jad0110
Member
I've got an AR-15 noob question here. I've done a lot of research, and can't quite nail this one down.
FYI, I have a sweet Yugo M70 (semi auto AK clone) at the moment. Nice gun, but I just can't seem to find a shooting position/hold that feels at all comfortable for me. I figured I would over time, but that has not happened. I don't have that problem with ARs, including carbines. So I'm considering violating my rule of not selling guns and trading my AK clone, which I am not attached to, for an AR carbine in 5.56 (5.56 because as I understand it, 5.56 chambered ARs can safetly fire any .223 Remington or 5.56 ammo, while the same isn't necessary true for .223). And yes, I could swap stocks on my AK. But I figure at that point, I will have sunk as much money into my AK as I would into a box-stock AR carbine. Kinda like that guy I knew 10 years ago in college who bought a brand new six-cylinder Mustang and then sank $4,000 of performance mods into it. He ended up with a 'Stang that cost as much (if not more) than a V8 GT but had a voided warranty, sounded like a tractor with it's dual exhaust and it was still slower .
Anyway, I know the A2 uppers (as well as the A1) with their integrated rear sight are fixed in place. But the A4 flat top variant (called A3 by some manufacturers) has the option of a removable carry handle, ala A2. This appeals to me, as I would rather shoot irons for a while, then mount a red dot or something of that like much later when I become proficient with the irons. Plus, the asthetics of an AR with the carry handle are just more appealing to me. And as I understand it, scope mounting is simpler on a flat top, and more choices are available.
Question: what advantages does the A2 configuration have over the A4/A3? It seems to me, AR noob as I may be, that the A4 has greater flexibility.
I am in no way bashing the A2 configuration, by the way. I'm just curious and would like to learn more.
One additional question while I am making this post: As I understand it, it can be more cost effective to build your own AR. Though I don't totally trust myself to build an AR from scratch, would it still be an advantage (price wise) to assemble my own AR (carbine length) from complete lower and upper assembly kits and just buy the Mags in addition? What kind of price advantage (%) are we talking?
And just FYI, these are the ARs I'm looking at (primary use will be range fun, possibly my wife's primary HD weapon and God forbid, Hurricane Katrina style SHTF scenarios):
DPMS Panther AP4: http://www.dpmsinc.com/firearms/firearm.aspx?id=36
Bushmaster Superlight Carbine with A3 upper: http://www.bushmaster.com/catalog_xm15_BCWA3F16SL.asp
Rock River Arms Mid-Length A4: http://www.rockriverarms.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_id=224
FYI, I have a sweet Yugo M70 (semi auto AK clone) at the moment. Nice gun, but I just can't seem to find a shooting position/hold that feels at all comfortable for me. I figured I would over time, but that has not happened. I don't have that problem with ARs, including carbines. So I'm considering violating my rule of not selling guns and trading my AK clone, which I am not attached to, for an AR carbine in 5.56 (5.56 because as I understand it, 5.56 chambered ARs can safetly fire any .223 Remington or 5.56 ammo, while the same isn't necessary true for .223). And yes, I could swap stocks on my AK. But I figure at that point, I will have sunk as much money into my AK as I would into a box-stock AR carbine. Kinda like that guy I knew 10 years ago in college who bought a brand new six-cylinder Mustang and then sank $4,000 of performance mods into it. He ended up with a 'Stang that cost as much (if not more) than a V8 GT but had a voided warranty, sounded like a tractor with it's dual exhaust and it was still slower .
Anyway, I know the A2 uppers (as well as the A1) with their integrated rear sight are fixed in place. But the A4 flat top variant (called A3 by some manufacturers) has the option of a removable carry handle, ala A2. This appeals to me, as I would rather shoot irons for a while, then mount a red dot or something of that like much later when I become proficient with the irons. Plus, the asthetics of an AR with the carry handle are just more appealing to me. And as I understand it, scope mounting is simpler on a flat top, and more choices are available.
Question: what advantages does the A2 configuration have over the A4/A3? It seems to me, AR noob as I may be, that the A4 has greater flexibility.
I am in no way bashing the A2 configuration, by the way. I'm just curious and would like to learn more.
One additional question while I am making this post: As I understand it, it can be more cost effective to build your own AR. Though I don't totally trust myself to build an AR from scratch, would it still be an advantage (price wise) to assemble my own AR (carbine length) from complete lower and upper assembly kits and just buy the Mags in addition? What kind of price advantage (%) are we talking?
And just FYI, these are the ARs I'm looking at (primary use will be range fun, possibly my wife's primary HD weapon and God forbid, Hurricane Katrina style SHTF scenarios):
DPMS Panther AP4: http://www.dpmsinc.com/firearms/firearm.aspx?id=36
Bushmaster Superlight Carbine with A3 upper: http://www.bushmaster.com/catalog_xm15_BCWA3F16SL.asp
Rock River Arms Mid-Length A4: http://www.rockriverarms.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_id=224