The OIP 3.8 Pound AR–SHOT Show 2015

The OIP weighs in at 3.8 pounds.

The OIP weighs in at 3.8 pounds.

Sifting threw the latest and greatest rifles can be a daunting task. Put your self at a convention the size of SHOT Show and it can quickly become an impossible task. Its only when a weapon jumps out and smacks you in the face that you notice it. Walking through the lower floors of the show, I happened into just that smack in the face. Battle Arms Development. Cutting through the ridiculous costumes and epic Star Wars themed booth porn, I found the OIP–the lightest AR-15 I’ve ever held, and it is about to be in production.

The OIP Carbine  will be built by Bentwood Gunsmithing. Weight is the primary concern. “Ounces Into Pounds” represents a concept anyone who has ever carried a weapon can truly understand and appreciate. Coming in at 3.8 lbs. unloaded and without optics this rifle is a featherweight. Fully loaded with a lancer 20 round magazine and an Aimpoint H1, the rifle still comes in under 6 lbs. The OIP is the lightest AR 15 on the market. The plan is to produce the gun in limited numbers–100 rifles a year. The price for this flyweight: $2879.

  • 7075 Upper, lower, stock assembly. Natural clear type 3 hard-coat anodized. Upper features an internal dri-film lubricant coating.
  • Filament wound carbon fiber forearm, ventilated.
  • JP adjustable trigger
  • Titanium ion bonded bolt carrier
  • Nickel-boron coated bolt and gas key
  • Hawkins Precision Titanium muzzle device (available in brake or flash hider configuraton. Serves as interface with Gemtech HALO
  • Nitrocarburized 4150 CM Ordnance steel barrel. 223 Wylde chamber. 1-8″ rifling twist. Barrel is patented by Knight’s Armamant Corp and is used under license.
  • Battle Arms BAD short throw selector kit
  • Titanium pins and screws.
  • Titanium gas block
  • ERGO swift grip.
  • Lancer 20 rd Magazine
  • Proprietary operating system. Includes an all-new unique buffer and recoil spring assemblies.
  • OIP is a “system” rifle. Not merely an assembly of parts. Each functional component is designed specifically to enhance performance, reliability, accuracy, and handling.
Everywhere you look, weight has been cut out.

Everywhere you look, weight has been cut out.

The OIP challenges the way you perceive carry weight. Though the rifle is not designed for tactical applications, it is a groundbreaking step in developing the optimal fighting rifle. The OIP is balanced perfectly. It uses a lightweight KAC barrel, a titanium flash hider and gas block. As you can imagine, the gun swings easily and stops on a dime.

As there will only bee 100 of these produced this year, the odds of us getting one in are minimal. Still, if you like what you see and want to emulate this rifle or some of its features, Battle Arms Development does offer a wide variety of lightweight AR components and upgrades to help you optimize your own rifle. Check out what they’re doing now, and stay ahead of the weight curve. These guys are setting the pace for the rest of the industry.

Even the barrel has been dimpled.

Even the barrel has been dimpled.

And the OIP is still strong enough to handle the recoil.

And the OIP is still strong enough to handle the recoil.

The carbon fiber handguard.

The carbon fiber handguard.

No dust covers. They weigh too much.

No dust covers. They weigh too much.

{ 40 comments… add one }
  • Davidp August 31, 2016, 11:20 pm

    I have spec’ed out a rifle that should weight 53.2oz and will cost nearly $2200 to build. Using parts from Kaiser, Faxon, V7, smoke composites, JP, Taccom, LaRue, Brigand, Elftmann, magpul and Next Intent tactical. With Faxon producing the lightest 14.5 and 16 inch barrels and the 16 inch has an advertised weight of 1.19lbs or 19.04oz still nearly 36% of the total rifle making it front heavy. I would have expected a rifle of this weight to be produced by BAD I believe the next closest in weight is the Kaiser US Monarch at 4.25lbs but is something like $900 less.

  • Frank February 7, 2015, 2:06 am

    The parts are superior in strength to the standard AR. The weight is less. I am a mechanical engineer and unless you are going to beat you enemy with your AR this gun is mechanically superior.

  • Frank February 7, 2015, 2:01 am

    I bought one because as a engineer you may confuse weight with stability and they are not the same. If you review the parts of this rifle you will see it is superior in strength to the standard AR. Come on you old fashion pussies, if it were up to you we would still be hunting with the musket.

  • Joe February 5, 2015, 6:14 am

    Why are these Wednesday postings coming up when clicking on to Thursday articles ???

    • Administrator February 5, 2015, 6:57 am

      Could be a browser problem on your end. I just tested today’s email and the links seem to be fine.

      • Joe February 5, 2015, 7:28 am

        On my end only the last two, the one with the two girl hunters and the one with the black man are coming through correctly, the rest are linking up with yesterdays story lines. Oh well…

  • Suppressors Are Fun! February 5, 2015, 12:05 am

    My Daniel Defense AR might be heavier, but it’s accurate as any out of the box rifle out there.

  • Steve February 4, 2015, 8:43 pm

    I bought my first AR because I missed my Army Infantry days. It gave me a chance to experience the fun part without the BS that went along with it. Every Saturday became a range day my first summer with her. She was nicknamed ‘Memory Jane’ and I remember busting butt to get the yard work and other chores done early so I could be with her. She is a full size Colt with a carry handle and 20″ barrel.

    I’ve since put together a kit rifle for my wife with a 16″ barrel and collapsible stock. Belive it not, my old DA Pam 750-30, a cartoon pamphlet on the M16A1, shows an XM 177 E1/2 rifle in this configuration on page 29. We love plinking with our AR’s, and go on 3-5 day camping excursions through farmland to varmint hunt. Neither one of us ever complained about the weight combined with our LBE backpacks which contain hundreds of rounds, shelter halves, food, water and other camping gear. I also carry a Colt 1911 Government and my wife carries her Colt King Cobra with a 6″ barrel. Not bad for a couple in their middle sixties.

    AR’s have been grossly overdone. It’s time we stopped playing around with the design and came up with something new.

  • Dave February 4, 2015, 5:59 pm


    That’s “sifting through”, not “sifting threw”.

  • John February 4, 2015, 4:21 pm

    Nice for girls !! And the range, I like some weight to my guns, I like to know my gun wont break under heavy fire !!!

  • Bob Halpern February 4, 2015, 12:58 pm

    This new 3.8 pound AR-15 from Battle Arms America, by Brentwood Gunsmithing breaks down to $757.64 per pound, which is very extravagant for maybe 95% of shooters, especially with what appears to be the “vintage” impingement design, the old charging handle design that causes scope interference issues, and the fact that the base price is $2,879.
    For those of us that wear a high end Seiko chrono, and are not able to step up to a Rolex, I’ve bought a very light weight (4.7 pound) “every shooter” affordable AR type 5.56mm carbine with an underfolder stock, a gas piston operating system, a right side charging handle (like an AK47) with clearace for any scope, and has a folded length of only 25.5 “, for easy transporting. It has been very reliabe, super fast onto the target, and priced at $770 MSRP, which is only $163.83 per pound. It’s the Kel-Tec SU-16C, and if you’ve never owned one, keep an open mind. I love mine, and the coyotes DO NOT laugh at my Kel-Tec.

  • Tim February 4, 2015, 11:22 am

    I’ve shot and earlier version and it has no felt recoil. Matt and they guys have been working on this for over a year and the result something that challenges the traditional AR model. Every component was evaluated to whether it was a value add or not and if it had to stay, how light could they make it.

    An exceptional weapon and like one poster put it a concept weapon that won’t be for everyone. I’d rather pay a man for his craft then compare his art to mass production “good enoughs”.

    • Patrick July 16, 2015, 4:45 pm

      I shot the prototype, the SBR and the full auto versions. I ordered one in December and got it in a few months. I have a very bad back and this rifle means I can finish a 4 day course painfree. If you can’t afford the rifle, don’t slam those who can. If you don’t like it or can’t see the value, fine. I can afford a Rolex but I don’t like them. I don’t slam those that wear them. I just ordered the Gemtech gmt halo to compliment my rifle. It works, is accurate, runs great and is fun to shoot. Thanks Matt and Dave.

  • Pops February 4, 2015, 11:10 am

    So this rifle costs about $800 a pound. My DelTon Sporter I got NIB on a Black Friday sale for $499 cost me $73 a pound. It weighs around 6.8 pounds.
    I’m good with people experimenting, pushing the limits, and I like light rifles, but is losing 3-4 pounds worth up to roughly an additional $1300? If I want to shed 3-4 pounds prior to a mission, hike or whatever, I’ll just hit the bathroom first. Pretty sure some days I can shed 3-4 pounds in the can.

  • Thomas McManus February 4, 2015, 10:43 am

    Hmmmm. As a Las Vegas resident, I had the chance to use their gunsmithing services with a Model 700. Over two months after I brought the gun in, they still hadn’t done any work on it. Although it looks like a very nice rifle, I can’t say I recommend Bentwood Gunsmithing.

  • Gregory Crawford February 4, 2015, 10:22 am

    $2,800.00 for a 3.5 lb. AR-15?? Not a chance! For 1/3 the cost, or less, I can own at least 3 of the older models that may weigh more but appear to me (from the photo) to be more sturdy and possibly more dependable. As well, for $2,800.00 one could own a top of the line 308.

  • Chuck in Phoenix February 4, 2015, 10:21 am

    My Carbon 15 with a loaded 30 round mag and a Trijicon Tri-Power was only 6.5 pounds
    This one is 6 pounds with a 20 round mag,,, My guess is will be as unreliable as my Carbon 15 was too.

    • Tim February 4, 2015, 11:27 am

      This one is made of metal and runs super smooth. Shot 62 grain with no kick.

  • Al-G February 4, 2015, 9:54 am

    Nice piece of work!
    Probably a good investment, worth more if it’s never been shot!
    Buy 2, use one and sell the other one in a few years… I’ll pay for the one your using!

  • wow February 4, 2015, 9:28 am

    Who is that holding the gun in the first photo – Dr. Frankenstein?

  • Pseudo February 4, 2015, 9:23 am

    How about some clarification as regards all of the hoop-ola regarding weight, “…anyone who has ever carried a weapon can truly understand and appreciate.” These are not being carried by folks in combat who have to damn sure try to limit weight as much as they can. Must carry their ammo, rations, water and other assorted equipment.

    Now all I can figure is we are talking hunting use here in this article and this AR15 is .223 caliber, (why not 5.56? more weight?) which from what I often hear about is not the best round to use for hunting.

    So one is out hunting so what if a standard AR15 perhaps weights an additional five pounds more or less? I am sure these hunters are carrying far less ammunition then a soldier would. I mean the hunter is able to typically take a break at their discretion. Lets say they happen to shoot a deer and then must pack it out, how do they know if it will be 100 pounds to pack out or 110 pounds.

    So what is the hoop-ola regarding weight?
    I am just looking for some reasonable answers not trying to start some angst diatribe and replies.

    Hell I have carried both the M14 and the M16, to me this “weight item” is a bunch of ado about nothing. More marketing and media driven then having an actual valid point.

    • DaveGinOly February 4, 2015, 6:22 pm

      Ummm, 5.56 and .223 are the same caliber (i.e., size), fire the same bullets, and their cartridge dimensions are essentially identical. The difference between the two is that the 5.56 operates at a higher chamber pressure so their throat lengths (leade) differ (higher chamber pressure requires a longer leade before the bullet engages the rifling). This particular gun is chambered for .223 Wylde, which is a compromise between the two throat lengths meant to be suitable (but not optimized) for both rounds.


  • jeff February 4, 2015, 9:15 am

    Guys, lighten -up the criticism… I can’t afford one either, but I’m glad to see anyone pushing the envelope. I’m thankful that capitalism and markets allow these “toy-studies’. I may never buy a new house, a new jeep, or a new harley…but if other guys didn’t I wouldn’t have the benefit of their trickle-down. High dollar one-offs and short boutique runs pave the way for lighter, stronger, better tools for the average joe…like me and you.

    • Dan February 4, 2015, 3:03 pm

      Agreed!! Innovation for innovation’s sake is a noble pursuit.

  • Cantxsailor February 4, 2015, 8:50 am

    Ya Joe and it seems there are lots of them. I’m starting to believe they pose in front of the mirror to see how cool they look holding their “mine is bigger than yours” toys. Interesting idea but I figure if you can’t carry 6.5 lbs you probably can’t carry 4.5 either.

    • praharin February 6, 2015, 12:49 pm

      It’s not exactly that simple. I am capable of carrying a 9 pound rifle quite easily. All day even. But, no matter who you are, you have a limit of what you can carry all day, AND remain combat effective. The difference between a 4 pound rifle and a 6 pound rifle is two full 30 round magazines. If we can reduce weight without sacrificing any functionality (and I’m not saying this rifle is the answer) why not? The answer is usually cost, BTW. But many weight savings can be made with negligible cost, and this rifle seems to be a test bed for many possible weight saving mechanisms.

  • Evan February 4, 2015, 8:48 am

    No ejection port cover, no forward assist…no use that I can see for this rifle. I don’t particularly care how lightweight it is if it lacks some necessary parts to function properly.

    • DaveGinOly February 4, 2015, 5:59 pm

      Lack of an ejection port cover it one of the “features” that disqualify this weapon for tactical use (as its maker admits that it’s not for). Forward assists were incorporated into the M 16A1 to address problems that have long since been rectified. They remain a part of most ARs because “that’s the way ARs are made”; nothing but sheer inertia against making changes to the design. Several manufacturers of ARs and AR uppers have dispensed with this largely useless “feature.” How many other 5.56mm firearms have a forward assist? If the AR still actually requires one (that is, if an AR requires a forward assist “to function properly”), that doesn’t speak well for the design, and one should look towards a more reliable gun. If it doesn’t require one (as most other 5.56mm combat weapons don’t), why retain it?

  • Rip February 4, 2015, 8:38 am

    Half the calories with a full course price. .His shirt reminds me of Emril Lagasse. Sorry, I gad to throw that in. Nice toy though.

    • praharin February 6, 2015, 12:44 pm


  • Joe February 4, 2015, 6:49 am

    Clearly they are marketing this overpriced clone for the “I have everything and You can’t” mentality.

    • Alan February 4, 2015, 9:16 am

      I view it more like a ‘concept car.’ No-one expects to see million dollar Volvos out on the street. They build them as test beds, to see what can be done. Every operator I know wants to find ways to reduce weight and still maintain combat efficacy. From batteries and electronics to weapons and ammo, saving 10% across the board can be a huge difference. If these guys have found a way to cut closer to 30% of the weight and still function, albeit with reduced reliability in adverse conditions, that’s a step forward. Those individual improvements can be cherry-picked and edited further, getting the best of both worlds. It gives all of us an idea of what the possibilities are, and sets a baseline to work from.

  • Bill February 4, 2015, 5:56 am

    The difference from the men and boys has always been the price of their toys LOL

    • Joe February 4, 2015, 8:19 am

      Well..that’s the way people covered with cash put it
      The rest of us know real men build their toys and wanna be men revert to their daddies cash.

    • Truth February 4, 2015, 3:47 pm

      If your really worried about weight just spend 399.00 and get a exp556 it maybe a pistol,but with a sling it can be shot like a rifle,and it’s really a pretty dead on shot for the distance most people shoot anyway…the truth is most people shoot more paper targets,cans and bottles than deer,or other people in combat …do you really need to keep the shots inside a dime all the time to enjoy shooting,the answer is no..That for hard core shooters ,or for we pull out our toys to show our friends …
      I myself enjoy owning cool weapons ,and have a few in the 3-4k range ,but let’s be honest those that bark at weapons like a 2800.00 3lb Full AR only do it because either you can’t afford it,and are the type of person that would also call the new 400k ford GT a waste of money as well…because they can also do the speed limit in their 1998 GT mustang,and spend most of their time in a school zone,or shopping anyway …
      Weapons like this Lite weight AR were not made for Combat,or hunting it’s just built to bring attention to the
      company name so they can sell all the other weapons they offer that are in the main stream price range for middle America….just be happy we are in a great country that allows us to still purchase,and own these toys in out homes….

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude February 5, 2015, 10:40 am


      • Vic February 5, 2015, 12:42 pm

        Um… Costly rifle for sure.. But not really that bad….”not for hunting or defense”?…That’s not the case.. It looks like a quality arm so it is going to go bang..

        We do not hunt Dangerous Game with a .223 so it is perfectly suitable for hunting , Mountain Lions, Coyotes. Soft Fuzzy Bunnies etc.. No significant recoil anyway so it nice to have a light weapon..

        Self defense.. Why not? … perhaps not for the Siege Of Stalingrad… or Battle of the Bulge.. But around the house…….It would be fine..


      • OldRed February 6, 2015, 10:14 pm

        Actually carry a gun all day. Ounces do turn into pounds. In the last days of my quail hunting when I was really starting to have trouble with MS but didn’t know I had it. I carried a 12 Franchi that weighed 5 pounds 3 ounces and dumped the whole magazine once or twice. It slapped me in the face when I shot it. It really stung late in the season using 1 1/8 oz #7 1/2 shot. I sure did like the 5 lb 3 oz carry weight after 8 or 9 miles. I would have like it more if it only weighed 4 pounds.


    • Palmer April 24, 2015, 11:41 am

      I bought one. It is fast and kick ass. I have put a thousand aggressive simulated combat rounds through it without a hitch. Come on my old fashion friend I can tell you as an engineer with the new metal alloys and wire feed CNC anything is possibly. Look at Cabot 45’s. Three years in business and they have won the National Pistol Championship 2 times. Not bad for a lacey 10,000 dollar gun.

    • Palmer April 24, 2015, 11:45 am

      I bought one. It is fast and kick ass. I have put a thousand aggressive simulated combat rounds through it without a hitch. Come on my old fashion friend I can tell you as an engineer with the new metal alloys and wire feed CNC anything is possibly. Look at Cabot 45\’s. Three years in business and they have won the National Pistol Championship 2 times. Not bad for a lacey 10,000 dollar gun.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend