I disagree. Steady your nerves, I'm about to bash on military equipment.
Here are my 6 harsh criticisms of Milspec gear:
1. This is what Uncle Sam decided could be mass produced at minimal cost by the lowest bidder.
2. Standard issue Milspec gear is about as good as government cheese- you can live with it, but do you really want to?
3. Issue gear is given to the troops the Generals consider expendable. They aren't taking top quality, expensive stuff to the grave. (This is a criticism of the equipment and the system, NOT our brave men and women in uniform!)
4. Milspec is the lowest standard of equipment the government will use. If it was any worse, they couldn't give it away.
5. Top tier operators get better equipment. Milspec doesn't cut it for them. Why should it cut it for you?
6. Milspec gear is designed to function for the lowest common denominator. You are smarter than that.
If you haven't already freaked out at my blasphemy, let me assure you that there is a place for Milspec kit. If all you can afford right now is surplus gear, it can be an excellent choice. Because of it's abundance, Milspec surplus gear can be had cheap-cheap. Much of it is robust and overbuilt to tolerate abuse in hostile environments.
I know. You're still mad at me and demanding an explanation. Ok.
Consider the M16:
The rifle was originally issued with a 3 prong flash hider. It worked fine, but knuckle heads insisted on using it to break chain link fence. They then insisted there was something wrong with the flash hider that kept breaking. Milspec standards changed the flash hider to the "bird cage" we are all familiar with. It was probably the same gang of thugs that used the thin barrel to snap crate straps. Soon reports came back of bent barrels and they had to be thickened to new Milspec standards. That adds considerable weight! Fast forward to today. You'll never guess what the latest manufacturing trend is- light weight "pencil" barrels! Do I even need to rehash the change in powders during Viet Nam?
Consider the 1911:
John Browning designed the pistol with a grip safety. US MIlspec standards required a thumb safety and it was added to an already perfect design. Do any of you shoot a Glock? You do? Enough said there.
I've even heard "rumors" that when the USMC needed sleeping bags they chose light weight civilian models over the available military model. The other branches eventually caught up and the current modular system was developed.
Ok. One more example. I give you the ACU camoflage pattern... Yeah...
Here is what I want you to take away from this:
Milspec gear is NOT always the best. You have a choice when you lay down your hard earned money. Keep in mind, the Military buys from civilian manufacturers. Those same civilian manufacturers are the ones leading product research and then competing for contracts. Uncle Sam tests that gear and sometimes makes changes, but they aren't always changes for the better. Conversely, I'm not saying you have to get all your gear from Gucci.
Make sure you choose the equipment that performs best and best suits your specific need. Consider "MilSpec" just another brand label.