adelbridge
Member
FYI you can buy a side charging ar
It just seems that the AR has additional devices that do things that on another rifle could be done with the same device, and that's what makes it more complex, and therefore more expensive.
But WHY make it with a non-recipricating charging handle, and then need a forward assist as a result? Just put a handle directly on the bolt and do away with the charging handle (which I think is rather awkwardly positioned anyway) and the forward assist. Sure, it might reduce the rate of fire a bit, but when firing semi-auto, which most of us do, then it wouldn't make any difference at all, plus it would handle more like other rifles, which would mean not having to get used to something different?
AR charging handle also makes for a support track for BCG taking a lot of the wear off the internal receiver.
There are things that I do and don't like about ARs.
Having the stock in line with the barrel helps prevent muzzle climb when shooting full auto. Oh... wait... the AR does not have full auto.
If you're going to mount a scope, it has to be fairly high so that you can operate the charging handle and avoid a strain in your neck from craning your head far over.
The whole argument that the modularity allows you to switch uppers and cheaply shoot other chamberings doesn't hold water. Most of the expense is in the upper and the optics.
It's a lot of fun to shoot, it's plenty of cartridge for anything up to and including coyotes, the recoil is mild, and most of the time reloading for it is pretty cheap. While the 30-06 gulps powder, the 5.56 just sips. So there is a lot to like. Also, you can specify a heavy target upper, or a garden variety upper to suit your needs. 2 MOA is good enough for my application, so I get by fairly cheaply.
Look at the Nikon P223 fixed 3x scope. It's all you need for a 2 MOA rifle, it's extremely bright, and it's not expensive.