InRangeTV's WWSD is the best guide to building the best ar-15

InRangeTV's WWSD is the best guide to building the best ar-15
prove me wrong

Attached: huh.jpg (1920x1080, 522K)

The AR15 is obsolete.
Both from the manufacturing perspective and functionality perspective.

retard

If youre pedantically focused on weight like they were, maybe. If you're interested in other factors like accuracy on the range or shootability within the home, no its shit.

It's true
Extruded aluminum and polymer are the modern standard small arms manufacturing methods, they've made everything that came before obsolete.

user those things are 1 MOA guns

satanist

How does two gimps placing horrificly at a few gay competitions manage to convince you that they've created 'the best ar15'?

>prove me wrong

It's your job to provide the proof, but I will not argue that they had some great points. Cost is a very real factor though and for that, I'd forgo the carbon-fiber shit.

sure thing guy

Accuracy isn't just moa, its ability to make use of it. So ditch the solid stock because they're horrid unless your lop is 2 inches, get a longer barrel (I'm aware of m855, but if its a range gun you want excellent at distance not adequate) and a proper 6x magnified optic. Also ditch the bipod because you'll never use it except from a bench, in which case you'll be using a rest anyway.

As for HD, get an SBR with an adjustable stock and can.

>InRangeTV's WWSD is the best guide to building the best ar-15
Of course. Marxist revolutionaries need the best they can get.

Attached: 1540676221136.png (1500x875, 605K)

Reminder that Aero Precision has a pencil barrel upper available at Brownells (M4E1). Pair it with a complete poverty pony lower with ambidextrous parts, and you’ll achieve 2/3 of WWSD’s goals. Those goals being
>1. Free floated hand guard
>2. Pencil barrel
>3. Lower assembly of innovative design

The reasoning for this last point points towards a lower that is of lower cost from integrating the buffer, lower, grip into one monolithic assembly. The present glut of AR lower manufacturing, plus the advent of 80% lowers, plus 3D printing put alternative spins to this theme of low cost innovation.

>anything those two cancerous commie fags touch is shit

prove me wrong

Attached: dsdsd.jpg (640x360, 71K)

Attached: forgotten satan.png (1000x1083, 347K)

>6x magnified optic on a fighting gun

Do you people actually like guns or do you do it to "troll the libs epic style" ?
Serious question

>If you don't like Communist Satanists bootlicker elitists you are nogunz and have no vested interest in securing the 2nd Amendment

Found the fanboy

t. SEETHING Marxist

Attached: 1541152926154.jpg (334x506, 42K)

Which muzzle device were they using? I’m sure the weight was great for movement but worse for recoil. Without a gamer brake their split times were probably a lot slower than they could have been.

>no forward assist
into the trash it goes

Their build was interesting but by no means optimal. The weight was super low, but that means increased recoil. Everything was so light, it likely has awful heat sinking. I image it's like most other ar15s (2-3 moa with standard ammo) those groups are going to get big really fast. Probably a 6 moa rifle after just 2 mags.

Garbage lower. Throwing modularity in the toilet and not taking cold weather gear into consideration with the non adjustable length of pull

Attached: 1485224650848.jpg (1200x750, 380K)

I don't see either of them

The thing is that they didn’t design a rifle. They just took a hodgepodge of off the shelf parts and threw them together. They made it clickbait by putting Stoner’s name on it.

FUck these guys...Won't be long and I'll be killing them...Once that Holy/Civil war pops off Commies/Satanists will be the first to die!

explain how the actual gun is obsolete

Hey look, there's dubs in this thread!

Oh, sweetie. I love how angry you are. Please, try to defend this commie faggot more. Is this your whole argument?

Attached: F0CBB098-D56C-4026-BCC7-6A750B17D4BC.png (259x194, 7K)

Yes almost as much as I love Liberty/The Constitution! But not as much as I enjoy watching Commies die a miserable slow death and Evil being crushed under the boot of righteousness! Does that answer your question you faggot!

Attached: 1419247076306.jpg (236x285, 6K)

I'd like to see how that lower does in sub 0° weather.

It's share blue type trolls, trying to break up the gun community and destroy Ian and Karl's popularity (well, Ian's at least). Lots of their vids get millions of views, and that helps keep people pro 2A.

Are you a wizard?

>unironically recommending a fixed-stock polymer lower in the era of $39 milspec lowers and adjustable stocks

Attached: glockshadowgote.png (743x801, 426K)

I've never actually seen a source for this. Do you have one?

>claims fixed A1 length stock is garbage
>posts soldiers with fixed A1 length stocks

I think the problem with their experiment was that they wanted to make a new infantry rifle, but at the same time these were rifles they were going to own and use so they didn't want to actually make a mass produced, lowest common denominator cannon.

I also don't trust carbon fiber on an infantry rifle. Would a big enough ding on the handguard lead to complete destruction of the fiber later on?

Forced memes and samefagging is really more of a reddit thing. Just because you came from there and started browsing Jow Forums doesn't mean you get to shit up other boards.
Again, suicide yourself

Their gun is so good they have to deleted reupload several video and avoid upload certain video to youtube out of fear.

except that design is actually decently strong and wont break

post broken CAV-15s then

I live in an area that gets down to -40 regularly throughout the winter, I only have fixed A2 stock since they're the correct LOP for me, even when in pretty severe cold weather gear.

Ah, muffin. Need a safe space?

Attached: 1537627379977.gif (524x399, 53K)

Czech’d

Attached: C7F56A96-6C14-48DF-8FF8-7D9DC8359F5D.jpg (540x960, 52K)

Just that in multiple comments over the past little while he’s denied the South African white genocide. The party orchestrating it there are full on communist revolutionaries and since he’s denying their atrocities he must share or at least sympathize with their political views

Are you going to engage with me or just spout random le epic maymays like some kind of bot?
I guess that proves my initial point, you don't give a shit about the firearms community and are some meme loving reddit freak

There isn't a white genocide in South Africa. The ANC sure seems to be moving dangerously in that direction, but it isn't fucking HAPPENING yet, you nut.

Perhaps Ian has a higher standard of Genocide (tm), since well publicized genocide numbers tend to be in the hundreds of thousands. That, combined with not beong heavily involved in racial politics would explain it pretty easy.

there are videos of karl kassarole doing pushups on it, running it over with a truck, even shooting it, and it still works fine

Attached: 1529964309260.jpg (576x768, 98K)

>Ian
>firearms community
Lmao, go worship e-celeb cock somewhere else.

>Someone who sponsors 2 gun matches and provides free content to millions of people discussing firearms use and history
>Some memelord on an anonymous Pakistani bread making site
Sure got me there

>muh shareblue
>Ian, someone who likes UK gun laws, is 2A

Attached: 1538783559951.jpg (211x239, 13K)

All I'm hearing is you blowing Ian.

Adjustable stocks are a meme. Folding stocks are good but you cant have one on an ar.
Glorious slavshit wins again.

check'd

oh boy! a neckbeard used it a few times in the desert!
You know how I know youre a civilian? You have not a fucking clue the abuse grunts put on their rifles.
A lower receiver needs to be able to withstand decades of abuse, a CAV15 will not

Attached: 20108441_10155694011993606_1912138902778686912_n.jpg (533x960, 50K)

I wonder how well the component manufacturers they used could supply army of 300k soldiers.

The collapsing stocks on carbine versions of AR were back in the day two position, as short as possible and extended. Effectively half folding stock. Also there are uppers with recoils springs/buffer in places other than stock, receiver extension is absolutely necessary, but those tend to deviate a lot from original AR design.

Attached: doubt.jpg (200x303, 16K)

All I'm hearing is you screeching for people to stop liking what you don't like.

>rust on barrel, ejection port, and other steel fiddlybits
>totally proofs that a one-piece polymer lower/stock would fail
Post broken CAV-15.

based

Is that really what you took away from that picture? Good lord you are a fucking brainlet.
What would a Cav lower look like after 15 years of being issued and field use? You are gaining literally nothing by switching to them, and losing a fuck load. With the entire lower being one piece, if a single part breaks, the entire thing needs to be replaced. Meanwhile any normal lower can just have the parts hot swapped by an armorer in 10 minutes.
They barely weigh less
You are sacrificing length of pull
They will not last as long
Karl is not a veteran or a firearms engineer. He cant even take care of his own fucking teeth, why the fuck should he lecture me on military small arms design?

Attached: kn4trsgpiz711.jpg (1280x720, 132K)

>if a single part breaks, the entire thing needs to be replaced
Uh, if you crack the magwell then you're not using the gun. Also if you need an armorer you're not doing that job in the field, just get an extra at base, the army can afford extras since plastic is cheap.
I mean the army is already switching to polymer side arms and they have been used by LEOs for decades now.
Unless you're in extreme cold polymer us more durable than steel too, you're not backing up anything you say, just saying
>They will not last as long
Okay how, why? You have provided no evidence, you're literally talking out of your ass
The only thing you have is a rusty training rifle you got off google images. If you are in the military you're probably some pog or worse a tryhard cav scout who thinks he knows everything because he just got out of AIT.
Cut the act

Dubs

But user. He is in the military, he doesn't have to provide evidence of support his claim. He's automatically right because he protecc our freedoms. Besides, that's what google is for.

Attached: 1541257834158.png (595x451, 141K)

Attached: 14c.jpg (207x253, 7K)

The LoP argument is a sign of severe autism.

Let's see if I got this right. You would give up your guns and second ammendment rights as long as it ment some commies die. Sound about right?

How does that boot taste, commie?

A source for this would be nice.

>thread started to discuss a firearm built on a youtube channel
>shareblue trolls: "hey guys, it's a thread about popular gun guys from the internet! We better go shit up the thread with personal attacks and not touch the actual topic!"
How do all these trolls have NOTHING better to do?

How do you having nothing better to do? Stop being a commie and getting so booty blasted

Except the cav lower replaces more than the magwell, it replaces a significant number of parts compared to a standard lower, all while removing functionality.
Both extreme cold and extreme heat weaken the structure of polymer. If a rifle is sitting in a shipping container in afghanistan at anywhere from 130 to 140 degrees, there is a serious potential to sacrifice its structural integrity. You even admit that the military would be sacrificing integrity for cold weather environments. I post pictures of rusty rifles to show you the absolute retarded shits grunts do to their rifles that not even metal withstands. Their rifles are dropped, stomped on, scratched, and mortared often.
Best yet, you still cant provide a single fucking benefit to these shitty lowers. What better thing do they do? The maximum thing they might provide is a few ounces in weight saving.

I dont irrationally hate polymer. On some guns it works fine, like the SCAR 16. But inrange has not a single fucking clue what makes for good small arms development, and their WWSD rifle is a shining beacon of that.

>durrr hurrr why does every modern designed rifle have adjustable lengths of pull durr

Attached: 1516220208146.png (645x773, 87K)

>cav lower replaces more than the magwell
Correct...except the only part it replaces that wasn't polymer already is the lower receiver itself. How often do grunts break stocks and pistol grips, that they need to be swapped in 10 mins? Since you can't seem to find a broken CAV15 to post, how bout we see some broken M16 stocks instead?

>How often do grunts break stocks and pistol grips, that they need to be swapped in 10 mins?
Often enough that it makes literally no sense build a part that would require an entire lower swap to replace them. If 1 thousand pistol grips are broken per year in the army, that now compound to 1 thousand lowers that need to be replaced.
>how bout we see some broken M16 stocks instead
Any situation a standard m16 stock would have broken in would have broken the cav ages before it. There are literally tens of millions of standard AR lowers, and a few thousand cav

Attached: 36605098_10156758608643606_787384637704896512_o.jpg (768x1024, 65K)

I'm a bit flabbergasted people defend the CAV-15 lower in this day and age. Their real appeal back when was they were markedly cheaper than a regular lower assembly, but now they run just as much while offering less. And before you argue about weight, that will be at best marginal. A fully populated aluminum lower (WITH a stock you can adjust) will be just above 2 pounds. An unpopulated CAV-15 lower is right around 1.5 pounds, so once you get the buffer, FCG, push pins etc. etc. it's going to be the same damn thing. You may be saving a few ounces, but I don't know what the hell else you're gaining from choosing a CAV-15 over a regular M4 lower.

There are people who unironically worship everything Karl and Ian do. Literally the only good thing about inrange tv is the mud testing series, and its not like that is some massive display of thought or data gathering.

>all the metal parts are rusted and rotted out
>but the plastic stock and grip are fine
How would the CAV15 fare worse again?
I'm not defending it as THE GREATEST TACTICALIST THING EVAR (though maybe OP is), just as 'not shit'.
I liked CAV15s before they were cool (when they were still made by Cavalry Arms).

Okay but what advantage does it give you exactly? Why do you pick one over a M4? So far, all I'm getting is
>it -might- weigh a tad less
>you aren't given as much options in customization
>you're stuck with its LOP
I fail to see any appeal here whatsoever.

Devil's advocate here, they did a pretty good job I thought. Stoner absolutely would have tried to use more plastic if the technology was there, and he didn't put a fucking forward assist on by choice either. However with modern materials available I can see him trying to use shitloads of Ultem and PEEK.

I don't want to. I think it was a good guide for civilian AR building.

>Keeps posting images from some facebook page
interesting.
Again, if polymer isn't strong enough than how come the army started using polymer pistols and every LEO does too?
Polymer does break, but it doesn't bend over time due to repeated stress causing parts to be slightly out of alignment, but not enough to break. That causes major issues that are hard to detect.

>WWSD?
We already have that answer, and it's a shitload nicer than the abortion InRange produced.

Attached: uploaded_633822436790222500_file-tfb.png (900x544, 851K)

>still no proofs of polymer bits breaking

What advantage does any part choice give? The only real downsides are pretty niche (no adjustable stock, no special snoflake custom grips), or unsourced claims of inferior durability. The CAV15's main advantage is weight reduction, and simplicity. Honestly I'm pretty sure the whole WWSD concept started with Ian, Karl, and/or Russel debating on what a CAV15 lower would be good for.

If you don't see the appeal...that's cool. Nobody's forcing you to operate with it.

>ITT:AR fags defending their meme brand AR parts

Trips

>still no proofs of polymer bits breaking
I'm confused, I never said anything about it breaking.
>What advantage does any part choice give?
Is this a serious question? Some people would like to swap out stocks and grips for things more to their liking. If this wasn't the case, there wouldn't be countless options of either available to the consumer. A CAV-15 lower does not permit this, you are stuck with the stock and the grip it comes with.
>pretty niche
Swapping out grips and stocks? That is very basic commonly practiced...
>The CAV15's main advantage is weight reduction
Already addressed, if you save any weight at all it's going to be a few ounces.
>and simplicity
Granted, but this is very amrginal considering the simplistic and durable means by which stocks and grips are attached to standard lowers.
>If you don't see the appeal...that's cool. Nobody's forcing you to operate with it.
No, but I'm waiting to be presented with actual merits and advantages the CAV-15 lower offers over regular contemporaries.

>The only real downsides are pretty niche (no adjustable stock, no special snoflake custom grips)
>Adjustable stocks and removable grips
>pretty niche

Attached: 1506429584490.jpg (392x379, 119K)

Military rifles have been just fine without them for centuries seriously unless you're professional basketball player tall an A1 stock is just fine for you.