Why a collapseable stock AR?


PDA






doubleg
July 17, 2009, 12:56 PM
So I was trained using a full size M16A4, with the vest on it was pretty darn uncomfortable to shoot. But 95% of the people who rant and rave about the neccesity of having an m4 "clone" aren't wearing armour. The full size is really not that large, is cheaper, and easier (for at least me) to shoot. The weight is NOT that much different. The way I see it no matter what your carrying its going to be heavy after long enough. So why sacrifice accuracy for that cool looking tactical stock?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why a collapseable stock AR?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Reid73
July 17, 2009, 01:05 PM
Because form is more important than function for the great majority of owners. In the eyes of a Walter Mitty, "cool-looking" and "tactical" are paramount virtues.

In a strange way that makes sense, given that most people will never use such firearms for their designed purpose anyway.

mp5a3
July 17, 2009, 01:06 PM
I have a full size 20" w/ a fixed stock, I find it slightly more comfortable, plus it has the "classic" look.

P.B.Walsh
July 17, 2009, 01:13 PM
Yes, I like the classic look too. :)

Nanook
July 17, 2009, 01:14 PM
A simple answer, really.

Two shooters in the family, both of vastly different heights. One rifle fits both of them.

I don't have a tactical bone in my body, but I like the telescoping stock for the above reason.

And I don't have to buy two rifles. Well, unless I wanted to. LOL

DMK
July 17, 2009, 01:16 PM
I prefer the A1 length stock or the Cavalry Arms C1 stock (http://www.cavalryarms.com/OEMC1.html).

I bought two adjustable stocks for my carbines when the AWB ended in Fall '04. I pretty much bought them out of spite because I was denied the right to own them for ten years previously. But honestly, they don't offer me any additional functionality. In fact, I lost the ability to carry a basic cleaning kit and multi-tool in the buttstock. They are on there pretty much for cosmetic reasons.

I do like folding stocks. They offer a much more compact profile for storage or transport. However, that is not an option with an AR unfortunately (except for some 22LR guns).

KW
July 17, 2009, 02:25 PM
Adjustable length of pull is a good thing. It allows each user to set it to the length that works for them. It also allows an individual user to change their LOP if needed for different field positions, different clothes etc. If you don't like the cheek weld of the CAR or M4 stock, then get a VLTOR, SOPMOD, MAGPUL etc. all of which offer an improved cheek weld and adjustable LOP.

dubbleA
July 17, 2009, 02:45 PM
I am not johnnny law, nor AF or a weekend warrior waiting for dooms day, just a simple rancher that likes the compactness of a collapsable stock on an AR . Used 99.9 percent for hog eradication, they make it easy to stow in anything from a quad to a helicopter.

franconialocal
July 17, 2009, 03:02 PM
I carry a Colt AR-15 A2 in my cruiser with a collapseable stock.

Generally I keep it fully extended. I like the "full size" feel of the rifle at that point. I will generally deploy it this way for most situations that I use it, esp. if I'm outdoors in the woods, field, etc.

However, if the woods are particularly thick where I am I will reduce it down. I will also reduce it down for building searches, when I'm wearing heavier winter clothing or tac. gear.

I also reduce it for situations if I ever have to shoot from INSIDE my cruiser while seated (luckily only in training so far). This is one reason I'm kind of turned on by the Bushmater "Carbon" series due to being so short.

I really like and appreciate the full stock look and feel too, but for me, anyway, it's just not as functional. My Ssgt., on the other hand, has a full size stock and bbl. on his. Personal preferance really.

rcmodel
July 17, 2009, 03:08 PM
My old Colt SP-1 has the factory collapsible stock, but it only has two positions.
Closed, and Open.

So, for me, it was never about fit.
It was about SO handy getting in & out of vehicles quickly, SO not snagging in the brush when coyote hunting, SO fitting in a very compact carry case, etc.

rc

Publius1688
July 17, 2009, 03:27 PM
I don't have, or want, a collapsable stock on my AK, although they are widely available. Perhaps some folks like the look only, but I can see that there are some functional advantages: different sized people can use the same rifle, and I suppose it could help with storage somewhat.
However, I just don't see the "advantages" of a folding stock outweighing the stability of a good wood or polymer stock. Unless you happen to be a paratrooper.

Bartholomew Roberts
July 17, 2009, 03:31 PM
1. You don't sacrifice any accuracy by using a telestock. As long as you can achieve a good, repeatable cheek weld, you are good to go - and many of the telestocks out there now are better in this regard than the fixed stock.

2. For years, shooters have modified their stocks to get a length of pull that suited them, so why would you not want a stock that can be individually adjusted to provide a perfect length of pull for shooters pf vastly different sizes? I can bring an AR w/ telestock out for a shooting session with the family and everybody from small children to my mutant behemoth cousins can shoot it comfortably.

3. Different positions - Shooting 3-gun, I pretty much have to use a squared-off position to be competitive, especially if movement is involved. This requires a short stock (like a telestock on first position or closed or a fixed entry stock). However, if I want to sling up and shoot standing at 200, that is a different position and requires a different length to be comfortable. If I am prone, then the comfortable length changes again. You can do all this without an adjustable stock of course; but it is nice to have the option - and comfort helps a lot with shot to shot consistency.

Telestocks serve lots of useful purposes above and beyond using a rifle with armor or heavy clothing.

waterhouse
July 17, 2009, 03:33 PM
The rifle fits in a smaller case with the stock collapsed.

I can shoot it, and my wife can shoot it, and my nephew and niece can shoot it, all at different lengths. Expensive bolt actions often are set up for adjustable lengths and such. Why not have this option on an AR?

I don't find the collapsible stock to be uncomfortable. I don't think I lose any accuracy with the collapsible stock.

Although it may not be a sound practice, I can set my stock to a different length depending on if I have the suppressor on it. Hanging a pound off the end of the barrel changes the balance. This can be somewhat corrected by moving the stock a notch or two.

I've owned fixed stocks before. I don't see what is gained by them, and I see several pluses to an adjustable one.

COMPNOR
July 17, 2009, 03:41 PM
But 95% of the people who rant and rave about the neccesity of having an m4 "clone" aren't wearing armour.


Are people really ranting or raving about the collaspable stock, or the 16" barrel? 95% may not be wearing armor. But maybe they are wearing bulky clothing? As others have pointed out, it allows multiple people to use the same gun, and get comfortable with it. I've never seen any better accuracy out of a fixed stock. Its all up to the shooter.

Perhaps the best reason is because they can. They don't need any other reason than that.

MTMilitiaman
July 17, 2009, 03:50 PM
+ When I taught my ex-girlfriend to shoot, the M4-style collapsible stock on my AK came in handy. It was the first centerfire rifle she had ever shot. I am 6'5". She was 5'5". With any other rifle, this could have presented a problem. As it was, I just clicked the stock in a couple positions and she was good to go, and she did okay.

+ Sometimes when I am walking around the woods with a rifle on those hot summer days, I wear a Camelbak with a 3-liter blatter and some small essentials. The strap isn't really thick, but it is nice to be able to just click in the stock one position.

+ Some optics have specific eye-relief. Depending on the mounting options available on your rifle, it can come in handy to be able to adjust LOP to achieve proper eye relief for your optics. This becomes especially convenient when you do more shooting from field positions than the bench.

I was trained with the A4 as well and did okay with it. Even though I don't do much shooting with body armor anymore, I still find the advantages of the collapsible stock far outweigh any classic appearance advantage of the fixed stock. And it has nothing to do with being a mall ninja--the advantages are purely functional.

benEzra
July 17, 2009, 04:05 PM
Because form is more important than function for the great majority of owners. In the eyes of a Walter Mitty, "cool-looking" and "tactical" are paramount virtues.
You know, these threads would be more helpful were it not for ignorant flamebait such as this.

In a strange way that makes sense, given that most people will never use such firearms for their designed purpose anyway.
And, pray tell, what is the "designed purpose" of a 16" barreled, midlength-gas-system, non-automatic civilian AR-15?

Just for the record, when I shoot an AR, I shoot it one notch from the fully collapsed position. The standard fixed-length stock is way too long unless you have long arms and/or shoot from a fully bladed stance. FWIW, I find the AK stock length to be just about perfect.

Badger Arms
July 17, 2009, 04:09 PM
I'll tell you, having an M4 stock with body armor and a 14.5" barrel for entry work is a given, must, absolutely imperative. I'd prefer an 11.5" barrel myself, but they are LOUD and not as effective at longer ranges. Plus the muzzle flash is a bit intrusive. Basically, you've got a little flash-bang going off in your face at a cyclic rate of 900rpm... not cool.

Dr.Rob
July 17, 2009, 04:30 PM
Portability, use with winter clothes or LBV in 3 gun, use in tight quarters... all good reasons.

Heck
July 17, 2009, 07:26 PM
I'm a bigger guy and prefer the full length fixed stock and for me feels a lot more solid platform when aiming. Went with the ACE ARFX skeleton style. Was only a $35 upgrade on my Del-ton Mid length kit. I am not a fan of the asthetics of an A2 stock on a 16 inch rifle but did select the A2 stock on the 20 inch rifle I just ordered.

Boba Fett
July 17, 2009, 07:31 PM
One word: versatility.


Versatility: limited to none.
http://www.rockriverarms.com/images/products/purstda2.gif


Versatility: high to overkill.
http://www.rockriverarms.com/images/products/pupselite.gif

Harold Mayo
July 17, 2009, 09:19 PM
Why? Lots of reasons but the most important one is because someone wants to have it.

Why do you feel a need to criticize?

DMK
July 17, 2009, 09:44 PM
Quote:
"In a strange way that makes sense, given that most people will never use such firearms for their designed purpose anyway."

And, pray tell, what is the "designed purpose" of a 16" barreled, midlength-gas-system, non-automatic civilian AR-15?
I took that to mean they were designed to be "weapons of war".

I'll acknowledge that Stoner designed the original (select fire) AR-15 to be a weapon of war with the intent of obtaining a lucrative government contract.

I'll also acknowledge that I tend to romanticize weapons, as many of us do (like many of us romanticize fast cars, motorcycles, boats, ships, aircraft and other such things), it is my sincerest wish that I never need to fire a shot in anger.

Just because one collects guns that resemble or imitate military weapons does not necessarily mean that they wish for war.

nc76
July 17, 2009, 09:52 PM
If my stock wasn't adjustable the gun wouldn't fit in it's case. Then I would have to buy a new case :)

Mags
July 17, 2009, 09:57 PM
I use the second position of my collapsible stock exclusively. If it could permanently lock in that position I would be happy. With that in mind the second position might not fit the next guy as well. So you know the saying "different strokes for different folks" I think that applies here.

mljdeckard
July 17, 2009, 10:04 PM
Because (I feel,) that a full-size M-16 is too big anyway. It's an intermediate-powered cartridge, I don't like it as much in full-size layout.

The effective range difference is negligible. If I wanted to touch something past 300 yards, I would be using something else anyway.

HorseSoldier
July 17, 2009, 10:05 PM
I was taught to shoot an M16A2 way back when, but was taught to really run and fight an M4, which includes stuff other posters have mentioned like shortening the LOP for a modern squared off (or very slightly bladed) stance when standing, etc.

meytind
July 17, 2009, 10:11 PM
A full size A2 stock is way too long for me to shoot squared up. I almost always shoot squared up, so I need a shorter stock. I never even adjust it, I just leave it one click from fully collapsed. If I could find a fixed stock of that length, I would have no problem using that.

12131
July 17, 2009, 10:29 PM
No one is ranting or raving about the collapsible stock. It serves its function to a lot of people. Just because you like the full-size fixed stock for your purpose doesn't mean it fits other folks' requirements.

possum
July 17, 2009, 11:16 PM
i have a collapsible stock, it stays in the 2 position, never changes, as a matter of fact i am thinking about going to the ctr for the friction lock feature, and the ctr is a bit more robust and sturdy imho.

the sully stock is a great option form defensive edge. it is a fixed stock approx the same length of pull of between the 2-3 position on a collapsible stock.

SHvar
July 17, 2009, 11:35 PM
Because I wanted mine to be 16 inch carbines with collapsible stocks primarily, and because Im 6ft tall, my wife is below 5ft tall, she has short arms, and has trouble with rifle stocks.
Why, so I could choose the adjustable stock I wanted, and I wanted an AR that feels balanced, portable, and can be kept in a smaller case if I feel like it. I only extend the stock when im going to fire it, aside from that its always collapsed.
Because I wanted one to be an M-4 based rifle.

Precision Paper Puncher
July 17, 2009, 11:42 PM
because out of 6 shooters in my family, i have to have it all the way extended, and my youngest has to have it all the way collapsed....

now should i buy a different rifle for all 6 of us, or just ONE that will FIT all of us....?

benEzra
July 17, 2009, 11:56 PM
Quote (benEzra):
And, pray tell, what is the "designed purpose" of a 16" barreled, midlength-gas-system, non-automatic civilian AR-15?

Quote (DMK):
I took that to mean they were designed to be "weapons of war".
I think that may have been what he was insinuating. But the thing is, non-automatic, civilian-length Title I AR-15's have never been issued by any military on this planet, AFAIK; they are exclusively civilian guns, unlike the Winchester Model 70, the Remington M700, or the Mossberg 500 12-gauge. Their "design purpose" is civilian target shooting, defensive purposes, hunting, and civilian law enforcement, not "war" like the Brady Campaign would have people believe.

Zach S
July 18, 2009, 03:23 AM
All of my reasons have been listed by other members.

The adjustable LOP comes in handy since my wife is a foot shorter than I am, as a matter of fact my little sister started shooting with an AR, when she was 12.

I like a short LOP. Cutting 1.5" out of my 590 stock was kind of a pain, and it smelled funky when I ran the saw through it to cut it off, and then used the beltsander to flatten it out. With the M4 and CAR stocks on my ARs, shortening the LOP was much easier.

I wasn't allowed to have one for ten years.

cameron.personal
July 18, 2009, 04:54 AM
Why an adjustable stock?

Length of pull. Not everyone has the same length arms.

'Nuff said.

Glockman17366
July 18, 2009, 07:57 AM
When I bought my latest AR (a Rock River), I wasn't looking for a collapsible stock, but that's what was on all the AR's at the shop. This included RRA, Bushy and Stag.
I wouldn't have ordered the RRA with that stock, but now that I have it, I do like it better then the fixed type.

yeti
July 18, 2009, 09:43 AM
Because I already had a fixed stock A2.

tju1973
July 18, 2009, 10:30 AM
I like the look of an M4, but not enough for it to be a necessity-- I was "raised" on the A2, and its all we got when I was in the Corps (91-96-- 0331/8531)...I still like the A2, and probably that is what I will get- -maybe I will go for a flatop receiver if I get a good deal, but full size is probably the way for me (barrell and stock)-- although probably because also I won't be wearing body armor. I admit that with my deuce gear and flack, that sholdering and the lop of an A2 was sometimes a chore...

DMK
July 18, 2009, 11:59 AM
the sully stock is a great option form defensive edge. it is a fixed stock approx the same length of pull of between the 2-3 position on a collapsible stock. This is also the same length as the older M16A1/Colt SP1 style stock and the Cavalry Arms C1 stock.

RockyMtnTactical
July 18, 2009, 01:24 PM
I don't like the A2 length all that much for all purpose shooting. Also, my wife likes shooting with the stock much shorter than the A2.

What is wrong with having the option to shorten or lengthen the stock according to the needs/wants of the person behind the weapon?

bigalexe
July 18, 2009, 01:29 PM
I have a telescoping stock on my shotgun, the reason its their is because my dad is taller than me, and my shooting buddy is shorter than me. It allows us all to use the gun comfortably, also the recoil reduction helped make the purchase justifiable.

Honestly unless you have a family or group of people who shoot the same gun (assuming this isnt a gun for combat) who are different sizes I dont see a need for a collapsible stock. A sheriff i know told me the reason he has a collapsible on his weapon is because it makes getting around in tight spaces easier with it all the way collapsed but if he is outside he adjusts it to where it really should be for him.

DPMSAR
July 18, 2009, 03:27 PM
Just to throw it out.. I personly change the length based on shoting postion I do fully extened for prone but standing i prefer fully colapsed and third hole for the bench

jackdanson
July 18, 2009, 04:06 PM
An A2 stock is just a smidge long for me. I saw some shorter ones for sale that I'm going to use when I build my 20 in AR.

Still Too Many Choices!?
July 18, 2009, 08:34 PM
Why not... 'Nuff said!!

But, I use mine at different lengths depending on if I'm using the magnifier knock-off or just the Eotech... The magnifiers eye relief changes what is comfortable.

Still 2 Many Choices!?

amd6547
July 18, 2009, 09:52 PM
I have a tele stock for my home-built AR for those times when storage concerns are paramount, but I generally keep my A1 stock mounted.

steveracer
July 18, 2009, 09:57 PM
Getting into and out of a humvee was much easier with the M-4 than the M-16. Still carried the M-16, even with a choice of basically whatever I wanted.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why a collapseable stock AR?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!