https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI5 NPiicXjE Do you have th

It's an interesting thought exercise but what they've actually managed to come up with looks like shit.

If they have fun playing with their polymer lowers at 3 gun more power to them.

>>33820928
I really like fixed stocks, but I'm not sure if that was the best choice for them. If you're wearing a plate carrier or shorter, then I think a collapsible stock would be better.

I like these guys but they've been making some REALLY questionable choices with this little project of theirs...

>>33820928
>Rethinking the AR-15 in 2017
>2017
>no folding stock

Too bad Ian and Karl are armchair warriors with no clue.

Also. Reminder Karl used to do work for or with cav arms and mentions so in one of the videos where they shoot the lower at his two gun match.

>>33821607
>Reminder Karl used to do work for or with cav arms
Welp that explains why they're unironically deciding to opt for a fucking fixed stock and saying that's an "ideal" trait in 2017...

>>33821632
I don't think they ever called the fixed stock ideal

They are going for low weight above all and it's a trade-off

>>33821644
The whole series is supposed to be what an optimized AR would be as deaigned by Stoner in 2017. To think that vision would include sacrificing something as convenient as stock length manipulation for the sake of a bit of weight savings is questionable, at best.

>>33821632
I thik the deal was that they wanted a polymer lower which wasn't shit so they went with that one. Stoner designed the AR with a fixed stock, so it's borderline imo.

>>33821657
It's more then that, they are seeing what today would be considered "new" technology for the AR and how it comes together

The title is just click bait

>>33821673
Stoner made a lot of design decisions with the AR that were products of the knowledge and technology at the time. Do you think they should still have fixed carry handles and unlined bores, too?

>>33821684
>unlined bores
That was the US military skimping, not Stoner.
And the handles were at a time where optics weren't really a thing. Ian and Karl mention it.
As I said, borderline. They did say something about it bein the only non shit polymer lower, if they outright say that they'd prefer a polymer collapsible I'd be much happier.

>>33821739
Stoner originally designed the AR with an unlined bore. The Army used this as a pretense to keep it unlined.

>>33820928
>Do you have their ideal rifle, yet?
- 14.5" pencil barrel w/ flash hider
- No forward assist
- Aimpoint H2

Differences are a 9" quad rail, your average lower with ambidextrous fire-select and magazine release, and collapsible stock (currently an HK-style collapsible stock for extra mallninjicity). It will have a light whenever I find a mount that suits me.

Karl never worked for CavArms. He's only associated with them because he knows them from shooting local matches. He explained that somewhere.

File: 8t6wls2of7sx.jpg (67KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 720x960px

>>33821607
>Too bad Ian and Karl are armchair warriors with no clue.
They may be armchair warriors, but they are warriors nonetheless!