The AR15 as a gadget

[the_tyrant]

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/ar-15/


I was shaking as I shouldered the rifle and peered through the scope at the small steel target 100 yards downrange. It was officially the coldest day in Las Vegas history, and I was in the middle of the desert, buffeted by wind and surrounded by the professional gun press, about to fire an AR-15 for the first time.
I grew up with guns, and I even own a small .22-caliber target pistol that I take to the range occasionally. But I had fired a rifle maybe twice in the past five years. I was a novice, and I was frozen to the core. I flinched as I pulled the trigger the first time, sending my shot wide of the mark. But the recoil wasn’t nearly as bad as I had feared; in fact, the shot was actually pleasant. I fired again with more confidence, and the bullet rang the distant steel plate like a bell; then the next shot hit, and the next.
“You’re doing great,” said Justin Harvel, founder of Black Rain Ordnance and maker of the gun I was shooting.
“It’s not me,” I replied. “I’ve never shot like this in my life. It’s gotta be this gun.”
“Yeah, it’s definitely not your daddy’s hunting rifle, is it?”
In the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, the AR-15 has gone from the most popular rifle in America to the most scrutinized and, in some quarters, vilified. Also known by its military designation, the M16, the rifle was racking up record sales in the years before Sandy Hook, but now, in the midst of a renewed effort to ban this weapon and others like it from civilian hands, the AR-15 market has gone nuclear, with some gun outlets rumored to have done three years’ worth of sales in the three weeks after Newtown.
Now that the post-Newtown nation has suddenly woken up to the breakout popularity of the AR-15, a host of questions are being asked, especially about who is buying these rifles, and why. Why would normal, law-abiding Americans want to own a deadly weapon that was clearly designed for military use? Why are existing AR-15 owners buying as many of these rifles as they can get their hands on? Are these people Doomsday preppers? Militia types, arming for a second American Civil War? Or are they young military fantasists whose minds have been warped by way too much Call of Duty?
Preppers, militia types, and SEAL Team 6 wannabes are certainly represented in the AR-15′s customer base. But fringe groups don’t adequately explain the roughly 5 million “black rifles” (as fans of the gun tend to call it) that are now in the hands of the public. No, the real secret to the AR-15′s incredible success is that this rifle is the “personal computer” of the gun world.
In the past two decades, the AR-15 has evolved into an open, modular gun platform that’s infinitely hackable and accessorizable. With only a few simple tools and no gunsmithing expertise, an AR-15 can be heavily modified, or even assembled from scratch, from widely available parts to suit the fancy and fantasy of each individual user. In this respect, the AR-15 is the world’s first “maker” gun, and this is why its appeal extends well beyond the military enthusiasts that many anti-gun types presume make up its core demographic.

Very, VERY interesting interpretation of the AR-15 as an open platform for innovation and tinkering. Definitely worth a read

[MH]

Yeah... IR15 touch HD and don't forget to jailbreak it...

[TFatseas]

I am a firm believer in the K.I.S.S principle.

(Keep It Simple Stupid) Mine is nothing more than A3 upper with a detachable A2 carry handle.

Might get a red dot or a small 3x scope in the future though, I'm not sure yet. First priority is for the panic to die down so I get my hands on more mags and .223.

[Stealhead]

I am a firm believer in the K.I.S.S principle.

(Keep It Simple Stupid) Mine is nothing more than A3 upper with a detachable A2 carry handle.

Might get a red dot or a small 3x scope in the future though, I'm not sure yet. First priority is for the panic to die down so I get my hands on more mags and .223.


That must be some gun companies marketing because the M16A3 is a fully automatic M16A4 ordered in small numbers by the US Marines.What makes an A3 an A3 is that it has a sear that allows fully automatic fire over an A4s three round burst.In the military the upper of an A3 and A4 are exactly the same.

The A3 you are talking about has to be some firearms manufactures name for an upper receiver that has picatinny rails.I am curious though why have an upper that allows for the direct mounting of sights but not not some other site other than the carrying handle mounted one?Seems kind of a moot point.I would buy an optic and get the full benefit of the upper from the start myself and if I could not afford them all in one go I would buy a rear sight that mounts on the upper first that way I have a back up iron site available for immediate use should the optic fail once I was able to purchase one and a usable weapon with iron sites in the mean time.

[August]

I have this Colt scope for my AR. The nice thing about it is you can still use the iron sights when it's mounted on the weapon.

http://www.gunaccessories.com/AR15/images/ar154x20.jpg

[TFatseas]

That must be some gun companies marketing because the M16A3 is a fully automatic M16A4 ordered in small numbers by the US Marines.What makes an A3 an A3 is that it has a sear that allows fully automatic fire over an A4s three round burst.In the military the upper of an A3 and A4 are exactly the same.

The A3 you are talking about has to be some firearms manufactures name for an upper receiver that has picatinny rails.I am curious though why have an upper that allows for the direct mounting of sights but not not some other site other than the carrying handle mounted one?Seems kind of a moot point.I would buy an optic and get the full benefit of the upper from the start myself and if I could not afford them all in one go I would buy a rear sight that mounts on the upper first that way I have a back up iron site available for immediate use should the optic fail once I was able to purchase one and a usable weapon with iron sites in the mean time.

http://www.biggerhammer.net/ar15/uppers/

On regards to the carry handle. It's because I'm a cheap college student and good optics cost money.:03:

Also, I just like the lines of an AR with a carry handle.

And besides, the A2 sights are a lot better than the BUIS that came with the gun.

[TFatseas]

I have this Colt scope for my AR. The nice thing about it is you can still use the iron sights when it's mounted on the weapon.



Yep, I wouldn't mind finding one of those Colt scopes, but rarity and the Colt premium are making them a tad hard to get a hold of.

I thinking along the lines of something like this for my AR.

https://www.primaryarms.com/Primary_Arms_3X_Compact_Scope_PAC3X_p/pac3x.htm

[Dammit_Carl!]

I ain't going to lie; I wouldn't mind a AR type rifle as I'm very comfortable with the system but I can't honestly justify getting one at the end of the day.

Home D is covered with the shotty (and pistol if/when I can be assed to get one - looking hard at a Stoeger Cougar right now). Fun stuff is covered by the Swede Mauser and the Garand.

Eh, maybe someday...

[Ducimus]

I ain't going to lie; I wouldn't mind a AR type rifle as I'm very comfortable with the system but I can't honestly justify getting one at the end of the day.


I was in the same boat. What justified it to me was two things:
1.) It's a rifle my recoil sensitive wife can shoot comfortably and get rounds on target with.

2.) It's better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it. With the Gun control crew in washington working in full swing to remove that option, I decided that "Now is the time" to get one. :haha:

(Thankfully I was watching the news reports and got our rifle and mags before the rush started in full swing. I saw the news about sandy hook on Friday, was at the gun store the following saturday morning, Fienstien opened her mouth the following sunday afternoon, and the run on the gun stores was at full tilt the following morning on monday.)

[breadcatcher101]

I guess I am old school, but I am happy with my Colt SP-1 AR-15, has a 20 inch barrel, shoots the 55 grain load, is a pleaure to shoot--and very tight groups.

Years back I had a chance to get one of those Colt scopes, 3X I think it was. The guy wanted too much for it IMO, and within 300 yards who needs one anyway.

As for add ons, a sling is all I need, still use the old 20 round mags as well.

[August]

Well aside from the scope the only other modification I've done to my AR is to replace the round hand guard with the old style triangular one. It fits my hand better and the weapon doesn't feel so "rolly".

[Dammit_Carl!]

I hear you, Ducimus.

An SBR AR type would be a good replacement for the shotgun. Or, I get a bayonet for the Garand for the ultimate intimidation factor.

Buying both is really the only correct answer here. :yep:

[Takeda Shingen]

Or, I get a bayonet for the Garand for the ultimate intimidation factor.

I'm not sure just how intimidating I would actually find someone with a bayonet. The strength of the firearm is the ability to harm beyond the range of physical contact. Using a melee attachment negates the distinct advantage of a firearm.

[breadcatcher101]

Nothing wrong with adding a scope, August. I would have bought that one but like i said, too much was wanted for it.

Mine also has the triangle grip as well as a fixed butt stock. From a distance it loks like one of the early type M16's except mine has the enclosed bird cage.

And I do have a bayonet. Not that I need it, but I got in out of respect for a couple of senators from California.

[Stealhead]

I'm not sure just how intimidating I would actually find someone with a bayonet. The strength of the firearm is the ability to harm beyond the range of physical contact. Using a melee attachment negates the distinct advantage of a firearm.



That all depends in well trained hands a rifle with bayonet becomes a very effective melee weapon and can be very deadly.In combat of course the bayonet is only used when the normal role of the firearm is not a viable option.This is very rare in modern warfare but up until the end of WWII a bayonet was a very viable weapon and still is in very close quarters.A solider needs to be able to make a firearm a melee weapon in certain situations.

I do not know when it comes to more recent wars but in Vietnam the bayonet saw a lot of use(as in killing or injuring an enemy) and they do get fixed even today.Sorry the video has some language.(the troopers rifle has a bayonet fixed as you can see it got close enough to be of use)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=121_1246978752

Outside of direct warfare the value of a bayoneted firearm is more questionable though some police officers are killed by getting beaten to death sometimes with their own pistol proving that at extreme close range and blade never hurts or that it can be impossible to bring the ballistic advantage to bear sometimes.

@TFatseas (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=242543) do they have LMT BUIS that kind are just like the rear site in the carrying handle but does not take up the space of course they are designed to be the same height as a carrying handle rear.Of course if you like the carrying handle go with it just it seems to waste having a pictanny upper to me.

[Takeda Shingen]

That all depends in well trained hands a rifle with bayonet becomes a very effective melee weapon and can be very deadly.In combat of course the bayonet is only used when the normal role of the firearm is not a viable option.This is very rare in modern warfare but up until the end of WWII a bayonet was a very viable weapon and still is in very close quarters.

I do not know when it comes to more recent wars but in Vietnam the bayonet saw a lot of use and they do get fixed even today.Sorry the video has some language.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=121_1246978752

Outside of direct warfare the value of a bayoneted firearm is more questionable though some police officers are killed by getting beaten to death sometimes with their own pistol proving that at extreme close range and blade never hurts or that it can be impossible to bring the ballistic advantage to bear sometimes.

Firearms are poorly balanced for melee combat. Giving up your tactical advantage at range to try to use your bayonet on a skilled practictioner will result in said practitioner holding the firearm. If you are talking about carrying a knife with you, that would be an effective alternative in close combat, given training of course. If you are talking about putting a bladed weapon on the end of your 3 1/2 foot long M1, then we are talking about a massive drop in combat efficiency at close range. Again, what works on the battlefield does not necessarily translate into what works in personal defense.

[breadcatcher101]

Even the M1 carbine, a very short weapon had a bayonet and they did have a purpose. My uncle carried one in WW2 and he said they always used it when escorting prisoners.

As for combat, better than nothing I would think.

[August]

Nothing wrong with adding a scope, August. I would have bought that one but like i said, too much was wanted for it.

Mine also has the triangle grip as well as a fixed butt stock. From a distance it loks like one of the early type M16's except mine has the enclosed bird cage.

And I do have a bayonet. Not that I need it, but I got in out of respect for a couple of senators from California.

:salute:

[Stealhead]

Firearms are poorly balanced for melee combat. Giving up your tactical advantage at range to try to use your bayonet on a skilled practictioner will result in said practitioner holding the firearm. If you are talking about carrying a knife with you, that would be an effective alternative in close combat, given training of course. If you are talking about putting a bladed weapon on the end of your 3 1/2 foot long M1, then we are talking about a massive drop in combat efficiency at close range. Again, what works on the battlefield does not necessarily translate into what works in personal defense.


I don't see the point of your post when I clearly stated that the bayonet was the best viable option for a solider a different situation than personal defense.A person that has a firearm for personal defense would be wise to have something else to fall back on in the case of a very close quarters situation where bringing the firearm to bear is not possible.A bayonet would not be a good choice because the likelihood of facing someone with a bayoneted rifle or I recon a spear is not very high.

I did not say that perfectly clearly the first time sorry about that.

[nikimcbee]

I am a firm believer in the K.I.S.S principle.

(Keep It Simple Stupid) Mine is nothing more than A3 upper with a detachable A2 carry handle.

Might get a red dot or a small 3x scope in the future though, I'm not sure yet. First priority is for the panic to die down so I get my hands on more mags and .223.

See AK-47:haha:

[Takeda Shingen]

Even the M1 carbine, a very short weapon had a bayonet and they did have a purpose. My uncle carried one in WW2 and he said they always used it when escorting prisoners.

As for combat, better than nothing I would think.

Yes, you are absolutely right; it was better than nothing. This was the guiding principle behind it's invention as well. It was designed during the advent of the modern era of warfare as a weapon of last resort for single-shot firearms, thus turning the rifle into an impromptu polearm. Of course, it suffererd from the same problem that all polearms do; they had limited range of motion and they functioned best when used in groups. This is why soldiers that carried these firearms, like the committed polearm soldiers, carried a sword until the firearm technology advanced to give soldiers a faster-loading weapon.

[Takeda Shingen]

I don't see the point of your post when I clearly stated that the bayonet was the best viable option for a solider a different situation than personal defense.A person that has a firearm for personal defense would be wise to have something else to fall back on in the case of a very close quarters situation where bringing the firearm to bear is not possible.A bayonet would not be a good choice because the likelihood of facing someone with a bayoneted rifle or I recon a spear is not very high.

I did not say that perfectly clearly the first time sorry about that.

To be honest, I didn't see the real purpose behind your remarks given that the thread was about personal defense, and not battlefield combat, but I was more or less carrying through with the discussion to be polite.

[Stealhead]

To be honest, I didn't see the real purpose behind your remarks given that the thread was about personal defense, and not battlefield combat, but I was more or less carrying through with the discussion to be polite.


You come across as a person that it is hard to openly discuss certain topics with to put it in polite way.

[Takeda Shingen]

You come across as a person that it is hard to openly discuss certain topics with to put it in polite way.

I'll keep my opinion on you to myself. Now let's have the two of us stop hijacking this thread.

[Dammit_Carl!]

http://www.coldsteel.com/Product/88GMS/GROSSE_MESSER.aspx

For those times when a bayonet is not enough, that AR gets too expensive to feed and your inner Conan is crying to be let loose. :up:

[Takeda Shingen]

http://www.coldsteel.com/Product/88GMS/GROSSE_MESSER.aspx

For those times when a bayonet is not enough, that AR gets too expensive to feed and your inner Conan is crying to be let loose. :up:

That would be a step in the right direction. Very effective outdoors, but much less so in narrow rooms and hallways, as well as with ceilings lower than 10 feet. Of course, with the price of $339 US, one would have to wonder about the actual quality of the piece. :hmmm:

[Dammit_Carl!]

Watch the videos of the fat guy slicing up stuff - metal looks to be adequate for the job, I guess.

But, for the sword to enter AR / True Operator territory, it needs picatinny rails.

[Ducimus]

Since the subject came up, some may find this interesting.

Judo Bayonet Fighting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tTSSEFBmZs&playnext=1&list=PLD2A99231AA65B1E9&feature=results_main)

Personally, im putting a bayonet lug on my rifle for historical reasons (as an appreciation for the last wood and steel battle rifle), and because i have the utmost respect for certain politicians who label things as "evil features", some of which were never used in any crime I have ever heard of - ever.

[Takeda Shingen]

Watch the videos of the fat guy slicing up stuff - metal looks to be adequate for the job, I guess.

But, for the sword to enter AR / True Operator territory, it needs picatinny rails.

It isn't usually the blade, but the hilt that will fail. While the blade looks nice, the close-ups of the hilt and guard show it to be rather cheaply made.

Compare it with a similar bastard sword, which retains the simple non-museum design and yet features a higher quality (at about twice the price, too):

http://www.armor.com/sword195.html

[Dammit_Carl!]

Nice.

Piffle on the edged stuff; I want a http://www.museumreplicas.com/p-543-bar-mace.aspx

And for what it is worth, I've seen the AK crowd is starting to get their fashion accessories as well - soon they'll be totin' all sorts of crap on their rifles too!

[Takeda Shingen]

:haha:

Get yourself a horse and you'll be playing polo with heads.

[TFatseas]

See AK-47:haha:

Covered...

http://imageshack.us/a/img7/9121/qwedje213.jpg

Although, one is a 74.:03:

[Stealhead]

Covered...

http://imageshack.us/a/img7/9121/qwedje213.jpg

Although, one is a 74.:03:

Bulgarian AK74

And

Hungarian AK47

[nikimcbee]

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i253/tozman/Military/1572491.jpg

This has always been my fav AK, the one's the Russian cops carry. Never shot one though.

[Dammit_Carl!]

Now a Krinkov SBR slinging 5.56 is something I can get behind!

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/01/chris-dumm/new-from-arsenalk-var-5-56-krinkov-pistol/

And I quote Ruby Rhod here,"Hot! Hot! HOT!!"

p.s. Yes. I know they are talking about a pistol version but its just a hop, skip, jump, $200, and paperwork to make it an SBR.

[TFatseas]

Bulgarian AK74

And

Hungarian AK47

Yep, top one is a Bulgy TGI build where I replaced the original furniture with plum KVAR stuff, and the bottom is a Hungarian kit.

[nikimcbee]

Yep, top one is a Bulgy TGI build where I replaced the original furniture with plum KVAR stuff, and the bottom is a Hungarian kit.

So how can you tell that?:hmmm:

[Stealhead]

So how can you tell that?:hmmm:
The Hungarian AKs have the unique shape to the grips. The majority of AK-74s in the US are from Bulgaria so you can take an educated guess.The plum is the higher quality kit a Bulgarian stock usually will have a greenish color to it.Actually it is all very technical most AK's are actually military surplus that have been re-manufactured to be semi auto only they are then shipped to the US in sections and put back together in the US this has to do with firearms import laws.

Now you can find some old Chinese AKs and also Egyptian Misirs that where originally shipped to the US in the 1970's to early 80's (pre 1988 assault weapons ban) and sold as a solid unit and not put together in US factory.Any "new" AK though is technically produced in the US put together at a factory or sold to you in parts that you build yourself.The quality can be horrible some times so it is better to buy the parts and make it yourself or have a gunsmith do it for you.This is not to cheat the laws but to reduce costs a firearm produced 100% outside the US erans a higher tariff than one that comes in parts that is finished inside the US.