GUNS!!!!!!!!

[sb]

Rare look at a mint condition E German SKS

https://www.full30.com/video/fbe335c...a343236a913b2d

[The Reverend Floater]

Dumb question: What's the most efficient way to reduce weight on an AR 10? I've owned one for a while and am just now getting around to playing with it. It's a PWS with a long barrel and it's heavy as fuck.

[2FUNKY]

Dumb question: What's the most efficient way to reduce weight on an AR 10? I've owned one for a while and am just now getting around to playing with it. It's a PWS with a long barrel and it's heavy as fuck.

Light weight BCG, spring, buffer. Milled shorter barrel, shorter lighter shroud. 10 round hunting mag.
I know you said efficient but that’s the reality. A10’s are heavy.

[TAFKALVS]

Dumb question: What's the most efficient way to reduce weight on an AR 10? I've owned one for a while and am just now getting around to playing with it. It's a PWS with a long barrel and it's heavy as fuck.

AR10s are pigs in general and if you have a piston system (which I think PWS guns are?) its going to make it hard to shed the weight.

I would suggest a fixed minimalist stock, a light scope mount (aero precision), a carbon fiber handguard. Think backpacking, every gram counts.

[2FUNKY]

AR10s are pigs in general and if you have a piston system (which I think PWS guns are?) its going to make it hard to shed the weight.

I would suggest a fixed minimalist stock, a light scope mount (aero precision), a carbon fiber handguard. Think backpacking, every gram counts.

Everyone I’ve shot are heavy af.

You could also do a skeleton stock. In the grand scheme of things they are very hard to make “ light weight”.

[sb]

LOL, I would wager you have never shot a FAL.

SCAR is about the lightest .308 around but it kills optics and your wallet.

My Galil 329 is a fantastic shooter, for an AK, but it is not light which helps it handle the .308 recoil some what.

I wish that CZ Bren 2 in .308 would come ashore but that will be years.

[2FUNKY]

Lol. Nope. Didn’t say I’ve shot them all. Smh.

[wooley12]

Dumb question: What's the most efficient way to reduce weight on an AR 10? I've owned one for a while and am just now getting around to playing with it. It's a PWS with a long barrel and it's heavy as fuck.

Remove the bayonet.

[AKPogue]

Dumb question: What's the most efficient way to reduce weight on an AR 10? I've owned one for a while and am just now getting around to playing with it. It's a PWS with a long barrel and it's heavy as fuck.

http://f-1firearms.com/bdr-10-3g-skeletonized-rifle/

https://pof-usa.com/firearms/revolution/

[AKPogue]

SCAR is about the lightest .308 around but it kills optics and your wallet.

Really, just a quick Google search and kills optics part seems pretty ludicrous. I guess if your putting a cheap $100 scope on a SCAR then maybe.

[sb]

Nope, this is years of info coming out of actual gun forums. The recoil on the SCAR tears down all but the toughest mil spec scopes. Its well known although the SCAR fanboys do not like to talk about it.

I like the SCAR ergonomics and layout but FN has chosen to keep the price tag high and there are very many .308 options out there.

[AKPogue]

Nope, this is years of info coming out of actual gun forums. The recoil on the SCAR tears down all but the toughest mil spec scopes. Its well known although the SCAR fanboys do not like to talk about it.

I like the SCAR ergonomics and layout but FN has chosen to keep the price tag high and there are very many .308 options out there.

I have never had a SCAR and have never shot one. I have a list of guns to buy and as of now a SCAR isn't on my list. I did a little research on this and still don't think you're right. From what I've gathered and I could be wrong it isn't the recoil that has been the problem. It appears to be the bolt slamming forward that was the issue. Apparently that was a problem when they first came out but scope manufacturers supposedly have fixed that problem. Do you think if this was really a problem it wouldn't be all over the internet? Scope manufacturers would have a disclaimer of no warranty on scopes fired from a SCAR and at least looking at the Leupold website they had nothing come up when I searched for SCAR 17. Plus I've seen plenty of pics of guys being deployed with them, I don't think they would carry a SCAR in those units if the scopes wouldn't work. You'd be able to get a SCAR super cheap because nobody would want a rifle that you couldn't put a scope on.

[mangle]

The SCAR 17 has a unique recoil pattern. The bolt carrier in that rifle is massive, and it makes for an unpleasant experience for both mounted accessories and the shooter. We primarily use it to test stuff to make sure it stands up to recoil. After 200 rounds in a day behind one, I'm done. I run a NF 2.5-10x24 in a Larue LT111, it it hasn't had an issue through a few thousand rounds. Offset mounts are harder on optics in this platform.

Note that a SCAR 17 has an incredibly short fore end (watch out for the gas block with your hand) and polymer rail sections that get beat up in a hurry. There's not a lot you can do to make it much lighter.

As for AR-10s, the bolt carriers are havy, but nothing else is inherently so. My 16" 6.5 CM (Faxon big gunner barrel, normal mass BCG, car buffer, carbine stock, 14" Centurion rail, and a 3.5oz Surefire brake) comes to about 7lb10oz (compared to the 8lb ish SCAR 17, also 16" barrel with massive brake). I could have pulled about 4 oz out of a rail without going shorter, saved 2.5 pretty easy on the brake, and knocked out a whole ton of weight on the BCG. A good adjustable gas block is 1.7oz, so I guess I could have knocked off another ounce with a fixed titanium one.

[riser4]

Isn't heavier better with a round like the .308? I know fuck-all nothing about AR-10s and have never even fired one. Well, weight, and balance. Sure, I hate lugging huge weight. However I hate shooting a recoil monster just as much.

[Diamond Joe]

^ Yes

I would not want my M1A to be any lighter, 308 is a serious round

[SumJongGuy]

Definitely a trade off between swing weight and caliber/kick. Compacts and composites are just plain all around harder to shoot accurately for me. Shorter barrel is part of the problem but a stable platform, solid feel goes a long way to accurate shooting for greenhorns like me.

[riser4]

^ Yes

I would not want my M1A to be any lighter, 308 is a serious round

Full size M1A? I keep batting things around regarding a battle rifle and the M1A always filters back to the top. The Scout Squad model piques my curiosity however, with the shorter barrel it seems like one is then removing one of pluses of the M1A. My objective is a rock solid, dependable battle rifle, that hunts OK if needed, that would hopefully be lower down on the ban list because it doesn't have the 'evil' features.

[sb]

Personally I would not want a .308 with a less than 18" barrel.

One of my favorites is my Springfield INC M1A with NM sights is a joy to shoot particularly in the E2 stock with a GI bipod. Next favorite is the PTR91, the best value in a full battle rifle these days. Followed up by my Galil and then my FALs.

Speaking of FALs, DS Arms has the rare Israeli thin barrel parts kits with barrels and receivers to be available soon.

[sb]

Meant to add that the Brownell retro AR10 rifles are getting great reviews.

[mangle]

Meant to add that the Brownell retro AR10 rifles are getting great reviews.

I've always wanted an AR-10 with the original carry handle charger setup.

I'm also a fan of heavier rifles in short action cartridges until I have to carry one somewhere or shoot unsupported.

[The Reverend Floater]

Sounds like I just deal with it. Not like I'm hunting with it so I guess it doesn't matter. It's just a beast!

[sb]

https://www.brownells.com/firearms/r...aspx?rrec=true

[splittin]

The retros are looking tempting.

[sb]

Ah yeah

[irul&ublo]

Tell that girl to wash her socks