Home AR-15 What I hate about AR15 rifles

What I hate about AR15 rifles

By
madmin
-
115
42

This is the NGSW video I talk about:

At Desert Tech we love firearms innovation, we are always going against the grain and bypassing traditional designs. We are always doing amazing and fun stuff on the range and hope you enjoy this video!

Follow us on our other channels:
FACEBOOK:
INSTAGRAM:
TWITTER/X:
Youtube:

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, social media, internet forums. etc.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

42 COMMENTS

  2. The AR-15 isn't a innovation killer. The gun community/consumers are innovations killers. On the one hand they decry the "lack of innovation" in the industry. But in the next breath complain about any new design as being "untested, proprietary and lacking the same aftermarket support as the AR-15". Then you wonder why everyone nowadays is just making variations/takes on the AT-15 with current trend being bufferless uppers on standard AR-15 lowers with folding stocks.

  3. I’ve never experienced any of these issues you speak of with mine. They are a great AR for the money. And are much more accurate with sites. I see you don’t run them on many of your rifles…

  4. Most of the M4 was the Magazines. The other rifles tested XM8, HK416, Scar L used non U.S.G.I. Magazines. XM8 used G36 magazines well HK416 and FN Scar used steal magazines made to a USGI pattern with improved followers. The USGI magazine then went through multiple revisions and improvements to try and correct them until Lancer and PMags.

  7. I love the thought process you have. Inline with an inventor or engineers thought process. But as a vet who's been in combat you points are valid. I've never had a reliability issue with ar's (knock on wood), but the other points you stated I've noticed personally.

  9. A Few Things:
    1)The biggest weakness the entire AR family has is it's relative fragility in 'over the beach' testing.
    2)The velocity loss due to chopping the barrel is operational requirements intersecting with the inherent weakness of 5.56, not an AR family one.
    3)It's old (at least 64 years depending on how you count) and has modernized better than all it's peers and many of it's alleged successors.
    4)Point 3 needs to be taken with the added context that all of that modernization has occurred effectively outside it's design envelope.
    5)A lot of people think that it's the best, because for them, it is. For many, whether they verbalize it, or not, the fact is that they want to buy in to the logistical train surrounding the standard issue rifle of their country. That log train effects everything around it, well in to the civilian sector. It means all my accessories and enablers are going to be geared to it (the AR fam), it means most ammunition being produced will be 5.56 and .223. These are just a few things your are accessing by buying an AR. There isn't an industry behind a single one of the other 5.56 weapon systems the way there is just for the AR family.
    6)Item 5 has more to do with the AR being an innovation killer than anything.
    7)Have a good day and best of luck with your business.

  10. Survivability…training gunfighters to make ambidextrous "optimal use if cover" is key. The ambidextral gunfighter requires a rifle with perfectly mirrored controls. The 7.62 MDR I tested was great at that.

  11. No one wants to move past the ar platform because no one can afford to be guinea pigs for unreliable over priced products. Also because many of us want reliable part availability and not proprietary parts that basically leave you dead in the water if something breaks in the not widely tested "innovative" platform. I'm sure if something that was truly innovative came out people would consider going to it so long as it wasn't a 1 off manufacture patent thing.
    That's the issue with all the proprietary innovative stuff. It can't get market share cause only one company makes it and so it stays proprietary and small production.

  13. I dont like how sensitive AR15s are for different ammo and running suppressed or not. A good fighting rifle should run on cheapest garbage ammo to hand loads to match grade suppressed or unsupressed, different barrel lengths, etc. None of this buffer weight and spring stuff or gas adjustments should be necessary. The AK47 can run no matter what. I also dont like the gas rings. AKs dont deal with that either.

  14. Remember guys this video exists to sell you a product. The criticisms here are all either non-issues, preferences which the AR15 platform can easily accommodate, or borderline deceitful (1 failure every 500 rounds?) The Baseline Reliability report from 2016 established 1 stoppage every 3,600 rounds. The MDR's rail can't even hold a zero.

  16. I love his video. I have many of the same complaints for the AR. I've built four and probably owned twice that many in my lifetime. And the reason for that is they end up pissing me off so I get rid of them and then I find myself deciding to get another one. They are dirty, and after you buy the weapon you need to spend even more money on parts to make them reliable and ergonomically fit for you. After spending my life around many different types of shooters from military to law enforcement to civilian, I think the AR-15 has so many fanboys because it is the most "TACTICOOL" rifle someone can own without absolutely obliterating their bank account. Nowadays you can build a decent one for less than $1,000. Affordability and parts availability is what makes these rifles so popular. When I was growing up, everyone was shooting SKS's. Not because they were the best rifle. But because they were inexpensive and kind of resembled the then "TACTICOOL" AK-47.

    I also agree with you saying that people believe that if the military use it it must be the best there is. I was in the military. That is not the case. The military uses the best it can get for the lowest price possible. That's why the military still hasn't widely adopted 300 blackout for its shorter barrels. It's not so far and beyond better than 556 to justify the price and kit and logistic changes. It's also the reason why there are better weapons out right now that take the same 5.56 round that the military still has not adopted. Much as us poor citizens, they are very budget conscious. Why buy 500,000 great rifles when you can buy 2 million decent rifles for the same price? I understand that that is an over exaggeration, but the point still stands. AR-15 is the closest weapon a civilian can own that closely resembles military weapons. Within a budget that your average person can afford. The moment a better rifle comes out that can be made to look "TACTICOOL" that can be had for the same price, I have no doubt that there will be far less AR-15's being sold.

  20. I think you have a superior product on the market, Although at the time I can’t afford one.

    These are two applications where I think a Bull up design specifically your Bullpup design win out, but never does.

    1. Sniper Systems. I have used a Steyr and Hellion And I think that just for making a sniper system compact, maybe with an integral suppressor is the future. There are less reloads and that is the complaint from anyone about Bull pups

    2. Machine Gun Systems. Again, the problem is the reload for most people. Let’s be honest here. Reloads on M249’s, 240B’s SUCK. Imagine taking a nut sack attached to a partial magazine or a magpul drum Instead of using belts. Belts just freaking suck. They complicate every facet of the machine gun. They complicate loading, they complicate carrying, and they complicate function of the weapon. No one will agree that loading a bullpup is worse than a belt fed weapon.

    These will be the future, whether people get behind them or not someone will figure it out. No one wants to carry around a long ass SR 25. I didn’t. No one wants to carry around a long ass 240B. Ergonomics, light and simplicity will win the day, every time.

    I have several designs for weapons because I think high technology is simplicity, not complexity. So many of our systems today are so complex and they are high tech, but I feel like that is low tech. I feel like you’re on the right path to solving the problem with bull pups being integrated into mainstream. I like your weapon better than the others. I have a Hellion, eventually yours will be in my gun room.

    Respectfully and humbly.

  21. Thanks for taking your time to share your opinion. Love the content.

    My favorite thing about the ar is parts availability and squad compatibility. My least favorite is the exposed buffer tube design.

    Cheers boys.

  25. Lets see: Whine about charging handle: You know, the control you use ONCE per shooting session unless you have a malfunction.
    Whine about safety: The control you probably wont be using at all in any real sense. One that is as mentioned, the gold standard across the firearms industry. HK selectors are KNOWN for being terrible to actuate and reach. Especially if you are going to use the argument for simple motions in fighting — your not going to use the safety.

    Reliability: The company that makes the MDRX is whining about AR's for reliability. Go fucking watch Garand Thumb's 600 dollar full auto Palmetto State abuse video and get back to me about reliability. The MDRX I have had the chance to shoot loves to turn into a machinegun and randomly fire when dropping the charging handle. REAL RELIABLE DESERTTECH.

    You are an idiot if you think you can flex the barrel on a FREE FLOAT barrel by influencing the handguard. That was a valid complaint on older non free float rifles, but the one you are holding in your hand, that is NOT POSSIBLE.

    The XM8 / G36 would have already been phased out of military service. Please see the German Military and it's complaint of melting trunnions. The US actually uses it's equipment unlike all of Europoors military. And if we are going to simp for the XM8, we should point out it's ergo flaws, all of which are identical or worse to the M4. And just like when the M9 was selected, they used clacked out old M1911 / M4's for the competition instead of brand new firearms for fair comparison. I personally know some of the guys who were on the XM8 testing program.

    Your points with bullpups providing better ballistics in the same size package is valid, and well known. But dont come out here whining about ergos' with beard hair pulling with your burn your finger off MDRX gas block. Your sins are worse. You did not want to make an AR because you could not make one profitably that would actually sell.

  29. It has a lot of good likes… but a couple dislikes in addition to what you said. Mags don't always lock in if there is a mag issue, dirt or debris, or an issue with the mag catch. Noticeable in snowy/icy conditions and muddy/sandy conditions. Just when you think it is in and fire, it can drop free. Also if you have a bad jam that may be easier to clear if you field strip, oh well too bad, you can't field strip the weapon if the bolt wont fully seat (or at least very close to) in battery.

  32. Most of my rifle owning friends and relatives have AR15's. I am the Star Wars guy of the group, I like bullpups! I just don't like the way the AR platform feel like. The weight of my .308 MDRXCOM is fine with me. I do have the 20" .223 bolt kit. I own several lever guns and bolt actions that I like. One day I may own the SRS system, but I am not sure which barrel kits I will buy. Even though I prefer bullpups, I would be interested in a bolt action kit for an AR.

  34. I've pointed out exactly all these problems and more (To Include this "Varmint Ammo's" lack of Stopping power, it should have been equivalent to 6.8 REM SPC from day one)) with the M16 during a 24 year Military Service starting in 1977 and since as a Civilian. But No One with the Power to fix anything will listen because they don't give a shit how it will help at the Warriors level. It's small potatos and acceptable loses to them.

  35. Saying it's an "innovation killer" is one of the biggest reason I can't stand the AR. The market has become so sickeningly homogeneous and boring it almost makes a guy lose interest in the hobby. The AR is Schrodinger's Rifle: Possessed with a near infinite degree of variance while also being the most boring fuckin thing on the gun market.

  36. Then you should have developed a bufferless, monnolithic AR 15/10 upper with side charging Handle and no T-handle & forward assist … with with the same low weight, recoil, accuracy .. but greater reliability … to be mated your own bullpup lower …. or .. an AR lower.

    You should have always … developed this "Next Gen' AR upper .. specifically for your bullpup lower and your improved AR Lower. And then you could have offered your BAR-L & BAR-H to various military and Police forces .. and semi autos to the civilian market.

    Your MDR … should have been bufferless AR upper .. mainly for a BULLPUP lower … but can mate to any AR Lower.

    C'mon main. If you wanted a bullpup … to replace the AR .. you had to start with with AR upper first … but with the improvements .. that can be mated to any AR lower … or … your BP lower.

    And your upper will have at least the same weight, recoil, and accuracy … and similarly priced AR uppers .. but is is mainly designed for your BP lower … as the same weight, same triggers and mag release etc as the AR lower.

  38. The whole idea of what the army uses is best is always screwing innovation. If the people who thought that always had decision-making power, we would still be running muskets because the army used them, and we never would have gotten to new better rifles like the m1903 or the Garand or eventually the ar15 itself. To think that we should just randomly stop innovating now is simply absurd.

Leave a Reply