They need a version with wood
Most Browing BAR's I've seen
do have wood stocks. The rifle linked appears to be an SXAR (Winchester camo'ed variant of FNAR). FWIW, the shortrack stocks can be made to work with the FNAR for those who don't like pistol grips. EDIT: it
is the SXAR, even has the solitary rail up front (there's 3 on the FNAR) and Realtree. I'm not sure why, but they've gone to a dual-rail scope base (mine's a single rail).
It's a decent unit. The fnar accuracy is reported to be excellent. I would like to see one in a non-pg traditional walnut stock with black matte metal.
BAR Shortrack, Oil Finish
The rear stocks can be made to work with the FNAR/SXAR (but camo would look funny) but I think the foregrip is different due to the magwell configuration. The black synth stock looks great on the FNAR. There was even talk for a little while about McMillan doing a benchrest stock for it (below). The FNAR is guaranteed at 1MOA from the factory, no tweaking, and I'd guess the non-guaranteed Browning BARs are close to that with match ammo. Mine is just under 1MOA with decent hand-loads (I'm no OCD benchrest reloader), zero accurizing whatsoever, with a decent scope (Konus M30), and I rarely nned to clean anything but the barrel/chamber. They come in heavier than an AR10, but I've yet to see somebody try to make a stock setup for them as light as an AR10's, which I think would bring them much closer. The factory FNAR has about a half-pound of
steel rails alone, another half pound of rubber pads on the butt, and the stock itself is an unnecessarily dense plastic with a long forearm. Before the Panic (maybe still, even) you could get a 1MOA accurate FNAR for about
half the price of a bare-bones, non-accurized AR10. Unless you're throwing +2000$ at the problem, the FNAR is
extremely competitive with other platforms (and probably still is if you throw and extra grand at the FNAR).
The main downsides are its lack of easy configurability, and its takedown is far more difficult (though it's only needed every thousand rounds). I
suppose its interrupted-thread locking lugs
could be more prone to sand-fouling--but again, mine goes for a thousand rounds between strippings (granted, I don't pour sand into the rifle)
I, too, thought the OP was referring to the 1919
TCB
(Unrelated, but I can't help asking; how does an FNAR come in "nose heavy" if it has a metallic reciever, the same barrel (if you're comparing apples to apples), the same 20 rounds of 308, and a heavier stock made of overly thick plastic and solid rubber pads? Do AR10's have a shorter length of pull, plastic mags, or am I missing something? The FNAR usually clocks in about a pound or so heavier than AR10's, are those ARs all short/light sporter barrels?)
