Palmetto .308 AR10 - Crazy Great Prices
- Thread starter WinThePennant
- Start date
- Status
ID-shooting
Member
All AR10's are prorietary, nobody can agree. Expensive Sig's, Rugers, Knights, DPMS, even Armalite. All are different, with different parts, none of them resemble Stoner's original design.
All you can do is pick one and buy mantinance parts accoringly. I am just glad they choose the more common magazine platform.
newfalguy101
Member
While its true that AR-10s are different between major brands, there seems to be a slow shift towards the DPMS pattern as the most common. I am pretty certain the Aero Precision is a DPMS pattern, as are several other offerings
bhhacker
Member
Im just hoping that with black friday there will be a .308 AR that will be in my budget. Which will be tough to do, as its well under 1000 but black friday is the best chance for it!
WinThePennant
Member
PSA has .308s (their version of the AR10) under a $1,000 all the time. If memory serves, you can piece together an AR10 from PSA for as little as $800.
bhhacker
Member
Im hoping that PSA drops that price a bit for black friday so i can use the rest of the budget for optics.
A boy can dream!
A boy can dream!
Jackal
Member
Lol, bhhacker, sounds like you want a PTR91. They are well proven and can be had in the $875 region. $5 mags are a bonus...
WinThePennant
Member
PTAC .308 AR10 - Selling for $699.
http://palmettostatearmory.com/inde...c-tac10-16-carbine-length-308-win-1-10-rifle/
http://palmettostatearmory.com/inde...c-tac10-16-carbine-length-308-win-1-10-rifle/
boricua9mm
Member
DPMS Pattern? How about SR-25 pattern!?
DPMS simply set out to build rifles based on the SR-25 and make a rifle as close as possible to the Knight's gun, whittling away expenses where necessary to meet their targeted price point.
As far as I'm concerned, the "DPMS pattern" label is a misnomer, as they are the Pepsi Cola of this game.
Actually, when you shop for an upper at RedXarms, they state "THIS UPPER IS DPMS COMPATABLE". When you shop for an upper at Hardenedarms, they state "Fits DPMS style lower receivers". When you shop at MidwayUSA, it's "DPMS LR-308". You can be right about the SR-25 pattern, but that's not what all the retails are using to identify their products.
Can we discuss this PA-10 incompatability issue a little more extensively? What exactly is not matching up? Are pin sizes different, or is it the well for the trigger group, or do upper/lower hinge pins not line up? Will a DPMS upper (sorry, a SR-25 upper) not fit onto a PA-10 lower, or is it a PSA upper not fitting on a LR-308 lower, or is it both?
Last edited:
Dpms and sr-25 are different patterns. Manufacturers are referring to the magwell not the receiver pattern. The incompatibility issue comes from the charging handle on the psa hits the receiver extension on the dpms lower. Some people have filed away a little material on the lower and it works, but you have to paint the bare aluminum. If your buying a 308 ar buy all the parts from one company. There is no spec and every manufacturer makes things a little bit different. For the price of a complete rifle you can't get hurt on it.
Blade First
Member
Another vote for Aero Precision...recently built one of their M5 lowers to mate to a DPMS upper and it is an exceptionally nice package.
Re: the lack of a true .308/7.62x51 NATO spec akin to that often touted as AR-15 'mil-spec'...we seem to be making progress.
In the meantime, buyer beware...incompatibility is quite expensive to fix and customers wanting to build the cheapest rifle they can screw together often get exactly that.
Re: the lack of a true .308/7.62x51 NATO spec akin to that often touted as AR-15 'mil-spec'...we seem to be making progress.
In the meantime, buyer beware...incompatibility is quite expensive to fix and customers wanting to build the cheapest rifle they can screw together often get exactly that.
ID-shooting
Member
I have to agree, buy your upper and lower from the same company. Regardless of who started first, the fact is, no two companies are doing it the same. Unless you are wanting a special configuration there is no reason to try to piece one together right now. Sub 1K has quite a few offerings, jump to 2k and you options are vastly wide. AR10 market while not new, is certainly not as great as the AR15 market. Give it time though, if 7.62x51 prices continue to drop, people will be shooting more and more of it. The interest will grow and the market will adjust. I know I have seen it grow in the last six months here from the local forums I belong to.
boricua9mm
Member
I've never shopped at RedXarms, nor Hardenedarms, and at this far into my shooting journey, if I'm getting by just fine, I likely won't ever be perusing their wares. The reason you see references to "DPMS pattern" is because the majority of people can not conceive spending $1k on a firearm, let alone 2.5-3.2K for something like the LMT or LaRue rifles, and especially not the 4-5k for something bearing the SR-25 badge.
People relate to what they know, or what they think they know. In order to make money in sales, you need marketing that speaks on the buyer's level. Sadly,the more people toss around "DPMS pattern" the more we'll continue to see this.
Fact is, "DPMS pattern" itself is all over the board. They have had rifles with different rail heights and now you have the Gen. 2 rifles. Which one is the true "DPMS standard?"
That's quite confusing. DPMS did not invent the magazine specs either, they used the SR25 specs for the mag well and mag bodies. They decided to go their own way with the receiver cuts. As such, it seems that describing anything as "DPMS spec" does more to confuse the issue than to help answer questions of compatibility, but I digress...
The weird thing about all of this is that you can mix and match uppers and lowers from the SR25, MWS, LaRue, and Armalite rifles and everything mates up just fine. Now, granted, the legacy Armalite upper presents challenges that won't allow it to feed from the standard SR25 mags. The DPMS rifles, on the other hand, have a rounded profile like that of a regular AR15, so while they will fit on other lowers, there is an awkward gap whose functional integrity I'm not sure of.
At the end of the day, I agree to keep these projects as much of a single-source proposition as possible. It helps avoid major headaches and potential money pits. The big problem with PSA is there appears to be instances when even PSA components are not playing nicely with their kinfolk.
For the sake of long term sustainability, I think it wise to take note of what the Military has invested in. Of course, decades from now this too came become a concern; just take a look at the diminishing availability of M14 USGI parts as a potential example.
- Status
