My tastes run towards pretty, classic deer rifles but inexplicably, I've got my eye on an AR15 5.56/.223. My use would be home protection from the coming mongol hordes and shooting at the range. Either one could be fitted with a combo red dot/holographic optical sight though I am thinking open sights would be best for the intended use.
There are two configurations that have caught my eye, the first one having a conventional hand-guard. It is listed for sale for $498 (new in box) so around $200 less than comparable Optics-ready MP15 Sport II's. However, it is listed as a CA Compliant model and lacks a flash suppressor though the barrel is threaded. Anyone know if the CA compliance thing results in an inferior (function) rifle? Nothing seems different from a standard MP15 Sport II besides the absence of a flash suppressor. That and sights would be inexpensive add-ons. Having a standard fore-end, I like that you can use a normal off-hand rifle stance to fire.
The other configuration below has the full-length rail and ventilated handguard. Not having fired one, I am assuming one has to grip under and around the lower action ahead of the magazine rather than the fore-end when firing, which would seem an un-natural position. My gut says the rail and the shape of the unsupported ventilated guard would prevent you from using a conventional two-handed off-hand stance when shooting.
Which configuration do you AR15 owners prefer?
There are two configurations that have caught my eye, the first one having a conventional hand-guard. It is listed for sale for $498 (new in box) so around $200 less than comparable Optics-ready MP15 Sport II's. However, it is listed as a CA Compliant model and lacks a flash suppressor though the barrel is threaded. Anyone know if the CA compliance thing results in an inferior (function) rifle? Nothing seems different from a standard MP15 Sport II besides the absence of a flash suppressor. That and sights would be inexpensive add-ons. Having a standard fore-end, I like that you can use a normal off-hand rifle stance to fire.
The other configuration below has the full-length rail and ventilated handguard. Not having fired one, I am assuming one has to grip under and around the lower action ahead of the magazine rather than the fore-end when firing, which would seem an un-natural position. My gut says the rail and the shape of the unsupported ventilated guard would prevent you from using a conventional two-handed off-hand stance when shooting.
Which configuration do you AR15 owners prefer?