Is it a waste of money?

Is it a waste of money?

Attached: 45b0a91f1d0e9949fb02363d39c19319.jpg (843x347, 68K)

Yes. Not to mention front heavy.

In terms of practicality? Yes, you can have an AR10 that will perform better for the same price or cheaper and won't be as abysmally heavy.

In terms of cool factor and collectors value? Only you can judge.

But if a gun is heavier wouldn't that make it more manageable? Which could make it more accurate?

no and no

Yes, and I still want one.

Do you think it's cool? Then it's not. In every other regards? Yes. It was a clunky, awkward stopgap implemented when the military was desperately trying to acquire enough AR10s to issue for the DMR role that had been so retardedly neglected leading up to the GWOT.

I think it looks alot cooler than cookie cutter ar10s

Fuck off nogunz

Yes, but if you have the money to waste and want one then go for it.
Not every gun you own has to be practical nor the best nor honestly even good.

this whole setup doesnt even make any sense.

> fore grip on a 26"+ inch gun
> bipod, accomplishing nothing a bag cant do
> 3x scope on a 600 yard accurate rifle
> laser and probably incompatible ACOG optic

>over 11lbs unloaded without optics

>cheaper than new guns
>sub moa
if you are the army, no, if anyone else, yes

Post yours faggot

Yes and yes, just harder to carry for a long time

I'll say it again, fuck off nogunz

Attached: 1550433271441-2069007044.jpg (2560x1440, 657K)

Wow

Attached: 20180216_160307.jpg (4032x3024, 1.43M)

you're fucking retarded if you think this. it doesn't work for when comparing completely different types of rifles.

Why the fuck would I start a thread about a chassis for a gun I dont own?

Attached: 1547830668504.gif (220x167, 268K)

Within the same platform yes, but generally between different platforms no.
e.g. Free floated DI AR-10 with a heaver/stiffer barrel of the same quality will likely (but not necessarily) be more accurate, and have less felt recoil.
The felt recoil and accuracy of different platforms however vary to an even larger degree.

Pretty much yes.

It was a costly kludged stopgap to get a DMR, and if you want one as a civilian a repro of it will cost an absolute fortune. That money can easily buy an LMT which will shoot circles around it.

If you are married to the aesthetic and money is no matter, then it's not really a waste of money because you are just paying a premium for what you want.
Might help absorb some recoil, but weight alone won't help anything with accuracy. That chassis helps with accuracy because it allows the barrel and gas system to free float, not because it's heavy.

McMillan is going to stop making M14 stocks, so this will be the future of all accurized M14 rifles

Oh, this thread again.

>Is it a waste of money?
Not if you have a bunch of M14 sitting in crates and it would be really nice to have a battle rifle without having to wait for all the hassle of adopting a new rifle.

Attached: 15876051_1628666780774124_6816303610616348672_n.jpg (750x421, 43K)

>Is it a waste of money?
only if you dont kill someone with it

As someone who fell for the M14 meme to the tune of a 3k SEI when I was in my cash flush undergrad days throwing money at everything then promptly sold it after shooting 200ish rounds.

It is absolutely not worth the cash to anyone who's experienced a modern AR10/SCAR. While it btfos a G3/FAL (inb4 poorniggers) it's absolutely outclassed in every way with contemporary options.

Only buy this as a historical oddity. For me I needed to free up cash and didn't have a real investment in it's history beyond "wow that looks badass" and was left sorely disappointed.

not necessarily. the big problem with the EBR is that it's very front heavy.

Yes.