Any FNAR fans out there?

[Bobarian]

I've wanted an FNAR for some time now.

As far as I can tell from FN's website, there are two options: the Standard with the 16" barrel, and the Heavy with the 20" barrel. Is that right?
Anyone care to weigh in on the pros and cons between the two?

Sorry if this has been discussed before. If it has, I couldn't find the thread. Thanks.

 

[taliv]

I wouldn't call myself a fan but I've seen several shoot and have been surprised how accurate they were. Granted I don't know anyone who has put more than a couple magazines through one so who knows how they hold up after a few hundred or thousand rounds.

The barrel profile choice depends entirely on what you plan to do with it.

 

[justin22885]

soooo.. what can it do a PTR91 cant at significantly lower cost and decades of worldwide military proven reliability?

 

[bikemutt]

I had one some time back. It was accurate, but it was a complex device to pull apart, I had my 'smith clean it. And it was heavy. There's not a single thing I recall it doing better than my CMMG AR10.

 

[Nature Boy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the FNFAR a BAR with some tactical furniture?

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

I've wanted an FNAR for some time now.



As far as I can tell from FN's website, there are two options: the Standard with the 16" barrel, and the Heavy with the 20" barrel. Is that right?

Anyone care to weigh in on the pros and cons between the two?



Sorry if this has been discussed before. If it has, I couldn't find the thread. Thanks.

I think they are pretty interesting myself. I particularly like the Browning BAR that it is based on. I'd assume that longer, heavier barrels for the FNAR are no different than the pros and cons of longer heavier barrels on any other rifle. Basically, you are trading lighter weight/mobility for the perceived or realized benefits of a more rigid, heavier barrel and increased velocity of the projectile due to length of the pressurized barrel.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

soooo.. what can it do a PTR91 cant at significantly lower cost and decades of worldwide military proven reliability?

It's not really relevant to the question asked. If the question was "is the FNAR worth the extra money" it might be worth asking.

 

[DPris]

Depends on what you want to do with it & what role you'd expect it to fill for you.

Battle or field rifle, no.
Accurate and configurable-to-fit-you precision semi-auto, yes.
Denis

 

[browningguy]

what can it do a PTR91 cant at significantly lower cost and decades of worldwide military proven reliability?

As far as I know no one has ever used a PTR91 in combat. The original yes, the PTR no.

Mine is a light version, and it's significantly more accurate than any PTR I have ever seen. They are difficult to disassemble, but it's not a combat rifle, more of a precision rifle. When I bought mine they were right at $1000, not significantly more than a PTR. It's a really decent rifle for shooting heavy metal in 3 gun, not really any better than an AR10 but if you like being different it's pretty good.

 

[SuperNaut]

I love mine, I've had one since they were introduced in 2008. I've put a lot of rounds through it both factory and handload, and it has been flawless.

 

[Bobarian]

Thanks for the responses guys. Not trying to start a food fight.

This is one of those times when emotion trumps logic and reason.
I fondled an FNAR a while back at a gun show, and it was lust at first sight.
I can't justify owning one, I just want it 'cause I want it.

And nothing against the AR10, but my hunting' buds seem to think they don't belong in a tree stand.

 

[Casefull]

I can't justify owning one, I just want it 'cause I want it.

Now that is a good reason. Have fun if you give in. haha

 

[DPris]

Nothing wrong with wanting it just because you want it, just understand that it's not a military battle rifle design & wasn't intended for that role.

If it doesn't have to be a battle rifle, then it does a good job of what it was designed to do.
Denis

 

[Trent]

Nothing wrong with wanting it just because you want it, just understand that it's not a military battle rifle design & wasn't intended for that role.

If it doesn't have to be a battle rifle, then it does a good job of what it was designed to do.
Denis

A 22 long rifle can be a battle rifle if you take it to battle with you. (e.g. AR-7)

If you took an FNAR in to battle it'd be a hell of an asset for a dedicated marksman. Lightweight, 20 round detachable box mag, accuracy rivaling or often exceeding an H&K PSG-1. Incredibly reliable.

Quite frankly it's a far better choice for long range than just about anything else out there. Leagues more accurate than my SCAR17.

The only downside is the breakdown & cleaning process - bit tricky, with some small parts to keep track of. Still, easier than some other mainstream "battle" rifles - I have some belt feds that are way more prone to parts breakage and a whole lot harder to clean and maintain than that little FNAR!

 

[DPris]

When this issue comes up, it becomes a matter of definition & understanding.

For those who don't know any different, the FNAR profile may look like a military-ish rifle.

Typically, military rifle designs are created & manufactured with the ability to do easy take-down, cleaning & maintenance in the field, among & amidst all the gunk & mud & blood & rain & snow & dust that a battlefield may produce & provide.

The FNAR was built as a semi-auto precision rifle, mostly for urban (LE) or range use, with a side trip or two into the hunting season, if you want to tote the weight.
Assuming it could & would be taken into a calm, warm & dry environment for thorough cleaning after & between uses.

Being based on the Browning BAR, it does not break down easily for field (or anywhere else) cleaning, as a true battle rifle design does.

The ubiquitous AR-15, for instance, and its arch-rival, the AK-47, both break down in less than a minute for cleaning & maintenance, anywhere, in just about any conditions.
Same with FAL, AUG, Tavor, H&K 91/93 & clones, and other current military arms. Also the same dating back to the bolt-action days with Springfields, Garands, Mausers, Enfields, Mosins, and so on.
Very far from the case with the FNAR.

And it was not built to handle the battlefield as main battle rifles are.

My point was that if anyone looks at the FNAR, thinks "battle rifle", and buys one for that role, he or she may be disappointed.

And before you ask how I know what the intent of the model is, I discussed it with FN when I wrote up one of the first ones out.
That's the niche they see it occupying- precision rifle for LE primarily, hunting & range fun secondarily.

Yes, you could take it to war, but other designs more easily maintained would be better choices there, most especially in a long-range context.
Poor choice for standard infantry, semi-auto .308 is not a huge boon for 500-yard snipers in a military context. If it were, you'd be seeing them fielded.

Ya want one, get one. It's a good rifle.
Just saying understand what it is & what it isn't.
Denis

 

[HexHead]

soooo.. what can it do a PTR91 cant at significantly lower cost and decades of worldwide military proven reliability?

They are designed to shoot ½ MOA at 100 yards right out of the box. A PTR, like most military rifles are designed to shoot minute of man. And your PTR is no HK.

FN started with Browning's BAR, and with input from police agencies designed the FNAR to be a police sniper rifle. BARs also have decades of proven reliability.

 

[SuperNaut]

They are designed to shoot ½ MOA at 100 yards right out of the box. A PTR, like most military rifles are designed to shoot minute of man. And your PTR is no HK.

FN started with Browning's BAR, and with input from police agencies designed the FNAR to be a police sniper rifle. BARs also have decades of proven reliability.

Exactly, also, probably the biggest thing that the FNAR can do that the PTR can't, is to be a FNAR.

The OP didn't ask about the PTR 91.

 

[Frostbite]

I would like one, but I am not sure it they are allowed here. Maybe with a smaller magazine.

 

[greyghost01]

A friend of mine has one, It shoots very well, But field strip is out, It was one I considered but because of field strip issues I kept looking finally settled on a Sig Sauer 762 DMR its also heavy but it met all my requirements and Im very satisfied with it.

 

[barnbwt]

soooo.. what can it do a PTR91 cant at significantly lower cost and decades of worldwide military proven reliability?

PSG-1 is a far more appropriate comparison. The real question is why was the PSG-1 so expensive for what you get? Also, sixty years of solid sporting background for the BAR should really count for something.

 

[bikemutt]

FWIW, I spotted what looks like a 20" model on the wall yesterday, $999.

 

[HJ857]

I'm guessing most in this thread have never handled an FNAR, which seems typical in most any FNAR thread. The first thing is that while more difficult to break down, there's no good reason to field strip it. That's just stupid.

You can clean the piston area in a matter of a minute by removing the handguard screw. Cleaning the bolt and receiver area is just not needed. I've done it maybe four times over three years and I never thought it needed it. The action simply does not get dirty. Nothing that a squirt of oil won't take care of.

 

[DPris]

I have worked with one, and there's nothing stupid about the need for field stripping in certain contexts.

Eventually, the gun will need a thorough cleaning.
How soon & how often depends on the conditions of use.

Occasional Saturday at the range, not all that often.
Once a year hunting, probably not that often (depending on the conditions- it gets soaked in rain, it gets dropped in the creek, etc.).

Field stripping does become far more of an issue in a battle rifle context, which is why some of us have pointed out its unsuitability for such use.

A dedicated hunter buddy of mine has had a Browning BAR as his main rifle for decades.
Twenty years ago he noticed it was slowing down in cycling, after using it annually for several seasons. I asked him how long it'd been since he cleaned it thoroughly. Said "never", didn't know how to get it apart, had just been swabbing the bore & squirting a couple drops of oil in the action where he could get at it.

Got him a set of breakdown instructions, he (a mechanic) didn't much like the effort it took, but got it thoroughly de-gunked & oiled up, and commented on how much faster it was running.

The guns are not so finicky that they have to be meticulously maintained, but they do have to be maintained, and the severe conditions of the battlefield require an easier design to do that with.
Denis

 

[judgedelta]

I've got a couple of BARs and have looked at the FNAR with interest over time. The buttstock is butt-ugly; period. I saw a picture once of an FNAR with a prototype McMillan stock with full pistol grip and adjustable comb that really made the FNAR what it should have been. Never came to production, however. Plenty of videos on Utube to show you how to disassemble. Also there is a guy in New York (I think) that does trigger jobs on the FNAR and BAR rifles, which they need badly.

 

[CaliCoastie]

Have a fnar, haven't shot much of anything lately, much less it much.

Biggest question, how many people have needed to "fieldstrip" a weapon on the battlefield? Not in the military, as a civilian?

Fyi everyone who has ran rounds or even held my fnar finds it very comfortable to handle.