who prefers old school a2 ar15 to carbine

[KBCraig]

I started service with the A1, then A2 shortly after. The CAR-15 was the only "shorty" in use then, and only by SF units.

After I moved into federal LE, I shot whatever they gave me. Mostly it was A2, but also the Colt SMG 9mm (they blocked the giggle switch on everything).

Adjustable buttstocks are fine, but I still prefer a 20" barrel and rifle length sight radius. I also hate the carry handle.

If I was building my choice, it would have a 6-pos stock, flat top upper with BUIS, 20" barrel, and A2 hand guards.

 

[JNewell]

I think there's actually a lot to be said for an A1, rather than an A2, overall.

The A2 buttstock is more robust but the extra length is not great for most purposes. I'm 6-5 and wear 36" sleeves and prefer the A1 to the A2.

The A2 sights are great on a square range but in real life I like the A1 rear sight. I'll take the A2 (square) front sight post, though, if we're using issue sights.

The A2 barrel is unnecessarily heavy and it's heavy in the wrong place. I much prefer the A1 pencil barrel. And while none of the issue flash suppressors are very effective, the closed bottom of the A2 is only an advantage if you're prone on a dusty surface.

The A2 hand guards are far better than the A1 triangles, and the double-shielded egg guards are better still.

The only other A2 change that I appreciate is the forward assist. If you ever have to use it, it's a better target to strike.

A nice pair would be a modified A1 "rifle" as above and a flattop with red dot and BUIS on an A2 lower and either a 16" or 20" pencil barrel and a modern, effective flash suppressor. I like the cheek weld on the fixed buttstocks better but if I were getting in and out of vehicles, clearing structures or had transportation needs that favored shorter OAL I'd go with 16" and a telescoping stock.

Obviously, YMMV.

 

[tuna]

I started with the M16A1, went to A2 and finished my career with the M4.
Have never used an AR and really don’t want one. I’ve had the hankering a few times but never bought one.
We’re into get an AR, I’d go with the AR. For me, I don’t see an improvement with the A2. Especially in semi only.
The M4 I thought was just stupid. Cut the length but add a ton of weight with stupid add ons that serve limited use. (I was not infantry when in the army and wasn’t security forces in the Air Force, so my operator credentials consist of being paid by the same place)
I did see one M4 that a CW4 had in Afghanistan, it looked slick because he took off all the lights and lasers and crap. But I still preferred my M9 instead for ease of carrying.
I do like the look of the old A1s, but can’t see paying the “preban” prices for what is an “old gun”.

 

[Hustler One]

Ok. Serious question here. Who here actually went on patrol in a hostile fire area and carried their rifle by the carry handle? F the carry handle

 

[M60]

Ok. Serious question here. Who here actually went on patrol in a hostile fire area and carried their rifle by the carry handle? F the carry handle

Lol. Nobody used the carry handle, or the safety on a patrol.

 

[tuna]

What’s the hate against the carry handle?

I’m pretty sure the number of people going in patrol with ARs is a slim percentage of those bought.

 

[Picton]

I never used the carry handle, other than when I was turning in like five rubber duckies at a time carried like suitcases. But to me, it's like any other carry handle: it's an obsolete design requirement that has defined the classic lines of the firearm. I don't think any model of the "AR platform" looks right without it, and all my early training and experience with the M16 used irons. So I got used to the elevated rear sight, and the fixed stock and carry handle always gave me a comfortable sight picture.

I've never fired a flattop. I don't care to, either.

 

[KBCraig]

What’s the hate against the carry handle?

Even on the A1, the center of balance was already at the hand guard retaining ring. By the time the A2 added mass out in front of the gas block/front sight, it got worse. Try to carry one by the "carry handle"... you'll be dragging the muzzle in the dirt.

Of course, tactically speaking, there's never any reason to carry a rifle like that. That just adds to the list of reasons why it was a silly idea in the first place.

Shave it all off (including the front sight), so that sights appropriate to the task can be added.

 

[whacko]

I think there's actually a lot to be said for an A1, rather than an A2, overall.

The A2 buttstock is more robust but the extra length is not great for most purposes. I'm 6-5 and wear 36" sleeves and prefer the A1 to the A2.

The A2 sights are great on a square range but in real life I like the A1 rear sight. I'll take the A2 (square) front sight post, though, if we're using issue sights.

The A2 barrel is unnecessarily heavy and it's heavy in the wrong place. I much prefer the A1 pencil barrel. And while none of the issue flash suppressors are very effective, the closed bottom of the A2 is only an advantage if you're prone on a dusty surface.

The A2 hand guards are far better than the A1 triangles, and the double-shielded egg guards are better still.

The only other A2 change that I appreciate is the forward assist. If you ever have to use it, it's a better target to strike.

A nice pair would be a modified A1 "rifle" as above and a flattop with red dot and BUIS on an A2 lower and either a 16" or 20" pencil barrel and a modern, effective flash suppressor. I like the cheek weld on the fixed buttstocks better but if I were getting in and out of vehicles, clearing structures or had transportation needs that favored shorter OAL I'd go with 16" and a telescoping stock.

Obviously, YMMV.

The a2 barrel was made heavier and more robust due to airborne operations and evidence of bent barrels on the a1 from heavy abuse. If your rifle attached to the drop bag hits the ground hard and bends.......it's f***ing useless. If it gets left on he fender of a 5 ton, gets run over when Snuffy starts moving......the barrel gets bent and it's useless. ground combat and day to day thrashing that a rifle goes through did prove the a1 barrel needed to be made stronger. But hey......on the a1 it "looked" nicer eh? Your average civilian will never put an ar through the same day to day shit that a marine or soldier will.

 

[Picton]

The a2 barrel was made heavier and more robust due to airborne operations and evidence of bent barrels on the a1 from heavy abuse. If your rifle attached to the drop bag hits the ground hard and bends.......it's f***ing useless. If it gets left on he fender of a 5 ton, gets run over when Snuffy starts moving......the barrel gets bent and it's useless. ground combat and day to day thrashing that a rifle goes through did prove the a1 barrel needed to be made stronger. But hey......on the a1 it "looked" nicer eh? Your average civilian will never put an ar through the same day to day shit that a marine or soldier will.

Perhaps. But paratroopers don’t put their personal weapons in any kind of dropped bag unless they’re machine gunners. At which point they’re jumping a pistol anyway. Your M1950 weapons case stays on your harness until after your landing.

I’m sure you’re not wrong; I can see an improperly done left PLF putting stress on the weapons case and damaging the rifle inside. But the old trooper in me thought I should correct that one little point.

 

[Hustler One]

I never used the carry handle, other than when I was turning in like five rubber duckies at a time carried like suitcases. But to me, it's like any other carry handle: it's an obsolete design requirement that has defined the classic lines of the firearm. I don't think any model of the "AR platform" looks right without it, and all my early training and experience with the M16 used irons. So I got used to the elevated rear sight, and the fixed stock and carry handle always gave me a comfortable sight picture.

I've never fired a flattop. I don't care to, either.

Not sure if youre aware but if you do come across owning a flat top you can cut down and shave a carry handle and make a cheap rear buis. Theyre also sold that way now for those who like that sight. I believe LMT sells them.

 

[whacko]

Perhaps. But paratroopers don’t put their personal weapons in any kind of dropped bag unless they’re machine gunners. At which point they’re jumping a pistol anyway. Your M1950 weapons case stays on your harness until after your landing.

I’m sure you’re not wrong; I can see an improperly done left PLF putting stress on the weapons case and damaging the rifle inside. But the old trooper in me thought I should correct that one little point.

Point taken.

I've seen 2 each a2 rifles have the barrels run over by 5 ton truck tires. They survived except for the hand guards. I know.....Soldiers leaving rifles leaned against a tire is stupid. Not all Soldiers are smart. I've also seen m16s used as pry bars to set up an army cot......stupid? Yes. The military makes changes based on the lowest common denominator. I've always been under the opinion that the thicker barrel on the a2 was done for that reason.....designing to the lowest common sense factor.

 

[67ray]

I'm thoroughly furious..... I bought an LMT lower last week. And then then do this flash sale on me. Thread related because it's one of the nicest 20in ARs can buy and it's 600 off.....

MLKMRPSC20-MARS - LMT

If you literally just bought it, call LMT and explain the situation. There is a good chance they will give you the sale price, or something else perhaps a credit on future order.

 

[mac1911]

Even on the A1, the center of balance was already at the hand guard retaining ring. By the time the A2 added mass out in front of the gas block/front sight, it got worse. Try to carry one by the "carry handle"... you'll be dragging the muzzle in the dirt.

Of course, tactically speaking, there's never any reason to carry a rifle like that. That just adds to the list of reasons why it was a silly idea in the first place.

Shave it all off (including the front sight), so that sights appropriate to the task can be added.

The iron sights on a AR are always going to be "tall" as the barrel sits low from your sight line.

 

[Picton]

Not sure if youre aware but if you do come across owning a flat top you can cut down and shave a carry handle and make a cheap rear buis. Theyre also sold that way now for those who like that sight. I believe LMT sells them.

I know, and thanks. I was in a unit that carried M4s early enough that commanders had no clue what to do with rails. I have lots of experience with the squashed carry handles, in a past life.

But I wouldn’t own a flattop. It’s a merry-go-round I’d just rather not get on. I feel like that’s part of what this thread’s about.

 

[H-minus]

Perhaps. But paratroopers don’t put their personal weapons in any kind of dropped bag unless they’re machine gunners. At which point they’re jumping a pistol anyway. Your M1950 weapons case stays on your harness until after your landing.

I’m sure you’re not wrong; I can see an improperly done left PLF putting stress on the weapons case and damaging the rifle inside. But the old trooper in me thought I should correct that one little point.

I would always lower my weapons case if winds were high and I was tracking hard left despite trying to slip right. It would be almost impossible not to PLF on my rifle under those conditions under the old T-10 canopies. Plus I was jumping an A2 for CE jumps. We didnt get the M4s until about 3 months before my active duty ets. Never got a chance to jump the newer T-11. They may have better tracking ability against the wind.

 

[Picton]

Those T11s look like nothing I’d want to deal with. Mass-tacs are sporty enough; I don’t want to steer. Get down, get out, done.

I jumped an MG precisely once, a SAW at Ranger school. I don’t recall rigging it to be lowered. Thank god I had a backwards landing. That sucker was BULKY.

 

[H-minus]

Those T11s look like nothing I’d want to deal with. Mass-tacs are sporty enough; I don’t want to steer. Get down, get out, done.

I jumped an MG precisely once, a SAW at Ranger school. I don’t recall rigging it to be lowered. Thank god I had a backwards landing. That sucker was BULKY.

Being a medic had the benefit of never having to jump or hump an MG or missile/rocket system (it would also grant me door position on most jumps too, which was nice). Although my aid bag added about 30lbs to my load so I had plenty to carry while wandering unfamiliar drop zones in the dark trying to find my unit.