Similar "AR Set Ups" or Variety for those of us who are serious about training?

[Arch]

I keep moving toward 100% identical redundancy only for my ARs (i.e. furniture, trigger, sights, optic, WML, sling). I have owned / used AR15s since 1984 as a civilian, and have always had the "you need at least two set up identically if you actually may need them" mindset. However, over time I have been moving away from "range variety" (i.e. different configurations just for range fun) entirely.

At this point my "go-to guns" are ...

LMT 16" MRP with LMT trigger, LMT SOPMOD Stock, LMT fixed sights, Aimpoint CompM4S in LaRue LT659NV, SureFire M600 Scout, GGG 2pt Sling
LMT 16" MARS with LaRue MBT2S, LMT SOPMOD Stock, LMT flip sights, Trijicon TA31H-G in LaRue Mount, SureFire M600 Scout, GGG 2pt Sling

I have two of each of the above.

I have other ARs (multiples of: Colt 6700, Colt 6920, Colt 6960, Daniel Defense M4A1, etc). I am wondering if I should just sell the "others" and concentrate on improving my proficiency with the "go-to" guns. I would use the proceeds to add a third identical LMT 16" MRP and LMT 16" MARS since the "trainer unit" would be seeing considerable use. Honestly, I could see keeping my Colt 6920s as "KISS" guns too.

I shoot about 180rds a week as a typical mean round count, but up to 600rds on some weeks.

What are your thoughts on the "consistent manual of arms" vs "range variety" debate?

[Arch]

By the way, I am just a civilian that enjoys the shooting sports. However, I do view firearms first and foremost as defensive tools. I am in no way a collector, cloner, mall ninja. Just a civilian professional that enjoys shooting but takes self-defense very seriously.

[C-grunt]

I dont fall into the "everything needs to be the same" mentality. Its a decent concept if you are dealing with low trained people or dealing with multiple people and a pool type firearm. But when dealing with someone who actually trains regularly (in your case A LOT) I find that they tend to run anything pretty good. I doubt you'll see a huge drop in performance with a different setup.

I have guns for fun but I also believe in different tools for different jobs.

[Arch]

@C-grunt

Thank you. I feel like I don't train enough. I use to shoot more but ammo prices and availability have slowed me down quite a lot. Over the past month I've been stepping it back up. I've ran about 1,500 5.56, and 500 45ACP. I can't afford to maintain this level, but did notice a slight "improvement" (read: speed on target and follow up shot speed) from the extra trigger time.

As my ammo supply dwindles I'm dropping back to my 180rd (two 90rd range trips per week) regimen.

All ARs work the same so I can see where having some variety wouldn't HURT my serious training, but muscle memory is a real thing. If I've been focusing on my LMT MARS and then take my LMT Defender MRP I find myself looking for the ambi safety. Is this going to get me killed in some highly unlikely and purely imaginary self-defense scenario? Probably not. Haha.

[C-grunt]

Changes in controls could definitely slow you down. But putting an ambi safety on isn't hard, so that's good. I'm talking more about different rifle types.

Just for an example lets say you have a 16 inch rifle with an ACOG and a 11.5 inch rifle with an EOTech.

Now you can always set up a drill that will favor one setup over another. But if we set up a general course of fire with movement, barricades, and targets from 10-200 yards..... i don't think you'd see a whole lot of difference between the two rifles in that drill.

[Arch]

I agree with you, and have actually tested something very similar recently.

I ran a 10.5" pistol with Aimpoint T1 side-by-side with a 16" ACOG equipped rifle. My performance was what you'd expect. The T1 was quicker under 50 yards and the ACOG was better 50 to 400. Otherwise, I didn't see any real difference beyond the increased muzzle blast from the 10.5 on the "cardboard barricade" I was using at shooting stops 1 through 3.

ETA: beyond stop 3 I had just painted a circle in the grass as my stop.

[ST911]

What are your thoughts on the "consistent manual of arms" vs "range variety" debate?

Far less an issue within systems than between them, i.e. AR vs SCAR/FAL. Essential controls are in the same location and the processes to run the gun and keep it in operation are the same. There are exceptions for specialized attachments and high performers.

Adding... Baseline skill sets matter. The more familiar with you are with the equipment the less difference a motor or cognitive stutter makes when something is different.

A suppressed SBR, a 16" carbine with LPV, and an 18" precision setup are all more alike than different.

[markm]

Far less an issue within systems than between them, i.e. AR vs SCAR/FAL.

That's me. I don't keep AKs, FALs, SCARs, etc. Not because I don't shoot enough to be proficient. Just that I don't need the headache of another platform, mags, ammo, etc.

My ARs, I keep as different as I can afford to. Too much duplication doesn't make sense because that's money tied up that could be a different set up.

[bamashooter]

Diverse knowledge along with a practical application of assorted weapons is smart.

[Five_Point_Five_Six]

I try to keep the controls the same between rifles. I don't run any ambi lowers or ambi safeties, I mount VFGs and lights in the same spot on the rail and use push button tailcaps instead of tape switches. This is just to keep things simple and so my wife and oldest daughter can run any of our rifles if I'm not home.

I use similar optics and rails, Aimpoints and 1913 quad rails, with 100 meter zeroes on everything.