I want a .308 AR that is reliable, great for short to moderate distance[/span], and reliable. I’ll probably through an ACOG or Aimpoint & Magnifier on it and do shooting from 25 to 200 yds (maybe 300).
My Concerns
Reliability. I took a look at the 10 about 6 or 7 years ago. Lots of issues. Most being attributed to mags. Have the Gen II mags fixed that?
Do I need to worry about the spring tension of the extractor spring? CS available? Work w/ Crane “O” ring?
Mag cost.
The barrels on the standard model seem pretty thin, “pencil” style. How does this do for longevity and accuracy?? I like that they are chrome lined, though.
Wow, deja vue. Seen this on TOS. Anyways go for it, how many people can say they have an AR-10. Out of all of my friends and family members who shoot and have AR’s myself and my BOL are the only ones with a 10 and they are great.
I think when buying a new AR-10 they have all the kinks worked out basically especially with the new Gen II mags which are only $30-$35 when you buy the package of 5. 762SASS also has the 20 rounders on sale for $30.
In my opinion, the shortest barrel for the 7.62NATO round, one that makes sense anyway, is 18 inches. That’s what I have on my FAL and it’s un-Christly loud. A 16 inch barrel will be significantly louder and the muzzle flash too large to hide. The loss of muzzle velocity is the corker for this idea. Thinking about it, I can’t come up with a logical reason to want 7.62x51 in such a short barrel, going to that caliber means you’re looking for lots of extra knock down power, you’d lose some of that with such a short barrel. Again, it’s just my opinion.
If you want a short, light, compact rifle with more power than 5.56NATO, it’d be more practical to go with either 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC.
I disagree, depending on your requirements, the 16" barrel configuration is probably the best, most efficient compromise in accuracy, power and portability in a full power rifle cartridge. If you’re looking for a sniper/DMR-type gun I’d agree with you, but if you’re just looking for a fighting battle rifle 16" rules the roost.
In terms of loss of velocity do you have any figures? I seem to remember from years ago on the FAL Files that there were several tests that documented that between 21 and 16" loss of velocity averages about 50 fps/inch. This only becomes an issue at extended ranges. All other things being equal inside of 400m 7.62 NATO out of a 16" barrel will outperform .223/5.56 handily.
You’re not going to totally “hide” the muzzle flash even on a 20" barrel with a suppressor that said a FH does a fantastic job on the end of a 16" barrel.
Any differences between 7.62 NATO out of a 16" and 18" barrel are marginal at best…outside of 2 fewer inches on the end of your gun.
Well, yes, the 5.56NATO is an assault rifle cartridge, however both the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC are full power MBR cartridges in that they both have over 2000 foot pounds of muzzle energy, nearly 75% more than the 5.56 NATO.
That’s what makes both the 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel so valuable, full power in an AR receiver. Additionally, both fit at least 25% more rounds in a standard AR magazine volume than a 7.62NATO. Even more important is the fact that both cartridges function through a standard length AR15 receiver system, not the much longer, heavier, and more expensive AR10 length system.
Nevertheless, if one must have an AR10 7.62NATO rifle, an 18 inch barrel is as short as I would go.
Except that 5.56 and 7.62 NATO are far more commonly available cartridges. Even still the OPs request was about the 7.62 NATO. IIRC 7.62 NATO delivers more energy at the muzzle than all three.
That’s what makes both the 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel so valuable, full power in an AR receiver. Additionally, both fit at least 25% more rounds in a standard AR magazine volume than a 7.62NATO. Even more important is the fact that both cartridges function through a standard length AR15 receiver system, not the much longer, heavier, and more expensive AR10 length system.
That’s your perceived value and that’s all well and good but not everyone agrees or everyone would be shooting 6.8 and 6.5. Again the OP asked about a 16" AR10, not an AR15. There are plenty of examples of very nice, reliable, manageable AR10 variants.
Nevertheless, if one must have an AR10 7.62NATO rifle, an 18 inch barrel is as short as I would go.
Again totally fair to have preferences but your reasoning gave a flawed impression.
A 16" .308 AR-10 is just fine for killing or paper shooting. It delivers excellent sectional density and BC as well as quite a bit more muzzle energy than any of the medium size AR-15 cartridges like the 6.5 Grendel or 6.8SPC.
Some of the stuff on the internet is blown way out of proportion in regards to reliability issues, however I do not think that overall they are equal to an AR-15 in that respect. They can be close, and individual examples may be superior or equivalent.
The ArmaLite Gen II mags solved a lot of issues for people who claimed to have them, and also eliminated the difficulty loading them.
I would recommend ArmaLite or KAC. After many years of using their small parts, and seeing their other AR’s, I don’t think DPMS makes a quality product, so I personally avoid them. A lot of other people swear by their .308 AR’s but shun their .223/5.56 AR’s (:eek:). Completely personal preference, I suppose.
Constructor at www.ar15performance.com is developing a lightweight 18" upper to plop on a DPMS lower. Based on what he has done with the 6.8spc, I’ll bet this will be a winner.
Yes, it is. We’re not restricted to the 5.56NATO versus the 7.62NATO dichotomy any more, we have an abundance of choices with regard to caliber in the ergonomically superb AR form factor.
You missed something, he was actually talking about a lightweight .308, scroll down the link a bit.
That said the price of ammo significantly adds to the price of the gun. .308 is far cheaper, is more readily available, and still delivers superior performance to 6.5 or 6.8. Yes the AR10 system is more expensive in initial outlay, but over the life of the weapon the cost more than balances out.
According to ammoengine, the price of the cheapest 6.8SPC for plinking (Remington UMC) can be had for the same per round cost as as TAP barrier .308 or Lake City Match and significantly more expensive than a lot of quality match ammo. For practice ammo you get 2 rounds of .308 per 1 round of 6.8. Why would you spend more money on a less effective round? http://www.ammoengine.com/find/ammo/6.8mm_Remington_SPC http://www.ammoengine.com/find/ammo/.308_Winchester_7.62x51mm
You’ll also find that there is a LOT more .308 listed than 6.8…just sayin’
If you have unlimited funds (or don’t pay for your own ammo) it’s great, but I’d imagine that the OP has already considered 6.5/6.8 and is going with .308 for a reason.
I could debate that 308 vs 6.8 cost issue with you…but that’s not the comparison the OP asked. Let’s stay on topic! I’d also like to know the answers to all of his questions…especially re: reliability.
A very good thread a while back discussed how DI was unreliable for 308 under hard use.
I’ll add that I’m also eagerly anticipating the Magpul 308 mags.
For me, 18" is minimum barrel length, for comfort and ballistics.
I’d like to know about thinner barrel aspects with .308.
“Unreliable” and “not as reliable as” can be two drastically different states. As I mentioned, you may have individual examples of .308 AR’s that are as reliable, or have better reliability than the similarly used AR-15, but it is probably unlikely.
That is not to say that you can not have hundreds or thousands of individually used samples that perform reliably on a far less grueling regimen than someone would subject an AR15 to…
Why? Ammo is more expensive. Recoil is far greater. Weight is a factor.
If we want to discuss reliability, someone better get data on mean time between failures, nature of the failures and a comparitive analysis to an AR15 with similar fire schedule under a controlled environment.
Anything else is subjective white wash, and really hard to qualify or quantify. The anecdotal relation of stories may bear out the reality, but a gut feeling on reliability issues is far too subjective. Especially when usually expressed by people who have only ever seen a .308 AR on a shelf in a gun store, or shot a friend’s once at the range.
If I’m not mistaken, the UK MOD’s new L129A1 is a version of the LMT MRP308 with a match grade stainless steel 16" barrel.
There are factory rounds specifically designed for shorter barreled .308s that mitigate many of the issues with blast and noise, and provide very useful terminal ballistic effects out to 600-700 meters. Two examples are the TAP 155gr BTHP and Amax loads. Also, the TAP 168gr Amax load exhibits less than 100fps difference in 20" vs 16" barrels based on my chrono testing to date.
As for shooting paper, Frank Galli - owner of snipershide.com - states he “hammers” 1MOA targets at 800 yards at sea level with a 16" .308 semi. This is not ideal for F-Class, but certainly good enough for practical shooting.
IMHO, a 16" .308 AR makes a handy package with loads of capability…
My 16" REPR with NF 2.5-10x32 mil/mil zero stop scope:
when I wake up in the morning, there’s only one thing on my mind and that’s a good hot cup of coffee, and that Cuisinart coffemaker is top of the line!
If I am not mistaken I believe that I read your range report on your weapon and you made mention that your rifle was putting out under 2400f/s with the 168tap
However the 168 amax tap that I have on the box say’s it’s puts out 2700f/s, I know it is over stated a bit, but you list the diff. as only 100ft
In my own math on #'s posted that the 16in vs full sized 308 put’s out about 93% of the velocity of what the comm. rd is capable of in 24inbbl which is pretty good. These #'s come from published 16in barrels of which both put about 100f/s more that your velocities so you might actually be getting more vel. perhaps it is your chrono, or that part. lot of ammo
As stated there are other weights to help out the shorter barrels, just go lighter and it is a intermediate length bbl
110gr tap still puts out over 2900f/s and over 2100 pounds of E in a 16in bbl
