The AR-15 Thread - AR-15's and Magazines

[Ninurta]

I've changed the name of this thread to reflect and expansion of the scope of it from just magazines to include the AR-15 platform. After all, what good is a magazine without a gun to run it in?

This post is just a bit of housekeeping, to re-home an earlier opost I made to this more inclusive thread, to attempt to keep everything in one place. That post can be found here, and is reproduced in it's entirety below:

I've been thinking about buying a bigger gun.  The one I have is small, just something to stick in my purse, but I'd like to have a rifle, or AR-15 the way things are getting. 
Don't know if I can afford one though. I live on a fixed income, so I have to watch my pennies. 

I'll probably just have to settle for a bigger hand gun. 

Glad you got that taken care of @"senona".  You never know when you'll need a working gun.

Shop around. 

I got mine for less than 600 bucks brand new, tax and all, but it lists for around 750. You CAN lay a lot of money into an AR, but it's unnecessary. AR Snobs would have you believe that there are important differences, but there really aren't. Mine is one the snobs call "entry level" (it's a Smith and Wesson M&P-15 Sporter II), but I was handling AR's before most of them were even a gleam in their teenage mother's eye, and I'll tell you right now that the workings of all of them are exactly the same regardless of how "Buck Rogers" looking they are. A higher price does not mean higher quality - they are all the same at their most basic level. Paying out high-dollar on one means you are either buying a name label, or too many geegaws on it.

I laugh at some of the snobs insisting on a "free floating" barrel (claiming it's more accurate) and then getting that barrel with the "notch" for a grenade launcher machined into it, because it "looks like" a military M4. "free floating" barrels on an AR is like lipstick on a pig - unnecessary expense. It's an AR, not a freaking sniper rifle. It occupies an entirely different spectrum of firepower. There is no advantage to getting an expensive free floating barrel, and then having that harmonics-killing notch in it for a grenade launcher, especially considering they will never have an M203 to make use of it. All that notch is ever gonna do for them is make their barrel "whip" at the notch (which is a weaker point than the rest of the barrel) on every shot, negating the "free floating" advantage entirely.

"Basic" is not bad, nor is it substandard - it's what the rifle was designed as to begin with, and will work like a charm for it's intended use.

So shop around, look for "basic" or "entry level", as those are the only REAL AR's left in the world. They are work horses, not show horses - a MUCH better option when it's time to actually plow a furrow.

One distinction that IS important is the rifling pitch. It matters because it affects bullet flight with varying bullet weights. The original M-16 through M-16A1 had a 1:12 pitch, for use with 55 grain bullets. The Marines screwed the pooch on that by insisting on a 1:7 twist and heavier 62 grain bullets, trying to turn an assault rifle into a sniper rifle. The net result was the lighter bullets skip right past the tighter rifling and often fly wild. I got mine with a half-way 1:9 pitch, because that will work fairly well with both bullet weights.

The niche for AR's is from muzzle-in-their-gut work out to about 500 or 550 yards, with the sweet spot being from 125 yards or so to about 250 yards, and when you need more rapid fire. "Rapid fire" is not generally long range work. If you need more range than that, buy a sniper rifle instead.

Wow. This post probably belongs in a thread of it's own. I probably ought to see to that.

.