Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles Quality AR's

I may get put on ignore here but I have to ask the question.

Why are quality AR parts viewed as "overpriced" while most everyone dreams of McMillan stocks, custom barrels and custom smiths, S&B, NF, Leica, Swaro optics for bolt guns?

Let's take LaRue mounts for example. A quality mount that sells for $195 and alot of folks complain about the price claiming a cheaper mount does just as good, while Badger base and rings for a bolt gun will cost more and no one says a word.

What's wrong with buying quality parts or a quality AR if you want to? If you want a budget plinker then by all means go ahead but why all the hate for proven quality especially when self defense is thrown into the mix?

I may add more to this but for now let's start here.

I don't think it's hating quality as much as not bowing to a brand name.

I have a LaRue Mount and a couple Armalite mounts. The LaRue mount is very nice but overpriced IMO. BTW - I just picked up an EoTech with a LaRue mount and I think that it's also overpriced.....but I wanted to check one out so who cares!!!

On the other hand, I'm sure there are much more expensive range-finders out there but you'd have to fight me for my Leica LRF 1200 scan. To get to the Leica, I went through a couple Bushnells and a Nikon and ended up with what I felt worked perfectly for my needs . Now if Bushnell had a model that performed as well or better for less $$, you can bet your farm that I'd own the Bushnell.

For me, need/function are my primary consideration but I do keep an eye on value. As long as something works, I could care less what name's on the box.

I also believe if you have plenty of money, always buy the best and you'll never be disappointed but just because someone has lots of money and wants to buy the "best", it doesn't mean that someone else hasn't spent less and found something that's perfect for them as well.....just my .02!!

Alright folks, let's move on.....and please excuse my buddy TWR!!!

Agreed. I think all too often we equate quality with price which isn't always' the case. If a product works it's a good product regardless of it's cost. That said, I like nice stuff as much as anyone.

Here is where I always seem to be at odds with most. 99.9% of these AR-15's sold are for nothing more than plinking and recreation only. I think we tend to lose sight of that from time to time.



Terry

Oh I agree, high price does not equal quality. And I also have stated before that you need to choose what works best for your needs and I try to be careful not coming off as saying "this is the only way" I realy do.

But dang, if you go by the logic some here seem to apply, a Model 1 sales barrel will be just as good as a Kreiger. You know, "parts is parts".

Don't guess it matters none cause I ain't out to change anyones mind but I find it odd that a custom bolt gun is viewed differently than an AR.

Carry on.

BTW - I've always drooled over the McMillan Classic in Desert Camo but my Rem 700 XCR is so scary accurate right out of the box, I'm afraid to mess with it!!

I know I could purchase the McMillan and have it professionally bedded and would have one helluva rife (and be out some serious $$) but mine is scary accurate so until I have money to burn, I'll "make due". Not cracking on McMillans at all, I'd personally love to own one and some day probably will but until then, I doubt the dead deer will care.....

I think I see both sides of the coin here but I maybe wrong. The guy that would make that statement probably only uses his rifle a few times a year to bounce around tin cans and shoot (at) rats at the dump. He's never shot a group with the rifle and it goes bang every time he pulls the trigger. Out of his eye's it would would seem like a valid statment. He has a blaster mentality.

Now that ammo is so expensive he'll probably never prove himself wrong.

Terry

I don't believe in paying for name.

That being said I will pay for what I require. And if another mount does as well as LaRue, but is less dollar, well I'm not stupid.

Much like my smith, he buys what is good parts where he can, and some things like rear sight windage screws suck from ANYONE, he has those machined to his tolerances and we pay for those...

Thats my idea of smart...

Another primo answer is I just dont have the best of luck with douglas barrels and for that issue it saves me money to buy a Krieger generally speaking, but if douglas were as accurate and had as long a life, no way I'd pay extra for them.

Same with stocks... HS isn't it..... MC does it best and I'll pay for that. But if HS was as good as MC, no way I'd pay for that.

And to relate to badger, I have them on my big gun, but don't need em on the smaller ones.... At least I think its badger on the big one, I know that the rings were way more than I thought I'd ever pay for rings, but track records of the 50 gave it that I needed to use the expensive rings...

Bottom to this is if you can't or won't pick and choose, just go buy the top line name with a good reputation, and you'll generally be fine but pay more... me I desire reliability and accuracy, and get both through a custom weapon built for its task. I suspect I"m lucky in the WOP lives the way I do, they use what works but fixes what doesnt' and you pay accordingly, not cheap, not overly expensive and it works...

Thats my take and somewhat of an explanation as to why I answer the way I do sometimes... IE I think its a joke to pay for a LaRue or McCormick gun.....

Jeff

My answer to your question is mention the old "Price/Value" comparison in conjunction with gun accessories, and yes, with guns themselves.

Each of us makes purchase decisions based on what we want, need, feel is top quality, intended use, and our personal budget and experience.
Other factors may include buying products for 'bragging rights', and to impress others.

I freely admit that to me, McMillan stocks, LaRue mounts, Swaro scopes and Filson clothes are 'over priced'. By that, I mean for me, whatever quality and features they represent are not worth the money it costs to acquire them, when placed in conjunction with the use I would have for them.

Others, obviously, may not feel the way I do, but then we are all individuals.

Some folks buy guns on what the resale value will be... I never sell anythign Iv'e bought....

And yep, there are uses for Filson, and such, but not for all folks.

You know we all buy a few things just cause we want them, I have 2 Ingram knives and skin very little fur anymore but I "wanted" them. I have Swaro SLC binos cause I needed them and couldn't afford El's.

As for LaRue mounts, I have a use for what they provide and make no excuses for buying them. Check my post's and you'll see that I have reccomended other brands when asked, I always know what the LaRue will do but most ain't me.

I don't have a need yet for McMillan stocks, the 3 bolt guns I have wear B&C "Ti" stocks and work for my niche. However a friend of mine just had a killer 223AI built complete with McMillan stock, Seekins base and rings, Jewell trigger and a NF scope. It got me thinking why the difference in how the 2 are perceived.

I don't think there is a difference in perception, it just depends on the group of people you are talking to.

There is a group that swears by savages topped with tascos or bushnells, and just can't fathom why you'd spend the $ on a custom rifle or high end glass.

As I posted in the Trigger thread, not everybody uses guns (esp. AR's) the same way.

Using your example-Larue. Why do you buy Larue mounts? Seeing pics of your AR's, and a couple of your posts I have a decent idea, but most do not use their AR for that. The first time I saw a Larue mount it was holding a Short-Dot on an issued gun, and addressed issues with the issued scope mounts. Larue mounts are made for a specific purpose and the mass, mass majority of AR owners do not have a use for them.

For my use, Larue is the ONLY answer. Why? Because I carry a LPV (low powered variable), and a dot and will switch them out as needed. In this use a mount that allows me to quickly detach and reattach an optic with virtually no lose in zero is mandatory. I wouldn't even try this with other mounting systems. Being in combat and wondering if your optic is zereod sucks.

However, if you're using your gun for competition or hunting and mounting a scope and leaving it, why would you pay $200 for a set of rings? I wouldn't. There are several brands that are probably just as strong as Larue, that are way cheaper.

Something to keep in mind is not everybody has a need for Larue mounts... Or any other piece of equipment.

Charles_A makes unbelievably good sense. Yes, I get chided for not having a Larue mount on my match AR. but the last time I removed the scope was to replace the scope with another one and that was 2 years and a few dozen matches and some thousands of rounds in the past.


Instead of paying $200 for a Larue, I opted for an inexpensive but well-built Brownells mount with canted rail. Saved $100 and I can assure you the scope has not moved.

I don't mind paying top dollar for good stuff, but I do that only for things that will give me a real benefit, not just the name. It's like buying a car that goes 200MPH and using it to drive around town.

When you're in a damp, cold deer stand a filson cruiser is worth every penny you paid.

TRW, I think I am totally guilty of this thinking and have made posts stating such. Yes, I have all the high end optic's,Badger rings/mounts. I do think it depends on the use of said weapon, that said my AR's are mostly for playing and varmit hunting.

Ramblin... I agree on the cruiser, would just as well agree on a big parka, in fact the parka might make my wife happier comfort wise while the Filson would keep me just happy.

As others have noted, if you get the performance first, then you worry about cost.

IE I have to have a certain level of performance, and I"m a typical male and don't have excess cash, I'll get there as cheap as I can typically.

What level you need varies...I often shake my head at folks with a 500-1000 buck rifle and a 100 dollar scope. What good does it do to have the rifle, but not be able to see the deer of a lifetime early or late? Me, in that situation I'd pay 500-1000 for the scope, cant' see it, can't shoot it... and buy an HR handirifle... MOD(minute of deer) is big, and I don't really need more than the handirifle.
Anything beyond that is either different needs, or wants.

No bugger on the wants, but lots of us like to point out that for some uses, cost doesn't relate to performance. Beyond that some of us drive the same vehicle till it dies, my current one has over 300K miles on it, others want a Lexus new every year.... fine by me too, but mine gets my job done. While the Lexus gets your job done too, which could be done with mine, but yours is simply a higher cost.

Jeff

I trade trucks every 10 years or so, maybe if it wasn't for LaRue.....

I'll take quality products that suit my needs everyday, cost is long forgotten in the end as long as the product does what you want it to do. If it doesn't even a bargain is a waste of money.

so it looks like we have gone full circle.

We all agree that some products, for some folks, under certain circumstances, for a particular use.................that cheap is a waste of hard earned money, and top shelf is appropriate.

Simple, eh?

Nope, we will never all agree to the same things but that is what makes this interesting.

Noveske
Baer
VTAC
JP

etc.