Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 12/12/2016 11:07:57 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/19/2016 9:51:01 AM EST by Paulie771]
Just a thought exercise I've been having. I know sub-6 lbs ARs are possible. What would one look like that meets Cooper's criteria for a Scout rifle? I throw 6.5 Grendel out there due to its ballistics and their similarity to .308.

The criteria:
No longer than one meter
No heavier than 3 kilos (6.6 lbs) with glass and sling
Low power scope, ideally forward-mounted (not forward-mounted seems to be a bit controversial)
BUIS preferable but not mandatory
fast "loop" style sling (Ching or Rhodesian)
2 MOA at 200m

Is such a build possible in an AR?
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:15:17 AM EST
Yes
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:17:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 11:17:59 AM EST by cttb]
It might be impossible to get under 6.6 lbs with sling and glass in 6.5 Grendel. If it can be done, I'm sure it would cost a bunch due to having to buy expensive light-weight components.

I don't buy the supposed benefits of the forward-mounted optic. As others have said, scout rifles are a solution searching for a problem. If you want a compact, light rifle, just get a compact, light rifle. There are plenty available today without pigeon-holing yourself into Cooper's scout concept.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:19:13 AM EST
You can do it, but like the guy above me said you would have to buy all lightweight parts.
pencil barrel, light wight bcg, etc.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:26:37 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cttb:
It might be impossible to get under 6.6 lbs with sling and glass in 6.5 Grendel. If it can be done, I'm sure it would cost a bunch due to having to buy expensive light-weight components.

I don't buy the supposed benefits of the forward-mounted optic. As others have said, scout rifles are a solution searching for a problem. If you want a compact, light rifle, just get a compact, light rifle. There are plenty available today without pigeon-holing yourself into Cooper's scout concept.
View Quote



Going with one of the Second Gen DPMS upper/lowers would probably make it quite a bit easier.....
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:27:07 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 11:28:07 AM EST by Paulie771]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By buckshot_jim:
You can do it, but like the guy above me said you would have to buy all lightweight parts.
pencil barrel, light wight bcg, etc.
View Quote


Yea, that's what I was thinking too. I've got a 7 oz Burris 2.75x scout scope on my polymer stocked Ruger GSR. I would imagine you'd have to hit 6 lbs with the carbine itself to even get close.

So a lightweight rail over 14.5" lightweight barrel? What's the lightest weight stock? Maybe I should post this in tech...

A Steyr Scout costs $1400, give or take, and is considered the epitome of the concept by Cooper himself. Think it could be done for that?
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:30:04 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cttb:
It might be impossible to get under 6.6 lbs with sling and glass in 6.5 Grendel. If it can be done, I'm sure it would cost a bunch due to having to buy expensive light-weight components.

I don't buy the supposed benefits of the forward-mounted optic. As others have said, scout rifles are a solution searching for a problem. If you want a compact, light rifle, just get a compact, light rifle. There are plenty available today without pigeon-holing yourself into Cooper's scout concept.
View Quote


I agree, actually. I think a 16" lightweight carbine in 6.5 Grendel with a 1-4x that weighed in around 7# would be quite a little package.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:35:01 AM EST
ACOG might be the only way to get that weight and still have good glass.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:41:49 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:


I agree, actually. I think a 16" lightweight carbine in 6.5 Grendel with a 1-4x that weighed in around 7# would be quite a little package.
View Quote


Don't get a 1-4, you'd just be making it needlessly heavy. A 2-7 would be a better choice, or maybe a fixed power scope plus a lightweight dot sight.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:43:32 AM EST
How bout a CWAR or mini recce in 6.5 Grendel?
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:44:00 AM EST
Mk12 in 6.5.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:48:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 11:49:37 AM EST by miker84]
Attachment Attached File


With my 2.5-10x32 optic and a loaded mag, this one is pushing 10lbs. This is with the AA 16" LW barrel.

A smaller mag, different optic, maybe a different receiver set, and other LW parts would get you under 7 I think.

Pretty sure my 12.5 grendel will be light when I can get a barrel.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:49:44 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Grendelsbane:


Don't get a 1-4, you'd just be making it needlessly heavy. A 2-7 would be a better choice, or maybe a fixed power scope plus a lightweight dot sight.
View Quote


Are 1-4x generally heavier than 2-7x?

I really like the 2.75x fixed I have now. Just not a fan of the forward mount. Seems like I'm looking through a straw with it's field of view.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:50:22 AM EST
I've built a pencil barreled are that was under 7 lb with a accupoint 3-9x, no reason for goofy "scout" glass.

The reason for scout/pistol optics is for top feeding with strippers, you don't top feed an AR, so that requirement is dumb.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:51:21 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:


Are 1-4x generally heavier than 2-7x?

I really like the 2.75x fixed I have now. Just not a fan of the forward mount. Seems like I'm looking through a straw with it's field of view.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Originally Posted By Grendelsbane:


Don't get a 1-4, you'd just be making it needlessly heavy. A 2-7 would be a better choice, or maybe a fixed power scope plus a lightweight dot sight.


Are 1-4x generally heavier than 2-7x?

I really like the 2.75x fixed I have now. Just not a fan of the forward mount. Seems like I'm looking through a straw with it's field of view.


ACOG would be the way to go
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:51:57 AM EST
"True scout rifles" are dumb
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:53:36 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 11:59:03 AM EST by 2JokersWild]
You've actually nailed what my next build is. I found these 2 examples elsewhere.

This one is reported to weigh 5.6 pounds, with the user being able to get around 4 pounds if he changes the stock.

Lightweight


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click



I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:55:56 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By miker84:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/224641/gd-105900.JPG

With my 2.5-10x32 optic and a loaded mag, this one is pushing 10lbs. This is with the AA 16" LW barrel.

A smaller mag, different optic, maybe a different receiver set, and other LW parts would get you under 7 I think.

Pretty sure my 12.5 grendel will be light when I can get a barrel.
View Quote


Mag and ammo aren't generally included from what I've read, just the rifle, glass, and sling.

That's a sexy beast, though. You could drop that mount for some QD rings and maybe shorten the rail a bit to drop a few oz. Same for the stock probably.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 11:59:14 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:
I've built a pencil barreled are that was under 7 lb with a accupoint 3-9x, no reason for goofy "scout" glass.

The reason for scout/pistol optics is for top feeding with strippers, you don't top feed an AR, so that requirement is dumb.
View Quote


Damn, that's a really good, and really obvious, point I hadn't considered.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:01:29 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 12:23:51 PM EST by Paulie771]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
You've actually nailed what my next build is. I found these 2 examples elsewhere.

This one is reported to weigh 5.6 pounds, with the user being able to get around 4 pounds if he changes the stock.

Lightweight


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click

I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.
View Quote


I'd love to see a parts list for those to work up a cost.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:02:55 PM EST
A 12.5" with a light weight thread on can like a Harvester, and 1-4x or 1-6x would be pretty sweet.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:08:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
You've actually nailed what my next build is. I found these 2 examples elsewhere.

This one is reported to weigh 5.6 pounds, with the user being able to get around 4 pounds if he changes the stock.

Lightweight


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click

I'd love to see a parts list for those to work up a cost.

I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.

I think the post button ate your response..... 
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:15:40 PM EST
What is the purpose of the forward mounted scope?
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:23:01 PM EST
My Grendel is a 13.6" polygonally grooved, M4 profile barrel with a 2.5" BA comp pinned and welded. Why that barrel, you ask? Because it was free. It's got a fixed 3x Primary Arms optic. Seems pretty close to the conditions Op set. It's lightweight (could be lighter if you strip it down) and accurate and looks like this.

Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:24:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:

I think the post button ate your response..... 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
You've actually nailed what my next build is. I found these 2 examples elsewhere.

This one is reported to weigh 5.6 pounds, with the user being able to get around 4 pounds if he changes the stock.

Lightweight


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click

I'd love to see a parts list for those to work up a cost.

I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.

I think the post button ate your response..... 


Thanks. I fixed it.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:24:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Vne:
My Grendel is a 13.6" polygonally grooved, M4 profile barrel with a 2.5" BA comp pinned and welded. Why that barrel, you ask? Because it was free. It's got a fixed 3x Primary Arms optic. Seems pretty close to the conditions Op set. It's lightweight (could be lighter if you strip it down) and accurate and looks like this.

http://i1334.photobucket.com/albums/w653/Vne70/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG1184_zpsno90aanz.jpg
View Quote

I'm sure the vertical grip, flashlight and extra rail covers all lend themselves well to being a lightweight build.......
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:25:50 PM EST
For those who have not read Cooper's original article:
The Scout Rifle
N.B.: the rationale for the forward scope includes, but is not limited to, the ability to top off the magazine via chargers. Cooper later clarified that the optics are desirable, but NOT a mandatory requirement for a Scout Rifle.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:29:35 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:


I'd love to see a parts list for those to work up a cost.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
You've actually nailed what my next build is. I found these 2 examples elsewhere.

This one is reported to weigh 5.6 pounds, with the user being able to get around 4 pounds if he changes the stock.

Lightweight


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click

I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.


I'd love to see a parts list for those to work up a cost.


You'll cry......I'm started sorting it, the big key piece seems to be the skeletonized upper and lower.

Skeleton frame
Grip

Stock
Lighter stock

Full parts list of the 300 BO (With shitty formatting included for free) 

F1 firearms receiver set, tactical dynamics grip and LPK, SRC reliabolt and balanced BCG, MFT minimalist stock, Odinworks o2lite handguard, t-box barrel co. 12.5" barrel in 300blk, Odinworks adjustable gas block, ALG defense ACT trigger, milspec buffer tube assembly, AXTS raptor ambi charging handle,SSI cookie cutter comp,troy industries QD sling mount,aero precision 30mm scope mount & vortex strike eagle
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:33:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:

I'm sure the vertical grip, flashlight and extra rail covers all lend themselves well to being a lightweight build.......
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
Originally Posted By Vne:
My Grendel is a 13.6" polygonally grooved, M4 profile barrel with a 2.5" BA comp pinned and welded. Why that barrel, you ask? Because it was free. It's got a fixed 3x Primary Arms optic. Seems pretty close to the conditions Op set. It's lightweight (could be lighter if you strip it down) and accurate and looks like this.

http://i1334.photobucket.com/albums/w653/Vne70/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG1184_zpsno90aanz.jpg

I'm sure the vertical grip, flashlight and extra rail covers all lend themselves well to being a lightweight build.......


That miniscule weight doesn't bother me as the benefit outweighs the cost. But if you want it lighter then allow me to quote myself for the reading impaired.

"could be lighter if you strip it down"

Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:35:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By PigBat:
For those who have not read Cooper's original article:
The Scout Rifle
N.B.: the rationale for the forward scope includes, but is not limited to, the ability to top off the magazine via chargers. Cooper later clarified that the optics are desirable, but NOT a mandatory requirement for a Scout Rifle.
View Quote


A retarded concept and even more retarded now.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:35:59 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:
"True scout rifles" are dumb
View Quote

An AR "scout rifle" even dumber ..imo...
After having owned a few.
BCM KMR with Ti barrel nut and Ti hardware (V7 Weapons)
V7 or Ti upper and lower
Ti Bolt Carrier group
Light wt stock and as much Ti hardware and other parts as you can round up.
Aero scope mount
Leupold scope
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:36:21 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click



I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.
View Quote


>uses Swiss cheese receiver that compromises reliability to save weight
>adds an 8oz muzzle device
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:38:39 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:


>uses Swiss cheese receiver that compromises reliability to save weight
>adds an 8oz muzzle device
View Quote

Exactly. WTF is all that garbage?
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:39:37 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


A retarded concept and even more retarded now.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By PigBat:
For those who have not read Cooper's original article:
The Scout Rifle
N.B.: the rationale for the forward scope includes, but is not limited to, the ability to top off the magazine via chargers. Cooper later clarified that the optics are desirable, but NOT a mandatory requirement for a Scout Rifle.


A retarded concept and even more retarded now.


The most retarded rifle concept?

Quite possibly.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:44:10 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:


>uses Swiss cheese receiver that compromises reliability to save weight
>adds an 8oz muzzle device
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:


Then theres this 300 BK, although I dont know the weigh of it I suspect its going to be around the same.

Click



I'm really wanting to throw together a skeleton lightweight Grendel. Not sure if I'll SBR it or not, frankly thats an extra layer of headache I'm not sure I want to go through.


>uses Swiss cheese receiver that compromises reliability to save weight
>adds an 8oz muzzle device

Its 7.7 ounces to be exact. Its certainly one area one could save a significant amount of weight. I like the look of it but probably wouldnt include it on mine, as you say it is a lot of weight. But looks fucking cool (Very Stromtrooperish).

That said, the receiver should be perfectly fine. Not sure what your on about regarding the reliability. 
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:44:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 12:46:32 PM EST by Click2Boom]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:

Exactly. WTF is all that garbage?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:


>uses Swiss cheese receiver that compromises reliability to save weight
>adds an 8oz muzzle device

Exactly. WTF is all that garbage?


Retarded ass garbage

These fucking $2000 builds with strike eagles kill me too.

These geniuses could have a better (i.e. not made with flimsy retarded parts, weaker metals, etc) rifle like a colt, psa premium, bcm, nice homebuild, aero, etc PLUS an ACOG and a m300 scout light for the same price.

But derpers gotta derp
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:45:44 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:

Its 7.7 ounces to be exact. Its certainly one area one could save a significant amount of weight. I like the look of it but probably wouldnt include it on mine, as you say it is a lot of weight. But looks fucking cool (Very Stromtrooperish).

That said, the receiver should be perfectly fine. Not sure what your on about regarding the reliability. 
View Quote


Thank you for correcting that it is only 7.7oz, not 8oz. I now retract all my previous statements. Awesome build!
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:45:52 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


A retarded concept and even more retarded now.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By PigBat:
For those who have not read Cooper's original article:
The Scout Rifle
N.B.: the rationale for the forward scope includes, but is not limited to, the ability to top off the magazine via chargers. Cooper later clarified that the optics are desirable, but NOT a mandatory requirement for a Scout Rifle.


A retarded concept and even more retarded now.


Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:48:17 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:

Its 7.7 ounces to be exact. Its certainly one area one could save a significant amount of weight. I like the look of it but probably wouldnt include it on mine, as you say it is a lot of weight. But looks fucking cool (Very Stromtrooperish).

That said, the receiver should be perfectly fine. Not sure what your on about regarding the reliability. 
View Quote


You don't see how Swiss cheese receivers compromise reliability? Well, if you're only shooting indoors or from a bench then I suppose you wouldn't.

Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:48:24 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Vne:


That miniscule weight doesn't bother me as the benefit outweighs the cost. But if you want it lighter then allow me to quote myself for the reading impaired.

"could be lighter if you strip it down"
View Quote

So then you have....a bog standard AR. Standard upper, standard lower, standard BCG, standard stock. I dont see 1 part there that constitutes as a lightweight part intended for a lightweight build. Maybe I'm missing it though, what parts on that are aftermarket parts designed to support a lightweight build? I'd love to know as it could help me with my build.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:49:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:


The most retarded rifle concept?

Quite possibly.
View Quote


Besides the forward mounted optic I like the concept for hunting/gp rifles. As soon as there is talk of military scouts I start daydreaming
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:49:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:


Thank you for correcting that it is only 7.7oz, not 8oz. I now retract all my previous statements. Awesome build!
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Click2Boom:
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:

Its 7.7 ounces to be exact. Its certainly one area one could save a significant amount of weight. I like the look of it but probably wouldnt include it on mine, as you say it is a lot of weight. But looks fucking cool (Very Stromtrooperish).

That said, the receiver should be perfectly fine. Not sure what your on about regarding the reliability. 


Thank you for correcting that it is only 7.7oz, not 8oz. I now retract all my previous statements. Awesome build!




Like I said, those arent my builds. I simply saved those as patterns to start with when I put mine together. 
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:54:58 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:

View Quote


That doesn't look like a bolt action with a pistol scope.

Link Posted: 12/12/2016 12:56:35 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That doesn't look like a bolt action with a pistol scope.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:



That doesn't look like a bolt action with a pistol scope.

Scout concept for modern times.



Totally didn't intend for it to end up Scoutish.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:00:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:

Scout concept for modern times.



Totally didn't intend for it to end up Scoutish.
View Quote


The recce is what the scout meant to be.

A 12-16" light barrel AR with a variable scope is a great overall rifle.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:03:02 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:

So then you have....a bog standard AR. Standard upper, standard lower, standard BCG, standard stock. I dont see 1 part there that constitutes as a lightweight part intended for a lightweight build. Maybe I'm missing it though, what parts on that are aftermarket parts designed to support a lightweight build? I'd love to know as it could help me with my build.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2JokersWild:
Originally Posted By Vne:


That miniscule weight doesn't bother me as the benefit outweighs the cost. But if you want it lighter then allow me to quote myself for the reading impaired.

"could be lighter if you strip it down"

So then you have....a bog standard AR. Standard upper, standard lower, standard BCG, standard stock. I dont see 1 part there that constitutes as a lightweight part intended for a lightweight build. Maybe I'm missing it though, what parts on that are aftermarket parts designed to support a lightweight build? I'd love to know as it could help me with my build.


You might soon realize that a standard AR is pretty fucking light as it is until you start adding 15" handguards, heavy profile barrels, billet receivers, fore-grips, hand stops, magpul prs or ubr stocks, heavy scopes with one piece quick detach rings, oh and "cookie cutter comps" because they look cool like storm troopers.

So long as you don't add all that shit it'll stay light and reliable. No need to mill holes in your receivers.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:16:41 PM EST
These lowers won't win any GD beauty contests but incredibly sturdy and light.
They're the only polymer lower with a track record of durability. Offer a life time warranty on the lower and choice of colors. Receiver weight (complete) is almost a full pound lighter. A1 Length Integral Stock (5/8" shorter than A2) with sling loop. 13" Length of Pull.
If I was going to build a light weight 'Scout' AR15, I'd start with one of these.

GWACS Armory that bought out the CavArms manufacturing process.


Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:19:56 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That doesn't look like a bolt action with a pistol scope.
View Quote

No magazine cutoff either.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:20:33 PM EST
My BCM 14.5 ELW w/ KMR 13 weighed 5.75lbs without an optic, a B5 stock, BCM BCG and large latch CH. Add a TA33 ACOG in an SLR mount for 10 oz and a sling and you are right about there. I would use a lightweight BCG, ditch the flash hider and add a thread on 13 oz silencerco omega and call it perfect.

This would be my ideal 6.5 Grendel and one I hope to build soon.

Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:20:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 1:30:58 PM EST by BoxofRox]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By miker84:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/224641/gd-105900.JPG

With my 2.5-10x32 optic and a loaded mag, this one is pushing 10lbs. This is with the AA 16" LW barrel.

A smaller mag, different optic, maybe a different receiver set, and other LW parts would get you under 7 I think.

Pretty sure my 12.5 grendel will be light when I can get a barrel.
View Quote


That's pretty hefty, my 18" Grendel with a 4-16x scope weighs 7.5lbs with an intentionally heavy stock to help balance when the suppressor is on. I have an enhanced sopmod stock which weighs 12oz, I could get the whole rifle to 7 if I wanted.

And it has a 15" rail. So shorten it to 13", put a lighter stock on it, 16" barrel, lighter optic, and I bet you're at 6.5lbs.
Link Posted: 12/12/2016 1:25:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/12/2016 1:30:25 PM EST by Paulie771]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By smarcus:
My BCM 14.5 ELW w/ KMR 13 weighed 5.75lbs without an optic, a B5 stock, BCM BCG and large latch CH. Add a TA33 ACOG in an SLR mount for 10 oz and a sling and you are right about there. I would use a lightweight BCG, ditch the flash hider and add a thread on 13 oz silencerco omega and call it perfect.

This would be my ideal 6.5 Grendel and one I hope to build soon.
View Quote


So the upper alone weighs that much without the BCG or CH? I was thinking something very similar to this for my build. I wonder what such a build with a titanium or other lightweight BCG on one of the GWACS lowers would end up weighing?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top