compactness, hence the original stocks having 2 positions
Jeremiah Roberts
>Does anyone know what the original intent was for adjustable/telescoping stocks on the AR? To make it more compact and retain stock something that serves the purpose of being stock. Original telescoping stocks from 60's were two position. Either it was collapsed or not. There wasn't adjustment at all. Also they had bodyarmor back then.
Aiden Foster
Transports are pretty packed yo
Jonathan Diaz
>Also they had bodyarmor back then. Sure but it wasnt widely used.
Sure but was this the intent? Did they actually go "hey we should make this more compact so people can get in and out transports easier.
Jordan Roberts
Why make things shorter in the first place? No reason right? Yeah thats why millions were put into research and design of it.
Zachary Ramirez
So what was it? Im just trying to understand what drove the decision.
Chase Sanchez
When you make a long thing that needs to be carried around 24/7 have the ability to be shorter then you would consider that to be a benefit.
Charles Williams
"Oh you know this long stock kinda snags on foliage a lot, and is kinda awkward around all t vehicles we use now, as long as we are making a carbine we might as well put on a collapsible stock"
Camden Anderson
Decreasing OAL for close quarters. Old trick with fixed stock 20” rifles was to tuck the stock under your shoulder. Made it a little shorter to manage indoors. If you look for combat footage or pictures youll often see the stocks around position 3-5, but when looking at door kickers or cool guys the stocks are often completely collapsed.
Oliver Ward
>Sure but it wasnt widely used. Bullshit. >Sure but was this the intent? Did they actually go "hey we should make this more compact so people can get in and out transports easier. Are you retarded? There are plenty of reasons to make weapons more compact. Including ease of boarding and disembarking vehicles. For most of the time weapon is something that is just something that can get stuck on anything for soldiers. A fucking burden to be dragged around. It isn't used 99% of the time, even in fucking war zone.
Carbine stocks were always designed in mind with paratroopers that had minimal space and needed to have a weapon strapped to their body without interfering with movement. They became very useful in urban and indoors combat or cramped locations. This extended to vehicles as the carbine eventually replaced SMGs as the go-to for compact firepower.
The AR-15 carbine stocks telescope instead of fold because of the recoil buffer spring fitted in the stock. It's less that it was adjustable to start with and more of a design limitation.
Jason Diaz
Fair, and they original started with a stubby fixed stock. Hence top pic.
But why adjustable? Was there ever anything officially released? Im considering asking Colt but it seems like I need to actually write them a letter (cant find email contact).
But was this the official reasoning? I feel like the fixed stock would snag less since it is smooth, and given the original operational environment (jungles of vietnam) vehicle use seems limited.
So while these are valid points they are points after the fact.
James Ramirez
Flak vests were widely used in Vietnam. M55s, m69s and m52a were used extensively, however the collapsing stock wasn't intended for body armor as they only had 2 positions, and we're mainly for compactness while in transport vehicles.
Andrew Howard
>why adjustable So you can bring it to different positions depending on the scenario. The buffer tube would not allow for a folding stock.
Bentley Robinson
You are angrily calling bullshit for no reason. Flak jackets are a bit more compressable and again were not widely deployed.
Again its a valid reason but im trying to figure out what the official driving reason was.
Carter White
>Flak vests
Softer and more flexible. We will have to agree to disagree with how widely used they were (unless you have data?)
Still though, was this a stated reason? Does anyone know? I feel like design notes for the CAR and XM177 projects would be available.
Xavier Scott
Are you taking the piss or just stupid
Liam Davis
>again were not widely deployed. Issued to virtually everyone. Some may have chosen not to wear it as those were heavy, especially people like special forces. There is nothing angry about pointing out your false claims. >Again its a valid reason but im trying to figure out what the official driving reason was. To get more compact and handy weapon for special forces and other troops that need more compact guns. This isn't rocket science. That is the main reason why military organizations and their suppliers usually develop carbine versions of their fucking rifles. Telescoping stock is as short option as there is to AR-15. That stock just is in collapsed position is just too fucking short to be proper stock.
are you intentionally being obtuse? is this bait? why do you even give a shit as to what "the intention" was for the collapsible stock? did you ever imagine it has multiple purposes? being more compact, easier to fit into vehicles and the armory, and also viable for every soldier despite arm length? are you fucking retarded? why do you need someone to spell it out for you when you already know the answer?
Vinyl acetate coated aluminum is lighter than a fiberglass A1 rifle stock. It telescoped to minimize material while still achieving rifle length of pull when extended.
Dylan Thompson
Okay let me be a try a new approach....
The army experimented with weapons designs and somewhere along the line concluded that they should have adjustable stocks on their rifles.
We can all logical deduce a myriad of reasons for why this is a valuable feature, but these are sort if after the fact observations. The army in its experimental weapons program most likely had a very clear written purpose for why they had an interest in adjustable stocks.
What I want to know is what was this official reasoning was if anyone happens to know.
I want to know for 2 reasons, 1) because I like guns and part of that includes factoids about weapon development, and 2) because people want to ban guns that have an adjustable/folding/collapsible/telescoping stock (from what I can gather they think it makes it concealable), so it would be nice to have the official reason.
I can also draw logical conclusions, and infact mentioned all these reasons in my first post. However these are just my logical conclusions. I dont have any clue whether they are the same reasons that officially drove the development.
From what I can gather so far, none of you have any idea either, apart from the same logical conclusions we have all been able to make. Again though these are just our conclusions.
Xavier Nelson
Increase the handling and maneuverability of the weapon it cluttered or confined spaces. This will further increase operator performance with the aforementioned weapon.
Eli Smith
Why don't you just fucking consult the Army paperwork for the procurement of the XM-177?
Kevin Perry
>Guis why army want make gun meant 2 b compact be compact with collapsing stock? just fucking hurl yourself off of a bridge
Dylan Adams
Where is a good place to get one of these stocks? Any specific brands or places?
Leo Perry
>We can all logical deduce a myriad of reasons for why this is a valuable feature Why is this such a mental exercise for you to comprehend why a collapsing stock might be handy, Jesus Christ I want to fucking rape you until your asshole bleeds so you'll start thinking for hours about the benefits of having a collapsing rectum