Right now its at 4.8lbs without optics.

Its on an older Bushmaster lower with a Commercial tube and standard Carbine telescoping stock. I hear too many variations of what the actual buttstock weighs (not the extension and such, just the plastic stock)

I am happy with 4.8lbs but wondered if I could shave off more weight by going to the Minimalist stock.

Anyone know the difference in weight between a standard CAR stock and the MFT Minimalist?

I don't have the exact answer but it's going to be a few ounces at most. Unless this is part of a total overhaul involving the shedding of weight in many parts then I don't think it's worth the squeeze. You're also talking about the area that makes the least amount of difference in felt weight, so your chances of feeling any difference are basically nill. Those stocks look cool though so if you just wanted to get one for looks/comfort then by all means have at it. I really like CAR stocks personally but that's just me.

I like the basic car stock as well but I am using an already existing lower. I has a few lowers to build up still and was debating what stock to use for it.

Right now at 4.8lbs it feels like a bb gun.

Most of the weight was shed from the pencil barrel but since I went adjustable gas I went with a LW spring and buffer kits and a lightweight BCG and am finding myself challenging myself to build a rifle right at or under 5lbs with optics.  I will probably end up doing it but was curious as to the weight of a standard stock.

I hate it when I get a harebrained idea in my head, it always end sup costing me more money in the long run.

ETA I found a PSA one that lists at 7.71 oz. Mine is a Bushmaster so its probably the same since both are generic stocks.  Looks like the MFT is 5.8 so thats almost 2oz difference. Using that will soak up 2 of the 4ish oz from the Holosun. I might be able to still squeak by at 5lbs.

I think this thread is probably what you're looking for.

That gives the weight of the Minimalist as 6.00oz. But going off this thread over here, as well as the above thread, the CAR stocks are 4.6oz.

Just to confirm, that would be for the CAR stock:



Not the Carbine stock:



The standard carbine stock comes in at 6.60oz, at which point you could save weight with the minimalist, but a negligible amount. You'd probably be better off using the same $50 for the new stock and bumping up your optic/mount budget to get lighter options there. But if you're really looking to drop weight, then the CAR stock on a V7 buffer tube/castle nut/end plate with a Taccom ultralight recoil system is going to be one of if not the lightest setup.

Perfect. Thats what I am looking for. I have the Taccom system now.  Also thanks for the clarification on the two stocks, thats why I was getting conflicting into. Many, including myself use the term  CAR improperly when talking about the telescoping stocks.

Going with your recommendation on the stock. Thanks man

I love the look of the minimalist stock, it's usually my go to...but if you really want to save weight, you can't beat the Smoke Composites:

http://www.smokecomposites.com/stocks

You will save about 5 oz compared to MFT Minimalist

Just over an once difference. The MFT is going to be tight on the RE vs loose with others listed.

Ended up getting a CAR stock from M&A and used my Anderson receiver extension (3.6 oz)

Rifle total weight 4lbs 14.8 ounces
Rifle with optic 5lbs 3.5 ounces

Less than 800 bucks in total

 WB:  If you really want the lightest weight, skip the standard tube/buttstock set up and check out the non-adjustable, combination units from Smoke Composites. You can save yourself about half a pound over just about any adjustable buttstock.

My carbine size, closed end buttstock/tube assy from Smoke weighs about 4 oz total.  If you have adjustable gas, you could add to that a 1 oz buffer from Taccom.  Further reductions are possible with special lightweight lower receivers and bolt carriers.  - CW

This!

They are super sexy and light, but they are pricey; I paid about $500 for the carbon fiber closed carbine length stock and the 12” handguard.  The stock weighs 138.55 grams (about 4.89 ounces) and does not require a separate receiver extension.  Even the BAD LBS with a lightweight receiver extension weighs over 6-1/2 ounces.

My hunting-style 6.8 SPC rifle weighs 4 lbs - 7 oz with iron sights, 5 lbs on the nose with Leupold 2-7x28 scope.  Without the Smoke buttstock, I couldn't have gotten that low. - CW