AR Sponsor
Posted: 6/20/2026 11:44:31 AM EDT
|
I really don’t get it in a serious rifle… For a range toy or one you’re just gonna put a box or two thru a couple times a year, yea sure whatever, you do you. I carried an M4 for 23 years and hauled it around the desert and up and down mountains both here in the states and in sandbox, so I certainly get the appeal of a lighter rifle. What I don’t get is the cult following LW barrels seem to have with some people, especially those who’ve never served. LW barrels heat up quicker and accuracy degrades faster over longer strings of fire as it does, so why would I or anyone want one in a serious rifle!? Yes, in the civilian world I’m very unlikely to ever put enough stress on the barrel to need a SOCOM or HBAR profile barrel to negate accuracy degradation in a given situation, but I’ve run into so many people screeching about the weight savings of a LW barrel and all I can ever think is, “Dude, your rifle goes from your house to your car and your car to the flat range, is the 4oz of saved weight really so life changing!?” Seriously, can anyone explain it to me cuz so many of the LW advocates treat it like a damn religion. **This stemmed from a heated conversation I overheard at the range yesterday and I’ve been thinking about it since. |
Arfcom's favorite midnight DG shelf stocker
Joined:
Apr 2004
Posts:
75817
EE: 100% (26)
UKR
|
I love my lightweight rifle because it's easy to carry and doesn't hurt my back the way the thicker profile rifles do. It's a fun rifle to carry because I forget it's there. Yes, it heats up quickly but also cools quickly too. It's definitely not a mag dump or FA host. It's pleasant to carry and easy to shoot all day without getting tired. Proof Attached File |
connoisseur of fine Soviet and European armored vehicles since 2007.
We are all dogs in God’s hot car of life
Thank you UKjohn for the membership!
We are all dogs in God’s hot car of life
Thank you UKjohn for the membership!
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
295
EE: 100% (28)
USA
|
I think weight is subjective but in my personal opinion, at least doing one run-and-gun 5-6 miler with a SIG SPEAR and also taking a number of carbine courses and such, what I found the problem isn't weight per se but rather weight distribution, and comfort. A padded sling, for example, and a centrally balanced rifle I think are far better. The SIG SPEAR, for example, I ran all nearly 6 miles with a unpadded "original" vtac sling and by the end of it I was hurting having to hold it up because the sling dug into my shoulders, and this tired me out even more because now I'm holding this big ass heavy rifle out with my flimsy arms. So I was miserable. But with AR15s, I never get tired with it no matter the weight. The main thing I look for is keeping it as centrally weighted as possible where if I held it up on the palm of my hand by the magwell, it would balance but maybe sometimes tip slightly forward towards the muzzle. I feel when this happens, it makes carrying it a breeze because all the weight is really in your chest area and the barrel is sticking outwards, which doesn't seem like much, but when it is swinging and moving around, that weight is playing a factor into your overall stamina in a gun fight. That plays a lot into shooting too because as you aim and raise the weapon, the weight is more towards the point where you can strongly hold it up and by it being more towards the muzzle end, all that weight is shifting forward which again doesn't sound like a lot but when you're already tired, that plays heavily into it. |
|
Originally Posted By DMFLMK: I think because there are so many fat people in the country now days that when you carry around that much body weight, getting tired is easy to do. When choosing between a donut or barrel weight, most of Americans are choosing the donut every time. You're not incorrect. About 70% of American aged military men/women in USA are unfit for military service. That's pretty significant number compared to WW2 when that number was only 40%. |
|
My favorite rifles are sporter barrels. My go to hunting rifle is a Winchester Featherweight. All my AR's have either stainless target barrels or govt profiles. None of them are anything I'm going to take anywhere but the range. All were built long before pencil barrels were easy to find. I don't care about barrel heating. I'm not going to fire any gun fast enough for it to matter. |
|
Both… Personally I understand the appeal of a lighter barrel and I understand everything is a trade off. And again, in a recreational rifle there’s no real downside. But I’m talking about a fighting rifle, and so were they… In that context I don’t see a viable argument for a LW barrel. Especially it when you’re talking about 4oz. My real issue is the cult following I’ve seen for LW barrels among some. And in that I’m talking more about what their debate was. |
|
Originally Posted By GerryOwen: Both… Personally I understand the appeal of a lighter barrel and I understand everything is a trade off. And again, in a recreational rifle there’s no real downside. But I’m talking about a fighting rifle, and so were they… In that context I don’t see a viable argument for a LW barrel. Especially it when you’re talking about 4oz. My real issue is the cult following I’ve seen for LW barrels among some. And in that I’m talking more about what their debate was. A quarter pound weight at the end of your rifle is something. The biggest benefit is that fatigue during a gun fight sucks. |
|
Originally Posted By GerryOwen: Both… Personally I understand the appeal of a lighter barrel and I understand everything is a trade off. And again, in a recreational rifle there’s no real downside. But I’m talking about a fighting rifle, and so were they… In that context I don’t see a viable argument for a LW barrel. Especially it when you’re talking about 4oz. My real issue is the cult following I’ve seen for LW barrels among some. And in that I’m talking more about what their debate was. If i can get that 4oz out and don't need it for the use of the rifle; that 4oz can go to the can and keep the rifle more balanced and quicker to point. |
|
Originally Posted By GerryOwen: I really don’t get it in a serious rifle… For a range toy or one you’re just gonna put a box or two thru a couple times a year, yea sure whatever, you do you. I carried an M4 for 23 years and hauled it around the desert and up and down mountains both here in the states and in sandbox, so I certainly get the appeal of a lighter rifle. What I don’t get is the cult following LW barrels seem to have with some people, especially those who’ve never served. LW barrels heat up quicker and accuracy degrades faster over longer strings of fire as it does, so why would I or anyone want one in a serious rifle!? Yes, in the civilian world I’m very unlikely to ever put enough stress on the barrel to need a SOCOM or HBAR profile barrel to negate accuracy degradation in a given situation, but I’ve run into so many people screeching about the weight savings of a LW barrel and all I can ever think is, “Dude, your rifle goes from your house to your car and your car to the flat range, is the 4oz of saved weight really so life changing!?” Seriously, can anyone explain it to me cuz so many of the LW advocates treat it like a damn religion. **This stemmed from a heated conversation I overheard at the range yesterday and I’ve been thinking about it since. M-16A2s, A4s and M-4s are pencil profile under the hand guards. It’s light where it needs to be heavy and heavy where it needs to be light. A free float hand guard will make far more difference with regards to accuracy. An M16A1 barrel has thicker walls, accounting for bore diameter differences, than an M-14. It’s not really that thin. |
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
|
At 64 now and not terrible shape but I'd ask myself how long is a gun fight going to last? In my situation probably not long and I am not going to go trapesing through the woods for long periods or days on end. Protect the family if they are still around fight as long as I can then see what the lord has instore for me. Pick your poison, if you think you are going to be Billy badass build rifle you think you need and spend as much as you need on it and train with it. That said you still might get shot in the back by someone else behind you or a sniper in a tree and barrel weight will have nothing to do with it. |
|
My shot timer told me everything I need to know. Fresh the difference is minimal. After a bit of running around and a few mags the difference becomes substantial in how much faster I can maneuver a lightweight rifle. Different tools for different jobs though. I’m not going to go run and gun with a heavy stainless barrel and M193, nor am I going to run match ammo and high mag at 500 yards on my LW barrel guns. |
|
A discussion about fighting rifle by people who do not fight is a stupid ass argument anyway. The likelihood of using your AR in this fantasy scenario is so remote it isnt even worth discussing. Getting better with your pistol is the right answer. The thought of this fantastical scenario where we will be responsible for dispatching bad guys at 300 yards is beyond reason. If the law and order has fallen so far as to make this an unpunishable crime then you would more likely need to stay concealed and not draw attention to you and your location or stash. The alternative is some form of law and order exist and you do this. Thats not a defensive shoot. This is how silly these discussions of fighting rifles and war readiness are. |
|
I dont go out of my way to make light or heavy guns. I do go out of my way to walk, hike, ruck, and hunt with them. M4a1 barrel Attached File Attached File M16a4 Attached File Attached File I like midweight guns because they are easier to hold steady after exertion and you're catching your breath. |
Do Good
Be Dangerous
Live Free
Be Dangerous
Live Free
|
Lightweight barreled rifles just handle better. I think it’s as simple as that. Now if I ever thought I’d be blasting 900 rounds as fast as my full semi auto would let me, then I’d go with a 14.5” Colt SOCOM barrel, but I just don’t think I’ll ever have to do that. |
|
Originally Posted By BruceLeroy: A discussion about fighting rifle by people who do not fight is a stupid ass argument anyway. The likelihood of using your AR in this fantasy scenario is so remote it isnt even worth discussing. Getting better with your pistol is the right answer. The thought of this fantastical scenario where we will be responsible for dispatching bad guys at 300 yards is beyond reason. If the law and order has fallen so far as to make this an unpunishable crime then you would more likely need to stay concealed and not draw attention to you and your location or stash. The alternative is some form of law and order exist and you do this. Thats not a defensive shoot. This is how silly these discussions of fighting rifles and war readiness are. So the 2nd amendment is for what exactly? |
Do Good
Be Dangerous
Live Free
Be Dangerous
Live Free
|
Originally Posted By 03RN: So the 2nd amendment is for what exactly? Originally Posted By 03RN: Originally Posted By BruceLeroy: A discussion about fighting rifle by people who do not fight is a stupid ass argument anyway. The likelihood of using your AR in this fantasy scenario is so remote it isnt even worth discussing. Getting better with your pistol is the right answer. The thought of this fantastical scenario where we will be responsible for dispatching bad guys at 300 yards is beyond reason. If the law and order has fallen so far as to make this an unpunishable crime then you would more likely need to stay concealed and not draw attention to you and your location or stash. The alternative is some form of law and order exist and you do this. Thats not a defensive shoot. This is how silly these discussions of fighting rifles and war readiness are. So the 2nd amendment is for what exactly? You are by far one of the ones here that talks the talk and walks it. That said, and I love the 2nd amendment but honestly it is far long gone weapon wise on what the founders were thinking when they wrote it and has nothing to do with barrel weight. I still agree with it though. Uprising against the government or those that wish to oppress us would not be an easy task if even achievable today. Now being attacked by another country invading us maybe, even then a Red Dawn scenario is obsolete with the technology today or say 10 years from now. JMO |
|
https://thenewrifleman.com/the-okay-boomer-rifle-or-the-old-man-rifle/ old man rifle |
Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
|
Originally Posted By MRW: https://thenewrifleman.com/the-okay-boomer-rifle-or-the-old-man-rifle/ old man rifle Hey, I have one of those. 
|
We are living in a Tom Clancy novel
Over 50 and reputed to be a formidable brigand
https://hr1871.com/
Over 50 and reputed to be a formidable brigand
https://hr1871.com/
|
Of all the things in life to ponder and make a post about... someone liking a barrel with a few less ounces isn't one of them for me. For some who hike and hunt, not only do they seek weight reduction in the barrel, but other areas on the rifle as well. In short, a lighter barrel might not be the ONLY thing someone sources in search of a lightweight rifle. Considering the intended uses in many cases, the light barrel delivers just fine. |
|
"Serious rifle?" "Range toy?" Excuse me OP, have to LOL a little bit here. Lightweight barrels managed to get through many years of somewhat serious action in Southeeast Asia. As a matter of fact, those skinny barrels stayed in service until the '80s. I'm no longer in the military and I'm not LE, so I'm not expecting any "serious" use to involve gun fights against dozens of opponents over a protracted period. If that happens, a heavy barrel won't help much with my closed-bolt, semi-auto AR. I think gas tube life may trump barrel life. I have a 40 round mag in my house gun. If that's not enough in a home invasion then I may have problems that won't be fixed by a heavier barrel. If things get really sporty with armed Antifa mobs, I do have an M16 with a Colt SOCOM barrel. That said, it won't last that long against human wave assaults either. |
"An age of glory passed like a lightning flash. The mandate of heaven passed from you but you didn't see. Times change and power passes. It is the pity of the world."
Song dynasty poet
Song dynasty poet
Joined:
Dec 2025
Posts:
300
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
| I carried an M60 ALOT and 750 rounds, Assistant carried spare barrel, 750+ and M16 with his load out. When I was young and full of energy it started out light. Add in the other gear and you get a back ache, knee aches, etc. Running with it for any length of distance sucked. Hump, Hump, and Hump! I think the best feeling (almost better than sex) at the end of the day (when ever that was) was taking my boots off. |
|
Originally Posted By GerryOwen: Both… Personally I understand the appeal of a lighter barrel and I understand everything is a trade off. And again, in a recreational rifle there’s no real downside. But I’m talking about a fighting rifle, and so were they… In that context I don’t see a viable argument for a LW barrel. Especially it when you’re talking about 4oz. My real issue is the cult following I’ve seen for LW barrels among some. And in that I’m talking more about what their debate was. I think that a lightweight barrel is more than suitable for any fight that 99.999% of us will ever get into as a civilian. Most people can't shoot for shit so anything will work. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
| Pencil 16" BCM and midweight 12.5" Zion15 both with Aimpoint H1 are a pleasure to hike with around the ranch for hours/miles. I admit the midweight 16" DD with irons and BCM with PA 3x prism aren't appreciably worse. BCM ss 16" with full LaRue quad rail, bipod, lpvo definitely feels worse. |
|
Originally Posted By GerryOwen: Fair, but it still maintains accuracy better once heated up. And what kind of "accuracy" are we talking about? At what distance? Under what circumstances? In my case I can't imagine doing a movie-quality, hostage rescue shot at a couple of hundred yards. However, I might need to do a center-mass shot at under 100 yards. Do you really think there's going to be enough shift to make a difference with a decent quality AR bbl? That's assuming my pencil barrel is heated up enough to shift. I'm not ashamed to admit that most quality barrels are more accurate than I am these days. |
"An age of glory passed like a lightning flash. The mandate of heaven passed from you but you didn't see. Times change and power passes. It is the pity of the world."
Song dynasty poet
Song dynasty poet
|
I got mine during the Sandy Hook panic and it was all I could find. It's a Daniel Defense barrel and I'm pretty happy with it Attached File |
The “Three Stupid” Rule: “Do not go to stupid places, with stupid people, and do stupid things”
Religion is a handy device for keeping the philosophically deficient in line.
Religion is a handy device for keeping the philosophically deficient in line.
Joined:
Jan 2025
Posts:
1600
EE: 100% (1)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By Raoul_Duke70: Cuz I don’t have FA and I’m not having to take shots where the difference in group size after the barrel heats up are gonna have any meaningful impact on my ability to get hits at the ranges I’m likely to use it. nailed it carrying a heavy rifle sucks when you do it for any amount of definitive time. Unless you expect long engagements with lots of rounds downrange or want better accuracy/harmonics, the lw is more than adequate for 99% of the people shooting, lugging, or otherwise hauling the rig around |
|
Originally Posted By JimmyAR: You are by far one of the ones here that talks the talk and walks it. That said, and I love the 2nd amendment but honestly it is far long gone weapon wise on what the founders were thinking when they wrote it and has nothing to do with barrel weight. I still agree with it though. Uprising against the government or those that wish to oppress us would not be an easy task if even achievable today. Now being attacked by another country invading us maybe, even then a Red Dawn scenario is obsolete with the technology today or say 10 years from now. JMO Originally Posted By JimmyAR: Originally Posted By 03RN: Originally Posted By BruceLeroy: A discussion about fighting rifle by people who do not fight is a stupid ass argument anyway. The likelihood of using your AR in this fantasy scenario is so remote it isnt even worth discussing. Getting better with your pistol is the right answer. The thought of this fantastical scenario where we will be responsible for dispatching bad guys at 300 yards is beyond reason. If the law and order has fallen so far as to make this an unpunishable crime then you would more likely need to stay concealed and not draw attention to you and your location or stash. The alternative is some form of law and order exist and you do this. Thats not a defensive shoot. This is how silly these discussions of fighting rifles and war readiness are. So the 2nd amendment is for what exactly? You are by far one of the ones here that talks the talk and walks it. That said, and I love the 2nd amendment but honestly it is far long gone weapon wise on what the founders were thinking when they wrote it and has nothing to do with barrel weight. I still agree with it though. Uprising against the government or those that wish to oppress us would not be an easy task if even achievable today. Now being attacked by another country invading us maybe, even then a Red Dawn scenario is obsolete with the technology today or say 10 years from now. JMO After the several episodes of rioting we have been through I came to realize the most likely reason to need a rifle is not an oppressive.gov or foreign invader. It is when .gov is not there and not coming. Social order has broken down and you are on your own. One of the suppressed stories of the Ferguson riots were the businesses that were not burned or looted because owners were on site being very rooftop Korean with these effective weapons. The mobs cursed them, threatened them, but walked on by—night after night. We have seen it elsewhere also. A few people properly armed can change a mobs behavior. I put together a suppressed shorty in 300 and 556 for just this scenario. I used to keep an AK decades ago when they were cheap to buy and run. But I transitioned to my current rifles for the same purpose. Certainly not to go to war with the .gov. But we cannot depend on them to be there anymore, if we ever could—certainly not in my adult life. After 93 on I would never be without a rifle in the house ready to go. For that purpose, I like them light and maneuverable. Light barrel, light suppressor, age appropriate aiming device and a white light. |
| There's a reason people don't use them in shooting sports, even sports where the round counts per stage might be under 50. All things equal, people can usually shoot a well-balanced heavier rifle much more aggressively than a lightweight rifle that takes much more effort to return and may do so inconsistently. If these light guns offered some tangible benefit in pointability and speed, without these drawbacks, you'd see them a lot more often in shooting sports. |
|
I think there’s ways to do lightweight right and wrong. Pencil barrels that are skinny from chamber to muzzle are a no-go for me, ever. I shoot suppressed 90% of the time. Too much whip and sag and stringing affecting POI. I have a lot of lightweight rifles but their barrels are not pencil barrels. All my barrels are tapered to some degree. Lots of BA Hansen profiles - thick at the chamber, tapering to a medium or light muzzle. This is the way. I also shoot mostly SBRs, so inherently shorter barrels keep things lighter. Even my 308 s are only 16” and they’re crazy lightweight, with tapered med-profile barrels. And government profiles suck. Taper-profile barrels FTW |
|
Originally Posted By Bebop_941: Is this anecdotal or do you have an explanation to support such a claim? |
Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
|
Accuracy test https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Colt-6520-Accuracy-Evaluation/118-486023/?page=1 |
Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
|
Originally Posted By MRW: Go find Molon's data. It holds I remember a test of his comparing a Colt pencil barrel to a Colt government barrel and the gov. barrel shot better but I believe it was a sample of one to one. I questioned it then and he responded with insults so I just gave up trying. I'm just curious how a thicker barrel past the gas block mitigates heat to affect accuracy in any significant way. Especially when everything from the gas block to the chamber is the same profile. Isn't the chamber where things heats up the most? Wouldn't more weight at the end of the barrel stress the barrel more at the chamber when hot (almost like a pendulum)? These are questions I've never heard answers to so I've just always figured the weight and balance benefits of a lightweight barrel far exceed any accuracy gain of a gov. barrel. Maybe I'm wrong but it'd be nice to understand the mechanics of it. |
|
Originally Posted By MRW: Accuracy test https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Colt-6520-Accuracy-Evaluation/118-486023/?page=1 This looks like it may be a different test than what I remember. I'll take a look - thank you. Edit: I read the article and it's an evaluation of a single barrel with no comparison. I did find some info suggesting the extra material forward of the gas block might act as a heat sink to disipate heat away from the chamber more than a pencil barrel will. Considering the profile difference isn't that large, I don't know how significant that effect would be. Also, I recall some precision shooters attaching weights to the end of their barrels to tune harmonics. It's a stretch but that may play a role though not heat related. |
|
Originally Posted By BrandonP: There's a reason people don't use them in shooting sports, even sports where the round counts per stage might be under 50. All things equal, people can usually shoot a well-balanced heavier rifle much more aggressively than a lightweight rifle that takes much more effort to return and may do so inconsistently. If these light guns offered some tangible benefit in pointability and speed, without these drawbacks, you'd see them a lot more often in shooting sports. You don't see fat guys in drop leg holsters and 15 pound ARs when you have to move and shoot more than 30 seconds. My DD LWs are freaking laser beams with 77 GR SMK. Been using the ACOG TA01 equipped rifle lately. Attached File Attached File |
Isaiah 1:18 - "Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD: "though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow"
|
I shoot 2 gun, precision gas gun, run and guns, tac games, light fighter, night fighter etc all with a 10-12 lb setup. Took 1st in night fighter, 2nd in light fighter both of which involved timed ruck runs. These aren't matches for fat guys who can only run for 30 seconds at a time. People generally aren't using hyper lightweight setups. One exception is tac games, and the people shooting these ultra light setups generally don't do well if the COF requires longer strings at lower probability targets. The last sniper match I shot, one team shooting a lightweight proof barrel was having massive issues with heat causing vertical stringing on the longer courses of fire. The bolt gun shooter is a buddy of mine, he immediately pitched that barrel. It doesn't take 5 mags of fire to start seeing this vertical stringing. The point is, shaving a little weight off the gun and losing capability isn't the solution any more than a micro chest rig is going to help some great big fat guy move efficiently. We've all seen the meme. Here's a picture from last year 2 gun (I'm on the right). One stage involved around 800 meters of running. I guess the heavy gun, side plates and gas mask were a bad idea. 
|
|
Originally Posted By GerryOwen: I really don’t get it in a serious rifle… For a range toy or one you’re just gonna put a box or two thru a couple times a year, yea sure whatever, you do you. I carried an M4 for 23 years and hauled it around the desert and up and down mountains both here in the states and in sandbox, so I certainly get the appeal of a lighter rifle. What I don’t get is the cult following LW barrels seem to have with some people, especially those who’ve never served. LW barrels heat up quicker and accuracy degrades faster over longer strings of fire as it does, so why would I or anyone want one in a serious rifle!? Yes, in the civilian world I’m very unlikely to ever put enough stress on the barrel to need a SOCOM or HBAR profile barrel to negate accuracy degradation in a given situation, but I’ve run into so many people screeching about the weight savings of a LW barrel and all I can ever think is, “Dude, your rifle goes from your house to your car and your car to the flat range, is the 4oz of saved weight really so life changing!?” Seriously, can anyone explain it to me cuz so many of the LW advocates treat it like a damn religion. **This stemmed from a heated conversation I overheard at the range yesterday and I’ve been thinking about it since. The drawback you mention, (heat and inaccuracy) are much over blown unless you are shooting High Power Matches or benchrest competition (or mag-dumping 500 plus rounds at the maximum rate of fire possible). Practical accuracy, such as "run-and-gun" competition, or combat is not affected as much as people on the internet make out. I have never seen a standard lightweight barrel drift so much that it drops off a torso-sized target at 200 yards. In fact, I would posit that a heavy barrel is only good for a range toy, something that is only use for competition. Unless you are a LEO sniper or something. The HBAR was not adopted for the M16A2 because it was deemed unnecessary, even with full automatic fire in combat, and the SOCOM was a knee-jerk reaction to one isolated incident in, actually, rather unusual circumstances. |
|
Originally Posted By Fooboy: OP carried the dumbest barrel ever - govt profile. which is lightweight close to receiver and heavy past the FSB lol The only reason the M4 got that barrel profile was so the MILES and other barrel mounted accessories would fit without modification. If that restriction had not been there, the barrel would have been .56 inch forward of the front sight. |
AR Sponsor