My buddy wants to pick up an entry level AR soon, and I've

>>30758920
Move along, nothing to see here

>>30758920
The Riger is solid, but it's not milspec due to every part being changed a little with a Ruger logo stamped on it.

The S&W is milspec and about the same quality. Though that price is just a little on the high side for one.

i have a couple AR's one being a ruger 556. took it out of the box and shot a few hundred rounds ran great no issues.

the front sight post is stamped aluminum and kinda weird
the hand guard is also a lot slimmer than a traditional m4 carbines.
barrel and flashhider are their own sort of thing as well.
1:8 twist rate isnt bad either way and the internals are all milspec so id say go for it if he doesnt want to just pick up an upper parts kit or something.

File: troy.jpg (72KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 900x600px

>>30758920
I got a fully built Troy for 600. Came with a sick ass key mod handguard with full picatinny on top. Didn't have sights doe.

>>30758975
Not Op, just curious. Is milspec worth it? I keep hearing conflicting things about it.
One side says it's an arbitrary spec. The other side says it's better build quality.

They're both good entry level guns. Get whichever is cheaper and use the saved money on ammo

>>30758920
IRRC correctly the Ruger has some unique handguard system and a slightly different flash-hider. So it depends what kind of base you want to start working with. I have an M&P and I love it.

>>30759063
There typically isn't much of a price difference. Mil spec is worth it in my opinion. It used to be that commercial was more popular than milspec, but that trend has changed. Milspec is more available, and it tends to be a little tougher than commercial. But you would probably never know the difference unless you seriously abused your rifle.

I'm really considering the Colt AR15A4, I've heard great things and for a grand flat I can't really mope about the price

File: 1452907427260.png (82KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x501px

>>30760068

>>30760095
humor me, is there something I'm not in on? The only AR platform I've handled and truly liked was a DPMS AR10 and a Colt LE6920. Every other rifle I own is bolt action, minus my sks.

>>30760057
>There typically isn't much of a price difference. Mil spec is worth it in my opinion. It used to be that commercial was more popular than milspec, but that trend has changed. Milspec is more available, and it tends to be a little tougher than commercial. But you would probably never know the difference unless you seriously abused your rifle.
The reverse, actually.

Milspec just means it must be at X level of quality. That level isn't actually terribly high, and the civilian market is willing to pay for better, so commercial is getting more popular and of higher quality.

Anyway OP both are nice, I personally really liked a buddy's Ruger AR556, it just felt really nice somehow compared to my PSA build, which itself I have no complaints about. Examine both, pick the one you like.

>>30758975
Stop posting tripshit

>>30760031
Thanks, he had mentioned switching the handguard on the Ruger to something with rails to mount a light... I'll tell him to research that a bit more.

>>30758920
The S&W sport. I have one and it rocks.

Get a Windham

>>30760166
A colt is fine, you are paying for the name when it comes it AR 15s though. There are several now that are cheaper and equal or higher quality.

File: 13435459_1263458673694692_3611233364603495825_n.jpg (86KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 960x720px

M&P sport makes good dakka.

>>30760068
But a BCM 20" govt profile upper and slap it on an inexpensive lower that has an A2 stock. Buy a removable carry handle, and some A2 handguards and boom. A much better rifle set up identically to the Colt AR-15 A4 for a lot cheaper.

OP here again... which one has better sights?