The firearms world is kind of a funny thing. Enthusiasts tend to rush on to the next popular “thing” as soon as it hits the market. For a long time, during the ’94 assault weapons ban, everyone jumped on the heavy barrel (HBAR) bandwagon. By 2010 and still today, the trend is to make everything as light as possible.
But there’s a very important missing element there. But first, as usual, a bit of history.
The M-16 sported a lightweight “pencil” barrel when it first came onto the scene, though it was called the “standard” profile at the time. In all, the package was a svelte 6.9 lbs. Nobody thought anything of it until some armorers kept getting reports of bent barrels. When the product improvement program got started, one of the tasks to “fix” the bent barrel problem.
Well, we know how that turned out.
The end result of the A2’s efforts to fix the “problem” was thickening the muzzle end of the barrel forward of the gas block and bayonet lug. The A2 program increased the weight of the whole rifle to 7.8 lbs, and had another effect of shifting the balance of the rifle quite a bit more forward.
And that gets me to the topic today.
Currently my lightest and heaviest AR-15 configurations, coming in at 7.2 lbs and 9.2 lbs respectively.
The Rifle Weight Pendulum
Even though the original M-16A1 had a lightweight barrel, it wasn’t the only variant of AR-15 available at the time. In 1964, Colt started producing heavy-barreled models for use as light machine guns. And, as I mentioned earlier, heavy-barreled models gained popularity during the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
Personally, I don’t think this had to do with their usability so much as it was marketing tactics by gun companies “convincing” the public that they needed one. HBAR models are cheaper to produce without the extra time machining the profile, so they stood to make more money in a slowed market. Another reason might be that some states consider the HBAR models to be “sporting” rifles, and allow them to be sold in the state where AR-15s are otherwise banned.
In either case, rifles grew heavier. The HBAR models added about another pound to the weapon and shifted the balance even further forward.
As the Global War on Terror (GWOT) picked up, I noticed a distinct turn back towards lightweight configurations. Around 2010 to 2012, pencil-barreled models began dominating the enthusiast community. That makes sense, really.
As people gained experience in conflict and returned home to share what they learned, the AR-15 world became more about defensive use rather than high-power matches. Notably, this is the transition to what sociology professor Dave Yamane calls Gun Culture 2.0. He maintains an excellent blog of the same name that deserves a read.
Back on topic.
As anyone who has had to carry stuff for long periods will tell you, weight matters. Ounces become pounds, and pounds become pain. The benefits of heavy barrels are not relevant for the average self-defense minded shooter, so why cause the extra pain?
What does that weight do for you?
The Effects of Weight
There are really only two things that come to mind when we talk about the effects of total weight. I want to be clear here, I’m talking about the total weight of the rifle and everything bolted on to it. Heavy barrels, in isolation, are a slightly different subject that I covered in my article about barrel selection.
Right now I just want to focus on the total weight.
Physical Exertion
The heavier a rifle becomes, the more of a pain in the rear it is to carry. I can hear the internet commandos out there right now howling to “get stronger.” While the goal of getting stronger is always valid, and is something we should aspire to, that’s the wrong retort.
I can’t remember which trainer it was that said it, but I thought they put it well. “Get stronger” is fine to a point, but we need to think of it differently. If the capability we gain for having a heavier weapon is worth the weight, then let’s do it. Many a grunt will complain about having to lug the 240 around, but nobody will complain about what it brings to the fight.
Carrying a 12lb AR-15 that doesn’t do anything better than a 9lb AR-15 except having more junk bolted to it is a different story. Pounds add up to pain and are a bigger drain on your physical resources. Don’t make your life more difficult.
For marksmanship, total weight also negatively affects performance, especially from the standing position. One bit of interesting research done in 1997 actually tested this and found that heavier rifles led to greater fluctuations in muscle movement, which negatively affected aiming.
But that’s not the whole story. If that were true all of the time, then why do high power shooters insert weights into their rifles to make them even heavier?
Recoil Management
On the other hand, weight does have a benefit to recoil characteristics.
Consider the ballistics of a rifle. I touched on this a bit in the article on velocity and trajectory, but I’ll recap. The recoil you feel as you fire a rifle is the combined energy of the bullet mass and expanding gasses exiting the muzzle away from you, like a small rocket engine.
Increasing the mass of the rifle also increases the required energy to exert force against you. In other words: Heavier rifles mean less felt recoil. This is why so many PRS competitors are running around with 15 to 17 lb rifles.
On Rifle Balance
A lot of people talk about how a rifle balances, without ever really discussing what that means. The simple truth is that everyone has a different preference.
Most people find a rifle to be well-balanced when the center of gravity falls somewhere around the middle of the weapon. I think that’s a fair description, but I also talk about it in terms of falling between the firing and support hands.
You can shift the balance point of your rifle by adding weight to either the front or the rear. While doing this in either direction adds to the overall weight of the weapon, you might find that doing so also dramatically changes how the rifle feels and handles.
I’ve seen several cases where adding weight to the rifle in the right place actually made it seem lighter and easier to handle.
In general, the rifle feels “livelier” and easier to point as you shift the balance point rearward towards the stock. In weapons with a heavy rearward balance, like bullpups, it’s easy to shoulder and fire the weapon with a single hand.
However, I’ve found that strong rearward balance also makes the muzzle less steady. I recall one particularly frustrating range session with my Recce Rifle equipped with a 2.5-10×32 scope. The reticle of the optic seemed to jump wildly with every little movement. I just couldn’t get it under control.
Conversely, a forward balance helps steady the muzzle and absorb some of these movements. If you’ve read the post on the government profile barrel, I described this as “hang.” Of course, a front-heavy weapon also feels heavier than it actually is. It’s slower to bring to the ready, and slower to move from target to target.
Finding the Middle Ground
I can’t tell you what you’re going to like. Everyone has a preference. I personally prefer my AR pattern rifles balance around the front half of the magazine well. To keep weight down, I avoid excess weight where I can, but I’m also not silly about skeletonized lightweight parts or anything like that.
Depending on your needs, consider going heavier than a lightweight barrel for some applications. In my post about Recce Rifles, for example, I suggested a medium weight barrel as opposed to a lightweight. I did that precisely because of my experience with “jumpiness” and higher magnification optics. In those circumstances, I’d rather have a little extra weight on the barrel and save weight elsewhere. That also gives just a bit more hang.
Hunting rifles followed this same evolution. For a while, it seemed like everyone was trying to make super light rifles with skinny barrels and flimsy stocks. You can get away with that for a .223, but I would be concerned firing a 7mm mag like that. Recently, I’ve noticed a pivot back to medium-weight barrels and lightweight stocks.
Over to You
Tell me, how often have you considered both weight and balance in your projects? What’s your preferred way of handling it?
I’m far from an expert on things like this, but for an AR-10 I recently built, I considered my usage and the cost of the build. I’d be using it infrequently, not for home defense or anywhere maneuverability would be paramount, and not on long hikes, but I didn’t want it excessively heavy, nor did I want a $3K gun. So, I ended up with mostly standard-ish AR-10 components (e.g. a regular steel BCG, not a lightweight; Aero Precision receivers, not 2A Armament lightweights), with the only things specifically chosen for light weight being a 20″ pencil barrel and a skeletonized forend. Naked, it weighs 8lb3oz and balances at the middle of the magwell, and with BUIS, scope, bipod, and full 10-round mag it weighs 12lb2oz and balances at the front of the magwell. I’m pretty pleased with the result, but I guess we’ll see how I like it after I’ve been using it for a while.
That sounds like a great build, actually.
Stepping up to a 308 is one of those cases where I feel like the extra weight is worth the added capability (usage dependent, of course). I don’t know of many 308 semis that clock in under 11 lbs when loaded. I think my own M1A tips the scales at 14 or 15 lbs, which is probably too much.
Carried “the pig” for a time and also m203 back in big army days so going to civilian life and heavy profile barrels was not so much an annoyance in my younger days. I can admit that my previously owned Del-ton A3 with heavy profile barrel was tiresome carry at end of 6 to 9 mile weekend jaunts. Will report back on the weekend snow shoe jaunt carrying the A2 equipped with Criterion 20″,AR, HBAR, 1×8
Matt, what collapsible stock are you using on your A5 build? Really like that set up!
Hey Jerry!
That sounds like a fun jaunt. It would be nice to do that stuff around here, but I think my neighbors would frown on it, lol.
That particular stock is a VLTOR E-Mod on A5 tube/buffer.
I still use the EMod on my Recce, but switched to a UBR 2 on the 20” rifle. I find it balances a bit better while giving a very solid lockup.
Matt, managed to trek 4 miles on Sunday, it was minus 2 for the high. Planned to push for 5 miles but when I started to feel energy reserves dwindling it was time to return. Surprising how quick your body burns energy in subzero temps. The temp is very comfortable for snow shoe hikes, you don’t overheat lol. Perfectly gorgeous sun filled day with not a cloud in the sky. Carrying the A2 was a breeze in patrol ready position. No strange second looks from the squirrels and grouse carrying the black rifle. ; )
Hey Jerry, that sounds like a good one. I hit 5 miles on Saturday, but it wasn’t nearly that cold. You definitely do use up more energy trying to stay warm.
I was trying to think of a suitable substitute for a rifle in a ruck, and was leaning towards a sledgehammer, but I would probably still get a lot of odd looks, lol.
Help is coming in the form of the WWSD 2020 rifle.
I believe the BCM enhanced LW barrel leaves the barrel at the breach thick but the tapers it to muzzle to pencil type diameter. This leaves more weight at the center of the rifle. It seems to work pretty well with neutral balance.
Yep, and I’m a big fan of the BCM ELW profile (as well as the Faxon Gunner and Criterion Hybrid, both of which follow a similar pattern)
I’ve personally found a sweet spot for weight, recoil management, balance and such but I’ll be attaining it in a different way next time. I’m currently running a Centurion free float mid-length hand guard but it’s just not necessary…I can’t utilize all the space available. It’s great and all but I think I’ll be moving towards a 16″ Gunner barrel and a lightweight and free floated handguard because I run suppressed and have that extra bit of length and weight at the end. Might even lighten things a bit. I do have another el ‘cheapo upper with a 1:8 wylde pencil barrel and can’t get tighter than 8″ groups at 100 yards with 55 grain bullets. I’ll step it up to 62 grain and see if that improves but after that, it’s time to go to a buddies house and spec that out and possibly swap barrels to that Centurion. While I’m at it, because that one is for competition, I’d really like to try out that Strike Industries adjustable gas block. They’re down to $90 now and easy enough to install. I have a feeling I might actually have to start shooting brass and not steel for more consistent cycling with an adjustable block, at least for competition. Anyhoo, I’m willing to pick up to 7 ounces of heft to balance a gun out. After that, I really start looking at the options available. I’m fine with a 7 to 10 pound AR if it has a light, LVPO… Read more »
That 8″ at 100 yards seems…excessive. A 1/8 shouldn’t have any issues with a 55gr bullet. But if you’re going to switch to a Centurion barrel, then I bet you’ll enjoy it!
Two things, I am not an armorer, just a shooter. And I misspoke above. The barrel I’d like is a Faxon Gunner, not a Centurion. Although I believe they make some great barrels and they are well received as I understand it.
Maybe the barrel nut isn’t torqued to spec? I can shoot 3″ with my other ARs but have never gotten anything better than 7 or 8 at 100 with that upper. I should mention, it’s got a 1-8 power scope and the other better grouping AR has a 1-6. I can still shoot better with my 10.5″ with an Aimpoint.
Any ideas on whats wrong?
The things that jump out to me are one of the following:
– Optic not mounted correctly/tightly (or is broke). You could try with iron sights or a different optic and see what happens
– Barrel nut not torqued to spec
– Damage to the crown of the muzzle
There are other things that could affect group sizes, but not that dramatically
I’ll check all three. I’m fairly confident with the scope and mount. The crown I’ve never bothered to look at and I don’t have a way to check the barrel nut, but I’ve heard horror stories of hand tight barrel nuts when they should be, I think, 65 – 80 ft lbs. Maybe it’s time to invest in that torque wrench and barrel/upper vice block.
It’s been super disappointing considering how flat that gun holds and how light it is. Its now a money gamble on investing in tools to confirm or money in the barrel and using buddies tools.
Thanks Matt.
By and large the “pencil” M16, barrels weren’t bent, they just had carbon deposits at gas ports that fooled the gauges…
I saw HBAR more from the SOCOM profiles (beefed up from A2 under the handguards due to concerns about barrels bursting under extended full auto fire) and molon accuracy testing than anywhere else. I saw lightweights come around first with 3 gunners and the like with the community coming after 2012 — like 2014-2015 or so.
Because of the buffer system, ARs don’t or shouldn’t have much in the way of recoil. If you’re feeling true recoil, you need a heavier buffer or stronger buffer spring. Where ARs benefit is with compensators, which serve to control the muzzle — ARs have issues with muzzle rise and control, not recoil.
Given quality comps like Precision Armament or others, I find heavier muzzles have issues with momentum that lighter barrels. Yeah, in static prone off bipod or rests, there is some benefit to heavy barrels, but across most uses for a carbine, you’ll see a benefit with lighter muzzles. One notable exception is with a suppressor where the barrel serves as a heat sink for the suppressor — and also adds weight (which is why you see suppressed guns with shorter and shorter barrels, like 10.5″).
Thank you, Matt, for your balanced article (pun intended). It helps me make my decisions on weight distribution on my PRS platform. I guess trial and error, ammo, bag placements, position, etc. all still play an important part as the true science is still in the coming. This 2015 article shows how much research ground there still is to cover (link below). On top, each rifle and platform has its own unique recoil oscillation, so the science will always be generic and informing but never completely dictating what needs to be done. If you express .5 MOA in degrees, we’re talking 0.000796 degrees of angle. Crazy 🙂 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282556539_Experimental_Measurement_of_Rifle_Dynamics_During_the_Range_Shooting_of_Biathlon_Weapons
Thanks again, Matt.
Thanks, Dutch. There is definitely a lot of art and science to this, and even more so when you get into PRS-style shooting. I”ll give the article a read, thanks for sharing!