18 spr profile rifle gas vs 16” pencil midlength
Timney single stage trigger vs Sear Link Technology Trigger
No Ambi controls vs Ambi controls
Brake vs Flash hider
Plain carbon fiber Tube vs MLOK
Standard buffer system vs SCSS
So how exactly is that rifle from 2010 a part for part clone?
They both have:
free float carbon fiber handguards
cassette drop in triggers
Young BCGs
Polymer Lower w/ integral handguard/buttstock
The PDQ lever, SLT, SCSS, and MLOK of course didn't exist in 2010.
I suppose it could be considered a substantially original thought on Karl an Ian's part to include ambi controls on an AR-15 circa 2017.
Looking at the new ballistic advantage barrel you guys changed to from a faxon super pencil where the weight gain of 4 oz is equivalent to the weight saings of the KP15 vs a milspec M4 lower. That means someone with a milspec M4 lower and a faxon barrel compared to a WWSD and ballistic advantage barrel are equivalent or close enough in weight all other parts being equal. The M4 lower gun can even be lighter than the WWSD rifle if it omits the SCSS as well since it adds weight compared to the milspec system. You can go even lighter on the receiver extension with exotic materials and exotic stock choices that end up closing the gap if not coming in lighter than the KP-15. Ian also considered an 18" barrel for the WWSD rifle, so it is entirely within the concept and not entirely different. The funny thing about the barrel change was that the faxon was overgassed, but the entire debacle of IMR vs Ball powder was that ball powder made the gun overgassed. That's definitely NOT what Stoner would do, he knew how to gas a rifle properly. Of course you could tame the gas I'm sure with extra buffer weights, but that's cutting into the weight savings of the barrel itself.
Even if otherwise Ian and Karl's genius and originality would then lie in the difference being a 2" barrel reduction, flash hider selection, ambi controls, choosing to use MLOK some time after 2014, and the selection of the SCSS buffer system. I'm sure that's commensurate with Stoner's brilliance. Or you know Stoner would have just made an SR-25 styled rifle since he actually designed that one.
Or to parallel history Stoner would have let Sullivan and Fremont do all the work while he worked on failed 7.62 projects until 1974. Funny enough they omit Sullivan's new BCG since it has "no applicability" to what they're doing since it isn't a military rifle and not designed for full auto, it's a "reimagined Colt SP-1" or something similarly nebulously defined like that but nevermind that Stoner designed full auto military rifles and his SR-25 being semi auto is because it's a literal sniper/DMR rifle. Or perhaps it has no applicability since building a gun around full auto capacity has less of a commercial applicability? Nevermind the fact that sullivan's BCG has more preferential unlocking cam path and other benefits that work in semi auto (for longevity) and also for shooting suppressed, but I suppose the WWSD rifle was never intended to be suppressed since it's a gamer gun and the original FH was fixed.
But then they select Young manufacture BCG "the best BCG on the market," which after spending 16 minutes talking in a video about how it's easy to clean and the nebulous appreciation of that in how it actually affects a rifle's function (I am aware of the competition shooting benefits for the camp perry style matches) there is less than a minute spent talking about the blind hole style cam pin being stronger and improved, which parallels Sullivan's BCG, but that had no applicability to WWSD but now it does with Young MFR. Maybe it's because KE Arms owns Young Manufacturing and the MSRP is the same for both so more profit for everyone involved? Funny how "the best BCG on the market" gives KE Arms more money than otherwise. Of course you don't even need a proprietary bolt cam pin hole and pin for that sort of benefit, you could just install your cam pin in the same orientation each time and have more longevity for free on any AR-15. Ah yes, there it is, Stoner would have designed a gun in 2020 that ensures KE Arms generates as much profit as possible for a company he is not employed by.
Even on the point of the original BCG being chromed, Stoner made a poor choice in the matter. Choosing the chrome the BCG but not the barrel was a massive mistake and in backwards order. I wouldn't consider Stoner's original choice of what to chrome being a sound and thoroughly tested one.
