I have wanted a Government Profile barrel for my 20" HBAR Bushmaster A2 for some time now. Tonight I finally placed an order with ADCO for Government Profile contouring. Then I got thinking, what if I end up not liking this and missing my old HBAR?

I don't know, maybe it is just the mood I'm in tonight but now that I am getting a Government Profile, I'm thinking that I will really miss the HBAR.

I do a lot of different kinds of AR shooting; plinking, bench shooting, hunting, a majority of my shooting requires me to be moving so perhaps a Government Profile is best.

Are you guys who have gone from HBAR to Government Profile happy with your decision? Does the Government Profile have any cons to it?

Thanks.

yes i did the same and will never go back

I have 1 hbar and its fluted

One of these days I've got to get around to drafting a message to all the noobs about the stupidity of "Government Profile" barrels.

Here are some lowlights about this misbegotten profile:

It's ass-backwards. Barrels have ALWAYS been HEAVIER towards the chamber and LIGHTER towards the muzzle.

It was designed to mount an M-203. Are you going to do that?

It was also designed by comittie. The Marines wanted a full HBAR. But the Army did not; and they both wanted to mount the '203. Foolishness ruled the day and thus the "Government" profile was born.

My AR, that I have had for over twenty years, has the FIRST "Government" profile, the one that is best suited for a general-purpose rifle chambered in 5.56. It is now called a "Lightweight" barrel. It is all that you need.

You are not being issued this gun, right? You have a choice, and an opportunity to make a wise decision, right?

Go Lightweight then.

Quoted: One of these days I've got to get around to drafting a message to all the noobs about the stupidity of "Government Profile" barrels. Here are some lowlights about this misbegotten profile: It's ass-backwards. Barrels have ALWAYS been HEAVIER towards the chamber and LIGHTER towards the muzzle. It was designed to mount an M-203. Are you going to do that? It was also designed by comittie. The Marines wanted a full HBAR. But the Army did not; and they both wanted to mount the '203. Foolishness ruled the day and thus the "Government" profile was born. My AR, that I have had for over twenty years, has the FIRST "Government" profile, the one that is best suited for a general-purpose rifle chambered in 5.56. It is now called a "Lightweight" barrel. It is all that you need. You are not being issued this gun, right? You have a choice, and an opportunity to make a wise decision, right? Go Lightweight then.

I do agree with you on that i love my SP1 and  Sporter lightweight

Quoted: Go Lightweight then.

Where do you get a lightweight in 20" these days?

ETA:  I am looking for just an upper.

When the ban lifted - I replaced all mt postban HBARS with govt profile prebans.

I will NEVER own an HBAR again.  Govt. profile, in a chrome lined service barrel, is the only way to go for a 20" rifle.  Possibly the lightweight is the only exception (I own two of those as well)

But I shoot my Govt. prifles the most.

Quoted: Go Lightweight then.

Where do you get a lightweight in 20" these days?

ETA:  I am looking for just an upper.

EE

I think you'll be pleased.  

I've read in the past that gov't profile is 1 lb. lighter than an HBAR and while that may be reality, my perception is that it's much lighter than the HBAR.

Having had both now I'd never do an HBAR again but that's just my opinion.

Now, are you still going to buy a complete A4 with a 1/7 twist rate barrel?

Scott

as far as the cool factor....NOTHING REALLY BEATS IT.....i've got a 16" hbar which i've thought about changing a time or two but i like the fact i don't have to perm. attach a fh.....the fact that i'm not falling under the "cool" factor and i'm using my rifle b/c it works for me...not b/c it looks cool.....although it doeeeeeees look cool (w/ all those gizmos on there...speaking of AR's in general).....another reason i haven't switched is b/c there is other things i want and a govt. profile barrel isn't exactly at the top of my list.....also guys say they hate the hbar b/c of the weight....well most of the keyboard warriors on here don't lug theirs around 15 hours a day so i don't see the big deal on that....and also they bog it down w/ weight anyways w/ the surefires, ff's, flip-ups, lasers, suppressors, bayos, optics, vfg's, or whatever else they deem necessary to put on it......honestly its ur rifle and if you're happy i'm happy.....i just see better things to spend money on than that......


.....sorry to come off as ranting which i wasn't trying to but just trying to broaden ur horizons a bit......hope you enjoy ur barrel and post pics when you get it back!

Except for a precision rifle, I'll never use an HBAR again.  

I have a middy barrel from before they were all the rage.  Back then there were no non-custom middies in anything but HBAR, nor with the option of 1/7 or chrome lining.  I'm going to get one of the BCM uppers to replace mine sometime.  It's too damn heavy.

Government profile barrels are the best thing ever. You'll see.
I'll never own a HB again.

HBAR was a marketing gimmick allowing manufactures to cut down on machine time. Unfortunatly, everyone ate it up ike candy. There is no reason for a combat rifle to have a heavy barrel. If you want to sit at a bench all day and shoot then you bought the wrong rifle to start with.

Quoted: Quoted: Go Lightweight then. Where do you get a lightweight in 20" these days? ETA:  I am looking for just an upper. EE

I had to buy "government" profile barrels (Sabre Defence) and have them re-profiled.

Quoted: Government profile barrels are the best thing ever. You'll see. I'll never own a HB again.

+1

Hated the HBAR. Too F'in heavy!! The govt profile has a much better balance and weight.

I have a 20" govt, and a 16" standard (pencil) barrel.


You will never go back. There is absolutely no reason to own an hbar unless you're building a dedicated varmint or match rig using a premium barrel like Krieger.

HBAR's suck the snot off a water buffalo's ass-crack.

Gov.profile is much more wieldy.

I recently came across a deal on a lightly used 20" Bushmaster which was too cheap to pass up.
I'm not fond of A2 uppers and I didn't even bark when I saw HBAR printed on the barrel.

A week later, the A2 HBAR upper was sold on the EE and an A3 CMT upper and a Bushmaster 20"
gov.profile barrel now reside on that lower.

The difference in weight is amazing and makes the rifle quite handy.

Trust me when I say you won't miss the Rosie and Oprah-ish HBAR.

HS1

I have both and I love and prefer HBARS but lately I seem to be using my 14.5/phantom govt profile alot..it is very handy and light..I think Im gonna try a pencil barrel next.

Quoted: I have both and I love and prefer HBARS but lately I seem to be using my 14.5/phantom govt profile alot..it is very handy and light..I think Im gonna try a pencil barrel next.

govt profile M4? No such thing, unless you are referring to the M4 barrel "light under the handguards".

Quoted: The Marines wanted a full HBAR.

I don't suppose you have a cite for that claim?

Quoted: Quoted: I have both and I love and prefer HBARS but lately I seem to be using my 14.5/phantom govt profile alot..it is very handy and light..I think Im gonna try a pencil barrel next. govt profile M4? No such thing, unless you are referring to the M4 barrel "light under the handguards".

M4 barrels were light under the handguards. M4A1 barrels are heavier (not HBAR though)

Quoted: Government profile barrels are the best thing ever. You'll see. I'll never own a HB again.

+1

Quoted: Quoted: The Marines wanted a full HBAR. I don't suppose you have a cite for that claim?

Black Rifle

The Marines tested HBARs against lightweights with thermocouples to measure the heat differences when using the old triangle handguards and the proposed new interchangable round ribbed type. Interestingly, the Lightweight barrel with round handguard shot cooler than the HBAR with triangular handguards! The HBARs were more accurate, as you would expect. But of corse they added over a pound of weight to the rifle. When the M-203 compatibility issue was brought up, HBAR under the handguards went away, but was kept in front of the gas block...SO THAT PART OF THE BARREL WOULD NOT BE BENT DURING BAYONET DRILLS

So, instead of modifying the M-203 mount, they modify the barrel

They make the barrel heavier than it need be, so bayonet traing can be conducted

Although the book does not state it, I think one of the reasons the A2 profile was adopted was so that there would be DIFFERENCE between it and the A1, to justify Colt selling a bunch of them

There is quite a difference between 'tested' and 'wanted'.

In fact they "desired" it...

Along with the non-combat "target" 800 m rear sight...

I think a heavy barreled 9 lb rifle is a great idea..

in 7.62, NOT 5.56...

and NOT as a general-issue assault rifle.

I remember hearing that the A2 barrel was left heavier after the FSB just for general durability.  In particular I remember hearing about GIs using rifle barrels to bust open bands on ammo crates.  I seriously doubt anyone's using rifles as pry bars these days, but I can see that happening in a less professional, draftee army.  Anyway, having the exposed portion of the barrel in a combat rifle a little more durable always struck me as an OK idea.

I heard that, and also it was made thicker to handle the stresses of using a bayonet.


Bayonets are obsolete.


I hate the A2 sight. What a dumb idea. I think it was the USMC that wanted that sight with their doctrine. Who the hell is going to shoot 800 meters with an AR-15? We're taking "area" targets here, like cars. OK. No problem. BUt really, .223 against area targets at that distance? Gimme a break. The original A1 sight is perfect for the range in which .223 is even effective in the first place.


The A1 sight is the best. Set it for a 200 or 300 yard battle zero and you're done. No stupid BDC wheel, no windage adjustment that gets bumped and rubbed off zero.  A1 is also lighter.


Speaking of .223 and .308. 9lb AR's are the stupidest things ever. The WHOLE idea of the AR was a "system"...which includes magazines, rifle, and ammunition all coming together for 1 goal - lightweight.


Why have a gas-impingement system if you are going to negate the weight savings of that very, very light action-system by adding 5lbs of shit to your rifle? Just go with a piston. Now, if you NEED that other stuff, now you've made the rifle heavy. If that's the case, and you have pistons and lots of gear, why not just go with .308 and be done with it?


Isn't it silly to justify the weight savings in the cartridge and action (2 most important areas) in lieu of flashlights and other stuff? Doesn't Cartridge and action take precedence over other stuff?


For example, like saying that you value the gas-impingement system and .223 and thin aluminum mags, becuase they save you precious weight to add other stuff.


The whole reason the .223 was used in the first place was for weight savings. If weight wasn't an issue, then Stoner wouldn't have designed a thin aluminum mag> He would have made a more robust one like the AK's. We might have used a larger more powerful cartridge.



Bah, sorry for the rant.

Well, when you factor in that most battles occur at less than 600 meters, the GI doesn't need to be able to shoot any farther.  So you give him a lighter gun with lighter bullets so that he can fight harder and longer at the distances that he is most likely to be fighting at.  HBAR on an (most) ar-15 is dumb.  You might find the varmit crowd, or the benchrest crowd needing them, but I don't, and neithor do most other people.  

If you only have ONE AR, and don't plan on getting another Upper ,
get what ever the heck you want.

For general shooting / carrying ,  a Govt. profile is great.

Personally , I think everyone should have at least one 20" and one 16" upper.

I like my toys heavy, the HBAR does fine in the accuracy department as well. It's a matter of personal preference, I've lugged around a C9A1 in the Canadian Reserves (M249 w/o the Elcan optic for you folks stateside) and really couldn't complain over the extra 0.5 kg of barrel.

Quoted: If you only have ONE AR, and don't plan on getting another Upper , get what ever the heck you want. For general shooting / carrying ,  a Govt. profile is great. Personally , I think everyone should have at least one 20" and one 16" upper.

Consider it done!

(at least for me)

www.cdnninvestments.com/arsp1upnewco.html
Best upper style available for general purpose.  A1 sights and light profile.

Eugene Stoner had it right in the '60s.

The whole reason the .223 was used in the first place was for weight savings. If weight wasn't an issue, then Stoner wouldn't have designed a thin aluminum mag> He would have made a more robust one like the AK's. We might have used a larger more powerful cartridge. Bah, sorry for the rant.

Stoner's original mag wasn't aluminum it was steel (at least the first ISSUED mag, the 20 round "waffle mag")  There was an earlier 25 round mag, I'm not sure what it was made of but my guess would be steel.  The "waffle" mags didn't feed properly, and apparently corroded, so they were determined to be junk and destroyed.  Were the aluminum straight 20 round mags designed by Stoner?  I think corrosion was more the reason than weight.  Anyway, Stoner obviously wasn't very bright since he opposed the idea of the forward assist and we know from the experts on this forum he was dead wrong! P.S. He also probably didn't have much "combat experience" which is also one of the requirements for weapon design according to the "experts" around here....I don't know how Browning and Garand ever pulled that one off....

Quoted: www.cdnninvestments.com/arsp1upnewco.html Best upper style available for general purpose.  A1 sights and light profile. Eugene Stoner had it right in the '60s.

didn't check the link but are those 1/12 twist barrels?  If so I don't think it'd be good for shooting the heavier loads.  

Quoted: HBAR was a marketing gimmick allowing manufactures to cut down on machine time. Unfortunatly, everyone ate it up ike candy. There is no reason for a combat rifle to have a heavy barrel. If you want to sit at a bench all day and shoot then you bought the wrong rifle to start with.

+1

I just changed out my Hbar barrel for the Gov. prof  barrel this weekend.  Shweew I got the same fealing that I had after my audit came out and they owed me LOL . Man what a load off. With the Hbar my AR weighed in almost as heavy as my standard M1A.  And thats just not right.

Me like Govt. profile.

I would not have any problem with the A2 Government profile...IF it was rotated 180 degrees, so it was .725" under the handguards and .625" in front of the gas block, like God intended.

Quoted: Man what a load off. With the Hbar my AR weighed in almost as heavy as my standard M1A.  And thats just not right.

That's my point. If you are going to carry the weight of an M1A, carry the M1A. After all, if you are limited to semi-auto, either go with the heavy hitter, or go light weight. The light weight can justify not using a heavier caliber. The heavier rifle justifies using the heavier caliber. Using a heavy rifle to shoot a light caliber is stupid.


Now, in full-auto, everything changes.


As for the SP1, it would be the best upper except the 1/12 barrel which limits you to 55gr. Not even 62gr will work. So no deal, especially when 68-77gr loads are the bread and butter these days. It doesn't have the stupid A2 sight, and no brass deflector (tough shit for south paws).


Now, an SP1 with modern handguards and a 1/7 or 1/8 crome lined barrel would be the best.