PAhunter86

gettting an upper and lower and putting them together is easier then building a Lego set. You just put them together and push in 2 pins.
Unless things are different for civilian models, that's how M16's and M4's work.

footballplaya

thats the impression i was under, pahunter.. anyone know where to get good deals on uppers and lowers.. i hear you can get a stag upper/lower a couple days apart and get really good prices.. a nyone else know of this?

MO Archer

Nevermind.

ipscshooter

Please explain in detail the "kind of recoil" an AR-15 produces. I'm really curious about this. Leupold and Nikon scopes stand up quite well to recoil from things like .338 Win Mags. These certainly produce close to 10 times the recoil of a .223. How is it that these scopes will stand up fine to Magnum cartridges, but are humbled by a puny .223. What is different about the "kind of recoil" produceed by an AR such that it will damage scopes that hold up well to vastly more powerful calibers. Doesn't make one iota of sense.

And, what the he!! kind of scope "wouldn't last long" on a BB gun? Forgive me, but these seem like some of the dumbest statements I've read on here, and I'll need some plausible explanation for how you've come to your conclusions.

Pighunter56

Ipscs, I gotta ask the same thing, how can these scopes not withstand the recoil of an AR? the .223 has no recoil at all, heck, I have a Simmons Eight Point, that has lasted 5 years on a .300 Win Mag, without any problems, certainly a leupold or Nikon will be able to stand the recoil of a .223!!!!!!!!!!

Rammer

I think he meant that air rifles needed a special scope......

And, no an AR15 does not need a special scope. I have put thousands of rounds thru 2 different ARs with the same Nikon 4.5-14x40 on it, and it doesn't lose its zero.

ipscshooter

I think you must have missed his prior post. Here's what it said:

I'm trying to figure out what it is about an AR's recoil that apparently makes scopes not hold zero, when they do it fine under the recoil of much more powerful rifles. I still think that his problem is with his mounts, not with the scope.

cataway

Pighunter56said
"certainly a Leupold or Nikon will be able to stand the recoil of a .223!!!!!!!!!! "
yes you would like to think so. the AR has a bolt that slams forward,its much like the action of a BB gun, it may be even a little harder .this slamming forward affects a scope differently than what it would on a bolt action gun, if a scope is not made for this secondary recoil in time it will effect the constance zero, we call them flyer's.
i started out using a Leupold 4-14x40 a great scope ,but after a number of shots a pattern developed . using a five shot clip i found that i could call were the first and second shot were going to go. #1 would be high and a little to the right #2 would be a little low and to the left #3,4,5would be touching right were the scope was zeroed. the same was true of the Nikon 4-14.
after going through two Leupold's and one Nikon i switched to a scope that is made for an AR. now if i get a flier i know its me.

ipscshooter

So, why don't we see this effect on other semi-auto rifles like the BAR and the Remington 740/742/7400/750?

Rammer

I guess I must be lucky then.

Nikon 4.5-14x40 in A.R.M.S. #22 Rings. No matter how many times I take that scope off my AR and attach my EoTech, it still holds its zero......And it bounces around on the seat of my pickup everyday......