[magsite20 1,664]

While looking at something else on a posting a while back I came across this:

 

http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2259&cid=4

 

This applies to several guns that make the claim they are “MilSpec” simply put if it’s not government surplus or stolen it’s not a “Spec” gun anymore than any other gun made.

 

For one thing an AR has a different pattern to the way the interior of the lower receiver is milled than a M4 or M16 and they don’t have all the holes drilled to hold the additional parts in an automatic weapon.

 

Should Note that DaveM’s Bowie might be a Spec knife.

[David Mark 2,452]

Should Note that DaveM’s Bowie might be a Spec knife.

 

[aka_mythos 35]

I do design work for the military and I'm well aware of how MilSpecs work and impose requirements and I think you're linked article is being overly litteral and semantic in its interpretation. MilSpec is a standard constituting a baseline of quality. An AR15 manufactured to the same quality and undergoing all the required processies and checks can claim to be of a MilSpec quality. The way you're interpreting it is an assertion that MilSpec is synonymous with millitary issued, It isn't.

 

The main aspects of the applicable MilSpec that apply to the M16 and other firearms entail specific dimension checks made at particular tolerancing, the material used to produce each component, the plating, hardening, and treatment of those materials, and the specific means by which components are checked. You produce the parts within exactly the same parameters, treat, and check the parts in exactly the same way, and they pass, they meet the MilSpec and it only becomes a matter of semantics. So while an AR15 built to that same standard might never be accepted by the military due to the lack of features, it does meet all other standards.

 

If it doesn't meet those manufacturing requirements you're right its not MilSpec.

Edited January 11, 2012 by Mythos

[magsite20 1,664]

I do design work for the military and I'm well aware of how MilSpecs work and impose requirements and I think you're linked article is being overly litteral and semantic in its interpretation. MilSpec is a standard constituting a baseline of quality. An AR15 manufactured to the same quality and undergoing all the required processies and checks can claim to be of a MilSpec quality. The way you're interpreting it is an assertion that MilSpec is synonymous with millitary issued, It isn't.

 

The main aspects of the applicable MilSpec that apply to the M16 and other firearms entail specific dimension checks made at particular tolerancing, the material used to produce each component, the plating, hardening, and treatment of those materials, and the specific means by which components are checked. You produce the parts within exactly the same parameters, treat, and check the parts in exactly the same way, and they pass, they meet the MilSpec and it only becomes a matter of semantics. So while an AR15 built to that same standard might never be accepted by the military due to the lack of features, it does meet all other standards.

 

If it doesn't meet those manufacturing requirements you're right its not MilSpec.

 

While I understand some of your point it comes down to it’s either MilSpec or it’s not, similar to is not the standard to be met. For one thing they didn’t pass an inspection / audit by the governing body.

 

Seems like the manufactures’ should state something like “we use the same materials, heat treat, and dimensional tolerance standards as the applicable MilSpec”. Guess it’s just too hard to make that sound hardcore and sexy in an ad.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

I do design work for the military and I'm well aware of how MilSpecs work and impose requirements and I think you're linked article is being overly litteral and semantic in its interpretation. MilSpec is a standard constituting a baseline of quality. An AR15 manufactured to the same quality and undergoing all the required processies and checks can claim to be of a MilSpec quality. The way you're interpreting it is an assertion that MilSpec is synonymous with millitary issued, It isn't.

 

The main aspects of the applicable MilSpec that apply to the M16 and other firearms entail specific dimension checks made at particular tolerancing, the material used to produce each component, the plating, hardening, and treatment of those materials, and the specific means by which components are checked. You produce the parts within exactly the same parameters, treat, and check the parts in exactly the same way, and they pass, they meet the MilSpec and it only becomes a matter of semantics. So while an AR15 built to that same standard might never be accepted by the military due to the lack of features, it does meet all other standards.

 

If it doesn't meet those manufacturing requirements you're right its not MilSpec.

 

Very well said.

[Scott Kenny 144]

Actually, a MILSPEC defines the manufacturing process, so if you follow the manufacturing process specified, it is by definition MILSPEC.

 

For example, most aircraft use MIL-H-5606a hydraulic fluid ('cherry juice'). It's all made the same way, and some of each lot could go to the military, but there is no guarantee that any quantity of any lot will go to the military. But the aircraft spec says 'thou shalt use MIL-H-5606a', so any hydraulic fluid that you buy needs to have that milspec on the can. We never had anything that said property of the US Gov't in the hangar, but we had a lot of MILSPEC stuff.

[DogMan 2,343]

I do design work for the military and I'm well aware of how MilSpecs work and impose requirements and I think you're linked article is being overly litteral and semantic in its interpretation. MilSpec is a standard constituting a baseline of quality. An AR15 manufactured to the same quality and undergoing all the required processies and checks can claim to be of a MilSpec quality. The way you're interpreting it is an assertion that MilSpec is synonymous with millitary issued, It isn't.

 

The main aspects of the applicable MilSpec that apply to the M16 and other firearms entail specific dimension checks made at particular tolerancing, the material used to produce each component, the plating, hardening, and treatment of those materials, and the specific means by which components are checked. You produce the parts within exactly the same parameters, treat, and check the parts in exactly the same way, and they pass, they meet the MilSpec and it only becomes a matter of semantics. So while an AR15 built to that same standard might never be accepted by the military due to the lack of features, it does meet all other standards.

 

If it doesn't meet those manufacturing requirements you're right its not MilSpec.

That's what I wanted to say but I couldn't have done it so eloquently, or with the proper credentials. Thank You.

[Nailbomb 10,221]

its a pretty simple logic statement.

 

All military weapons are mil spec, this does not mean all mil spec weapons are in the hands of our military.

 

when they say mil spec, they really should give the spec's that the gun met. But saying its mil spec is flashier than..

 

"meets military standard MIL-STD-810F"

 

... Like my cellphone does.

[RobRez 1,895]

So, basically, if you pass the tests, and are admitted into the military, you meet the MILSPEC requirements for a soldier and thus you yourself can be considered MILSPEC ??

[Dad2142Dad 6,559]

So, basically, if you pass the tests, and are admitted into the military, you meet the MILSPEC requirements for a soldier and thus you yourself can be considered MILSPEC ??

 

That would be correct, I am MIL SPEC

[Nailbomb 10,221]

So, basically, if you pass the tests, and are admitted into the military, you meet the MILSPEC requirements for a soldier and thus you yourself can be considered MILSPEC ??

 

Why not? theres NSNs for horses and they have to meet specs too, so if you can have a mil-spec horse, why shouldn't I be considered mil-spec?

 

I know theres a NSN for beer too, I believe it was Budweiser. maybe thats mil spec?

[RobRez 1,895]

Cool, I should offer free MIL SPEC tattoos for people who are MIL SPEC. Do it just like a painted on stencil!

[Nailbomb 10,221]

LOL. you would have to find a military standard you could apply.

[Dad2142Dad 6,559]

Cool, I should offer free MIL SPEC tattoos for people who are MIL SPEC. Do it just like a painted on stencil!

 

thats great. Knew a guy who had the USDA Grade "A" Beef Stamp tattooed on his butt

Edited January 11, 2012 by Dad2142Dad

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

The "My AR is more MilSpec than your AR" shit drives me up the wall.

 

There are, without a doubt, manufacturers that cut corners to put out cheap products that are of inferior quality, but you don't always have to pay 150%+ over the rest of the market to have a good weapon if you do your homework and learn about the system (Spike's vs. Colt for example). If you like paying lots more for a Horsey Logo or a Nike Swoosh on your weapon, that is fine with me, just don't talk shit about weapons that you don't own as being inferior due to a different logo on the side receiver!

 

Lastly there are better quality manufacturing standards that exist than the minimal "MilSpec" which is often determined by bureaucrats and politicians that are looking for a system that will meet minimum reliability standards at an acceptable cost for initial purchase and maintenance throughout the service life of a given item.

[Nailbomb 10,221]

at a very minimum you could offer free meat tags?

http://www.theusmarines.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/USMC-Meat-Tag-011.jpg

[YARP 300]

As long as it's YARP/idiot proof, I'm happy!

[TonyRumore 1,332]

I seriously doubt the manufacturer's that claim their shit is "mil-spec", even have a copy of the military specification(s) that apply to their product.

[magsite20 1,664]

So, basically, if you pass the tests, and are admitted into the military, you meet the MILSPEC requirements for a soldier and thus you yourself can be considered MILSPEC ??

 

That would be correct, I am MIL SPEC

 

Not me after 20 years I was put out on the civilian market as surplus with no usable military application or warranty.

[Nailbomb 10,221]

So, basically, if you pass the tests, and are admitted into the military, you meet the MILSPEC requirements for a soldier and thus you yourself can be considered MILSPEC ??

 

That would be correct, I am MIL SPEC

 

Not me after 20 years I was put out on the civilian market as surplus with no usable military application or warranty.

Don't be hard on yourself... maybe this will make you feel better?

[magsite20 1,664]

Thanks I needed that! Guess in some circles I’m a lean mean fighting machine.

[MT Predator 2,294]

There are several little things that can determine whether or not an AR meets military specs. For instance, staking the gas key screws to keep them from backing out of the carrier. You'd be surprised how many manufacturers do not do this. I had a chart at one time illustrating this. Will look for it when I get to the house and post it.

Edited January 11, 2012 by MT Predator

[Sim_Player 1,939]

Good 'ole 5606 hydraulic fluid.

 

I was a F-16D Crew Chief for a couple of years.

 

And we were both very "milspec" at the time, if I recall correctly.

 

I've was ISO'd "to death" at my next job for the next 8 years (in private aviation).

 

They are both specific manufacturing standards.

 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2012 by Sim_Player

[MT Predator 2,294]

Here's a link to M4 info. You have to click on "Comparison Chart" to see who has what on their Carbines.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=html

[Dad2142Dad 6,559]

Here's a link to M4 info. You have to click on "Comparison Chart" to see who has what on their Carbines.

https://spreadsheets...d=5&output=html

 

Thats a great site MT thanks for posting it

[schultze13 354]

If my AR's were Mil-spec I would shit can them. If I remember correctly Mil-spec says a rifle should be able to hold a 5 shot group under 4" at 300 meters. If that is all the better my AR's would shoot I would just carry a slingshot.

[magsite20 1,664]

That’s part of the point people seem to miss is MilSpec is not the highest standard of quality that someone could hope to achieve it’s a minimum standard. Some how the gun buying public accepts this marketing tool as being the best thing out there.

Colt only claims MilSpec on military M4s not their law enforcement weapons.

[timy 1,185]

Cool, I should offer free MIL SPEC tattoos for people who are MIL SPEC. Do it just like a painted on stencil!

 

Could you offer them on a percentage basis? I figure I'm 35% mil-spec since I'm 35 years too old, 35 pounds too heavy, and can only run 35 yards before taking an extended break.

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

If my AR's were Mil-spec I would shit can them. If I remember correctly Mil-spec says a rifle should be able to hold a 5 shot group under 4" at 300 meters. If that is all the better my AR's would shoot I would just carry a slingshot.

 

That is ~1.25 MOA which is far, far better than any of the MilSpec M16 family weapons I have fired will do. I believe it is more like 5" at 100 yards which is ~5 MOA according to this - http://www.americanr...x?id=2287&cid=4

 

Military standards of accuracy and endurance in a rifle are quite different than civilian standards, and not in the way most would expect. In fact, accuracy is a disquieting aspect to a MilSpec M4, which can barely hit the inside of a barn and still meet the Military Standard of a 5-inch group with iron sights at 100 yards. Most shooters—myself included—would not be satisfied with a 5-inch group, but that’s Uncle Sam’s metric for accuracy with the M4. By that generous measure, every commercial M4 carbine passes with flying colors.

 

 

If you are hitting sub 4" groups at 300 yards for five shots, you have a keeper in my book unless you have a heavy barrel or varmint barrel on that sucker!

Edited January 12, 2012 by BuffetDestroyer

[Fallschirmjager667 729]

If my AR's were Mil-spec I would shit can them. If I remember correctly Mil-spec says a rifle should be able to hold a 5 shot group under 4" at 300 meters. If that is all the better my AR's would shoot I would just carry a slingshot.

 

i would cream my pants if i could hold a 4" group with anything