What will kill the AR platform?

[Vultite 57]

So what I want to know is when and what will kill the AR platform?? This is a very old design and many military communities are looking to replace it if they haven't already. The Israeli's went to a design of their own, the Tavor-21 which is pretty sweet. Even the US is trying hard to get rid of it (but failing) So I want to know WHAT YOU THINK! If you think at all

Edited May 4, 2012 by Nailbomb

[IndyArms 10,186]

You need to ask this at ARFCOM...

 

 

 

 

[Juggernaut 11,054]

normally, a speck of sand does the trick....

[Vultite 57]

LOL, I forgot to add the elements to the poll, sand, water, ect....oh well, thats what happens when you use guns that you don't need to worry about those things...BUT i meant "kill" as in popularity and official use...

Edited August 9, 2010 by Vultite

[csspecs 1,987]

I think they are to common to be eliminated. Going to gas piston would likely help.

[MT Predator 2,294]

I voted for piston uppers replacing direct impingement ones as it is already happening in certain Military units. It didn't really really kill the AR but rather is upgrading it. No need to trash an ergonomic design that does work well with a piston upper. Now they need to tackle a caliber with better ballistics for putting down bad guys. Plus, the U.S. Military already has a metric shit ton of AR parts and accessories so that doesn't need to be purchased all over again. If they went for a different platform, they'd have to buy a bunch of crap.

Edited August 9, 2010 by MT Predator

[MT Predator 2,294]

normally, a speck of sand does the trick....

I figured someone would go there!

[MN.9130 44]

I'll toss my vote, and my disgust, on Other: The Elements.

 

I've been handed an unsafe AR three times too many. Once was enough, three convinces me the platform isn't what we need. It's not what I need to defend myself properly, but hey, at least I can beat Tommy Taliban senseless with it before I get taken down?

[mgconnor13 206]

AR's are cheap compared to the "replacements" on the market. think the unit price for an M4 is $650, try buying a SCAR, ACR, or HK 416 for that price. I doubt the DOD will drop the AR until something just as cheap comes out that's way better. Getting the most most bang for your buck really matters when you're going to spend a few billion dollars. My money is on DEWs (directed energy weapons) replacing the M-4/16. fire arms technology hasn't made any huge leaps in awhile just evolutionary steps. Phasers are in the work and anti-air lasers are in the operational phase of development. Electronics and optics are getting cheap to produce so a viable directed energy weapons is only a mater of time.

 

the The Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response rifle (PHASR) is an example of a non-lethal D.E.W.

I remember reading a piece on a rifle that used electrical pulse to disrupt nerve impulses. Supposedly it could stop a chicken's heart.

 

Just my 2 cent

Edited August 10, 2010 by Rusty truck

[Bean.223 365]

When Colt makes a suitable replacement the Feds/Mil types will finally come around...

 

And what Rusty says, they are getting them "relatively" cheap.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Bean.223

[shades_of_grey 1,092]

I'll go with Other: not lubing the hell out of the gun every other mag and/or any amount of sand/dirt. DI is just plain unreliable in anything other than ideal operating conditions.

 

I think a relatively cheap and quick fix would be to replace existing DI uppers with piston uppers. Obviously a new, (more powerful), cartridge is needed as well.

[DogMan 2,343]

I don't have a clue. The DOD doesn't make rational or practical decisions with regard to any kind of weapon or weapon systems much of the time so trying to predict what they will do is much different from trying to decide what SHOULD be the replacement to the AR from a user's perspective.

[VanKiller 322]

I may kill it with my next design............magnetic pulse cannon made out of a stun gun........

 

Wonder what ever happened to that guy with the centifuge ball bearing slingin mother f*******r.....that was different. Would put out a zillion projectiles without much noise at all...........bet the feds had a ball with that one.....

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

I envision the bastard offspring of the of the AR & AK.

 

Not a death, more a rebirth.

..............................................................................................

 

Just pick a heavier friggin caliber for it, 7.62Nato/.308, 7.62x39, 6.8SPC... Pick one!

 

Piston driven, nuff said.

 

A heavier profile barrel, a nice mid-weight at 16-18".

 

A better bolt design, less and larger lugs, with a beefier extractor

 

Use the newer, high tech coatings on the internals/barrel. Less lube, longer intervals between cleaning and greater reliability.

 

Loosen the tolerances, you don't need to be able to shoot his middle finger off at 600 yards when he flips ya the bird... Just need one in center of mass.

................................................................................................

 

This way, the weapon is vastly improved, and the only real changes are to the Upper Assembly and new mags/ammo.

................................................................................................

 

Just my $0.02

[DogMan 2,343]

I envision the bastard offspring of the of the AR & AK.

 

Not a death, more a rebirth.

................................................................................. .............

 

Just pick a heavier friggin caliber for it, 7.62Nato/.308, 7.62x39, 6.8SPC... Pick one!

 

Piston driven, nuff said.

 

A heavier profile barrel, a nice mid-weight at 16-18".

 

A better bolt design, less and larger lugs, with a beefier extractor

 

Use the newer, high tech coatings on the internals/barrel. Less lube, longer intervals between cleaning and greater reliability.

 

Loosen the tolerances, you don't need to be able to shoot his middle finger off at 600 yards when he flips ya the bird... Just need one in center of mass.

................................................................................. ...............

 

This way, the weapon is vastly improved, and the only real changes are to the Upper Assembly and new mags/ammo.

................................................................................. ...............

 

Just my $0.02

 

EXellent idea. Could be the answer. I wondeR where a gun similar to this could be found.

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

 

 

EXellent idea. Could be the answer. I wondeR where a gun similar to this could be found.

Yes, yes, yes... But the cost.

 

I would have one too, if the price was a lil'more reasonable.

[Klassy Kalashnikov 1,393]

 

 

EXellent idea. Could be the answer. I wondeR where a gun similar to this could be found.

Yes, yes, yes... But the cost.

 

I would have one too, if the price was a lil'more reasonable.

 

The price of the XCR is irrelevant. I mean, really, since when does the government give a shit about spending money?

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

EXellent idea. Could be the answer. I wondeR where a gun similar to this could be found.

Yes, yes, yes... But the cost.

 

I would have one too, if the price was a lil'more reasonable.

 

The price of the XCR is irrelevant. I mean, really, since when does the government give a shit about spending money?

I said, "I", not they... They spend our money, I spend my money... Pretty damned relevant to me.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

I voted "New weapon systems like the ACR,XCR,SCAR".

 

But I don't necessarily think they'll "kill" the platform in general. The platform itself will continue be around longer than any of us, given it's popularity in the general public and shooting sports.

[Casp 119]

Nothing. In widespread military use it'll probably be succeeded by things like the ACR and the SCAR, but it'll never go away completely, just like the 1911.

 

Even though I know everyone is going to jump on my case for saying this: <heresy> The AR is not the piece of crap everyone makes it out to be, and there is nothing wrong with DI and I'm sick of hearing about it. </heresy> Yes, there is something wrong with the standard M4 carbine, but there is nothing wrong with the AR platform in general besides the complete inability to mount a folding stock.

 

"Heathen! Burn her at the stake!"

 

I wonder how many more people I can piss off this week...

Edited August 10, 2010 by Caspian Sea Monster

[shades_of_grey 1,092]

...I know everyone is going to jump on my case for saying this: <heresy> The AR is not the piece of crap everyone makes it out to be, and there is nothing wrong with DI and I'm sick of hearing about it. </heresy> Yes, there is something wrong with the standard M4 carbine, but there is nothing wrong with the AR platform in general...

 

Tell that to our men in Vietnam whom the unreliable DI system got killed by jamming in the middle of firefights. Yes, I know they issued the wrong ball ammo to start with etc.. but the fact remains that DI AR's are just too damn finicky and require a ridiculous amount of maintenance to function.

 

Those AK's, (Chinese type 56's, whatever), the enemy were using never, (or so rarely it may as well be never), jammed... and also punched through jungle cover a helluva lot more effectively as well.

[Casp 119]

The M16 used in the Vietnam war was a prototype weapon with a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG list of problems which all affected it's reliability, and ball powder ammo was not the greatest of these. I concede that, at that time, it was a piece of crap. The design is 55 years old though (going back to the original AR-10 prototypes), and we have quite well worked out its problems by now. Unfortunately the current standard issue carbines we have now are also a pain in the ass, but that's because the system is horribly off-balance. The gas pressure is too high while the moving mass is too light. The XM16E1 had the same problem because the Edgewater buffers weren't heavy enough. You can make an AK run just as poorly if you remove enough weight from the bolt carrier without somehow regulating down the gas pressure. There are otherwise-standard DI M4s out there with heavier-than-standard buffers that have run 20k+ rounds without cleaning, with the same reliability an an AK or a G36.

 

You want to see a rifle that runs really dirty in the receiver, try any H&K roller-delayed weapon. That's propellant gas leaking out around the casing at peak pressure, with the casing already backing out before the bullet has left the muzzle. They run FAR dirtier than any DI AR, I can attest to that from personal experience, and you don't see many people complaining about the reliability there. I certainly never had any problems with mine.

 

What I'm saying is, YES, SOME of the AR-15 configurations DO have reliability problems, including our current standard issue carbine, but it is NOT the design of the gas system that is to blame.

 

The general rule I go by is that a poorly made AK is reliable but inaccurate, while a poorly made AR is accurate but unreliable. Well made and properly configured AKs and ARs are great weapons on equal footing. If you were sending me into combat, and presented me with one AK and one AR and told me to choose one, uninspected with no idea who built each or with what parts, I'd chose the AK every time. Better safe than sorry. But if you gave me the choice of running a completely custom configured AK vs. a completely custom configured AR that I know and have control over every part, I'd choose the AR out of personal preference, and it would definitely NOT be running a piston conversion. I'm sure most of the other posters here think I'm downright insane for that, but a girl's gotta stick to her principles.

 

I'll make no real arguments in defense of the 5.56mm NATO round. I'll admit we could do better there. I'd personally like to be running 6.5mm Grendel... if I could afford it...

 

I swear to god I'm not trying to start a flame war here. I'm just tired of all the popular, sweeping generalizations. At the other end of the spectrum, I'm equally pissed off at the hard-core AR aficionados who will tell you all day that there is no such thing as an accurate AK.

[rob-cubed 74]

The only thing that will kill it is a decision at the top. There have been plenty of complaints about the M4, and plenty research done and ongoing into possible replacements--the problem always comes down to money and the gargantuan cost of issuing a new weapons system. Simply put, the M4 remains good enough compared to its contenders, all of which have cost significantly more per unit.

 

I vote for a plasma gun, around 2050...

Edited August 10, 2010 by rob-cubed

[SaigaNoobie 66]

I'd really like to see a new weapon design that wasn't $1300+ for civilian markets.

 

New caliber. 6.5 or 6.8 just get it done.

 

Chrome Lined Barrel.

 

Short-Stroke piston.

 

Chrome lined chamber.

 

Chamber slightly OVERsized rather than so tight there are extraction issues.

 

Bolt handle attached to bolt carrier.

 

Direct Push magwell.

 

Thumb safety/selector.

 

Spring over/under/beside the bolt carrier,not behind it.

 

Sheet-Metal Stamped Steel Receiver.

 

I like the idea of lower and upper pieces. Stamped lower, stamped upper.

 

How about some extra space in the receiver for sand/trash/etc that gets in there.

[Gunfixr 76]

Nothing will kill the AR anytime in the near future except maybe totally going away from solid projectile weapon systems for something more advanced, which we don't have available at this time.

The military may go away from the AR platform, but not in the immediate future, and le would eventually follow.

The rifle still won't "go away". Remember, the AK design is even older, and out of service, but still in widespread use. So also is the FN FAL, which is also older than the AR.

The HKs run quite dirty, as mentioned, but you don't hear complaints about those, and they work. The AR works also, if set up correctly. Mine ran 1600rds w/o cleaning, mostly Wolf (read dirty as hell), about a third of that lacquer. I oiled it at the beginning of the shooting day, and that's all. Never missed a beat.

 

The AR isn't "dying" anytime soon.

[Ruffian72 548]

Son on 2nd tour was assigned in outer regions to stop flow of weapon resupply. Whole unit was switched to AKs. Reasons are well known for those in the field for long duration in baby powder sand. Same malfunctions happen in humid/tropical regions. (Won't go bang) Fight people cranked up on local uppers, .223 doesn't bring'm down. I'm second of 3 generations that has encountered this problem. 60's,80's and 00's:smoke: You fight with what you're given. Just that our troops deserve better.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

The M16 used in the Vietnam war was a prototype weapon with a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG list of problems which all affected it's reliability, and ball powder ammo was not the greatest of these. I concede that, at that time, it was a piece of crap. The design is 55 years old though (going back to the original AR-10 prototypes), and we have quite well worked out its problems by now. Unfortunately the current standard issue carbines we have now are also a pain in the ass, but that's because the system is horribly off-balance. The gas pressure is too high while the moving mass is too light. The XM16E1 had the same problem because the Edgewater buffers weren't heavy enough. You can make an AK run just as poorly if you remove enough weight from the bolt carrier without somehow regulating down the gas pressure. There are otherwise-standard DI M4s out there with heavier-than-standard buffers that have run 20k+ rounds without cleaning, with the same reliability an an AK or a G36.

 

You want to see a rifle that runs really dirty in the receiver, try any H&K roller-delayed weapon. That's propellant gas leaking out around the casing at peak pressure, with the casing already backing out before the bullet has left the muzzle. They run FAR dirtier than any DI AR, I can attest to that from personal experience, and you don't see many people complaining about the reliability there. I certainly never had any problems with mine.

 

What I'm saying is, YES, SOME of the AR-15 configurations DO have reliability problems, including our current standard issue carbine, but it is NOT the design of the gas system that is to blame.

 

The general rule I go by is that a poorly made AK is reliable but inaccurate, while a poorly made AR is accurate but unreliable. Well made and properly configured AKs and ARs are great weapons on equal footing. If you were sending me into combat, and presented me with one AK and one AR and told me to choose one, uninspected with no idea who built each or with what parts, I'd chose the AK every time. Better safe than sorry. But if you gave me the choice of running a completely custom configured AK vs. a completely custom configured AR that I know and have control over every part, I'd choose the AR out of personal preference, and it would definitely NOT be running a piston conversion. I'm sure most of the other posters here think I'm downright insane for that, but a girl's gotta stick to her principles.

 

I'll make no real arguments in defense of the 5.56mm NATO round. I'll admit we could do better there. I'd personally like to be running 6.5mm Grendel... if I could afford it...

 

I swear to god I'm not trying to start a flame war here. I'm just tired of all the popular, sweeping generalizations. At the other end of the spectrum, I'm equally pissed off at the hard-core AR aficionados who will tell you all day that there is no such thing as an accurate AK.

 

Very well said.

[Casp 119]

OhByTheWay, I asked Tokageko her opinion and she said "the M14 is coming back. "

[Crusader 64]

OhByTheWay, I asked Tokageko her opinion and she said "the M14 is coming back. "

The M14 has never really left. It is used for SF and for other asymetric purposes. As for the AR, it will not be replaced for a long time. I do see a Modification Work Order (MWO) from TACOM replacing the DI with a pistion style attachment like what we see on the LWRC. This MWO will likely be done at installation DOLs. I only predict this because it is the most efficent and cost effective way of correcting a capability gap identified with the systems Mean Time Between Failure MTBF. As for the ammo, the 5.56mm is being updated and is more lethal than ever. I have not seen or heard of any pending MWO, this is only a prediction on what I think I know.

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

I am with Gunfixr because even if the military adopts other weapons, there are more AR's in civilian hands than anything else besides maybe Remington 870's. I don't think the AR will die because you can still buy replica Sharps and Model 94's at many sporting good stores because nostalgia drives a lot of gun sales.

 

I have no problem with any of these weapons: AK, AR, FAL, SCAR, ACR, XCR, HK416, G3, etc. Each can be effective if properly maintained and in the hands of someone that is trained to understand how the system works and keep it working.

 

A Harrington & Richardson break action single shot may be the most reliable gun in existence, but the rate of fire sucks so I doubt that it is in contention for the new issued long arm for our military.

 

There is more to consider than just reliability in this equation. Remember that a bunch of M14's that were supposed to be on their way to the CMP program (or destroyed), got refurbed and reactivated as the mission of our troops required a .308 in Afghanistan and Iraq to penetrate through walls. The M14 was phased out originally around the time of Vietnam (except as a drill rifle) yet it is still being used today.

 

NEVER SAY DIE!