8.2 LBS!, 1 IN 9" Twist rate barrel! WTF! sorry for my rant, but this rifle is not worth the $2600+. Now were did the ACR gain a whole pound? It doesnt make sence either that the base weighs the same as the enhanced version with all the rails.
Ergonomics impacts speed, effectiveness, and the training learning curve. Non-issues for civilians, but for large LEO agencies, and the military good ergos are vital for several sound reasons....i don't understand this weight thing...i mean 7 or 8 or 9lbs?...what is this golf?..."i'm definitely not using the 9-iron for this one bob."...oh, i forgot it's the NEW amerika where if it weighs more than a remote, a cell phone, or a mcburger...its not worth my money...have you seen what they sell at wal-mart...cardboard to put your tv on?...i guess wood was to heavy......and don't get me started about "ergonomics"...what does that mean anyway?...what now we have to have our weapons all Feng shui'ed...so our chi is balanced and in sink with the oneness of the universe?...now take a second and ask this kid if he complains about the weight of his gun?.....hahaha...oh yea an AK weighs 9.5lbs with an empty mag....john-boy here has two loaded mags...
The mass of the bolt carrier and the trunnion where the barrel locks up is where alot of the weight is. So yes, I agree that the multi-caliber requirements did increase the overall weight.My ACR is on order so I am no expert on this particular rifle but I have owned guns since 1969 and I am sure I have more guns and experience than anyone else in my neighborhood.
So with that said, I am thinking that the weight of the ACR is in large part due to the multi-caliber requirements from 5.56 through 7.62 x 39 - like the mass of the bolt carrier for example.
What do you guys that have them think?
...well said man...it's just that the preoccupation with the use of technology to augment or improve some of the shortcomings that come from cookie-cutter training and other things, IMO shouldn't replace or hinder human adaptability...many guys say this: john boyd, Musashi, sun tzu, the USMC staff that wrote warfighting, etc...Ergonomics impacts speed, effectiveness, and the training learning curve. Non-issues for civilians, but for large LEO agencies, and the military good ergos are vital for several sound reasons...
First time carbine class shooters usually bring guns that are overloaded with crap, and very heavy...
Remington is stripping the ACR down to bare bones to military testing. They are doing everything to get the weight down. I am issued an M4 and M9, and would not want to increase in weapon weight. I feel the same way about the HK416, though the SCAR MK16 is a good weight, especially when compared to the M4A1
That isn't the point. Civilians tend be an army of one, and can wrap themselves around any weapon they purchase for their hobby. With military and LEO, the weapon has to accommodate thousands or even millions, with the end goal being an effective fighting force with an advantage over adversaries, with short spool up times....as far as being "non-issues" for civi's...man, most of the good training in the military comes from civilians...for ex: the military times just came out with an article that says the USMC is going to start 3-gun training in quantico...red-dots...forward grips...stance...brazilian jujitsu...civilians...civilians...and then LE asks the military to train them...it actually takes a while for it to trickle down to the grunts... however the spec-ops communities stay up to date because most of the time they get their training straight from the private sector...
Being multi caliber will always have a weight penalty. This is a given. However, this is not the ACR's problem. If this were the issue the ACR wouldn't be undercut in weight by the LMT MRP, XCR and SCAR.My ACR is on order so I am no expert on this particular rifle but I have owned guns since 1969 and I am sure I have more guns and experience than anyone else in my neighborhood.
So with that said, I am thinking that the weight of the ACR is in large part due to the multi-caliber requirements from 5.56 through 7.62 x 39 - like the mass of the bolt carrier for example.
What do you guys that have them think?
…you’re right, if I had a limited budget, was influenced by corporate lobbying, and had to manufacture a user friendly light infantry weapon to accommodate: teenagers, middle-agers, women, men, 90 pounders, 240 pounders, 4ft 8ers, 6ft 11ers, Pashto speakers, people that wear glasses, various IQ levels , whiners about weight, and also be politically correct…That isn't the point. Civilians tend be an army of one, and can wrap themselves around any weapon they purchase for their hobby. With military and LEO, the weapon has to accommodate thousands or even millions, with the end goal being an effective fighting force with an advantage over adversaries, with short spool up times.
So when you essentially say the importance of ergos is overstated, and mock the concept, you are definitely thinking singular and myopic.