The Battle Arms Development OIP “Ounces Is Pounds” rifle is an ultra-ULTRA-light AR-15.  Its proud owner David writes …

It’s the lightest AR-15 ever available- under 3.9 pounds dry with 16″ barrel (11″ SBR is 3.6 lb). It’s called the OIP, manufactured by Battle Arms Development, and available through Bentwood Gunsmithing. The exclusive barrel is used under license by Knight’s Armament Corp. The only plastic used on the gun is the grip. Every component except the fire control is proprietary; made just for this project. The OIP’s operating system is tuned and balanced to achieve superior handling, and minimal recoil.

I have not been able to find the specs on this AR, other than a page on the Battle Arms Development website inferring that it weights less than four lbs. Regardless of its weight and other specs, I can see from the photo that is is one very handsome gun.

Submit photos you have taken to TFB’s Photo Of The Day.


  • allannon

    The real savings is in your wallet, where the money used to be!

    I’ve been thinking about a stock-ultralight AR. The main holdup has been that I’ve also been thinking about a marksman AR, and an AR pistol, and so on. 😀

  • Richard

    I was able to hold this exact rifle in my hands the other day down at Bentwood. I was surprised picking it up and realizing that that an AR could be this light, and I was surprised again when it still is fully capable for serious use if need be. The lower isn’t plastic, it wasn’t front heavy, and the bolt/buffer spring is apparently worked out to be reliable. Great option for someone who needs to carry it around all day. While still having a reliable main optic, light, and sling mount.

    • ThomasD

      That is probably the better application – rather than the LRRP/scout guy, give it to the guys who carry one every day – but rarely use it.

      • iksnilol

        Give it to everyone, the guys who don’t use ut much but carry it and the guys carrying a ton of equipment.

    • hami

      You forgot to mention that it is also jaw dropping-ly beautiful

  • iksnilol

    You could make a practical AR pistol out of this. 300 BLK with 9 inch barrel and no stock (kinda like the OA-93). It would be lighter than a Desert Eagle and way more practical while still being a “heavy 1337 pistol”.

    • Michael R. Zupcak

      Look at the Extar 5.56 pistol. EXP556 or something. It’s just under 3 lbs. Looks like a lot of plastic, which I don’t like, but they redesigned the gas system to eliminate the receiver extension.

      • Matt Shermer

        I saw the EXTAR Pistol at a gun show today, I thought it was an OA-93 at first glance as well. It seems like a fairly solid gun for a Polymer AR Pistol, I would like to see how it stacks up against the Kel-Tec SU-16 Pistol, seems like it has a similar design purpose at the same price point, definitely cheaper than Rock River’s Piston AR Pistol.

        As for this rifle, I’d like to see how it holds up in environments where you commonly find conventional ARs. Even if the target market is the backpacking and lightweight foot travel crowd, it’s prudent to anticipate abuse.

  • Manny Fal

    For those not using laughably antiquated imperial units, that’s 1.76kg and 1.6kg. Don’t these Americans know REAL OPERATORS use the metric system?

    • Steveindeleware

      Not in America. That whole concept of ‘think metric’ tried back in the 70’s has been an utter failure. Tell me, how much is gas in liters? Or what’s the speed limit in kph?

      • Camilo Emiliano Rosas Echeverr

        Barrels in inches and quarters and eights of inches. Bullet diameters in hundreths of inches. Bullet section in square millimeters. Bullet weight in grains. But the thing that really makes my brain hurt is case capacity measurement in grains (which is weight) expressed for volume in water milliliters, since it seems it is simply impossible to thik in cubic milliliters.
        Oh, and weight in grains and speed in foots per second that translate to energy in foot-pounds through some conversion factor I’ll die before remembering, instead of linearly like grams, meters per second and joules would do: just move the decimal point.

        • gregge

          One cubic centimeter = one milliliter.

      • Paladin

        Metric makes so many calculations simpler, The only reasons the U.S. hasn’t switched are cultural inertia and cost.

        Of course it’s hard to figure out how much gas is per litre and what the speed limit is in kph when all the signs are in imperial units. That’s not a problem with the measurement system, that’s a problem of conversion from one to the other.

        Riddle me this, how many cubic inches in a gallon? How many ounces in a ton? How many square feet in an acre? The conversions are all arbitrary, and you can only learn them by rote memorization.

        By comparison, let’s try equivalent conversions in metric: cubic centimetres per litre? 1000. Grams per tonne? 1,000,000. Square metres per hectare? 10,000.

        There’s no contesting that metric is the better system.

        • uisconfruzed

          But I’ve been to metric countries (Europe), even after the conversion metric gas is MUCH more expensive.

          • Paladin

            That has nothing to do with the metric system, and everything to do with the taxation system. Euro countries tax gas heavily, while the U.S. subsidizes it.

          • uisconfruzed

            But, but, it was funny.

      • 1911a145acp

        on the first one – TOO damn high!, On the second one TOO damn low!!

    • Jozna

      When was the last time REAL OPERATORS landed men on the moon again? I forgot.

      • Giolli Joker

        The landing on Mars will be fully metric, as NASA as switched to the international system about 20 years ago…

        • iksnilol

          we operate so much that the moon is too close for our landing.
          So close we gotta touch down on Mars for our operating.

          *drop microphone*

        • HSR47

          Yeah, 50 years ago we used freedom units and sliderules to put men on the moon.

          Today, our government spacejockies are using the communist scale, and they can’t even get a man into orbit without the help of the private sector or other governments.

          It’s obvious where the problem lies.



      • me ohmy

        they had space shuttle door gunners for perimeter security too..

    • uisconfruzed

      Bien sur! Juss like zee Frenchies and their pretty white flag!

    • 1911a145acp


  • USMC03Vet

    It’s cheaper and more efficient to drop the lbs from the waistline instead.

    • Camilo Emiliano Rosas Echeverr

      Or you could just lift some weights, you know?

      • billyoblivion

        It all depends on why you’re choosing a particular piece of equipment. If you want an ultra-light rifle for backpacking, where it’s going to be carried a lot and shot a little or not at all, and going to be carried with a lot of other things (like food), I’d rather carry a pound of food I *will* eat than a pound of rifle I might not or probably won’t use.

        OTOH, if I was going to be bouncing up and down the hills of some remote mountainous area hunting bad guys and had something that looked like regular resupply, then I’d be working on getting stronger *anyway*, and would focus more on robustness than weight, but would rather lose weight than comfort.

  • MP

    Implied, not inferred.

    Implications come from sources of information. Inferences are done by receivers of information.

    Just trying to keep your blog above the 4th grade English level.

  • Steveindeleware

    Increased weight in a firearm, decreases the felt recoil.

    • Rogier Velting

      It’s a .223… it’s not like it has much recoil to begin with.

      • gunsandrockets


        But have you fired such a lightweight .223? I have, and it’s almost unnerving how different the experience is compared to firing an ordinary .223 rifle. The recoil feels much more like firing an ordinary .30 caliber rifle. You give up rapid fire control to gain that featherweight.

        In my opinion the greatest advantage of a featherweight AR, is using it as a core for the typical gadgets people today attach to an AR. You end up with a loaded AR of similar weight to an original plain-jane M-16a1 loaded with just a 20 round magazine, despite all the gadgetry.

        • Rogier Velting

          I have to admit I have not. But that does sound like a valid reason for a featherweight AR-15.

  • Wow, It’s great to see a product designed here on the TFB. It is certainly lightweight and was carefully tuned down to be reliable.

  • Rogier Velting

    Less barrel rigidity means it’ll heat up faster, not sure that’s something you should want in a semi-automatic rifle.

  • me ohmy

    wonder how my CAVARLY ARMS/NOW GWACS polymer lower/stock and light upper config would match that..?
    they are really light to begin with

  • Evan Ferguson

    I like it. I’d like to have the cut-outs on the lower filled in though. I’d sacrifice the weight for protection from sand and such.

    • iksnilol

      Yeah, but if you have enough holes sand and dust will just go right through it.

      Trust me, I am an (computer) operator.

  • It isn’t designed as a range gun. You don’t need an ultra light rifle for a range gun.

  • aka_mythos

    I look at the weight reduction here and I say “Great! Now I can carry more ammo!”

  • markgreenman

    The H-K MP7A1 weighs 4.18lbs, with a 7″ barrel and extensive polymer furniture, so the weight of this AR is truly impressive.

  • Blake

    I ride steel-frame bikes & shoot steel-frame guns at steel targets :-).

    • Grindstone50k

      And I eat steel-frame steaks.

      • Blake

        Then I shall refrain from making any comments about the frame of your significant other &ltgrin&gt

      • 1911a145acp

        And you poop steel framed turds?
        Sorry… trying to get that one before anyone else did…;-)

    • iksnilol

      I shoot steel frame guns (less flip/recoil) but I like lightweight bicycles.

  • gunsandrockets

    Interesting. Achieves the same weight as the original Carbon 15 rifle but without using polymer receiver or upper.

  • Cymond

    That dimpled barrel doesn’t look very light! From what I’ve read, the lightest profile that’s still safe is something like 0.570″ external diameter. The barrel offered by Mag Tactical Systems looks pretty close to that minimum, but I haven’t seen one in person to confirm.
    An aluminum screw is a little lighter than a titanium grip screw, and can be found at some online hardware stores. Damage Industries offers an aluminum receiver end plate with QD point.
    It probably has a lightened bolt carrier, but I wonder how light it is. The Boomfab titanium carrier is about 4.4 ounces (a standard carrier is about 11.5 ounces).

    And then there’s all those little parts that can be made from titanium. V7 Systems offers a lot of small titanium parts like the castle nut, cam pin, mag catch, etc. However, they tend to be very expensive compared to the small amounts of weight they save.

  • Camilo Emiliano Rosas Echeverr

    It’s not that it’s difficult to understand, it just baffles me the use of different standards that require the use of conversion factors going to one from the other.

  • iksnilol

    5.56x45mm weighs about the same as 9x19mm

    • Blake

      True enough, but the mags are about half the size for the same capacity & thus easy to carry in a pocket or small pouch…

      • iksnilol

        That and you can have a primary gat and sidestrap have the same ammo and mags.
        I am lovin

  • iksnilol

    Why didn’t they just alu wrap it? Like the Lothar Walther ultralightweight barrels?

  • Blake

    & if you can’t get your hands on a Kel-Tek (or just don’t like them for whatever reason), then check this out:

    Not sure if they’re any good, but there’s something appealing about the idea of a small AR-style Glock “pistol” with about an 8″ bbl & a Sig brace…

  • 1911a145acp

    Since the SIG brace seems to viable ( for the time being ) an FN P90 Bullpup “pistol” with a SIG brace SHOULD have happened already……..

    • iksnilol

      Or y’know, a P90 in 9x19mm, .40S&W and 7.62×25 Tokarev. That’s what also should have happened already.

  • 1911a145acp

    I think the wt. stated was dry, sans, light, optic, mag and ammo, Still impressive. Lightest I have ever built was 5 lbs.

  • iksnilol

    5k GBP is a bit outside my budget Though it seems good, how much lighter could it be if you made it out of titanium?

  • anonymouse

    Was lucky enough to shoot this rifle earlier in the year. Was seriously impressed with how light it was, almost cartoonishly light, while still functioning very smoothly. Despite the lack of weight the recoil impulse still felt as low as any a 5.56.

  • iksnilol

    Obviously I don’t know much about bicycles, I only use them for practical purposes and sometimes recreation. Thanks for the information, I will look into it more.