I used to think they were worthless but I have the hots for one right now... the new sig brace helped but when I figured out that a dot sight and technique extends usable range quite a bit... and it is compact and fall under my ccw does not hurt! well that and an "extra" lower sittin around waitin for a build does not hurt!
The Case for the AR-15 "Pistol"
- Thread starter kilibreaux
- Start date
- Status
PorkChopsMmm
Member
I thought they were worthless, too. I built one in 300 AAC with an 8" barrel and now think it is the cats meow. I can't believe that it is so small, can pack such a punch, and be so accurate. Easy to shoulder even without the brace.
32_d3gr33s
Member
I see you are from west michigan. Where do you do your shooting at? I've got a 7.5 inch 5.56 pistol and an upper reciever laying around. I've been conteplating building a 300 blackout for it as well. As it sits now makes an awesome truck gun and a blast to shoot at the range...
PorkChopsMmm
Member
I live in the country and just shoot wherever. I don't even know where a range would be around here.
300 AAC is awesome but ammo is $$. It is going to get me into reloading.
300 AAC is awesome but ammo is $$. It is going to get me into reloading.
Nom de Forum
Member
For use as a pistol it is a slow joke.
For use as a pseudo-rifle it is clumsy and saves only 5 to 8 inches of clearance space. If you need that extra 5 to 8 inches of space you would be better of having the extra 15 to 18 inches of clearance space a conventional pistol provides.
If you are thinking this pseudo-rifle is a great idea for home defense consider the following:
The best defensive strategy for inside your home is to stay put in your bedroom with a M4orgery or 18" barreled shotgun while having a telephone conversation with the police dispatcher. These weapons are less clumsy than a pseudo-rifle. Let the trouble come stand in your bedroom doorway not knowing exactly where in your dark bedroom your shot will be coming from. If you must move out of your bedroom to defend others, a pistol will be far more difficult for an intruder to deflect a grab than a rifle if he surprises you at contact range. If you are defending the outside of your home a real rifle is always the second best choice. The best choice is a claymore, command detonated from inside your home.
For use as a pseudo-rifle it is clumsy and saves only 5 to 8 inches of clearance space. If you need that extra 5 to 8 inches of space you would be better of having the extra 15 to 18 inches of clearance space a conventional pistol provides.
If you are thinking this pseudo-rifle is a great idea for home defense consider the following:
The best defensive strategy for inside your home is to stay put in your bedroom with a M4orgery or 18" barreled shotgun while having a telephone conversation with the police dispatcher. These weapons are less clumsy than a pseudo-rifle. Let the trouble come stand in your bedroom doorway not knowing exactly where in your dark bedroom your shot will be coming from. If you must move out of your bedroom to defend others, a pistol will be far more difficult for an intruder to deflect a grab than a rifle if he surprises you at contact range. If you are defending the outside of your home a real rifle is always the second best choice. The best choice is a claymore, command detonated from inside your home.
Lennyjoe
Member
I built one. It is not for personal defense it is for fun. Had a bunch of left over parts, grabbed a barrel off of Gunbroker and threw it together. Haven't shot it yet though but I did put a linear compensator http://www.joeboboutfitters.com/Kaw_Valley_Precision_22cal_Linear_Comp_1_2x28_Blac_p/kvp-linear223-blk.htm) on it rather than a birdcage flash thingy mic jobber....
*Kemosabe*
Member
Tell me if I got this right.
I built an AR-15 pistol (I keep a copy of my 4473 in the pistol grip) with a 11.5” upper.
I can put a “stock” like the one on the gun in the top of the photo of crazysccrmd's post on my pistol and it’s legal to be there and I can shoulder it like a rifle LEAGLLY???
If so, why is it not a pistol with a shoulder stock?
I built an AR-15 pistol (I keep a copy of my 4473 in the pistol grip) with a 11.5” upper.
I can put a “stock” like the one on the gun in the top of the photo of crazysccrmd's post on my pistol and it’s legal to be there and I can shoulder it like a rifle LEAGLLY???
If so, why is it not a pistol with a shoulder stock?
Last edited:
32_d3gr33s
Member
Yes and no... You can buy the same part as in the photo. Not a similar part. That is a Sig "pistol" brace, designed to be used on pistols. It's not a stock, it's a "brace".
*Kemosabe*
Member
32_d3gr33s - "That is a Sig "pistol" brace, designed to be used on pistols. It's not a stock, it's a "brace".
I have the big picture.
Sig makes a stock for an AR-15 pistol and calls it a “brace”, then the BATFE says, “We believe you, therefore it’s not a stock.” So a stock becomes a brace by BAFE edict. That’s okay by me… thanks!
When I was a LEO a judge once remarked about the questioned contraband that a perp had, “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and smells like a duck, it probably is a duck.”
I am going to buy one of those not-a-duck braces ASAP!
Thanks for your reply…..Sabe
I have the big picture.
Sig makes a stock for an AR-15 pistol and calls it a “brace”, then the BATFE says, “We believe you, therefore it’s not a stock.” So a stock becomes a brace by BAFE edict. That’s okay by me… thanks!
When I was a LEO a judge once remarked about the questioned contraband that a perp had, “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and smells like a duck, it probably is a duck.”
I am going to buy one of those not-a-duck braces ASAP!
Thanks for your reply…..Sabe
Last edited:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Yep. It is another erosion of the basic principles of the National Firearms Act, defining all these "special" weapons we aren't supposed to have (without registration).
'Most everyone knows that there is no logical basis for a law distinguishing a very bad super dangerous AR15, or Remington 870, with a 14" barrel from one with an 18" barrel, but the severity of the punishments has for a long time given an almost mystical weight to that false distinction.
Now we have AR15 "pistols" that aren't rifles. Sure. Same action and cartridge and capacity, but just a little harder to aim -- but that's not a violation of the NFA.
Then we ask if we can shoulder them, if a little awkwardly. Sure! Still not a "rifle" with a short barrel so not a violation. Uh huh, wink wink.
Then SIG asks if they can sell an "arm brace" that looks just like a butt stock and acts just like a butt stock, but "isn't"? And the ATF says, sure! Put all that together, use it EXACTLY just like an SBR -- make it indistinguishable from an SBR to the casual observer -- but it's fine. Not a rifle, wink wink.
And to take it a step farther, now drop in one of those bumpfire trigger packs (3MR) and now run off 600 rounds a minute of "simulated" full auto, from your "NOT-an-SBR."
It all leads me to think we're seeing the last days of (at least many of) the NFA restrictions. Build two rifles that look identical, and work the same way (with only minor internal technical differences in HOW) and one's perfectly legal but the other's worth a $250,000 fine and 10 years in prison? That's getting ripe for a major court case.
This, a large caliber pistol for confined spaces, and for me, the only choice is .45 ACP, as it hurts the ears quite a bit less than other pistol calibers and you ability to hear "well enough" recovers from it faster.
A big boom is much better than any crack from a handgun in a closed space.
The Sig brace gives folks a nearly SBR rifle if they wish. The AR pistol with just the buffer tube would be cool, but not particularity efficient IMO. Heck, I don't like noise like that in the open with muffs. I'll pass.
mr.trooper
Member
I read an article and watched a few videos recently of people using a "cheek weld" on the buffer tubes as third point of contact on the weapon.
They were all able to get acceptable accuracy results and engagements speeds to defend yourself, and reach out well past the normal usefull range of a conventional handgun while doing so.
The 6.8 or 300 may kick too much for that, I don't know, but It doesn't seem to be an issue with 5.56.
They aren't much good at being a conventional handgun, but they can be used effectively with some specialized skill adaptation. I certainly don't poo-poo them like I used to.
They were all able to get acceptable accuracy results and engagements speeds to defend yourself, and reach out well past the normal usefull range of a conventional handgun while doing so.
The 6.8 or 300 may kick too much for that, I don't know, but It doesn't seem to be an issue with 5.56.
They aren't much good at being a conventional handgun, but they can be used effectively with some specialized skill adaptation. I certainly don't poo-poo them like I used to.
So far this thread has been about rifle calibers predominantly. I think an area that it actually holds a lot of potential is for when it comes to pistol rounds, such as 9x19mm or .45 ACP.
The recoil is easy to control with the weight of the gun, especially with the buffer shouldered. It allows greater accuracy in a shorter amount of time at longer ranges than a pistol can easily manage.
The recoil is easy to control with the weight of the gun, especially with the buffer shouldered. It allows greater accuracy in a shorter amount of time at longer ranges than a pistol can easily manage.
Nite Ryder
Member
Everyone has an opinion when it comes to AR pistols. That opinion changes once you own one, especially if it's one you built yourself and build exactly what you want. I have two AR pistols, one is a early Bushmaster Carbon 15, the other is one I built from parts purchased through an online auction sight. They are fun to shoot, maybe worthless for a lot of other things, but you can not take away the fun factor. I can get the business end of one of these pistols 'on target' much faster when I'm driving my pickup down a country road that I can one of my full length AR Rifles. With a decent sighting device they are pretty accurate out to 100 yards. True, they can't beat the accuracy of one of my Encore pistols with a scope, but they can darn sure beat the fire power.
Attachments
Sam1911: I found your post on actual trials of this concept the most useful Post for me. Thank you thank you for giving your experience.
I have considered building one of these pistols. Your post gave me pause. Can you try to explain to us exactly why you ended up being more effective with a pistol? Can you explain exactly what about it made you less effective with the A.R. pistol? Can you narrow it down to particular aspects?
I have considered building one of these pistols. Your post gave me pause. Can you try to explain to us exactly why you ended up being more effective with a pistol? Can you explain exactly what about it made you less effective with the A.R. pistol? Can you narrow it down to particular aspects?
Hometeached1
Member
Lets hope it's almost over, I REALLY want a 10" Uzi for a HD/around the place "rifle". I know I know...I would not care or use FA, expect for fun.
FrankCastleThePunisher
Member
The AR pistol is probably not as good as a pistol in the house, but it sure compliments the pistol for personal defense outside the house up to 100 to 175 yards and as a truck/vehicle gun with high capacity and firepower. And it is really something to consider if you have an ccw permit
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Sure! Though I should preface by again saying I am not talking about building a variant that can/will be used as an SBR-like carbine, such as with the SIG brace, or even shouldering a long buffer tube. What I've tested is shooting these (and AK pistols, KelTec PLRs, etc.) AS HANDGUNS.
I practice, train, and compete with service style handguns very regularly. Most primarily that's either a 1911, an xDM, or a S&W 629. I use handguns in the role of defensive or "practical" shooting, which means dynamic courses of fire shot at high speed and at ranges of 0 to 30 yards, with multiple targets, moving targets, use of cover, and so forth.
When using the rifle-pistols this way, against a timer, they are not competitive. That means (to me) that I can't get hits on target as fast, as accurately, with them as I can with a handgun. Reasons for this?
1) Bulk, weight, balance -- they don't sit in the hand like a handgun. They're bulky and slow to get on target and to move through transitions between targets. They don't have that svelte liveliness in the hand that lets you really react smoothly and quickly to the threats.
2) Sight configuration -- They generally have rifle sights, designed to be used with the stock mounted against the face (or even optics used the same way) and breaking that situation to try to use them at arms' length as a handguns means peering at and trying to align sights that are now too far away, too small, and bouncing around as you try to hold up this most-of-a-rifle.
3) Reloads -- Holding 85% of an AR-15 at arms' length and trying to perform a fast reload is pretty clumsy compared to reloading almost any common service sidearm.
4) Carrying/draw/presentation -- Can't holster these, can't really carry them like a normal handgun so you don't have that smooth, fast 4-count draw-stroke some of us have gotten down to 1 second or faster. There are a variety of carry styles, mostly based on the problematic one-point sling concept, but that's a pretty bad compromise compared to a strong-side belt holster.
5) Pistols are faster than rifles anyway -- This one is controversial among some of my pals but it is definitely what I see. And I understand that it doesn't really speak to your question. I have run tests many times and I can say with complete confidence that I am faster at putting multiple aimed shots on multiple targets with a handgun than with a (shoulder-mounted) long gun, rifle or shotgun, on targets within about 20 yards. So, while no-one ever has suggested that an AR-15 "pistol" is as effective to use as an AR-15 carbine, I am still faster/better with a handgun than with the carbine. So it is only logical that the difference in performance would be even greater when comparing a service sidearm to an AR "pistol."
Nite Ryder
Member
All well and good Sam! We understand what you are saying, but what happens when the target gets beyond the 20 yards you are speaking of? Yep, there is a very real possibility that your target isn't going to come as close as 20 yards to you, if they know you are there. Handguns are great in the hands of an experienced shooter, but what about the person that doesn't have that experience, the person who has never done enough practice with a handgun to get good at shooting one? Not everyone knows how to shoot a handgun, there is much more than just pointing it in the general direction of the target and pulling the trigger. Handguns certainly do have their place in a defensive situation, that is why many of us carry concealed on a daily basis. Rifles also have their place in defensive shooting, but so do short barreled weapons with a high magazine capacity like an AR pistol. No one firearm fits every situation. I suspect most of the readers of this forum have more than one gun. When you have many, and when you have a variety of what you want to shoot, I see nothing wrong with owning an AR pistol. It won't fit every need we have, but it will fit many of those needs.
32_d3gr33s
Member
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,690
A normal holstered pistol doesn't stick out a foot in front of you, pointing at whoever you are looking at. Try carrying like that in a crowded hallway...through brush...etc.
Definitely a match though... a novelty holster for a range toy gun
Definitely a match though... a novelty holster for a range toy gun
Last edited:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Of course and with very little debate, the shouldered carbine or shotgun starts to pull ahead of the sidearm as distance increases.
As a practical matter, we all should understand that the immediate (and so, justifiable) need for firing a weapon at an attacker tends to fall off precipitously as distances climb to the double digits, but the chance always does exist.
That's shouldered weapons, though. Not true "hand-rifles."
Fortunately, that works both ways. "Your target" as a citizen in peacetime USA, is very unlikely to be presenting a realistic articulable threat sufficient to justify firing a weapon at them at such distances, either. Unless you're envisioning getting into a rifle fight at distance, which very very few of us would consider a scenario likely to arise.
Now, if you're talking about shooting prairie dogs or coyotes, well, that's a different discussion.
Ok, what about them? Are they far more likely to be that much better at shooting a rifle or shotgun? I hear that idea a lot, but I tend to think it's more of a case of not shooting a rifle AS BADLY as they shoot the handgun. But sure, familiarity comes into it. A long time hunter with no handgunning experience will be far better at defending himself with his Win94 than with a Glock someone hands him. I get that.
And maybe the totally unschooled novice, would as well. But...
Un, GRIN. If handguns are difficult for people to shoot well and usefully, AR pistols are FAR more so. They are truly a weapon of "last resort." As in, if you left your range toy sitting on the table and it's the first thing to hand when someone kicks in your door, I guess you'll have to use it. But that's about it. Otherwise, they suck pretty bad.
Again...not saying that applies necessarily to a well-set-up one with a shouldering ability, like that SIG "arm brace" stock.
Especially that "range toy" need. And that's fine. No harm in range toys.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Ha ha ha! That's awesome! What a hoot!
- Status
