Agreed. I like my 1.5 for its relative simplicity and looks, plain and simple. Much like a MK12 it's just one of those guns that's instantly recognizable.

I actually just did some accessory swapping yesterday and got the weight balance just where I like it.  I think the Block II is going to stay this way.

also, I don't use any sort of rail covers -- they add up weight and if I'm shooting I either shoot by the mag well or have gloves on.

i've never owned a block 2 mainly due to cost.  but the PR builds just feel 'right'

I have two Block II's and one Colt 1.5 PR; I just completed the upper for another Colt 1.5 PR. IMHO I prefer the Block 1.5 PR; it just balances better for me.

Where are you guys getting those metal NSN tags on the magwell?

Allegedly a guy in the mk18 thread was going to have a bunch made.  Put my name in, never heard back.

Asmig. Although I think the window to put your name in has closed for now.

He said it would be a while before they were ready.

They're not metal but we got ours from StealthGuy on a run he made for all of us. The asmig guy is supposed to be making us all some "more correct" labels, but no word on that lately.

You really notice the weight of a few rail covers?  I may pop mine off to see if I can tell the difference, but I sort of figured it wouldn't be very noticeable.

I also seem to always forget my gloves when I head out to shoot.  

ounces equal pounds, pounds equal pain;

do better PCC's/PCI's of your range equipment

I feel like I do. I was running 3 KAC 11 ribs and a bunch of FDE ladders, got rid of all of them and it looks better/feels a little lighter on the muzzle end. Small difference but a few smalls add up to a big of course.

11 ribs are about an ounce -- if you have three of them, that's almost a quarter pound of weight off the end of the weapon that's past the center of balance.

IMHO, I actually prefer the KAC RIS/RAS, or "Phased Replacement" or "PR" or "1.5" configuration aesthetically to the Block II, but it's hard to argue with the added capabilities of the Block II.  

For a frankly negligible increase in aggregate weight - the Block II not only gives you more room to grip, but a free floated barrel, and infinitely more room to mount optics/accessories.  Compared to the Block II configuration, the "Phased Replacement" configuration is lean and light, but not very capable or adaptable.

The only real thing that the PR configuration has going for it is balance, which, on the one hand, I don't particularly mind a front heavy rifle - but it is possible to "load up" the Block II much further forward, where even small amounts of weight can alter balance significantly.  

On the one hand, the Block II may be an example of the old "jack of all trades, master of none" concept, but for a "grab only one, and go" rifle, it's hard to beat - and at the end of the day, whether you're a part of a military unit, or an individual enthusiast - the general purpose weapon is arguably the best option for all but the most specialized purposes.  For those carrying one weapon for a prolonged period of time, throughout a large range of possible mission sets, an overly specialized weapon can sometimes be a liability.  

Another thing to consider is that the use of the Block II configuration also reflects a large expansion in the "VAS," Visual Augmentation Systems components of SOPMOD, i.e. NV and thermal equipment.  When SOPMOD was originally conceived, the NV equipment available for the M4A1 was, for all intents and purposes, the AN/PEQ-2 and the AN/PVS-17.  

More recent increments have expanded beyond the simple IR LAM and NV scope to CNVD-I2, CNVD-T, with continuing plans to develop an integrated MDNS - Miniature Day/Night Sight.    

Meanwhile, the Colt RO921HB is an extremely accurate barrel for what it is, and with the free floating RIS II, the Block II M4A1 is capable of some very respectable accuracy at range.

Moreover - while VAS items, particularly "clone correct" ones are still quite expensive - they're quickly coming "within the reach" of many civilian shooters - if you hop over the NV forum, you'll see that it's not unheard of for folks to have thermal sights, NV clip-ons, etc. - and given the price of some "clones," and the number of folks building "trifectas" of expensive SOF clones (MK 12, CQBR, M4A1), and then rounding their collections out with KAC rifles, SR25s, expensive bolt guns, etc. -- and of course, suppressors for all of them - even older PVS-22s or SU-232/PAS are not out of reach.  

Meanwhile, recent releases of things like the ATPIAL-C, Adams Industries Legionnaire, AB NightVision MOD-3, and the upcoming TNVC "Night Goggles" line and IR Patrol, "owning the night" has never been more affordable.  

Thinking of it this way - if many "cloners" or "premium" or "boutique" brand shooters divested themselves of some of their "platforms" to invest in a single "suite" of equipment, the Block II might make a whole lot more sense as a "last to go" type of rifle.  You might "lose" your "CQB specific" and "precision DMR" or some other specialized "class" of weapon(s), but you will essentially open up your "operating envelope" by 100% by allowing you to do essentially everything you can/could do in the day - at night as well.  

The Block II is still a 14.5" carbine, and more than capable of CQC - and while heavy - in reality, most of the time "dynamic operations" do not involve holding your rifle at the high ready for extended periods of time - they're "as quick as you can" engagements, and if they last longer, ideally done from the prone, or behind cover, or both, and/or the nearest facsimile to them.  At the end of the day, chest-thumpers and pithy statements aside - this is one of the reasons physical fitness and physical conditioning are considered important, in a practical sense - to combat troops - it's unrealistic to expect anyone, no matter how many weights they lift - to not be tired at the end of an eight hour day doing "up-down" drills on a range at the high ready with any rifle - being able to "fight through" the weight on an assault through the objective or a call-out is a different matter entirely.  

A single Block II can be set up "mission dependent" for various degrees and types of day or night operations - and perhaps most importantly, you can do so without having to dismount or move any of your accessories/items, many of which may be semi-permanently secured and/or zeroed:

A Block II, no FSP can be fitted with a low power variable day optic, white or dual spectrum light, and an IR LAM "out front" for a basic, no frills general purpose setup.  

Going passive?  You can mount a CNVD, in either NV or thermal varieties out front of most day optics, and still leave the LAM sitting right where it was, able to be used.  

Not satisfied with the low end of your variable and/or piggybacked MRDs?  With the Block II, you most likely still have room, if desired, to put an offset RDS.  

Going to be in a support by fire or overwatch position?  No need to be saddled with a Grippod - you still have room for a QD bipod.  

With a 7" rail configuration on a "PR" M4A1 - can you do all of these things?  Sure - but probably not all at once.  You can't really, realistically put a CNVD, day optic, and LAM all across the 12 o'clock rail of a PR M4A1, or any carbine length rail.  

This means either removing the LAM completely, or keeping it semi-permanently mounted and zeroed to a side rail - generally considered less ideal, and which might displace your light, which might displace your controls, etc. ad naseum.  

Now, that's one heavy weapon - will your weapon always be that heavy?  Hopefully not - but again, stripped down, "lean and mean," the Block II is really not that much heavier than a PR in terms of the overall weight of an individual's field gear, while offering a pretty tangible set of benefits.  

Now does this apply solely to M4A1 Block II clones?  Of course not - and there are much lighter combinations with similar, if not better capabilities - but this topic was about clone builds in particular - but could be extrapolated to the "general" trend of using rifle-length rails on carbines versus shorter rails, and even fixed FSBs and/or rail mounted BUIS.  What, if anything, do you gain, versus what, if anything, you lose?  IMHO, the answer is potential capability, flexibility, and adaptability.  

If nothing you do, or ever intend to do would benefit from these potential capabilities, then the question is answered.

Anyways, that's my long-winded opinion.  As they say, "YMMV."

~Augee

Which says a lot as the 1/1.5 PRs are pretty heavy too.

 

capabilities = weight

even a KMR would weigh significantly more if it was a 2 piece rail, in order to mount a 203.

Block II's are great because they can do all things pretty well. Capable out to 600m. 14.5" barrels for CQB. Lots of rail space for bipods, scopes, etc.