Buying first AR- Get the M-4 type or the M-16 type?


PDA






.455_Hunter
August 15, 2007, 06:27 PM
Greetings,

I have decided to buy an AR-15 type weapon for plinking, target shooting, casual varmit hunting and other possible "emergency operations". This will suppliment my underfolder Yugo AK clone. Since I am a lefty, I am looking at Stag's M-4 Carbine style or their M-16A2 style weapons. I understand the M-4 style is more compact, but the M-16 style just shoulders and points better for me.

What would you recommned? I have experience with both styles (right-handed of course) from the Army, but I would like some outside opinions.

Thanks,

Hunter

If you enjoyed reading about "Buying first AR- Get the M-4 type or the M-16 type?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GunTech
August 15, 2007, 06:39 PM
Unless you need a compact weapon, I vote for the 20 inch bbl of the rifle. You get more velocity, and I've never liked the collapsible stock of the M4. You can also typically get an AR-15 rifle a little cheaper than the M4.

I suggest a flat top, since you may want to mount a scope. Rail system is optional unless you need 'tacti-cool'. Get a free folat handguard, and don;t attach a sling to the barrel.

Acera
August 15, 2007, 06:40 PM
I would almost always go with what fits you and feels most comfortable.

RockyMtnTactical
August 15, 2007, 06:56 PM
Carbines are more versatile.

You could get a 16" barrel and an A2 stock, if you prefer the fixed A2 stock over the 6 position stock...

Ford
August 15, 2007, 06:56 PM
yeah If you already know you like the 4L better go for it.
I just bought a 2TL myself. ;)

10-Ring
August 15, 2007, 07:31 PM
Me, I like the shorties, but if the longer versions work better for ya, get that! :cool:

Dusey
August 15, 2007, 07:40 PM
Armalite m15a4. 16" chrome lined barell; removable carry handle; mid-length gas system; collapsable stock; picatinny quad rail forend; Lifetime warranty-what more could one ask for?:)
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/glocklover/guns006.jpg
I know it may look like I'm fat in this picture, but it is just my tactical organic insulation suit:o

Average Joe
August 15, 2007, 08:57 PM
M4 type. I have been thinking of getting one myself.

Limeyfellow
August 15, 2007, 09:16 PM
I still perfer the feel of the a2 type. It just fits me better, the sight radius feels better for my eyesight and find it comfortable. You may even want to look at an a1 too. Go to a store and shoulder them both to see what works best. If you can try and rent both from a gunrange to test or if you have any friends test theirs.

Bazooka Joe71
August 15, 2007, 09:27 PM
Carbines are more versatile.

erict
August 15, 2007, 09:28 PM
16" vs. 20" - not enough difference (IMO anyway) to haggle over, go with what feels best.

A2 stock vs. collapseable - again, go with what feels best.

A2 vs. flat top upper - definetely go flat top.

You will always have the option for better optic choices that way. If you still prefer the A2 sights, throw a detachable handle on it.

SpeedAKL
August 15, 2007, 09:30 PM
Depends on what you want to do with it. For maximum accuracy, or if you're going out hunting, the 20-inch wins hands down. The carbine is lighter, more compact, and has far more customization options available if you wanna
"tac" it out. OTOH, a 20-in barrel has more "match"-style options available.

Much of it comes down to feel, though; ask yourself which feels better in firing position. I personally preferred the balance of the shorter-barreled gun.

GunTech
August 15, 2007, 09:39 PM
Depending on the load, dropping from 20 inches to 16 can cost you almost 200fps, or about 6% velocity loss.

Putting a 16 inch barrel on an AR is a great solution if you feel the 223 just has 'too much power'.

brentn
August 15, 2007, 09:48 PM
Its amazing cause I was going to post this exact same question today. I am juggling the carbine over the full length..

Originally i wanted the full length rifle becuase it was a replica of whats issued (just in semi auto of course ;)) it has better velocity, and its very very reliable.
Then I started looking at the carbine and was thinking about how awesome it looks...

I've just decided to get both eventually, Going to go all out traditional here and get the M15A2 by armalite, so far I have seen NO complaints on this brand. They seem very very sturdy, have good customer service and provide quite a bit of technical information on thier site, which suggest to me that they sure as hell know what they are doing.
I defenitly want the integrated carry handle instead of the flat top cause thats the way the rifle was issued originally. They make some very nice A.R.M.S. mounts for the integrated carry handle that provide no loss of zero. Scope mounting would look interesting, but would work just fine. I figure that and an ARMS bipod mount for the plastic handguard and a bipod and this will be one real nice shooter, while keeping everything traditional.

Going to finally pay for it friday, i've been waiting a friggen couple months to do this, and now its going to happen. One thing I can't wait to do is detail strip it and understand EVERYTHING about it, I love that, figuring crap out. I wouldn't mind doing a video review for it on youtube, cause there are none for armalite, just not to sure what areas would be best to cover for a review.

The Deer Hunter
August 15, 2007, 09:52 PM
Everyone is about the 16" M4geries these days. Everyone says they are more versatile, but how so? The gun alone is very versatile as is, so you could always just change uppers at a later time.

Maybe the 4" less are good for room clearing but most people don't do that. From what I recall, that extra 4" give you quite a difference in velocity so whats the real big difference if you plan on actually shooting it not just bolting on junk and executing tacticool missions for chairborne operations?

I'm not saying that you shouldn't get a 16", but a 20" can do just as much as the 16".

how awesome it looks

I'm sure 70% of 16" M4geries are sold based on that.

SecuritySixShooter
August 15, 2007, 09:58 PM
Get what fits you best and is most comfortable. For "emergency operations" you always have an AK. Personally I went with the M4 but I dont have supplements (yet).

RockyMtnTactical
August 15, 2007, 10:22 PM
Everyone says they are more versatile, but how so?

Let me ask you, how are they NOT more versatile?

Now, I just assume that when someone asks about which type of AR to get that they are wanting it for self defense (maybe that's because I see the number one usage for my AR15's as for self defense).

With that thinking in mind, what is the most likely scenario where you would need an AR15 for self defense? You home, maybe even your property in general (your yard).

It's highly unlikely that you will be in any engagements past 20 yards (which is well within the frag range of an M4 style carbine). So, what is the advantage specifically? Well, you can manuever if your home (As well as other CQ) much better with a carbine. How many entry teams go into buildings with 20" AR15's? Not many at all, in fact, SBR style carbines are far more common.

Not to mention, a 16" carbine can still reach out and touch someone. My brothers and I hunt coyotes with our carbines quite often, they are plenty accurate even in the shorter barrels.

Not to mention, they are lighter, point faster, etc...

The advantages of the 20" only give a slight advantage and that advantage is only realized at longer ranges which are far less likely to need a rifle for.

I have one 14.5" (w/ permenant Phantom attached), two 16's, and one 20". I love them all, but the carbines get much more use and are far more practical for the majority of situations I may face... M4's are gaining more and more popularity in the military, and they fight at a variety of ranges... but still, most engagements are at ranges under 100 yards.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/mwirig79/coyotecallin15.jpg

brentn
August 15, 2007, 10:28 PM
I'm not buying it for home defence, I have a shotgun for that. Not everyone is buying them for defence, if they were then you have some defenite merit.

For me its about taste (just what I like instead of deciding on what everyone else likes) and collection. I want "thee" service rifle, simple as that. I want to show a friend or family member that this is what the troops are using. Not that they aren't using M4's, but the full length has been around since the begining. Granted its semi auto, everything else is identicaly except for the selct fire switch.

Thats what made me decide.
I'm going to build a carbine after, really want something with a 10.5" barrel that will be 'tech'd out. Thats what I'll use for home defence, but for now the M15A2 will be for collector value and target shooting, and my shotgun will be just fine for home defence.

igpoobah
August 15, 2007, 10:32 PM
Get one of each!

highfive
August 15, 2007, 11:00 PM
I don't have one yet but even the army is trying to change all to M-4, more versatile. I love the M-4 over the M-16. But I'll say go with whatever makes YOU feel right

GunTech
August 15, 2007, 11:07 PM
Colt makes the M4, FN makes the M16. Guess who's pushing hard for the Army to adopt more M4s. The shorter barrel reduces the range at which the M193 and M885 fragment (about 2700 fps). Past that range, the 223 loses a lot of lethality.

plexreticle
August 15, 2007, 11:09 PM
I don't like the colt style collapsible stock. Try before you buy if you can.

rkh
August 15, 2007, 11:13 PM
This may be an unpopular view, but if you're going to get an AR--do it right the first time! Cure yourself of BRD before you contract it.

I'd sugget you shop around for an LWRC or grey market HK-416 upper. Both are expensive, but the LW isn't much moreso than other top of the line ARs.

Although I've owned and loved DI AR rifles, I find that shooting piston-driven models is a much more enjoyable experience given their simplified cleaning routines.

Onmilo
August 15, 2007, 11:30 PM
Split the difference.
Get an M4 type carbine lower and attach a Government profile 20" upper.
I recently built one of this type for myself and it is rapidly becoming my favorite AR.

brentn
August 15, 2007, 11:38 PM
I would never buy an HK416 upper, nor a piston conversion kit, defeats the whole point of owning a eugene stoner rifle.

Armalite has a great article on this here (http://www.armalite.com/library/techNotes/tnote54.htm).

Just a little snippet
The Stoner system allows a very symmetric design that allows straight line movement of the operating components. This allows recoil forces to drive straight to the rear. Instead of connecting or other mechanical parts driving the system, high pressure gas performs this function, reducing the weight of moving parts.

In Piston systems, the path of the operating force is mechanically shifted around the action, resulting in a considerable mass of moving parts moving outside the centerline of the firearm.


The only difference that I can see in the 416 outfit is the piston driven bolt, the barrel and some other minor improvements such as a widened magazine well etc

hags
August 15, 2007, 11:53 PM
Go with the M4gery, most 20" barrels aren't chrome lined. How much will you be shooting out past say 300 yards? The carbine will get you there no problem.
Stay away from the A2 upper receivers. You will, if you want to evolve, upgrade your optics. Get the detachable handle, once you try an Eotech or Aimpoint you'll have to have one.
Just my opinion, do what makes you happy.

rkh
August 15, 2007, 11:54 PM
...resulting in a considerable mass of moving parts moving outside the centerline of the firearm



You mean like an AK, or an AR-18? Truly inferior rifles, them. :rolleyes:

My LWRC is the finest rifle I own, and by all accounts, HK-416s are just as nice.

Edit:

Here's a quote from the Armalite article:

There is a debate about which system remains cleanest.


There is no debate. None. I can't believe they even said that.

GunTech
August 16, 2007, 01:00 AM
The moving mass in a piston actuated rifle effects accuracy, and each round fired torques the barrel at the gas port. Direct gas action rifles like the M16 don't have this issue. They can be built lighter, and there is no distortion of the barrel during operations.

Better? No. But the direct gas action contributes to better accuracy. AK-47, 5 MOA. M16, 2 MOA.

'nuff said.

tommytrauma
August 16, 2007, 01:24 AM
A lot of (most?) carbine instructors are teaching a squared up stance for carbine shooting instead of the more traditional bladed stance. Lends itself to more effective firing on the move, makes for nice transitions, offers the full face of any body armor to the threat area instead of the less protected side, etc. A A2 stock is an awfully long length of pull in this stance, especially with armor or a LBV.

I'm not big on the M4 style stocks though, I prefer something more robust. The Sully stock offers an extremely robust solution, with a LOP the same as a M4 on the second detent. Works great for me.

Sully next to an A2 length cav arms;
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q115/tommytrauma/slr_cav.jpg

illspirit
August 16, 2007, 01:47 AM
I'd say go for the M4gery. If you end up hating the regular collapsible stock, there's a bunch of after-market models which snap right onto the buffer tube.

rkh
August 16, 2007, 02:16 AM
The moving mass in a piston actuated rifle effects accuracy, and each round fired torques the barrel at the gas port. Direct gas action rifles like the M16 don't have this issue. They can be built lighter, and there is no distortion of the barrel during operations.


I agree, to a point. If you plan on shooting the rifle competitively in 600 yard NRA matches, then the DI system might make sense. I assumed that if the OP was looking for competition rifle, he wouldn't be considering a carbine-length barrel.

Like many people, I don't have access to a range longer than 200 yards. Although I wish I had a 1000 yard range at my disposal, I don't think anyone, regardless of his or her state of residence, would be legally justified in taking a "defensive" shot at 200 yards or more. Given that the loss of accuracy at that 200 yards is negligible with a well constructed piston AR, I think the piston ARs are superior practical weapons, and further serve to encourage user training by making maintenance and cleaning a far less onerous task.

Seeing as virtually every other autoloading rifle ever made (before and after the stoner system appeared) has utilized a piston system, these complaints relating to a reciprocating mass above the barrel are not particularly meaningful.

zerosignal
August 16, 2007, 03:28 AM
Sorry, but the "piston causes innaccuracy" claim is just utter nonsense.

The M14 has been used for YEARS as a match-grade service rifle.

Most of the innaccurate AK-47's are that way because of loose tolerances, a sheet-metal receiver, and crappy ammunition. It has nothing to do with the gas piston. Arsenal Inc. AK's with tight tolerances are known to shoot 1 MOA all day long with quality ammo.

benEzra
August 16, 2007, 09:11 AM
I have decided to buy an AR-15 type weapon for plinking, target shooting, casual varmit hunting and other possible "emergency operations". This will suppliment my underfolder Yugo AK clone. Since I am a lefty, I am looking at Stag's M-4 Carbine style or their M-16A2 style weapons. I understand the M-4 style is more compact, but the M-16 style just shoulders and points better for me.

What would you recommned? I have experience with both styles (right-handed of course) from the Army, but I would like some outside opinions.
You could split the difference and get a midlength upper (instead of carbine length) with a 16" barrel.

Whatever you do get, I'd recommend a flattop upper with either a detachable carry handle, or something like Rock River's "Tactical Carry Handle."

http://www.rockriverarms.com/images/ela407.gif

GunTech
August 16, 2007, 09:18 AM
Sorry, but the "piston causes innaccuracy" claim is just utter nonsense.

The M14 has been used for YEARS as a match-grade service rifle.

And service match is now totally dominated by th AR-15/M-16. M14/M1As can't compete.

There have been several tests of piston modified ARs vs direct gas action, and the piston guns demonstarted reduced accuracy (technically precision -increased mean distribution of hits)

hags
August 16, 2007, 09:34 AM
I think the novelty of the piston action on ARs is wearing thin.
It's a dead issue except for those who sell or own them.

Onmilo
August 16, 2007, 11:09 AM
Fourty years and still chugging along.
My impression is the M16 doesn't need a new gas system and I doubt the Military will want the logistic nightmare of conversion on a general scale.
Special Ops will still get what they want, they are TDA and if a new gas system makes those guys all warm and fuzzy, so be it.

.455_Hunter
August 16, 2007, 02:33 PM
Thanks for your replies.

I know there are many quality AR platform manufactures out there right now, but Stag is the only one catering to my lefty needs. I shot enough rounds out of right handed M16s and M4s in the service to know that if I am going to spend $800-$1000 on AR type rifle, its going to be left handed. I did not really enjoy the shower of hot brass and particles that goes with an issue M-4 cycling in front of my nose, even with the so called deflector.

Stag's full size specs are as follows-

Stag-15L Model 4L Pre-ban
Caliber...5.56 Nato Chamber
Upper.....Forged and Mil Spec.
Sights.....Detachable Carry Handle/Front Post
Barrel.....20" 1/9 Twist (NOT CHROMED)
Selector...Ambi
Magazine...20 Round
Stock......A2 Buttstock


Here are the specs for the carbines-

Stag-15L Model 1L Pre-ban (Classic M-4 type with fixed front site)
Caliber...5.56 Nato Chamber
Upper.....Forged and Mil Spec.
Sights.....Detachable Carry Handle/Front Post
Barrel.....16" Chrome Lined 1/9 Twist
Selector...Ambi
Magazine...30 Round
Stock......6 Position Collapsible

Stag-15L Model 3L Pre-ban (New M-4 syle with no sights at all, just Picatinny rails front and back)
Caliber...5.56 Nato Chamber
Upper.....Forged and Mil Spec.
Sights.....None
Barrel.....16" Chrome Lined 1/9 Twist
Selector...Ambi
Magazine...30 Round
Stock......6 Position Collapsible


What are the advantages/disadvantages to a chrome bore?
How does the fixed front sight interfere with the field-of-view on scopes/red dot type optics with the 16" and 20" versions?

I have also learned that Stag will be coming out with a heavy barrel varmint type sporter next year- very interesting!

Please comment.

Thanks,

Hunter

RockyMtnTactical
August 16, 2007, 02:39 PM
There is no reason not to chrome line your chrome moly barrel if your number one concern is reliability.

The 5.56/.223Rem cases are not tapered at all so the case makes contact with the chamber for much of the feeding and extracting. That is why it is so imperative that your chamber stays clear of corrosion, rust, and pitting. This was a lesson that was quickly learned by the military when it rushed the M-16 into service in Vietnam.

William Davis, Former Chief, Small Arms Branch recalled that, “The principle problem was a failure to chrome plate the chamber. That was the cause of the serious malfunctions that caused the controversy in Vietnam.”

Chrome will also make the chamber more “slick” than steel, which will enhance feeding and extracting.

Chrome lining increases the life of your barrel. It will ease cleaning and maintenance as well.

The one downside to chrome is an ever so slight decrease in accuracy. This difference in accuracy is practically unnoticeable and will not be missed in a defensive weapon.

tommytrauma
August 16, 2007, 11:58 PM
Stag is my only option

It's an AR, the Lego® of the rifle world. You can configure your Stag any way you want to.

GunTech
August 17, 2007, 01:12 AM
RockyMtn Tacticall is 100% right. The Army already knew about chrome chambers from the pacific theater of operations in WWII. Tghe 30-06 alsop has very little taper.

FWIW, the AK has a chromed bore too. The original M16 did not have the chrome chamber, and MacNamara's wonder boys, sensing army reluctance to the M16 declared that if the rifle needed a chrom bore, Stoner would have put one in there. The first m16 in the field were issues without the chrome chamber and other minor changes the Army called for. The later addition of the chrome chamber solved a lot of reloiability problem, but everyone seems to have conveniantly forgotten the fact that the army requested the chrom chamber well before the M16 was ever issued to troops.

KC&97TA
August 17, 2007, 02:39 AM
AR's are not LEGO's ... think this and you'll end up with a pile of crap parts Buy the entire rifle or buy all the parts for a Quality Manufacture. It's something you hold in your hands and put your face on that goes BOOM, pay the price to step in the ring with the big boys and get a good gun, or you'll be here or ARF.com looking for gunsmithing advise and unhappy.

a 16" barrel on M885 5.56mm has 2970fps, a 20" barrel has 3110fps. Once you get out to 600m+ they this is a major factor, for most they couldn't shoot 600m to save thier life, so it isn't that big of deal to most.

I'll tell you that an M4 will hit point target just as well at 600m as a A4 will. A M16M4 with ACOG or RCO will hit at 750m, but the M16A4 will push past that 800m mark with a RCO and a savvy shooter.

The M4 is the new Trend, it's like when Smokey and the Bandit came out, everyone wanted a Black Trans Am. For Civilian purposes, it's just a toy, for wageing war; when you have to carry a rifle every day for 7 months to a year strait, the 4" off the barrel and 6" off the stock to have a 29" rifle instead of a 39" rifle add up to make life alot easier, to clear buildings and get in and out of hummers, it's alot easier.

For Competionion shooting, you want a National Match Upper, Go with Rock River Arms or Fulton Armory. Personally I have a RRA Entry Tactical, it's been a 100% champion and it's all geared out the way my issued rifle is. I also have a RRA National Match that holds Sub-MOA at 1000 yards, yes a 5 shot 7-5/8" group at 1000 yards.

for controversy in Vietnam... how about crappy ammo, primers being set off by inertia, no forward assist, no brass deflectory, shooting on full auto and burning out barrels, no issued cleaning kit carried on the weapon, improper maintence of weapons or no maintence of weapons; the list goes on. The M16 has changed drastically.

vanfunk
August 17, 2007, 06:18 AM
For me its about taste (just what I like instead of deciding on what everyone else likes) and collection. I want "thee" service rifle, simple as that. I want to show a friend or family member that this is what the troops are using. Not that they aren't using M4's, but the full length has been around since the begining. Granted its semi auto, everything else is identicaly except for the selct fire switch.

Cosmetically, the Armalite M15A2 rifle is very similar to the M16A2 service rifle. However, many of the similarities are only skin deep, if it matters to you. Armalite uses 4140 barrel steel instead of a chrome-moly-vanadium alloy. Not a big difference (RRA and others use it too), but a difference nonetheless. The HBAR barrel profile adds a pound of weight to the rifle, as compared to the M16A2. Also, the 1/9" twist of the Armalite won't stabilize the 77 grain rounds (and possibly the 75's) that have gained favor recently. Armalite attaches their front sight bases with screws, not taper pins, which makes for easy adjustability but provides nowhere near as strong a connection to the barrel. The bolts are not individually proofed, magnafluxed and shot peened as are their .mil counterparts.

The Armalite is a good rifle, to be sure, and certainly attains the "look" of the M16A2. It's just helpful (IMO) to know all the facts before committing to a purchase.


Colt makes the M4, FN makes the M16

Colt still makes the M16A4, in addition to the M4:

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF APRIL 07, 2007 FBO #1958
AWARD


10 -- M16A4 Rifle, NSN 1005-01-383-2872, PN 12973001
Notice Date
4/5/2007

Notice Type
Award

NAICS
332994 — Small Arms Manufacturing

Contracting Office
TACOM - Rock Island, ATTN: AMSTA-AQ-AR, Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, IL 61299-7630

ZIP Code
61299-7630

Solicitation Number
W52H09-07-R-0235

Archive Date
5/5/2007

Award Number
W52H09-07-C-0117

Award Date
3/30/2007

Awardee
Colt Defense LLC, 547 New Park Ave., Hartford, CT 06141-0118

Award Amount
$10652058

Line Number
0001AA, 0002AA, 0003AA

Record
SN01267692-W 20070407/070405223451 (fbodaily.com)

Source
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice

HTH,
vanfunk

tommytrauma
August 18, 2007, 01:53 AM
AR's are not LEGO's ... think this and you'll end up with a pile of crap parts Buy the entire rifle or buy all the parts for a Quality Manufacture. It's something you hold in your hands and put your face on that goes BOOM, pay the price to step in the ring with the big boys and get a good gun, or you'll be here or ARF.com looking for gunsmithing advise and unhappy.

You can actually manage to swap out buttstocks without ending up with a frankengun, as hard as that might be to believe.

People tend to swing from one extreme to another. The extreme of frankenguns is buying each spring, detent, etc seperately and as cheaply as possible, leading to the nightmares you describe. However, saying that one must buy a factory configuration weapon and not modify it would be the opposite extreme on the same subject.

As you point out, using quality parts is a necessaty. However, the OP is in no way confined to the configurations offered as factory setups from Stag. ARs are easy to modify without compromising reliability, as long as you take the time to do it right. Swapping a A2 buttstock for an M4 is a 10 minute job. The most time consuming part of replacing a detachable carrying handle with an optic is the time it takes to zero. I regularly switch back and forth from a 16" upper and a 20" upper with no issues whatsoever. Legos®.

Don't assume legos equal frankenguns.

I won't make fun of your apostrophe if you don't make fun of my spelling.

triage1998
August 18, 2007, 02:11 AM
anybody say get both yet?:evil:


I really couldn't decide. I first got the Bushmaster M4. Then I picked up the CMMG 20" Goverment profile. Then just got a great deal on the Colt 6920 the other day. I still can't decide which I like better.

I am no help at all:cool:

I just wanted to post a picture :)





http://i14.tinypic.com/62dhqv7.jpg

otomik
August 18, 2007, 02:11 AM
You can actually manage to swap out buttstocks without ending up with a frankengun, as hard as that might be to believe.I don't believe it. what about commercial or milspec receiver extension tube? yes, even changing the buttstock requires arcane knowledge.

can we have a discussion about ARs without someone bringing up the name Robert McNamara. Go watch Fog of War and tell me he isn't still a genius.

Rokman
August 19, 2007, 04:21 PM
I like the feel of the M4 (which is my first), but you need to just try them out and see what fits you best. My next AR15 will probably be a 20" model in a varmint style package.

Prdatr
August 19, 2007, 04:31 PM
Dusey,

Your not fat, your head is just too little for your body.

glockman19
August 19, 2007, 04:36 PM
My first AR wa the Stag model #4. My Second was the Stag Model #2.

They are both lots of fun to shoot.

I'd make the same decision again. Get the model #4 you can always buy another. I got mine from www.lanworldinc.com and got a great price. Chris is very knoweledgable and will take all the time you need discussing the differences.

Stag Model #2 $865

Stag Model #4 $910

If you enjoyed reading about "Buying first AR- Get the M-4 type or the M-16 type?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!