Why are my smartest AR builds ones I dream up for other people?

AR/M4 AR General Discussion
21

[QUOTE=MistWolf;1900564][/QUOTE] Basically, yes.

The stuff common all the way across the board on what I pictures as the ‘M4C Pattern Carbine’
Chrome Lined, 1:7 Twist barrel in 16" or 16" OABL Configurations [SBR’s are a bit different]
Forged Upper/Lower Receivers
Milspec FA BCG
Collapsible Stock
Weaponlight mounted at least 5" forward of the upper receiver
Iron Sights Present
Magazines with MagPul follower (either mil-spec Al, or PMags)
.mil type trigger group (Stock, ALG, or Geissele)

The stuff that varies slightly:
A2/A2X, BattleComp1/1.5/2.0, or BCM Muzzle Device
Milspec (w/ H or H2) or A5 Buffer System
RDS (Aimpoint H1/T1), or maybe EOTech or other Low Powered Variable Optic
Aftermarket Stock/Pistol Grip- usually MOE/MIAD/BCM GF grips; stock is either CTR/MOE/Rogers/UBR type, or SOPMOD/B5/IMOD/STR//EMOD/ACS/ACS-L with sloped cheek)
Sling (Primarily VCAS, but VTAC, Husky, Emdom, or other 2-pt are most common, the odd 1-pt appears)

And there seem to be three really common configurations for the upper:
The LAV type - fixed front irons, ambidextrous 12:00 weaponlight in front of the FSP/Fixed Railed Front Sight set up for direct activation. Either the Mossie FSP mount for the light, a 12.0 FSP Handguard (e.g. LAV DD Carbine), or longer handguard with DD 1.5 Fixed fronts.
The MD/IWC type - offset weaponlight (usually support side leaning), usually folding sights or fixed FSP. Usually an MOE handguard with IWC Offset type mounts, or longer FF handguard configured similarly
The SR07 type - folding iron sights, tape switch activation for weaponlights/NOD attachments located at 12:00, generally with a FF railed handguard.

22

Finally have pictures to illustrate:

Wife’s current carbine up top, my accidental favorite rifle in the middle, and my do-all recce on the bottom

Hers is a 14.5" Pinned BC 1.5 [this needed to be a Cali capable upper] DD LW Middy, Troy VTAC Rail. X300 @ 12:00, DD Fixed Front Sight, AP T1 on LT660 w/ MBUS Rear; API lower with G&R LPK, MOE+ Grip, GSSA, BAD Ambi Selector, H/Sprinco Blue in LMT Milspec Buffer, and LMT SOPMOD Stock. This thing is built brilliantly, and it’s hard not to be jealous of.

Next is the multi-colored rifle, this was meant to be my training beater, but in this configuration it’s my favorite rifle despite being affordable and lacking in bling. I never intended this to be my favorite carbine, but goofing around putting my Gen2 A5 lower on this upper with the TR24, and I couldn’t shake how well it handled or worked. I stumbled into a better configuration than I could have sorted out myself without just mashing parts together like a first grader with a stack of Legos.

It’s a DD V5 LW 16" Middy upper w/ OmegaX 12.0 Rail, SF M300 at 12:00, runs MBUS Sights under a Trijicon TR24RT, the LDE DBAL I2 fits under the 1-4x because of the LT135 1.93" Mount. The lower is a Noveske Gen2 Chainsaw w/ G&R LPK, MIAD, GSSA, A5 Buffer System with ACS.

Finally is my do-all Recce rifle; heavily informed by what I learned from the above carbine, and this thing is one hell of a rifle for what it is: an answer to a few too many questions.

It’s an HCS 16" Recce w/ URX 3.1 13.5" Handguard, OPS M4-S (or 14th) Can, SF VTAC L4 3V in VLTOR Scout Mount (poor-man’s M300) at 12:00, KAC 45* Offset Iron Sights, Leupold Mk6 Optic in LT-135 2.01" Mount. The lower is also a Noveske Gen2 Chainsaw w/ G&R LPK, MIAD, GSSA, and runs a UBR w/ H2/Springco Blue buffer.

The job devised is probably the least logical part of this, but for a civilian Squad DMR equivalent rifle, I think I’ve just about nailed it. Maybe a slight improvement here or there can be had (BCM Upper w/ 13" KMR, slightly lighter barrel meaning a lighter stock/buffer arrangement can be more comfortable), but for a 10lb capped 0-600m daynight reduced signature + NOD capable 5.56 weapon system I’m actually quite happy with the result, since this rifle handles everything I do well, with a roughly 24oz penalty with stuff that won’t be critical that often (match barrel, DBAL, that extra 2x zoom, can), and what I do well is still emphasized (spot, make good range estimates for longer shots, make decent hits at 550yd, use weapon mounted electronics smartly).

My latest rifle is only any good because I accidentally figured out a smart configuration with my DD V5 upper, and I was able to wind up with a decent Recce rifle that can function as a Mk12Mod-R (16" Barrel and OPS 14th shave off 3.5" of OAL from a true Mk12), and it’s about light enough to run with a low powered variable and make sense (hence the Mk6 optic), but it’s still a tad too porky to be a really good social use rifle (luckily I’ll have my Mk18 to go with it shortly), and I’m still inclined to run more rounds through my V5 LW carbine because it’s lighter and I’m not beating on a suppressor in the process.

I have tons of small complaints with each of MY rifles, but all three of the carbine configurations I’ve figured out for my wife (see below) were all instantly better, and I’ve basically given up and modeled my SBR layout off of her current carbine, because it just works better than what I had planned.

That’s how hers started off too, and that was damned good. Only change made was moving from the offset 6V E2 weaponlight off the handguard to the LAV configuration, with a Centurion C4 12.0-FSP handguard at X300 out front at 12:00. It now has a shorter twin with a VTAC/TROY Rail, but the same basic configuration.

23

I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently. I’m going to take my first carbine course this summer. I’m trying to hold judgement until after that, but I can’t help but wonder if my $800 for the class and ammo would be better spent elsewhere.

I’m a civilian, the chance of me needing a pistol is thankfully small. The chance of me needing a rifle is almost non-existent.

24

If you are going to possess a tool, I highly support knowing how to use that tool. There is nothing wrong with carbines as a hobby, I’d much rather be a recreational shooter than a golfer, and in the event that something puts my loved ones at risk there is nothing that I would rather have in my hands than a good carbine that I have thousands of rounds on. It doesn’t take the downfall of society to have a good reason for a rifle. The difference between the airsofter and the shooter is in the long game.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

25

So basically, it’s hilarious that people here have an AR with a light and iron sights or BUIS? Cause there aren’t a whole lot of other configurations possible.

What’s a non-mil-type trigger group?

I don’t own a “M4C pattern carbine” apparently :stuck_out_tongue:

For your tan rifle, does your support hand block your dbal?

26

I forgot the brand side of the weaponlights - very Surefire heavy, anything else is Streamlight or Elzetta; and yeah, some people consider a general use carbine GTG sans ability to identify threats at night.
Irons - same concept, there are people that consider no irons reasonable, or do ridiculous things like put MBUS on railed gas blocks, or have subscribed to the pre-2012 Marine Corps logic of ‘if you can unscrew the TA-31 mount, you can then add a charging handle’, so that does apply.

It’s more of a case that I’m really amused that there are just three particularly common configurations that seem to be settled on, almost all of which are based a very short list of weaponlights attached via an even shorter list of mounts, and one of five iron sight layouts using parts from really only four brands, and 97% of them fit one of three silhouettes.

By mil-type trigger group, I mean mil-spec hammer and full power hammer spring, non-adjustable; so none of the shady single stage match triggers, or adjustable NM setups.

My support hand when wrapped over will gas block area will blcok the IR illum side of the DBAL, but I can move my thumb down and leave it out of the way when I’m doing night stuff. It’s a bit of a transition, but that’s the farthest back I can stick it while still being able to activate it conveniently. I’ve briefly messed with some side rail placements, but I didn’t like them on my M16A4 with an APTIAL, and even on my personal guns didn’t, so that’s where the APTIAL lived on my M16, with the scope mounts I’ve chosen the DBAL works great in that same spot, so it lives there. I’m still waiting to snap up a second one for my Recce, and then let my tan one float between my 16" V5 and my 10.5" SBR.

27

What? You have to unscrew an ACOG to have a charge handle?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

28

Same here.

The one on bottom is the one I built for my wife. It also conforms quite well to Llama’s description.
BCM LW 16" with FSP, A5 kit, SSA, VTAC Mini L-4 in IWC mount, VCAS, and XPS-2. It was built with purpose in mind: lightweight, simple, reliable. It meets that requirement in spades.

The other was my original project that has gone through three iterations now. It is functionally identical to the other one, except that it uses a Centurion CHF barrel and low profile gas block. It usually has that Vortex 2.5-10x32 on it for the type of shooting I do with it. But I have a TR-24 that I swap in or out, need dependent… I think that having a suite of optics choices is ultimately the key. Configure the gun to how you are going to use it and go. Or, as many on here have been saying for years: mission dictates.

29

I guess I’m just not seeing the commonality you’re talking about besides a generic statement that people here tend to have white lights on their guns.

30

+1, in addition I found a significant benefit from running a steeper angle grip and short VFG with modern techniques.

31

LOL…

32

A sling, a light, and an optic.

I get there with a RIS II, an X300U, T-1, and a VCAS.

33

I still don’t understand the problem, but apparently everyone else does…?

I feel you think that the rifle you configured for your wife more perfectly meets her needs. I suspect this is because you are not your wife and are making a somewhat unfounded external conclusion as to how well it meets her needs. You are not applying the same rigid standards you have for your own setup to hers, therefor hers seems to fit her needs “better.” I doubt you have any genius for meeting others needs that suddenly vanishes when you try to apply it to yourself.

Assess where your rifle falls short, and make the necessary corrections. You say you want something lighter, smaller, and more accurate. You can have all three. Why not simply make it lighter, smaller, and more accurate?

34

I’m quite sure the former statement is completely accurate, but that’s seldom how it seems. Once I found the sorts of components where the rifle doesn’t fall short, and in fact excels in added areas, the idea of trying to wring out even more performance seems to be a giant money trap of diminishing returns, so it comes down to being able to accurately assess where a concept for a rifle DOES fall short, and where it merely fails to meet a mission statement or objective goal that doesn’t make tons of sense. It’s not really a problem, especially when a modular platform is used to its absolute fullest, but the varying efficiency to even simple mission requirements (e.g. a sling, a light, an optic) offered by different solutions means that some of them are inferior, and others while superior aren’t cost-efficient.

35

This is the most true statement ever made about carbine configurations. It’s my firm belief that many people get bogged down in capability, when in reality the rifle won’t be great at anything other than being a heavy version of a dream they had in their head. Light/simple always beats heavy/complex.

Obviously the “mission” has to dictate what is necessary, and what is not, but for most guys a good RDS, and light would be all they need.