User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 9:33:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: GenYRevolverGuy]
A couple years ago, nobody was making A2 stuff. A bunch of companies were making A4s, and some of those companies were calling those A4s A2s, but you couldn't really get an A2 without digging up an old upper somewhere and building around it yourself.
Then one day, a holding group bought the rights to an old gun company's branding and IP, and they hired a retro rifle nerd to run it, and now there's a shift. H&R released A1s first, then A2s started shipping a year or so ago, and they've been a hit.   SA-16A2 - Springfield Armory® It's going to be fun to see how far this goes. Personally, I didn't love the A2 when I was in the Army. The examples I was issued were mostly older than I was and it showed, and every USGI magazine I was ever issued before I deployed should have been smashed and trashed. Also, GI triggers are what they are, and the training wasn't very good. The marksmanship training was so poor, many (most?) of us couldn't hit the 300M targets with confidence, and bad maintenance practices caused reliability issues. I learned a hell of a lot more about shooting techniques and firearms maintenance towards the end of my career and after I got out than I ever did when I was in. I recently acquired my first civilian A2:  I dropped a trigger in it, lubed it up, and took it out, and it actually kind of rips. I was pinging the 300 yard target casually, I had a good hit rate at 400 with some effort, and 550 was a bit tough, but it was hard to see the target. The 0-2 aperture was also way more useful than I remember it being. I could get the A2 on targets from 50-200 with that aperture about as fast as I could my TA-31 ACOG. I bought this A2 as a range toy, training rifle, and Memberberries item, but my confidence in it is high. I'm going to put a loaded mag in that force pro pouch and keep it handy. Anyways, I don't have much love for Springfield, but I'm glad they're doing this, and I hope this trend grows a bit more. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:04:40 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Does the M16A3 actually exist in the real world?  I've never seen one nor have I ever met anyone who was issued one. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By DoubleARon: The M16A3 was better than the M16A2. I'm right. You know I am. If you disagree your bad and you should feel bad. Does the M16A3 actually exist in the real world? I've never seen one nor have I ever met anyone who was issued one. One of the Navy Corpsman attached to my unit for my 2005 deployment to Iraq had one. Flat-top upper with A2 handguards. The receiver was originally marked "M16A2," but the "A2 marking was X-ed out and replaced with an "A3" marking. It was the only one I had ever seen. I'm pretty sure I have a pic of it on one of my hard drives. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:05:17 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By USCG_CPO: LOL, you should have tried going thru boot camp with an old A1 that rattled like a box of screws and always felt like it was going to fall apart. I didn't get an A2 until about year into my first duty assignment and right after qualifying with it, it was taken away and I was assigned an M3 Grease gun I am pretty sure I was more accurate throwing a rock at the target.Anyways, glad to see more choices being offered. I did Basic with an A1. Qualified with a 39/40 with it. Great little gun. I didn't like the brass hitting me in the face though. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:07:50 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By USCG_CPO: LOL, you should have tried going thru boot camp with an old A1 that rattled like a box of screws and always felt like it was going to fall apart. I didn't get an A2 until about year into my first duty assignment and right after qualifying with it, it was taken away and I was assigned an M3 Grease gun I am pretty sure I was more accurate throwing a rock at the target.Anyways, glad to see more choices being offered. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By USCG_CPO: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Personally, I didn't love the A2 when I was in the Army. The examples I was issued were mostly older than I was and it showed, and every USGI magazine I was ever issued before I deployed should have been smashed and trashed. LOL, you should have tried going thru boot camp with an old A1 that rattled like a box of screws and always felt like it was going to fall apart. I didn't get an A2 until about year into my first duty assignment and right after qualifying with it, it was taken away and I was assigned an M3 Grease gun I am pretty sure I was more accurate throwing a rock at the target.Anyways, glad to see more choices being offered. I went through basic in 2006. Most of us had A2s built on A1 receivers. My first one was actually an H&R which means it was built between 1968 and 1971. As a teenager, I was issued a rifle that was 35-40 years old and updated to a specification that was 25 years old at the time. It was plainly obvious that these rifles were decades old, had been in the basic training environment for a while, and in retrospect, parts had possibly been to Vietnam. I'm pretty sure the M16A2s I was issued at Ft. Hood, including the one I carried for the first few months of my deployment, were FNs. When I did a brief stop in the NG after I left active duty, we had GM HydraMatic A2s in the armory. This was in 2012. I think all of those rifles, at least the lowers, would have been built in 1969 or 1970. These were 43 year old rifles still in inventory with a deployable unit. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:08:50 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: I don't understand the retro fascination. It's going backwards on purpose. Things have been updated and modernized for a reason. Why have any gun that doesn't have a modern (last ~10 years) design and manufacture? They're still fun to shoot. |
|
|
|
WY, USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:10:00 AM EDT
[#5]
I did my time in the USMC with it and have not found much into building one myself. Back in the days of gun shows and the pre internet ways of SOG magazine I didn't pick it up (pre money).
I would love to put one together that was carried. Good to know! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:13:37 AM EDT
[#6]
I put together a good copy of an A2 and a good friend engraved the lower with my years of service. It is one of my best rifles.
 Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:16:53 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: I went through basic in 2006. Most of us had A2s built on A1 receivers. My first one was actually an H&R which means it was built between 1968 and 1971. As a teenager, I was issued a rifle that was 35-40 years old and updated to a specification that was 25 years old at the time. It was plainly obvious that these rifles were decades old, had been in the basic training environment for a while, and in retrospect, parts had possibly been to Vietnam. I'm pretty sure the M16A2s I was issued at Ft. Hood, including the one I carried for the first few months of my deployment, were FNs. When I did a brief stop in the NG after I left active duty, we had GM HydraMatic A2s in the armory. This was in 2012. I think all of those rifles, at least the lowers, would have been built in 1969 or 1970. These were 43 year old rifles still in inventory with a deployable unit. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By USCG_CPO: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Personally, I didn't love the A2 when I was in the Army. The examples I was issued were mostly older than I was and it showed, and every USGI magazine I was ever issued before I deployed should have been smashed and trashed. LOL, you should have tried going thru boot camp with an old A1 that rattled like a box of screws and always felt like it was going to fall apart. I didn't get an A2 until about year into my first duty assignment and right after qualifying with it, it was taken away and I was assigned an M3 Grease gun I am pretty sure I was more accurate throwing a rock at the target.Anyways, glad to see more choices being offered. I went through basic in 2006. Most of us had A2s built on A1 receivers. My first one was actually an H&R which means it was built between 1968 and 1971. As a teenager, I was issued a rifle that was 35-40 years old and updated to a specification that was 25 years old at the time. It was plainly obvious that these rifles were decades old, had been in the basic training environment for a while, and in retrospect, parts had possibly been to Vietnam. I'm pretty sure the M16A2s I was issued at Ft. Hood, including the one I carried for the first few months of my deployment, were FNs. When I did a brief stop in the NG after I left active duty, we had GM HydraMatic A2s in the armory. This was in 2012. I think all of those rifles, at least the lowers, would have been built in 1969 or 1970. These were 43 year old rifles still in inventory with a deployable unit. Basic in 2008 at Ft. Benning, everyone had (FN) M16A4s except for the guys in Infantry OSUT who had M4s with M68s. The armory at OCS was full of A1s though. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:17:17 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ex0331: I did my time in the USMC with it and have not found much into building one myself. Back in the days of gun shows and the pre internet ways of SOG magazine I didn't pick it up (pre money). I would love to put one together that was carried. Good to know! It was tough finding an A2 upper and a proper barrel when I built my A2 copy. Even more tough was being sure of feed ramp compatibility. Now complete A2 rifles are available factory-built from multiple companies. Crazy times. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:31:14 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SGT_Tentpeg: M16 is a full automatic weapon. Do they mean AR15? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:35:19 AM EDT
[#10]
Here it is in the PSA Daily Deals email ($1,199): https://palmettostatearmory.com/springfield-sa-16-a2-5-56-nato-20-30rd-rifle-black-sa920556b-a2.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=daily_deals&utm_campaign=am&utm_term=04-30-2024&utm_content=51655157974
On the H&R page, they have CL blem rifles for $1,099, CL rifles for $1,149, and CL CHF rifles for $1,299. https://palmettostatearmory.com/brands/h-r-arms-co/firearms.html |
|
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:38:48 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By desertmoon: This is Springfield we are talking about. Be thankful that they didn't name it, " The Flatulator " or some other nonsense.  Right, or have the A2 grip and handguards emblazoned with "GRIP ZONE"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:41:43 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SGT_Tentpeg: M16 is a full automatic weapon. Do they mean AR15?  Attached FileThe AR-15 is a full auto weapon. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:42:29 AM EDT
[#13]
This reminds me that I need an M16A2 clone.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:42:49 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: I don't understand the retro fascination. It's going backwards on purpose. Things have been updated and modernized for a reason. By this logic I should throw away my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and 1911. (its ok to own guns for purposes of fun and recreation) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:44:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: VTD]
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By desertmoon: This is Springfield we are talking about. Be thankful that they didn't name it, " The Flatulator " or some other nonsense. The Springfield "HellifIknow" ? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 11:51:46 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: I was in the Army for 6 years and I never saw a range set up to shoot paper at 300. We had these: https://invtactical.com/cdn/shop/products/25-meter-m16a2-zeroing-target-alt-c2-shooting-targets-305621.jpg?v=1693729298 Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By mcantu: Originally Posted By djkest: We always did 25-meter paper targets and then moved the rear sight aperture two clicks. That's a preliminary zero, not confirmation. Confirmation would be done at 300 I was in the Army for 6 years and I never saw a range set up to shoot paper at 300. We had these: https://invtactical.com/cdn/shop/products/25-meter-m16a2-zeroing-target-alt-c2-shooting-targets-305621.jpg?v=1693729298 Same. 25m paper targets to zero and then to a 300m pop-up range or a 25m paper qualification target with all the pop-up silhouettes printed on it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:04:16 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: I don't understand the retro fascination. It's going backwards on purpose. Things have been updated and modernized for a reason. Nope 20" A2 is peak  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:05:49 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kalahnikid: By this logic I should throw away my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and 1911. (its ok to own guns for purposes of fun and recreation) rifles, and in 2024, your Glocks. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:08:32 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FightingHellfish: The biggest reason that soldiers struggled with the more distant targets is that the rifles were never fully zeroed in many units. As a civilian would you consider your rifle properly zeroed with out confirmation at range? I always missed the 150 and 200. 25 meter zero is really stupid. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:10:15 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Does the M16A3 actually exist in the real world? I've never seen one nor have I ever met anyone who was issued one. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By DoubleARon: The M16A3 was better than the M16A2. I'm right. You know I am. If you disagree your bad and you should feel bad. Does the M16A3 actually exist in the real world? I've never seen one nor have I ever met anyone who was issued one. I've only seen them once in 2003. OK NG Artillery unit. Flat top with shiny new ACOGs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:19:41 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kalahnikid: By this logic I should throw away my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and 1911. (its ok to own guns for purposes of fun and recreation) Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kalahnikid: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: I don't understand the retro fascination. It's going backwards on purpose. Things have been updated and modernized for a reason. By this logic I should throw away my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and 1911. (its ok to own guns for purposes of fun and recreation) Even then, these are still AR15s. You're a carry handle optic mount and a FSB light mount away from being level with the modern field. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:25:19 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Even then, these are still AR15s. You're a carry handle optic mount and a FSB light mount away from being level with the modern field. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By Kalahnikid: Originally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: I don't understand the retro fascination. It's going backwards on purpose. Things have been updated and modernized for a reason. By this logic I should throw away my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and 1911. (its ok to own guns for purposes of fun and recreation) Even then, these are still AR15s. You're a carry handle optic mount and a FSB light mount away from being level with the modern field.  Attached FileYup! My project from last weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:28:51 PM EDT
[#23]
I think the M16A2 is the worst version.
I still want one with a TA31 and a RAS though.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:37:53 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I think the M16A2 is the worst version. I still want one with a TA31 and a RAS though. Wouldn't that be an A4? I want to set my 20" PSA kit like that but for now it's going to have a detachable carry handle and A2 guards. Is that the A3? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:41:11 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cooper1: Not MD legal  I was just in a MD gunstore yesterday trying to decipher exactly what is and isn't MD legal. I live in WV, but do my shooting at my moms place in MD. I have an AUG and X95 I would like to sight in, I think we determined that the AUG is maybe legal, and the Tavor probably not. In other words, who exactly knows what is MD legal 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:42:44 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By colklink: I was just in a MD gunstore yesterday trying to decipher exactly what is and isn't MD legal. I live in WV, but do my shooting at my moms place in MD. I have an AUG and X95 I would like to sight in, I think we determined that the AUG is maybe legal, and the Tavor probably not. In other words, who exactly knows what is MD legal |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:46:20 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JamesJones: Wouldn't that be an A4? I want to set my 20" PSA kit like that but for now it's going to have a detachable carry handle and A2 guards. Is that the A3? Yep that would be the A4 with the flat top. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:48:34 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DoubleARon: I think MD legal is a subjective opinion from some cop at the state level based his feelings on the barrel profile. Yep. And ARs are legal in MD. No M4 profile barrels, no pencil barrels. Heavy barrels, even with bayonet lugs, threaded muzzles and collapsible stocks are legal. I generally just take my Ruger AR556 to shoot, that is 100% MD compliant. |
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:54:30 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By UndrGrndPrdcts: I don't understand the retro fascination. It's going backwards on purpose. Things have been updated and modernized for a reason. Might not be the greatest if it was your only AR, but there are things to like about them. They just have cleaner lines and less things to fiddle with. I like how A1 handguards feel more than probably any other I’ve tried. As another poster mentioned, if you needed to you could add an optic and light to a retro AR and it’ll keep up with whatever is current today. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:54:40 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By STL_Nik: ARF loves to gobble SA cock while shunning every other company who as much as farted near the 2nd amendment. This place never fails to surprise me. FUCK SPRINGFIELD ARMORY from the gun owners of Illinois. As a former IL gun owing resident I have to agree. Not sure I understand how they get a pass for screwing over IL folks but whatever. |
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 12:56:43 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: I was in the Army for 6 years and I never saw a range set up to shoot paper at 300. We had these: https://invtactical.com/cdn/shop/products/25-meter-m16a2-zeroing-target-alt-c2-shooting-targets-305621.jpg?v=1693729298 Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By mcantu: Originally Posted By djkest: We always did 25-meter paper targets and then moved the rear sight aperture two clicks. That's a preliminary zero, not confirmation. Confirmation would be done at 300 I was in the Army for 6 years and I never saw a range set up to shoot paper at 300. We had these: https://invtactical.com/cdn/shop/products/25-meter-m16a2-zeroing-target-alt-c2-shooting-targets-305621.jpg?v=1693729298 I think that was the point the poster was making. That you only confirm you zero at the qual range when you are in the Military. They don't have you take your newly zero'd rifle to a known distance range shoot at the 100-300m targets then go back to zeroing if you screwed up. Which means lot's of zero's for riflemen were really "close enough" as opposed to "confirmed zero." It's honestly not enough trigger time if you want the best. But it's Gov we're talking about so "close enough" is "good enough for government work." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 2:05:23 PM EDT
[#32]
Just based on seeing some newer shooters at the range, they'd benefit from starting over with iron sights and learning to actually shoot before slapping various optics on their guns. Yes, I like A1 uppers as well as 20" A2s.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 4:13:40 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SGT_Tentpeg: M16 is a full automatic weapon. Do they mean AR15? DerpyDerpaDerpDerpDerp. You know, you’re gonna shit when you find out LRB and JRA call their GI M14 clones an “M14.” |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 4:25:13 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By STL_Nik: ARF loves to gobble SA cock while shunning every other company who as much as farted near the 2nd amendment. This place never fails to surprise me. FUCK SPRINGFIELD ARMORY from the gun owners of Illinois. This should’ve been the first post. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 4:27:21 PM EDT
[#35]
Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: A couple years ago, nobody was making A2 stuff. A bunch of companies were making A4s, and some of those companies were calling those A4s A2s, but you couldn't really get an A2 without digging up an old upper somewhere and building around it yourself. Then one day, a holding group bought the rights to an old gun company's branding and IP, and they hired a retro rifle nerd to run it, and now there's a shift. H&R released A1s first, then A2s started shipping a year or so ago, and they've been a hit. https://files.springfield-armory.com/wp-content/uploads/model-hero-sa16-rifle-2200x1257-3.jpg  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwuKAESTsYoIt's going to be fun to see how far this goes. Personally, I didn't love the A2 when I was in the Army. The examples I was issued were mostly older than I was and it showed, and every USGI magazine I was ever issued before I deployed should have been smashed and trashed. Also, GI triggers are what they are, and the training wasn't very good. The marksmanship training was so poor, many (most?) of us couldn't hit the 300M targets with confidence, and bad maintenance practices caused reliability issues. I learned a hell of a lot more about shooting techniques and firearms maintenance towards the end of my career and after I got out than I ever did when I was in. I recently acquired my first civilian A2: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/257918/IMG_9632-3183526.jpg I dropped a trigger in it, lubed it up, and took it out, and it actually kind of rips. I was pinging the 300 yard target casually, I had a good hit rate at 400 with some effort, and 550 was a bit tough, but it was hard to see the target. The 0-2 aperture was also way more useful than I remember it being. I could get the A2 on targets from 50-200 with that aperture about as fast as I could my TA-31 ACOG. I bought this A2 as a range toy, training rifle, and Memberberries item, but my confidence in it is high. I'm going to put a loaded mag in that force pro pouch and keep it handy. Anyways, I don't have much love for Springfield, but I'm glad they're doing this, and I hope this trend grows a bit more. Always glad to see a decent A2 offering. But that Fritz cover on a steel pot gives me Forrest Whitaker eye. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 4:51:07 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By crusaderf8u: As a former IL gun owing resident I have to agree. Not sure I understand how they get a pass for screwing over IL folks but whatever. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By crusaderf8u: Originally Posted By STL_Nik: ARF loves to gobble SA cock while shunning every other company who as much as farted near the 2nd amendment. This place never fails to surprise me. FUCK SPRINGFIELD ARMORY from the gun owners of Illinois. As a former IL gun owing resident I have to agree. Not sure I understand how they get a pass for screwing over IL folks but whatever. Because they didn't actually |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 6:29:39 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tommyrich: One of my very first AR's was a Colt 6600. Still have it and will never sell it, and to this day one of my favorites to shoot. My first AR was a budget parts-bin rifle in an A2 HBAR configuration I bought around '92. I got other rifles and kinda lost interest in it. Then, many years ago, I took it apart to sell the stripped lower to an Arfcommer in CT. A couple of weeks ago, I put it back together with a PSA lower from the parts box. I haven't taken it to the range yet. I'm missing a trigger guard and the buffer retainer is bent, so I have to get those. I took a pic to show my buddy that it bit me right after I put it together. I think it was angry about all those years stuck in the safe.  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 6:43:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: gearjammer351]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: 3) The 20" M16s are actually great rifles for a variety of reasons including superior external and terminal ballistics, the rifle length gas system, and some of the best iron sights fielded on any rifle ever. 4) 20" guns just plain shoot better than 16" guns, M4s, or SBRs. Agreed. Back in the 90s, they switched us (11C in a mech unit) from A2s to M4s gradually. Two guys from each vehicle got the M4 and the others kept their A2. The next qual, I couldn't hit all the targets with the M4. I hated the idea of removing my 'expert' badge, so I begged to try again - still didn't get expert.  Third try, I borrowed my gunner's A2 and hit 40/40. Maybe I didn't get a good enough zero or something, but I have always shot better with a 20" rifle anyway (with irons, that is). |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 6:47:59 PM EDT
[#39]
An A2 with a carry handle mounted TA-01 ACOG. If you can see the target you can hit it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 6:57:17 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Action45: More retro options is never a bad thing FPNI |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:09:35 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 03RN: Because they didn't actually Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 03RN: Originally Posted By crusaderf8u: Originally Posted By STL_Nik: ARF loves to gobble SA cock while shunning every other company who as much as farted near the 2nd amendment. This place never fails to surprise me. FUCK SPRINGFIELD ARMORY from the gun owners of Illinois. As a former IL gun owing resident I have to agree. Not sure I understand how they get a pass for screwing over IL folks but whatever. Because they didn't actually They did, but when called-out on it, they shit-canned the company they hired to do the political lobbying for them and apologized. Whether or not they knew what was going on, only insiders would know. Damage was done, already. Rock River Arms was also using the same lobbying company and if I remember correctly, never took it back. The lobbying group expected the anti-2A bill to pass and got specific carveouts for their corporate clients like SA and RRA. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:11:51 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cooper1: Not MD legal |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:16:04 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kalahnikid: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/60275/20240428_095823a_png-3200342.JPG Yup! My project from last weekend. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:20:35 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JLPettimoreIII: TIA, eh danny? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JLPettimoreIII: Originally Posted By Kalahnikid: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/60275/20240428_095823a_png-3200342.JPG Yup! My project from last weekend. Danny's gone, I'll be outside.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:23:02 PM EDT
[#45]
I never had an issue with Colt A2s. The FNs were the real nightmares once we got those
The mag issue was real. Units should have been DXing 10% of their mags every year but hung onto them until they were literally junk |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:29:22 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: We almost always did confirmation zeros before scored quals. I remain convinced the marksmanship struggles were 80% training and 20% the GI trigger. The "GI" trigger being the burst FCG, which is horrible and whoever adopted it should be pummeled. The regular FA trigger from the A1, Navy models or unit COTS purchases is not bad especially when worn (or cleaned up). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:35:12 PM EDT
[#47]
Springfield still doesn’t make a SA-35 with an optics cut and accessory rail but they can pump out this carry handle bullshit 😑
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:36:13 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rudukai13: Springfield still doesn't make a SA-35 with an optics cut and accessory rail but they can pump out this carry handle bullshit @springfieldarmory
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:36:55 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kalahnikid: Danny's gone, I'll be outside.  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2024 7:37:36 PM EDT
[#50]
Deployed with the same A2 twice. Longer and a little cumbersome, but I can still handle it like an extension of myself after nearly 20 years. I’ve built two and plan to have one engraved with my SN.
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
