The One Gun Solution (GP Carbine) - Reality?

[Ironman8]

Agree with the other response; anything at (or close to) 1x at the bottom, and up to 10x currently.
The biggest question is really what your budget is (don't forget to factor in mount), and if there are any features that you know you must have. There are examples in each price range that stand out above others, and a few that I have as personal favorites.

I still have a 1-4x NightForce that is great.
1-6x are still completely viable; the Leupold VX6 Multigun (now discontinued) is solid, and at around $1200 were a great value. The Swarovski 1-6x with BRTi reticle was huge in 3-gun, but lacked in overall robustness; at around 2k it was one of the top 1-6 options before the 1-8s really hit. I am fond of the Kahles k16i as well, though while generally considered to be "hardened" Swarovskis, I liked the BRTi reticle of the Swaro more and the forgiveness of the Swaro seemed better. I may like it more with the new Kahles 3GR reticle. But at around 2k as well, it isn't in a different category. For around $1200, the Bushnell 1-6.5x is a good value. My 1-6s are on 11.5" and 14.5" 5.56 rifles.

I also own a couple 1-8x, with time on a bunch. The original Leupy 1.1-8x is a tank, and has several good features, but is prohibitively costly for most, and somewhat outclassed with the 1-8s that have dropped in the last few years. My two favorites are the NF NX8 1-8x and the now discontinued Swarovski 1-8x BRTi. I like the ATACR 1-8 as well, but I tend to favor just stepping up in magnification/reticle/adjustment for the guns that would usually get the 1-8x ATACR. My 1-8x NX8 lives on a 14.5" 7.62 SR-25, with a realistic max expected range of 500 meters, with 90% inside 200 meters. While I would prefer a more optimized reticle in the NX8, it gets me what I need for inside 200. My Swaro 1-8x is on a 14.5" 6.5 Creedmoor SR-25, that I use as a lightweight precision rifle with a suppressor that I get in and out of vehicles with and move through restrictive terrain with, with expectation to get fast lethal hits from 5 meters to 500 meters, with limited expectation out to 800 meters. In this setup, weight is very important; and with a light, laser, bipod, and suppressor, cutting weight wherever available while retaining capability is why I favored a lightweight 1-8 over a 4-16 with top-mounted dot. In neither application does a FFP reticle give an advantage for me, so the weight and expense of that feature was not necessary. I do use the Swarovski ballistic turret on the 1-8, which I find very useful for precision application past 800 or so.

Awesome info Jack, thanks for your contributions here. Some of your posts early on about LPVO's has helped me through the years with different optic purchases.

[Ironman8]

Excellent thread, I'm picking up quite a bit of info. Our intention is to move to a free State (we're 2 years past due), and I want to take advantage of short barrels and NFA items.

As a civilian, when I think of a GP rifle, I think of the rifle I would grab first when I leave the house, don't know what I will encounter, or when I will come back.

It changes the definition, for me, if I know what the mission will be and when I'll come back.

I don't want to change the direction of the thread, but does that definition change anyone's rifle build?

Same. I have a CQB/night fighting-oriented rig; an SPR/DMR rig that while mission-specific are still somewhat versatile, but my "the one-gun" setup is the most adaptive and versatile with a lot of trial and error in finding the proper balance in being fully capable while not being a disproportionate pig or worse...the "jack-of-all, master-of-none" abomination that does nothing well.

It's definitely not changing the premise of the thread at all and the bolded part of PB4445's post describes my intention for the "one gun solution" well. If funds are limited and/or you're just not the type of person to have multiple different setups (some mediocre, sub-standard, or half complete....and don't hardly get shot) then how would you setup your go-to rig to be capable and effective in close quarters and out at range (whether that's realistic or not, I still want the capability) during day (out to 400yds) or night (out to ~100yds)? Like I've mentioned, the LPVO SBR or "Mini-RECCE" is that platform for me during the day...the night-time capability was where I needed guys like F2S, Docsherm, and PB4445 to chime in with their experience.

[Wake27]

Interesting take and thanks for taking the time to explain. I'm definitely leaning toward trying the piggyback MRDS as a backup to day/active IR target acquisition after your and Jack's posts here. Sounds like it's really the only mousetrap that works when running the LPVO as a day optic. And I do understand your thought process on the passive vs. active anti-detection considerations and one that I really haven't thought about...although my limited understanding of IR laser/illumination TTP's is basically to treat it like it's white light and you should be fine in that respect.

As for the bolded part, I was just talking about that with a family member. Having a place outside of the city is now a much higher priority. If Covid was truly a deadly bug, things would have gotten real sporty, real fast with how our media works. I'll just try to have both the tech and land

I definitely want to try the top mount MRDS. I like my offset RDS, but it creates quite a bit of bulk, especially with how my throw lever is oriented on 1x. If I can reduce bulk and weight at the same time as having a slightly more effective aiming solution with nods, I definitely want to compare to what I currently have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JoshNC]

Take whatever AR you have, put Ultradyne irons on it (easily move from 0 to 400 yards), and adjustable white light for no light, and maybe a visible laser for low light. Or you can scrap you rifle, spend thousands and thousands of dollars on short barrels, Aimpoints, night vision and IR lasers.

What?

[pointblank4445]

I definitely want to try the top mount MRDS. I like my offset RDS, but it creates quite a bit of bulk, especially with how my throw lever is oriented on 1x. If I can reduce bulk and weight at the same time as having a slightly more effective aiming solution with nods, I definitely want to compare to what I currently have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Give it a whirl. It always confused me that many put it down but so many guys are scrambling to put their sight at 1.93...2.04...2.25...and higher all the time for heads up but piss and moan about "chinweld" when you put in on top of the front ring...I don't get it.

I will say that I popped an ACRO to try on top and it's legit. Don't like the lines/footprint aesthetics of it over the RMR or the proprietary battery but that little sucker feels like a REAL primary aiming device. Haven't looked at it through NV yet, but initial impressions are good.

[Wake27]

Give it a whirl. It always confused me that many put it down but so many guys are scrambling to put their sight at 1.93...2.04...2.25...and higher all the time for heads up but piss and moan about "chinweld" when you put in on top of the front ring...I don't get it.

I will say that I popped an ACRO to try on top and it's legit. Don't like the lines/footprint aesthetics of it over the RMR or the proprietary battery but that little sucker feels like a REAL primary aiming device. Haven't looked at it through NV yet, but initial impressions are good.

As soon as Badger releases the mount for the C1, I plan on it. A few years ago I thought the same thing about an ACOG and top mounted RMR. Then I tried a 1.93 and liked it for the most part. Now that I think I’m settling on the 1.7, I agree that a top mounted MRDS seems fair with the ever higher mounts gaining popularity for primary optics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ironman8]

As soon as Badger releases the mount for the C1, I plan on it. A few years ago I thought the same thing about an ACOG and top mounted RMR. Then I tried a 1.93 and liked it for the most part. Now that I think I’m settling on the 1.7, I agree that a top mounted MRDS seems fair with the ever higher mounts gaining popularity for primary optics.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you planning on a laser? If so, where do you plan on mounting it (RE: 1.70 vs 1.93 mount)?

[Wake27]

Are you planning on a laser? If so, where do you plan on mounting it (RE: 1.70 vs 1.93 mount)?

Not yet sadly. I just sent my application for a trust to a lawyer and figured I’d get into NFA stuff before NODs and lasers so I probably have a few years before I get there. But this thread has me debating on how everything would be set up based off of what I know I like right now.

I am, however, hoping to be able to play with one or two of my personal uppers with some work lasers and nods within the next year or so.

ETA - misread your post. I assume I'll put some type of laser at the 12:00 which is why I'm curious how well that'd work with a Razor in the 1.7 mount.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JoshNC]

I look at it this way....

If the Covid thing has taught me anything, it's not that I have any gear deficiencies...rather that I wish I live on a bigger piece of land and that $2800 might be better suited for that endeavor rather than tech that will be out of date in 10 years...

Yep. This is how I feel as well.

[Canonshooter]

The "one AR solution" is, IMO, driven entirely by one's own circumstances and needs. What may be way too "Tactical Timmy" for one user may be legitimately needed by another.

ARs are a major financial rabbit hole. All the marketing hype for the "must-need" gear and accessories is cultivated in magazines and online forums. As a result purchase decisions are often impulsive and made without the needed critical thinking;

What's it for?

What are my realistic needs for a defensive or general purpose rifle?

Would my money be better spent elsewhere (like training) rather than some latest & greatest must-need doodad?

Then there's the entire NFA thing. Sure, personally I'd love to have a SBR set up with a suppressor, but my lack of desire to submit myself to the big-brother process (not to mention the expenditure) has remained the determining factor as to why I haven't scratched that itch (at least as of yet).

So back on-topic, here is my own "critical thinking" analysis for a one-AR solution based on what I believe are realistic needs;

• I live in an area that is heavily wooded and hilly. A typical "defensive long shot" would be under 300 yards (a simple visual survey of the surrounding area combined with Google maps tells the story)
• I want the lightest configuration possible. I have discovered first-hand how easy it is to loose track of accessory weight and end up with a boat anchor rifle.
• Keeping things lightweight requires some compromise. What features to compromise requires critical thinking on realistic needs.
• I want a rifle that carries and handles well, and is easy to shoot from typical field positions
• I want a rifle that I can engage targets within the 300 yard envelope quickly and with utter confidence
• I want the rifle to consistently shoot terminally-effective ammo with adequate precision and total reliability
• I want a tier-1 quality rifle that from a maker that has a proven track record

Having spend way too much $$ over the past few decades trying configurations and accessories that left me wanting, about five years ago I assembled a "general purpose defensive rifle" that admirably fits my needs/expectations, and is in fact the only AR I now own;

• BCM complete lower fitted with a Geissele SSA and A5 RE/A5-2 buffer
• BCM complete mid-length upper, 16-inch BFH ELW
• Leupold FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm scope in a Daniel Defense mount . The entire package is lightweight (12 ounces), low profile and snag-free.
• Midwest Industries offset BUIS
• Two 5-slot rails at the front of the handguard, one at 9 o'clock to mount a WML and one at 6 o'clock to mount a bipod (both of which are only attached as needed)
• Multiple sling attachment points for the various slings I own
• Rifle as shown in photo below with unloaded magazine weights 7.5 lbs.

This rifle consistently shoots 1.3 MOA or better with Speer 75 grain .223 Gold Dot ammo. It functions flawlessly and smoothly with this (my go-to) ammo, as it does with every 77 grain OTM 5.56 load I've tried.

After spending untold money on LPVO scopes, I purchased the Leupold on a whim, based on it's extremely light weight and it's excellent reputation as a dangerous game rifle scope (heavy recoil). It's bright, clear, has long eye relief and is easy to shoot with both eyes open. It has an adjustable, lockable eyepiece that renders the simple duplex reticle razor sharp. Coming from the other scopes with which I always felt compelled to dick round with reticle brightness, magnification and parallax adjustments, this Leupold scope is a 100% hands-free point-and-shoot solution. It turns out that at least for me, losing all those settings I used to fiddle-dick around with is not as much of a sacrifice as I thought it would be. Sometimes, there really is elegance in simplicity.

With the factory-set parallax distance of 150 yards, I have the 75 grain Gold Dots zeroed at that range. At 100 yards the POI is 0.8" high, at 300 yards 14.2" low - quite manageable within the intended defensive engagement envelope.

This is the "one AR" solution that works for me. I really like this rifle. As an old guy, I like simple things that I can use effectively, and this configuration nails it for me.

I hope you find this old guy diatribe useful, no offense to anyone intended.

Obligatory Photo