What drives your "build"?

[Nuclear_Arms]

As far as my shooting goes, I think a lot of it has to do with the available environment mixed with competing interests. I grew up playing video games, and they had a lot of influence on my early decisions. My very first rifle was a Springfield M1A-loaded stainless. I quickly started turning that gun into my vision of a BAMF semi-auto sniper rifle. I put it in a JAE stock, played with various scope mounts, optics, and internal parts. Ultimately, I ended up with a great looking rifle that I just didn't shoot very much due to the inherent quirks of the M1A platform.



I was living in Montana at this point, around 2008, and decided it was time to finally get into the AR game. I still had never gotten seriously into shooting, because i was more interested in "show" than actually having the skills. I set out combing the forums and began sketching out my "TEOTWAWKI" build. I was originally looking at all the low end parts that were raved about on ARF. But, I eventually found the more technically (and tactically) oriented sights and revised my parts list. Since I didn't really shoot that much, I didn't really know what I wanted. So I set out to do a general purpose recce-type built around a Centurion 16" LW CHF barrel. I slapped on some cool colored Magpul hardware and a fancy ribbed Spikes/Seekins BAR rail, and ended up with exactly what I had envisioned. I finished this one in 2010, after nearly a year of agonizing over part selection and then assembling it piece by piece.



It wasn't long after I completed this project that I began participating in local two-gun and three-gun matches. The more I shot, the more I realized the shortcomings of what I had built. I didn't care fore the very wide handguard, and had problems with some of the internal parts I had used (Spikes ST-T2 buffer. It had issues with weak ammo in cold weather). At the same time, my wife (then girlfriend) shot my AR, and immediately declared that she wanted one of her own. While building a KISS type lightweight based around a BCM 16" pencil barrel for her, ammo prices began to climb.

My range in Montana had a 1000 yard steel plate set up. I found myself spending more and more time on it with my AR. But I began running into the limitations of the TR-24G's reticle. I decided to go ahead and commit to the recce concept and turn that AR into a fun target shooter, and keep the KISS build for serious use.



Once the Air Force moved me to California, I was presented with a new set of problems. I no longer had access to my nice long range, and had to deal magazine size restrictions (AND the stupid bullet button). This pretty much ruled out any type of action shooting OR long range shooting. I found myself becoming more focused on the fundamentals of marksmanship, especially from various positions other than prone or sitting at a bench. I began signing up for small local marksmanship matches that take place between 25 and 100 yards.





I realized that all that time spent behind a bipod, and all the other time spent running around VTAC targets and shooting ad IPDA targets, didn't really help my fundamentals. I could keep it in an A-Zone at relatively close distances, and do it quickly, but I was not very good at putting shots into small circles from positions under time pressure. I also found that my skill with iron sights was woefully inadequate. So I set out to build what I thought was an ideal marksmanship training rifle to let me practice those fundamentals and iron sights. So I grabbed a BCM 20" government upper, and now swap it back and forth with my recce's lower.



In all, I have found that I spend less time looking for the latest gizmos and more time thinking how I can further improve my current rifles to suit my needs. Don't get me wrong, I still think about possible build projects (I have had a 308 project slowly moving along for well over a year), but such projects are MUCH more grounded in how I will actually use them versus imaginary situations. I am active duty military, so I figure that if I get sent overseas they will issue me the appropriate rifle. But they can't issue me the requisite fundamentals and skills that are needed for excellent shooting. I spend most of my range time now either working on marksmanship fundamentals, or pistol drills- and I think my shooting projects reflect those changes.

If i was to do it all over again, I would have taken the advice that Rob once gave on another site. Buy a high quality basic carbine, and shoot the piss out of it until you really figure out what you are going to want to do with it. That, to me, is a much better route than building what you THINK you want, then shoehorning yourself into one type of style only to later find that you would rather do something else.

[Computalotapus]

In all, I have found that I spend less time looking for the latest gizmos and more time thinking how I can further improve my current rifles to suit my needs. Don't get me wrong, I still think about possible build projects (I have had a 308 project slowly moving along for well over a year), but such projects are MUCH more grounded in how I will actually use them versus imaginary situations. I am active duty military, so I figure that if I get sent overseas they will issue me the appropriate rifle. But they can't issue me the requisite fundamentals and skills that are needed for excellent shooting. I spend most of my range time now either working on marksmanship fundamentals, or pistol drills- and I think my shooting projects reflect those changes.

If i was to do it all over again, I would have taken the advice that Rob once gave on another site. Buy a high quality basic carbine, and shoot the piss out of it until you really figure out what you are going to want to do with it. That, to me, is a much better route than building what you THINK you want, then shoehorning yourself into one type of style only to later find that you would rather do something else.

That was a pretty cool read. You should post more haha

[FortTom]

The more I shot, the more I realized the shortcomings of what I had built. I didn't care fore the very wide handguard, and had problems wiith weak ammo in cold weather).

....... I found myself becoming more focused on the fundamentals of marksmanship, especially from various positions other than prone or sitting at a bench. I began signing up for small local marksmanship matches that take place between 25 and 100 yards.

I realized that all that time spent behind a bipod, and all the other time spent running around VTAC targets and shooting ad IPDA targets, didn't really help my fundamentals. I could keep it in an A-Zone at relatively close distances, and do it quickly, but I was not very good at putting shots into small circles from positions under time pressure. I also found that my skill with iron sights was woefully inadequate. So I set out to build what I thought was an ideal marksmanship training rifle to let me practice those fundamentals and iron sights. So I grabbed a BCM 20" government upper, and now swap it back and forth with my recce's lower.

In all, I have found that I spend less time looking for the latest gizmos and more time thinking how I can further improve my current rifles to suit my needs. Don't get me wrong, I still think about possible build projects (I have had a 308 project slowly moving along for well over a year), but such projects are MUCH more grounded in how I will actually use them versus imaginary situations.

If i was to do it all over again, I would have taken the advice that Rob once gave on another site. Buy a high quality basic carbine, and shoot the piss out of it until you really figure out what you are going to want to do with it. That, to me, is a much better route than building what you THINK you want, then shoehorning yourself into one type of style only to later find that you would rather do something else.

It is absolutely logical, that you've dedicated more of your time to shooting fundamentals, over "latest gizmo's". But "a much better route than building what you THINK you want..." What we "THINK" we want?....

I get the feeling that you're assuming that folks don't know what they want or need, or everyone that builds a rifle with "gizmo's" (not sure what your definition of gizmo is) don't need them in the first place. If not, don't be offended, there is plenty of that to go around, and, I was leery that was the was what this thread would devolve into. I'm fairly certain it was carefully guided to that from the onset.

If you are referring to folks who have very little experience with the AR, or building a rifle to drag out of the safe to impress folks, then carefully dusted and inspected for lint, then you are correct. 100% correct.

I currently have 5 AR's that I've put together, and have owned many more. Most ( more lately, anyway) were built with an idea in mind, and were planned piece by piece from start to finished. A couple started with a stripped lower, but finished with "store bought" complete uppers.

Most AR's are fundamentally the same, but can differ greatly upon intended use. The 5 that I have settled on keeping, at least for now, either have major, or subtle differences based on preference. I have tried "gizmo's" that didn't work out so well. So what? That's part of the fun of experimenting. How do you know you don't need something, that it was useless, or conversely find it's the greatest thing for ones particular intended use since smokeless powder? Hopefully, not over the internet through the eyes of one or two folks, or a couple of youtube video's and blogs? However, it definitely doesn't hurt to read other posts and watch video's, especially when a fairy large number of folks warn that said "gizmo" is a piece of crap, could ruin your weapon, or worse, get you killed in a self defense situation.

You have to weed out the luddites, and wannabe's, sure, but as you stated, and as should be, "I spend most of my range time now either working on marksmanship fundamentals, or pistol drills - and I think my shooting projects reflect those changes". Well done, many, many folks I know throw a couple of targets up on the range, shoot about 40 rounds from a bench, and call it a day. But limiting yourself forever to a basic carbine, for fear of building something that won't fit your needs, well you might very well be limiting the payoff of all of those long and hard hours you put in honing your shooting skills.

Some folks can make one basic rifle perform all of the usage it'll ever see with absolutely no problems. But modern times, and components allow us to fine tune rifles into exactly what we want them for, rather than a "one size fits all". And an underlying theme that one will see in these type threads is that most people aren't smart enough to know the difference. The bottom line is that even if the gun you pull out of the safe on a given day, for a trip to the range, isn't the one you'd use for a particular situation, it's still fun to lighten up a bit, grab a butt load of ammo, and go shoot the crap out of it. You can spend your serious training time, with the "correct" rifle for your intended use.

Have fun...

FT

[Nuclear_Arms]

I get the feeling that you're assuming that folks don't know what they want or need, or everyone that builds a rifle with "gizmo's" (not sure what your definition of gizmo is) don't need them in the first place. If not, don't be offended, there is plenty of that to go around, and, I was leery that was the was what this thread would devolve into. I'm fairly certain it was carefully guided to that from the onset.

If you are referring to folks who have very little experience with the AR, or building a rifle to drag out of the safe to impress folks, then carefully dusted and inspected for lint, then you are correct. 100% correct.

I was definitely saying the latter. If you've already been shooting for a while, and understand your needs/wants and how to best build to suit them, then build away. I was speaking more towards those who are just starting out with the mentality that I had, building a purpose that exists in our imagination more than any real experiential use.

[FortTom]

I was definitely saying the latter. If you've already been shooting for a while, and understand your needs/wants and how to best build to suit them, then build away. I was speaking more towards those who are just starting out with the mentality that I had, building a purpose that exists in our imagination more than any real experiential use.

Then I'd have to agree with you 100%. My first few were store bought, new and used, and not really modified or accessorized much at all.

FT

[rob_s]

I was definitely saying the latter. If you've already been shooting for a while, and understand your needs/wants and how to best build to suit them, then build away. I was speaking more towards those who are just starting out with the mentality that I had, building a purpose that exists in our imagination more than any real experiential use.

that's what I did too, built something I thought would be cool, or the internet thought would be cool, but that turned out to be unsat for the kind of shooting I was doing.

[browcs]

After finally getting my Colt 6720, I decided to keep this carbine rail-free and will pretty much keep it as it looks here in this craptastic photo:



I already added though a Raptor charging handle, BFG UWL, and BFG/Vickers sling. I will add a new grip since I hate the OEM grip. For now, I will not replace the stock. Purpose for this carbine: training.

[rob_s]

The lack of good sling-mounting options on the 6720 is something that still frustrates me. Even just a side-sling-swivel like the 6920s use to have would keep one from having to buy alternate attachment methods right out of the gate.

I recently bought an Aimpoint PRO and, despite the above sling-mounting difficulties, I suspect it will soon grow a 6720 beneath it if the prices stay in the $800 range.

I've always like the idea of having a very basic and easy to understand carbine in the safe for new shooters, or as a loaner, or as something to travel with.

FWIW, if you're not attaching the sling to it (I wouldn't) I'd pull off that sling swivel at the toe of the stock. That thing winds up jabbing me something fierce every time I try to use an M4 stock.

[browcs]

FWIW, if you're not attaching the sling to it (I wouldn't) I'd pull off that sling swivel at the toe of the stock. That thing winds up jabbing me something fierce every time I try to use an M4 stock.

I'm debating swapping the stock to perhaps one of the new Magpul SL stocks; but right now, it's not a priority. The sling swivel hasn't bothered me on my work Colt which still has it's OEM stock.

I really appreciate the simpleness of the set-up. Frankly, I don't miss having a rail since I don't plan on attaching any other things beyond the RDS and light.

[rob_s]

I'm debating swapping the stock to perhaps one of the new Magpul SL stocks; but right now, it's not a priority. The sling swivel hasn't bothered me on my work Colt which still has it's OEM stock.

I really appreciate the simpleness of the set-up. Frankly, I don't miss having a rail since I don't plan on attaching any other things beyond the RDS and light.

I noticed it when I (A) stopped wearing a chest rig and (B) started trapping the stock between my elbow and ribs on reloads. May also be a function of how skinny I am... was.

[Steeles]

^ha, I was shooting with a buddy this past weekend he had an M4 stock with that sling attachment on it he wasn't using (QD endplate). He went to practice transitions to support side and the sling mount caught on his sling. needless to say upon arrival at home he promptly took the mount off the stock!

[DutyUse]

Pretty much spot on here.

There are a ton of items and accessories I should have unloaded, but if you have so much stuff you tend to forget what you have. Now that I think about it I did giveaway some of those same $500 Surefire lights that you can't unload now. Just goes to show you things like lights have come a long way in the last 5 years. Another example is rail systems. Back then a Daniel Defense Lite or M4 Rail was the shit, but now who is going to pay $300+ for one?

I should keep inventory on an Excel sheet, but as often as guns are torn down and rebuilt, I'd spend all my time updating the sheet. Ideally, for me the setups I would keep:

2 Colt 6720's (2 is 1, 1 is none)
1 MK18 type SBR setup
1 DMR/Recce type setup.

I agree 100% about keeping KISS duty rifles that will always stay classic and have much less things prone to failure. It's fun to build custom guns, but if crap really went down those rifles would be the last ones I would grab. No matter how much you try and make the newest whiz bang thing by the time you finish it's already outdated, it's the same thing as custom cars. I was just raised shooting out on the farm so my hobby has always been firearms. Plus it's always fun breaking out a custom rifle on someone who has never seen anything but rock rivers and walmart bushy's :D

[DutyUse]

I will admit to aesthetics being original drivers on my early buys and builds. As time has progressed and I've learned things / matured, aesthetics still play a part in it, but form should follow function, and if it can do the job AND look good, then I'm all for it. If something looks awesome but doesn't do the job or doesn't do the job as well as something else, it's not getting used.

First Buy:

First Build:


Second Build 1.0:


Second Build 2.0:


Second Build 3.0:
Two offshots:

First Built SBR

First bought SBR.

.

This is an amazing family of rifles! Great choices

[ennbee15]

Keep it simple is my build mantra. Don't use rails, I use the standard handguard or magpul handguard for better heat dissipation. An optic, rear buis, fsp , sling and a light. Boring, I know. But I'm old and I like what I like.

[Nathan_Mack]

My build concept has to fill a void in application or collection, but the two are never mixed when considering a build. If I did, it would muddle up the decision making process.

For an Application Build:

Must wholly fill a gap in a specific application without simple modification to a currently owned rifle that will also not alter the overall role of the currently owned rifle. This is even more strict if the "new" rifle is the same caliber as the current one. In other words, each rifle must have dedicated use value.

For Collection Build (or acquisition):

Simple. If I don't already have one and I want one I may buy or build it. Although this category never includes AR type rifles. They just aren't "collectable" to me.

Once I've decided to build, I price out the whole rifle as I imagine it down to the last pin and spring. Then I price out parts of a practical financial type. If the build can't get within about 80% of my expectations for the build with the money available I scrap the plan and save more and re-evaluate need/want down the road.