@
tango-papa @
Wayne Dobbs
I've been through Will Larson's (RIP) class twice as well. That and a bunch of bench time is really all I have going for me. Do you find Ken's or anyone else's class to be a huge differentiation from what Will taught? One thing I did appreciate about Will's class was the willingness to discuss things outside the mil-spec. Some folks (and what I've read leads me to believe Ken's may be this way) focus on "The M16 rifle as designed by Stoner and perfected by Colt." and "if you have something else, then you should've bought a Colt instead." That doesn't help you with the reality of the commercial AR market and what you're going to encounter with public and even department guns.
I'm certainly not opposed to taking another class, but don't want to spend the time and money just to reaffirm what I already know.
As to the secondary theme this thread seems to have taken (Colt vs BCM/DD/etc), I will say that my experience after working on a fairly broad sample of AR's is that Colt has 100% hands down the most consistent parts in terms of dimensions, quality, etc. There's a fine line between "better" and better. I'll be honest, I don't really care for BCM. I don't think their guns are bad and there are certainly worse guns to be had, but I'd take a Colt over a BCM every single time. Same for DD, though DD is probably my second pick to Colt. Some of it is assembly procedures. Some of it is parts dimensions. Some of it is "this is "better"" but not quantifiable and introduces other issues.
If a gun works, it works. I don't care who's logo is on the side. That said, my role often involves working on them as well. When it works and it's easy to work on, it's usually a Colt.