Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles Time is a flat circle

What was once old is new again. Or nostalgic.

A lot of guys learned to shoot on the A2. It appears some people think it's time to re-arm. I can't say I blame them.

kwg

Good point. I'm sure there's more than one guy who's not touched a weapon since receiving a DD214 that might now decide they need to think about it again. Go back to what they "know" they can be effective with.

I haven't seen a street price and I'm sure someone can build one easily but it's an intriguing rifle for someone who doesn't want to do that.

Just a few short months ago, Colt SP1 rifles were bringing over $2000. A1 and A2 stripped upper receivers were fetching $250 and up.

There was a demand for some reason but I'm not sure why.

It's hard to think of a better iron-sighted rifle.

I would change only the barrel profile.

The A2 is a joy to shoot.

16" barreled AR's are just nasty to shoot. A 16" anything that operates in the 60,000 psi range is nasty to shoot. They're even worse when someone is shooting one right next to you.

Had an FN15 in the above configuration (except it had a removable handle) and it was a lot more pleasant.

I had a Marine let loose with a burst about 18 inches from me with one. BFA attached and we were in an alley way doing some MOUNT training. Shooter had ear pro, no one else did. Probably 70% of my tinnitus in that 3-5 second event.

I saw Colion Noir put a video out on it as well. Looks like a cool retro. I know I like my Colt A2. It has a lightweight barrel, so it may not shoot as well as some (HBAR's). I've been happy with it though. Pretty sweet rifles, if you like that type of thing..




Good posts. I agree..

You don't like the lighter "govt." profile? Why would you change it?? Makes the rifle lighter than an HBAR.

I prefer the A1 profile. The heavy section of barrel between the FSB and the FH was to prevent conscripts from bending their barrels when using as a prybar.

A taper, slightly heavier than the A1 profile, with a 1/7 twist and chrome lining is ideal to me.

Everything I shoot my 16" guns I ponder the concussion of a couple guys running M4s in some small house in Iraq or Afghanistan. With a fragmentation grenade as emphasis!

It's a wonder they can hear at all.

Probably a bit of nostalgia, but nothing wrong with that.

I remember when the A2 was rolled out to the FMF, I shot some of my best scores on the KD course with the A2.

They were welcome replacements for the well-worn A1's that I was issued from 1977 to 1983.

If they're not too crazy on the price I might have to get one.

StarchedCover

What?

That same night, I also got caught in a different area, stacked up with some guys when 3 flash bangs went off in the alleyway. That didn't help.

I was one of the last classes at TBS to qualify with the A2 with iron sights. I had already been shooting for 25 years at that point (I joined late), but never with iron sights at that range. The A2 was a joy to shoot. And, having never been taught anything other than Kentucky windage, it was a great learning experience too. My buddy George, a prior enlisted tracker, helped me appreciate it a lot.

But, having used the M4 in the Fleet and on deployment, I don’t think the A2 compares favorably. The M4 shot better, even at the 500, and was an all-around handier rifle. The battalion gunner (who retired as a CWO5) told me that the M4 shot more accurately because Colt made better barrels than FN. I have no objective way of testing that, but it tracked with my experience. I also heard that the Corps only adopted the A2 over the M4 because the M4 was too short for close order drill. Again, no way of verifying that, but that would be entirely in character for the Corps in which I served.

The funny thing to me was that once I had to qualify with the M4 and ACOG, I went right back to using Kentucky windage. My last time on the range at Pendleton, I was shooting a late relay, so there was a full value wind at the 500. I simply held on the target to my right and shot a perfect score at that range.

I still remember the serial number for the M4 I carried in Afghanistan. I would love to be reunited with that rifle. At least I can see her whenever I want, because our combat camera Marine used her to make the new unit patch for 2d Battalion, 1st Marines. Lots of nostalgia this morning…

Interesting. I think it boils down to either you like the A2, and appreciate it for what it is. Or you probably don't like it. Of course the M4 may seem more accurate, or you think it is because you were using an optic of some sort.

The A2 is a niche gun, and the older guys probably have more of an appreciation for it. I like it, and every time I shoot my Colt, it puts a smile on my face. At my club's AR shoots, I generally leave it in the back seat of the truck though. Yes, it's fun to pull out for nostalgia. But nostalgia doesn't win the race, now days.


That's not saying it doesn't shoot well though.

This little excerpt from wiki explains a little about accuracy between the 2:

"Accuracy
In a study conducted by the Army Marksmanship Unit, they found that at a distance of 300 yd (270 m), the M16 achieved a 24 in (610 mm) grouping, and the M4 achieved a 32 in (810 mm) grouping, which dropped to 12 in (300 mm) and 18 in (460 mm) respectively when using match grade ammunition.[95] As the average male torso is 18–19 in (460–480 mm) wide, author Chris McNab concluded that this meant the M4 can be consistently accurate up to 300 yards, and noted that the frequent usage of optical attachments meant it could be accurate to higher ranges."

This is also what I'd expect,when going from a long sight radius to a short one.

Interesting point about the groupings from the Army Marksmanship unit. I never shot the A2 (or A4) with an ACOG. I did shoot the M4 with iron sights on one range and still did better with it than I had with the A2. But I cannot consider it an apples-to-apples test because they were years apart.

May have just been differences in rifles. Your M4 may have had a better barrel. The A2 may have had tons of rounds through it too. So many variables there. But personally, I'd take the 20" A2, with the longer sight radius. If the main subject is "accuracy". To each their own.



This was 10 shots from an A2, at my clubs shoot. I only shot 1 match with that rifle, that day. That rifle was brand new to me at the time as well. It's a pretty good shooter. I had it out, letting my buddies at the club shoot it too, as they had carried rifles like this in their military days. Most of them had A2's at the shoot that day, or weighted national match rifles with HBAR's. There were some other guys from much bigger clubs that brought their Olympic style AR's. That's when I draw the line, and leave the A2 in the truck. Cool to see companies bring out these rifles, for the small amount of guys that like them, or want one.

Here's a good video:

16 and shorter are unpleasant.

There are ways to make them much more pleasant to shoot.