The AR blues.

[sinlessorrow]

So lately I've been having the AR blues.
Idk if anyone else has ever had this but have you ever wondered why we still use it? I know it works, and it works well, but isnt there something better out there?

With all these countries dropping our rifles and moving on to "better" things its got me wondering, why cant we find a better rifle?

I mean why hasnt someone stepped up and developed a better rifle in America? While I love my AR-15's, I do wonder why in 50yrs has no one been able to truly develop something better that is actually made in America?

The Tavor is a good example, field reports seem to show its superior in reliability(now no telling if its true) to their M16's they used. This is why they are no longer using them for new troops.

I guess its just the human side of me thats always wanting better. Considering alot of the firearms stuff we make is the best and used by almost everyone, why can we not design a better rifle?

So what do yall think? Why havent we found something better, when other countries seem to think they have?

And be gentle its been a rough day lol.:(

[J_Dub_503]

I can find no better joy than a trip out with my AR (Well, there is one but that's a different subject.) I think the modularity inherent to the design is what keeps it relevant. With the vast amount of aftermarket add-on's, there's not much of a limit to what you can build. There's products to change Ergos, mounting solutions for slings, lights, and optics etc... Also, the many calibers that have been created and/or adapted to the platform that make it an ever-evolving design.

Mr. Stoner's successful creation has survived 60+ years and beat out a number of competitive designs for one reason... It Works!

[Rattlehead]

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/687fea91677be9103defb8dc0b97e8b7.gif

[sinlessorrow]

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/687fea91677be9103defb8dc0b97e8b7.gif

Look here you trekkie!!

Im not saying the AR is bad, trust me I love mine. I also understand that they work and work well.

My main point is that alot of countries that used to use them are now moving on to greener pastures(you know what they say).

What im saying is why havent we actually been able to create a better rifle.

As good as the AR-15 is, there is always room to improve.

[Heavy Metal]

Because the AR is so easy to modify and improve. We are far along on the diminishing end of returns with gunpowder-based small arms now. There really ain't much improvements to be had when you are already in the high-90s effieniecy wise, not enough to offset the logistical sunk costs.


.....and I would pick an M-4 over ANY Bullpup on the market.

[J_Dub_503]

Do I hear the implication of energy based firearms? I always knew that there was some reallity to Mars Attacks! Mark me up for T&E, lol.

I agree with the assessment made upon powder charged arms, you can only go so far. Unless there is a break through in gun powder formula or bullet design, I feel, the market is near it's peak.

[C4IGrant]

So lately I've been having the AR blues.
Idk if anyone else has ever had this but have you ever wondered why we still use it? I know it works, and it works well, but isnt there something better out there?

With all these countries dropping our rifles and moving on to "better" things its got me wondering, why cant we find a better rifle?

I mean why hasnt someone stepped up and developed a better rifle in America? While I love my AR-15's, I do wonder why in 50yrs has no one been able to truly develop something better that is actually made in America?

The Tavor is a good example, field reports seem to show its superior in reliability(now no telling if its true) to their M16's they used. This is why they are no longer using them for new troops.

I guess its just the human side of me thats always wanting better. Considering alot of the firearms stuff we make is the best and used by almost everyone, why can we not design a better rifle?

So what do yall think? Why havent we found something better, when other countries seem to think they have?

And be gentle its been a rough day lol.:(


Some "groups" of people are not known for being "good" at maintaining mechanical items. So with this in mind, the AK (for instance) is a much better choice.

When a country drops a certain weapon, you need to dig a little deeper and figure out why. ;)



C4

[vaglocker]

The AR is still around For the same reason the AK pattern rifle is still around. It does what it does extremely well.

[PlatoCATM]

If you want a different rifle for aesthetics then go buy one. If the M4 is issued to you then you know there are a shit-ton of better things to spend money on than another mutli-million dollar arms competition for marginal gain, not to mention the cost of fielding, and retraining the entire force to even the low to mid ability most everyone has.

[NWPilgrim]

An AR shoots better than most people can. Money is therefore better spent on training, optics, and more effective ammo.

[sinlessorrow]

Everyone makes excellent points.

If the start of this thread came across like I was bashing the Stoner system i am sorry. Just look at m history here and you will I have nothing but praises for the Stoner design.

My main thig was with the great minds we have in america why havent we developed something superior.

Be that LSAT, phazer weapons, or just a new tech is corrent rifle designs.

[Heavy Metal]

Developing an effective Laser Rifle is easy!

Don't worry about the Laser itself, we got that already. Just build an ultra-small, ultra reliable and ultra effiecinet fuel cell or battery! Simple!

[chadbag]

Do I remember reading that while some countries adopt other rifles for their standard troops, most special forces type units around the world are now using "m16" based weapons? (including things like the HK416)

If that is true (I've read it a few places) that might be what you call a clue?

---

[sinlessorrow]

Do I remember reading that while some countries adopt other rifles for their standard troops, most special forces type units around the world are now using "m16" based weapons? (including things like the HK416)

If that is true (I've read it a few places) that might be what you call a clue?

---

Ive read the same thing.

While I agree the platform is one of the best in terms of ergos, I find it interesting most seem to be heading the piston direction.

[SteyrAUG]

I want my flying car dammit.

:jester:

[Packman73]

I want a lightsabre for yard work...

[sinlessorrow]

I want a lightsabre for yard work...

Forget the lightsaber i want one of those clone troopers blasters.

[militarymoron]

With all these countries dropping our rifles and moving on to "better" things its got me wondering, why cant we find a better rifle?

The Tavor is a good example, field reports seem to show its superior in reliability(now no telling if its true) to their M16's they used. This is why they are no longer using them for new troops.



which countries are dropping current M4-style rifles vs. old, worn-out M16's? we've done the same thing - we've phased out older versions while improving the current platform.

also, moving on doesn't mean it's 'better'. it can be a matter of pride and moving away from not using something 'not designed here'. it's only natural for a country to want to develop and field and home-grown rifle, rather than buy one from another country.

like someone else brought up - look at what that country's elite forces are picking, not what the conventional forces are issued.

[Moose-Knuckle]

I want a set of Icelandic triplets (females of legal age just to be clear). :p

OP, go purchase a Kalashnikov varient. ;)

[Javelin]

Some "groups" of people are not known for being "good" at maintaining mechanical items. So with this in mind, the AK (for instance) is a much better choice.

When a country drops a certain weapon, you need to dig a little deeper and figure out why. ;)



C4

I think it boils down to those countries and cultures that sit in chairs vs. those cultures that squat in the sand.

That's pretty much an indicator as to which type of weapon platform and equipment they will be carrying.

[Heavy Metal]

Forget the lightsaber i want one of those clone troopers blasters.

To hell with that! I want my Adrian Barbeaubot!

[SteyrAUG]

I want a set of Icelandic triplets (females of legal age just to be clear). :p




I want to change my answer.

[sinlessorrow]

I think it boils down to those countries and cultures that sit in chairs vs. those cultures that squat in the sand.

That's pretty much an indicator as to which type of weapon platform and equipment they will be carrying.

This has me slightly confused, care to explain it to a simpleton like myself?:o

[skyugo]

to paraphrase something that was recently said in handguns:
every rifle sucks, just determine what shortcomings you're willing to put up with, choose one and work with it.

[a1fabweld]

I'm from the school of "If something works, & works well, don't **** with it". The AR D.I. design is awesome & has proven itself many times over.

The flavor of the week is the ACR, SCAR, blah, blah, blah. Until these weapons prove themselves in wars as the D.I. AR has, I've no reason to even think about switching my platform.

I feel the same way about my HK91 platforms. I can't find a good reason to change something that works so well.

[Javelin]

This has me slightly confused, care to explain it to a simpleton like myself?:o

My experience has been that folks that live in the sand squat, sit on the floor, don't have toilet seats and have no furniture. They usually carry AK platforms by coincidence?

Western culture has furniture, uses toilet seats and chairs and use the AR platform. Coincidence?

My conclusion is based on personal experience and I was trying to be little humorous sso take it for what it's worth.

;)

[Failure2Stop]

With all these countries dropping our rifles and moving on to "better" things its got me wondering, why cant we find a better rifle?


Define "better".

[JR TACTICAL]

I'm from the school of "If something works, & works well, don't **** with it". The AR D.I. design is awesome & has proven itself many times over.

The flavor of the week is the ACR, SCAR, blah, blah, blah. Until these weapons prove themselves in wars as the D.I. AR has, I've no reason to even think about switching my platform.

I feel the same way about my HK91 platforms. I can't find a good reason to change something that works so well.

I thought the SCAR was proveing itself currently in the hands of SF units?

[SMETNA]

http://www.cracked.com/blogimages/2009/04/hoverboard.jpg

[montanadave]

http://www.cracked.com/blogimages/2009/04/hoverboard.jpg

OMG! Where did you get those?

And do they make a tactical model in coyote brown with PALS webbing?

[sinlessorrow]

Define "better".

Well I put better in ETA: quotation. because its more of a he said she said thing.

The countries now switching to their own fireamarms like Israel, make statements like our new rifle is far more reliable and accurate than our old M4's.

So the countries swapping say their rifles are "better".

[C4IGrant]

Well I put better in parenthesis because its more of a he said she said thing.

The countries now switching to their own fireamarms like Israel, make statements like our new rifle is far more reliable and accurate than our old M4's.

So the countries swapping say their rifles are "better".

Or, the country wants to support one of its own.

Another reason is that they shouldn't have ever gone to the DI platform at all (as they do not know how or cannot properly maintain it).

I am a FIRM believer that not everyone should have an M16/M4 or AR15.



C4

[Heavy Metal]

Define "better".

...and that cuts to the chase.

Too many people are hung up on tailfins and not thinking about whats under the hood.

Mission dictates the tool. The better tool is the one that better serves the mission.

Now, what is the mission I ask?

[a1fabweld]

I thought the SCAR was proveing itself currently in the hands of SF units?

3 years of service history to a few small branches isn't much of a history at all IMO. I'll check back with the SCAR platform in another 20 years. Or not.

[Failure2Stop]

Now, what is the mission I ask?

Exactly. For many of the countries that are going to something else it is simply because to them, "better" means "built here". It does make sense in economic and national pride categories. Whether or not it equates to better performance is lost for those that don't really know what to do with a rifle once it is in their hands.

I will say this: I see no reason to opt for a DI gun except in an AR, and that is only because it was designed to work as one. The AR has warts, most certainly, but so do ALL of the other modern "assault" rifles.

[sinlessorrow]

Exactly. For many of the countries that are going to something else it is simply because to them, "better" means "built here". It does make sense in economic and national pride categories. Whether or not it equates to better performance is lost for those that don't really know what to do with a rifle once it is in their hands.

I will say this: I see no reason to opt for a DI gun except in an AR, and that is only because it was designed to work as one. The AR has warts, most certainly, but so do ALL of the other modern "assault" rifles.

I had not thought of the nation pride part, it does make sense though. Javelin and Grant both make good points as well.

I will agree the AR-15 is the only rifle I woukd ever choose DI in, because like you said it was designed that way.

[Failure2Stop]

I had not thought of the nation pride part, it does make sense though.

Several nations require that their weapons are produced within their borders. My note about national pride is a distant second to the "built here" requirement.

Another fun fact: several "special" units from other countries carry Colts... specificallly Diemaco/Colt Canada in quite a few. Somehow it is easier to swallow buying from Canada instead of from the US to these nations.

Onto recent adoptions by other nations:
When put head to head against the M4/M16 they universally fail to demonstrate superiority in any aspect to and significant degree and compare poorly in others. Conceptually, the ACR/Masada was the single greatest advancement, but it failed to pan out (for several reasons with many factors involved).

[sinlessorrow]

Several nations require that their weapons are produced within their borders. My note about national pride is a distant second to the "built here" requirement.

Another fun fact: several "special" units from other countries carry Colts... specificallly Diemaco/Colt Canada in quite a few. Somehow it is easier to swallow buying from Canada instead of from the US to these nations.

Onto recent adoptions by other nations:
When put head to head against the M4/M16 they universally fail to demonstrate superiority in any aspect to and significant degree and compare poorly in others. Conceptually, the ACR/Masada was the single greatest advancement, but it failed to pan out (for several reasons with many factors involved).

Thanks for the answer. That's very intersting about the Colt Canada purchases.

I have to agree about the ACR concept, it was one of my most looked forward to rifles in a long time but we all know how that ended.

[SMETNA]

I have to agree about the ACR concept, it was one of my most looked forward to rifles in a long time but we all know how that ended.

. . . . . thrown into the bushes