Why I learned to like the AR-15.

7 Replies, 771 Views

Tactical shooting has never interested me, I've always been into accuracy. I have an old Remington 788 with a hart bbl,1:14 twist in 223 improved that was nicely bedded (not by me) and it sports a timney trigger. On my best days it would shoot in the .15 range using 52gr Bergers or 53gr Sierra's with a case full of imr 4895. I never liked plastic, but one day I shouldered an AR-15 and it spoke to me. The danged thing just felt right! So, a dpms lite 16 followed me home.
I didn't expect much but I carefully prepped 20 brass (my usual, deburr the flash hole/turn the necks/uniform the pockets, etc.) I selected a mid level load of 4895 under some berger 52gr hps. I know it had a fast enough twist to stabilize heavier bullets, but I went with my tried and true favorite bullet.
Now with a non-floated pencil thin bbl, I sat down at the bench.
Holy Moly! With my first load I was shooting .4 groups! Thus began my love affair with the platform. I had no idea a semi auto rifle could be so accurate. That carbine is long gone, but I set out to see what I could do with ar15s. I learned about thermo-fitting, free floating handguards, etc. and was on my way.
I found the journey quite satisfying. It culminated in a bartlein heavy barrel chambered in 6.5 Grendel thermofitted to a bcm upper and a timney trigger group. That stupid thing almost had no preferences for bullets as long as they were in range of 95 to 120 grains. It shot one ragged hole groups with the Hornady 100gr bullets, which have been replaced by a polymer tipped bullet. Besides the little accurizing steps in putting it together, I'm convinced the case design itself has something to do with it. I know the 220 Russian variants in .22 and 6mm has taken a lot of championships in the bench rest world.
Anyway, I've only competed against myself, but I found it satisfying. It's not applicable to the tactical world but that wasn't my goal. In my mind Townsend Whelen said it best. "Only accurate rifles are interesting."
(This post was last modified: 02-22-2024, 03:56 AM by tommag.)
[-] The following 4 users Like tommag's post:
  
That's a great story. Personally, I like building things, so I'm naturally attracted to the AR platform. It's a DIYers gun. Also, if I'm honest with myself, I like utilitarian looking firearms because I think they look cool. I know, it's probably one of the lamest reasons to like a gun, but I've always been sucker for lookers, when it comes to women, cars, and firearms. One gun I almost bought in the early '00s or '10s was the FN-FS200 with the integrated scope.

At the time they could be had for around $2,000. I lusted after that gun for years, but couldn't justify spending that much on a gun just because it looked like something out of science fiction movie, or video game. The integrated scope looked cool, but in reality was terrible. At the time $2k was a premium price for some 5.56 gun, there were lots of much better options at that price (in truth there still are). But as it turns out my reluctance was a mistake. The FN-FS2000's are stilling for twice the price today.

My point is, if I'm honest, I like the AR platform because for a relatively modest price a person can build a rifle that suits whatever itch needs to be scratched, You don't have to be an expert gunsmith to DIY it. Parts are easy, not requiring a lot of skill to make them work together. And the AR platform just looks cool.
[-] The following 3 users Like Quivox's post:
  
That's a great story. Personally, I like building things, so I'm naturally attracted to the AR platform. It's a DIYers gun. Also, if I'm honest with myself, I like utilitarian looking firearms because I think they look cool. I know, it's probably one of the lamest reasons to like a gun, but I've always been a sucker for lookers, when it comes to women, cars, and firearms. One gun I almost bought in the early '00s or '10s was the FN-FS2000 with the integrated scope.

At the time they could be had for around $2,000. I lusted after that gun for years, but couldn't justify spending that much on a gun just because it looked like something out of a science fiction movie, or video game. The integrated scope looked cool, but in reality was terrible. At the time $2k was a premium price for a 5.56 gun, there were lots of much better preforming options at that price (in truth there still are). But that gun looked sexy to me. As it turns out my reluctance was a mistake. The FN-FS2000's are selling for twice the price today. ...oh, well, one of many missed opportunities to make money on a firearm. But I digress.

My point is, if I'm honest, I like the AR platform because for a relatively modest price a person can build a rifle that suits whatever itch needs to be scratched, You don't have to be an expert gunsmith to DIY it. Parts are easy, not requiring a lot of skill to make them work together. And the AR platform just looks cool.
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2024, 03:57 PM by Quivox. Edit Reason: correct spelling mistakes. )
[-] The following 1 user Likes Quivox's post:
  
(08-21-2024, 03:31 PM)Quivox Wrote: That's a great story.  Personally, I like building things, so I'm naturally attracted to the AR platform.  It's a DIYers gun.  Also, if I'm honest with myself, I like utilitarian looking firearms because I think they look cool.  I know, it's probably one of the lamest reasons to like a gun, but I've always been a sucker for lookers, when it comes to women, cars, and firearms.  One gun I almost bought in the early '00s or '10s was the FN-FS2000 with the integrated scope. 

At the time they could be had for around $2,000.  I lusted after that gun for years, but couldn't justify spending that much on a gun just because it looked like something out of science fiction movie, or video game.  The integrated scope looked cool, but in reality was terrible.  At the time $2k was a premium price for a 5.56 gun, there were lots of much better preforming options at that price (in truth there still are).  But that gun looked sexy to me.  As it turns out my reluctance was a mistake.  The FN-FS2000's are stilling for twice the price today.  ...oh, will, one of many missed opportunities to make money on a firearm.  But I digress. 

My point is, if I'm honest, I like the AR platform because for a relatively modest price a person can build a rifle that suits whatever itch needs to be scratched, You don't have to be an expert gunsmith to DIY it. Parts are easy, not requiring a lot of skill to make them work together.  And the AR platform just looks cool.
That FN fs2000 is a cool looking bull pup.  According to Wikipedia it ejects forward to the right through a tube above the bbl. I've never heard of such a thing but it sounds innovative.  I like the concept of bull pups as it still gives you good velocity in a compact package, ideal for carry in a vehicle.
[-] The following 2 users Like tommag's post:
  
Yeah, the ejection is interesting, but I missed the boat. I'm not paying $4,000 -$5,000 for an FN-FS2000. I wish I had bought it back around 2010. But oh, well. Put it on the pile of "could have, should haves"
[-] The following 2 users Like Quivox's post:
  
The first "AR" I ever shot was an M-16 during the small arms firing school before the National Matches at Camp Perry. It was a bone stock M-16A1 and we fired at 200 yards. Getting it sighted in took a few shots and then it was like a laser beam that went "Spronggggg" every time I pulled the trigger. The coach told me to not put any pressure on the sling because it was mounted to the barrel. But it could stack those bullets in on each other. I wondered then why they didn't shoot them in the matches if they were so accurate and was told they just didn't carry to shoot the 5/600 yard stages with the 55 grain bullets. It was the next year the Army team showed up with M16A2's and dominated the service rifle competitions. They used the heavy match bullets and had put a free float tube under the handguard to attach the sling to. I bought a new Colt that same year. I still have it and it shoots small groups and has accounted for a crapload of game. Biggest bodied deer I have ever killed dropped from 1 55gr soft point into the lungs.
[-] The following 3 users Like MontanaLon's post:
  
For me it was out of frustration. I got the idea to have Mosin Nagants for my son and I- too late. When I started looking, there was still talk of buying them for $75. But if you could even find one, they were WAY above that price. So what’s a guy to do for a “hobby gun” that you don’t just open the box and start shooting? Clearly the answer is AR! I started doing 80% lowers, big bore calibers for hunting (450 Bushmaster, 350 Legend) and I was hooked!
(This post was last modified: 08-22-2024, 06:00 PM by srjdsmith.)
[-] The following 2 users Like srjdsmith's post:
  
(08-22-2024, 12:12 AM)srjdsmith Wrote: For me it was out of frustration. I got the idea to have Mosin Nagants for my son and I- too late. When I started looking, there was still talk of buying them for $75. Buy if you could find one, they were WAY above that price. So what’s a guy to do for a “hobby gun” that you don’t just open the box and start shooting? Clearly the answer is AR! I started doing 80% lowers, big bore calibers for hunting (450 Bushmaster, 350 Legend) and I was hooked!
I put an upper together for a friend in Iowa chambered in 357max rimless. This was Moleman's wildcat that Winchester standardized (without crediting him, grrr). I used 223 basic brass and did extensive load development but couldn't get it to shoot better than 2.5moa. That was with my cast hp version of the 200 gr rcbs mould designed for the 35 Remington.  He paid for the barrel but I canned the project and refunded his money in frustration.  The barrel is still here somewhere.  Funny how the definition of accuracy has changed. In the 60s and 70s 2.5moa was something to be proud of for a hunting rifle. Now, that's an embarrassment.
(This post was last modified: 08-22-2024, 01:36 AM by tommag.)
[-] The following 1 user Likes tommag's post:
  



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Best CLP you can buy!