View Full Version : Ruger AR-556: conventional DI M4-clone
SomeOtherGuy
09-29-14, 13:41
Got an email today, and you can see the basics at the Ruger website:
http://www.ruger.com/products/ar556/features.html
In general, yet another M4 clone from a mainstream maker isn't that remarkable or interesting. But there are a few details I think are interesting:
1) Ruger already has piston and oprod AR-like rifles (the SR-556 and SR-762) so it's interesting to see them adding a direct impingement rifle.
2) Interesting that they chose a carbine length gas setup instead of midlength.
3) Barrel is cold hammer forged, and 1:8 twist, advertised by them as working with 35 to 77 grain bullets. Nice to see 1:8 rather than 1:9, I've long thought that 1:8 is the best compromise for the bullets actually used by civilian shooters of AR-style rifles.
4) The gas block has some thought put into it and includes a QD cup as well as bayonet stud and sight tower.
wildcard600
09-29-14, 13:51
....and we have reached market saturation.
thanks for watching folks....
WickedWillis
09-29-14, 13:54
Got an email today, and you can see the basics at the Ruger website:
http://www.ruger.com/products/ar556/features.html
In general, yet another M4 clone from a mainstream maker isn't that remarkable or interesting. But there are a few details I think are interesting:
1) Ruger already has piston and oprod AR-like rifles (the SR-556 and SR-762) so it's interesting to see them adding a direct impingement rifle.
2) Interesting that they chose a carbine length gas setup instead of midlength.
3) Barrel is cold hammer forged, and 1:8 twist, advertised by them as working with 35 to 77 grain bullets. Nice to see 1:8 rather than 1:9, I've long thought that 1:8 is the best compromise for the bullets actually used by civilian shooters of AR-style rifles.
4) The gas block has some thought put into it and includes a QD cup as well as bayonet stud and sight tower.
I think the SR556 gets a bit of a bad rap, I have shot it on several occasions and really enjoyed the rifle. If only it was a few hundred less then some ask for it.
NCGREENSWAMP13
09-29-14, 13:55
Looks interesting enough but just because you make great guns doesn't mean you'll make great AR15s. Like all new products, only time will tell.
I'm meh on this, they're about 3 years too late.
Looks interesting enough but just because you make great guns doesn't mean you'll make great AR15s. Like all new products, only time will tell.
Some would argue that ruger does neither...
NCGREENSWAMP13
09-29-14, 16:38
I'm meh on this, they're about 3 years too late.
Some would argue that ruger does neither...
This is true. My 10/22 and mark III are great but thats about the only rugers I have experience with.
lightestfighter
09-29-14, 17:03
http://youtu.be/UdoLE9Dgvjc?t=1m20s
The bolt is 9310, it's shot-peened, and it's pressure tested. It's actually pressure tested with the barrel as we proof-test them as an assembly.
It may make for a good, cheap "entry-level" gun - shoot the hell out of the stock barrel, then replace it with a BCM.
Interesting.
Cue broken record comment.
Not sure how highly I am going to rate this. If they come out with a 7.62 version I might be more interested. That said, while I have no experience with the Ruger ARs The MkII pistol has a proven, if a pain in the ass to break down for cleaning, record. My experience with various Ruger firearms, revolvers, 10/22, shotguns, bolt actions, and even a lone P89 have all been good. Never really had an issue, though they may not be the most refined they generally work well. Now their Mini series of rifles I have seen a number of issues with. Have read of several issues with their AR series as well though never seen issues in person so I can not speak well in that regard.
Time will tell on these I suppose.
justin_247
09-29-14, 17:58
The MSRP is $749, so it is definitely meant to compete with the M&P 15 Sport.
I'll be interested to hear more about it once some of these start getting into people's hands.
zombiescometh
09-29-14, 19:16
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AQOMeh8FDZk
SomeOtherGuy
09-29-14, 20:03
The MSRP is $749, so it is definitely meant to compete with the M&P 15 Sport.
If that's MSRP I would expect actual retail to be $500-600, which is very low for an AR that's basically on the full design spec (dust cover, telestock on a milspec tube, sight tower gas block, etc.) that also happens to have a hammer forged 1:8 twist barrel. It may not be a competitor for BCM or Daniel Defense buyers, but it could clobber the cheap-junk market. (Just noticed that the barrel is not stated as being chrome lined - but sub-$600 I'm not sure that matters.)
The MSRP is $749, so it is definitely meant to compete with the M&P 15 Sport.
I'll be interested to hear more about it once some of these start getting into people's hands.
Ah I did not see that. For the price it may be a deal, but I can already hear the gun counter guys proclaiming how Ruger can put out a Milspec rifle for under $700 while Colt wants $1000.
justin_247
09-29-14, 21:29
Ah I did not see that. For the price it may be a deal, but I can already hear the gun counter guys proclaiming how Ruger can put out a Milspec rifle for under $700 while Colt wants $1000.
Yup.
It's definitely not an "M4-clone." But, hey, if it undermines DPMS and Bushmaster even the slightest amount, I am not going to say anything.
For $600 it looks like it could be a decent entry level AR especially relative to Shrubmaster, DPMS, Windham, and their colleagues. Ruger might give S&W some AR competition too. We'll have to wait and see if it shoots well and also how reliable it is. A CHF 1:8 barrel sounds like a good start, even without the chrome lining. The 9310 bolt I'm not crazy about but in a low round count entry level rifle it might be o.k. We'll see.
HuntingTime
09-29-14, 22:11
Its a business. If the people will buy it, why not make it. This is for those Ruger guys that are still on the fence about buying an AR-15 and want an entry level price. Ruger is a smart company and will make a lot of money from this, plus they includes a few upgrades that you don't normally find at that price point.
For $600 it looks like it could be a decent entry level AR especially relative to Shrubmaster, DPMS, Windham, and their colleagues. Ruger might give S&W some AR competition too. We'll have to wait and see if it shoots well and also how reliable it is. A CHF 1:8 barrel sounds like a good start, even without the chrome lining. The 9310 bolt I'm not crazy about but in a low round count entry level rifle it might be o.k. We'll see.
I'd take the Windham over the Ruger or any others you've listed any day of the week. At least Windham's specs are 4150CMV chrome lined chamber and bore, full auto profile bolt carrier group with a Carpenter 158 shot peened bolt, milspec diameter buffer tube, and 5.56 chamber (so they say, but haven't seen anyone refute it yet). If you ask me, Windham's only problems are 1:9 barrels, and being the original Bushmaster facility/employees.
Sounds like a decent offering. Put it around $600 street price and it will sell. I'd rather that sell over DPMS or Bushmaster AR's.
It would be a good alternative to the S&W Sport, and since it offers the dust cover/forward assist it has a slight edge over the Sport.
HuntingTime
09-29-14, 22:25
Interesting, I have one of the original Windham SRC and it has a commercial buffer tube.
I would wager most people who are bashing on the SR556 haven't shot one. They are surprisingly good guns, and I am just as much of a top tier manufacturer kind of guy as anyone here.
This is a well spec'd out rifle that will probably hit the shelves under $700. If it shoots like the multiple examples of the SR's I've shot, it will be a good gun, especially for the price.
Then again, I've never been that impressed with BCM barrels, so maybe I'm just weird...
Interesting, I have one of the original Windham SRC and it has a commercial buffer tube.
The two SRC's I owned and flipped during the madness had milspec tubes. That's what I based my statement on. Thanks for letting me know about yours. I'd still take a Windham over the Ruger even with a commercial diameter extension.
I just saw two new Windham rifles recently and both had commercial tubes.
The two SRC's I owned and flipped during the madness had milspec tubes. That's what I based my statement on. Thanks for letting me know about yours. I'd still take a Windham over the Ruger even with a commercial diameter extension.
trackmagic
09-30-14, 01:24
I cannot for the life of me understand why any manufacturer would put a commercial-spec tube:
1) Everybody wants mil-spec EVERYTHING they can get
2) It is harder to find accessories for commercial-spec tubes
Sounds like a decent offering. Put it around $600 street price and it will sell. I'd rather that sell over DPMS or Bushmaster AR's.
It would be a good alternative to the S&W Sport, and since it offers the dust cover/forward assist it has a slight edge over the Sport.
The Sport barrel is Melonite-lined though, and it's proven itself to be a solid entry-level AR. I personally put little value in the dust cover/forward assist, but a lot of guys do like having them.
I look forward to seeing the head-to-head comparisons and longer-term performance for sure. Options are always good.
I dig the serrated FSB and the skinny CAR handguards.
If you look at him shooting it in the video, it looks a tad over-gassed to me. But that's probably to be expected as it's probably designed to shoot cheap-ass ammo.
Wow! How did I miss Ruger's product launch? I checked their website yesterday morning and didn't see anything there. I guess I should have checked it again last evening.
Anyway, I have had one of the new AR556's for a couple weeks and was one of the "jury testers" for the new rifle. As I understand it, Ruger sent a fairly small quantity of these out prior to the official launch to get some last-minute feedback.
There's really not much to be said about the gun that most of us here are going to be impressed with. It uses a 4140 unlined and untreated barrel, a semi-auto bolt carrier with the "Colt" notch and comes with some pretty darned cheap plastic furniture. The furniture I can overlook since probably nine out of ten AR owners change out whatever comes on a rifle with their pet brand of stocks, pistol grips, etc.
My initial reaction to this gun was kind of negative based on the choice of an unlined barrel, carbine gas system and unique front sight base. But now that I've shot the rifle a little bit I think it's as about as good as can be had for the money and think the rifle will sell well based on price point alone. Ruger fully expects these new guns to sell right around the $600 range and I assume that once the newness wears off, the price will settle down into the mid-fives.
Anyway, I will get some pictures up here shortly. If anyone wants to see photos of anything specific or has a question about features, etc let me know. I'll do my best to answer.
Ruger's new AR-556 along with my old Ruger SR-556C:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/P1000744_zpsf85c0298.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/P1000744_zpsf85c0298.jpg.html)
I dig the serrated FSB ...
I have never seen glare. But, I am cross-eyed since the mule kicked me in the head.
Ruger 5.56 is definitely not for me.
The front sight base is "F" height but is machined rather than forged. Ruger pins the block on top, saying that they found this gives a better gas seal and allows them to use a smaller gas port while maintaining good reliability with a broad variety of ammo.
There's a QD swivel socket in the bottom of the base right behind the bayonet lug.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/KIMG0740_zps8fa3d8c6.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/KIMG0740_zps8fa3d8c6.jpg.html)
If that's MSRP I would expect actual retail to be $500-600, which is very low for an AR that's basically on the full design spec (dust cover, telestock on a milspec tube, sight tower gas block, etc.) that also happens to have a hammer forged 1:8 twist barrel. It may not be a competitor for BCM or Daniel Defense buyers, but it could clobber the cheap-junk market. (Just noticed that the barrel is not stated as being chrome lined - but sub-$600 I'm not sure that matters.)
I know the market is saturated, but how can anyone knock on this rifle? If it has a street price under $600 its a good buy. (if its reliable) For that price I probably will pick one up for my wife/beater rifle. It will certainly give the MP sport a run for its money. Personally, being lazy, I would rather buy the prebuilt rifle than piece something together from PSA.
Also, all made in house, and in America. That has to be worth something these days.
Cellphone footage taken by my eight year old kid.
This is the new Ruger with cheap Walmart Tula ammo. I've put a couple hundred rounds of the stuff through the rifle with no issues.
http://vidmg.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/KVID0803_zps7a06ce83.mp4
The Sport barrel is Melonite-lined though, and it's proven itself to be a solid entry-level AR. I personally put little value in the dust cover/forward assist, but a lot of guys do like having them.
I look forward to seeing the head-to-head comparisons and longer-term performance for sure. Options are always good.
The dust cover is there to prevent dirt/whatever from entering the action. It's not optional in my opinion.
Ruger reportedly put close to 20,000 through three of these guns in testing. Two suffered broken bolts very near the 20k mark with the 3rd completing the firing schedule.
SomeOtherGuy
09-30-14, 12:14
Ruger reportedly put close to 20,000 through three of these guns in testing. Two suffered broken bolts very near the 20k mark with the 3rd completing the firing schedule.
Interesting. A broken bolt at 18-19k has lasted two to three times longer than I was expecting it to.
On that note, I'm sure Ruger could have bought all the Carpenter 158 material, or finished bolts, that they could ever want - this isn't some garage assembler. And they have an unwritten fix-anything-that-breaks policy, so they will probably end up replacing some bolts without payment. I'm going to guess that their engineering either determined that 9310 was as good or better (for their exact design including their own machining, heat treating, etc. processes or plans), or that the cost savings were large enough to warrant replacing some later on. I'm curious how much cost savings there is to a company the size of Ruger, especially since they probably could have bought someone else's C158 bolts by the truckload at whatever the lowest possible price is.
On a different note - the Ruger website says something about a patented new and different barrel nut and collar. I can see that the delta ring has some texturing, but is the barrel nut itself different from the GI style?
Here's the barrel nut. It is threaded onto the upper in the conventional manner (I'm told a typical barrel nut will fit but haven't confirmed) but has exterior threads for the delta ring. The delta ring is a threaded collar that tightens up against the handguards and locks them in place. This system does away from the snap ring, spring, etc. but still maintains the ability to accept other plastic handguards. I verified this by installing a set of Colt M4 handguards on my test rifle. On the downside, I don't see how some of the drop-in railed handguards from Troy, etc will work on this rifle.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/KIMG0741_zpsfe03ce16.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/KIMG0741_zpsfe03ce16.jpg.html)
A 4140 steel barrel that is hammer forged... I really don't know how one will affect the other.
I wouldn't classify it as professional grade, for obvious reasons, but it could be built rather solidly.
I wouldn't classify it as professional grade, for obvious reasons, but it could be built rather solidly.
Upper and lower on my sample are nicely fitted and would likely be a good pair to build off of. I have test fitted a VLTOR, S&W and Colt upper on the Ruger lower without issue.
Complaints? Yeah, I have a couple. To go more in-depth on what I posted above, I think Ruger should have used a mid-length gas system. This would have set the rifle apart from the other entry-level guns on the market and would have given it a broader appeal, in my opinion. Along these lines, I would have liked to have seen some chrome or QPQ or similar treatment to the barrel even if such a coating added $25 or $50 to the final sale price of the gun. The change to 1x8 twist is a welcome step and hopefully we'll see some barrel treatment in the future. Otherwise, I don't like the cheap furniture but that isn't hard to replace. I had initially wondered why Ruger didn't just use Magpul MOE furniture but I suppose that's all pretty much a non-issue. There are so many options out there and the furniture is so easy to change that it was probably a smart move on Ruger's part to use about the cheapest stuff available. But that's not so much the case with the gas system or the barrel...
MILSPEC buffer tube, BTW, just to set the record straight.
This will definitely appeal to the lowest priced AR ever most awesome rifle club for sure.
This will definitely appeal to the lowest priced AR ever most awesome rifle club for sure.
That's what Ruger's likely to be going after with this new model.
But really, would anyone take a full-on "top tier" Ruger over a similar Noveske, BCM, etc? Best they start with the masses and try to win hearts and minds that way.
Here are a couple photos of the front sight block. Note the QD socket on the underside:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165337_zps1ba6116e.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165337_zps1ba6116e.jpg.html)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165501_zps65b7535f.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165501_zps65b7535f.jpg.html)
A couple photos that hopefully help show the threaded collar that works as the handguard retainer:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165930_zpsfa7fc4ea.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165930_zpsfa7fc4ea.jpg.html)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165831_zps950df38d.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_165831_zps950df38d.jpg.html)
Standard carbine buffer:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170009_zps88033c1d.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170009_zps88033c1d.jpg.html)
Notched hammer:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170218_zpseb0c96c1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170218_zpseb0c96c1.jpg.html)
Notched bolt carrier:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170421_zps505cf4fb.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170421_zps505cf4fb.jpg.html)
Chromed bore on bolt carrier:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170546_zps6954a71e.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170546_zps6954a71e.jpg.html)
Staking:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170636_zpsfae6830e.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170636_zpsfae6830e.jpg.html)
Ruger's pistol grip:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170715_zps0250e356.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20140930_170715_zps0250e356.jpg.html)
Sorry for the couple blurry photos. They looked okay on my phone's screen. Ah, well.
Ed Head's review:
http://www.downrange.tv/blog/torture-testing-the-new-ruger-ar-556/31594/
Quick Draw
09-30-14, 19:52
Tokarev, what was your take on the trigger feel, and have you fired it for accuracy with some decent ammo, especially heavier projs.
Just curious as I am not in the market for one of these.
Tokarev, what was your take on the trigger feel, and have you fired it for accuracy with some decent ammo, especially heavier projs.
Just curious as I am not in the market for one of these.
The trigger is your basic GI type. Single stage with the usual bits of crunch and creep. It isn't the worst trigger I've ever felt but it ain't the best.
I haven't done much beyond dial the irons in with some M193. I will tell you that the rifle seems to shoot okay with some 50gr frangible that doesn't shoot well at all out of a 1x9 twist barrel.
I have a Burris XTRII that needs some testing. When I have some time I'll mount it on the new Ruger and see what I can do off the bench.
turnburglar
09-30-14, 23:18
Tok:
What profile is the barrel, or better- weight of the whole rifle? Also is the rear sight gtg or needs replacement?
Tok:
What profile is the barrel, or better- weight of the whole rifle? Also is the rear sight gtg or needs replacement?
Rear sight is a single aperture plastic unit similar to the Magpul MBUS. It isn't the same exact style and isn't marked Magpul but it could be made by them for Ruger. It works okay and is probably as good as the other plastic sights on the market.
The barrel is a fairly beefy profile. Ruger says it is medium contour. It measures something like .85" under the handguards, .75" at the gas block seat and .6" from the seat to the muzzle.
Weight of an empty rifle is six and a half pounds.
Already hitting gunshops in the sub-$600's.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=445345190
I just picked one up for $575, you can not go wrong there for a completely in house built AR made here in the USA!
I just picked one up for $575, you can not go wrong there for a completely in house built AR made here in the USA!
Nice.
Give an update on what you think of the rifle after you've had time to give it a good going over and have gotten it to the range.
I've now tried a set of Colt, S&W and DPMS Glacier handguards on the Ruger. All have fit without problems.
In better news, the Troy 7" drop-in railed handguard fits right on the gun without issues. Hopefully this means the Troy and/or VTAC Delta will fit and clear the Ruger's front sight base.
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/01/31c8a52f61c7b8f5cef6963ef39fd90c.jpg
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/01/fcf96b38b3c1d1923b485e35a818b1fc.jpg
And, for the gentleman who asked earlier about barrel profile:
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/01/6b97791ebd8b41de796d62cde527ea5d.jpg
Sean from Vt
10-02-14, 18:04
I bought one today. $599.95. I like it. Everything is very stiff on mine. Take down pins require blunt for. The trigger hopefully will break in some otherwise I will buy springs for it and I haven't managed to force the D-Ring down yet. All in all I've seen a lot worse AR's for a lot more money.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I haven't managed to force the D-Ring down...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The delta ring on this rifle is a threaded collar and not the usual spring-loaded affair. Mine was pretty snug out of the box but it didn't require any tools or anything to unscrew.
Sean from Vt
10-02-14, 18:10
That explains a lot. Thank you!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Sport barrel is Melonite-lined though, and it's proven itself to be a solid entry-level AR. I personally put little value in the dust cover/forward assist, but a lot of guys do like having them.
I look forward to seeing the head-to-head comparisons and longer-term performance for sure. Options are always good.
Yes the DC/FA are a good feature to have. Have you ever built an AR15 without them???
On my builds, I always buy uppers with both.
Upper and lower on my sample are nicely fitted and would likely be a good pair to build off of. I have test fitted a VLTOR, S&W and Colt upper on the Ruger lower without issue.
Complaints? Yeah, I have a couple. To go more in-depth on what I posted above, I think Ruger should have used a mid-length gas system. This would have set the rifle apart from the other entry-level guns on the market and would have given it a broader appeal, in my opinion. Along these lines, I would have liked to have seen some chrome or QPQ or similar treatment to the barrel even if such a coating added $25 or $50 to the final sale price of the gun. The change to 1x8 twist is a welcome step and hopefully we'll see some barrel treatment in the future. Otherwise, I don't like the cheap furniture but that isn't hard to replace. I had initially wondered why Ruger didn't just use Magpul MOE furniture but I suppose that's all pretty much a non-issue. There are so many options out there and the furniture is so easy to change that it was probably a smart move on Ruger's part to use about the cheapest stuff available. But that's not so much the case with the gas system or the barrel...
Good points.
I'm speculating that Ruger may offer other options in the future e.g. models with Magpul upgrades, chrome-lined barrels, maybe even a mid-length barrel.
Starting off at a base model is usually a marketing tactic for the budget shooter, then offering upgrades down the road for those who prefer it.
vicious_cb
10-03-14, 08:43
Here are a couple photos of the front sight block. Note the QD socket on the underside:
Guaranteed to flip your rifle upside down the minute you bend over or your money back.
Little Creek
10-03-14, 08:45
I have a Sport. I have other M4 style carbines (DD & Colt) with FA and dust covers. Being a LH shooter, a FA gets in my way when I reach for the charging handle. If you read the history of the FA, it serves no purpose, that the indent on the bolt carrier does not share, and can turn an M4 into a club if you jam a dirty round into a dirty chamber. I do not miss the dust cover as I am too old to be a warfighter.
I like Ruger and I would prefer this M4 style carbine without a FA and with a free floated Key Mod or M-LOK rail. I did put a 13" Troy VTAC Alpha rail on the Sport.
The Sport barrel is Melonite-lined though, and it's proven itself to be a solid entry-level AR. I personally put little value in the dust cover/forward assist, but a lot of guys do like having them.
I look forward to seeing the head-to-head comparisons and longer-term performance for sure. Options are always good.
Guaranteed to flip your rifle upside down the minute you bend over or your money back.
Yep. Interesting feature but it might have been better to build the sockets in on the left and right since I don't think a GI side sling swivel will fit over the unique gas block.
jackblack73
10-03-14, 08:56
Guaranteed to flip your rifle upside down the minute you bend over or your money back.
Not so different from a standard front sight base sling mount.
This thing belongs in a trash can.
A better gas seal is achieve by pinning the gas block on the top rather than bottom? I don't think so.
What keeps that threaded delta ring from coming unscrewed over time?
A unshrouded firing pin carrier. Really?
http://youtu.be/UdoLE9Dgvjc
Movement Drill with Ruger AR-556: http://youtu.be/Uahy_BFZtkA
Copy of Partial Mag Dump Ruger AR-556: http://youtu.be/cCCj1Z9jcbA
lahunter57
10-05-14, 12:11
This thing belongs in a trash can.
A better gas seal is achieve by pinning the gas block on the top rather than bottom? I don't think so.
What keeps that threaded delta ring from coming unscrewed over time?
A unshrouded firing pin carrier. Really?
Is Ruger forcing you to buy it or something? It may not work for you, but maybe it'll get someone into the AR market, and I always see that as a good thing. It would be nice if it had a C158 bolt, but then you raise the price.
For the price, I really don't see this as a bad buy for a first timer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It would be nice if it had a C158 bolt, but then you raise the price.
Other companies, most notably JP, are using 9310 as a bolt material. Bolts made from 9310 have been working fine, no?
lahunter57
10-05-14, 12:35
Other companies, most notably JP, are using 9310 as a bolt material. Bolts made from 9310 have been working fine, no?
I can't speak from experience because I don't have anything but C158 bolts just because that's the mil spec. I don't think I'd have a problem owning the ruger, but I for sure wouldn't exchange my BCM bolt for it.
I'm not bashing rugers stuff, I really think they are targeting a different market. I'm sure it'll work great for most, heck, I even kind of want one just to put in the safe for a rainy day.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Speaking of bolts; Ruger says they took three rifles and submitted each to a 20,000 round durability test. One rifle made it through. The other two both suffered broken bolts at something like 19,000 rounds.
I assume barrels, etc were well worn on these guns but I don't think we'll have any real worries with bolt longevity.
Heavy Metal
10-05-14, 13:01
Looks like it will compete with it's own Mini-14.
Needs a treated barrel IMO. Dust Cover is nice to have, the FA is kind of a wash, seems to solve about as many problems as it causes. Lack of a FA is not a deal breaker in my book.
Why buy a piece of crap like this? You can get a Colt 6720 for 799.00 from PSA. People that buy garbage low end AR's are the ones that contribute to the myth that the AR is unreliable, etc...
Is Ruger forcing you to buy it or something? It may not work for you, but maybe it'll get someone into the AR market, and I always see that as a good thing. It would be nice if it had a C158 bolt, but then you raise the price.
For the price, I really don't see this as a bad buy for a first timer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Get a Gunfighter or Raptor and that ceases to be an issue.
I have a Sport. I have other M4 style carbines (DD & Colt) with FA and dust covers. Being a LH shooter, a FA gets in my way when I reach for the charging handle. If you read the history of the FA, it serves no purpose, that the indent on the bolt carrier does not share, and can turn an M4 into a club if you jam a dirty round into a dirty chamber. I do not miss the dust cover as I am too old to be a warfighter.
I like Ruger and I would prefer this M4 style carbine without a FA and with a free floated Key Mod or M-LOK rail. I did put a 13" Troy VTAC Alpha rail on the Sport.
Sean from Vt
10-05-14, 14:49
I own one and don't see it as a piece of crap. I see it as what it is, an entry level AR. PERIOD. If you don't want one move along. Let people that can't afford more buy this as a gateway. I've built 2 ARs one in 6.8 and a 300 Blackout. I bought this just cuz I wanted to.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't believe in entry level AR's. If you can't afford a solid basic carbine then I suggest a handgun. People who are trying to save every dollar will also not be able to feed it good ammo or magazines.
I own one and don't see it as a piece of crap. I see it as what it is, an entry level AR. PERIOD. If you don't want one move along. Let people that can't afford more buy this as a gateway. I've built 2 ARs one in 6.8 and a 300 Blackout. I bought this just cuz I wanted to.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sean from Vt
10-05-14, 15:03
You have every right to your opinion. I don't agree but have a great day.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd take the Windham over the Ruger or any others you've listed any day of the week. At least Windham's specs are 4150CMV chrome lined chamber and bore, full auto profile bolt carrier group with a Carpenter 158 shot peened bolt, milspec diameter buffer tube, and 5.56 chamber (so they say, but haven't seen anyone refute it yet). If you ask me, Windham's only problems are 1:9 barrels, and being the original Bushmaster facility/employees.
I've yet to see one with a staked castle nut. Not a huge problem, but still.
A Colt for under a Grand is going to be hard to argue against. The 6920 is usually the gun I recommend whenever a newbie asks for purchase advice. The materials and specs are there and they've been tested over the long haul so we know the combos all work well together.
With that said, we're dealing with sixty year old technology so we know pretty well what makes an AR run. Ruger chose to cut some corners that I don't think they should have cut but I'm sure their new gun will work well for 99% of their market. Those who want something more expensive with better furniture and milspec coatings have plenty of options. Those who're more motivated by price now have another product to consider.
Anyway, maybe the AR-556 will be a real hit and we'll see Ruger launch a few other MSR's aimed at the mid-level market.
wildcard600
10-05-14, 16:00
I don't believe in entry level AR's..... SNIP
I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. Calling knock-off AR's "entry level" is like calling a Hi-Point 9mm a "entry level" HK USP.
IMO
Hill_Country556
10-05-14, 21:51
Does it have a magazine disconnect?
Does it pop a big orange flag out of it somewhere to remind you that it has a loaded chamber?
Is the barrel marked with "PLEASE, FOR F#@K SAKE, READ THE INSTRUCTION MANUAL BEFORE YOU ATTEMPT TO USE THIS DAMN THING!!!!"?
:D
An entry level AR is a configuration, not a price point. A Colt 6920 is an entry level carbine. If it's not reliable, a sub $700 AR isn't an entry level carbine any more than a Mini-14 is
Little Creek
10-06-14, 05:05
Get a Gunfighter or Raptor and that ceases to be an issue. I use Raptor's, thank you. It is my favorite charging handle, so far. I would like to try the ambi Gunfighter though.
Is there another QD attach point at the rear of the rifle?
Is there another QD attach point at the rear of the rifle?
Nothing there other than a GI-type sling loop on the toe of the stock.
Nothing there other than a GI-type sling loop on the toe of the stock.
Dont see the point of having one at the bayonet lug but not at the rear!
Renegade04
10-06-14, 16:01
Dont see the point of having one at the bayonet lug but not at the rear!
Here is the logic in this design. If someone chooses not to have a sling on the Ruger, then there is no sling swivel just dangling there and not being used. Now, should someone decide they want to add a sling, all they have to do is buy a QD sling swivel and snap it in. The fact that the stock has a loop built in and does not have a receptacle for a QD sling swivel is not a big deal. I think the fact is that this new Ruger is offering some new innovations that some of the die-hard AR snobs are not comfortable with. There are those of you who are bitching about the BCG. If the new owner of an AR-556 feels the need, they can always buy an upgraded BCG. For most intentive purposes, the BCG it comes with will serve them just fine. Additionally, for a bolt to fail at 19,000 rounds is pretty impressive. I have seen bolts in some Colt bolts break with less than 10,000 rounds. The threaded handguard ring is a great idea. From some who have had the chance to test it and change out various handguards, it works extremely well. Much easier than the typical "Delta ring" assembly does. The AR industry in constantly changing. Look at what happened since the first piston-operated AR was built. Look at what has happened since the first monolithic upper was built. Look at the various new designs for free-float rails. Changes can be a very good thing. Only time and testing will determine this. In regard to the Ruger AR-556, I think it is important to reserve critical opinions until prolonged testing and evaluations prove it unadequate.
Dont see the point of having one at the bayonet lug but not at the rear!
If one feels the need to add a QD sling socket to the rear, it should be an easy deal to add one of the adapters that clamps around the buffer tube or replace the receiver end plate.
Also, Damage Industries sells a GI-type stock with a stud built in as does Magpul and others.
Other companies, most notably JP, are using 9310 as a bolt material. Bolts made from 9310 have been working fine, no?
Yes 9310 bolts are ok for the most part. I'm currently testing AIM's NiB BCG with the 9310 bolt. So far so good, but I haven't put it through thousands of rounds yet.
I don't believe in entry level AR's. If you can't afford a solid basic carbine then I suggest a handgun. People who are trying to save every dollar will also not be able to feed it good ammo or magazines.
Really?
Entry level anything has its place. Entry level cars, tv's, phones, and guns. Not everyone can afford or need a full-priced Milspec rifle as their first.
If someone can't afford a full Milspec AR, doesn't mean they can't have an AR.
brushy bill
10-06-14, 20:10
I don't believe in entry level AR's. If you can't afford a solid basic carbine then I suggest a handgun. People who are trying to save every dollar will also not be able to feed it good ammo or magazines.
I get the rationale WRT 6720s at $799 versus this for only another $150 or so. But not tracking on your point on mags / ammo. D&H or NHMTGs at $8-$9 or PMAGs at $10-$12 compared to say Glock Mags at $20-25 or even more for others. Comparing 5.56 ammo to .45 or 9mm quality bulk ammo is also pretty close...maybe even slanted towards the 5.56 being cheaper than handgun.
I think I'm having just as much fun--maybe more--playing around with YouTube as I am with this new rifle!
http://youtu.be/oU8eZgynH28
Here it is again in slow motion:
http://youtu.be/cCCj1Z9jcbA
That's pretty fast trigger pulling, Tokarev. Any tricks to it other than plain old repetitive work?
That's pretty fast trigger pulling, Tokarev. Any tricks to it other than plain old repetitive work?
Sorry for the thread drift...
A solid base is important. Try to assume a stance that puts a good portion of your upper body behind the rifle. Lean into it a little.
Something I see fairly often is fairly large statured people shooting with the stock collapsed or maybe only open just a bit. This puts the shooting arm and wrist at a radical bend. Let the stock all the way out and try to get your shooting side wrist as straight as possible.
Some of that compressed stance stuff comes from shooting nose to charging handle but that type of eye relief isn't needed if you're shooting with a red dot.
Otherwise, repetitive work is important. When you reset the trigger, try to keep your finger in constant contact. Ideally the finger shouldn't move any more than necessary to release the sear and then release the disconnector. Excessive travel equals longer time.
Little Creek
10-07-14, 17:09
Here is the logic in this design. If someone chooses not to have a sling on the Ruger, then there is no sling swivel just dangling there and not being used. Now, should someone decide they want to add a sling, all they have to do is buy a QD sling swivel and snap it in. The fact that the stock has a loop built in and does not have a receptacle for a QD sling swivel is not a big deal. I think the fact is that this new Ruger is offering some new innovations that some of the die-hard AR snobs are not comfortable with. There are those of you who are bitching about the BCG. If the new owner of an AR-556 feels the need, they can always buy an upgraded BCG. For most intentive purposes, the BCG it comes with will serve them just fine. Additionally, for a bolt to fail at 19,000 rounds is pretty impressive. I have seen bolts in some Colt bolts break with less than 10,000 rounds. The threaded handguard ring is a great idea. From some who have had the chance to test it and change out various handguards, it works extremely well. Much easier than the typical "Delta ring" assembly does. The AR industry in constantly changing. Look at what happened since the first piston-operated AR was built. Look at what has happened since the first monolithic upper was built. Look at the various new designs for free-float rails. Changes can be a very good thing. Only time and testing will determine this. In regard to the Ruger AR-556, I think it is important to reserve critical opinions until prolonged testing and evaluations prove it unadequate.
AMEN, Brother.
Looks like it will compete with it's own Mini-14.
Needs a treated barrel IMO. Dust Cover is nice to have, the FA is kind of a wash, seems to solve about as many problems as it causes. Lack of a FA is not a deal breaker in my book.
I think this is an important point. This rifle undercuts Ruger's Mini-14 on price and desirability for the folks who are looking for an inexpensive semi-auto. The Mini-14 price has been going up quite a bit lately and I bet sales have been getting weaker since the popularity of the AR has grown. That makes this a very important rifle for Ruger, because this rifle will replace the sales they've been losing by not having a DI AR in their line up and it will cream the sales of the Mini-14. It will be interesting to see if the Mini-14 in its current configuration will survive.
I've not touched the AR-556 yet, but I like what I've seen so far, as I believe they got the low cost AR right. If it turns out to be reliable it could be a big hit.
I've owned or own several Ruger products and I've always been happy with them for what they are. In addition to my DI Noveske and BCM builds I have a SR-556 I bought a few years ago. Other than being a bit heavy (heavy barrel and rail) it is perfectly reliable and shoots well.
I like the machined gas block/sight of the AR-556, it looks clean and if it works well, great. I also like the fact that Ruger made their own BCG and barrel. I've always thought the 1/8 twist was the perfect compromise. 6.5 lbs., not bad. Hammer forged, good. Not chrome lined, not a big deal. I like the barrel profile too. DC and FA, I won't leave home without them. Even though the rifle is not BCM or Daniel Defense quality it looks like a solid rifle that can replace the Mini-14 and sell to the masses who want a (probably) reliable rifle.
I'd like to add one to my collection just to try it out.
TacticalSledgehammer
10-08-14, 10:05
I'd be willing to try one. It looks like a quality product (in a consumer grade ar15 category) from a big name manufacturer.
Looks like yet another low cost AR for people who don't know about PSA. I don't like that heavy barrel. It is guaranteed to be front-heavy and handle like crap, just like the M&P Sport... but gun noobs are usually fascinated with heavy barrels and many probably won't shoot it from anything but a bench, so it makes sense from a marketing standpoint. I predict it will sell very well. If nothing else everybody is talking about it... it has 5-6 page threads on just about every gun forum I'm on.
Looks like yet another low cost AR for people who don't know about PSA. I don't like that heavy barrel. It is guaranteed to be front-heavy and handle like crap, just like the M&P Sport... but gun noobs are usually fascinated with heavy barrels and many probably won't shoot it from anything but a bench, so it makes sense from a marketing standpoint. I predict it will sell very well. If nothing else everybody is talking about it... it has 5-6 page threads on just about every gun forum I'm on.
What would make the PSA a better value than the Ruger? I am familiar with the name but have never seen nor used one of their rifles.
Do they manufacture any of their own parts or are they an assembler using parts from a number of sources? Do they warranty their products? What about ten years down the road?
What would make the PSA a better value than the Ruger? I am familiar with the name but have never seen nor used one of their rifles.
Do they manufacture any of their own parts or are they an assembler using parts from a number of sources? Do they warranty their products? What about ten years down the road?
LOL. Surely you jest. PSA: We don't need no stinking warranty, CS, or manufacturing. People will buy our crap because it's cheap.
PSA = the flea market of gun sellers.
Ned Christiansen
10-08-14, 19:00
Somebody may have touched on this.
Here's the most important aspect of this, I think: Ruger guys, guys who have a Mark II .22 or a Red Label 20 gage, or a Super Redhawk, and are big Ruger fans, and are guys that have previously had no interest in Black Rifles, and in fact are guys who have perhaps looked upon Black Rifles and Black Rifle owners with disdain, will now, it being a Ruger, buy one. They may not tell anyone, they may feel a little conflicted about it all..... funny and guilty.... but hey, the moment they take delivery of it, whether they like it or not they've swelled the ranks and that's good for all of us!
Wow! $535?
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=446672960
SomeOtherGuy
10-08-14, 21:49
LOL. Surely you jest. PSA: We don't need no stinking warranty, CS, or manufacturing. People will buy our crap because it's cheap.
PSA = the flea market of gun sellers.
PSA can be a good value if you understand what you're getting. I like their selection of FN-made CHF barrels. I wish more of them were available as a bare barrel rather than sold only built into uppers with parts I wouldn't have chosen. I haven't bought much of their AR stuff in 1-2 years but in the past the quality was unpredictable and quality control didn't seem to be part of the model. That said, a good number of the parts were fine and often high quality contractors, you just didn't know for sure what you were getting, or that it had any QC, like you would by spending more for a BCM, DD or other top brand.
I think PSA is good for people who like to build and modify ARs, and have some experience with how things work and how to troubleshoot if need be. I currently run a PSA upper for competition. But I don't use anything PSA in my home defense gun.
That's one, probably small part of the market. Far more people just want to buy a consumer product that works out of the box, and if it fails, call a phone number and send it back for the manufacturer to deal with (even if two minutes and a $1 part would fix the problem). For this large segment of the market, what Ruger's offering will be ideal, and very competitive with the M&P15 Sport, which seems to be its most direct competition. And Ruger, like S&W or DPMS, can make and ship enough of these to supply major chain stores with large monthly sales volumes. AFAIK PSA sells at their own store and via the website, but not through any significant number of unrelated stores (I'll see a random PSA upper at AIM Surplus sometimes, and that's about it). The mass market is chain stores and ordinary gun shops. They aren't reading M4c, they don't know or want to know all these details, they've never heard of BCM or LMT and probably think Colt only makes single action revolvers. It's not people like most of us, but it's a huge market segment. As Ed said above, Ruger's offering of this style rifle may bring in people who would not otherwise consider an AR, and that is good for us in the long run by further making modern rifles common rifles, so they can't as easily be banned.
Wow! $535?
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=446672960
$535
WOW, INDEED! As cheap as a Glock.
I see this as GREAT news. No excuse NOT to have an AR in EVERY American home and behind every blade of American grass. (Eat your heart out Yamamoto.)
Sorta like the Winchester lever action rifle of many moons ago and more recently the venerable pump shotgun. Standard Americana.
The increasing commonality of the AR can only help it politically. You won't be able to ignore them.
And from a recognized major American firearms manufacturer to boot! All the old standby American firearm icons now make AR's. S&W, Ruger, Remington, Mossberg, and of course Colt. (Waiting on Winchester.:)) The "black rifle" is now a red, white, and blue rifle.
If Weatherby starts making AR's, the FUDD market will be totally bought into the fold. No more them VS us.
Hmmmm, an AR lower with the Weatherby logo and rollmarked, nay laser-engraved....... WBY-15, or Vanguard Series 15, or an ever pretentious-sounding Mark XV. :D
Ya heard it here first.
Hell, the Europeans already have "high end named" AR's with Oberland and HK. Even Schmiesser makes AR's (Although the name is probably for recognition ala Armalite.) Maybe AR's rollmarked Messerschmitt, Korth, or BMW is in the future. Ya never know.
What would make the PSA a better value than the Ruger? I am familiar with the name but have never seen nor used one of their rifles.
Do they manufacture any of their own parts or are they an assembler using parts from a number of sources? Do they warranty their products? What about ten years down the road?
The thing that makes PSA such a great value is that you can put together a rifle that is about as close to mil spec as you can legally get for less than most low-end ARs. If you buy the right stuff from them, you can put together a rifle built to the same specs as a Colt or BCM for the cost of an M&P Sport or this Ruger. Their complete uppers are their best product. Chrome lined 4150 HPT/MPI barrel made by FN (hammer forged "machine gun steel" barrels available), C158 shot peened HPT/MPI bolt, M-16 profile (shrouded firing pin) 8620 chrome lined carrier with staked grade 8 fasteners... those are the most important parts. They also have a lot more options when it comes to barrel length, barrel profile, and gas system than just a 16" HBAR with carbine gas.
They make some of their parts in-house, but most they source, like Aero Precision lowers and LW Schneider fire control parts. I don't think they offer any warranty on builds using their parts, though they will replace any defective parts. I suppose a warranty might be a bigger concern if you didn't know how to work on ARs yourself. Personally I don't like to rely on warranties... I try to use quality parts and plan on replacing them myself when they have a certain number of rounds on them, or if they break or wear out. I wouldn't want to send my rifle back to the mfg. every time it needs a bit of routine maintenance. 10 years down the road? I expect I will have replaced most of the components on the rifle at least once. That would be a lot of shipping back and forth to the mfg. for stuff I can do myself on my work bench in a matter of minutes.
If they can be bought for around $535, I am in.
If they can be bought for around $535, I am in.
I see the bid's already close to $600 but, yeah, if we can buy these new at not too much over $500 they'll be hard to ignore.
Heavy Metal
10-09-14, 10:08
I didn't notice the notched carrier. That is full on derp in 2014.
Available through GT Distributing for $559.95:
http://www.gtdist.com/ProductDetail.aspx?PartNumber=RUG-8500
NWcityguy2
10-09-14, 18:06
This will be a good rifle to recommend to friends who are sheepish about ordering a PSA online. Ruger has long been the company who is late to the party but when they do release a gun it has a good combination of features for a little less $$$ then you would expect.
Things I like about it...
-9310 Bolt with chrome lined carrier/gas key
-Thin profile handguards
-Doesn't have an A2 grip
-1:8 twist
-Mid-weight profile
Things I don't think are a big deal one way or the other...
-CHF barrel
-Unique FSB
The #1 thing I wish it had...
-A rear sight with both small and large aperture
The 1st thing I'd change about it...
-Adding a forged 7075 charging handle
Here's another little video in slow motion. Note ejection with M193-type ball. I might mess around with buffer weights just a bit to see what that does.
Ruger AR-556 high speed video: http://youtu.be/Z3Z_VUin_OQ
lahunter57
10-10-14, 10:03
Just out of curiosity, what's the approx. round count and your maintenance schedule?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The #1 thing I wish it had...
-A rear sight with both small and large aperture
That one did surprise me about it. But not hard to swap out.:)
Can't complain though. Mines been holding it's own quite well.
That one did surprise me about it. But not hard to swap out.:)
Can't complain though. Mines been holding it's own quite well.
Yes. Of all the things I would have preferred be different as a factory item, the rear sight wasn't one of them.
They make some of their parts in-house, but most they source, like Aero Precision lowers and LW Schneider fire control parts.
I'm pretty sure PSA doesn't make any of their parts in-house.
That said, I've had nothing but good luck with every PSA component I've used so far.
I'm pretty sure PSA doesn't make any of their parts in-house.
That said, I've had nothing but good luck with every PSA component I've used so far.
Correct, PSA does not make their AR parts in house according to the PSA employee I spoke with last time I called, wish I remembered his name.
They do outsource to several suppliers, unfortunately some of them make low quality and out of spec parts. That's one of the main problems/complaints about PSA.
When ordering and buying from them you need to be careful and make sure you know exactly what you are getting. If you are not sure, call and ask. A lot of their printed information on the website is very misleading to say the least.
Know what you want and know what you are ordering and everything will be fine.
Sent from my crappy iPhone 6
using Tapatalk
Scratch the Troy/VTAC Delta rail off the list. The rail would have fit-and looked quite nice on the rifle-had Ruger used a traditional AR front sight base.
What happens is the Troy has an internal flange on the bottom length of handguard that fits into the space between the standard GI sling swivel and the bayonet lug. There is no space on the bottom of the Ruger gas black since they chose to use a machined-in QD swivel socket.
I don't know how the Daniel Defense would work. It might clear the area on the bottom of Ruger's front base just fine. But unless things have changed, the FSB has to be removed to install the DD. If I'm going to pull the front sight base I'd just replace it with a low profile gas block and use a BCM forend.
Looks like the 7" non free float rails might be the only option without making some mods. [emoji35]
Here's the interference between the front sight base and forend.
I had been planning on cutting off the QD sling swivel socket with a Dremel followed by dressing up with a file. There isn't much room to work around the handguard cap. I tried knocking out the taper pins in order to pull the front sight block to make it easier to work on but I can only get one taper pin out. The second pin is stuck fast and I cannot get it to budge for the life of me.
I pulled the barrel this morning and dropped it in the mail to Marvin Pitts. I'm sure he'll be able to pop out the taper pin and mill the QD socket off no problem. I also tossed a GI barrel nut and delta ring in the box so he can replace the proprietary Ruger nut while he has the front sight off.
Hopefully all this will allow me to correctly and easily install the VTAC Delta. I'll be sure to post again when I get the barrel back from Marvin.
New Direct-Impingement R…: http://youtu.be/UTw3-zIwndQ
A friend of mine at Ruger tells me they've sold a year's worth of production in just these first few months. The AR556 is selling way better than anticipated.
brushy bill
03-04-15, 09:23
Tokarev or others with hands on experience. Any updates or feedback on how these are working out with higher round counts? Any bugs of note?
My fiancé got me the ar-556 for Xmas ordered it in November from lgs as of today March 4th still haven't got it must be a pretty hot ticket. In the mean time I have built my own from complete scratch in 5.56 currently working in a 6.8 upper. I'll be going from 0 black rifles to 2.5 black rifles if the ruger ever shows up stupid bgd.
I actually haven't done much shooting with my AR556 as of late. Since the front sight base made using a Troy VTAC Delta impossible, I pulled the barrel and sent it to Marvin Pitts. I asked Marvin to remove the QD socket from the bottom of the base but to leave the bayonet lug in place. That should solve the mounting issue with the Troy.
I'll update when I can.
Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk
If you think about it. There are a lot of people who will never be serious shooters, will never care to be, and won't ever get the most out of their rifles. However, these people do recognize and have brand loyalty. Most may just own a Redhawk or some other revolver and want an AR "just because". The SR-556 isn't cheap and a regular DI rifle would I presume be a better deal.
I'd think after over a decade of modern war, the "stigma' of the M-16 is well behind us compared to the Vietnam era. I'm old enough to remember that nobody really wanted an AR "because they jam". So people bought Mini 14s or HKs. Now the M4 is considered 'the gun' and I can't see it as anything but positive on a political level.
But I'm not going to buy a Ruger AR.
... a regular DI rifle would I presume be a better deal.
But I'm not going to buy a Ruger AR.
What makes other rifles in the same price range a better deal? Yeah, Ruger did some funky stuff with the front sight base and the furniture is fairly low budget but Ruger used good material with the internals.
Is brand loyalty a bad thing? People who own a Redhawk or a 10/22 or whatever are likely very happy with these purchases and have come to expect a good combo of quality, durability and price from the Ruger label.
I finally got the Troy VTAC rail installed on my Ruger. This took a bit of work. I had to pull the barrel and send it to Marvin Pitts to have the QD sling swivel socket machined off. Had Ruger not chosen to use a proprietary/funky front sight base this would not have been an issue. I actually don't mind the looks and styling of the Ruger FSB but I wish they'd have stayed closer to GI dimensions.
Anyway, the gun is back together now and running along just like it did before the new forend. My goal with this gun is to make a spare training rifle and have something that runs well but isn't terribly expensive that I can loan out to friends and use as a general purpose rifle.
My next change will be the addition of a better trigger. Something like the ALG would be just fine given my desired results but I might add the Ruger 2stage, just because. I guess it depends on what kind of price I can come up with.
I also want to add an inexpensive light (probably a Streamlight in VTAC plastic mount) and a red dot. In keeping with the "loaner" theme I might do with a Vortex or the little cheapy T-1 knockoff from Bushnell. I haven't decided how cheap is too cheap yet. Maybe I'll just get an Aimpoint PRO.
Here's a photo of Marvin's machining. As always, his work is perfect.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20150707_150835_zpsschslahe.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20150707_150835_zpsschslahe.jpg.html)
And here's the rifle with the VTAC installed.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20150706_200521_zpsphfjc9mf.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20150706_200521_zpsphfjc9mf.jpg.html)
Here's another photo of the gun with the VTAC installed. This is my first experience with the longer Troy drop-in and, while not perfect, it really changes the feel of the rifle.
The gun's still a bit too heavy for my tastes but I don't want to spend money getting the barrel reprofiled and or chopped to 14.5" and pinned. If I decide to lighten the load I'll probably just replace the front end with a pencil barrel or something like that. Too bad Ruger didn't use a lighter profile mid-length gas system right out of the box. It would have really set this gun apart from the budget competition in my opinion.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20150709_095246_zpsqfzcjzkm.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/PSX_20150709_095246_zpsqfzcjzkm.jpg.html)
MeanCarbine
02-12-16, 12:52
This thing belongs in a trash can.
A better gas seal is achieve by pinning the gas block on the top rather than bottom? I don't think so.
What keeps that threaded delta ring from coming unscrewed over time?
A unshrouded firing pin carrier. Really?
Why buy a piece of crap like this? You can get a Colt 6720 for 799.00 from PSA. People that buy garbage low end AR's are the ones that contribute to the myth that the AR is unreliable, etc...
So do you guys still feel like this is a POS rifle?
Anyone else care to opine?
I doubt you'll find much praise here.
It looks good on paper. I would like to get one eventually.
Today I rebarreled my AR-556 with a new barrel from Ballistic Advantage. The factory Ruger barrel actually shot well and didn't give me any reliability issues at all but I was tired of the weight. I also replaced the "Colt cut" bolt carrier with a BA M16 carrier so I killed two birds with one stone.
The rifle doesn't really look any different from the last batch of pictures but it sure feels better. Swapping out the barrel shaved about half a pound off the front end of the gun.
https://youtu.be/BYKYSnxOD_E
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.