Quoted:
I bet money the m16a2 weighs less at work just wondering
View Quote
Not exactly a retro questions but happy to answer.
Some of the numbers I found while trying to find an exact were a bit all-over the place and put the two at the same weight or even the A4 as lighter. I am guessing they weren't compensating for the RAS and/or had the carry handle removed.
After some digging, I finally found a source that has a handy table of weights right next to each other that actually makes sense.
The source for this is Army Document FM 3-22.9 "RIFLE MARKSMANSHIP
M16-/M4-SERIES WEAPONS"
Weights without Magazine or Sling
M16A1: 6.35lbs
M16A2/M16A3: 7.78lbs
M16A4: 9.08lbs
The main reason I say this is the document that makes the most sense is due to the Knights Armament M5 RAS that the M16A4 has instead of the standard circular handguards. The Circular handguards have been weighed at about 120g per piece or 240g for both (one manufacturer that lists the weight lists it at 213g for the pair). If we average those two weights, we get a pair of A2 handguards weighing in at 8oz. The M5 RAS is listed by KAC as having a weight of 17oz.
The handguards alone give us a weight difference of 0.5625lbs out of the 1.3lbs that the document lists as different. Now factor in the larger FSB and the weight difference between the A2 upper and an A4 upper with the detachable carry handle attached and I get a felling the weight differences would add up.
Then you get into the fact that, with all that rail space, people will want to start attaching things and that will increase the weight even further.