am thinking of getting an ar only interested in F N or colt ,i know F N makes them for the military now ,are there civillian model as good as the military version and which is better FN or colt ? wanting it to target practace and home defense

My Colt M-4 HBAR Elite is nice, but it is an AR after all, same ol', same ol'. Nothing much special about them, squeeze trigger, goes bang, hits target. Colt name may be worth a bit more in long run, but I didn't buy it to sell it used.

Buy the one with features you want or need.

Colt. For the name. For the history. For your Mother.

I am sure its a flip a coin decision, recent Colts all seem to work fine.

Well I don't know about the FN AR, but my FN Scar 16s is heads and tails above the Colt Competition I used to have!!

Colt Competition isn't Colt, just to keep the comparison fair.

forget them piston AR's and SCAR's and just get you a good AK! The SCAR is just an AK want a be!

I have spent a good bit of time both at Colt Defense and Fabrique nationale.

Both are excellent companies. FN though, is a thoroughly modern, completely state of the art factory that I was immensely impressed with its capabilities.

COLT, is a great manufacturer, and its weapons are top notch, but the facility leaves a lot to be desired. The unions are destroying colt.

In the end you cannot go wrong buying either and I would carry either into battle with confidence.

I've been issued both Colt and FN M4s, and there's no practical difference between them functionally or in terms of accuracy. Would be proud to own either.

Why is the union responsible for substandard facilities? Sounds more like a management problem.

Hopefully FN does a better job with the quality of the triggers they send out on their ARs. My friend had the pleasure of spending $2800 on a SCAR 17s and got the worst trigger I've ever pulled. So bad it ruined the rifle. You shouldn't spend that much and get a [bleep] trigger. The QC department at FN should have never let that one leave the factory.

I can't comment on the FN rifles other than they look well made and "feel" like a solid rifle. I have never actually shot one. However, I just got a new Colt LE6920 and am very pleased with its fit and finish. The receivers have absolutely zero play between them, the front sight post is pinned perfect (not canted) all moving parts are smooth and finished well, and no blemishes in machining or anodizing. I know this isn't the case for all rifles coming out of Colt's factory but I was very pleased.

never seen a bad trigger ruin a rifle. Won a handful of perry medals one year before I learned to work on my own m14 after it started doubling and a guy ran some Emory paper in there. Pull was around 10 pounds for two weeks shooting

And while I agree on what u see from.on colt on ur particular gun being nice I
Not one of those issues makes it shoot better by a noticeable difference

I agree mostly. I have had better accuracy with tight fitting receivers vs loose ones. Although, that mainly affects the shooter, not necessarily the rifles mechanical accuracy. Having not shot an FN, I left accuracy and reliability out as I can't compare. The Colt is accurate for what it is and obviously very reliable.

Probably no major difference, but from everything I have read FN is prohibited from contract by using the same exact processes on it's non-US military M16 variants while Colt is not. Look up information on Technical Data Packages for more details.

Issued by whom?

Is FN now making M4's? I know Colt lost the DOD contract but it was contested, never heard who wound up with it.

Yes, they are:

http://kitup.military.com/2013/02/army-awards-m4m4a1-contract-fn.html

I hadn't been paying attention, that's good to know.

Thanks.

I guess I have unrealistic expectations that a $2800 rifle should do better than a 10+LB 3 stage trigger full of grit. I expect a decent one when you spend that kind of money.

its reasonable to expect a decent rifle for $2800.00, if for certain it had a bad trigger for that money they can keep it. I researched the SCAR 308, check out the story on it being imported etc etc. lots of stuff FN does is kind of looney like that 5-7 pistol, and that abortion 308 based on the hunting BAR, magazines 40 each I think. I would get the Colt, I am familiar with that brand.

by the way you can get a cheaper but equally bad trigger from Ruger the SR-762 for about half the price, and it only takes a $230 Giessle to fix it.

Ha, a Geissele will make many triggers feel like crap. How's that Ruger working out compared to the DPMS?

I would recommend the gun to a friend with no qualms. It is a tad heavy but accurate enough to suit me, factory trigger is an abortion. Of the 3 I tried over the last 11 months I like it the best.

I don't disagree, but a trigger doesn't make a rifle innaccurate or unreliable typically. That was my point. I base my take on a gun by its accuracy and reliability.

Not that I'd spend 2800 on a rifle anyway, I can build a better gun with a good trigger for half that, but thats not my call anyway.

Just saying triggers are generally one of the easiest fixes out there.

Issued by the U.S. Army, units I've been assigned to have had both manufactures.

Of interest, a past rifle I was issued had been refurbed up to M16A1 standards ( I've been around a while) it had a 4 digit serial, and was stamped "Colt XM-15" on the receiver. It also had 4 rebuild stamps on it, and this was in 1991. You just don't see that any more, since there have been so many new weapons made and pumped into the system due to wear and tear in theatre.

I have an FN15 with the 20" barrel and it is really nice. I also have an older 6920.

With comparing newer production Colts and the new FN AR's,from what I saw the FN's have a slightly nicer finish and quality. The new FN is pretty accurate, although it doesn't like steel case ammo. My 6920 will eat anything, but it also has a few thousand rounds through it.

I would highly recommend the FN. There do not seem to be many around; I had to hunt for mine.