Looking to purchase a new AR any suggestions?

[cmshoot]

That's all speculation in my opinion. Has anyone like SOTAR ever did a direct comparison of a FN barrel bought from FN vs one bought from PSA?

I'd interested in that. Because that letter clearly states the barrels "wouldn't be unsuitable for FN's own commercial purposes"

I don't know if Chad Albrecht has done that comparison, but I'd be very interested in it if he does. I'll do some digging.

To me, FN's statement "wouldn't be unsuitable for FN's own commercial purposes" is the single biggest red flag in the letter, and further proves what I believe.

Notice that FN states "commercial purposes". Commercial, as in civilian sales, as in "does not have to meet or exceed military specifications". That tells me that FN knows that those barrels will not meet or exceed milspec, so they can't use them for "military purposes", and would only use them in "commercial purposes". Yuuuuuuuge red flag.

Again, more obfuscation. Smoke and mirrors. It would have been very easy for FN to answer that question, and they chose to cloud the issue.

None of this means that the FN/PSA barrels are not great barrels for what us non-military folks are using our barrels for. It does make further evidence that FN makes different barrels to different specs for different folks, with differing prices.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

If they buy the lowers there is infraction. Einstein!

add that to the long list of things you're wrong about

 

[cmshoot]

Just looking at Brownell's and see an SOLGW trigger that is built by Schmidt. Same trigger as PSA sells and ALG. Just at different prices. It really amazes me sometimes what people will pay for a name when that name just sourced it from the manufacturer like a couple dozen other name brands did.

Also include Aero, FCD, and Centurion Arms in that group with that same trigger.

Yes, it's common practice, but does not mean that's what everyone is doing with everything.

 

[cmshoot]

Brownells sells SOLGW parts cheaper than SOLGW does. Does SOLGW have a different spec they send to Brownells?

That's not the same as what I explained, because SOLGW doesn't make anything. SOLGW contracts with different companies to make their parts for them, with SOLGW's name on them.

Their BA barrels are marked SOLGW.

Their rails made by SLR, Hodge, and others, are all marked SOLGW.

FN, on the other hand, makes all their own barrels in-house.

 

[CTS Tactical]

Just looking at Brownell's and see an SOLGW trigger that is manufactured

I don't know if Chad Albrecht has done that comparison, but I'd be very interested in it if he does. I'll do some digging.

To me, FN's statement "wouldn't be unsuitable for FN's own commercial purposes" is the single biggest red flag in the letter, and further proves what I believe.

Notice that FN states "commercial purposes". Commercial, as in civilian sales, as in "does not have to meet or exceed military specifications". That tells me that FN knows that those barrels will not meet or exceed milspec, so they can't use them for "military purposes", and would only use them in "commercial purposes". Yuuuuuuuge red flag.

Again, more obfuscation. Smoke and mirrors. It would have been very easy for FN to answer that question, and they chose to cloud the issue.

None of this means that the FN/PSA barrels are not great barrels for what us non-military folks are using our barrels for. It does make further evidence that FN makes different barrels to different specs for different folks, with differing prices.

If I am not mistaken, FN is only allowed to make any parts that adhere to the TDP for military use. They cannot legally make that same part and sell it to PSA or anyone else. They are basically building guns for the military under license from Colt's TDP.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

I don't know if Chad Albrecht has done that comparison, but I'd be very interested in it if he does. I'll do some digging.

To me, FN's statement "wouldn't be unsuitable for FN's own commercial purposes" is the single biggest red flag in the letter, and further proves what I believe.

Notice that FN states "commercial purposes". Commercial, as in civilian sales, as in "does not have to meet or exceed military specifications". That tells me that FN knows that those barrels will not meet or exceed milspec, so they can't use them for "military purposes", and would only use them in "commercial purposes". Yuuuuuuuge red flag.

Again, more obfuscation. Smoke and mirrors. It would have been very easy for FN to answer that question, and they chose to cloud the issue.

None of this means that the FN/PSA barrels are not great barrels for what us non-military folks are using our barrels for. It does make further evidence that FN makes different barrels to different specs for different folks, with differing prices.

Yep, agree there. That part put a end to the myth that they are Gov contract overruns. Atleast for that particular batch that the letter is addressing.

 

[cmshoot]

Just looking at Brownell's and see an SOLGW trigger that is manufactured


If I am not mistaken, FN is only allowed to make any parts that adhere to the TDP for military use. They cannot legally make that same part and sell it to PSA or anyone else. They are basically building guns for the military under license from Colt's TDP.

I do not believe that is true, at least in regards to their barrels. I have never seen or heard anything that prohibits Colt or FN from making their milspec barrels for civilian sales. I've owned both, sourced through legal civilian sources.

 

[cmshoot]

Are the Hodge barrels 5R rifled? There is a known velocity increase in 5R compared to standard rifling. Especially compared to 4 or 6 groove.

Buddy of mine just ran a borescope down his Hodge 12.5" EPR barrel. It has 6 groove rifling.

 

[CTS Tactical]

I do not believe that is true, at least in regards to their barrels. I have never seen or heard anything that prohibits Colt or FN from making their milspec barrels for civilian sales. I've owned both, sourced through legal civilian sources.

Colt can. FN cannot. At least that is my understanding. Colt owns the TDP and military is licensed to use it. That is how FN managed to get the contract away from Colt. They had to agree in the contract that anything made to Colt's specs (TDP) would be made for military consumption only.

 

[CTS Tactical]

This is in PDF form so I cannot copy and paste so here are screenshots: