If you want a constructive discussion, then please try to not showcase stuff in the way that profits your points omitting anything that doesn't fit.
I can also present stuff in a way that makes it look huge, even with the oh-so bad BAR.
USF Riflemen Garand long range DPS is 1.46
USF Riflemen BAR long range DPS is 2.95
THAT'S 203% THE DMG!!!!!!
If you compare that with the G43
Grenadier Kar-98k long range DPS is 1.97
Grenadier G43 long range DPS is 1.98
That's only a 0.5% improvement.
So USF gets a 103% improvement for 60 munition, while Ostheer gets two 0.5% improvements for 45 munition? BALANCE PLEASE! Even more WTF, USF CAN GET THAT IMPROVEMENT TWICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you compare such weapons there are many more factors than just the DPS at one single range. LMG is a long range improvement that decreases the closer you get. At 0 range it has close to no improvement. Additionally you cannot use it on the move.
The BAR on the other hand is another kind of upgrade. It's a straight upgrade. It's profile is extremely similar to the Garand one, so there is not one range where it really is a "giant" upgrade, but it just adds like ~4 DPS at every range. Additionally the BAR offers better moving modifiers than the Garand.
So in total I think the BAR is a bit too weak right now, but not much. ~5% or such maybe, if you want to buff it more DPS wise you probably should lower the utility buffs (Firing on the move stuff).
Edit: Probably best would be best to decrease long range damage a bit more, but increase mid damage to emphasize it's a mobility short/mid range upgrade. This would also help to differentiate it more from the M1919A6
Edit2: Fixed the numbers. Thanks Cruzzie.
Anyone thinking OP is right just needs to read this post by Milka then unbunch their panties.
If it doesn't convince you continue by reading Jinseual's post.
Rifleman are very good from the very start of the game and continue to be good with BARs at he correct range.