How much weight can you drop w/o losing capability?

[Sry0fcr]

The light weight mafia isn't looking for utility, it's a trend (at least their brand of light weight) that can't go away fast enough. If you wonder if they balanced utility, dependability with light weight, you usually won't find a well balance there. Light weight for the sake of light weight, to the exclusion of other useful attributes is a fool's errand. Light weight for many is just something trendy folks wanted and manufacturers rushed in to fill a demand.

I refuse to use ti on anything, we're not building race cars and aircraft. For these vehicles there is no room for nonsense, everything is streamlined and efficient, but for most lightweight makers it's anything but.

We have several products with the H designation, for heavy. We're not trying to say light weight isn't good, only practicality and dependability is more important to us. Our sling mounts aren't ti or aluminum, they're 4140 steel so they last. We shave off weight where we can so they don't weight too much over their TDP counterparts, there's a practical side to weight saving, it should never get to the point of sacrificing reliability and practicality.

100% agree with you on the LW Mafia, they can get stupid, which is why I framed the conversation the way I did. I'm not suggesting that anyone "chase a number", I'm just realizing that I should have paid a little bit closer attention to weight on some of the components.

I really do appreciate the thought that you put into your products. I'm about to order some flat TGFs from you though.

[Duffy]

ASF (Ambidextrous Selector, Forward Controls) is launching next week
IMG_5275.jpg

[MistWolf]

ASF (Ambidextrous Selector, Forward Controls) is launching next week
IMG_5275.jpg

45° throw? How much are they gonna be?

[zombiescometh]

https://www.battlearmsdevelopment.co...41?category=38
3lbs 13oz $3200

https://www.vsevenweaponsystems.com/...ened-5-56-sbr/
4lbs 11oz $3000

https://www.gandrtactical.com/BCM-MK...ce_p_1412.html
5lbs 8oz $1400

It’s not quite a perfect comparison since one is a rifle, a sbr and one is a pistol configuration. But gives you a basic idea of what’s possible. And what you give up or have to spend more on to lose weight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JerDerv]

This isn't the 1960s any more. Many companies and individuals are utilizing software and advanced materials to optimize the functionality and ensure dependability of any given component or assembly. We see it in the automotive industry, the semiconductor industry, medical industry, etc. These improvements are generally expected, new and improved is basically normal. Our understanding of how to manipulate and maximize materials today has never been more advanced. Why the majority of firearm owners are not open to these improvements just blows my mind.

Is it because we may need to depend on our weapons to save our lives or the lives of our loved ones that we are afraid of something new and improved? Is it that when i look to my peers to see what they build to protect themselves, I assume that if the masses come to that conclusion then that must be what i should do to?

Its easy to understand how the fear of malfunctions or part failure would prevent people from trying something different. What i don't understand is the assumption that a component made out of a superior material with an improved design must be a sacrifice because it doesn't weigh as much.

Do not misinterpret this post for anything other than encouragement to keep an open mind. Im not saying lighter is better, im not saying heavy is bad. What i am saying is, optimization and continuous improvement should be welcomed.

Now.... who wants to buy my brand new and improved, high tech ultralight aluminum gas tubes!?

[OhThatGuy]

This thing is $499 and just over 3 lbs before the brace. Swap the polymer trigger group for standard metal parts, slap on a red dot and it’s good to go.

0704C649-E643-4EA1-B140-331C65D6C26A.jpg

[R0CKETMAN]

https://www.battlearmsdevelopment.co...41?category=38
3lbs 13oz $3200

https://www.vsevenweaponsystems.com/...ened-5-56-sbr/
4lbs 11oz $3000

https://www.gandrtactical.com/BCM-MK...ce_p_1412.html
5lbs 8oz $1400

It’s not quite a perfect comparison since one is a rifle, a sbr and one is a pistol configuration. But gives you a basic idea of what’s possible. And what you give up or have to spend more on to lose weight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This one has become one of my favorites.


https://www.gandrtactical.com/BCM-MK...ce_p_1412.html

[Duffy]

If I had a taco every time I hear "solution in search of a problem" used to describe one of our products, why, I'd open a Mexican restaurant. A wheelchair is a solution in search of a problem for an able bodied person, but that solution wasn't meant for him. This is a long way of saying we're not afraid to step outside of the established confines and experiment with ideas that seem unconventional. Some of these lightweight rubbish should have been kept as experiments, but they're marketing and selling them as if they were "innovations", they are not.

I can't speak for others in the industry, though I think I understand others because we're of the same mind here re: the use of titanium on a duty/defense firearm. For us, if we want light weight, 7075 is our go to material. If we want durability, 4140, 4130, 8620 heat treated. We're not building race cars and aircraft where every ounce exacts a price in performance, this is the reason it's not the right application for us.

Attention to detail matters in its application, same can be said of material. Steel and aluminum have done very well on AR15/M16, we simply don't see the need ourselves for ti, there are easier and less expensive, and let's be honest, more effective ways of reducing weight on an AR without ever using ti, which seems to be the favorite for many hobby grade AR and AR components maker because it's flashy, another reason we'd avoid it, bad optics.

Companies like vSeven makes light weight components without sacrificing utility, I can get behind that.

This isn't the 1960s any more. Many companies and individuals are utilizing software and advanced materials to optimize the functionality and ensure dependability of any given component or assembly. We see it in the automotive industry, the semiconductor industry, medical industry, etc. These improvements are generally expected, new and improved is basically normal. Our understanding of how to manipulate and maximize materials today has never been more advanced. Why the majority of firearm owners are not open to these improvements just blows my mind.

Is it because we may need to depend on our weapons to save our lives or the lives of our loved ones that we are afraid of something new and improved? Is it that when i look to my peers to see what they build to protect themselves, I assume that if the masses come to that conclusion then that must be what i should do to?

Its easy to understand how the fear of malfunctions or part failure would prevent people from trying something different. What i don't understand is the assumption that a component made out of a superior material with an improved design must be a sacrifice because it doesn't weigh as much.

Do not misinterpret this post for anything other than encouragement to keep an open mind. Im not saying lighter is better, im not saying heavy is bad. What i am saying is, optimization and continuous improvement should be welcomed.

Now.... who wants to buy my brand new and improved, high tech ultralight aluminum gas tubes!?

[AndyLate]

It is interesting to me that the pendulum has swung from light to heavy a few times since I originally was introduced to the AR platform in 1986.

In my mind, it took too long to arrive at the continuous taper barrel profile, which provides a significant gain in stiffness without adding unnecessary weight.

As far as weight vs capability - with a light, MRO, and BUIS, my 16" BCM lightweight runs in at 7 lbs 3 ounces. It may be possible to drop that weight down a pound, but the $ per ounce would get high fast. Admittedly a 11.5" barrel would shed a bit of weight, but then you are either running a pistol brace or paying $200 for a tax stamp.

A magnified optic adds both weight and capability - my AR built around a 16" BRT light optimum barrel wearing Trijicon 1-4 scope is 7 lbs 13 oz without a light or BUIS.

Andy

[Duffy]

We don't follow trends or fashion, I think it's a poor business model to chase after something that changes every 2 or 3 years, not to mention fashion never helps make a gun or component better, so they're merely window dressing disguised to look functional. Reliability and practicality aren't fashion, they are the foundation, and not subject to change because of fads.