- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Official AR-15 thread
Posted on 1/16/16 at 6:54 am to Carson123987
Posted on 1/16/16 at 6:54 am to Carson123987
Just thought I might join the famous AR-15 thread with my first purchase.
quote:
Manufacturer: Smith & Wesson
Model: M&P15 Sport Version II, 10202
Caliber: 5.56mm NATO / .223 Rem.
Capacity: (1) 30 Round PMAG
Barrel Length: 16"
1
Posted on 1/16/16 at 7:31 am to kirbydawg
Nice. I ordered my first (Ruger AR556) but it hasn't arrived yet. I can't wait to put holes in something.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 8:05 am to LSUMurse
Went to jims in br yesterday and they actually have a Dencent deal on a pre owned ar build. It was a palmetto lower and lpk, magpul moe grip Stock and handguard with bcm gun fighter charging handle, spikes full auto bcg, magpul mbus rear sites with a folding Yankee hill front site, I'm not sure of the barrel and neither was the guy behind the counter but it also had a vortex red dot optic. They had it priced st 780, which compared to the mp they sale all day long if have chosen this one which seemed ready to go.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 8:53 am to DisplacedBuckeye
Any suggestions on an upper for hunting applications? Up to 200 yards is what I am interested in
Thanks for any help.
Thanks for any help.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 9:34 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
No, it isn't and that's not what it was designed for
No? What was it designed for, then? quote:
It's one of the many advantages, but not the primary one
What is this primary advantage?
Posted on 1/16/16 at 9:54 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
No, it isn't and that's not what it was designed for.
Actually, yes it was.
quote:
The .300 BLK cartridge was developed as one step forward towards the goal of replacing the MP5-SD with a more accurate and more powerful firearm for our troops and law enforcement officers. As John Hollister said many times when we were out on the range, when officers go in for a high risk warrant they can either take the quiet yet underpowered MP5-SD or the noisy and gigantic AR-15. AAC wanted to make something that had the ease of use of an AR-15 but the portability of a MP5, that could go from subsonic rounds to supersonic rounds with the change of a magazine.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 10:17 am to cajun12
quote:
Any suggestions on an upper for hunting applications? Up to 200 yards is what I am interested in
Tikka T3 or Remy 700 in 30-06 or .270.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 10:26 am to Kill Switch
also, from Kevin Brittingham (founder of AAC)
quote:
These were our original requirements for this caliber: Muzzle energy has to equal or exceed the AK-47. .30 Caliber projectile. Use unmodified 30 round magazines to full capacity. Use unmodified AR-15/M-16/M-4 bolt. Gas impingement system. Shoot super and subsonic. And one thing that was nice, but was not a ‘deal killer’, was non-adjustable gas system. Cycle all four ways – subsonic suppressed and unsuppressed, and supersonic suppressed and unsuppressed.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:08 am to Carson123987
quote:
No? What was it designed for, then?
It was designed as a 30-cal round for the AR platform that would match 7.62mm ballistics and penetration. That was the first priority during development. Developers and the customer wanted the round to use existing inventory parts (mags, bolt, receivers, etc.) with only a barrel change being necessary. The round was supposed to provide similar weight, durability, and recoil characteristics to the 5.56mm. The round needed to use subsonic and full-powered ammo without adjusting gas.
A suppressed round was one half of many requirements during development. If that requirement was unable to be met, production would likely have continued because the round is an excellent choice for close-quarters battle and short to medium range, suppressed or not.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:15 am to Carson123987
quote:
also, from Kevin Brittingham (founder of AAC)
quote:
These were our original requirements for this caliber: Muzzle energy has to equal or exceed the AK-47. .30 Caliber projectile. Use unmodified 30 round magazines to full capacity. Use unmodified AR-15/M-16/M-4 bolt. Gas impingement system. Shoot super and subsonic. And one thing that was nice, but was not a ‘deal killer’, was non-adjustable gas system. Cycle all four ways – subsonic suppressed and unsuppressed, and supersonic suppressed and unsuppressed.
This all started because you said this:
quote:
If you aren't shooting suppressed, don't get a blackout. It's that simple
Then you post something to back that up that refutes it. I'm glad we're at least on the same page now.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:29 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
It was designed as a 30-cal round for the AR platform that would match 7.62mm ballistics and penetration. That was the first priority during development. Developers and the customer wanted the round to use existing inventory parts (mags, bolt, receivers, etc.) with only a barrel change being necessary. The round was supposed to provide similar weight, durability, and recoil characteristics to the 5.56mm. The round needed to use subsonic and full-powered ammo without adjusting gas.
i have google too, thanks
quote:
Then you post something to back that up that refutes it. I'm glad we're at least on the same page now
that doesn't refute it at all. look up the ballistics of 5.56, 300blk, 6.8spc, and 6.5 grendel and tell me why you would run 300blk if you didn't have a can.
look at the performance differences between 5.56 in 16" vs 9" barrel and then 300blk in 16" vs 9". the writing is on the wall: it is optimal for suppressed cqb in a short barreled platform. it's not complicated. it has great muzzle energy with a 9" barrel (close to M855 out of a 16"), but not everyone is running a SBR. the average guy does not need a blackout. at a base level, the ballistic differences between 5.56 and 300blk are not enough to warrant the differences in ammo price when running a standard 16" rifle.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:30 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
match 7.62mm ballistics and penetration.
Wut. As in .308? If so, that isn't true.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:34 am to ChatRabbit77
just ordered a complete PSA pistol Lower for my 10.5 build. Will go the pistol route for now
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:35 am to Carson123987
quote:
i have google too, thanks
I have a lot more than that, bud.
quote:
that doesn't refute it at all. look up the ballistics of 5.56, 300blk, 6.8spc, and 6.5 grendel and tell me why you would run 300blk if you didn't have a can.
look at the performance differences between 5.56 in 16" vs 9" barrel and then 300blk in 16" vs 9". the writing is on the wall: it is optimal for suppressed cqb in a short barreled platform. it's not complicated. it has great muzzle energy with a 9" barrel (close to M855 out of a 16"), but not everyone is running a SBR. the average guy does not need a blackout. at a base level, the ballistic differences between 5.56 and 300blk are not enough to warrant the differences in ammo price when running a standard 16" rifle.
Your statement was that without suppressing it, there was no reason to use it. I simply pointed out that this is not the case, and you finally agreed. It was a grind, but we got there.
quote:
not everyone is running a SBR
The guy literally asked about a 7/7.5" build.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:36 am to ChatRabbit77
quote:
Wut. As in .308? If so, that isn't true.
What's not true? You quoted a handful of words out of context.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 11:51 am to cajun12
quote:
Any suggestions on an upper for hunting applications? Up to 200 yards is what I am interested in
Thanks for any help.
I think to keep it an AR, go for 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 spc. The new 7MM Raptor is coming soon which will be awesome (it is said to be good on deer out to 300yards).
This post was edited on 1/16/16 at 11:52 am
Posted on 1/16/16 at 12:06 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Your statement was that without suppressing it, there was no reason to use it.
for the average, occasional shooter, that is the case. all they see is ammo price.
quote:
The guy literally asked about a 7/7.5" build.
i never saw that post; i only saw the inquiry as to the advantages of 300blk
we were never in disagreement as to the quality of the cartridge and what it's capable of. i'm simply arguing that Joe Schmo is fine with a 5.56.
if the guy from previous page does go with a 7.5" blackout upper, that's fine, but I don't see the point unless you're getting a can. the extra noise, concussion, gas, and inferior ballistics don't outweigh the lighter weight and easier maneuverability. I got my 8.5" blackout because I didn't want the extra weight of a 14oz can hanging on a 16" barrel.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 12:16 pm to Carson123987
quote:
for the average, occasional shooter, that is the case. all they see is ammo price.
Agreed, but as far as I can tell, that's not the case here.
quote:
i never saw that post; i only saw the inquiry as to the advantages of 300blk
He mentioned a 300blk pistol build in the post you replied to, but point taken. Glad we're on the same page at least.
quote:
we were never in disagreement as to the quality of the cartridge and what it's capable of. i'm simply arguing that Joe Schmo is fine with a 5.56.
I don't think that's even what was being debated.
quote:
if the guy from previous page does go with a 7.5" blackout upper, that's fine, but I don't see the point unless you're getting a can. the extra noise, concussion, gas, and inferior ballistics don't outweigh the lighter weight and easier maneuverability
Well, again, that would depend on what he intends to use it for. I still haven't seen that from him.
Posted on 1/16/16 at 12:38 pm to ChatRabbit77
quote:
Wut. As in .308? If so, that isn't true.
I think he meant 7.62x39
Posted on 1/16/16 at 1:00 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I think he meant 7.62x39
Correct, I should have been more specific.
Page 505 of 948
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News