Upper, lower, barrel and furniture are Olympic Arms.  All lower parts, bolt and carrier are Bushmaster. A-2 configuration with 20" heavy barrel, not threaded and free float aluminum handguard.  Rifle is in excellant condition, no noticible dings or scratches or finish wear.  I've been offered this and I would like to know how much it should go for.  thanks!

I'd give 550 to 6 for it.

Thank you!  I can buy it for $500 but it is quite a bit heavier than I think an AR should be.
Perhaps I can do a barrel swap with someone at a later date.  

Quoted: Thank you!  I can buy it for $500 but it is quite a bit heavier than I think an AR should be. Perhaps I can do a barrel swap with someone at a later date.

Nope, swapping means your getting rid of parts.  Just buy more stuff

If you don't want it sent them my way and I'd take it off their hands for $500.00.  It is heavy because it set up that way.  A2, HB, with free float HG should be a tack driver off a bench rest at 100yds.  If you want light you want one of the new AR-15 M4 carbine.  But if you pass on this send them my way.

Whatcha got to trade?  

Not to assume anything did you buy it?  All I have to trade is that green stuff from the Federal
Reserve.  If you do not want that AR let me know.  I would be willing to buy it for the $500.00
the seller is asking for.  Can drive anywhere in AR for a F to F on weekends.  However if you
decided to buy it I think you got a good deal.  I was just offering if for some reason you did not
want it.  

I would jump on another Oly like that. The one I have is, in fact, a real tack driver. This year I got blessed with a 8pt. buck with it at about 600yds. first shot heart/lungs. They are great rifles.
God's Blessings,
Ken

Quoted: I would jump on another Oly like that. The one I have is, in fact, a real tack driver. This year I got blessed with a 8pt. buck with it at about 600yds. first shot heart/lungs. They are great rifles. God's Blessings, Ken

God, where around AR did you get a 600 yard shot.  I don't doubt you made it,  But the only places I've seen are some roads

I'd be interested in the ammunition used for that shot.  The energy levels from any that I've seen would be down to near 22 rimfire levels at 600 yards.  I've loaded heavy charges with Nosler Partition bullets and still have no faith in the 223 on deer past 300 yards if even that far.   JMO!

Quoted: I'd be interested in the ammunition used for that shot.  The energy levels from any that I've seen would be down to near 22 rimfire levels at 600 yards.  I've loaded heavy charges with Nosler Partition bullets and still have no faith in the 223 on deer past 300 yards if even that far.   JMO!

We've got a HTF member (I won't name names it wasn't said in public) that has either used, or seen .223 used on the thousand yard line in competition.  If your accurate enough at a thousand to compete I'd bet it'd knock the piss out of a deer at 600.  IIRC he said it was a very heavy load.  I've seen them used out to 6 and 7 hundred yards.

Yea, but the 1K yard guns have the front sight lowered, free floated barrels, etc. They aren't just pulled from a rack. It costs a lot of $ to get accurate out there with iron sights.

It had been a while since I read in the American Rifelman article about this,  but I think the Army team was using either a 70 or 74gr 223 hand load but they would have to hand feed them one at a time.  Sort of defeats the true spirit of the all around military rifle.  

If you are going to shoot 1,000 yds in a class where it is a standard mil rifle then the same gun should be able to shoot 200, 300, 500 and 1,000 with out mod and handloading one at a time.   I think this a strech of the true sprit of an all around military rifle like the M-14 or a M1 to let them take a M-16 that has to be modified from here to next week to shoot the longrange leg and call it a standard military rifle.  Besides the free float handguard and the special barrel they have to be hand loaded one round at a time because they will not fit in the magazine.  If all issue guns were in that configuration then fine.  The way they have to trick out an M-16 to do the long range leg I think it is not  fair, right or in the true spirit of the high power match.  

Why are there so many articles in the current gun magazines about soldiers over there now wanting something for the 300 to 500 meter range with more knockdown power?  Why the 6.8 SPC?  Why do I keep seeing where they are digging around for M-14s, rebuilding them and shipping them overseas as fast as they can?  

I love my AR-15s but unless it comes in 308, I would rather shoot my M1A at anything that far away.  A 300 Win Mag bolt ain't too bad either.    

There are plenty special configurations for the AR from rimfire 22 to 50BMG, but in a standard A2, A3 or M4 configuration I do not think it is the all around weapon, and is weak at long range.

Quoted: Yea, but the 1K yard guns have the front sight lowered, free floated barrels, etc. They aren't just pulled from a rack. It costs a lot of $ to get accurate out there with iron sights.

Yeah, I'm wierd. I think I a precision rifle should have a bolt sticking out the side of it.

Quoted: It had been a while since I read in the American Rifelman article about this,  but I think the Army team was using either a 70 or 74gr 223 hand load but they would have to hand feed them one at a time.  Sort of defeats the true spirit of the all around military rifle.

Yes, I believe they are even going up and past 80gr to get that distance.

Quoted: Quoted: It had been a while since I read in the American Rifelman article about this,  but I think the Army team was using either a 70 or 74gr 223 hand load but they would have to hand feed them one at a time.  Sort of defeats the true spirit of the all around military rifle.   Yes, I believe they are even going up and past 80gr to get that distance.

I'm thinking that's what GS said the other night.  Maybe even closer to 90

The Marines are using 77gr across the course (1-6) NGMTU and AMU are using 77gr at 1-500m and for Infantry Trophy Matches, and 80gr (these and heavier to be hand feed because they wont fit in a magazine) at 600. But that's not a problem because there is no rapid fire at 600. And most everyone is using 90gr at 1000.
And the NRA rules state that a 'service rifle' has to have the outward appearance of a standard, issue combat rifle. And dont think that the m1 and m1a/m14 dont have to have some work done to them to get them off to 1000 yards accuratly too.
And as for fair or not, it depends on which match you're in. 3.1.2 - 3.1.3 Service rifle, 3.1.4 Foreign service rifle, 3.1.5 As Issued M-1 Garand, 3.2 Any rifle (no larger than .35caliber), 3.3 NRA Match rifle, 3.3.1 Semi-automatic Match rifle 3.3.2 NRA Match rifle (other Nations), 3.3.3 U.S. Palma rifle (308 only), or 3.3.4 NRA Any Sight Match rifle.

Ok, I stand corrected, all's fair in love, war and the right class of long range shooting.  Yes, they also modified the M-14, M-1 and 1903 for the teams back then.   I assume as long as it looks like an M-16 that's all that counts.

Quoted: The Marines are using 77gr across the course (1-6) NGMTU and AMU are using 77gr at 1-500m and for Infantry Trophy Matches, and 80gr (these and heavier to be hand feed because they wont fit in a magazine) at 600. But that's not a problem because there is no rapid fire at 600. And most everyone is using 90gr at 1000. And the NRA rules state that a 'service rifle' has to have the outward appearance of a standard, issue combat rifle. And dont think that the m1 and m1a/m14 dont have to have some work done to them to get them off to 1000 yards accuratly too. And as for fair or not, it depends on which match you're in. 3.1.2 - 3.1.3 Service rifle, 3.1.4 Foreign service rifle, 3.1.5 As Issued M-1 Garand, 3.2 Any rifle (no larger than .35caliber), 3.3 NRA Match rifle, 3.3.1 Semi-automatic Match rifle 3.3.2 NRA Match rifle (other Nations), 3.3.3 U.S. Palma rifle (308 only), or 3.3.4 NRA Any Sight Match rifle.

You would be the one who knows.

Looks like we got a little sidetracked with this one. Went from a "what's my rifle worth" to a balistics discussion.