Interesting Trip To The Gun Store....LE6920's Galore...

[rob_s]

Guess I’ll have to try again from a computer.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Elmore's armorer course is on my list of classes to take.
I've got the Colt AR15/M16 cert. (x1) and Will Larson's (RIP) course (x2).
Was scheduled for a recert with Colt about 2 weeks ago, but it got covid-cancelled.

Take your thick skin if you do a class with Elmore.

[tango-papa]

Take your thick skin if you do a class with Elmore.

Yeah, thanks for that heads-up.
I've heard the same from a couple guys I work/worked with over the years.

They also said Elmore knows his stuff and as long as you've got thick skin and take a jar of butt-hurt balm to class, the info/knowledge take-aways are worth it.

Curious if you agree?

[ST911]

Take your thick skin if you do a class with Elmore.

Yeah, thanks for that heads-up. I've heard the same from a couple guys I work/worked with over the years.

They also said Elmore knows his stuff and as long as you've got thick skin and take a jar of butt-hurt balm to class, the info/knowledge take-aways are worth it.

True statements. Encyclopedic knowledge, with an equal level of...candor. With that, I also know of examples in which he went way out of his way to help some folks out that needed it and took nothing in return.

[tango-papa]

True statements. Encyclopedic knowledge, with an equal level of...candor. With that, I also know of examples in which he went way out of his way to help some folks out that needed it and took nothing in return.

Good stuff, thanks.
I'm a big fan of candor, so right up my alley.

[stinx]

I bought a 6920 last week from GT distributors and had it shipped to my local FFL, I got the Magpul version was $999.00 I just checked and the magpie version is out of stock but they had others www.gtdist.com/colt-m4-semi-auto-16.html

[rob_s]

Someone really ought to make a chart and then do a write up of what all the features mean...

That chart / write up of features that @rob_s imagined really peaks my interest.

The "chart" rob_s referred to is/was a great comparison tool along with the write-up(s) that went along with it.
He (rob_s) created it several years ago and later took it offline after it created quite the controversy in certain interweb circles.

You can find a few different versions of "the chart" by searching for "m4 carbine the chart".

I wondered if there was some veiled irony the the “chart” reference. Then concluded I was too cynical.

Guess I’ll have to try again from a computer.

hopefully the google gods are working with me not against me today.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

[farscott]

No trouble at all - will see if I can attach/send via PM.


FYI (I dug out my notes to make sure I got it right)...

I took pretty good notes each time I attended William Larson's (RIP) Semper Paratus Arms Armorer course. He made sure to define/explain Milspec very thoroughly as follows:

What is Milspec?

The Milspec is a document (Technical Data Package) that describes the essential technical requirements for purchased materiel that is military unique or substantially modified commercial items. MIL-STD-961 covers the content and format for defense specifications.

The TDP is a proprietary document, owned by Colt, that details how to build a Milspec M4/M16. Any company that makes a part for a military contract carbine/rifle has access to the portion of the TDP applicable to the part they are making.

Milspec criteria include every aspect of the rifle, from the materials it's made from to the treatment of those materials, the dimensions of components made from those materials, testing of these parts, wear and durability, accuracy and service life.

A Milspec rifle is approved by a US Government inspector.

Why is Milspec important? Standardization is beneficial in achieving interoperability, ensuring products meet certain requirements, commonality, reliability and total cost of ownership.


tp

A couple of nits to pick. The MIL-SPEC is not the Technical Data Package. And there is no one single MIL-SPEC that describes the M4 rifle. MIL-SPECs are documents that outline requirements for parts and processes. In DoD practice, a Statement of Work (SOW) is created that describes what a product's form, fit, and function are in terms of requirements. That SOW references multiple MIL-SPECs so that each SOW does not have to recreate the wheel. MIL-SPEC documents address standards for everything from colors to performance testing to data analysis to labeling to shipping requirements. Most MIL-SPEC documents are available online at https://assist.dla.mil/online/start/

The technical data package (TDP) is compromised of the drawings and prints for a product funded by the DoD as described in the SOW. A TDP is typically owned by the DoD as the development that led to the TDP was funded by .gov. There can be TDP for products not funded by the DoD. I am not aware of the M4 TDP's ownership status.

The concept of the TDP is that it is comprehensive enough to allow the recreation of the product described from scratch. If Colt uses gauges to measure a part, the TDP should (but may not as TDP are always done by contractors and .gov checkers typically have no clue as to what is being checked) include the prints for the part and the gauges as well as instructions on how to use the gauges. The prints usually reference multiple MIL-SPEC documents. For example, barrel steel may be specified by MIL-SPEC, finish by another MIL-SPEC, etc.

[ASH556]

@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.

[Nightvisionary]

I would be a buyer at $699. That is the last sale price I recall 6920's selling at within the last year and that is what they are worth. Anything north of $800 are PT Barnum prices and more than I paid for my amnesty list G series FN FAL so no way.