Ar15 upgrade

Homesteading & Country Living Forum

Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
bmwrickster

bmwrickster

Awesome Friend
Neighbor
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
131
Location
whitewater wi
So I just recently within the last couple days upgraded my AR-15 with the folding stock Generation 3 now it fits in my backpack which quite nice if there was a few little modifications I had to do but overall it does work has anybody else use the Generation 3 folding stock upgrade
 
I have gotten away from the ARs,,,, I would like a AR 9 but I can't afford the ammo right now

maybe down the road a ways when things get back to normal
 
A picture or link would be great. I have heard of AR folders which must take a bit of redesign. They are illegal in California so I can't ever have one but I am interested anyway.
 
Screenshot_20210601-183613.png
Screenshot_20210601-183613.png
 
And it was cheap to I just had to do a little bit of filing on the top basically I used my wife some fingernail file that's just to take it down a little bit and that working on the gun it was on the hinge part so you're not going past the blooming on the gun itself just on the hinge
 
That's a pretty decent price for a folding stock adapter. No folding stock but I did just upgrade one of my AR's with a Prime nickel boron bolt and carrier, Hyperfire Hypertouch trigger, J&P polished and tuned chrome silicon buffer spring, and a few other little odds and ends. Runs a lot smoother now and is also more reliable. I'm switching out all my AR triggers to Hyperfire's (even my Geissele's). Not only do they have an awesome trigger pull, they'll ignite pretty much any primer no matter how hard it may be.
20210521_221049.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, I have an AR15 but I went in the opposite direction. The AR 15 is accurate but I am not in the military and have no resupply or backup so AR reliability is my goal. I went with Ultradyne iron sights which are quicker close and much, much better at long range. I went back to the M4 dual head shield hand guard since all my Gucci rails had overheated and attachments began falling off under heavy use. I have a white light mounted at 6:00 o'clock and a Rise RA 140 drop in trigger which is all the trigger I will ever need. I made my own sling from 1 1/2 webbing and mounted it in the mil spec stock with a drilled, screw-in mount and at the front with a mount on the Elzetta light mount. I have a traction ring around the handguard of my own design (made out of a drain gasket) which allows my whole hand to pull straight back on the rifle, not at one particular point, and collapses and provides traction on barricade surfaces. One huge reliability feature is the use of MCarbo heavy duty magazine springs in all my mags. For over a year now, absolutely no malfuctions.
 
Schattentarn said:
Well, I have an AR15 but I went in the opposite direction. The AR 15 is accurate but I am not in the military and have no resupply or backup so AR reliability is my goal. I went with Ultradyne iron sights which are quicker close and much, much better at long range. I went back to the M4 dual head shield hand guard since all my Gucci rails had overheated and attachments began falling off under heavy use. I have a white light mounted at 6:00 o'clock and a Rise RA 140 drop in trigger which is all the trigger I will ever need. I made my own sling from 1 1/2 webbing and mounted it in the mil spec stock with a drilled, screw-in mount and at the front with a mount on the Elzetta light mount. I have a traction ring around the handguard of my own design (made out of a drain gasket) which allows my whole hand to pull straight back on the rifle, not at one particular point, and collapses and provides traction on barricade surfaces. One huge reliability feature is the use of MCarbo heavy duty magazine springs in all my mags. For over a year now, absolutely no malfuctions.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity how much did all that cost you?
 
I'm planning on upgrading my AR15 to something more practical for me. I finally realized that there are no zombies coming to get me, so I have no use for an AR 15 or the thousands of rounds of ammo that I have for it.
 
Ram619 said:
That's a pretty decent price for a folding stock adapter. No folding stock but I did just upgrade one of my AR's with a Prime nickel boron bolt and carrier, Hyperfire Hypertouch trigger, J&P polished and tuned chrome silicon buffer spring, and a few other little odds and ends. Runs a lot smoother now and is also more reliable. I'm switching out all my AR triggers to Hyperfire's (even my Giselle's). Not only do they have an awesome trigger pull, they'll ignite pretty much any primer no matter how hard it may be.View attachment 12774
Click to expand...
I like the larue triggers they are great for the price made in tx
 
Arcticdude said:
Not for me there isn't. I dont consider a .223/5.56 a good hunting round, except for maybe coyote, and my 22-250 is much better. I only bought the AR because obama made me.
Click to expand...

Once the new 6.8/.277 round is selected by the military, I expect the 5.56/.223 to get dropped by most manufactures in AR platforms.
Check out the firing line at NRA High Power. 5.56/.223 used to be the predominate round used. Now 6mm or 6.5s are in the majority.
 
MOS0231 said:
Once the new 6.8/.277 round is selected by the military, I expect the 5.56/.223 to get dropped by most manufactures in AR platforms.
Check out the firing line at NRA High Power. 5.56/.223 used to be the predominate round used. Now 6mm or 6.5s are in the majority.
Click to expand...

There are way too many 5.56 platform rifles out there for manufacturers to start dropping them anytime in my lifetime. I do agree that the 6.8 is a better round, but also more expensive. That might not matter to some, but many people do take the price of ammo into consideration when buying a new gun.
 
Ram619 said:
There are way too many 5.56 platform rifles out there for manufacturers to start dropping them anytime in my lifetime. I do agree that the 6.8 is a better round, but also more expensive. That might not matter to some, but many people do take the price of ammo into consideration when buying a new gun.
Click to expand...

I think market demand will dictate what the manufactures produce.
Market it right, people will buy new uppers in whatever 6.8/.277, and retire the 5.56/.223 to the back of the gun safe.
As I mentioned above, look at how many shooting High Power have made the switch already to a better round.
 
MOS0231 said:
I think market demand will dictate what the manufactures produce.
Market it right, people will buy new uppers in whatever 6.8/.277, and retire the 5.56/.223 to the back of the gun safe.
As I mentioned above, look at how many shooting High Power have made the switch already to a better round.
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with the 6.8 caliber, I'll have to check it out. I dont particularly care for the "metric" or military calibers. However, my 45-70, 50-70 and 30-06 we're once military calibers too and I love them. I'm not a fan of semi autos or military look alike guns, even though I have a bunch of them. I'm more of a lever action man.
 
Arcticdude said:
I'm not familiar with the 6.8 caliber, I'll have to check it out. I dont particularly care for the "metric" or military calibers. However, my 45-70, 50-70 and 30-06 we're once military calibers too and I love them. I'm not a fan of semi autos or military look alike guns, even though I have a bunch of them. I'm more of a lever action man.
Click to expand...
I never met a gun I didn't like. Some are much better than others for a given task. Some are almost worthless for anything. I admire the engineering and manufacturing skills.
 
Arcticdude said:
I'm not familiar with the 6.8 caliber, I'll have to check it out. I dont particularly care for the "metric" or military calibers. However, my 45-70, 50-70 and 30-06 we're once military calibers too and I love them. I'm not a fan of semi autos or military look alike guns, even though I have a bunch of them. I'm more of a lever action man.
Click to expand...

For reasons unknown to myself, the Army picked for their next generation weapons systems, the 6.8/.277 diameter.
IIRC, three different companies have submitted candidates. One is of the teleoscopic design, another a composite shell body with a metal head, and one metal body with a redesigned head, all are supposed to be lighter than current 5.56, more capable, more lethal and able to penetrate next gen body armor.

Semi-autos have their place.
But I would rather see emphasis on skill, marksmanship, first round hits than trying to use technology as a replacement.
I know more than a few guys with tricked out ARs that cannot miss fast enough. And that is not even under combat situations but shooting at the range.
 
Dracos said:
I never met a gun I didn't like. Some are much better than others for a given task. Some are almost worthless for anything. I admire the engineering and manufacturing skills.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
But if you look at some of the older gun designs vs newer ones you can see where the end goal is more about how to make a firearm at the least cost, most volume, and sometimes it shows.

Vietnam era Marine Sniper Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock recommended the bolt action Winchester Model 70 for future sniper use (as well as the 30-06 round). But the Pentagon bean counters found they could buy one and a half Remington 700s for the price of one Winchester Model 70. It takes more time and effort for a 3-position bolt mounted safety vs a simple safe/fire safety. Same goes for a control feed vs push feed, fixed blade ejector vs a spring/plunge ejector.

Post WWII, the Pentagon looked for a new system for acquisitions of military gear, which would lead to the Defense Acquisition Cycle. I had to take a few courses (mandatory) from the Defense Acquisition University (yay). Hence, the saying, "The contract is awarded to the candidate who met the most requirements, at the lowest cost."
And in some cases, you can see/feel it.
 
MOS0231 said:
For reasons unknown to myself, the Army picked for their next generation weapons systems, the 6.8/.277 diameter.
IIRC, three different companies have submitted candidates. One is of the teleoscopic design, another a composite shell body with a metal head, and one metal body with a redesigned head, all are supposed to be lighter than current 5.56, more capable, more lethal and able to penetrate next gen body armor.

Semi-autos have their place.
But I would rather see emphasis on skill, marksmanship, first round hits than trying to use technology as a replacement.
I know more than a few guys with tricked out ARs that cannot miss fast enough. And that is not even under combat situations but shooting at the range.
Click to expand...

The reason the military is changing cartridges is because the 5.56 just wasn't very effective in the Middle East. It doesn't have enough power at longer ranges like desert areas and in CQB scenarios it isn't very good against barriers. The 6.8 packs like 30%+ more power in a round that's not any bigger or heavier.

Semi/full auto's are needed in the military, mostly for suppressive fire. When the people shooting back at you are firing 600 rounds/min you have to be able to match it at the very least. Otherwise you'd be spending a lot of time with your head down in cover.

I know quite a few people that have lots of very nice guns and I agree most of them couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. The reason isn't the type of weapon they're using, it's because they never shoot them.
 
As I have said before. I told my son, A 22 long rifle that goes exactly where you aimed it is more powerful Than a ten second blast from an A-10 Warthog that harmlessly expends it energy behind the target.
 
MOS0231 said:
Agreed.
But if you look at some of the older gun designs vs newer ones you can see where the end goal is more about how to make a firearm at the least cost, most volume, and sometimes it shows.

Vietnam era Marine Sniper Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock recommended the bolt action Winchester Model 70 for future sniper use (as well as the 30-06 round). But the Pentagon bean counters found they could buy one and a half Remington 700s for the price of one Winchester Model 70. It takes more time and effort for a 3-position bolt mounted safety vs a simple safe/fire safety. Same goes for a control feed vs push feed, fixed blade ejector vs a spring/plunge ejector.

Post WWII, the Pentagon looked for a new system for acquisitions of military gear, which would lead to the Defense Acquisition Cycle. I had to take a few courses (mandatory) from the Defense Acquisition University (yay). Hence, the saying, "The contract is awarded to the candidate who met the most requirements, at the lowest cost."
And in some cases, you can see/feel it.
Click to expand...
You know what you are talking about.
 
Ram619 said:
The reason the military is changing cartridges is because the 5.56 just wasn't very effective in the Middle East. It doesn't have enough power at longer ranges like desert areas and in CQB scenarios it isn't very good against barriers. The 6.8 packs like 30%+ more power in a round that's not any bigger or heavier.

Semi/full auto's are needed in the military, mostly for suppressive fire. When the people shooting back at you are firing 600 rounds/min you have to be able to match it at the very least. Otherwise you'd be spending a lot of time with your head down in cover.

I know quite a few people that have lots of very nice guns and I agree most of them couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. The reason isn't the type of weapon they're using, it's because they never shoot them.
Click to expand...

I have been a long advocate of replacing the 5.56 while in the Marines, and even more so once I started shooting NRA High Power Rifle. It was not uncommon for those of us shooting factory match grade 168grn .30 rounds to shoot better scores at the 600yrd line then those shooting 5.56 handloads atop compressed charges and VLD bullets.

Saw the limits of the 5.56 in rural Afghanistan. There was a reason why the insurgents attacked from elevated positions, with PKMs, RPGs in the main effort, and AKs in the harassment/security role. They knew the limitations of the 5.56 round.
The M2 and MG240s (my personal favorite), got the most effective use. M16/M4 were just wasting ammo. You use a MG240 in the suppressive role while the riflemen advance with "I AM UP! THEY SEE ME! I AM DOWN!" advancement or flanking maneuvers.

The US Army spent a lot of money to over come all the deficiencies of 62grn "green tip" with the M855A1 EPR round. A lot of money. And, only to replace it with a better round in their next generation weapons systems. Again, according to the Defense Acquisition Cycle, the contract award goes to the candidate that met the most requirements, at the lowest cost.

Based off his posts, I think I would rather have a platoon of Arcticdude like riflemen (i.e. "riflemen" definition per the late, great COL Jeff Copper) with bolt action 30-06 rifles whom have a 90% first hit rating than a platoon of yahoos with AR15s and a 1 in 10 hit rating post-SHTF.
 
Dracos said:
You know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Sir, I have been around.

Pop-culture reference: Days of Thunder.
The part where the Tom Cruise character admits he knows jack-sheeot about cars. He just drives them.
The Robert Duvall character/crew chief, puts different tires on the car and has Cruise do laps around the track to understand the car.

That is a similar analogy to those who have only shot one rifle and with no other experience. They automatically think that rifle is the best as that is all they know.
I knew more than a few Marines who fell into that mentality. They did not understand ballistics, FPS, Ft/lbs, SD, CO etc. as they were not informed. No fault of their own. It is not like we had access to that kind of knowledge or chronys in boot camp.

I will gladly admit it I was equally ignorant until I started handloading and shooting NRA High Power Rifle.
Then, I understood the need for not only the knowledge of ballistics, but and more importantly, the need for the mastery of the fundamentals of marksmenship, per COL Jeff Copper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top