User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:24:46 PM EST
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:25:29 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m not familiar with that exact configuration, but at first glance it looks like it’s superior to the adopted M16A2 rifle. The A2 is an abomination that took many steps back from the A1, which was probably the finest infantry rifle “for its time” ever fielded. Keep the A1 stock. Replace the A1 handguards with A2, and make it a flat top with an A1 detachable carry handle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:25:55 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I recently finished my A2 clone (complete with a minty Trijicon 1x24 Reflex and NOS gooseneck) and it shoots like a dream. Perhaps it's nostalgia but I always enjoyed carrying it. I'd be lying if I said there weren't miles where I wished it was a pencil barrel but I think it was a great rifle for its time for mass issue. Perfect? Maybe, maybe not. Abomination? Compared to what? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I am serious, and don’t call me Shirley. It is a worse rifle than the A1. I recently finished my A2 clone (complete with a minty Trijicon 1x24 Reflex and NOS gooseneck) and it shoots like a dream. Perhaps it's nostalgia but I always enjoyed carrying it. I'd be lying if I said there weren't miles where I wished it was a pencil barrel but I think it was a great rifle for its time for mass issue. Perfect? Maybe, maybe not. Abomination? Compared to what? To the A1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:26:20 PM EST
[#4]
The A2 pistol grip and its stupid little bump is the biggest piece of shit ever issued with an M16.
I swapped for an A1 or MIAD/etc as soon/often as I could. I don't get the cult of the A2 pistol grip here. You are alone in the world. Quoted: I what way? Get a rifle issued... set the front sight post flush, BSZ the rear. At the range, zero your rifle, then adjust windage and elevation as needed with a pair of knobs as you move to the 300 and 500 yard lines. (OK, be pedantic, elevation is a wheel.) No need to futz around with a tool to adjust elevation at the front sight post or to depress the pin to adjust rear windage. A1 sights suck. I qualified annually with an A2. Easy-peasy... m They're easily manipulated compared to an A1s sights, for example. Sure, you can "set it" but you can't "forget it" when you're dealing with knobs. GREAT for the flat range, NOT OPTIMAL for combat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:28:51 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I hate it because it represents the only time in this country's history that we've adopted a new rifle as a direct successor to the previous one that is worse in virtually every practical category. 3 round burst and the ass backward barrel weight distribution are the obvious ones. Agree on the three round burst. Mostly I hate the three round burst because it made the trigger inconsistent and creepy. I honestly never noticed the barrel weight distribution was an issue. Pistol grip nub and longer stock are personal preference I suppose, but I find few people defend them. It was a pistol grip. The nub was there, but didn't get in my way, and while I'm not over six feet, at least for me, the length of pull was never an issue. The rear sight. It's heavier and more complex than what it replaced. More fragile too. Yes, the rear sight added a a ounce or two. I guess that qualifies as 'heavier'. It was also far superior to adjust and make elevation and windage changes. I don't recall ever seeing one break. I guess I'm glad the plastic formulation was strengthened. The A2 aperture is an improvement. The 1:7 barrel is correctly matched to the new ammunition supply. That's about what I can come up with for improvements. m |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:31:59 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think I've explained my reasoning pretty consistently. You don't have to agree. My contention is that the A2 program was counterproductive, and the result of it was a worse rifle than it replaced. It's the only example of such a thing in American history to my knowledge. How about actual performance differences between the two instead of subjective likes/dislikes? In my mind the biggest negative was the 3 round burst that didn't reset. I know that Coldblue explained that the Army was going to remove the automatic fire option and he went with a COTS burst system as a middle ground, but a resetting burst would have been much better received |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:32:04 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's hardly an abomination. The stock is fine for men. If your a manlet than I understand your complaint. The rear sight is fine for field use. They don't get "knocked off". And with a paint pen you can tell when your buddy cranked it a few clicks off to mess with you. And the front sight is a huge improvement. The heavier govt profile barrel was developed with faulty information and doesn't add "that" much more weight but I would agree it isn't necessary but also doesn't make it an abomination. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I’m not familiar with that exact configuration, but at first glance it looks like it’s superior to the adopted M16A2 rifle. The A2 is an abomination that took many steps back from the A1, which was probably the finest infantry rifle “for its time” ever fielded. It's hardly an abomination. The stock is fine for men. If your a manlet than I understand your complaint. The rear sight is fine for field use. They don't get "knocked off". And with a paint pen you can tell when your buddy cranked it a few clicks off to mess with you. And the front sight is a huge improvement. The heavier govt profile barrel was developed with faulty information and doesn't add "that" much more weight but I would agree it isn't necessary but also doesn't make it an abomination. You said it a lot nicer than I would have. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:34:27 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 stock is too long to be useful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:37:58 PM EST
[#9]
You can tell by the picture that that thing smells like maple syrup and shame.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:39:21 PM EST
[#10]
I find it funny that people will say Marines are dumb and then say the A2 sights are too complicated. Even the dumbest of Jarheads can figure out the A2 sights.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:44:33 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To the A1. .....abomination. ....is a worse rifle than the A1. ...is not a bad rifle. I've also chosen the wrong word and kept on digging when it was pointed out. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:44:53 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How about actual performance differences between the two instead of subjective likes/dislikes? In my mind the biggest negative was the 3 round burst that didn't reset. I know that Coldblue explained that the Army was going to remove the automatic fire option and he went with a COTS burst system as a middle ground, but a resetting burst would have been much better received Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I think I've explained my reasoning pretty consistently. You don't have to agree. My contention is that the A2 program was counterproductive, and the result of it was a worse rifle than it replaced. It's the only example of such a thing in American history to my knowledge. How about actual performance differences between the two instead of subjective likes/dislikes? In my mind the biggest negative was the 3 round burst that didn't reset. I know that Coldblue explained that the Army was going to remove the automatic fire option and he went with a COTS burst system as a middle ground, but a resetting burst would have been much better received I temper my opinions on the A2 design team because I’m aware Coldblue was involved. I’ve also had other Arfcommers send me rather rude PMs on his behalf suggesting I should be banned or censured for personal attacks against him, simply for criticizing the A2 program and design. I have my opinion. I love the M16A1, and I think a very few modifications should have been made to update it in the 80s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:48:54 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: .....abomination. ....It is a worse rifle than the A1. ...is not a bad rifle. I've also chosen the wrong word and kept on digging when it was pointed out. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: To the A1. .....abomination. ....It is a worse rifle than the A1. ...is not a bad rifle. I've also chosen the wrong word and kept on digging when it was pointed out. I stand behind it. I don’t like the A2. I’m also able to recognize that it’s still better than most of its competitors from its era. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:49:54 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You have to understand some of the uniformed rocks we have in the service. Oh, I sort of do. They post here. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 7:58:09 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 35lbs is false. If you add plate and full mag pouches maybe. Plus all extra attachments. I was issued both and currently have 3 interceptors that all way under 12 lbs Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Once we were issued IBA and IOTV the A2 stock sucked. How did troops manage for 2 decades with A2 stocks and PASGT vests? Those were way more bulky than the IBA and IOTV https://www.wearethemighty.com/uploads/2021/01/members-of-3rd-plt-co-a-1st-bn-327th-infantry-regt-1st-brigade-airborne-div-f2f39b-1600-1536x1015.jpg  PASGT vest weight: 7.1-11 lbs depending upon size. https://bpldcassets.blob.core.windows.net/derivatives/images/commonwealth:d217qz443/image_access_800.jpg IOTV weight: ~35 pounds. https://live.staticflickr.com/2944/15193009730_2e2dea719a_b.jpg ETA: I only remember using the PASGT vest twice. The first time was at the basic training grenade range, and the assumption was they gave them to us because they were smaller, lighter, and easier to throw the live grenades. The other time was at POG school where we weren't allocated IBAs and the drill sergeants wanted us to wear something. 35lbs is false. If you add plate and full mag pouches maybe. Plus all extra attachments. I was issued both and currently have 3 interceptors that all way under 12 lbs You say that like the plates and attachments were optional. The only part of the IOTV that was optional for us was the shoulder things. Plates, side plates, nut flap, and the neck thing were all mandatory, and I’m pretty sure that guidance was division level if not higher. Put all that system together, and you’re easily north of 30 pounds without mags, IFAK, or anything else. Okay |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:04:44 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's hardly an abomination. The stock is fine for men. If your a manlet than I understand your complaint. The rear sight is fine for field use. They don't get "knocked off". And with a paint pen you can tell when your buddy cranked it a few clicks off to mess with you. And the front sight is a huge improvement. The heavier govt profile barrel was developed with faulty information and doesn't add "that" much more weight but I would agree it isn't necessary but also doesn't make it an abomination. This. Not a thing wrong with the A2. And yes, I carried one for many years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:05:51 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 pistol grip and its stupid little bump is the biggest piece of shit ever issued with an M16. I swapped for an A1 or MIAD/etc as soon/often as I could. I don't get the cult of the A2 pistol grip here. You are alone in the world. They're easily manipulated compared to an A1s sights, for example. Sure, you can "set it" but you can't "forget it" when you're dealing with knobs. GREAT for the flat range, NOT OPTIMAL for combat.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:30:43 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 pistol grip and its stupid little bump is the biggest piece of shit ever issued with an M16. I swapped for an A1 or MIAD/etc as soon/often as I could. I don't get the cult of the A2 pistol grip here. You are alone in the world. They're easily manipulated compared to an A1s sights, for example. Sure, you can "set it" but you can't "forget it" when you're dealing with knobs. GREAT for the flat range, NOT OPTIMAL for combat. Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 pistol grip and its stupid little bump is the biggest piece of shit ever issued with an M16. I swapped for an A1 or MIAD/etc as soon/often as I could. I don't get the cult of the A2 pistol grip here. You are alone in the world. Quoted: I what way? Get a rifle issued... set the front sight post flush, BSZ the rear. At the range, zero your rifle, then adjust windage and elevation as needed with a pair of knobs as you move to the 300 and 500 yard lines. (OK, be pedantic, elevation is a wheel.) No need to futz around with a tool to adjust elevation at the front sight post or to depress the pin to adjust rear windage. A1 sights suck. I qualified annually with an A2. Easy-peasy... m They're easily manipulated compared to an A1s sights, for example. Sure, you can "set it" but you can't "forget it" when you're dealing with knobs. GREAT for the flat range, NOT OPTIMAL for combat. What kind of knuckle dragging, tard scale fuckery do you need to get involved with to kill your BZO by accidentally turning A2 knobs? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:32:55 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You say that like the plates and attachments were optional. The only part of the IOTV that was optional for us was the shoulder things. Plates, side plates, nut flap, and the neck thing were all mandatory, and I’m pretty sure that guidance was division level if not higher. Put all that system together, and you’re easily north of 30 pounds without mags, IFAK, or anything else. Okay Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Once we were issued IBA and IOTV the A2 stock sucked. How did troops manage for 2 decades with A2 stocks and PASGT vests? Those were way more bulky than the IBA and IOTV https://www.wearethemighty.com/uploads/2021/01/members-of-3rd-plt-co-a-1st-bn-327th-infantry-regt-1st-brigade-airborne-div-f2f39b-1600-1536x1015.jpg PASGT vest weight: 7.1-11 lbs depending upon size. https://bpldcassets.blob.core.windows.net/derivatives/images/commonwealth:d217qz443/image_access_800.jpg IOTV weight: ~35 pounds. https://live.staticflickr.com/2944/15193009730_2e2dea719a_b.jpg ETA: I only remember using the PASGT vest twice. The first time was at the basic training grenade range, and the assumption was they gave them to us because they were smaller, lighter, and easier to throw the live grenades. The other time was at POG school where we weren't allocated IBAs and the drill sergeants wanted us to wear something. 35lbs is false. If you add plate and full mag pouches maybe. Plus all extra attachments. I was issued both and currently have 3 interceptors that all way under 12 lbs You say that like the plates and attachments were optional. The only part of the IOTV that was optional for us was the shoulder things. Plates, side plates, nut flap, and the neck thing were all mandatory, and I’m pretty sure that guidance was division level if not higher. Put all that system together, and you’re easily north of 30 pounds without mags, IFAK, or anything else. Okay I can go weigh everything but the groin protector. Would you like to bet how much it weighs. Thats a medium interceptor, large sapi plates, and neck protector. That's all we were required. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:44:32 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can go weigh everything but the groin protector. Would you like to bet how much it weighs. Thats a medium interceptor, large sapi plates, and neck protector. That's all we were required. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:44:39 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can go weigh everything but the groin protector. Would you like to bet how much it weighs. Thats a medium interceptor, large sapi plates, and neck protector. That's all we were required.  Attached File30 lbs exactly |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 8:51:04 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I can go weigh everything but the groin protector. Would you like to bet how much it weighs. Thats a medium interceptor, large sapi plates, and neck protector. That's all we were required. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/138579/20230221_204125_jpg-2720044.JPG 30 lbs exactly I forgot about the side plates. They weren't required in 04. But that's still less than 34 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 9:05:17 PM EST
[#23]
I don't miss my A2 at all I do miss my A1 with FN 1/12 barrel. Hate the A2 stock and grip both. The A1 is such a balanced rifle, reminds me of the M1 carbine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 9:10:39 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Meh, the rear sight may not be a big plus but while you may think it's overly complicated it does make shooting on a kd range easier. Shooting out to 500 yards with irons is a big confidence booster and when you're shooting out that far in combat it's nice to know you can. Agree completely. Brings a level of confidence that translates well to a lot of other shooting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 9:32:20 PM EST
[#25]
Since we're on the subject of the 3 round burst - I'm in agreement that they should have skipped it and just gone semi-auto only on the A2. Marine Corps doctrine and training is built around the Automatic Weapons fire in the Squad is that those fires should be coming from the SAW, which should be the M249/M416. That said, you can put a hell of a lot of lead down-range with the 3RB. Not sure what the actual RPM difference would be between SAO and 3RB with someone who's proficient with the gear. I liked the A2's I carried a LOT better than the A1's. I even had the misfortune to draw an XM16 at one point. The issues with that one probably stemmed from it being a clapped out POS rather than so much being wrong with the weapon system.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 9:39:00 PM EST
[#26]
My first AR was flattop, so I get that I'm waaay out of my lane if I were to try to talk anything about "military issue", buuut:
The A2 plastic seems like a very solid upgrade, as does the flash hider, the twist rate, and the front sight. That said, I replace the square post on my personal rifles with the KNS crosshair. I get the arguments back and forth either way, but I land more on the A2 rear sight than on the A1. I will say that I perceive the MaTech style lever/range setup to be pretty nice, and my favorite in rear irons. My airsoft/laser rifle has a carry handle and fixed front sight, just so I can keep some kind of practice up with rifle irons, and every now and then I wonder about having a an actual carry handle 5.56. How about this, as a way to both make partial peace and keep the convo going, what's "your old-school cool" carry handle, A1/A2 forearm rifle setup? Here's mine: A1 Length stock w/ A2 Polymer Rifle buffer/spring A2 rear sight Fencing & Brass Deflector A1 Selector A1 Pistol Grip (although I'd honestly probably do a Les Baer) A2 Rifle Handguards A2 Flash Hider A2 Front Sight 1/7" twist barrel, maaaybe 18" instead of 20" (modern "medium profile" if I can get it, A1 if I can't) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 9:41:01 PM EST
[#27]
A1 stock
A2 sight aperture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 10:17:54 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My first AR was flattop, so I get that I'm waaay out of my lane if I were to try to talk anything about "military issue", buuut: The A2 plastic seems like a very solid upgrade, as does the flash hider, the twist rate, and the front sight. That said, I replace the square post on my personal rifles with the KNS crosshair. I get the arguments back and forth either way, but I land more on the A2 rear sight than on the A1. I will say that I perceive the MaTech style lever/range setup to be pretty nice, and my favorite in rear irons. My airsoft/laser rifle has a carry handle and fixed front sight, just so I can keep some kind of practice up with rifle irons, and every now and then I wonder about having a an actual carry handle 5.56. How about this, as a way to both make partial peace and keep the convo going, what's "your old-school cool" carry handle, A1/A2 forearm rifle setup? Here's mine: A1 Length stock w/ A2 Polymer Rifle buffer/spring A2 rear sight Fencing & Brass Deflector A1 Selector A1 Pistol Grip (although I'd honestly probably do a Les Baer) A2 Rifle Handguards A2 Flash Hider A2 Front Sight 1/7" twist barrel, maaaybe 18" instead of 20" (modern "medium profile" if I can get it, A1 if I can't) I would just take an a2 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 10:40:40 PM EST
[#29]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 10:50:26 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol, no shit I don't have to agree. Thanks for pointing that out. It wasn't worse. There were some major issues with the m16 and a1. The weak plastic, lack of fencing, and front sight were serious negatives. The A2 fixed them. There were some issues withe the A2 but as a whole it was a better rifle. This is GD, you're doing it wrong. All opinions and comments should be predicated on potential "bro points" earned. If they are based upon a popular movie, they are even more correct. Also no matter how correct a statement somebody might make, scrutinize it hard and find a way to be contrarian, even if you have to take some or all of it out of context. Because that is how you "bro point", you gotta be edgy...like when you act like you don't care about girls or whatever. GD be "yeah bro...whatever." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 10:57:10 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 pistol grip and its stupid little bump is the biggest piece of shit ever issued with an M16. While I tend to agree it's useless, did it really impede you in any way? Did you really become 100% fuckwrangeled because of that stupid little bump? I have A1s and A2s and it's honestly the last thing I noticed when I switch between the two. The only thing I ever notice, assuming I'm not using optics or an RDS is A2s have a much nicer open sight than A1s which have two settings which are damn near identical. Guys who can't function unless their rifle has MOE grips or whatever are kind of funny to me. They only grips that F me up in any way are the straight down grips that are sorta fashionable these days. Takes me almost 10 rounds to get used to that stupid setup. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 10:59:09 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 stock is perfect for men over six feet tall. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The A2 stock is too long to be useful. The A2 stock is perfect for men over six feet tall. The A2 stock is too long? The sights are too complicated? I loved my A2's stock and the flexibility the rear sight gave me. Your fathers maybe should have been taller? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 10:59:36 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Garand, M14, and M1 carbine all had knob adjustable rear sights. I've never heard anyone complain about them changing their settings accidentally during combat. I recall Coldblue saying that when testing the A2 sights they were never able to knock them around enough to get them to change position https://www.americanrifleman.org/media/jaih4v3q/foster-m1garandrearsight-1.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=987&height=551&rnd=132831131653370000&quality=60 OMG THANK YOU. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:04:52 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 stock is too long? The sights are too complicated? I loved my A2's stock and the flexibility the rear sight gave me. Your fathers maybe should have been taller? For 1986 army it was probably perfect. For all the crap you have to strap on these days, it's probably a tad long for your average guy. One of the reasons they moved to the M4. For sunny day shooting, I love A2s. If I had to "one rifle only" I'd be fine with a A2, a M4 or even a A1. I can get them all to do 95% of the shit I would need a rifle to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:08:53 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In stock, PSA 711. I don't really mind the a2 stocks although I like the a1 better, I got a deal in a bunch of a1 length colt stocks that look like a2 with the spring and buffer. I don't think I've had ab a2 sight get knocked out do alignment I'm happy to see these PSA retro rifles. I missed out on the Brownells. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:11:27 PM EST
[#36]
I have nothing more to add to this argument than that first I wish my eyes were thirty years younger for the sights and that while I can deal with the A2 stock as a middle aged pudgy guy who doesn’t kick in doors for a living the 5’11” in me prefer the A1 stock length.
Looks like a nice rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:19:19 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: While I tend to agree it's useless, did it really impede you in any way? Did you really become 100% fuckwrangeled because of that stupid little bump? I have A1s and A2s and it's honestly the last thing I noticed when I switch between the two. The only thing I ever notice, assuming I'm not using optics or an RDS is A2s have a much nicer open sight than A1s which have two settings which are damn near identical. Guys who can't function unless their rifle has MOE grips or whatever are kind of funny to me. They only grips that F me up in any way are the straight down grips that are sorta fashionable these days. Takes me almost 10 rounds to get used to that stupid setup. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The A2 pistol grip and its stupid little bump is the biggest piece of shit ever issued with an M16. While I tend to agree it's useless, did it really impede you in any way? Did you really become 100% fuckwrangeled because of that stupid little bump? I have A1s and A2s and it's honestly the last thing I noticed when I switch between the two. The only thing I ever notice, assuming I'm not using optics or an RDS is A2s have a much nicer open sight than A1s which have two settings which are damn near identical. Guys who can't function unless their rifle has MOE grips or whatever are kind of funny to me. They only grips that F me up in any way are the straight down grips that are sorta fashionable these days. Takes me almost 10 rounds to get used to that stupid setup. The A2 bump causes my middle and ring finger to go numb, if carrying it for an extended period of time. The joys of carpul tunnel/cubital tunnel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:20:59 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 stock is too long to be useful. This. I found the original rubber butt M16 stocks for mine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:22:36 PM EST
[#39]
They effectively were when I was in basic in 1989
We had mostly M16A1s but some had the newer round hand guards on them which is all that rifle is |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:23:19 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Garand, M14, and M1 carbine all had knob adjustable rear sights. I've never heard anyone complain about them changing their settings accidentally during combat. I recall Coldblue saying that when testing the A2 sights they were never able to knock them around enough to get them to change position https://www.americanrifleman.org/media/jaih4v3q/foster-m1garandrearsight-1.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=987&height=551&rnd=132831131653370000&quality=60 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:23:31 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 stock is perfect for men over six feet tall. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The A2 stock is too long to be useful. The A2 stock is perfect for men over six feet tall. Not this one. The one I had that came with a kit was replaced quickly. Couldn't stand it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:44:26 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m not familiar with that exact configuration, but at first glance it looks like it’s superior to the adopted M16A2 rifle. The A2 is an abomination that took many steps back from the A1, which was probably the finest infantry rifle “for its time” ever fielded. Even today, for troops that aren’t mechanized, that’s a damn fine rifle. If the army in question isn’t fielding optics, the 711 would be damn hard to beat. A1 length stock would be a better fit for most folks, though. Other than that, it’s straight up superior to the M16A2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:46:28 PM EST
[#43]
YES!!!!!!!
I was the one who posted in the NDS H&R thread asking for a 711 I'm beyond glad they're making this rifle now |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:48:14 PM EST
[#44]
I have a few CS stocks and C7 receivers. I should start looking for barrels.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:54:07 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Keep the A1 stock. Replace the A1 handguards with A2, and make it a flat top with an A1 detachable carry handle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2023 11:56:44 PM EST
[#46]
I like the A2 stock
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2023 12:22:57 AM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like the A2 stock It’s fine for traditional shooting, get in armor and squaring up on target, it really shows it’s unneeded length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2023 1:10:48 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Garand, M14, and M1 carbine all had knob adjustable rear sights. I've never heard anyone complain about them changing their settings accidentally during combat. I recall Coldblue saying that when testing the A2 sights they were never able to knock them around enough to get them to change position https://www.americanrifleman.org/media/jaih4v3q/foster-m1garandrearsight-1.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=987&height=551&rnd=132831131653370000&quality=60 Quote HistoryQuoted: The Garand, M14, and M1 carbine all had knob adjustable rear sights. I've never heard anyone complain about them changing their settings accidentally during combat. I recall Coldblue saying that when testing the A2 sights they were never able to knock them around enough to get them to change position https://www.americanrifleman.org/media/jaih4v3q/foster-m1garandrearsight-1.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=987&height=551&rnd=132831131653370000&quality=60 k Quoted: What kind of knuckle dragging, tard scale fuckery do you need to get involved with to kill your BZO by accidentally turning A2 knobs? k Quoted: While I tend to agree it's useless, did it really impede you in any way? Did you really become 100% fuckwrangeled because of that stupid little bump? I have A1s and A2s and it's honestly the last thing I noticed when I switch between the two. The only thing I ever notice, assuming I'm not using optics or an RDS is A2s have a much nicer open sight than A1s which have two settings which are damn near identical. Guys who can't function unless their rifle has MOE grips or whatever are kind of funny to me. They only grips that F me up in any way are the straight down grips that are sorta fashionable these days. Takes me almost 10 rounds to get used to that stupid setup. k |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2023 2:13:55 AM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 bump causes my middle and ring finger to go numb, if carrying it for an extended period of time. The joys of carpul tunnel/cubital tunnel. Fair enough, legit need. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2023 3:26:17 AM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A2 stock is perfect for men over six feet tall. Correct. Lots of small fries in here. A2 is Man Sized but maybe Im the weirdo. I can also manipulate an M9 safety without changing my grip. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File