I qualified with one, went to my unit and was issued a Pig.
Bought my 1st AR in '08.
Still have it and a couple others and .308 ones too.

Actual poll numbers are at least somewhat in line with what I expected with about 85% of respondents owning AR's. Actual comments are more of a surprise.

I just kind of assumed that anyone who was interested in guns and shot regularly owned at least 1 AR. Honestly, if you own at least one semi-auto rifle why wouldn't it be an AR? They are extremely reliable. You have a ton of different choices from cheap to Gucci. There are a mind numbing number of aftermarket options - almost all of which you can install yourself. Ammo is relatively cheap. Recoil is negligible. They range from accurate (1.5 MOA) to really accurate (sub MOA). They are versatile and depending on what optic you put on it are good from 10 yards out to 600 yards. Hell, you can buy one lower and then get uppers in multiple calibers.

I own an FAL. Used to own an HK91 and an AK. Have a Garand. If I could only own 3 rifles they would all be AR's in various configurations.

quote:

Hell, you can buy one lower and then get uppers in multiple calibers.

This is definitely correct, but I'm curious how many people actually do this. I've had that plan a few times, but then I realized how cheap another lower can be and it just turns into another rifle.

ARs are the Barbie Dolls of the firearms world.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

This is definitely correct, but I'm curious how many people actually do this. I've had that plan a few times, but then I realized how cheap another lower can be and it just turns into another rifle.

True. That's exactly how I've ended up with multiple AR's. Buy an upper in 300 BO because it's on sale and I want to try the caliber.

Aeroprecision starts selling blemished AR receiver for $60, so I buy one. Upgrade the trigger and the pistol grip on my original AR. Swap out the original buffer and spring for something a little heavier. Now I have an extra trigger, pistol grip, spring and buffer and I realize if I buy a couple of more parts I can complete another lower for practically nothing. And before you know it I've got another rifle.

Also works the other way around. Buy a blemished lower from PSA for next to nothing. Now I've got an extra lower that's just waiting for me to add a new upper.

quote:

Also works the other way around. Buy a blemished lower from PSA for next to nothing. Now I've got an extra lower that's just waiting for me to add a new upper.

Yep, that too, lol! Back in the good old days (like 4 years ago), there was a place locally that would sell you an Anderson lower for $33. I bought....too many. I spent quite a bit of money playing with AR variants built on those, and ultimately sold most of them off at a loss when I got tired of them or realized that a particular build wasn't practical for me. It was fun putting them together, though!

quote:

Yep, that too, lol! Back in the good old days (like 4 years ago), there was a place locally that would sell you an Anderson lower for $33. I bought....too many. I spent quite a bit of money playing with AR variants built on those, and ultimately sold most of them off at a loss when I got tired of them or realized that a particular build wasn't practical for me. It was fun putting them together, though!

I look at it like renting it.
Some stuff takes a bigger hit but it's better than just hoarding more stuff that won't get used.

quote:

Originally posted by Houndog:

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

This is definitely correct, but I'm curious how many people actually do this. I've had that plan a few times, but then I realized how cheap another lower can be and it just turns into another rifle.

True. That's exactly how I've ended up with multiple AR's. Buy an upper in 300 BO because it's on sale and I want to try the caliber.

Aeroprecision starts selling blemished AR receiver for $60, so I buy one. Upgrade the trigger and the pistol grip on my original AR. Swap out the original buffer and spring for something a little heavier. Now I have an extra trigger, pistol grip, spring and buffer and I realize if I buy a couple of more parts I can complete another lower for practically nothing. And before you know it I've got another rifle.

Also works the other way around. Buy a blemished lower from PSA for next to nothing. Now I've got an extra lower that's just waiting for me to add a new upper.

It's like trying to get the milk and cereal to balance out. Too dry? Add more milk. Extra milk when the cereal is gone? Add more cereal. Also works for whisky and ice cubes.

Im like some others - owned a HK91 as my first hunting rifle when you could buy one for less than a Rem 700. $130. In the meantime I spent some weekends and such going thru Basic etc and using the M16 in every variant up to my retirement. And I discovered that .30 cal battle rifles are not current fighting weapons at all. Second tier fodder for less than leading edge fabricating economies.

The M16 platform has been in use now since 1965 with the adoption of the XM177 - 56 years. When properly used in it's optimal configuration, its the best at doing it's job, and for the most part newer combat guns copy a lot of Stoners original features. One of the most important isn't the gas system - it's the barrel extension pinned to the barrel, and inserted into the receiver with a barrel nut. That eliminates the skilled and laborious pressing of a barrel into a reciever trunnion while simultaneously setting headspace.

That is the most important reason why AK's aren;t home assembled like AR's, and why cranking AR's thru assembly is a speedier process using less skilled labor. Stoner took out the rocket surgery and made it so easy an caveman can do it. Another are the drop forged uppers and lowers, which is the most cost effective method for mass production - even more so than folding and stamping sheet metal, or shaping billet. It precisely forms most of the exterior dimensions quickly with no machining, leaving some simple processes for the internal shape that traditional machinery can handle easily.

For the soldier, it's also a design that takes down to the gas cylinder level for cleaning in less than 40 seconds. Think about it, the bolt has gas rings, and the bolt carrier a cylinder where barrel gas is piped to unlock it and then propel the carrier back. That's a gas cylinder. The M1 and M14 took much longer and had the unenviable problem of having gas residue deposits actually lock up the pistons removal with the results of damaging it if forced - requiring higher echelon repair. Army had to carry more in float at brigade supplying working weapons to keep soldiers armed.

Those old .30s had issues - just because the guys that used them don't post doesn't mean it wasn't happening.

Along with all that, the M16 was finally chambered in a round the Army had already studied and even proposed before WWII - a smaller Not .30 caliber intermediate round. We'd played with the .276 Pedersen before the first Garand prototype, which was originally configured for it. When Army decided .30-06 was plentiful and quicker to ship from mass storage bunkers they forced that round onto the design, and worse, ignored the opportunity to use a box mag. Garands were not trusted when first issued because of their problems - something reported in Army publications but withheld from the public. It was the Jammomatic of it's day and the response from knowledgeable combat troops was to keep the Springfield until it was ironed out. And we did, until the end of the war.

We weren't the only ones considering an intermediate cartridge, the Germans got into it with the 8mm Kurz - a short 8mm because "we haf too many boolit making machtines and we cannot change it in thees war now!" But the stamped metal frame and pistol grip design got notice - the Kalashinkov design group of engineers (He really did come up with all that? Really?) copied a lot of it and value engineered things to current Russian technological standards. IE a step backward. There, I said it. People say the AK was reverse engineered from the STG 44 and I say it was dumbed down to match factory abilities. They were not first tier techno mavens. And guess what, it was stuck with their most economical .30 bullet, from the 7.62x54 Russian rimmed - from 1891.

Not to say the original AR was in an intermediate - the AR10 built in Holland and sold to the Portuguese and others was 7.62 NATO. As Army wound down Project Salvo and decided .30 was actually overkill for modern combat 5.56 finally rose to the top, the Stoner team "smallered" the gun to fit and it was tested in Southeast Asia, promoted by the AIR FORCE, who had no skin in the game over caliber wars. They manuevered to be the proponent Agency and put thousands in the field where it proved itself. Once the M16 was fielded by Army the real problems arose, hatred by Ordnance Command, overselling it's easy to clean ability, and force production increases which caused non Colt subcontractors to supply out of spec barrels and ammo makers to use repurposed cheap powder. Nope, the whiz kids from the White House stepped all over themselves doing it wrong, as usual. It got to the point where trucks loaded with M16's and armory techs would arrive within hearing distance of a combat operation, size the chambers of the issued rifles and handed over a brand new proven one. Joe Snuffy likely zeroed it in the field against the enemy using Kentucky windage.

And those downloaded mags? Well, even soldiers didn't get it when they were told specifically to open the action first. Nope, you jam a fully loaded mag against the closed bolt and it can and will fall out when it doesn't lock in place. Two rounds short solved it more than pushups. It wasn't a mag issue, it was a user issue. Note the same doctrine was applied to 30's - same issue, different mag.

We got past all that misadministration and kept the M16, it's now in the 4th generation, and in use by over 104 nations. The M4 is in use by over 68 nations. The free worlds Right Arm - replacing the FNFAL entirely.

.30 cal battle rifles were a flash in the pan and some are the shortest fielded weapons in American history. The economics of bullet manufacture are what kept them in service, much longer than they should have.

I have two. My son has six or seven. I still want a Garand.

During my 1972 Summer of Love in San Diego I got to fondle one but primarily stroked my M14 the most on the grinder..

I didn’t have an interest in them for the longest time since as an infantryman they were just a work gun. I also wasn’t going to mess with neutered ones during the AWB.

Then the mild Obama election scare of ‘08 happened so I snagged a lower and built a decently high end one while I could. Then we hit that golden era and I got addicted to them, buying only when cheap and plentiful, stacking mags deep as well.

My Dad finally got on board this year, he got a couple stripped lowers and I gave him links to good PSA build kits. Assembled them for him over Thanksgiving, zeroed them too.

I've never owned or even shot an AR (held one a couple times). Back when it was still legal to buy an unmolested AR, I decided to go with the Mini-14 instead. Just was not enamored with the direct impingement system.

Of course, the Mini came with its own issues, mainly the accuracy problems of the earlier models. Fortunately I developed a workaround for that.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

quote:

Hell, you can buy one lower and then get uppers in multiple calibers.

This is definitely correct, but I'm curious how many people actually do this.

Me. For some time I've had an SBR lower used for one 11" 300 blk, two 14" 223, two 16" 223, and one 18" 22lr uppers. It worked OK.

I recently picked up two new lowers -- they are fully assembled and ready to roll. I have spare traditional springs and buffers, but I plan to buy JP silent springs for them. I also plan to obtain tax stamps, so they can be used with the shorter barrels.

I have one AR10 lower that is paired with 6CM and 6.5CM uppers. I have no plans for another AR10 lower.

I didn’t even read the question and answered I love them.

Shot and qualified with an M16 in the Army but was issued a pistol during my active-duty time. Used an AR during my LEO days, helped transition my department to ARs from Shotguns in the mid 90s. Have taken some AR classes in the past.

Don't own an AR. Just not that interested in them.

The AR is owned by many due to its exceptional functionality.

Few firearms systems are so flexible and modular. In pistols, maybe the 1911 is close. In rifles, the Remington 700 bolt action is up there. So many items can be bolted to an AR receiver. There are options for buttstock, grip, trigger, handguard, barrel, optics, and other accessories. Caliber options are huge, often with only a few component changes. If 223-length chamberings aren’t enough, the AR10 receiver allows 308-length chamberings.

The AR15 can be assembled on a budget. Or one can go all out, for a truly expensive rifle.

Depending on components, it can be light in weight. Or really heavy for stability and long range accuracy. Barrels can be short, long, or in between. It adapts well to iron sights, red dots, minimal magnification optics, or monster Hubble-like scopes.

Chambered in 223, it shoots and cycles just fine with bullets from 40 to 77 grains. Single feeding and eliminating the semi-auto function, it shoots bullets up to 90 grains. In normal times, factory ammo can be inexpensive. Factory ammo can be really accurate. It is easy to hand load. Magazine options are plentiful, and competitively priced.

The AR has no problems with a suppressor. Or a brake, or whatever muzzle device.

One will be challenged to find a semi-auto rifle that is in its league for accuracy potential to 600 or so yards. There is no semi-auto service rifle that can beat its accuracy to 600 yards. There are no semi-auto 223 rifles that can match its accuracy to 600 yards. There are manually-cycled rifle systems which cannot come close to its accuracy potential.

Its recoil is quite manageable. With different components it can fit shooters from the small & young to the largest of adults.

***
However, the AR isn’t perfect. The DI system pushes gas back into the receiver. The BCG needs some level of cleaning, and it definitely needs regular lubrication to perform reliably. Post-shooting cleaning and lubing isn’t favorite activity, but I just deal with it. IMO it is a fairly minor downside for a really good rifle system.

Like many semi-auto rifles, it’s easy to shoot with reasonable accuracy. Like most semi-auto rifles, it’s hard to shoot with truly outstanding accuracy on a consistent basis – it can be done, but few will ever acquire the skills.

I own a fair number of ARs. I think they’re great firearms, and I doubt I will own other semi-auto rifle systems.

I was introduced to the M1 Garand in Navy Bootcamp and qualified in 1963.

I manned a M2 50 BMG (Ma Deuce) in 1965/1966 in Viet Nam with an M-14 as a backup.

I was introduced to the M-16 during Navy Advisor training at Camp Pendelton attending Marine Advanced Infantry Training in 1969.

I carried an M-16 as a Navy Advisor in Viet Nam in 1970/1971.

I qualified expert with an M-16 until I retired from the Army in 1985.

I own several AR-15s in 5.56X45mm, 300 BK, and .50 Beowulf.

I own an AR-10 and an M1A in 7.62X51mm.

Own one. Bcm upper on a built Anderson lower. Sits in the safe, unfired. More of an "I think I can build a lower" project than akything.
I stick mainly to heavy barrel .22lr.

I have a small pile of AR carbines, one full sized FN like new USMC surplus parts build (complete with the standard handgrip battle rattle), and a couple of pistols from the PSA blem days. I got my first one in a trade back in the late 80’s; an old school Essential Arms lower parts gun the guy had no idea what he was doing building it from old worn out surplus parts. I replaced it with a quality 16” upper and sent it off to Birdsongs and Associates for a Black-T Teflon finish. Two true M-4 builds with pinned BCM extended flash hiders will go to the kids when they come of age.