I have one of the original AR-18/ 180's from Armalite, Costa Mesa, CA. It is one that
actually used the AR-18 to make. The lower receiver is the civilian stamped with just
the Safe - Semi selector positions, but the internals are of the AR-18 military version.
I know that Armalite changed the internal parts to the 180 at some point, but by the
time they had made my four digit serial, they had not.
What most do not know is that Gene Stoner patented the AR-15 gas tube system, and
had designed the basic action for it, which was also used in the AR-18/ 180 models.
There were actually three people involved in the design of the AR-15, the AR-18, and
the AR-180, and Stoner was only involved with the 15. It is correct that Fairchild
Aviation owned Armalite at that time, and with financial problems, and a total lack
of knowledge of the firearms industry, decided to sell the AR-10, and AR-15 rights
to Colt. After that, Gene Stoner left Armalite, and went to Colt as a consultant.
During the time Stoner was with Armalite, he was involved with the presentation
for testing of the AR-15 to the government. It failed testing on several issues. He
felt he could iron them out, so he left Armalite after the sale of the rights on the two.
The basics for the AR-18 for the military had already been pretty well designed to
overcome the issues with the 15. An AR-16 in 7.62 caliber had already been designed,
but it never went to production as the government was looking for the smaller caliber
round in 5.56. Armalite produced the 18 for submission. Several rifles were even sent
the the Navy Seals for trials. The Seals loved them, and even after Armalite had lost
out in the competition with Colt, they refused to return them in favor of the newly
adopted M-16.
Now, about the adoption of the M-16. Basically, the military always uses the 'M'
designation for the number of modifications. There were exactly 16 modifications to the
AR-15; ie: M-16. This wasn't the name of the rifle, it was the designation number of
modifications. Now, whenever the U. S. tests new military equipment, many of the allies
seek to have the same. Since they do not have access into the process at the early
stages just after testings, they use politicians to seek out the information from our
politicians prior to any official announcement of just what is adopted. In that way they
can get orders into the selected company fast to get a faster delivery of the new
equipment. This is the point where there was a political screw up. (and we all know just
how politics can screw up just about everything.) One particular politician (who was
more impressed with himself, and building a stature with other nations) informed all the
questioning allies that the U. S. was buying the M-16. That move prompted Colt to
quickly name their rifle M-16. At that particular time in the process, only the AR-18 had
passed all the tests. One of the issues that had not been changed on the 15 was the
chrome lining that was in the 18. The 15 was also supposed to have that, but it was
the Presidents 'Wiz Kids' that decided to not use it to keep the cost down.
Again, politics, and Colt pushed the issue through for the AR-15, due to the fact that
so many other countries would blame the U. S. for having them buy the inferior rifle of
the testings. At that time the 18, and not the 15 had passed the tests. The position
of politics, and the well known firearms company of Colt decided the issue. Also, due
to the lack of knowledge in the firearms industry by Fairchild Aviation, there was no
challenge made over this. It should have been a very strong challenge. Instead, it was
just non-existent.
Whereas, there was a problem at the time that was questioned on the AR-18, it did
not have anything to do with the testing phase of the time. This was in the weakness
of the folding stock hinge, and the plastic butt stock. Everything else at the time met
all criteria. Of the whole fiasco only the chrome lining part was not able to be covered
up when the problem without it due to the powder used, and the lack of chromium
caused problems. The first troops issued the new M-16 were told it was self-cleaning.
That was the claim of the 18, not the 15. The 18 could claim it best due to the gas
piston instead of the gas tube, and the specifically named powder to use in ammunition.
The AR in all rifles that use that designation actually stands for "Armalite". Only the
AR-15, and the AR-10 can properly call a weapon name an "AR" if it is not from Armalite.
Those are the only models where rights to it was given. Later models of the Armalite
rifles could be used by the companies that had purchased Armalite, and made rifles
under the Armalite name they bought.
I do feel that a heavier barrel might be a good move if one is firing a lot of rounds,
very fast such as in a full auto mode. However, in semi-automatic firing, I have
never found this to be an issue. However, only the companies that had previously
owned Armalite (Howa, and Sterling) were even involved with auto-fire rifles other
than the original Armalite. Eagle, who purchased the Armalite name in recent times
is not involved with auto versions as they are not competing in military trials. Some
LE possibly, but in most cases those agencies just go to the M-16.
The thousands of the AR-18's, and 180's made with the stamped receiver are quite
good rifles. They are very serviceable, and quite accurate. Many have been used
in National matches, and shoot well with the best names. Some have had barrels
replaced with newer design ones for very precision shooting at the 600 yard course.
One thing that some have experienced as a problem is with the spot welding of the
dovetail mount for the Armalite scope. In some cases these welds have come
loose. I have never seen one with that problem, and mine still is very solid. This
type of dovetail mount for a scope allows it to hold a scope to perfect zero every
time it is removed, and reinstalled. Firing the rifle actually causes it to seat the
scope even firmer to that zero. No extra adjustments are necessary as with other
mounting methods.
The unfortunate issue with the older model Armalite rifles today is that no one has
the original data, drawings, specs, or parts. It would take a list of those that have
these older Armalite rifles to give some company the idea that making parts for
replacement would be a viable effort. As it is now, they do not have call for parts
enough to know that there is a market. 20,000+ rifles out there is enough to entice
some company, but they just are not aware of these numbers. Why should they waste
time, and money to make parts, and advertise without such info?
I have been in contact with a company that questions just this, but they are talking to
me on the possibility of some parts. If someone would like to get a list started of
prospective purchases of parts for the early model armalite rifles , please get in touch with me.
[email protected]
