Chrome lined or Chrome-Moly?

[vikz]

for what i have research ,chromedlined is good if you will shoot a lot but accuracy might be better if it is not chromed lined and as far as i know .223 and 5.56nato is thesame so yes you can used both here is my new bushmaster M4A2..

updated version

Originally Posted by the_gunman1

Wich one is the better to have on an AR? Also can you shoot .223 in a 5.56 nato chamber?

[teamcnabb05]

Originally Posted by the_gunman1

It'll be next Feb but this is what I'm hoping for.

RRA rule!!!

[mpak87]

Originally Posted by the_gunman1

Thank you all for the opinions, info and links. I was originally looking at this one:




I was just unsure of the removeable rear sights. Thanks to you all I will most likely go with the one in the pic above. What would be a decent rear sight thats modeately priced? These (below) are on the RRA web site and are a little over $100.

I've got the ARMS #40 on my Stag model. 2L, and it works quite well for me. The only problem that I've had is that it tended to work loose at first, but a bit of locktite fixes that right up. Besides that, it is very, very solid. The adjustment on it works just like a regular A2 sight, and I don't have to worry about it being beaten up. I'll be getting an Aimclone for the rifle fairly soon, and the BUIS folds down low enough to not cause a problem. I can't tell you anything about the low profile ARMS, but I know that mine is pretty beefy.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by vikz

...and as far as i know .223 and 5.56nato is thesame

Absolutely NOT TRUE!

Fact: SAAMI specifically warns against the use of 5.56mm ammo in .223 chambers. The .223 SAAMI specification was originally made with bolt rifles in mind.
For more see the SAAMI website ammo warning.

5.56 v. .223 Remington specification.

Fact: The different manufacturer's chamber types are listed at length and in great detail at:The Maryland AR15 Shooters Site.

[the_gunman1]

JD, thanks for that pic brother it tells me alot. I understand the difference better now.

[the_gunman1]

I believe I have made my mind up on this one:


Since I'll be doing good to get it at all I believe I'm going with this AR, 10 good mags and a case of Wolf (grey casings) and probably this:


I believe this set up will give me plenty of good service to become good and familiar with the AR system. Then I'll look into getting an EO-Tech sight as soon as I can afford one.

[xd4life]

It's not much different that the UTE, Except it appears the rear sight is not fixed and it has the handle. If it is fixed and you are going to put that scope on it I wouldn't pay for the carrying handle.

[the_gunman1]

Originally Posted by xd4life

It's not much different that the UTE, Except it appears the rear sight is not fixed and it has the handle. If it is fixed and you are going to put that scope on it I wouldn't pay for the carrying handle.

I just like the idea of having the iron sights as a back-up. It is removable by the way.

[Mr. Wolf]

Shorter or CAR handguards have the ~7" gas tubes. In rapid fire / heating sequence, this is what over heats and bends / clogs, giving you a very expensive single shot weapon.

If you're doing a lot of rapid fire / auto fire, then the mid lenght / full length gas tube is the way to go... otherwise for most mere mortals, you won't notice any difference with the CAR lengths.

cheers,

[cougar_guy04]

Originally Posted by the_gunman1

I believe I have made my mind up on this one:

Very nice, that's what I was going to buy when I first started looking at AR's . . . decided to build a "clone" of it instead. I'm still debating between that carry handle and an ARMS 40.