Thoughts on new Colt LE6960-CCU (Colt Combat Unit)

[Old Bill Dibble]

I didn't see innovative in their ad. I think they were going for "we asked some dudes what they thought worked and this is what they came up with".

[Ibmikey]

I Have only five Colt AR's out of over thirty in the racks but love shooting them and never have a malfunction. Daniel Defense makes a superior product than BCM in my opinion mine shoots on a par with my 6950 only cost a bit more.
So many complaints are made on the finish of rifles of this type from most of the manufacturers...this is a multi purpose rifle designed to be drug through bad conditions and function when needed. One forum had a lengthy discussion by a member who was buying parts from multiple manufacturers but his most important issue was not are the parts compatible but is the color the same on each! It is ok if it does not function properly as long as it looks good.
I recently took an expensive AR and used Brownell's Armahyde (or however it is spelled) and sprayed over brand new anodized parts to make the majority of the rifle OD in color. Looks ok now but when it begins to get wear marks and the black shows through it will really begin to gain character.
In my opinion all firearms look better with a bit of honest wear on the finish, let's others know you use your weapons rather than having them sit in a locked container.

[turtlehead]

Or the Rhodes Scholars over at Colt could just start making quality receivers and they'd overcome the objections and sell more rifles. It's not rocket science.

Or they could start selling their rifles at used prices. Still not buying.

[RTFM]

Thanks all - I've been reading and returning daily to my post - just letting it take its natural course of discussion.

I have always admired the COLT name - as far as first to buy - I waiver even now.
I've been saving my money for a while now and I think the best decision I can make at this moment is who's ever rifle I can get at the end of October - first week of November with out being a waiting list.

Wins.

I do not feel their is such a giant difference in quality over the three discussed here that I would lament any purchase made.

Presently BCM and Colt to me are tied at first choice, with DD third place and lagging by about 0.5% a three way tie by all accounts.
Please continue to add input as you see fit, I enjoy reading and learning.

[Skadoosh]

The BCM and DD have hammer forged barrels. The Colt CCU does not. The BCM and DD have Keymod rails. The Colt is MLOK. Pretty clear which rifle is the loser here.

[turtlehead]

DD has hideous furniture.

Colt makes crappy receivers.

BCM for the win.

[ARSG12]

After hearing in the past how Colt is the top name in AR15s, it sure is strange to now hear so many bad things about them. The Colt LE6920 was once the gold standard that was said to be the all others were measured by.

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by ARSG12

After hearing in the past how Colt is the top name in AR15s, it sure is strange to now hear so many bad things about them. The Colt LE6920 was once the gold standard that was said to be the all others were measured by.

Anyone who claims that Colt isn't currently making high-quality AR-15s has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. I'm not sure why turtlehead keeps repeating the bogus claim that Colt's receivers are low quality, but he's completely wrong here.

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by Skadoosh

The BCM and DD have hammer forged barrels. The Colt CCU does not. The BCM and DD have Keymod rails. The Colt is MLOK. Pretty clear which rifle is the loser here.

You're right about the barrel (though the Colt's barrels are still plenty durable for most people's uses), but as someone who uses and installs both Keymod and M-Lok accessories on a regular basis, I can tell you that M-Lok is a superior mounting system to Keymod. I wouldn't reject a rifle because it had Keymod, but I'd rather have an M-Lok rail.

[turtlehead]

Poorly finished = lower quality.

It's not like this is some secret, Theo.

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by turtlehead

Poorly finished = lower quality.

It's not like this is some secret, Theo.

No. You can say it over and over again, but you're still incorrect.

Colt receivers are finished better than any other rifle in that price range; their anodizing makes their receivers tougher. The only way to get a higher-quality rifle is to buy a more expensive rifle like a DD, BCM, or LMT.

One of the by-products of Colt's super-tough anodizing is that it's not as pretty as the finish on lower-end rifles. But it's tough as heck. At that price I'll choose tough as heck over pretty any day.

[marine6680]

Colt receivers as far as fit/finish are not as nice as some others. All the ones I see sitting on shelves have various cosmetic issues.

I am not sure what would make the anodizing "tougher" as its all the same kind/type/process. Unless its a difference in thickness, because they simply leave them in the tank longer. But I doubt they do more than a DD or BCM or other high end rifles... So any difference in toughness, I would need to see actual testing using proper equipment to believe a real difference exists between higher end brands. I have rifles with dings in the anodizing of scopes, mounts and handguards, but not the rifle, so the finish on the receivers is tough enough.


Other than cosmetics, the quality is good. They are made properly and are tough. Build quality matters most in a rifle used to defend or sent to war or duty.


They do make a good baseline rifle, but their insistence on using a carbine length gas system is why I recommend others first. If they made the 6920 in midlength, then I would recommend them as a good go to for those who want a well made rifle with less chance of problems, but want to spend $1000 or less.

Its just easier for them to stick with the carbine length, as then they can use the same tooling for all their barrels, they just have to cut them to different lengths.


I hear said mlok is the superior mounting method... I have not had any issue with my keymod myself though.

But I do prefer the looks of the mlok rails more.

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by marine6680

I am not sure what would make the anodizing "tougher" as its all the same kind/type/process. Unless its a difference in thickness, because they simply leave them in the tank longer.

I don't know the reason for it, all I know is that our engraving machine had a lot harder time cutting through the finish on Colts than on any other rifles in that price range. The only other rifles that were as difficult to engrave were higher-end models like DD, BCM, etc.

Originally Posted by marine6680

But I doubt they do more than a DD or BCM or other high end rifles... So any difference in toughness, I would need to see actual testing using proper equipment to believe a real difference exists between higher end brands.

The Colts weren't any tougher to engrave than those higher-end models; those models were just as difficult to engrave as the Colts were. Those higher-end models do have a finish that's less smudgy than the Colt, but they also tend to run about $500 more.

Originally Posted by marine6680

Other than cosmetics, the quality is good. They are made properly and are tough. Build quality matters most in a rifle used to defend or sent to war or duty.

Agreed. The only quality difference between Colt and many of those higher-end brands is a prettier finish and a cold hammer forged barrel. But the former makes no difference to me in a hard-use rifle, and the latter makes a relatively small difference in the overall durability of the barrel.

Originally Posted by marine6680

They do make a good baseline rifle, but their insistence on using a carbine length gas system is why I recommend others first.

I agree 100%. For me, this is the main reason to pick a manufacturer like BCM or DD over Colt, at least in a 16" rifle.

[turtlehead]

I've never seen a rifle on the rack I wouldn't change. Even the boutique ones. So much more satisfying to assemble your own from scratch. Can pick and choose the best parts from all the different manufacturers.

And then attach them to a receiver set that doesn't look like it was pulled out of a dumpster.

I think I'm done now.

[marine6680]

I haven't changed my PSA or BCMs... I got them how I wanted them from the get go. Just added sights and any accessories needed. (unless you count replacing the basic furniture on the PSA with basic magpul drop ins)

Now, I have changed a few of my ARs a good bit... Mostly the fiance's rifles.

[Fishbed77]

The only quality difference between Colt and many of those higher-end brands is a prettier finish and a cold hammer forged barrel. But the former makes no difference to me in a hard-use rifle, and the latter makes a relatively small difference in the overall durability of the barrel.

As a side note, issued Colt M4s seem to survive just fine with the non-hammer-forged barrels.

[marine6680]

Most people would never know the difference in long term durability of CHF over regular barrels...


I prefer them because I have found them to be very consistent in quality and accuracy.

Even my FN barrels with their "double thick" chrome lining, despite the general rule that chrome lining can decrease accuracy, let alone a double thick plating... Mine have been above average.

Now I am going off what was said in another thread that BCM sources their CHF barrels form FN. Between my PSA and two BCMs, that makes three barrels that shoot very well for a standard AR.

[rickyrick]

My first experience with a CHF barrel was my 2009 production mini14. I never experienced the typical mini14 accuracy issues.

I own a PSA kit with their CHF chrome lined fn barrels ... it's great.

But I can't really tell the difference in most of my barrels in the ARs I have. An 80$ naked 4150 barrel seems to be pulling out in front accuracy wise, weird.

[Old Bill Dibble]

Anyone who claims that Colt isn't currently making high-quality AR-15s has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. I'm not sure why turtlehead keeps repeating the bogus claim that Colt's receivers are low quality, but he's completely wrong here.

Haters gonna hate...

I've never had any problem with my Colts. They tend to run more smoothly than my off brand AR's. I am too cheap to spend big money on DD/ BCM/ Noveske rifles when I can get the performance I need well over a grand cheaper. I can't fathom the marginal performance improvement I might get or even care about how an AR looks enough to spend that kind of money.

I have never found how the appearance of the finish on a rifle receiver looks effects it's operating capabilities, ever. An AR is a working rifle, like a Glock or a hammer. I don't need a pretty one I just need one that works and is affordable. Of course I spent 24 years in the Army so any Colt that is NiB looks way better than practically every rifle I carried for work for two and half decades.

[Gunslick]

Go BCM. I run mine as hard as an ar can be ran-in fact have blown a gas tube even and I don't do mag dumps. When we train for 3 gun matches and just for fun we do a lot of running and shooting on the move and a lot of close quarter very rapid fire and rapid target aquisition on multiple targets. Heck last time out which was yestarday we were running 1-5 drills but with 8 targets instead of 3 and they were spread at various distances instead of 3 targets 5-6 feet apart. We did it with 8 targets so there would be a reload in there. Ran this target quite a few times with no breaks in between. I run a hammer forged BCM 14.5 midi and H2 buffer. I think its about time to start running an H3 though. BCM's customer service is second to none also. If you are high volume shooter such as my self you can buy an upper for them, shoot it until the damn thing breaks ship it back to them, and they will ship you a new upper. Ive done it.

[stormyone]

The Colt says its available from Talo. Limited?

I'd get the BCM.

[Sry0fcr]

Originally Posted by turtlehead

Poorly finished = lower quality.

From a manufacturing standpoint the definition of quality is adherence to requirements. Without actually knowing what the anodizing process's acceptance criteria is (read: Colt's TDP) you can't factually make that statement. Of course you can have your personal opinion on what looks nicer, but one shouldn't confuse cosmetics with actual manufacturing prowess and then make those statements as facts.

Sincerely,
Exemplar Global Lead Auditor
ASQ Certified Quality Auditor
ASQ Certified Quality Process Analyst
ASQ Certified Quality Improvement Associate

[Llama Bob]

It looks to me like a quality basic weapon at a price point that's very hard to match assuming you go for an equivalent level of quality on the barrel and small parts. It looks like everything there is milspec or better.

The same gun from FN is almost $200 more expensive, although it does come with (potentially unwanted) magpul backup sights.

I've already got a gun serving the exact same role, but if I needed one I'd buy it and feel confident it was a good gun.

[peggysue]

Good deal for $500..get it

[Skans]

The MSRP on the Colt is $1,300.....Serously? Anyone can build (assemble) the same thing for about $600. Why aren't the Chinese making cheap 80% fake "Colt" receivers yet? They really need to get on the ball!!!