How well will the Ruger SFAR hold up?

[Balrog]

I am interested in the Ruger SFAR, but wonder how it might hold up over time and shooting compared to other 308 semi auto's like the M1A, FAL, or AR10.

I am not an engineer, so I am not sure how this lighter newer rifle will do. I am not asking about barrel life, but about the mechanical functioning.

 

[Varminterror]

“Gen2’s” have been around for over a decade. They hold up just fine.

 

[Buzznrose]

“Gen2’s” have been around for over a decade. They hold up just fine.

???

 

[Varminterror]

???

Ruger SFAR’s are just an iteration of the DPMS Gen2 design. Mega Arms did G2’s also. They’ve been around since 2012 or 2013, just not with a Ruger firechicken on the side.

It’s an AR design - all of the firing force is contained by the steel barrel extension and bolt, the length of the receiver set is largely irrelevant. It’s the same FCG as other AR’s as well - thoroughly proven and well understood. They work fine, and they will.

 

[Buzznrose]

Ruger SFAR’s are just an iteration of the DPMS Gen2 design. Mega Arms did G2’s also. They’ve been around since 2012 or 2013, just not with a Ruger firechicken on the side.

It’s an AR design - all of the firing force is contained by the steel barrel extension and bolt, the length of the receiver set is largely irrelevant. It’s the same FCG as other AR’s as well - thoroughly proven and well understood. They work fine, and they will.

Thanks! I didn’t know it was that similar.

I do like mine, but I don’t have many rounds through it.

 

[powermad]

Pay attention to the warning on page 18.
It will cook off a round after a string of rapid fire.

People are finding that it happens.

 

[C-grunt]

Any closed bolt rifle can have cook offs if you get them hot enough.

That's one of the main reasons that belt fed machineguns run open bolt.

 

[marksman13]

Ruger SFAR’s are just an iteration of the DPMS Gen2 design. Mega Arms did G2’s also. They’ve been around since 2012 or 2013, just not with a Ruger firechicken on the side.

It’s an AR design - all of the firing force is contained by the steel barrel extension and bolt, the length of the receiver set is largely irrelevant. It’s the same FCG as other AR’s as well - thoroughly proven and well understood. They work fine, and they will.

That’s not really true though. The SFAR and POF Rogue are smaller framed than the Gen 2 DPMS pattern rifles. The re-engineered the lower receiver of an AR-15 to squeeze in the 308 cartridge. Having owned both a DPMS Gen 2 and a POF Rogue, there’s no comparison between the two in terms of how they handle.

 

[Varminterror]

That’s not really true though. The SFAR and POF Rogue are smaller framed than the Gen 2 DPMS pattern rifles. The re-engineered the lower receiver of an AR-15 to squeeze in the 308 cartridge. Having owned both a DPMS Gen 2 and a POF Rogue, there’s no comparison between the two in terms of how they handle.

First - as plainly as can be said - I made no claim that any of these parts are interchangeable.

BUT, I am absolutely correct in stating that these midsize SFAR’s are just another iteration of the AR design. The design point is that the SFAR is just another “AR-12.5” with a shortened receiver set. There’s no magic here - the receivers are really nothing more than brackets which align the FCG, reciprocating mass, and barrel. All of the functional design remains the same across all of the AR-15, AR-10, SFAR, Gen2’s, etc. There’s nothing about the design which is functionally different, so questioning service life and functionality of the SFAR is like questioning the function of a hammer, just because the handle is a quarter inch longer… it’s still a damned hammer…

All of these intermediate sizes are just that. DPMS, Mega, POF, etc just shrank an AR-10 receiver set towards the AR-15 length and size. Ruger just shrank their receiver set and carrier more. Functionally, there’s nothing new.

 

[Balrog]

Sorry I even asked.

 

[LocoGringo]

Sorry I even asked.

I'm not sorry you asked. I'm curious myself and open to a "lively" discussion. Let it shake out...

 

[Varminterror]

Pay attention to the warning on page 18.
It will cook off a round after a string of rapid fire.

People are finding that it happens.

The same warning appears on page 17 of the Ruger AR556 manual, as well as on Page 22 of the Mini-14 manual… Ruger is covering their butt with “sustained fire warnings” about semi-autos cooking off… it’s not exclusive to the SFAR.

 

[Pat Riot]

I have one and I really like it. To me it’s an AR-15 with a stretched and more robust frame. The bolt is bigger so I assume it’s an AR-10 sized bolt, but it does use an AR-15 charging handle. Some components are AR-15, like the stock, grip, lower internals, forend. But you didn’t ask about that.

I really have no idea how long it will last or how many rounds it will handle. I do know that it’s definitely uniquely made so when and if I have any issues I won’t be asking people who obviously don’t know to help troubleshoot it. It will go back to Ruger. Especially if I see wear that indicates it may be detrimental. I wanted an AR-10 that didn’t weigh like an AR-10. I also wanted one that came with a lifetime warranty.

I can tell you that this thing is fun as hell to shoot. I really like shooting it. That Boomer muzzle break really helps with recoil.

 

[marksman13]

First - as plainly as can be said - I made no claim that any of these parts are interchangeable.

BUT, I am absolutely correct in stating that these midsize SFAR’s are just another iteration of the AR design. The design point is that the SFAR is just another “AR-12.5” with a shortened receiver set. There’s no magic here - the receivers are really nothing more than brackets which align the FCG, reciprocating mass, and barrel. All of the functional design remains the same across all of the AR-15, AR-10, SFAR, Gen2’s, etc. There’s nothing about the design which is functionally different, so questioning service life and functionality of the SFAR is like questioning the function of a hammer, just because the handle is a quarter inch longer… it’s still a damned hammer…

All of these intermediate sizes are just that. DPMS, Mega, POF, etc just shrank an AR-10 receiver set towards the AR-15 length and size. Ruger just shrank their receiver set and carrier more. Functionally, there’s nothing new.

I don’t see it as another iteration of the Gen 2 receivers, so I guess we’ll just agree to disagree. The Gen 2s reduced weight, but didn’t do nearly as much to reduce bulk or frame dimensions. I get your point that all of these are just variants of the original AR-15 design, but that’s not really the same as saying it’s just another iteration. I’d argue that the POF/SFAR design is different enough from the Gen 2 design that there could be some new problems introduced in the design. There’s at least enough of a difference to make the question about it’s ruggedness a fair ponderance.

 

[silicosys4]

I have one and I really like it. To me it’s an AR-15 with a stretched and more robust frame. The bolt is bigger so I assume it’s an AR-10 sized bolt, but it does use an AR-15 charging handle. Some components are AR-15, like the stock, grip, lower internals, forend. But you didn’t ask about that.

I really have no idea how long it will last or how many rounds it will handle. I do know that it’s definitely uniquely made so when and if I have any issues I won’t be asking people who obviously don’t know to help troubleshoot it. It will go back to Ruger. Especially if I see wear that indicates it may be detrimental. I wanted an AR-10 that didn’t weigh like an AR-10. I also wanted one that came with a lifetime warranty.

I can tell you that this thing is fun as hell to shoot. I really like shooting it. That Boomer muzzle break really helps with recoil.

The bolt of an SFAR is an AR15 size bolt, hogged out to accept a .308 cartridge head. The bolt head diameter of an AR15 bolt and an SFAR bolt are exactly the same.

 

[Varminterror]

The bolt of an SFAR is an AR15 size bolt, hogged out to accept a .308 cartridge head. The bolt head diameter of an AR15 bolt and an SFAR bolt are exactly the same.

We’ve had bolts like this running around since 2008… really even longer, back as far as 2003/2004, but certainly in similar design by 2008… it’s also well proven design…

 

[Varminterror]

I don’t see it as another iteration of the Gen 2 receivers

If you can provide sensible defense that the SFAR and the Gen2’s are not both “AR-10’s shortened towards AR-15 receiver length and size,” then you’d have a leg to stand on here. But they both are. Ruger’s is just shorter and smaller than the Gen2. Yes, they balance differently, but there’s no functional design difference (for example, the oversized Nemo Omen magnum length AR’s use a rebounding bolt carrier which was a unique functional design aspect when they came out, not proven AR tech), and every aspect of the SFAR has been implemented in other rifles for a long time.

I’m glad you like your SFAR, and I make no statements here about any superiority of any of these designs, but it’s ignorant to ignore the fact it’s just another iteration of the theme, “an AR-10 shrank towards AR-15 size.”

 

[marksman13]

If you can provide sensible defense that the SFAR and the Gen2’s are not both “AR-10’s shortened towards AR-15 receiver length and size,” then you’d have a leg to stand on here. But they both are. Ruger’s is just shorter and smaller than the Gen2. Yes, they balance differently, but there’s no functional design difference (for example, the oversized Nemo Omen magnum length AR’s use a rebounding bolt carrier which was a unique functional design aspect when they came out, not proven AR tech), and every aspect of the SFAR has been implemented in other rifles for a long time.

I’m glad you like your SFAR, and I make no statements here about any superiority of any of these designs, but it’s ignorant to ignore the fact it’s just another iteration of the theme, “an AR-10 shrank towards AR-15 size.”

I don’t own an SFAR, but I do own a few POFs. The POFs are genuinely AR-15 sized frames. I can pin a 5.56 upper to my POF Rogue lower. The Gen 2s aren’t nearly that close in size to the AR-15. The POFs and SFARs move the trigger group back in the receiver. They use AR-15 bolt carriers with a proprietary bolt. Again, I follow your train of thought that they are improvements based on the same original design, but I can understand the proprietary parts and design changes prompting questions.

 

[bfoosh006]

" Bolt and barrel extensions are CNC-machined from high-strength super alloy steel that outperforms traditional C158 bolts."

This is what interests me. I guess time will tell.

 

[tarosean]

Sorry I even asked.

Shoot it till it breaks. That’s the real answer.

 

[12Bravo20]

Any closed bolt rifle can have cook offs if you get them hot enough.

That's one of the main reasons that belt fed machineguns run open bolt.

And I have had cook offs with the M60 a time or three.

I throw my hat into the argument about the DPMS G2, POF, and Ruger SFAR. Yes they are very similar but not the exact same. Yes the basic design concept has been around for a while. And yes the design works. So there really is no need to argue about schematics here. And remember that there is not even an industry standard for the large frame AR's either. Yes the DPMS pattern is the most common but not all parts are fully interchangeable like they are with the AR15.

The SFAR hasn't been out very long so who knows how they will actually hold up, especially under heavy use. But I bet they will hold up just fine just like the POF and DPMS G2.

 

[Rule3]

Heck I didn't know what it was so looked it up.

Ruger® SFAR™ Autoloading Rifle Models

ruger.com

 

[Pat Riot]

The bolt of an SFAR is an AR15 size bolt, hogged out to accept a .308 cartridge head. The bolt head diameter of an AR15 bolt and an SFAR bolt are exactly the same.

Thanks. I don’t have an AR-15 to compare it to. That would be helpful, but I am not buying one just for comparisons.

 

[herrwalther]

I have a friend who works very closely with big name gun companies. He got a prototype SFAR (before it was even called SFAR) sometime around 2010. He still uses it to this day. If I ever get the chance to shoot his I will likely buy one for myself. It is an interesting rifle that I am doing more research on.

 

[silicosys4]

Here are pictures of my PA10 LFAR, my SFAR, and one of my AR15's for comparison. The thickness of the PA10's receiver walls is deceiving, as there is a lip designed in for cosmetic reasons. The actual receiver thickness is on par with the AR15.

Ruger SFAR engineering. Inside SFAR vs LFAR, AR15.

Here is a photo comparison of some of the engineering that went into the SFAR. I am not an engineer, I do not claim to have knowledge of the changes Ruger made other than the obvious, but from the photographs you can see that Ruger did some interesting things. Here is a top down, SFAR in the...

www.thehighroad.org

Varminterror is right. The SFAR is just a shrunken AR10 with some things moved around to accommodate the condensing of the action and trigger parts. Notice the difference in receiver wall thickness between the SFAR and the AR15. They shaved as much material as possible to save weight.

The SFAR bolt in the middle is exactly the same diameter as the AR15 bolt on the left, and is much smaller than the PA10 bolt on the right.

But the carriers are a little different.
The SFAR really is just a shrunken AR10.