Pre-ban assault rifles- worth the extra?

[Warner]

natedog - I like to read all opinions and ideas, and I liked this topic also. I feel I'm "solid" and not unnecessarily spooked by seeing alternate ideas and opinions - and I'll bet 98% + here aren't either.

I'd hate to feel the need to be too PC here too.

 

[Longbow]

I got a pre ban Colt SP1 for $550 . If not for the price, I wouldn't buy it.
Flah hiders doesn't really hide the flash, it just disperses the flash so you'll see spickles of flame instead of a fire ball. Some muzzle brake designs has the same effect. I say go postban w/ a good brake!

 

[Tamara]

natedog,

Pre-ban assault rifles- worth the extra?

I dunno...

Do you want a pre-ban? If so, then they are worth the extra. If not, they ain't.

BHP9,

As far as that whole "too valuable to shoot" spiel, I'll be sure to run a three gun salute through my HK91, my AKM/47S, and my Beretta AR70 tomorrow, just for you...

 

[Matt_B]

I bought an HK-94A3 (all HK-94s are pre-bans) because I wanted the retractable stock. Even though I can't SBR it(which is why I will probably move to Indiana), I still like being able to have a 27" long carbine. The short length makes it very convenient when transporting it. I've always wanted an MP-5 and the 94 was the closest thing I could get to one. That being said it wasn't cheap (over $3K) but it's in mint condition. I take good care of it but I do shoot it (200-400 rounds every 2 weeks). In general, I prefer to buy new firearms (you don't always know where a used one has been) but the 94 was the exception. When I bought an AR-15, I bought a brand new one with an A2 stock (I like having the trapdoor stock for storage of spare parts and batteries).

As far as retractable/folding stocks go, to me, some are better than others. The HK retractable stock is solid as a rock (remember Bruce Willis in Diehard using an MP5A3 to hang in the ventilation shaft?). It's every bit as solid as a regular stock. Also, the HK retractable stock really changes the overall length of the rifle (27"-34"). However, I'm not so keen on AR collapsible stocks. They only change the OAL 4" and I don't think they're all that sturdy. That being said, when the AW ban expires, I may get a collapsible stock for my AR just for the heck of it.

Bayonet lug? No need for one. Flash hider? Would be nice but again, not a necessity. We all know the whole pre-ban/post-ban thing is a load of s#$i anyways.

 

[Fatelvis]

no.

 

[standingbear]

unless you are a collector.otherwise the aw ban only affected the features...not the gun.besides,there are legal ways around some of the features(attachment of a muzzle brake simply pinned on vs the threaded barrel)if anything,the aw ban created a bigger market for look alike guns,more manufactured versions to comply and creative ways to legally go around the ban.if the awban sunsets,these people are going to be left with 1400 dollar aks that will be worth much less,if it doesnt sunset,theyll still have 1400 dollars aks that only collectors would want(cause they may increase in value or may not..back to same as before)its what ever YOU want to do with your money.if it floats your boat.do it.

 

[fixer]

obviously some a y'all ain't never shot a pre-ban AR with a Vortex or Phantom flash hider... no flash at all with the Vortex and virtually none with the Phantom on a 16" barrel... and none with either on a 20".

it doesn't "spread it out" or shape it differently... its just GONE.

it's interesting to see several shooters at a night class or 3-gun shoot and the difference in muzzle signature that barrel length, ammo and muzzle device makes.

colapsable stocks offer adjustmet for smaller people, thicker clothes or just to take up less space in a vehicle.

basicly, the '94 ban was BS "feel good" legislation, banning things that looked "scarey"

 

[DragonRider]

I'm of both sides. I bought my first AR less than a year ago, the 2nd a month after the first. I went through this same decision process and said I dont need one. So I got a Armalite Carbine. The reason I ended up getting a Colt pre-ban was that I really enjoyed the platform and was going to play with it some. My options are much more possible with a Pre-ban rifle. I got a good price on it and couldn't pass it up.

I know that the ban is 'supposed' to go away. But I thought I better play it safe and made a decision on the spot. The end result is I am happy with both of my purchases and can deal with it

John

 

[Onslaught]

Actually, the original purpose of this thread was to help me decide what kind of rifle to get. I was hoping for input. I'm sorry for offending anybody with my opinion.

Awe come on Natedog... you guys know I'm easily "riled" these days, now that I'm taking meds for ADD

It was this statement

I think it's kind of stupid to spend $500+ extra on buying a rifle to get the bayonet lug, flash suppressor, folding stock, etc.

along with a couple of "I don't, and anyone that does is just a ..."
pretty much all by themselves that got me going

Minus those, this was an excellent question, an A#1 post, and I really wasn't trying to shoot it down (believe it or not).

To have put it a nice way, if you want one, it's worth it. If you don't want one, then it's not. Freedom of choice and all that... I prefer the Pre-bans, and would certainly never think badly of someone who spent the extra $$$. That's what money's for.

At any rate, as a group, settling into being comfortable with losing or giving up things we "don't need anyway" is kinda sorta how anti-gunners got fence riders to vote for the AW ban in the first place. "We don't need these things on rifles! 80% of gun owners agree that THEY don't need a folding stock. Only bad guys in trenchcoats need them! They're less accurate... "

Remember this? "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds"?

So although not as eloquent, "anyone who needs a flash supressor is a Rambo wannabe" is just as loaded.

You get the picture.

PEACE - out