User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 1:57:10 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hence the reason Marines stuck with 20" rifles. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
20" guns are fine. They are light, easy to move around whatever. Then again, hump SASR's and 240's around, and everything else is pretty childs play... I can't disagree more, that shorter rifles are easier to maneuver under any circumstances, 20" belongs on the KD range, though it'd be better to axe them entirely. I agree. But for the average Soldier, the lethality issue is usually missing the target. The reliability issue is usually due to poor maintinence, bad mags, no lube, and an overall apathy for weapons proficiency in general. For these reasons, a shorter/easier to manipulate weapon is better for the lowest common denominator. They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:22:14 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: snip They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck.   |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:22:31 AM EST
[#3]
I've now decided due to this thread that I need a 34" barrel AR.
So I can have a 60 something grain round with 4000+ FPS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:28:46 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck.
I'm beginning to think you're just trolling me, at least I hope that's the case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:31:04 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm beginning to think you're just trolling me, at least I hope that's the case. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: snip They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck. I'm beginning to think you're just trolling me, at least I hope that's the case. Did you ever experience the Marines pre-9/11? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:31:08 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck.
More accurately, because it's a cult of marksmanship that thinks a 20" barrel is as important as their grandfathers thought a walnut stock was important. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:35:43 AM EST
[#7]
Why would you be satisfied with a 20" barrel when you can get a 24" barrel?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:37:34 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the Marines were cheap as fuck, we'd still be using A2's and irons... Or are you implying that A4's and Acogs are "cheap" and that being tuck in the ways of actually being able to hit things accurately is a bad thing? Did you ever experience the Marines pre-9/11? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck.
I'm beginning to think you're just trolling me, at least I hope that's the case. Did you ever experience the Marines pre-9/11? Are you under the impression that M4s are inherently less accurate than A4s? I'm a GWOT enlistee, so no I was not around for pre 9/11. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:38:00 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: More accurately, because it's a cult of marksmanship that thinks a 20" barrel is as important as their grandfathers thought a walnut stock was important. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: snip More accurately, because it's a cult of marksmanship that thinks a 20" barrel is as important as their grandfathers thought a walnut stock was important. The Marines have better rifle shooters and machine gunners because we have better training. Maybe we have better weapons selection as well.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:48:14 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've now decided due to this thread that I need a 34" barrel AR. So I can have a 60 something grain round with 4000+ FPS. Why the FUCK would you go with a carbine with such a short barrel when you can have a RIFLE with a full 40" barrel? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:52:52 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which makes it funny when everyone on the Army side bemoans troops who can't hit shit and have poor weapons maintenance all the time (even in this thread). The Marines have better rifle shooters and machine gunners because we have better training. Maybe we have better weapons selection as well.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip More accurately, because it's a cult of marksmanship that thinks a 20" barrel is as important as their grandfathers thought a walnut stock was important. The Marines have better rifle shooters and machine gunners because we have better training. Maybe we have better weapons selection as well.
I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:53:09 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Are you under the impression that M4s are inherently less accurate than A4s? I'm saying Marines stuck in their ways with M-16A4's are more accurate than people with M4's who don't learn, and maintain fundamentals of marksmanship. I'm a GWOT enlistee, so no I was not around for pre 9/11. Then you have no idea what "cheap as fuck" truly means. Quote HistoryQuoted: Originally Posted By Madcap72 If the Marines were cheap as fuck, we'd still be using A2's and irons... Or are you implying that A4's and Acogs are "cheap" and that being tuck in the ways of actually being able to hit things accurately is a bad thing? Did you ever experience the Marines pre-9/11? Are you under the impression that M4s are inherently less accurate than A4s? I'm saying Marines stuck in their ways with M-16A4's are more accurate than people with M4's who don't learn, and maintain fundamentals of marksmanship. I'm a GWOT enlistee, so no I was not around for pre 9/11. Then you have no idea what "cheap as fuck" truly means. This was what SOI looked like in 2001... Only thing better I got getting into the Fleet was an interceptor instead of the old school flak, and new sleeping bags... Otherwise it was pretty much the same.  When I got to my first Platoon (STA) we had gear from the 60' and 70's. That's cheap as fuck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:53:44 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
While I've never payed much attention to anything you say in normal GD threads, anytime you post in a GD thread regarding firearms (especially this and the 9mm FBI report thread), your replies always come out looking like: http://rs1img.memecdn.com/retard-kid_o_157311.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Can you butt stroke somebody effectively with a collapsible stock without breaking the receiver extension? While I've never payed much attention to anything you say in normal GD threads, anytime you post in a GD thread regarding firearms (especially this and the 9mm FBI report thread), your replies always come out looking like: http://rs1img.memecdn.com/retard-kid_o_157311.jpg LMFAO! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 2:58:06 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. Quote HistoryQuoted: snip I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:01:10 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Advantages Higher MV for easier shots and a slightly longer range envelope for frag/ yaw... longer gas system for lower heat and pressure leading to longer part life and reliability... longer recoil impulse shoots nice and soft, faster more accurate rapid fire... It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
snip
I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. The M4 gets it done too, though I would stretch that to 16". 125fps from that to 20" so I don't think that's a big deal. The M16 is 7 inches longer than my 14.5" carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:03:07 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why the FUCK would you go with a carbine with such a short barrel when you can have a RIFLE with a full 40" barrel? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've now decided due to this thread that I need a 34" barrel AR. So I can have a 60 something grain round with 4000+ FPS. Why the FUCK would you go with a carbine with such a short barrel when you can have a RIFLE with a full 40" barrel? I still need it to be maneuverable through terrain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:04:35 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Advantages Higher MV for easier shots and a slightly longer range envelope for frag/ yaw... longer gas system for lower heat and pressure leading to longer part life and reliability... longer recoil impulse shoots nice and soft, faster more accurate rapid fire... It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
snip
I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. Were you ever issued/trained on the M4 or were you toting a musket your whole time in? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:14:13 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The M4 gets it done too, though I would stretch that to 16". 125fps from that to 20" so I don't think that's a big deal. The M16 is 7 inches longer than my 14.5" carbine. Now that there's ammo like M855A1, I've been seeing all sorts of fun report of things like hard cover penetration, where the longer barrel gives better penetration against things like masonry blocks at longer ranges than the M4. It's just physics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:19:46 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Were you ever issued/trained on the M4 or were you toting a musket your whole time in? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: snip I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. Were you ever issued/trained on the M4 or were you toting a musket your whole time in? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:19:49 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When for a number of years close in terminal performance was predicted of not dropping below certain threshold, the longer 20" barrel increased the range over the M4 by a pretty fair margin. Might not matter in pistols, might not matter in heavy bullet, but for 5.56 125 fps can make a huge differance. Now that there's ammo like M855A1, I've been seeing all sorts of fun report of things like hard cover penetration, where the longer barrel gives better penetration against things like masonry blocks at longer ranges than the M4. It's just physics. How about engagements of 50 yards or less, with optics instead of irons and modern civilian ammo? How much of a difference are you expecting 125 fps (and the 20" barrel) make in that situation? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:22:07 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How about engagements of 50 yards or less, with optics instead of irons and modern civilian ammo? How much of a difference are you expecting 125 fps make in that situation? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: How about engagements of 50 yards or less, with optics instead of irons and modern civilian ammo? How much of a difference are you expecting 125 fps make in that situation? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:32:23 AM EST
[#22]
Thread needs more 20" love...
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:33:33 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about I move the goalpost even further, and contact shots in the dark? How much of a differance do you expect that to make? I've never looked at the terminal ballistics of .223 at contact ranges, so I've got no expectations. I assume that a good bonded soft point would still expand properly at contact range, my guess would be that it wouldn't matter. I cannot imagine any situation where a civilian would be engaging someone in a gunfight beyond 50 yards, and the "cool kids" - the guys with carbines, wouldn't be hampered by iron sights and .mil ammo. On the other hand, a shorter the barrel is much more maneuverable inside of a house (and riding along in a vehicle) for self defense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:49:15 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Got to play with M4A1's in 2001, had A2's for a long time and M4's right before getting out. (As well as the M107, M40A1, TOW, Jav, Mk-19, M2, 240, 249, and M9). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip
I'll give you better training, but I don't think the advantages of the rifle outweigh it's disadvantages. It's advantages all make it sound like it' really good for smoking bad guys. Were you ever issued/trained on the M4 or were you toting a musket your whole time in? Focusing solely on the differences between the M16 and M4, I think you're overstating the advantages of the longer barrel. The M4 is perfectly controllable, the M16 has no tangible advantage there. The extra velocity makes the trajectory slightly flatter but the M4 is more than capable of reaching out to any realistic engagement distance. I shot high expert twice with an M4, had zero issues hitting from the 500, so another negligible point. The additional fragmentation range is nice but largely pedantic in my opinion. The M4 has a reputation for breaking bolts but that is from testing done under "torture" conditions, out of hundreds of thousands of rounds fired through M4s I can only recall a scant handful of bolt breakages in the companies I was in, it happens but it's not common by any stretch of the imagination. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:55:53 AM EST
[#25]
You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 5:14:49 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck. The A4 was 20 percent more reliable than the M4 in testing; the M4 was more accurate though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 5:23:15 AM EST
[#27]
The 16" barrel maintains fragmentation velocity out to 100 meters. The 20" barrel maintains fragmentation velocity out to 150 meters.
I don't shoot at humans often enough* at ranges between 100m and 150m to care about the 20", but I do appreciate the usability factor of the 16". * ever |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 5:56:18 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The A4 was 20 percent more reliable than the M4 in testing; the M4 was more accurate though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They stuck with them because the Marine Corps is stuck in its ways and cheap as fuck. The A4 was 20 percent more reliable than the M4 in testing; the M4 was more accurate though. I can see that. I was more accurate with the M4 than the M16. I think the reliability issues with the M4 have been worked out with better extractors and a heavier buffer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 6:06:05 AM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was more accurate with the M4 than the M16. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was more accurate with the M4 than the M16. Quoted:
The A4 was 20 percent more reliable than the M4 in testing; the M4 was more accurate though. But....but....someone in GD said you can't make hits at 100yards with an M4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 6:18:34 AM EST
[#30]
I got on this train at 17 when the folks gave me my beautiful Colt SP-1 in '85. After that, in the Corps and later the AF, I carried an A2 (I have had the pleasure of 2 NIB A2' in my time). You think getting into and out of a Humvee is a bitch with a 20" try unassing a compact PU, which I did plenty of times. You figure shit out real quick and I could move quick enough after a bit that it was no longer an issue. Now, a 2000/01/02 Suburban, the door pocket held an A2 perfectly, Open the door, step out and grab rifle in one motion. Loved that about the Chevy, like they made the door pocket with the A2 in mind. Bottom line is, you adapt. A whole lot of our grandfathers and (and great grandfathers for the kids here) used Garands to clear houses and caves. They made them work. Ive done plenty of MOUT with the A2, and it worked fine, eyeball to the front sight, weapon over my right shoulder, thumb on the trigger. Not perfect but we cleared shit. One thing Ill say about the A2 over the M4 is that those 5.5 extra inches of barrel puts me 5.5 inches further back behind my barricade. Probably a much bigger deal for a guy with a 203 as the extra barrel allows him to get a little lower when firing.
Today I have an M4gery, which I really do enjoy . However, and yeah its because Im old so fuck you youngster, I still feel more comfortable with that SP1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 6:24:59 AM EST
[#31]
If you like your 20" you can keep your 20"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 6:28:41 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Want to know what cheap as fuck is? This was what SOI looked like in 2001... Only thing better I got getting into the Fleet was an interceptor instead of the old school flak, and new sleeping bags... Otherwise it was pretty much the same. https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/p526x395/564808_10151772853130346_602581833_n.jpg?oh=b26e0ea3d45fca753912581e7a2afbb5&oe=54C3BF63&__gda__=1421678387_1ba01ed2fab2801aad6ed7fe48a0bdbd When I got to my first Platoon (STA) we had gear from the 60' and 70's. That's cheap as fuck. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Originally Posted By Madcap72
If the Marines were cheap as fuck, we'd still be using A2's and irons... Or are you implying that A4's and Acogs are "cheap" and that being tuck in the ways of actually being able to hit things accurately is a bad thing? Did you ever experience the Marines pre-9/11? Are you under the impression that M4s are inherently less accurate than A4s? I'm saying Marines stuck in their ways with M-16A4's are more accurate than people with M4's who don't learn, and maintain fundamentals of marksmanship. I'm a GWOT enlistee, so no I was not around for pre 9/11. Then you have no idea what "cheap as fuck" truly means. This was what SOI looked like in 2001... Only thing better I got getting into the Fleet was an interceptor instead of the old school flak, and new sleeping bags... Otherwise it was pretty much the same. https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/p526x395/564808_10151772853130346_602581833_n.jpg?oh=b26e0ea3d45fca753912581e7a2afbb5&oe=54C3BF63&__gda__=1421678387_1ba01ed2fab2801aad6ed7fe48a0bdbd When I got to my first Platoon (STA) we had gear from the 60' and 70's. That's cheap as fuck. YOU HAD TENTS?? WTF. Oh, I had to hump the fuckin things, but only once did I ever set one up and then we never even got to sleep in them. Fuck, in ITS (that is what it used to be called) it was a NATO mat and a woobie. Tents, fuckin Pepsi generation shit right there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 6:30:55 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: YOU HAD TENTS?? WTF. Oh, I had to hump the fuckin things, but only once did I ever set one up and then we never even got to sleep in them. Fuck, in ITS (that is what it used to be called) it was a NATO mat and a woobie. Tents, fuckin Pepsi generation shit right there. Dude, I got out in 2006 and never saw a tent. Wrap up in your ranger-roll and shiver.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 7:43:40 AM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dude, I got out in 2006 and never saw a tent. Wrap up in your ranger-roll and shiver. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
YOU HAD TENTS?? WTF. Oh, I had to hump the fuckin things, but only once did I ever set one up and then we never even got to sleep in them. Fuck, in ITS (that is what it used to be called) it was a NATO mat and a woobie. Tents, fuckin Pepsi generation shit right there. Dude, I got out in 2006 and never saw a tent. Wrap up in your ranger-roll and shiver. Not a tent, it's a shelter. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 9:38:30 AM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. Quote HistoryQuoted: You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. I usually just use my AR-180 (18" barrel) and normal holsters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 9:54:02 AM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: YOU HAD TENTS?? WTF. Oh, I had to hump the fuckin things, but only once did I ever set one up and then we never even got to sleep in them. Fuck, in ITS (that is what it used to be called) it was a NATO mat and a woobie. Tents, fuckin Pepsi generation shit right there. Quote HistoryQuoted: snip YOU HAD TENTS?? WTF. Oh, I had to hump the fuckin things, but only once did I ever set one up and then we never even got to sleep in them. Fuck, in ITS (that is what it used to be called) it was a NATO mat and a woobie. Tents, fuckin Pepsi generation shit right there. It was a fun hump back the next morning after going back out to get everything.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 10:01:52 AM EST
[#37]
20 inch barrels are gross and for old timers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 10:02:55 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can't. It's an old nylon Tac Tailor drop leg, take the strap off gun will fly out. First time I had used it after putting together all my old stuff to shoot that rifle (borrowed from a buddy). I usually just use my AR-180 (18" barrel) and normal holsters.  http://youtu.be/trou1QhRfD4?list=UUkMuxQan8o1NgG5tn-7JDzg
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. I usually just use my AR-180 (18" barrel) and normal holsters. http://youtu.be/trou1QhRfD4?list=UUkMuxQan8o1NgG5tn-7JDzg
Good to see a 180 in use. Damn fine gun. often imitated but never surpassed IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 10:03:28 AM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. Quote HistoryQuoted:
You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. Never go full drop leg. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 10:16:06 AM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never go full drop leg. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. Never go full drop leg. Plus it accessorizes well with vintage mag-well grips when paired with A2 clones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 10:22:09 AM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which makes it funny when everyone on the Army side bemoans troops who can't hit shit and have poor weapons maintenance all the time (even in this thread). The Marines have better rifle shooters and machine gunners because we have better training. Maybe we have better weapons selection as well.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip More accurately, because it's a cult of marksmanship that thinks a 20" barrel is as important as their grandfathers thought a walnut stock was important. The Marines have better rifle shooters and machine gunners because we have better training. Maybe we have better weapons selection as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 11:35:40 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuote History
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 11:39:30 AM EST
[#43]
Maybe some barrel maker needs to collaborate with ASP....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 11:45:08 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can't. It's an old nylon Tac Tailor drop leg, take the strap off gun will fly out. First time I had used it after putting together all my old stuff to shoot that rifle (borrowed from a buddy). I usually just use my AR-180 (18" barrel) and normal holsters. http://youtu.be/trou1QhRfD4?list=UUkMuxQan8o1NgG5tn-7JDzg
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You should try ditching the top strap on your holster and sliding that thing up. It won't flop around as much and you won't need to dip your shoulder down just to reach your pistol. I usually just use my AR-180 (18" barrel) and normal holsters. http://youtu.be/trou1QhRfD4?list=UUkMuxQan8o1NgG5tn-7JDzg
Indoor ranges and drop leg holsters? I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:44:47 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Indoor ranges and drop leg holsters? I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: snip Indoor ranges and drop leg holsters? I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 4:30:47 PM EST
[#46]
Pic thread...My Colt 6720R..so,light, such handy, much carbine.
 |
|
|
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.
