is not a material specification. It is an inspection standard. The MP mark is required for military acceptance.
 
Last edited:
Here my take on the choice you are getting ready to make. Spending a$1,000 on a gas impingement rifle seems silly when for another $500 you can get a piston version of the same rifle.

A piston version of an AR15 is quantum leap from gas impingement in terms of reliability, durability, resale value, etc.... Not to mention all the work you save yourself every time you have to clean the darn thing.

My M-16 was a Colt and I thought it was great. I had DPMS .308 and found it to be a very good rifle, very reliable and equal to a Colt. I sold my DPMS and bought a POF 308 that I've had a couple of years and although they both shoot the same bullets, one is WAY superior.

One thing you have to realize is that today's metal working machines are all computer driven so accuracy is possible at lower price point then in the past, so the premium you pay for a given brand is for intangibles.

If you're definetely going for gas impingement, I'd take the DPMS.
 
Please show us some examples of how a piston AR is "is quantum leap from gas impingement in terms of reliability, durability, resale value".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top