What could be done to simplify the AR-15?

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

To me, the AR seems remarkably simple. Most of the time we are spending time and money ADDING complexity to the rifle (BAD levers, twin ejector, twin extractor, etc, piston doodads, etc). What could be done to SIMPLIFY the AR-15 without significantly reducing capability? The things I can think of can be done by others.


1. Delete the mostly useless forward assist. This would also simplify the machining of the bolt carrier. It would also slightly reduce weight.

2. Integrate and enlarge the trigger guard. I doubt this saves any weight or really simplifies the gun in any meaningful way. But it does reduce parts count and machining operations (plus eliminates the possibility of breaking the lower installing a roll pin).

3. Monolithic rail. I am not sure this would really simplify the manufacture, but would probably reduce parts count.


Possibly bad ideas/last ditch volksturm

4. Ditch bolt cover. Colt and others did that with the Expanse. This seems like a bad idea to me. It is a cheap part and helps keep garbage out with no cost to the functionality of the design. True last ditch.

5. Integrate QD mounts into monolithic rail and rear of lower. I actually don't care for this because once you damage them you are basically screwed unless you know a machinist willing to do some serious custom work.

Can anybody think of anything that could be done to further simplify the basic design?

[seb5]

To me, the AR seems remarkably simple. Most of the time we are spending time and money ADDING complexity to the rifle (BAD levers, twin ejector, twin extractor, etc, piston doodads, etc). What could be done to SIMPLIFY the AR-15 without significantly reducing capability? The things I can think of can be done by others.


1. Delete the mostly useless forward assist. This would also simplify the machining of the bolt carrier. It would also slightly reduce weight.

2. Integrate and enlarge the trigger guard. I doubt this saves any weight or really simplifies the gun in any meaningful way. But it does reduce parts count and machining operations (plus eliminates the possibility of breaking the lower installing a roll pin).

3. Monolithic rail. I am not sure this would really simplify the manufacture, but would probably reduce parts count.


Possibly bad ideas....

4. Ditch bolt cover. Colt and others did that with the Expanse. This seems like a bad idea to me. It is a cheap part and helps keep garbage out with no cost to the functionality of the design. Heck, I would like to see an auto closing version.

5. Integrate QD mounts into monolithic rail and rear of lower. I actually don't care for this because once you damage them you are basically screwed unless you know a machinist willing to do some serious custom work.

Can anybody think of anything that could be done to further simplify the basic design?

I like some of the ideas but think the F/A should stay. Many times before leaving base both in Iraq and Afghanistan, and lots of times during my LEO career I've pulled the charging handle back just enough to see the loaded round and let it go forward, seating with a push of the F/A. Those are the only times I've ever used it but it was comforting to check when I did.

[Kain]

What about an industry standard barrel nut/rail/handguard interface? I mean we have a pretty much standard accessory mounting interface for the most part, plus a couple. Would make swapping rails easier for those who like to play rail of the month.

[Singlestack Wonder]

The AR15 design is already simple, proven to run in the worst conditions, and has been going strong for 50+ years.

No reason to change anything unless one is a gun gamer and needs a kickstand to hold it up for ease of grabbing on an ipsc stage. For serious use, the design works fine.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Single stack, that is exactly the opposite of what I am talking about. I want ideas to simplify. If you aren't interested this really isn't for you.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Additional Bad idea

Alright , what about welding the receiver extension in place? Would allow you to ditch a few parts and weak points in the design. I don't know how you would replace the buffer detent pin if it ever weakened.

I guess you could also use a plastic lower with an integrated grip--but I suspect that would require metal sleeves for pins, etc which would be a step back.

[T2C]

I would like to see the fixed front sight base eliminated and replaced with a detachable unit with screws that can be secured in place with roll pins after the sight is attached. This could be easily done by cross drilling the screws every 90 degrees. That way some MK 1 Mod 0 Soldier/Sailor can't remove the front sight base and lose it if the weapon is set up for iron sights.

If a unit equips their rifles or carbine with optics, they can requisition carbines and rifles without the FSB. If a unit wanted to convert iron sight weapons, an armorer could drive out the roll pins, loosen the screws and eliminate the FSB without interfering with the gas system.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

That's a good idea.

[markm]

Monolithic is insanely expensive to do right. Most monolithic set up are made from 6000 series alloy because you can't weld 7075. So to get a 7075 monolith, you have to machine the living shit out of a monster forging.

I do like the idea of the trigger guard in the forging, but then you're stuck with whatever design is in the forging. I don't like bowed out/large trigger guards at all. I like to be able to set my gun on the edge of the bench/table resting on the mag well. The gun falls over with big trigger guards.

[T2C]

I think the rear of the trigger guard should be integrated into the grip. That would make it easier to change the trigger guard should a unit or branch of military service want a different design. No more pounding out the roll pin on the receiver and risking breakage. You just take an allen wrench and swap out the grip/trigger guard assembly.