Why Are ARs So Heavy?

[Slamfire]

Why so heavy? Because people carry them all the way from the trunk to the firing line.

So true. American's ride everywhere. In a state north of me, they allow deer hunters to shoot while sitting in their all terrain vehicles. Bubba never has to get out of the seat until he hits something!. Then he tosses it on the back and drives out!

It was different when people walked. If you notice, people 60 years ago were much slimmer than today's lard butts. And that includes the rifles. Hunting rifles prior to WWII, and those immediately afterward, are much lighter. My J.C. Higgins M50, a early 50's rifle, is much lighter than the typical modern 30-06. I suspect the WWII generation was tired of humping a 10 pound Garand around all day and wanted a lighter rifle.

 

[H2O MAN]

SlamFire1 I suspect the WWII generation was tired of humping a 10 pound Garand around all day and wanted a lighter rifle.

I really doubt that any of the WWII generation complained about humping a 10 lb. battle rifle.

 

[cracked butt]

Hunting rifles prior to WWII, and those immediately afterward, are much lighter. My J.C. Higgins M50, a early 50's rifle, is much lighter than the typical modern 30-06.

I think the fat heavy stocks started with the weatherbys- stocks way thicker than they need to be with an additional 2lbs of high gloss polyurethane applied to boot.

I've noticed that a lot of the older mauser and springfield sporting rifles (not bubba hack jobs) often have about the minimum amount of wood on them to make a functioning rifle.

 

[JonB]

This got me curious as to the weight of my AR - plain ol' RRA Elite CAR A4. No fancy optics, rails, lights or anything else. It does have an 16" HBAR, midlength gas system. According to my bathroom scale it weights 7.5lbs. Not the most accurate scale in the world, but it is all I have handy ;-)

It feels a little front end heavy to me, but it shoots well with just the irons so I am happy with it.

 

[El Tejon]

I really doubt that any of the WWII generation complained about humping a 10 lb. battle rifle.

Yeah, M1s were no problem for the Greatest Generation, but that little dinky bipod on the 18 pound BAR had to be taken off "to save weight".

I don't know, H2O, but from what I see at gun schools, the guys with the heaviest guns (carbines, rifles, shotguns) always have the biggest food blisters. If we had to walk with our guns, you can rest assured that they would not be so big and cumbersome.

 

[H2O MAN]

El Tejon
I don't know, H2O, but from what I see at gun schools, the guys with the heaviest guns (carbines, rifles, shotguns) always have the biggest food blisters.

Yeah, it is sad that we are over run with lard butts.


We should all strive to be a lean mean fighting machines

 

[telomerase]

I really doubt that any of the WWII generation complained about humping a 10 lb. battle rifle.

Weren't there a couple of 5.5-lb. carbines produced? Or is that a rumor?

What about those Carbon-15 things? They're certainly light. Anyone have opinions about them?

I agree with the OP, the old ARs were 6.5 lbs, considering the "recoil" of the cartridge that might be too much.

 

[10/22plinker]

I would say the big front post the standard rear sight, and not to mention bolt system is different than most guns

 

[rino451]

The only reason to have a 16" HBAR in my opinion is to reduce barrel whip/increase accuracy. That way one can justify the $1,200 scope bolted to the carbine. To bad many of us can't shoot even a pencil barrel to it's potential.

 

[wanderinwalker]

Okay, here's a couple of rifles and thoughts for you all.



From top to bottom, you have a 20" AR-15, Service Rifle, weighs about 12 lbs. In this case, I would argue that it is weight well applied. Between the heavy contour barrel, free-float tube and lead chunks, it is well balanced. Certainly not my first choice to have to hump any distance though.

The middle is a Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum. About 6-6.5 pounds, empty, add another pound or so for a full magazine of 10, plus another pound if you fill the buttstock holder. It also has a 20" barrel, and is considered by many to be a light, handy, short rifle.

Bottom is a T/C Encore, with 20" barrel in .45-70, about 6-lbs. Who says you can't have horsepower and light-weight? Yes, it does kick my butt up and down the range when I'm not paying attention. But there is never a question of whether or not I have enough gun for the job with this one!

I'm thinking my next rifle will be something lightweight, "evil looking" and semi-automatic. And it won't weigh 7.5-lbs empty! Maybe a retro-build 20" AR with a pencil barrel and A2 sights, like my match gun on Jenny?

But thanks for your thoughts all. And keep them coming.

Edited: A gun to carry around should be lightweight, reasonably accurate, but does need a little weight to make it easy to shoot. Maybe that's what I'm missing about all those porky carbines kicking around. And as to weight, I know I rarely carry a 6" N-frame revolver when a poly-framed Glock is sitting right next to it. Apply the same reasoning to rifles.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

The original point is well taken:

Because it costs less to machine HBARs compared to Lightweight & Govt. Profiles.

That's the long and short of it..... "Hey Bill, I've got an idea. We'll sell a ton of HBARs by marketing them as 'tactical' or some such nonsense, people will snap them up, AND we'll save a lot of machining costs greatly increasing profit margin." It's worked like a charm so far.

 

[jkingrph]

I have two, a standard H bar competion model and one with a custom upper. It sports a free floated very heavy, almost bull barrel and is probably the most accurate rifle I own. I do not plan on going on a march with these rifles or patrol for that matter, I got them to shoot as I like, and I can hold a heavy rifle steady, easier than a very lightweigt rifle. The other thing is they do not heat up as fast or seem to get as hot.

 

[jhco]

your just shooting the wrong kind of AR mine only weighs 2.5lbs loaded






its an AR-7

 

[DrLaw]

Okay, I've read this, and now I have a question

Which run more accurate? H-Bar's or regular? Just wondering as I am going to be building an AR now.

The Doc is out now.

 

[HorseSoldier]

I really doubt that any of the WWII generation complained about humping a 10 lb. battle rifle.

Then you haven't spent enough time around soldiers, marines, etc. Some things are timeless, like bitching about the kit and weapons you have to lug around. Even an M4 or M16 gets annoying if you've got it in hand or slung over your shoulder long enough.

 

[SFvet]

Heavy rifle equals good quality rifle lol. Naw but my AR10 Carbine is 9 lbs and its not all that bad - carry it around long enough and you get good exercise and in the long run you get stronger lol.

 

[benEzra]

your just shooting the wrong kind of AR mine only weighs 2.5lbs loaded

its an AR-7

LOL...

As to the original question, a lot of shooters do feel that the heavier barrels are steadier on target and more consistently accurate. Military weapons are generally carried for LONG distances and fired relatively rarely, usually at relatively close range, but few civilians will be marching 20 miles with their AR while carrying 50 pounds of other gear, so we can afford to have a little more weight on the rifle.

My AR preference is a 16" RRA midlength with an adjustable stock and RRA's standard weight barrel, which is more front heavy than milspec but makes accurate shooting a little easier.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

I have also wondered about why the popularity of the semiauto hbars in the AR platform. I just ordered a superlight 16", I beleive this will prove to be handier than the heavier variant for my purposes. (predator hunting)

 

[IndianaBoy]

ARs are heavy?


I didn't get that memo.


A better question. Why do people choose to get an M4 profile barrel?

 

[CBS220]

Because there are all those M203s floating around out there, of course.

But, speaking of odd choices, that one of yours is a little unusual as well, if only because of the upper.

 

[ar10]

My 10B weighed only 9.4lb empty when I bought it. After getting rid of the plastic fore arm pieces and replacing them with the pictitinny fore arm pieces then adding the 30rn mag I'm up to a light weight 12.2lb. But weight is all relative. I carried an M1 and that with the cartridge belt weighed a little over 15lbs. Then in ITR I got stuck with the BAR for 6 weeks, that one was 20.4 lbs w/o the cartridge belt. The M1A was about the same as the AR, can't remember how much that weighed, but not as much as the M1.

 

[wanderinwalker]

To all the 7.62/.308 shooters, at least with that much weight you have a gun that makes something take notice when you hit it! Why saddle a rat rifle with almost as much flab?

Just perusing through some catalogues quickly online, I noticed a lot of 20" HBAR rifles go in the 8.5-lb range. In my mind, that's a lot of weight for a .223, especially if it doesn't have a match trigger, free-float tube, Harris bipod, moon scope and 24" varmint barrel (which would end up being a bit heavier).

Because it costs less to machine HBARs compared to Lightweight & Govt. Profiles.

That's the long and short of it..... "Hey Bill, I've got an idea. We'll sell a ton of HBARs by marketing them as 'tactical' or some such nonsense, people will snap them up, AND we'll save a lot of machining costs greatly increasing profit margin." It's worked like a charm so far.

I think that must be the answer!

Oh, and about the weight of the M-1 Garand, my late grandfather was a Korean War vet. He always thought of the M-1 as a bit of a pig and said he much prefered a Grease Gun or a Carbine if it was getting carried.

 

[Kurt_D]

ARs are heavy?


I didn't get that memo.


A better question. Why do people choose to get an M4 profile barrel?

I won't lie, b/c it looks bada$$.

The 14.5" M4 barrel does balance well; lighter than the H-bar but does provide more mass than an A1 which some shooters like.

Overall it's looks though. A 20" H-bar looks the same as a 20" A2 so no one but some one who would carry it cares. The M4 profile looks different than a H-bar, can't do without that M203 cut b/c people want a .mil clone. I bet it is the most popular AR barrel hands down. Some companies even used a H-bar with a only the M203 cut to sell more rifles.

 

[45crittergitter]

Amen, originator. I can't waste money on a .22 (or a .30) that weighs more than my .416.

 

[Bartkowski]

I can't waste money on a .22 (or a .30) that weighs more than my .416.

Ya, cause heavy rifles are a waste, you know the benefits they carry don't mean anything.