Which AR-10 would you buy two choices only!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The upper and lower are different. Using BG terminology, the .308 version is a long action and the 5,56 etc, are short actions.

PS:
Semantics once Armalite owned the rights until they sold them to Colt who produced an M-series. Nowadays an AR-15 is any AR in 5,56 and even includes Wylde chambers which no real first issue Armalite ever had.
 
TikkaShooter said:
The upper and lower are different. Using BG terminology, the .308 version is a long action and the 5,56 etc, are short actions.

PS:
Semantics once Armalite owned the rights until they sold them to Colt who produced an M-series. Nowadays an AR-15 is any AR in 5,56 and even includes Wylde chambers which no real first issue Armalite ever had.
Click to expand...

That's funny, that's exactly how I think of it. I almost said it, but I didn't know if anyone else would appreciate the analogy.

Regarding the AR15, it goes much deeper than that. It's acceptable to call any AR-ish rifle an AR15, even if it shares almost no common parts. Take the SR25 for example, which has almost no common parts with any other AR or M series rifle.
 
stinger 327 said:
What is an AR-10? An AR-15 but in .308 caliber?:confused:
Click to expand...

Yes, but the AR-10 came first. Back in the mid-1950s Eugene Stoner and ArmaLite/Fairchild designed the AR-10 to compete in the US military competition to replace the M1 Garand rifle. The AR-10 lost out to an improved Garand, the M14 which became the US service rifle. ArmaLite scaled down the 7.62x51mm AR-10 into a new rifle, the AR-15 in 5.56x45mm which replaced the M14 in the mid-1960s and became the M16 US service rifle.

By then Colt had taken over production of the rifle and later sold a semiauto version commercially as the AR-15 and other model names.

AR stands for ArmaLite and the number 10 stands for the 10th firearm design by ArmaLite. 15 of course is their 15th firearm design.

Today the term "AR-15" is generically used (after Bushmaster's successful lawsuit against Colt) while "AR-10" belongs exclusively to ArmaLite/Eagle Arms much like "F-150" belongs to Ford.
 
Quentin said:
Yes, but the AR-10 came first. Back in the mid-1950s Eugene Stoner and ArmaLite/Fairchild designed the AR-10 to compete in the US military competition to replace the M1 Garand rifle. The AR-10 lost out to an improved Garand, the M14 which became the US service rifle. ArmaLite scaled down the 7.62x51mm AR-10 into a new rifle, the AR-15 in 5.56x45mm which replaced the M14 in the mid-1960s and became the M16 US service rifle.

By then Colt had taken over production of the rifle and later sold a semiauto version commercially as the AR-15 and other model names.

AR stands for ArmaLite and the number 10 stands for the 10th firearm design by ArmaLite. 15 of course is their 15th firearm design.

Today the term "AR-15" is generically used (after Bushmaster's successful lawsuit against Colt) while "AR-10" belongs exclusively to ArmaLite/Eagle Arms much like "F-150" belongs to Ford.
Click to expand...
It would be interesting to see a shoot out comparison of the M14 vs. AR-10.
 
grampajack said:
... Regarding the AR15, it goes much deeper than that. It's acceptable to call any AR-ish rifle an AR15, even if it shares almost no common parts. Take the SR25 for example, which has almost no common parts with any other AR or M series rifle.
Click to expand...

Actually the SR-25 uses a lot of AR-15 parts. Eugene Stoner and KAC took the old 1950s AR-10 design and refined it using lots of common AR-15 parts. SR stands for Stoner Rifle and 25 was a play on the sum of 10 + 15 as in AR-10 + AR-15!
 
stinger 327 said:
It would be interesting to see a shoot out comparison of the M14 vs. AR-10.
Click to expand...

I don't know if any old footage of the US trials in the 1950s exists but there are videos of an original AR-10 being fired full auto, something that was harder to do with the M14.

There are videos of current M14s and M1As firing alongside current AR-10s. I own one of each and enjoy them both, they both have their strengths and weaknesses.
 
Quentin said:
I don't know if any old footage of the US trials in the 1950s exists but there are videos of an original AR-10 being fired full auto, something that was harder to do with the M14.

There are videos of current M14s and M1As firing alongside current AR-10s. I own one of each and enjoy them both, they both have their strengths and weaknesses.
Click to expand...
Which one do you prefer or advantages and disadvantages of each over the other?
 
Quentin said:
Actually the SR-25 uses a lot of AR-15 parts. Eugene Stoner and KAC took the old 1950s AR-10 design and refined it using lots of common AR-15 parts. SR stands for Stoner Rifle and 25 was a play on the sum of 10 + 15 as in AR-10 + AR-15!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant the SR15, although I think this applies to the SR25 as well. I can't think of any major parts that are interchangeable. The BCG and barrel are different, the receivers are different. The only similarities, and I'm kind of assuming this because I haven't heard otherwise, would be the gas tube and perhaps the buffer, and the trigger group. Calling an SR15 an AR15 is like calling a Galil an AK47.
 
Jackal said:
16", because neither you nor the target is going to notice a 50fps loss, but you will notice the weight/maneuverability/balance.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. I think 16'' is just about perfect for most semi auto rifles. After that, the rate of return just isn't there. With that said, though, hunting is very different than self defense. Maneuverability and weight don't play a big part most of the time, and I've never personally witnessed anyone shoot a game animal offhand. Even if this is some epic tracking adventure, you're still going to have shooting sticks. The reality for most hunters in the lower 48 though is a fixed position in a deer stand or blind, likely not more than a hundred yards from the car. Under those circumstances, I will want to maximize whatever I'm shooting. If I can get an extra 100 fps by going to a twenty inch barrel, then I would do it. Really, I would just go to 24''. If nothing else, the extra weight will help with recoil, and the longer barrel will help with the report.
 
With that said, though, hunting is very different than self defense. Maneuverability and weight don't play a big part most of the time, and I've never personally witnessed anyone shoot a game animal offhand. Even if this is some epic tracking adventure, you're still going to have shooting sticks
Click to expand...

Up here in Northwest, WA, most folks hunt in dense brush, with most shots made offhand at ranges of 100m or less. A 16" barrel is amazing when navigating neck deep in salal and salmon berries:D.
 
Bobson said:
I'd buy the 18" version. I think 20" is "perfect" (my perfect) for a 308, but 18" is okay. I personally wouldn't want anything shorter.

Yeah, camo might make it harder to sell, but on a high end rifle like this, with a well done job from the factory, I wouldn't dwell on it. Besides, not like you're buying it just to sell it down the road.
Click to expand...

For a 308, 18-20" is my thoughts too ... Anything less is a huge waste, unless you just like a huge fireball and you might just as well shoot 7.62x39

As to camo ... If you're using it for hunting, it'll be more at home in the field ... And you won't be as likely to scare other hunters.
 
kimberkid said:
For a 308, 18-20" is my thoughts too ... Anything less is a huge waste, unless you just like a huge fireball and you might just as well shoot 7.62x39

As to camo ... If you're using it for hunting, it'll be more at home in the field ... And you won't be as likely to scare other hunters.
Click to expand...

That's a huge exaggeration. A .308 from a 16'' barrel is very far removed from 7.62x39. On average, you lose 20-25 fps per inch reduced. That's only a 100 fps loss over the four inch reduction from 20 to 16 inches. From a 16'' barrel, you're pushing a 150 gr. bullet at over 2500 fps, whereas a 7.62x39 would push the same bullet at more like 2000 fps. That's a 25% increase in power. To make 7.62x39 equal to .308, you'd be looking at probably a 20'' SKS vs. a sub 7'' 308. Even then, I don't think the numbers would add up. I don't think you could come anywhere close to making a functional AR10 variant that was short enough to equal a 7.62x39 of any length. If you think about it, a 10'' 308 would still push that same 150 gr. bullet at 2400 fps, which is still 300-400 fps more than a 7.62x39 from a 16'' barrel. A 10'' 7.62x39 would be more like 1900-2000 fps.

Long story short, a 16'' 308 is far from being a waste. For that matter, a 10'' 308 is far from being a waste. But, for the kind of hunting we do around my parts, I would spring for a 24-28'' barrel. Once you get up to 28'', you're really starting to see some return on investment. However, if I had to bushwhack it very far, it would be a 16'' barrel without a doubt. I know one thing for sure. A 16'' 308 can kill a deer further than I would feel comfortable taking the shot.

http://rifleshooter.com/2014/12/308-winchester-7-62x51mm-nato-barrel-length-versus-velocity-28-to-16-5/
 
GJ - thanks for setting me straight as I wasn't going on fact, just my own suspicions from seeing the huge fireballs from 16" and shorter 308 barrels.

I should have known better though as I have an PTR-91 pistol which has an 8" barrel ... I only bought it because I have a registered sear and thought it would be fun. The fireball it spits out is impressive, especially at dusk when you can see it well. OTOH, it still has quite a kick but it seems like a huge waste of energy which is where my remarks came from.
Try as I might I can't keep the 308 muzzle down unless there is some technique I'm not aware of. Typically, from 25 or so yards, shooting at the bottom of a zombie target(which would be about the center of mass) by the 3rd round (in F/A) I'm shooting at the head or above, so I don't shoot it in F/A anymore, in fact it rarely leaves the safe as it must isn't as much "fun" as I thought it would be ... the MP5, HK-52 and 53 (clones) are a different story :evil: as they are much more controllable but admittedly, the 52 (7.62x39) is more of a handful than the other two.
 
Up here in Northwest, WA, most folks hunt in dense brush, with most shots made offhand at ranges of 100m or less. A 16" barrel is amazing when navigating neck deep in salal and salmon berrie
Click to expand...

Nailed it ! That target rifle don't trail crawl.... Nicely put.

I experienced very little noticeable loss of velocity in the 16" bbl. Using H4895 and CCI LRP's and 168gr BTHPS ( a clone of the hornady match load) I was running 2620(ish)

If you were so inclined, I bet you could get the velocity numbers up using a faster powder load.
 
Last edited:
grampajack said:
... Long story short, a 16'' 308 is far from being a waste. ... if I had to bushwhack it very far, it would be a 16'' barrel without a doubt. I know one thing for sure. A 16'' 308 can kill a deer further than I would feel comfortable taking the shot. ...
Click to expand...

That was my reasoning when I bought my 16" ArmaLite AR-10A a while back. The shortest legal barrel without paperwork just happens to suffice for most of my applications. 18" has advantages but 16" isn't a deal breaker for me. Having the rifle in my hands, a careful examination, the $1000 price and SR-25/PMAG compatibility sealed the deal.

I suspect the OP would be happy with either rifle but I'd get the 16" Daniel Defense V5 mainly because I'm so pleased with my 2010 DD M4V3, 16".
 
grampajack said:
I wouldn't recommend rattle canning anything. I have an AR I use for shooting steel and corrosive stuff, and the finish was rubbing off. It's an inexpensive build, but it actually has pretty nice looks, so I wanted to cover the bare spots. I didn't want to go to the expense of doing a real gun finish, though, so I just got after it with some krylon. Problem is that gun oil will actually melt spray paint. So you oil the internals, and the oil gets drawn out by capillary action, then it soaks into the paint and causes it to rub off. And clear coats don't help much, despite a persistent myth that they do. It's okay for a range toy like mine, and it looks pretty nifty, but I would never do it to anything nice.
Click to expand...
I like Ceracote. Home Depot sells a great little aerosal spray kit with small glass bottle that will apply it great. You have to thin it a little for spraying it is ceamic based and tough. Google Ceracote and watch the video.
 
Last Winter "Recoil" magazine put out a very nice article comparing 4 or 5 AR Pattern rifles in .308.
It might be worth your time to see if you can find a back issue to help you.

Some years back I was getting rid of a boat anchor like piece of doody made by Sig and called a carbine. By that time I was completely fed up with Sig's line of carbines and their lack of Q/C and Customer Service.
I was wanting to trade this poor excuse away for a AR pattern rifle in .308 and here is what I found that at the time was true.
Their is no "Mil Spec" on this pattern of gun, so everyone added a bit or took away from the general Stoner design to fit their needs. The real down side was that there was NO real chance of swapping some of the parts or magazines from manufacturer to manufacturer. To some extent that would seem to remain true.
In my frustration I decided the answer at the time was an M1A. I cannot say that is still true, but at the time it was.
I wish you well on your search.
 
Averageman said:
Last Winter "Recoil" magazine put out a very nice article comparing 4 or 5 AR Pattern rifles in .308.
It might be worth your time to see if you can find a back issue to help you.

Some years back I was getting rid of a boat anchor like piece of doody made by Sig and called a carbine. By that time I was completely fed up with Sig's line of carbines and their lack of Q/C and Customer Service.
I was wanting to trade this poor excuse away for a AR pattern rifle in .308 and here is what I found that at the time was true.
Their is no "Mil Spec" on this pattern of gun, so everyone added a bit or took away from the general Stoner design to fit their needs. The real down side was that there was NO real chance of swapping some of the parts or magazines from manufacturer to manufacturer. To some extent that would seem to remain true.
In my frustration I decided the answer at the time was an M1A. I cannot say that is still true, but at the time it was.
I wish you well on your search.
Click to expand...
Sig makes doody and has bad customer service & quality control?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Impulse Buy AR 10 now lots of ???
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
z7
Z
S
  • Locked
AR-10 .308 Accuracy vs Barrel Length
2
Replies
26
Views
45K
dprice3844444
D
F
  • Locked
You ever bought a gun and were later like why did I buy this gun!!!!
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
hdwhit
H
M
  • Locked
Best AR-10 Brand Rifle?
Replies
14
Views
7K
Ndenway
N
J
  • Locked
AR-10 .308 - Which brands are best?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
7K
Buzznrose
Buzznrose
Back
Top