Gun-Reck
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2023
- Messages
- 641
I was in the army when the A2's were first issued. Today I want a removable carrying handle so I can mount optics.
While I think the whole retro thing is cool and some people will buy it, $1,250 will have most passing.
Define “rifleman”. Every “rifleman” is better with an optic than they are with irons. The military realized this fact somewhere around 2004 and has never looked back. Springfield’s rifle will resonate for folks looking for nostalgia, but in the end, it won’t sell well enough for multiple production runs.Can be found in the wild for ~ $1,000.
For a rifleman, good apertures work fine, like a 1X optic.
Meh, it's another AR in a market saturated by them. I'm sure it's a nice A2 clone, but again meh.
You don’t own an AR, but you are somehow an expert on what is required to fight with one? I’ll say it again. There’s a reason every branch of the military with a ground fighting force has made the change to optics over iron sights. It’s the same reason that these rifles will be tough to sell. There are entirely too many benefits to red dots or magnified optics.It's just a battle rifle, with very little to go wrong.
Sub-3MOA w/ ball ammo out to 300 yards rifle.
Aperture sights work fine for that application at those ranges.
Do not own any AR's, but like the looks of this one.
Aperture sights do not work AT ALL like a 1X optic. Shoot a red dot against irons for time and see how that theory works out for you.Can be found in the wild for ~ $1,000.
For a rifleman, good apertures work fine, like a 1X optic.
Aperture sights do not work AT ALL like a 1X optic. Shoot a red dot against irons for time and see how that theory works out for you.
You don’t own an AR, but you are somehow an expert on what is required to fight with one? I’ll say it again. There’s a reason every branch of the military with a ground fighting force has made the change to optics over iron sights. It’s the same reason that these rifles will be tough to sell. There are entirely too many benefits to red dots or magnified optics.
This has nothing to do with being able to shoot iron sights. It has everything to go with the fact that better options exist and a rifle not built to accept those better options isn’t going to sell very well, especially when better quality rifles, in more versatile configurations can be had for less money.Not owning one - doesn't mean that I have no experience w/ them.
This is a Civilian Defense rifle, not a CQB door-kicker.
My choice was an aperture sighted Mini-14 Carbine, but I like this new rifle.
Shoot mostly aperture sighted rifles from field positions.
Also hunt rabbits and squirrels w/ aperture sighted .22 LR's.
If one sucks w/ apertures, it is not the sight's fault.
This has nothing to do with being able to shoot iron sights. It has everything to go with the fact that better options exist and a rifle not built to accept those better options isn’t going to sell very well, especially when better quality rifles, in more versatile configurations can be had for less money.
no it isn’tIt's a battle rifle.
Again, your ignorance is obvious. I’m done. I hope you single-handily buy enough of these to make them profitable for Springfield. I hope you buy enough of them that they have the free cash to bring back the 10mm TRP Operator I’ve been looking for."Better," for the average civilian shooter, is generally heavy, expensive Gucci stuff.
A Defense/Battle rifle is like a hammer.
It just needs to do the work.
No. A battle rifle is traditionally a full sized rifle chambered in a full power cartridge. For instance, a FAL, M-14, M-1 rifle, G3, or similar rifles. A battle rifle can be select fire, but does not have to be.It's a battle rifle